Posted on 08/27/2002 12:05:50 PM PDT by ArcLight
…In the earlier colonial period, Gloria Main and Anna Hawley both found more guns than tables or chairs or stools. When men could afford to buy a gun, they did. This suggests either that they were very useful tools or that they had an important social meaning (for example, to reinforce their owners’ masculinity or provide peace of mind) – or both.
I note here that the author's antigun bias lingers; the idea that reinforcing one's masculinity ranks in importance with keeping one's scalp attached is a little arch for my taste. We get a repetition of this every time an anti-gun zealot suggests that gun ownership is compensation for some deep underlying psychological pathology - it's so deeply ingrained in their concept of firearms ownership that they never question it.
This is one of the final paragraphs of the article, and I pass it along without comment because none is needed:
The book and the scandal it generated are hard to understand. How could Bellesiles count guns in about a hundred Providence wills that never existed, count guns in San Francisco County inventories that were apparently destroyed in 1906, report national means that are mathematically impossible, change the condition of guns in a way that fits his thesis, misreport the counts of guns in censuses or militia reports, have over a 60% error rate in finding guns in Vermont estates, and have a 100% error rate in finding homicide cases in the Plymouth records he cites? We may never know the truth of why or how Arming America made such basic errors, but make them it did.
Whew...
I have always said, "Lawyers are like guns, you can get rid of all of them, just take mine last."
TS: I have always said, "Lawyers are like guns, you can get rid of all of them, just take mine last."
Lawyers are like handguns -- everyone claims to hate them, until they suddenly need one!"
Do you remember that really good article that was on FR about a year ago? The author told the anti to take his gun. Don't send someone else to do it. The anti should do it. He should have the courage of his convictions. Don't send a police officer or soldier. If the anti-gun person has the stupidity that he thinks that guns in the hands of lawabiding citizens are the problem then he should be the one having the courage to go door to door. Don't send someone to support his beliefs.
It was a great article. I don't know who wrote it.
You forgot "hater", as in "he's a hater", or "he's a hater from way back."
Does the leadership at Emory actually think they can drag this out so long that the gun nuts like me would actually forget about it?
LOL
The longer the "review" committe takes, the more the personal stench from Belleisles starts to linger on the Emory faculty.
Guess I'll have to write the History chairman again. You'd think he'd take SOME notice of an alumna, wouldn't you? Maybe he's getting a large volume of mail, or maybe he's just too embarassed to write back.
When you need a lawyer, all them lawyer jokes ain't so funny no more . . . :-D
Unfortunately, the rotten, greedy, & incompetent lawyers seem to get all the press. Nobody ever says anything about the foot soldiers who do just ordinary garden variety legal work, represent their clients well, and don't get paid a whole lot of money. No excitement in that, I guess. And of course the decent lawyers suffer the most from the jack-legs, 'cause we have to deal with them every day and they annoy us as much as they annoy everybody else. Plus we get tarred with their brush to boot!
When you write the History chairman, you may want to cc the Alumni Department, you know the ones that are always begging for money. They won't ignore you.
I say CC the local newspaper and let the bright light of publicity shine where the sun don't.
The rag is almost uniformly liberal (the owner is a raving nutter leftie) and rabidly anti-gun. The editors don't think the 2nd Amendment applies to anything but the National Guard (but just in case it does, they want it repealed.) They don't even think people should "have guns for hunting". As though the Second Amendment had anything to do with hunting.
Only if you hang with PBS viewers.
Bumpo to expose these left wing history revisionists, like Doris Kearns Goodwin.
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.