It may be said that there are two sides in the “gun debate.” On the one hand, we have big city, anti-gun socialists. On the other, libertarians and farmers. Guess which side the legacy media sides with?
But really the beauty of this “debate” is found in its great variety of hysterical myths.
Myth No. 1: There are more “hot burglaries” in pro-gun America than “gun-control” Britain
Au Contraire. States John R. Lott Junior in More Guns, Less Crime: “In Canada and Britain, both with tough gun control laws, almost half of all burglaries are ‘hot burglaries.’ In contrast, the United States, with fewer restrictions, has a ‘hot burglary’ rate of only 13 percent.”
Hot burglaries take place when the resident (or residents) are at home. Therefore, they are intrusive crimes, as Madonna and thousands of British people can testify.
Big-picture academics, of course, base their studies on strong empirical evidence. This is most important. In America’s case, big-picture studies reveal that would-be home invaders fear breaking into occupied houses simply because the risks are too high. What if the owner has a gun? Yes, this very question haunts would-be home invaders. But that’s the point, isn’t it?
Myth No. 2: America’s gun culture encourages school shootings.
The argument is, in part, a product of Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine DVD. Ignore the fact that some of the key scenes were staged. For Moore, the “gun debate” is an opportunity to make money. Indeed, he charged victims to watch his “docu-ganda” film.
Yet, there were thousands of guns in schools during the “repressed” 1950s. Students brought rifles on trains for school-based sporting activities. Later, young men jumped on NYC’s subways with their weapons of choice. Boys played with guns on weekends.
America doesn’t have a gun problem or a knife problem; campaigning reporters do have a problem with history, however. When we revisit the 1950s, we find context. If guns kill people, then where are all the bullet wounds on my father’s pro-gun generation?
Myth No. 3: Guns are a danger to their owners.
It’s a simple argument, but there’s one glaring flaw: guns are tools. One can’t single out a handful of accidents, and bury the many ways in which guns protect owners. We can, however, see guns as tools to defend grandmothers, scare would-be rapists, and hunt (among other things).
In the real world, more people die in motor-vehicle accidents. More people die in motorcycles accidents. More people die in fires.
An American is more likely to die choking on an object. Falling down the stairs is more dangerous. Bicycles also claim more lives, as do beds (or falling out of them).
In the end, bathtubs are riskier too. Accidental gun deaths don’t even come close to making the top ten. Step inside the weird syllogisms of Joe Socialist’s mindset and you’ll be banning cars, motorbikes, matches, stairs, bicycles, beds, and – wait for it - bathtubs.
Myth No. 4: Gun control laws prevent massacres.
No more serious abuse excuse takes place in the context of the “gun debate.” Let’s return to a controversial, familiar example. Enter: the infamous Columbine tragedy.
States David Von Drehle in TIME Magazine (April 30, 2007): “There’s a telling moment in Michael Moore’s film Bowling for Columbine, in which singer Marilyn Mansondismisses the idea that listening to his lyrics contributed to the disintegration of Harris and Klebold. What the Columbine killers needed, Manson suggests, was for some one to listen to them.” Adds Von Drehle: “This is the narcissist’s view of narcissism: everything would be fine if only he received more attention. The real problem can be found in the killer’s mirror.”
Myth No. 5: The media knows best, Bush is leading the Wild West.
Hey, it rhymes so it must be true, right?
Just curious, but how wild was the so-called “Wild West”? Really. If you want “wild,” try Hitler’s Germany, Stalin’s Red Russia, or even Mao’s China. All communistic or militant socialistic regimes banned law-abiding citizens from purchasing guns.
In the end, yesterday’s “Wild West” and today’s “Wild West” don’t even compare to the brutalities inflicted upon civilians in “gun-control” regimes. Banning law abiding citizens from buying arms, history argues, gives police states and criminals the edge.
Summarily, then, we have available to us mountains of big-picture studies. What’s more, families don’t deserve to live like prisoners. A mature society doesn’t engage in selective-focusing. It looks in the mirror. Nor does she hide facts.
And yet, some radical elements wish to ban cars, and bathtubs (if smelling them is any indication), but stairwells, and matches? As the Left’s comrade Josef Stalin said: “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns; why should we let them have ideas?”
Ben-Peter Terpstra, an Australian-European satirist, is a contributor to a number of websites, from On Line Opinion (Australia’s e-journal of social and political debate) to American Thinker. His pieces are also posted on his blog, Pizza Trays and Beer Bottles Ben-Peter can be reached at: Letters@canadafreepress.com
