(1918 Bolshevik Poster by Alexander Apsit reads "Citizens, hand over your weapons!") Posted on 01/12/2013 2:06:42 PM PST by DogByte6RER
(1918 Bolshevik Poster by Alexander Apsit reads "Citizens, hand over your weapons!")
Why I gave up my guns
• A former firearm enthusiast explains his personal epiphany
Late one night in the spring of 2008, I was jolted awake by the sound of yet another a burglar trying to break into my Atlanta home. We’d already had a series of scary close calls, but this time I was ready: I had staged my shotgun and a box of shells in a broom closet right by the back door, next to the umbrellas.
While my girlfriend called the police, I ran into the kitchen and looked out the window just in time to see a human form rush to hide in the shadows behind my car. I grabbed the gun and fumbled for the ammunition in the half-light, spilling most on the ground, but finally found one cartridge I was able to slide into the chamber.
I worked the action furiously, once, twice, and again, realizing dimly as I did that in doing so I was actually ejecting the shells, unspent, and basically unloading the weapon. But the unmistakable sound of the pump carried to the backyard, and, in a flash, the prowler was gone — a blur of raggedy jeans and tattered flannel sliding across the hood of my car and vaulting over the picket fence into the night.
I couldn’t make out his face or tell if he was armed. The next moment I was in the bathroom, vomiting hot puke all over the floor and toilet, water from the bowl splashing my face and eyes. Later, my girlfriend told me I had made her feel safe, protected. I just felt ill.
I’m a New Yorker born-and-bred, and unlike the just under half of all Americans who keep guns in their homes, I didn’t grow up with firearms. But when I moved first out West, and then to the South, I got into guns big-time. I’ve owned a dozen guns over the years, including a Bushmaster AR-15, and have fired scores more. I’ve put in countless hours at the range, in the woods, and at gun shows.
I’ve made good friends on the range, love shooting skeet, and appreciate how integrally guns figure into the rural professions and outdoor pastimes of many Americans. I understand, also, why so many Americans don’t just like their guns but love them. From the robust kick of firing a revolver to the emphatic, mechanical bursts of shouldering an assault rifle on full auto, I have come to know the rhythm of guns, have felt the addictive thrill of their multi-sensory intensity.
But on that night in 2008, I learned something else. I learned how guns relate to fear, and not just the fear my gun inspired in the would-be-burglar. Owning guns had given me a sense of security, but all that was a fantasy that imploded in a few terrifying seconds.
Sure, I had frightened away an intruder, defended my castle. But I could have just as easily been killed by him or accidentally shot myself or my partner. Hundreds of hours of range time didn’t mean anything in the confusion of the moment.
The ease with which I had bought my guns, fired them recreationally, and even stoically contemplated the possibility of defending me and mine with lethal force suddenly seemed foolish.
In fact, it was almost as if my very closeness to guns had blinded me to the real possibility that they might lead me to actually killing another human being.
Whether we like it or not, in today’s America, we are all close to guns. In a nation with nearly 300 million privately owned firearms, it would be hard not be. But just because we are saturated with weapons does not make our relationship with them mature or reality-based.
Instead, just the opposite is the case: The American vision of gun ownership is dominated by fantasy, and the public discourse around guns is frequently hijacked by a kind of fantasy logic.
Only in fantasy does keeping a gun in the home make you safer; the statistical reality is just the opposite. Only in fantasy is the possibility of even minimal gun regulation a threat “to take away all the guns.” And only in fantasy can arming teachers and abolishing gun-free zones be seen as a reasonable response to gun violence — for only in fantasy does throwing more of a problem at a problem equal a solution.
After Newtown, the predictable chorus of “if-only-I-had-been-there-with-my-gun” included an Oregon state representative, Dennis Richardson, who wrote to some of his constituents that, “If I had been a teacher or the principal at the Sandy Hook Elementary School and if the school district did not preclude me from having access to a firearm . . . most of the murdered children would still be alive, and the gunman would still be dead, and not by suicide.”
Perhaps. Or perhaps the good representative would have been shot dead without having a chance to draw his weapon. Or perhaps he would have been gunned down by confused first responders. Or perhaps Richardson would have taken the best aim he could while under stress, missed, and killed a child or two himself.
If trained NYPD cops can only manage to take down a single gunman by wounding nine bystanders in the process, as recently happened outside the Empire State Building, it seems unlikely to expect much better from the 63-year-old Richardson.
All of these scenarios are equally hypothetical, but that Richardson should offer macho posturing in lieu of constructive reflection speaks as much to what Gov. Cuomo has rightly termed a national “madness” as it does to that madness’ allure. If only the minimal difference between the life and death of 20 children, the only bulwark needed against tragedy, was some decrepit politician playing Dirty Harry.
I had thought I’d be ready to play that role, too. I had my shotgun at the ready that spring night because there had been three break-in attempts on our house in as many months, the last in the early afternoon while my girlfriend was home. I don’t think they realized she was there — the car wasn’t in the driveway — and when they tried to kick down the door, already damaged by someone with a crowbar a couple weeks prior, she called the cops, then me.
I got there before they did and found her hiding in the bathtub, the front door in splinters around the hinges and a couple of shotgun shells lying on the porch. Presumably, whoever tried to break in had dropped the ammo while attempting to get inside.
I called my landlords to give notice and took my gun out of its case, removed the trigger lock and put it in that closet. The feeling of safety this gesture gave me was quite real.
The desire to feel secure is understandable, but our fantasies are killing us. America averages 34 gun homicides a day.
For an organization that blames America’s gun crisis on violent movies, the NRA in particular seems deeply committed to cultivating the notion that we can all be the stars of our own personal action flicks.
I got my opportunity to play hero. Not in fantasy, but in real life, the chance to flex my finger with three pounds of pressure and shoot another human being dead in my driveway because he wanted to steal my TV. Right after we moved, I sold all my guns. I never wanted to put myself in that position again.
Enough is enough. In 2008, Japan, which maintains strict gun regulations, saw 11 gun homicides; in that same year, America had over 12,000. This is the world in which we live, which we have made for ourselves, and which understandably inspires fear.
The choice before us now is either to double down on that fear and make the situation worse by arming ourselves further, or to break the chains of fantasy altogether. Blithely wielding the power to kill does not make you heroic, and it will not make you safe. We are not free if we choose to continue living in fantasy, and we are not brave if we choose to continue living in fear.
Blanchfield is a Ph.D. candidate and Woodruff Scholar in comparative literature at Emory University in Atlanta.
English major, Emory University. Pretty much says it all. What the idiot failed to realize is that he accomplished exactly what MOST "gun self defense" situations do....scare off the assailant, perp, crook WITHOUT killing or injuring anyone.
I also have a sneaking suspicion that this is purely a piece of "creative writing", and that the author has never been within fifty feet of a firearm.
bfl
Yepper - and what kind of woman feels safe and protected by a dude who blows lunch all over the place when put on the spot? I can picture my wife suggesting some "Manning Up" classes if I did that after totally blowing any advantage a loaded gun would have given. It sounds ike this PHD would rather be dead by criminal and feel morally superior (in so much as a cowardly corpse can feel anything) rather than suffer the "hardship" of defending the loives of he and his loved ones. Sounds more like a bad trip flashback than the "epiphany" he calls it.
What a disgusting loser. Zero logic from him.
You make it sound like someone woke up that morning and said...’It’s such a nice day lets go out and kill some Indians!”
It began many years before with a vision of Wavoka the Piute in Nevada. (We could get into a religious discussion but that is for a later time).
It spread to all the Indian tribes only being rejected by the Navajos because of their fear of GHOSTS.
It foretold of the disappearance of the White man and a return of the buffalo, and dead ancestors.
They were told to make bullet proof “ghost shirts” and do the “Ghost Dance”, and attack the whites. Fear caused the white settlers to demand army protection.
The army surrounded this particular band of Indians, calling for them to give up their guns. The Indians brought out some junk guns (like current buy backs), the Army began to search and find hidden guns in the lodgings.
Then according to OTHER SOURCES, a medicine man gave the signal and the Indians began to shoot. The Ghost Shirts didn’t work and they were shot down.
Frederic Remington did a series of paintings on this. His friend, an officer was later arrowed to death.
So there is always an alternate version that no one likes to hear which must be taken into account.
Thank you for the clarification, it does cast things in a different light. However, the presence of 4 Hotchkiss guns suggests that the Federal forces were not there to play "patty cake" either. Their ordinance is indicative of a more modern approach and SWAT like behavior. "Overwhelming force" and "any means necessary" come to mind. The officers may have had a legitimate mission at the start but seem to have lost control when it turned into a melee, killing nearly all the Sioux and a goodly number of their own troops.
I see the "Ghost Dance" and the subsequent preparations from a different perspective. The Indians of the day were nomadic hunter gatherers. Forcing them on to "reservations" limited their hunting territory. Sending in Federal troops to disarm them would take away their only modern technology and put the hunters back in the stone age. It put their backs to the wall where their only choices were fight or starve. In retrospect that was not an accidental condition but rather the strategic plan of the "Great White Father"in Washington. The tactical plan was overwhelming force. The result was a near brush with genocide. It was not our finest hour.
The scariest thing is that the current Federal push for rigid "gun control" is going to put law abiding citizens in the same position. Can't run, can't hide, back to the wall, tons of ammo and guns on both sides. What's next? The last hope is the people that took an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution from enemies, foreign and domestic", do they really mean what the words say?
Regards,
GtG
They may be just your opinions, but I think they’re pretty good. Especially the one about the article being written for people who don’t own guns, I’d say that is a virtual certainty.
Could you be more specific about what I got wrong?
I didn’t see stress in this guys rant. It made no sense. Load one shell and start dispensing numerous rounds all over the floor. Writing this horse-excrement was the most stress this guy has been in all his life. Thats all
How exactly do you holster a 12 Ga. shotgun or a lever gun chambered in .45-70?
What a useless schmuck this guy is, when it wasn’t all fun & games he went to pieces....and now he has to “share” with us all his nincompoopery. I hope the GF dumps him PDQ and finds a real man, with a brain and a spine, gun optional.
“....or Richard Simmons.”
I feel confident Richard Simmons could break this guy in two.
I’m sure he could. Just keep the details to yourself.
The funniest thing is in court they no longer swear you in by stating, “...so help you God”. Now they simply say “...so help you”.
You’re literally swearing by yourself. That’s self-referencing and wouldn’t be allowed for identification or reference. It’s utter nonsense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.