Stuff; Occasional
Thought About Stuff that Goes On
By
Editors
Guns;
Argument is Futile
After
one of the recent gun massacres we Editors of Voices wondered if we
might commit to a position that would advocate some safety remedies of
a legal nature. But after we talked together about some of our
own gun experiences we changed our emphasis. Most damage to
people does not come from mass killings, or from the other
murders. We remembered the Boy Scout Master who brought a .22
revolver along to an outing up in the woods. He left the gun down
on a log. One of the boys picked it up, cocked back the hammer,
and took turns aiming it in the faces of some of the other boys.
Enough of them told him it was loaded that he aimed it down at his foot
before he pulled the trigger; he said nothing original as he limped
about.
Then there was the other guy we knew who got drunk one
afternoon and took his shotgun out in the desert to shoot snakes.
He hears a rustling sound in a large bush and fired. The large
round boulder behind the bush sent the pellets back at him (no
snake). Staying drunk helped as he dug the pellets out of his
upper body over the next few hours. And the friend who shot
himself in the leg practicing his fast draw; he got to keep his leg
(small caliber -- the gun that is). And the man and wife who
thought they had an intruder in the back yard one evening. He
gives her the house gun and they go out the front door and circle the
outside of the house from opposite directions. You know the
rest.
Likely we all know of similar everyday stories; and we all
know of everyday stories way worse. While no one could reasonably
object to measures that could prevent large-scale massacres, what about
the small incidents -- the carelessness and accidents. There is
certainly enough evidence of these to suggest action. This
is where we will think about an original approach. We wondered
what there could be to object to?
We thought we should
ask around about that. So as we often do we explained our plan to
our friend Jerome, out in Kern County. Jerome thought we
made some sense, “You might have them on the run a little after those
massacres.” He was not so sure about us “doing any good on the usual
gun fights, best pal and girlfriend shootings, messing with the trigger
while pointing the gun around or looking down the barrel, and so
on. A big part of the culture.” Jerome suggested that to
give our approach a “field test” we should talk to “our local gun guy
here.” That would be “Marlin, Marlin Brech.” “Marlin is a
spokesman for a gun group. He’ll want to hear what you say.
He always likes someone new to practice on. I know he comes down
to your area at times. I’ll tell Marlin about you. ”
After
some contact back and forth we arranged our meeting. Then we on
the Board had several get togethers to be sure we had the best possible
argument before we talk to Marlin Brech. We have the numbers,
the law, and logic. And we might have an original approach that would
be competitive in any forum.
Several weeks later we
met Brech at the outside seating of a restaurant along Colorado
Blvd. It was early afternoon just after lunchtime. He is a
smiling friendly guy who greeted us from his seat with his back against
the windowless part of the wall of the restaurant facing the
street. We all introduced ourselves. Then Marlin broke some
brief silence. “I have all afternoon so please ask me all you
want. Can I order you espresso or hot chocolate?” He had a
notebook open on the top of the table and an open briefcase down by his
right foot. Our outspoken colleague replied “we were going to
order milk and cookies.” The rest of us laughed at this
‘kidding’.
No laughing but with the same smile he replied “first
let me explain my group. We of Gun Freedom work as a
counterweight or check on our well-meaning but moderate-inclined
friends in the National Rifle Association. We stay on guard to
prevent any backsliding on gun freedom advocacy. Or
‘pussyfoot’n’. We let them know right away about ‘backslid’n’ or
‘pussyfoot’n’.” He winked at us over his own pronunciation of
those words. We also tried to keep smiling and not exchange
looks. And not look at the open briefcase. We ordered
beers. Even after all our studied preparation no one of us was
moving to be the very first to ask Brech a question.
First we tried for
rapport “we have no issue at all with firearms used in crime
suppression and certainly not with the right of individuals to protect
homes or businesses.” And so after no response from Marlin and a
deep breathe we continued “the great majority of gun injuries and
deaths result from personal encounters; people kill or injure people
they know -- often family members. We are concerned with 10,000
murders and almost twice that number in suicides each year. And a
number approaching 75,000 gunshot injuries. And so we are
addressing a violation of the Constitution, which specifically mandates
a ‘well-regulated Militia’.
If you support the right to ‘bear
arms’ for all citizens then you must believe that all citizens comprise
a ‘Militia of the Whole’. We agree with that
interpretation.” We thought just for an instant Brech dropped
his smile. “No competent military would tolerate this lack of
discipline. What we are saying then by these data is that the Militia
of the Whole is not at all well-regulated. Therefore we are
asking for legal remedies that would cause the Militia to be
well-regulated.” It took us some time to write out the exact words for
all of that. It did not take Brech so long to answer.
“I agree that the
75,000,000 gun owners together should be considered a Militia of the
Whole.” He writes in his notebook. “There are 1,500,000 active
duty military. Your number of 20,000 suicides a year by gun would
be a ratio of 400 a year in the active and highly disciplined Armed
Forces. Do you think the actual yearly number of suicides there is much
different?” After a pause Brech continues “750,000 injuries is
one tenth of one percent. I have no comparable numbers for the
Armed Forces but I will say that our groups have always worked for more
gun safety.”
We ask then about the number of murders and he
answers “of course the Armed Forces don’t have a comparable ratio of
murders. The military has competent law enforcement. Our
groups have always asked for more competent law enforcement.
Enforce the laws we have.” And so much for our original approach,
in frustration our less patient colleague lets his emotions get the
best of him and goes back to some common objections to guns. “And
you would do nothing about political assassinations, or people killing
their entire families!” Our conversation is starting to
deteriorate.
“First I will address your so called ‘problem’ of political
assassinations. What assassinations? When?” Brech is back
in auto-pilot now. “We in Gun Freedom cannot understand why the elite
commentators keep going on and on about this.” (‘Elite’? Us?) He
continues “It has been over fifty years since any President has been
killed. The few candidates since who had been killed or crippled
hadn’t even been elected yet; they were just running. Or the
shooter missed. And the Gipper remember just shook it off.”
We quickly looked at each other as Brech looked down at his
briefcase. “Our concern is that worthless people get guns and attack
politicians.” Marlin quickly answers “I will not allow you to
generalize from rare instances, to smear all members of the Militia of
the Whole. We are not any more worthless than the rest of the
population!” He starts to tap his fingers impatient I think with
the easy question we asked and the many times he has had to give that
answer.
Our colleague was angry
now “you make it possible for people to kill their family, their own
children!” Marlin is back to enjoying himself “interactions
between friends, acquaintances, and family are personal and none of the
government’s business. It’s a private transaction. When a
responsible gun owner wants to shoot one of these it does not involve
anyone else; they only shoot the people they intend. And what
would you have a man do? Try to run down the wife and kids with
the truck. Driving over the neighbors’ lawns, knocking over the fence
and trees? The dog! He could hit the dog! ” One of us tries
irony “that would not be considerate.”
And then Marlin sits up
straight and gets very animated and starts writing in his
notebook. We hear him say over and over “considerate
considerate.” And he looks straight ahead, not really at us, and
says “Gun owners are considerate. And responsible.
Considerate and responsible.” He seems very happy and
fulfilled. For him we are no longer there. So we quietly
get up finishing our beers and walk away.
Editors 2013 ©
