My ticket to the gun show: A godless, gunless liberal’s account
Me, dressed up for the gun show. This is how I dress anyway, so it wasn't a stretch. Photo by Ed Rorick
No, that title isn’t the prelude to a joke about my huge muscles (see photo, right). It’s about my real ticket to a real gun show. It cost $10.
The idea of going to a gun show had always kept a strange posession over my imagination. So when I heard that last Sunday was the final day of this season’s Indiana Gun and Knife Show, I figured I ought to go.
Correction: I was actually dying to go.
I’d had plans to meet my friend, Liz, for coffee later that morning, but asked her if she wanted to come to the gun show instead. She did, so we drove my green pickup to the Indiana State Fair Grounds, where I had attended a demolition derby at the State Fair just a week before. (If I ever sort through my complicated feelings about the derby, I’ll write about that, too).
Liz and I agreed that my unofficial bio would that of a first-time gun buyer who didn’t know anything about guns, but was anxious to learn. As I was told later by several people at the gun show, I wasn’t the only first-time buyer there. First timers, afraid that Obama is going to take away gun rights, have flooded the market. It was a perfect ruse and half true anyway, because my fascination was genuine. Hence, armed with only a lie, we bought our $10 tickets to the gun show, savored the tired joke in spite of ourselves, and prepared to enter.
My first experience was disappointment. I’d been determined to get photos and had brought my camera with high hopes. Unfortunately, placards mounted outside the convention hall made it clear cameras weren’t allowed. Neither were loaded weapons of any kind — something I had been specifically wondering about. It looked like I would have to rely on a pad and paper and memory. We went back to my truck, shoved the camera in the glove box and got back in line.
Naturally, I assumed my leather messenger bag would be thoroughly checked, and I didn’t want to take any risks. I approached the “security” table, which consisted of a couple of teenage-looking girls at a folding table.
“Do you have any loaded guns?” they asked.
“No,” I said. I went to open my bag, assuming they would want to take a look inside.
“Go on in,” they said.
“Don’t you want to check my bag?” I asked.
“No it’s fine,” one of the girls said. “Just go on in.”
For today’s liberal, entering a gun show is like entering the lion’s den — a place where Palin’s “real America” breathes easy and freedom is a dish best served cold as polished steel. But to be fair, a gun and knife show could also be the safest place on earth. For starters, your average lunatic could probably only get off a few shots before an entire convention hall of gun enthusiasts got their weapons loaded (plenty of ammo on sale at the gun show, too) and unloaded into whomever was stupid enough to try something. But more importantly, there is a basic political and philosophical homogeneity — and, hence, safety — to a gun show.
If you’re at a gun show, you’re surrounded by your people. If you’re the kind of right-wing gun-toter who scares weenie liberals like me by showing up armed at, say, town hall meetings, a gun show is where you feel most at home and best understood. It’s also where you feel really, really happy because you like guns and there are a lot of guns to buy
Timothy McVeigh worked at gun shows for a time following the Waco massacre. David Koresh, before he was killed in said massacre, was a big fan of gun shows as well. The last place in the world they would have showed up to start shooting and blowing things up is a gun show. They loved gun shows. I would be more worried if the security was lousy at an ACLU convention. Or a health care town hall.
The reasons crazy people like McVeigh and Koresh loved gun shows are pretty obvious. For starters, they’re free-wheeling marketplaces of death instruments where you can stock up your arsenal. But they’re also havens in which gun enthusiasts can mingle among a crowd for whom a fundamental government distrust is de rigeur, for whom terms like “de rigeur” are generally disparaged as needlessly elitist and obtuse, and in which almost everyone looks like some version of you. If you’re a gun show-type guy, the realities of a liberalizing, globalizing world have been encroaching upon your world view for quite some time. Jobs are going overseas. Mexicans have emerged from the kitchens in places like Indiana, with the audacity to stake a claim in the American Dream by buying homes, starting businesses and sending their kids to school. Indiana even voted for a black guy as president. The world is getting scary. But at a gun show, there’s nothing to fear.
Like Fox news, a gun show is an alternate universe where gun show types can be reasonably certain that everyone is going to be talking a lot of shit about Obama, about the public option, and about liberals in general. Everyone can and knows how to kill, so everyone pretty much cancels each other out in terms of violence. And, let’s be honest: 99.9% of the people there are white. Again, nothing to fear.
But that’s all very abstract compared to a more concrete appeal for the crazies: a loophole so big you could have fit the entire Waco compound inside of it. According to National Rifle Association literature I picked up at the show, handgun buyers in Indiana must submit to background checks, per federal statute, but transactions “between licensed firearms importers, collectors, firearms manufacturers or dealers” are exempt, except in “some instances” (my emphasis). Just like baseball cards. That makes them available to anyone who pays to get into a gun show, no background check necessary.
Inglorious collecters
Of course, few people who go to gun show are actually crazy. The most articulate man I met at the gun show was working the NRA booth. He had given up his guns years ago, he said. When his wife was nearly raped, he decided he would never be without a gun again. I wasn’t lying when I told him I totally understood that.
And not everyone is a redneck male. For starters there were a lot of women there. And a lot of shocking pink custom rifle and shotgun grips for them to buy if they felt so inclined. There were even a few African-Americans there (I think I counted three or four).
But let’s be honest: most were scary and scared-looking white dudes walking around with big guns strapped to their legs, their waists, and slung across their shoulders. Handguns, pump-action combat shotguns, assault rifles, some bearing one or two, some bearing several. You’d think the apocalypse was happening right around the corner, or right down the street.
“How many people here do you think have actually killed someone?” Liz asked me at one point.
“I have no idea,” I said, and tried to think of a clever reply. But as if on cue, a man wearing an T-shirt bearing an airbrushed image of a blue truck walked by and made one for me.
“There’s just no substitute for carnage,” he said to his friend. Of course, I didn’t know what he was talking about. But, being that it was a gun and knife show, I was pretty sure I had all the context I needed.
The politics of the day was inescapable, whether explicitly written on bumper stickers for sale, or whispered in quiet conversations. More than one vendor sold those posters of Obama painted like the Joker, with the word “socialism” printed below it. One vendor wore a shirt that said “I’ll keep my guns, money and freedom, you can keep the ‘change.’” At a booth at the far end of the hall, I overheard two men talking about fears of a coming race war. Another man, smoking outside, apologized to his unwitting audience of one for getting to worked up about Louis Farrakhan.
Posted at the booth for INGunOwners.com, was “birther” literature questioning Obama’s American citizenship. I asked the man working there if he had any extra copies and he said no. I was bummed because there was actually a lot of birther stuff on there I hadn’t read before. His big hand shook my hand and a shiver crept up the length of my skinny arm that I couldn’t adequately explain to myself, but which had something to do with the determined look in his eyes.
It wasn’t the first time I’d felt a steely chill that day. As I told Liz before we went, I had also wanted to see if what I had always heard about the abundance of Nazi memorabilia at these gatherings was true. Given the right-wing’s penchant for likening Obama to Hitler these days, I thought it somehow appropriate to prove a point, if only to myself.
I couldn’t believe how much there was. There were medals, leaflets, golden eagle lapel pins (you know, the eagle that looks like Obama’s health care symbol), and loads of eagle- and swastika-bedecked bayonettes. There was even a collection of little Nazi flags that looked liked they were made to adorn a tray of gelbwurst sandwiches.
I talked to one man who sold Nazi paraphernalia. He just liked collecting WWII stuff it seemed. He didn’t say why the preponderance of WWII memorabilia at the gun show seemed Nazi-related. There was certainly a lot more Nazi stuff than Japanese, for instance — and from what I could tell there was damn near parity between Nazi war relics and American ones. To be fair, I saw no explicit hate literature anywhere (though the “birther” and Obama-as-socialist material arguably contains racist overtones). But just a few days before the 70th anniversary of the Nazi invasion of Poland — a day that sparked a chain of events that would result in the deaths of at more than 70 million people worldwide — this obsession with all things Nazi was unsettling. From my perspective at the gun show, it seemed clear that all the town hall name-calling we’ve been seeing lately was simply the projection of a right-wing fascination with gore and fascism — a fascination too disturbing to claim in mixed company, but openly indulged among like-minded peers.
‘Obama Fingers’
Rising above the hundreds of vendors was one man whose talent was singular — a man from Tipton, Ind., who hand-carved gun handles, knife handles, jewelry and an assortment of other interesting items with exceptional artistry.
Among them was a set of what looked like severed, shriveled-up, brown fingers. They looked so real, and my expectations were so skewed at that point, that I thought they were legit until I was told otherwise. We’ve all heard horror stories. Perhaps it was a collection of severed fingers obtained from a former soldier? Perhaps they were his?
Not quite, but disturbing all the same. The fingers had been carved from the tines of deer antlers. But, as the vendor explained, they were, indeed, carved to look like the fingers that some American Indians had hacked from the hands of fallen American soldiers to string together as necklaces. His replicas had holes bored into them so they could be used to the same purpose.
He also carved replicas of severed ears, but he was all out of those. I asked him if he carved severed scrotums, like the ones American soldiers used to take from fallen Indians and make into coin purses. He said no, but added that he did own a bull scrotum coin purse, and loved how much it freaked out his daughters.
Liz was thrilled with the fingers and had to have one. Here’s a look at what she bought:
Liz and I agreed that if this guy were selling these fingers in a skate shop or a punk rock boutique, he’d be a rich man.
The carver laughed and said he could hardly keep the fingers stockes as it was. Half-jokingly, he’d been telling people they were “Obama fingers,” presumably because they’re brown-ish in color.
That was our cue to move on.
Forbidden lust
Despite the creepiness, however, I confess there was a part of me that enjoyed the gun show immensely. And not just as a social critic, tongue firmly in cheek. I actually really liked talking to most of the people there, who were very friendly, and was dazzled by some of the guns and paraphernalia on display. There were beautiful, antique six-shooters straight from the Wild West era. There were polished, blue steel revolvers with hand-carved handles and gold-plated triggers that costs thousands of dollars — guns that true collectors would never dream of firing. There was an old WWII photo, depicting two grinning 18-year-old sailors with their arms around the waist of an older, busty Asian woman in a floral print dress. There were demon-headed swords, .50 cal machine guns and a strange dude with shaved legs and painted toenails, who fed his dog and himself from a tin of canned meat.
By the end I had given my phony bio so many times I admit I began to like the sound of it. The dead, awesome weight of polished steel was strangely thrilling. The precision click of a half-cocked hammer, the smooth, easy spin of a revolver carousel — so satisfying and frightening at once, like peering off a steep mountain ledge at the end of a long climb. It wasn’t my first time holding guns. I’ve shot guns before — .22’s, shotguns, a few rifles. And though I can’t imagine owning one, I imagine owning one all the time. I am not immune to a gun’s easy appeal to my lifetime of action movies, crime novels and other kinds of masculine conditioning.
By the end, though, a threshold in me had been reached, the creepiness had won out. I had seen about ten disturbing things too many. On my way out, security stopped me again, just as they had when I entered. This time it was a big, muscle-bound guy.
“Woa, woa, hold on,” he said, stopping me before I could leave. “You got any guns in there?”
“No,” I said. “You wanna look in my bag?” Again, I went to open it.
“No, it’s all right,” he said. “Go ahead.”
“You sure?”
“Yeah, it’s fine.”
Fuckin’ A, U.S.A.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Wow.
Now I want to go to one.
That is a great story, and I understand the conflicted feelings you had.
Please write on the demo derby. Did you see a tractor pull? Those are almost as fun.
Thanks, iskid. I would like to write about the demolition derby, but, believe it or not, I had the overwhelming sense that there was some technique or strategy to the derby that I wasn’t catching. I need to learn more about it. Every sport seems chaotic until you learn or detect the rules, right?
Or, I could just relax a little and have fun, huh?
In response to another comment. See in context »Oh, and no, I didn’t see a tractor pull, but my dad took me to one when I was 12. You’re right, they are awesome.
But Robosaurus — that big, five-storey, fire-breathing, car-crunching robot — was also at the big thing I went to when I was 12. And I don’t think anything beats that. And I mean anything of any kind.
In response to another comment. See in context »I don’t think you understand “transactions between licensed firearms importers, collectors, firearms manufacturers or dealers” are exempt, except in some instances.
That means, unless you are a licensed firearms dealer, you must go through a background check. Therefore, not “anyone” who pays $10, can buy a gun. If the person fails the background check, then no gun!
This type of “reporting” (and I use the term in the most generous manner possible for the article) always goes back to this argument of “gun shows are unregulated”. In most states, the sellers at gun shows are licensed dealers and are required to do background checks.
Respectfully, year2009, you’re only half right. Many states do, in fact, require background checks at gun shows. But not Indiana, which is where the gun show to which I went took place.
I’ll refer you to this little bit of Indiana Code (here’s the link: http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar47/ch2.html
IC 35-47-2-7):
Note the clause “who has reason to believe.” Licensed firearms dealers are, indeed, required to perform background checks, but many of the sellers at gun shows are not licensed firearms dealers.These are private firearms transfers, and, as such, the private sellers are not required to perform background checks. They are only held to the above-cited law, which, in a de facto sense, is little more than a suggestion. A “reason to believe” is not a requirement (hence the loophole). If there’s no background check, there’s no “reason to believe” anything other than what can be discerned by looking someone in the eye.
The Brady Campaign (see http://www.bradycampaign.org/legislation/state/viewstate.php?st=in) and the Legal Community Against Violence (see http://www.lcav.org/states/Indiana.asp#SecondaryPrivateSales) — both credible sources, whether or not you agree with their agendas — have both spelled it out clearly. The latter puts it this way:
Too biased for you? A cover story in the Indianapolis Star last year (April 11, 2008) quotes the city’s most prominent gun dealer, Don Davis, owner of Don’s Guns (a friend of mine’s mother used to work there), and, naturally, a huge fan of gun rights:
The former mayor Fort Wayne, Ind., pointed to the same loophole in an article in the Fort Wayne News Sentinel (Feb. 24, 2009) as one of the reasons why so many illegal guns come from Indiana.
That enough “reporting” for you? I could go on, but I think I’ve made my point. Indiana’s persisting loophole is very well documented.
In response to another comment. See in context »Year2009, it does occur to me looking back through my piece that the bit of text I cited in reference to gun laws is a bit vague, and could depend entirely upon how you read it. I still stand by the basic fact of the matter: that the loophole persists in Indiana and is a real, well-documented thing.
But I shouldn’t have taken that knowledge for granted in my piece as much as I did.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] 8 days ago … Austin’s Headline Grab. 9 days ago … Go here to see the original: Austin Considine – American Crossroads – My ticket to the gun show … Share and [...]
Yes, it’s the safest place on Earth when you’re blending in with the natives in such an impeccable “Bubba” disguise! (and i claim authority in the matter having grown up in and around Kokomo, IN with a brother who was an avid gun enthusiast)
btw… You really dress that way all the time? Even when having coffee at the Abbey on Mass Ave. (is the Abbey still there?) or strolling through Broadripple? Come on
In my defense, I’m wearing that flannel right now (as I was when I went to a nice Mediterranean restaurant in Broad Ripple directly after the gun show — not that I didn’t get some strange looks!)
The Abbey is gone, but I’m pulling shifts at a cafe in Broad Ripple to help make ends meet. I wore the same flannel (and often wear the same hat) when I work there.
That said, I’m sure it’s a bit contrived, and I hope I grow out of it someday. But the tattoos are real. They aren’t going anywhere.
Like you, I also have an Indiana family full of gun enthusiasts. Even my sister has one in her apartment. And, like I wrote in the article, it’s not like I haven’t fired guns, or can’t see the appeal. I get it. And, like I said, there were parts of the gun show I legitimately enjoyed. I just get freaked out by all the birther and Nazi-type obsessions, and things like “Obama fingers” that seem to accompany gun show culture.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey, no explanation required whatsoever… There are some things i do truly miss about Indiana, and others that i’m glad to be far away from.
great piece btw.. talk about going into the trenches for your art!
In response to another comment. See in context »Great piece. A few quick thoughts:
1. You know who else had a love of Nazi memorabilia? Punk rockers. Read “Please Kill Me” and you’ll see all sorts of references to Nazi lore. One thing left out of the obits for the Stooges’ Ron Asheton was his unrepentant love of Nazi stuff.
2. No need to be ashamed of demo derby. Every summer in Joliet, I try to hit the Team Demolition Derby, which combines demo derby with racing (two teams, four cars each, first time to have one car make five laps wins). Great stuff!
3. I’m sure there are a lot of weirdos at gun shows, but these sorts of collector events tend to draw the strangest people anyway. My father went to a Hot Wheels convention once in Rosemont, Ill., and one guy told him the really good stuff was up in his hotel room. So my dad and a few other guys went to this guy’s hotel room, and he opens an attache case, and instead of cocaine 100s, it was rare HW cars. Oddballs, all of ‘em!
Man, I have had so many people recommend “Please Kill Me,” at this point, I’m starting to get embarrassed I haven’t read it yet. Especially as someone who was basically reared in the local punk rock scene. (Playing in nutty post-punk bands as a kid was my gateway drug.)
That’s a good story about the Hot Wheels guy. And your point is well taken. I know a lot of guys who love comic books, for example, but wouldn’t get nearly as nutty as some of the people who dress up at all the ComicCons. Gun ownership is the same way. I know a lot of really reasonable people who own guns, but who aren’t obsessed with Naziism, birther-ism and race wars, and see no need to stockpile assault rifles. You’re right: conventions of any kind are definitely a magnet for the more fringe elements of any culture. And even more reasonable types are probably encouraged to behave in more extreme ways in that kind of atmosphere, which just creates a climate of all around nuttiness.
In response to another comment. See in context »Oh, and to your point about punk rockers: totally. Remember when Morrissey was obsessed with writing songs about skin heads and flaunting skin head iconography?
In response to another comment. See in context »Mr. Considine,
Who says nothing stays the same. I went to a gun show 30 years ago and it was exactly the same. Although it true that there were no “Obama Fingers” there were plenty of equally creepy items for sale. There was a tee-shirt with a picture of a US soldier pointing an M-16 at a generic Arab who was back on his buttocks with the caption “What is the price of oil now?” (I think I saw Dick Chenney buying one). There were plenty of copies of “Soldier of Fortune” available and someone offering a poster that said something about turning a burglar’s head into a linger pink cloud (a bit Tarantino-esque when Quentin was but a boy).
However, unlike you, I was there “on business”. I owned a rife, an Italian infantry rifle, the Modello 1891(aka the “Mannlicher-Carcano”). It was easily the worst rifle ever made but I got it for free so the price was right (It came with the disclaimer “Never Fired – Only Dropped Once”, a reference to its service record in the Italian Army during WW II in North Africa). It was difficult to load, charge, and fire and if you could hit anything it was because you were aiming at something else. The carbine version was supposed to be the weapon used to kill President Kennedy in Dallas. If you hit someone over the head with it you might kill them, but you would have to hit him pretty hard.
While searching for someone selling ammo for this instrument of death I did indeed see a huge array of similar instruments. Cavalry sabers, broad swords, bayonets, to say nothing of the pistols and rifles (the old standard M-1, both the long barrel and carbines were plentiful and cheap).
Anyway I after some effort I was able to find a guy who sold 6.5 mm bullets, but it was shockingly expensive – 1 USD per round (a box was 20 USD). No wonder the Italian Army lost the war, the couldn’t afford to fire their weapons! I had to settle for buying the matching bayonet.
I never went back, unlike you, I really did not see the charm and the creepiness factor was sort stuck to my clothes and hair. It took a while to wash out. So thanks for the update but I can see that the date of gun show is never up.
There is a strategy. I think of demo derbys as something akin to bullfights, but a bit less artistic. Just think, you could write the next Death in The Afternoon. Just saying.
This was awesome! I have been to the Gun Show, and it is exactly how you described it. I laughed aloud 4 times. Picturing you there (knowing you) was the enjoyable part of the read. Per your point, that is what is great about America: the people you disagree with are more real when they are in their own element. There is something very peaceful about a gun show. Even some of the subliminal hate is rather civil.
Interesting column. I was at the 1500 also, albeit on Friday. This was my second time to go to a gun show, my first to the 1500. I thought it was interesting and fortunately, nowhere near as crowded as recent shows have been.
I would like to point out a couple of fallacies in your post as well as in your comments above:
First, you’ve misread the part about to whom guns may be sold without an on-the-spot background check. The line you quoted read:
“transactions “between licensed firearms importers, collectors, firearms manufacturers or dealers” are exempt, except in “some instances””. That means that the importers, the collectors, the manufacturers, AND the dealers are all federally licensed through the BATF. As it happens, I hold a federal “collectors” license, known as a 03 FFL or a C&R (for “Curio and Relic”, the only firearms to which it applies) and for those in the business of selling firearms (I cannot; my license only covers collecting), there is also a state-required license. All of these people have been background-checked for these licenses and since most also have a License To Carry Handguns(LTCH), we’ve all been checked for that, too. Nonetheless, anyone selling firearms at a table at the show was required to do an instant check on the purchaser, even if they hold a LTCH, as all of those selling are 01 FFLs, or dealers.
Now… As to the famous but spurious, “gun show loophole”, you are correct that a private citizen can sell his firearm to anyone he wishes as long as he has no reason to believe the person is not a criminal. This is simply because even as a holder of a 03 FFL, I cannot access the NICS check system. Be that as it may, however, requiring all sales to go through a 01 FFL because someone might buy a gun and misuse it is analogous to saying that I could not sell you a hammer or a chainsaw without a federally-licensed hardware dealer acting as intermediary, or a kitchen/butcher knife without going through a federally-licensed kitchen-supply dealer, to say nothing of the private sale of cars through a licensed car dealer… None of these *things*, including guns, were designed specifically to kill, but all have been used to that purpose. Yes, that’s correct, I said that even guns were not designed to kill. They were designed to propel a projectile at high speed in a specific direction, and that is all. The purpose for which that projectile is fired, just as the direction a car is driven, a chainsaw is turned when on, or a hammer is swung, is determined solely by the human doing so.
Those who think they are fearful of guns are usually not. For example, they will happily call a police officer to aid them, and that officer will do so with a firearm, but that doesn’t scare them at all. I think they’re actually scared more of either other people whose intentions they do not know or of themselves and the thoughts they have which might lead them to do unspeakable violence with those same guns. They say they wish only for safety and protection. The simple fact is that one cannot protect innocent people by disarming them, because those who have ill intent cannot be stopped by wishing them away or by fleeing from them… they can only be stopped by force.
If you have read this far, I thank you for your patience and indulgence. I hope that you and others will consider my words and thoughts. I can’t force you to do so and would not if I could, but I can and do hope for it.
Good day and good wishes.
Bobt, I absolutely read your comment from start to finish — several times, in fact — and really appreciate a.) your opinion b.) the respectful manner in which you’ve approached the subject with me.
I also read your second comment, and I see your point about the vested interests of those two sources. I’m not convinced their M.O. makes their statements of fact any less authoritative — not to the extent that they are simply fabricating the loophole. Most reporters for the NY Times are probably pretty liberal, for example, but I don’t automatically question their statements of fact any more than I would question anyone else’s. (Not that the Times is exempt from getting things wrong, as we all know!)
Still I can’t get around the essential contradictions: One “side” seems to say the loophole doesn’t exist, while the other maintains it does. From what I can tell, the Indiana Code that I cited indicates that it does, indeed, exist — at least on paper. That said (and as I noted above in my second response to Year2009), I allow that the text I cited in the original article may have been misread on my part, or at least too ambiguous to be used authoritatively. As such, I’ve left it in as a reference point for your and others’ comments, in hopes that we can come to some sort of consensus on the meaning of these disputed (and admittedly ambiguous) passages.
So, in the spirit of sincere inquiry, here’s what I’m wondering:
1. Is it possible that even though the loophole exists on paper, it does not in a de facto sense? In other words, is it possible that nothing legally compels private sellers to conduct checks at gun shows, but most do anyway? If that’s the case, though, how do we actually keep track?
2. Is it possible that not all collectors or private sellers at a gun show are required to carry the same collectors license you have?
3. How do all these private vendors at the gun show conduct these “instant checks,” as you suggest? Is it by computer? From what databases do they draw? Is it as thorough as the NICS checks? Could there be some difference in the nature of the checks that is the source of the contention?
Thanks, again for your thoughtful comments. I am, indeed, always interested in getting things right, and coming to a deeper understanding of any subject I tackle. It’s the awesome / nerve-crushing thing about the rapid-fire nature of blogs: it rewards you for having an quick opinion, for being a bit tongue in cheek, and, unfortunately, secondary-sourcing on gray issues. But the instant feedback from your readership keeps you honest (even if the stress often sends me reaching straight for a drink!)
In response to another comment. See in context »Thanks for the reply. The liberal bias alone does not make Helmke’s words false, no. Very often, however, those of us who read such things find that the Brady/VPC/fill-in-anti-gun-group-here people will be a bit…oh, let’s be kind and call it “disingenuous”. A classic example is where they claim that some shocking number of children die every day, killed by guns. In contrast, 1) the gun did nothing, it was used by a person, possibly one without training (i.e. unintentional suicide) or possibly a criminal, 2) the “children” include up to age 24 (not children at all, by any definition save that they have parents), and 3) an inordinate number of them are criminal-on-criminal(gang?) killings, such as over a drug deal gone bad. On that last point, honestly, I think they’re doing society a favor by stopping however many acts of thuggery any given punk will commit.
As for Davis, no, actually, his statements, as grudgingly as I admit it, are factual. The only people being affected by more and more (or really, any) gun laws are people in the business, trying to make a living. they certainly don’t affect the criminals, who by definition, don’t obey the law.
If you would like to make your own comparisons in re: the anti-gun groups’ statements, go take a peek at http://www.gunfacts.info. A gentleman by name of Guy Smith puts that together on his own, compiling data that people send him into a report that he makes available for free. He verifies every source and notes it so the reader can do likewise, and he also, as he notes in the beginning, accepts info that counters his purpose, verifying it just as thoroughly, if possible, and publishing it if it is valid.
You asked the following:
1. Is it possible that even though the loophole exists on paper, it does not in a de facto sense? In other words, is it possible that nothing legally compels private sellers to conduct checks at gun shows, but most do anyway? If that’s the case, though, how do we actually keep track?
Not only is it possible, it is mandatory. If someone who is not a 01 FFL dealer wants a background check on his buyer, he must use the FFL to do the sale. Consider, though, that no one mandates background checks on really any other possibly deadly item no matter it’s potential for abuse. Why? Simply because what the user does with his own property after the purchase is not the seller’s responsibility. (It was not the responsibility of Oldsmobile when Teddy Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopechne. He was driving drunk(breaking the law) and he failed to report the accident, but the vehicle functioned as it was designed to; it moved down the road when the accelerator was pressed and went where it was steered.)
2. Is it possible that not all collectors or private sellers at a gun show are required to carry the same collectors license you have?
Another de facto guarantee. One should not need a government permission slip to sell his own private property, for the reasons quoted above. The license I have allows me to have certain firearms shipped to me across state lines. A 01 FFL can have any firearm shipped to him in this manner, and can use the US Post Office even to ship handguns. The background check is identical, but the fee for my 03 is far lower. ($200/3 years vs. $30/3 years)
3. How do all these private vendors at the gun show conduct these “instant checks,” as you suggest? Is it by computer? From what databases do they draw? Is it as thorough as the NICS checks? Could there be some difference in the nature of the checks that is the source of the contention?
Again, see above. Most of the private sellers you saw (walking around with a gun for sale)were just people who came there because there were more potential buyers. They could have made those same sales in their front yard, in the Wal-mart parking lot, or right downtown in front of police HQ. Those who were selling firearms at tables were 01 FFLs, and they did their background checks, guaranteed… they don’t want any time in Club Fed. There were many vendors who were not 01 FFLs, sure, but they also were not selling guns, but rather knives, belts, candy, holsters, first aid kits, T shirts, etc.
I hope this quick reply answers your questions… I wish I had time to be more thorough, but I’m running late for work!
Will check back later.
In response to another comment. See in context »Have a great day!
OK, now that I can type without watching the clock…
I know that typically, the mindset of those who want more regulation (let’s call them statists) whether on the “left” or the “right” is that things they see as problems should have more attention given them by lawmakers. How often do we hear, “There oughta be a law!”?
As above, we hear this from the left about such things as “gun control” and from the right about such things as the abortion debate. I think the only new law we really need is one repealing a rather large percentage of those currently in place and slashing government bureaucracies and funding by an equal or maybe even larger percentage. Consider that until 1934, anyone with cash in hand could walk into a store or even mail order any firearm including fully-automatic, any suppressor (silencer), any anything-no ID, no age limit, no fingerprints, photos, or federal paperwork. We had very little violence against each other by comparison, with the exception of the 16 or so years leading up to it’s passage, which coincided with Prohibition and the rise of Organized Crime to feed the country’s thirst for the forbidden drink. (Suppressors were added in to control poaching, which rose during the Depression, but were then and are still lawful in most states, after paying a prohibitive tax.)
Sure, there had been “gun control” laws before, but mostly to keep minorities (mostly Blacks in the South, other minorities in places like NYC, etc.) from being armed and thus, able to resist effectively against those who would assault or otherwise threaten them. Then, in 1968, another strict “gun control” law was passed, mostly in the shock of horror following JFK, MLK, Malcolm X, and other notable assassinations. Once again, it was ineffective for it’s stated purpose, but now we had to have serial numbers, could not sell firearms across state lines, etc., etc. Following this, school shootings such as Kent State, UT-Austin, etc. happened. (Charles Whitman, a Marine-trained sniper with a brain tumor, would have taken out many more innocents that day, were it not for armed people (faculty and staff certainly, students possibly, I don’t know) who kept him pinned down until police could arrive and end his violent shooting spree. The Brady Law, requiring the NICS check, has been similarly ineffective in “gun control”, except for making it harder for us “good guys” to purchase what we want, when we want, though it’s done a good job of driving prices up and leaving the less-well-to-do without the ability to purchase effective tools for self-defense. (though many times, they can still usually pick up a cheap “junk gun”, also known as a “Saturday Night Special”. It might interest you to know that that type of pistol originally had a four-word name, the first referring to where they were often purchased or used. The original name, censored, was “Ni__ertown Saturday Night Special”.)
So what’s the point? Simply, that more laws, more regulations, more restrictions.. all of these affect only those of us who are least inclined to commit the crimes they are supposed to prevent. It’s like losing your watch near a tree but looking for it fifty feet away, on the sidewalk, because the light is better there. Instead of more laws, I would suggest more education. Let’s have classes available (not mandatory, just available, perhaps with an incentive) for people to learn how to make a firearm safe, what to do if one is found, who to notify. Maybe another class offered and available, possibly also with an incentive, to teach safe gun handling and good marksmanship.
In 1966, a town in Florida (Orlando, if memory serves) had a high number of women being raped. The police dept. made it known that women would be given self-defense classes and marksmanship lessons, and the rate of sexual assaults dropped markedly, just on the possibility that an intended victim had decided to not be a victim anymore.
This CAN work. It HAS worked. The same cannot be said for “gun control”; cities with strict control have more per-capita violent crime than those that do not. I can’t claim that as causative, only correlative. At the same time, I think we need to concentrate on family education. Lessons which stood us in good stead like the unity of a family, such things as personal responsibility, respect, faith, self-respect (note: not “self-esteem”, which doesn’t require anything of you and is worth just what you “paid” for it)would be good things to have people learn again. This is how we can reduce crime in our country and become again what we once were: Leaders in every respect.
I want to see so many good things happen in this country. I do not see them happening under the current (nor anything similar to the previous) administration. I do see this country moving quickly toward another attack like 9/11, except this time, we don’t have someone at the helm who will respond to those attacks with decisive action. Instead, I see someone who will bow and submit, who will apologize for things that require no apology. He is no leader. He has no strength of character, no zeal of Americanism. He gives a good speech, provided it is written for him and available. We do not need a speaker. We need a leader… someone who can rally people behind him. Those people rallying need to make true again the Japanese reasoning not to invade our mainland: “There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.”
I realize this has in places gone far afield from a mere visit to a gun show. The gun show is but one small aspect of a much larger issue, and I hope I’ve not bored you or any of your readers. I look forward to your reply and also to the follow up of your meeting with the other poster (techres). I think both will make interesting reading.
Good wishes and good day.
In response to another comment. See in context »Just a couple things to add. Don Davis is definitely the best known gun store owner in Indiana, but he’s more an advocate of what will put money in Don’s pocket than he is of Second Amendment rights. He is not trusted by many gun owners here.
Also, Paul Helmke, the former Fort Wayne mayor you quoted, is paid by the Brady Campaign… hardly an unbiased voice and certainly not in favor of gun ownership by any that aren’t wearing a badge. Take care.
Bobt: As to your point about Don Davis, he’s part of one of two TV ads every kid growing up in the Indianapolis area knows.
1. “Proving once again there’s more than corn in Indiana!” (Indiana Beach)
2. “I don’t want to make any money folks, I just loooooove sellin’ guns!” (Crooks finger as if he’s firing multiple rounds) “Heh heh heh.” (Don’s Guns)
In response to another comment. See in context »Let me see if I have this right…you can attend an Obama rally with a loaded weapon, but not a gun show? Does the NRA know about this? Plus no search, they could at least be a little afraid of liberal communist Nazis.
I propose an experiment next time you go find a black friend and dress him in a black panther outfit, give him a bag and gun and see if he is searched.
Hello! I just want you to know I know the guy you met from INgunOwners and he is not a scary person. He’s actually a great and kind person. Now, he does have hands that can crush rocks, but I can only hold that against myself for not having worked out harder at the gym myself. Can’t blame him for that.
As for your article, you seem to have found what you were looking for in the gun community including some evidence of the fears outsiders have of our community. What can I say, other than every home has a crazy uncle George and if you come to Thanksgiving you will get to meet the whole family – all of it – and there you have it.
But that one glimpse is not an understanding of us in any real sense. I would instead invite you to get to know us better and then write a second article. This time you went looking for racists, nutjobs, rightwingers, and nazi daggers and you managed to find them. I would invite you to come and meet all the people and things you missed: Jews, Blacks, middle class business owners, Social Conservative, Gays, Boy Scouts, Libertarians, and even some progressives. That may only be one part of our community, but you came to the table and focussed on uncle George and missed the variety of people sitting at the table as well.
I come from the Democratic wing of the Democratic party and was raised by people who you would find easy room to joke with and feel comfortable. I know where you are coming from and would make a great bridge to talk with you and show you a better understanding of the full gun community which is what you missed in your fast visit to a gun show. You just cannot get to know people that way (too many strange folk and personal baggage). Hell, I write this from the very active gun community of Bloomington, Indiana. That last sentence alone should begin to break your stereotypes of our community.
So, let’s try something different. Let’s talk. Let’s eat a meal together. Heck, let’s run out to a range and do a bit of shooting. I can do any of the above. I could even make room for you at a rifle clinic and bring a gun for you to shoot and ammo to boot.
Why would I do that?
Because you deserve it and so does the real “gun community”. You obviously want to know more, and have an interest in guns but are hampered by your concerns about us. I can help you with both. And I can do it without trying to change your politics one iota. As my wife likes to say, “You changed my politics on guns without changing my politics.”
And why did I do that with her? Because she deserved it as well.
So, what do you say? Come on in, have a seat, we can get to know each other far better than at Thanksgiving dinner, or at the 1500.
Let’s make some time and perhaps someday you will write another article as a followup!
Techres, I think this is a great idea, and I totally appreciate the invitation. I would love nothing more than to come down and shoot some guns, meet you and your wife, have a civil discussion, and write a follow-up.
As to your points about the article:
I’m sure the INGunOwners guy is a totally nice guy, as was pretty much everyone I met at the show. It just so happens that at that moment, I had just been reading some birther stuff (which I find totally repulsive) and had just moments before overheard a conversation about a race war. In that context, the strength of that guy’s hand, and the flimsiness of my own scared me a little, though I’m not proud to admit it. Like you, I should be spending more time at the gym
As for your broader point about my visit’s being only a glimpse, in which I only found what I came to find, I’ll humbly say this: you’re right. Some of the things I saw and heard can’t be explained away or excused in my book. The fact that I found the things I was looking for still means I found them, and I do think that’s unfortunate.
But, as a colleague has pointed out, you can find nutty people people at pretty much any convention if you’re looking for them. You’re totally right, which is why I think it’s a great idea that I come meet you in Bloomington.
I do want to emphasize that my feelings about gun ownership are very mixed, which I tried to convey in the article. And my snarky criticisms about some of the gun show-goers I encountered aren’t meant as a statement on gun owners, generally.
I mean it when I say some of my best friends are gun owners. So are a lot of people in my family. And I’ve considered buying one at one time, myself. I actually don’t understand sometimes why this is an issue that always cuts across traditional left-right lines.
I just find all the birther stuff, and “Obama fingers,” all the race hysteria, the ultra-conservative stickers and bumper stickers, and the obsession over Nazi paraphernalia at gun shows really disturbing. I’ll always be disturbed by that sort of thing. If I were running a gun show, I’d keep the political sloganeering and the Nazi pins out. It’s a gun show, not a political convention or a war memorabilia convention. As it is now, the associations invite the criticism by juxtaposition alone, and belie the idea that gun shows are just about the guns.
Do me a favor and click on the “Email me tips” button below the “about me” section of my page. Send me your email address and I’ll send you mine. Again, I think your suggestion is a great one. We’ll make it happen.
In response to another comment. See in context »Great!
First off, you do yourself proud for being willing to learn, experience, and listen which is hard for any of us to do, especially on a topic we find alternately fascinating and scary. I hope to honor your kindnesses in our meet.
Second, here’s a big secret, I don’t like the racist, nazi or Obama fingers stuff either! The fingers are something I have never seen before and hope never to see myself – that is just far, far too creepy for words and something I have never seen before at the 1500. The gun community is tense and inward right now, but that is way, way out there. And, yes, a head shop/skater shop would love those for a variety of sales opportunities.
Lastly, my email is en route and I look forward to meeting you soon!
In response to another comment. See in context »After you visit Techres come north to Elkhart County and see me. I consider myself a progressive Democrat yet I work at a gun store and at shows, including every 1500. I am sure you walked passed me. I too am will to share my guns and ammo and can give you an idea of what it is like behind the counter and the gun show tables.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey, Austin
This was great – thoroughly enjoyed it. There’s something about a gun show that just seems to capture so many random things… random, sometimes scary, things (ie. the finger).
Well done.
Hey, Colin,
Just came across your comment from a few weeks ago. I agree with your sentiments exactly. A strange brew, indeed.
In response to another comment. See in context »Good read, quite entertaining.
I was more concerned with the soft shoe response of the comments than the bias in your piece.
Of course there are crazies at every type of convention. Ever seen a Star Trek convention? Some of those people are lunatics.
The difference is I’m not afraid of those people blowing up a building, walking into a museum and blowing people away or killing our President.
There is a HUGE difference and you and the posters here seem to miss it.
Gun shows have been and will continue to be safe havens for people that want to harm us. to blithely gloss over that fact is to be disingenuous.
I whole heartedly agree there are wonderful law abiding people that attend gun shows. So what? The good people don’t cancel out the lunatics that want to cause mayhem.
Also, the loophole in the law is there and is taken advantage of at every gun show in Indiana. To deny it only makes me distrust those that deny. Law abiding gun enthusiasts would be better off admitting the issue than fighting it with claims of bias.
I enjoyed the piece. This is the first of yours that I’ve read. I’ll be back for more.
The little bit of obfuscation that I quoted below illustrates my point about gun advocates admitting the issues with guns and gun ownership perfectly. Guns as we know them now were invented for the purposes of fighting and killing human beings. To say otherwise makes me only distrust gun lovers even less. It is absolutely laughable that someone would make such a claim. What is the purpose of this sort of obfuscation? What is the purpose of comparing guns to cars, chainsaws, hammers and kitchen knives? The comparisons are ridiculous and ultimately serve to purpose other than obfuscation.
This is where you fail in your responses to the posters, Austin. I understand your need to be non-argumentative but letting such comments go without being checked isn’t helping anyone. It’s akin to interviewing Cheney and allowing him to rewrite history and spew his propaganda unchecked.
“Be that as it may, however, requiring all sales to go through a 01 FFL because someone might buy a gun and misuse it is analogous to saying that I could not sell you a hammer or a chainsaw without a federally-licensed hardware dealer acting as intermediary, or a kitchen/butcher knife without going through a federally-licensed kitchen-supply dealer, to say nothing of the private sale of cars through a licensed car dealer… None of these *things*, including guns, were designed specifically to kill, but all have been used to that purpose. Yes, that’s correct, I said that even guns were not designed to kill. They were designed to propel a projectile at high speed in a specific direction, and that is all. The purpose for which that projectile is fired, just as the direction a car is driven, a chainsaw is turned when on, or a hammer is swung, is determined solely by the human doing so.”
In response to another comment. See in context »All right, I’ll step in here.
Consrfunny, I took a break from this thread a while ago and just came across your comment today.
You make a good point about my being non-argumentative (shit, there I go again). In my modest defense, though, my feeling after a while was that I wanted to wait until I had my “gun summit” meeting (see the following post) to address some of those specific arguments more thoroughly and in person.
Anyway, I was enjoying the reader debate and didn’t want to step in. It was the first thing I’ve written that generated a sustained debate without my constant interjection, and I wanted to watch what readers on both sides could hammer out. Readers like you seemed to be making all the right rebuttals in my place, and, honestly, I found it more interesting and effective.
That said, for the record, I will state unequivocally that you’re absolutely right about the guns v. hammers and chainsaws thing. It’s an argument I want to bring up when I meet “techres” down in Bloomington, IN. It’s complete nonsense.
I don’t hunt, but I have no problem with responsible hunters. Even if, at our most generous, we allow room for a hunting exception in this argument, that still only leaves room for shotguns and standard rifles. Assault rifles and handguns are made to kill people, that’s it.
Hammers, axes, etc, though they can kill as well, are made to do specific other things like pound nails and cut wood. And a hammer or axe can’t kill people from atop a clock tower, or en masse in the halls of your local public school. Unless you’re an expert hatchet-thrower. In which case, you’re probably a kind of scary dude to begin with.
Even Lynyrd Skynyrd knew the truth here. To wit, from “Saturday Night Special”:
In response to another comment. See in context »How horribly wrong you are on this!
You see… those of us with carry licenses (LTCH)are among the most law-abiding citizens in any and every community. Certainly, there are a few that can be trotted out as bad examples, but the fact is that fewer than two of every thousand LTCH holders have their licenses revoked for _all_ causes, to include such things as a public intoxication conviction (a non-violent offense that has nothing whatsoever to do with firearms) We don’t want to blow up a building (which would take far more than anything sold at a gun show), walk into a museum and “blow people away”, or kill the President. See him and all of those trying to destroy this country from within impeached and removed from office, yes. Killed, no.
We don’t want to harm anyone. We also don’t want to be harmed by those who do (you know, the rapists, murderers and robbers) To blithely lump us in with those scum of the earth is beyond disingenuous; it is blatantly dishonest.
There are “lunatics that want to cause mayhem” who go to church, go to work, post on the internet, etc. You seem to be saying that everyone who does those things should be considered just the same as the worst of their number.
The only “loophole in the law” is that it is still legal to sell property you own to another person without seeking government permission or licensees to oversee the process.
To call this a “loophole” only tells me that you want government control over every little aspect of everyone’s life. In business, this is called “micro-management”. In government, it is called tyranny.
In your next post, you quoted what I said, comparing everyday items found in most homes that have been misused by criminals to commit murder to guns which have been misused by criminals to commit murder. Therein lies the purpose of the comparison; it does not matter which tool is misused, the point is that it is not the tool that commits the crime, it is the person who makes the decision to do so. We don’t need to control *things*, we need to control crime and we do that by controlling criminals.
You also say that my so-called “obfuscation” “makes you distrust ‘gun lovers’ even less”. (sic) I’m guessing you refer to my comment about the purpose of a gun. I own several firearms. None has killed anyone, but most have made some nice holes in paper. The same can likely be said about most firearms in this country. They CAN be used to kill, certainly. So can a rock, though not at as great a distance. Firearms (yes, including handguns and so-called “assault weapons”, an invented term that means “any gun we think is scary looking”) can also be used for hunting game. They can also be used to stop a crime in progress, a task to which purpose they are estimated to be put over two million times yearly in this country. I’m sure that nothing I say will convince you that everything I wrote is true. I think that’s a real shame. If you feel like checking on it, though, there are lots of websites out there that list news reports of crimes averted by intended victims who were armed at the time.
The reason we carry firearms is not to cause harm to others, but to prevent it to ourselves and our families. You, actually, are made safer by our decision to do so as well; when the criminal doesn’t know who’s armed, he may decide not to commit his crime on the chance that you might be.
Have a nice day.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m sorry but a nut with a gun is a dangerous nut.
True. Now substitute any of several words for “gun”… Maybe some of the words I suggested, for which I was accused of being deceptive or “obfuscating”, words like “car”, “truck”, “knife”, “hammer”, or “chainsaw”, or possibly even “stick” or “rock”.
It quickly becomes clear that it is the nut that is dangerous, not the item itself. Control the nut and the gun becomes little more than an expensive paperweight.
Happy Sunday!
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] charged blogs, the use of various stereotypes and misconceptions frequently appear. In a blog titled “My ticket to the gun show: A godless, gunless liberal’s account”, the author uses [...]
Native New Yorker and Democrat here, bought my first guns (three in one stop!) when I moved to Northwest Arkansas earlier this year. One Remington rifle, one Mossberg pump shotgun, one .357 magnum. Always been philosophically pro-gun but when you move to one of the most rural counties in the country you need firepower. As big as they are about property rights down there they’re even bigger on meth, and sketchy strangers will roll up on your land unannounced and not always with the best of intentions. The nearest cop may be an hour away.
The shop was Rebel Arms, about 30 minutes outside Fayetteville, Ark. There was a sign on the door that read “Swearing is a way for small minds to try to communicate big ideas.” When we entered, the deputy sheriff of the county was there. My northeastern trouble radar went up momentarily before I reminded myself of where I was. Everyone, the store owners, the sheriff, even the customers, were incredibly friendly and helpful. I told them my level of experience with guns (quite near zero) and my property and they chatted me up about what I needed, always meandering into only tangentially related anecdotes about their buddy who owned this or that gun.
At one point the sheriff got behind the counter and pulled a rifle off the rack to show me. Again I thought for just an instant that I was being set up, but it ended up being one of the guns I walked out with … to my pickup truck with New York plates and a MoveOn Obama bumper sticker on the bedcover.
I guess part of the reason I’m telling this story is you don’t need to go undercover to the gun culture. Chances are very slim you’re going to get static as an outsider. I also think having an understanding of how to operate a firearm is an important aspect of self-sufficiency.
I wonder also if those who rushed to buy guns and ammunition earlier this year will change their tune on liberalism just a bit when they see Obama’s term(s) has passed without any infringement on their second amendment rights.
And what did you learn while there? Did you ponder bias confirmation there? I’ve been to many gunshows and have to say I’ve never heard anyone talking about race wars. I’m not saying it didn’t happen, but I’m positive it’s not a constant. I did once see a few neo-nazis at the Indy gun show, and I must say I really enjoyed seeing them turned away from tables (especially the table of a collector selling Nazi memorabilia).
It seems your gunshow experience was a thrill though. But it seems you went looking for a thrill as evidenced by your comment about these people “knowing how to kill”. It would be silly to think you yourself didn’t know how to kill. I can certainly go ride a roller coaster and sit there stoically, feeling nothing other than pure physical sensations, I bet I could learn a lot that way. But that wouldn’t be fun, so I let myself be a bit scared and thrilled.
If you want to learn about a gun show go with someone who can temper your assumptions and prejudices (we all have them after all). Hell, I even know someone in the area who would be willing to show you around there. He’s one of those rednecks with a deep fried accent and a creative writing degree. Often times a first experience is a shock, let me know if you want to learn more.
This has to be the most obvious attempt to being non-obvious anti-gun liberal excrement that has ever been posted on the internet. You should try harder to conceal your unfounded, uninformed, uneducated, and pre-programmed contempt towards the 2nd Amendment.
Perhaps, in the future you can find a way to ridicule the remainder of the Consitution. You may even find a way to condone the 1st Amendment. I would bet that will create quite a conundrum. The “though police” probably appreciate you servitude.
Given the title of my post, I’m pretty sure I didn’t do a whole lot to disguise my obvious bias coming in to this. That’s what’s fun about blogs… you can be open about your bias, while still leaving yourself open to having your assumptions challenged — and, maybe, challenging those of others along the way.
It amazes me how many people have confounded the message of this piece with an “anti-Second Ammendment” message. Read it again. I never once come out against gun ownership. I explicitly state, in fact, that I have mixed feelings about it, but that I understand a person’s desire to a.) own a gun b.) defend what’s dear to him (see the anecdote of my conversation with the NRA representative).
All I’m pointing out is the scariness of some of the fringe elements of the gun-owning community — fringe-dwellers who seem, for some reason, to congregate at gun shows full of Nazi memorabilia, Obama fingers, and open fear of race wars. Did I “find what I was looking for,” as some have suggested? Of course. But I tried to be open and self-effacing about that (see, again, the title). And, as I have written in previous comments, the fact that I “found what I was looking for” doesn’t change the fact that I found it — and doesn’t change the fact that my finding it makes an unfortunate statement about gun show culture (notice I didn’t say “gun owner culture” — which is something I deem wholly different).
In response to another comment. See in context »Austin,
First off, I have to agree about the overall atmosphere bit. As a gun owner I find most gunshows to be gathering grounds for the hermits, eccentrics, random weirdness and our otherwise disenfranchised fellow citizens. I guess I would be considered a gun “snob” as I have an idea of what I am looking for ahead of time and I don’t participate in the rest.
What really rubs me the wrong way about your last post is that you support gun ownership for certain guns and practices. You see certain guns (handguns and assault rifles) as needing to be banned because they are made in your opinion, specifically to kill people. Which couldn’t be more off base, ignorant of the actual issues, and ignorant of basic knowledge of firearms and their ownership. First off the 2nd Amendment isn’t about duck hunting. It’s about citizens owning military arms to serve their government in a time of war or in the most extreme case protecting themselves from a Tyrannical Government. Handguns and “Assault Rifles” as you like to call them can and are used to hunt animals as well. “Saturday Night Specials”, “Assault Weapons”, “Cop-Killers”, “Sniper Rifles”, “Street Sweepers”, and anything else that the Anti-gun establishment use to divide and segregate the gun types. They have in some form or another tried to ban or carry out campaigns to ban all guns that fall under these tag lines. Once you add them altogether they include all guns, except for black powder muzzle loaders. Anything that is left over just falls under some sort of campaign against hunting, chauvinistic male fantasies of being the great white hunter and making up for our small “manhood” complex’s. To the Anti-gun establishment there is no acceptable gun, there is not reason to hunt, these are all throwbacks to an outdated establishment that needs to go away or be legislated away.
For you to accurately present a reasonable argument about guns and gun control you should understand what is driving gun violence in our country. The large school shootings grab headlines and the national attention but they do not account for the vast majority of gun crimes, which are in fact caused by gang violence in relation to the sale of drugs. Banning guns is never going to change the fact that 300 million people in the world have an appetite for 67% of the worlds drugs both legal and illegal. These products are consumable and in some cases are worth their weight in gold. The people who take the risk to engage in this trade don’t care about laws. Banning guns is not going to stop the violence associated with this trade. Banning guns is only going to affect legal gun owners in the US who are law abiding citizens. Guns only account for 10% of all the homicides in the US. Of that 10% only 2% can be attributed to “Assault Weapons”. Which is not an accurate number as they don’t have the weapon, just the casings or slugs which they believe may have come from this type of weapon. So if they have a homicide caused by a 7.62×39mm round they contribute it to an AK-47 but it may have come from an SKS, or a Mini-30 or even a single shot rifle. But the round is common to the AK-47 so it falls into the “Assault Weapons” category. Gun control is about people control. It will never stop the gun violence in our country. In fact all the cities that have strict gun control laws, they have the highest statistics per capita of homicide, rape, assault, robbery and home invasion. All I am saying is, be neutral, do you own research and educate yourself of the issues. Steer yourself away from the Brady Campaign propaganda and think for yourself.
Lastly by quoting Lynard Skynard to illustrate your argument you have purposely ignored the fact that Lynard Skynard is a very pro-gun and conservative group. They also wrote a song called “Gimme Back My Bullets” and “God and Guns”. “Saturday Night Specials” happened to be the “Boogey Man” so to speak of the early gun control movement in the 1970’s. Notice that society really doesn’t talk about them anymore. “Saturday Night Specials” aren’t on the Anti-guners priority list anymore. They got replaced by “Street Sweepers” in the early 1980’s, that got replace by “Assault Weapons” in the early 1990’s, that got replaced by “Sniper Rifles” in the early 2000’s, which are now being replace by “Cop-Killers” after the Ft. Hood shootings. Do you notice the trend here? Are you picking up what I am putting down? Educate yourself.
Hi, Jace,
Thanks for your comments. I actually agree with you on several points.
I question some of your “facts” however — New York City, where I lived for five years, has some of the strictest gun-control laws in the country, and is now (wait for it) one of the safest cities in the country as well (rated safest large city in America for several years recently). Giuliani was the one who took a lot of guns off the streets, by the way.
Also, your assertion that only 10% of all homicides are committed with firearms is so completely wrong, I can’t let it slide. Check the FBI’s most recent data on homicides:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/expanded_information/data/shrtable_07.html
This is not “Brady Campaign propaganda.” This is the FBI. As you’ll observe, 66.9% of all homicides committed in the United States in 2008 were committed using firearms. I don’t know where you got your 10%. But I humbly advise you to follow your own advice and “educate yourself” a bit more as well. Plenty of propaganda coming from both sides on this issue.
By the way, I never understood why there had to be “two sides.” I honestly don’t consider myself a part of one or the other.
Anyway, I don’t mean that to sound adversarial. I appreciate (for the most part) the tone of your argument. Your points about drug use and what you deem to be arbitrary gun control lines are well taken, and beg consideration in any reasoned debate about guns, to be sure.
In response to another comment. See in context »dear austin, i appreciate your attempt at an objective report. i guess you could count me in as a gun lover. i love hunting, fishing, skiing (water and downhill,and camping. i grew up fairly poor and went through years of college working construction or pipelining in the summer and as a waiter in school months. sometimes my dad got to take me deer or duck or dove hunting. i grew up in a different time than you. i was a boy scout and gentleman.i doubt u can understand what i refer to but i wish youngsters today could hunt or fish or go into a convenience store restroom that didnt have piss (or worse) everywhere. i had a few African-american friends.they were poorer than me and i was proud to give them a ride from college to home and back at thksgiv. and CHRISTMAS. then they were Negro and later became Black (or was it ‘black’). not many girls became pregnant in their school years and (i know this may b unbelievable to u) but for the most part they tried to find a decent guy to marry who would b a good husband and father. i often went months without a date struggling to get through college. (i’m sorry to ramble, but it’s sat. night and i had a few rough cases today and feel i may have had a little too much wine). i became a dr and treat and have empathy (as a christian should) for blacks(oops-is that ok), browns, and whites. do u understand why i became a dr rather than a journalist now? well, no. i wanted to help sick people, as i had been helped as a child after a servere illness. well, i now like to get out and hunt deer, quail, dove,etc. i deal with tons of patients every week who had fun after high school and who never took a book home. i deal with patients who demand the best care and have been taught they are as good as anyone when they never worked or held a job. when i was a kid u didnt go uot to eat if u werent well-off. i go out to eat and see families i take care of on welfare who drive a better car and live in a better house than i. many in the house live on welfare with 5-6 kids and claim to b single. the hubby has a good job and when welfare comes to check he moves out a week or two. i’ve been to many gunshows trying to find that special .22 for myself and later my son for rabbit, and ditto for a shotgun for doves and again for ducks(they are bigger u know) an even one for my wife. then a flat fast rifle for coyotes (they eat a lot more deer than i) and again for my son and then rifles for he and i for deer and then one for big stuff like elk. yea, i dont kill much (big game)but i shoot a fair bit and guess im a gun nut. that adds up to a lot of gun shows. i never have heard anything at a show like u did re.”fun to cause mayhem” or something to that effect-so unusual i had trouble visualizing it. i grew up when it did people and tyhe country good for most to work and pay taxes. it, for a while, made us the greatest country on the face of the earth-that controlled the gates of its’ enemies. well that’s about how God said it n the Bible. i know in your mind He doesnt exist and i do fear we will experience the death and destruction other nations experienced with the rise of socialism. it’s sure going the way He said it would. two things about it. i’ve known hundreds of hunters and only two killed outside war. one was a cop who had a crook shoot him and one was at home asleep when burglers broke in. in the original translation of the bible God actually said not to ‘murder’ which is different from killing. i kill every time i prescribe antibiotics (or brush my teeth). 2 things 2 consider-1. if u need a gun and dont have one , you’ll never need one again, and 2) those who beat their guns onto plows will plow for those who dont. thanks rc