Ryan Davis recently wrote this.
And this recently appeared from Michael Anestis and Bryan Craig. This is the abstract. It will cost you to read the whole thing.
Please read; your comments here are invited.
The abstract of the latter piece includes the statement: “These findings highlight that exaggerated fears may be motivating individuals to purchase firearms to diminish anxiety and that this trend may be particularly common among individuals who already own firearms.” The former seems to focus on hunting traditions.
My take?
“Exaggerated fears,” my butt. Reasonable fear of 2020’s happenings seems to be notably absent from each of these analyses.
The news media has repeatedly told us that police are being defunded, and warned us that COVID-19 alone might reduce police presence and availability in emergencies by as much as 20%. Similar strain on the emergency medical community means we are less likely to survive injuries at the hands of violent criminals if we can’t stop them before those injuries are inflicted.
At the same time, a combination of “progressive” prosecutors and COVID-19 concerns are emptying jails and prisons at a rapid rate. The media tells us violent crime is increasing precipitously. And do we even need to discuss the 2020 riots?
Fewer cops. More criminals on the street. More violence.
The massive increase in gun purchases isn’t about “exaggerated fears.” It’s about a logical response to an ugly and dangerous New Reality.
NJ resident here. I’ve been telling friends for years who had a vague in firearms for personal protection to buy when times are good, not wait for a crisis. Especially with NJ, who requires owners to first have a FID card granted by the state through your local police department — an application process that takes up to a year in some municipalities. Now, all of a sudden, a bunch of people I know filed for their FID cards using me as a reference. I of course filled out the reference survey. But then they’re dismayed about the prices and availability of guns and ammo. I’m sitting on more than a thousand rounds each of 9mm, 5.56, and 22lr, because I buy in bulk when things are on sale during high availability times — like in 2017.
It’s natural that people who weren’t previously thinking of buying guns would panic-buy in 2020. Sane people who want to protect their families and think about that sort of thing anyway should buy when times are good, because they won’t always be good.
Hope I am getting this correctly. Looking for state lawmakers next Tuesday, December 29, 2020, to convene sessions of both state houses at once and vote to RECLAIM by resolution, under the US Constitution, of their power, in accordance with their oaths of office, to choose electors. Next, on January 6, states with truly “duelling sets” of electors from the past December 14 can be rejected from the electoral count. The electoral count result will be Trump 232, Biden 227. The winner will be determined by “Contingent Election,” which is based on one vote per state in the House under the 12th Amendment (election to be held immediately). The SCOTUS may weigh in at some point, which right now looks unlikely. Such is the power of the Queen of the Chessboard, like a great battleship of yesteryear, omnipotent without necessarily raising a single turret. A lot can happen between now and January 6, though. See Stephen B. Meister, Twitter @StephenMeister, via Epoch Times, December 22, 2020. Let us be firmly calm and lawful, while keeping our plentiful powder good and dry.
Oh and BTW we want you guns too. WTF?
Reacting to negative crime and political news by hoarding ammunition is illogical but to be expected. Tens of thousands of rounds of ammunition is excessive in MY opinion.
For those who are hoarders, please learn correct ammunition storage.
When your grandson dies of old age and his widow has your/his stash auctioned off I don’t want to buy a truck load of duds.
“Hoarding” is such a relative term. One persons “hoard” might be a couple of weekends entertainment / practice / training for another. I’m often amused when the papers show an ‘arsenal.’ For some folks, that might be the contents of the small backup safe in the kitchen.
or what some might absent mindedly toss into the boot of the family salloon when going off for the weekend.
When YOU know who I am, where I live, shat I do in my weekly activities, my particular interests and abilities, THEN perhaps you can come round and talk to me about “hoarding” I have far less than I believe I should have on hand, andyet if da fuzzies SHOULD take a notioin to come round and clean my place out, Ive litle question the press would be reporting the discovery of “a cache of firearms and ammunitioi”.
Now I happen to believe, based in the photgraphs I have seen, that the photographs of the room up on the 32nd floor in Vegas DID indeed portray small collectioni of firearms and ammunition and accessories. But at this point I am not ocnvinced that all belonged to the object of the attention. Having dome some seroius photograpjy work, both illustrative and commercial, the images we saw just did not”look right”. Too staged too ordered, too pristine. Methinks there was an underlying story that did not reflect reality.
The next phase will be to classify gun ownership as a clinical condition. The libs have been trying to do this since the 1980s, because then they could justify gun control as combatting a “disease” and this is one more aspect. This approach was the reason that the act was passed in the 1990s to prohibit CDC and others to fund gun violence research – it was being brought in as a backdoor to justify regulation. They can’t recognize that inner city violence IS a clinical condition, with clinical solutions, and that is clear proof of their hypocrisy.
Good point imho. They are using the c-1984 to expand their power over us… temporariliy of course. This was supposed to go on for only a few weeks for a specific purpose. That purpose has come and gone and the weeks have turned intomonths and the lockdowns ever more restrictive.
Who knows how many really bad people are getting freed due to Covid. It seems to me that to allow them to not be punished for their crime and to resume predation causes the public “cruel and unusual punishment”. This will really raise your blood pressure.
https://nypost.com/2020/12/11/ex-bin-laden-henchman-back-in-uk-after-early-release-from-us-prison/
“`The defendant’s obesity is an extraordinary and compelling reason that could justify a reduction of his sentence in light of the current pandemic’, they wrote.”
They could have simply stopped feeding him.
how many really bad people are getting freed due to Covid.
they are not getting freed “due to Covid”. Nope. Evil tyrants are using the whole covid nonsense as a cover to work their long-developing plan to destabilise and take down our nation. They know a takeover is not possible when our contryis strong and functioning. Releasing criinals into the public only serves to further destabilise the nation. Their twisted value set is having them spring serious felony level criminsals into society, meanwhile trying to put a Mom with children in prison because she kept her restaurant open so she could earn enough money to feed her own chidlren.On’es freedom is unwarranted, the others incarceration is unwarrented. Upside down worlds rarely remain stable for long. THAT is their goal.. destabilise until chaos reigns supreme, then step up out of nowhere and propse “the final solutioin”, which desparate ignorati will eagerly embrace.. ANYTHING to bring “peace and security” back.
I regret not sticking up earlier. I guess I was one of those naively thinking “it couldn’t happen here”
Stocking not sticking. Damn autocorrect!
Actually, both of them work. 🙂
Joe, your not alone. As for myself, I don’t want to believe it could happen here, this election is unbelievable.
My fear is a tyrannical government and their police who will confiscate all our arms when their government bosses tell them to do so, the police in America today are the standing army our founding fathers warned us about however this was not always the case, not when I got on the NYC Housing Police in 1993, those men were the last of the common sense police generation unlike today where POs are arresting people for not wearing a useless mask, parents playing on the playground with their children or people walking alone on a beach! Yes there is plenty of fear being perpetrated by both political parties, they are both anti 2A, minus a very few, Rand Paul and Thomas Massie are the only two I can think of, and they are both capitalizing on ANTIFA/BLM. I hope Republicans fight harder for 2A than they did when Reagan banned full auto firearms. We the people are facing the most tyrannical government in our republics history and unless we stop worshiping some government employees and start acting like our founding fathers we might as well turn them all in when the police come knocking.
Ronald Reagan did not ban full auto firearms. Machine guns, destructive devices, and other weapons such as short barrelled rifles and shotguns were highly restricted in 1934 by the unconstitutional National Firearms Act under the FDR regime. No newly manufactured selective fire guns and the banning of certain military styled semi-auto rifles was brought about by George H.W. Bush.
The ban on the sale of newly manufactured selective firearms to non-sworn civilians was part of the FOPA in 1986, so Reagan. To be fair, this was a last minute poison pill amendment by anti-self defense forces and the bill contained a bunch of other good stuff so Reagan signed it. Bush actually banned the import of military style SA firearms. This was the brainchild of Bill Bennett who for some reason is liked by many conservatives.
With the idiocy of defunding police, while at the same time encouraging more violent crime creates in the liberal’s mind the proverbial “perfect storm.” The libs will blame “guns” and gun-owners, then deputize biker gangs or, more likely, request UN “peacekeepers” to come in and confiscate the guns using illegally archived purchase records. Somali pirates in blue helmets coming to your doorstep for your guns.
Given that the abstracted article is from an educational journal, I’m going to guess that there are some predefined notions that impacted the “conclusions” of their research. I tend to fall where you are, Mas, that the events of this that were controllable (riots, police funding, crime increases, lockdowns, shutting down businesses, apparent/suspected lack of integrity in the election process, Biden and company’s rhetoric on firearms/taxes/unemployment/private property grabs, etc.) are the driver. Sure, there’s a somewhat nasty virus out there. We can’t control a virus. We can control our response to it. The failure in properly responding to any of these items is a big driver in the recent surge of gun ownership.
I appreciate the opinion of Mr. Davis in the Newsweek article. While I dislike the idea of higher taxes to pay for government ownership of healthcare, forgiveness of irresponsible student debt, almost anything else “free” from the government, I could be a whole lot more comfortable with a Biden administration if they hadn’t already threatened to come after all the firearms.
Our country is very near the tipping point. Refuse to register. Don’t turn in anything.
There was a fb live last night with a Texas practicing attorney and a question rose asking about what it would take to be represented if a person was involved with defensive act,I say shooting. She said probably 20 k$ and up from there. If indicted that where the north boundaries go.
I hope a situation never arises for folks to find out but there is the need to defend
Hi Mas, Up here on the west coast of Canada, things are much quieter than elsewhere in the country, and way less disruptive than in the US. However, if things really go south in your country, I fully expect it to spill over the border, plus we have an idiot for a prime minister, and a very anti gun government, as I am sure you have heard. I cannot speak for any other in Canada, but my support for our US brethren and your country, is wholeheartedly given. I too, have multiple firearms, and sufficient ammunition if it is needed. Truthfully, I expect things to get a lot worse, and I would want to add, “before it gets better”, but I don’t see things getting better in my lifetime. For all his faults, President Trump was the right man at the right time, and if he is fraudulently removed from office, all of North America will be exposed to the globalist agenda, as well as the internal socialist takeover attempts. Unfortunately, I see this devolving into conflict. I sincerely hope I am wrong. As President Trump has said, It is not him they are after, it is us, HE, is just in the way. Be stalwart and steadfast my American friends.
Gerry Kirkham,
Amen. You see USA politics more clearly than half of the American voters do.
Hi Maas,
I have been reading your very sensible and accurate articles for most of my 69 years. I do not worry about idiots de-funding the police. If they do they will change course when the SHTF. Sometimes so called good ideas prove to be otherwise. I do wonder why well trained cops keep killing black men on and off camera. The social and financial costs are staggering.
My favorite guns are a hundred years old in design. Anti Fa is a myth. The far right is real and scary. Who keeps talking about civil war? (The far right thinks they will win it…) Who won WW1 and WW2 ? Hint: Democrats ran the government then. That means that liberals can shoot and hit targets. I was a (R) for 45 years Trump scared the (R) out of me. Now I am listed as an (I).
As far as Cops killing, it only seems to be a problem when it’s blacks who die. Even if most of the deaths are later justified. World war 1 & 2 democrats were a different breed for the Nation than what we have now. As the saying goes the Democrats now are not our fathers Democrats. I’m 74 so I can use the term father rather than Grand Father or Great Grandfather as most alive now can use. For record I lean Libertarian but list Independent.
I live in Texas, a Red state. There are no elected Democrats in my county. We’re about as far “Right” as it gets.
I haven’t encountered a far-right White supremacist in the wild for more than 25 years. From elusive media reports, any of the fringe groups that do exist are heavily infiltrated by the alphabet agencies.
If there were any right-wing folks causing problems at the “peaceful demonstrations” the police would have arrested them, BLM sympathizers would have refused to bail them out, and the Democrat prosecutors would never have dropped their charges. We’d be seeing them paraded into court on national news.
Who won WW1 and WW2? Hint: Democrats ran the government then. That means that liberals can shoot and hit targets.
But the liberal Democrats running the government weren’t the ones who picked up rifles and went “over there” to fight the wars.
(I), (D), and (C). There’s no difference.
It’s not Congress so much as the BATFE who I am worried about. Politically appointed bureaucrats unilaterally deciding what is or is not an NFA weapon. As for “exaggerated fear”, tell that to the people living at or near the ongoing riots. I would say their fear is quite reasonable especially since police are always late to the party anyway and judges simply run felons through the revolving door of criminal justice by accepting misdemeanor pleas in exchange for felony convictions.
Thanks for the pointer to the article from Ryan Davis.
As a long term Washington resident I’m very tired of the state government’s attempts (and successes) to make it into another California by punishing law-abiding citizens. It’s becoming time to ‘vote with my feet’ and move elsewhere. The recent legislation regarding guns is only one of many reasons for doing so.
In 1791 when seconds counted the sheriff was only weeks away.
In the 20th Century, when seconds counted the municipal police were (at their best) minutes away. Quite an improvement. Most of it attributable to the telephone. But we were asymptotically approaching the minimum.
In 2020+, when seconds count, we shouldn’t expect a response for hours; if ever.
There never was a substitute for the individual to take care for himself and those under his mantle.
The Progressives are on a collision course of cognitive dissonance: Defund police. Release prisoners. Probation for the newly convicted. No cash bail. No enforcement of felon-in-possession. Disarm the law abiding.
I don’t like these developments. Nevertheless, they collectively support the argument for the 2A.
The fear is real and I am taking it serious. I am in FL and have always had a good inventory of guns and ammo. I have become more aware and have taken some of my great safe-queens out and positioned them more strategically in home, car, and person. I have also made a few extra trips to the range to stay fresh. I try to shoot enough to stay well practiced but not too much to run out my storage of ammo. – I try to bring friends that are not avid shooters or never shot at all and turn them on and get them interested and trained by my LGS. Be prepared and spread the word.
Anyone familiar with a standard population curve knows it sort of looks like a single hill drawn by a kid. Unfortunately for all a population curve of political philosophies in the US is looking more and more like two hills with a valley between them. People are stacking up on opposite ends of the political spectrum over the Second Amendment issue along with other issues. This election (and now the calls that we should all forgive and forget and get along) only exacerbated the divide we are facing.
While some progressives dismiss calls for “understanding” gun owners as a Trojan horse, there is a purely pragmatic reason for them to care: gun lovers are voting against them. They don’t have to be. And the changes it would take to reach them are nearly costless.
We see something like this about every election cycle, someone who thinks if he just comes to our backwoods state and explains gun control, we’ll all slap our foreheads and say, “Now I understand! Here are all my guns.”
But we do understand. And we notice there’s nothing in his proposal about listening to our side of the argument.
The NRA is weaker than ever, but rural Americans don’t care any less about guns.
Ah, yes, the “If we just get rid of the NRA the Second Amendment supporters will fade away” argument. And the related:
“Fine, but progressives don’t want to take away people’s guns. That’s just gun-lobby fearmongering.”
Except, it isn’t.
Larry Arnold,
If I perceive the current situation correctly, the Dems have made such bad decisions that even liberals like the McCloskeys are buying guns now. If what has happened in our cities begins to happen in suburbs and small towns, then non-gun owners and non-preppers will look like idiots and losers.
I spent something over 5 years reading allegedly scientific peer reviewed “studies”, I’d kinda like to read the whole thing, but I’m not going to pay for it. On second thought, recalling the tortured rhetoric often presented, I’d rather not. There are those who can’t recognize reality.
They seem shocked, I say shocked, that first responders seem to be part of the group buying firearms. It’s not surprising that those living in ivory towers/state of altered reality/have a position they want to “prove”, can’t recognize that those folks have a firm grasp on the potential problem. A wise person prepares for potential problems long before they become immediate and life threatening.
BTW, I grew up in an area, and currently live in an area, where emergency response time is often not particularly prompt. However, I can quantify the response time with a practical consideration: more than enough time to bleed out.
I expect that there are many folks who can’t believe such a thing could happen to them. However, ignorance isn’t a defense against bad outcomes. Appropriate training for first aid and defense would seem to be a more optimal solution.
I am just old enough to remember the days when most automobiles did not have seat belts. Though the death rate from automobile crashes was significantly higher then than today, people back then did not fear to ride in automobiles (as the rate was nonetheless still low).
Since we can greatly reduce the rate of death in automobiles by wearing seat belts and shoulder harnesses whenever we are traveling by automobile, we wear them. Not because we feel fear, but because however small the danger of a bad outcome, if we can significantly reduce the rate yet further with little sacrifice in time, money and discomfort — reducing the rate is the right thing to do.
Similarly, on those days when I am too lazy to carry a gun (or when traveling by air and just don’t want to go through the ordeal of dealing with TSA regulation), I don’t feel fear. But I often do carry a gun because doing so is the proper thing to do.
Even though it may be a long time before I encounter a violent criminal, or even if I ever will, _someone_ will be threatened by a violent criminal today, and we don’t know who that will be. When it happens, the chances that criminal will be dealt with appropriately is more likely if more of us are prepared to deal appropriately with a violent criminal.
That’s why, if one takes training, lives a sober lifestyle and has a calm personality — carrying a gun is simply the right thing to do.
fsilber,
I’m afraid what you have written is just too simple for a college-educated liberal to understand. Making it more complicated won’t work either, since truth is rejected by their brain-washed minds.
Having access to the full text, there are some interesting bits omitted by just the abstract. First, and most illuminating (though placed last), is the “Declaration of competing interests”
quote:
Author note: The lead author (MA) receives personal income from a book on the topic of means safety. He also receives consulting and speaking fees related to means safety and is the PI on a clinical trial examining the efficacy of lethal means counseling. The second author (CB) receives personal income from training workshops related to lethal means counseling. He is the Co–I on a clinical trial examining the efficacy of lethal means counseling.
/quote
Secondly, the authors do manage to produce one paragraph on the limitations of their study.
quote:
In considering these results, it is important to remain cognizant of the limitations in our data. First, we utilized quota sampling rather than probability based sampling methods, thereby limiting our understanding of the generalizability of our results. Second, it is unclear to what extent intent to purchase firearms aligns with actual future firearm purchasing behavior. This concern is somewhat mitigated by the elevated rate of firearm purchasing behavior during 2020 among those in our sample who endorsed plans to acquire firearms in the coming year; however, the lack of longitudinal follow-up remains a limitation. Third, all of our assessments involved self-report. This introduces concerns of demand characteristics and honest reporting. Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, our protocol did not include items specifically discussing the racial justice movement, systemic racism, the 2020 presidential race, and other contextual factors that likely played important roles in firearm purchasing decisions during this timeframe. As such, we were unable to directly address the roles of such issues relative to COVID-19.
/quote
I’m not familiar with the instruments used in their study; however, their statistical analysis seems valid. Their inferences do seem to go well above and beyond the data and design of their study, and unsurprisingly skew in the direction of the authors’ interests/financial motivations.
Charles,
“Follow the money.”
What I see in these two views is the arrogance and self-righteousness of the American Left. Both assume that (A) being Anti-gun is so correct that no reasonable and thinking person can possibly disagree with it and, therefore, (B) if someone is Pro-gun, then it must mean that something is “wrong” with them.
Professor Ryan Davis sees it as a cultural issue. A byproduct of rural and hunting cultures. He writes things like “There’s no paradox in thinking that people shouldn’t have high-capacity magazines, but still voting against politicians who say as much.” In effect, he is assuming that Pro-gun people are really (secretly, in their hearts) Anti-gun but vote Pro-gun merely as a stubborn protest vote against the dictates of Big-City Leftists (who are viewed as outsiders). His recommendation is to simply lie to us, to tell us what we want to hear and then lead us down the Anti-gun path. Like all leftists, he sees us as “sheep” who will be easily herded.
The paper in the “Journal of Psychiatric Research”, on the other hand, sees us as mentally ill for being Pro-gun. It implies that we are paranoid and subject to “exaggerated fears”. This is driving us to, irrationally, buy firearms and ammo in great numbers.
This is not unusual, by the way. The Worldview differences between the Right and Left and between the Pro-gun and Anti-gun positions are so stark that it is common to view the other side as being mentally unbalanced. It happens on the Right too. As many of you may know, Jeff Cooper coined the word “hoplophobe” and defined it as a “Person who has an irrational fear of firearms”. It is the way that Col. Cooper viewed the Anti-gunners. As suffering from a mental illness.
In truth, both the Pro-gun and Anti-gun views are rational given the underlying Worldviews held by their supporters. The difference is not due to mental illness nor, necessarily, cultural differences. It is due to the underlying belief system.
Humans, and their behavior, can be viewed in two ways:
(1) Humans can be viewed as largely being pre-programmed by their genetics. Therefore, human behavior is largely constant and can change only very slowly as humans evolve. Social Scientists call this the “Nature” view of humanity.
(2) Humans can be viewed as being born as “Blank Slates”. Their behavior comes largely from their interaction with their external environment. Under this view, human behavior can be rapidly changed, perhaps in as little as a single generation, simply by making a complete alteration in the environment that is interacting with humans. Social Scientists call this the “Nurture” view of humanity.
It is not widely recognized but this division extends into politics. View #1, above, gives rise to what we call “Right-Wing” Politics. View #2 generates “Left-Wing” Politics.
Leftists view humans as “Blank Slates” that can be easily manipulated and overwritten. This gives rise to a Worldview that sees people as innocent but naïve. Rather like a herd of sheep. Therefore, leftist policies inevitably lead to a totalitarian form of government with a “Big Brother” shepherd in overall command and with various other leftists (Party members, the Secret Police, etc.) acting as “Sheep Dogs” to herd the flocks. Therefore, despite what the Leftists may say, left-wing ideology is always contrary to the concept of democracy. After all, does anyone ever expect that shepherd to conduct a vote of the sheep as to where to herd the flock next?
The Right-wing view takes the opposite position. It views people not as sheep but as wolves. Potentially dangerous creatures. Democracy can exist under this view since the pack may well decide, as a group, where to hunt next.
Naturally, leftists are Anti-gun since the concept of the sheep having arms is ridiculous to them. Right-wing Conservatives tend to be Pro-gun. After all, what use is a wolf if it has no teeth?
Frankly, I never expect the American Left to understand us. They are trapped in the prison of their own mind. They will always view us as either (a) ignorant rubes or else (b) mentally ill. They will never be able to step outside of their own Worldview to see us correctly. They will never understand the Mind of the Wolf.
It is (literally) the truth that their minds simply do not work as our (Conservative) minds do. Nor is it easy for a non-leftist to enter the mind of a true left-winger. The Worldviews are as different as if they belonged to alien species.
It is due to the underlying belief system.
Sorry, but I have yet to meet ANY HUMAN ho does not hold strongly to a positioin of himself as having a right to protect his own life. Some may be sufficiently barmy as to deny themselves access to certain types of tools to protect his own life. But is innate in every creature on the planet to use whatever means is availble to preserve their own lfe, and most often also the lives of other selected ones, typically family or tribe members. WHO would not reflexively extend a hand to fend off an incoming blow from an attacker? Or fal to the floor and assume the foetal position to protect vital organs. Or run from a dog chasing you….?
@ Tionico – “Sorry, but I have yet to meet ANY HUMAN ho does not hold strongly to a position of himself as having a right to protect his own life.”
Then you must number a high percentage of “Wolf People” among your friends and associates because such humans do exist. If you study accounts of actual crimes, you will not have to look too far to find cases where people just surrendered and allowed themselves to be beaten, robbed, raped and even murdered without lifting a hand in defense. Also, let us not forget the millions of humans that walked, on their own two feet, into the Nazi gas chambers.
The reason that many leftists view people as sheep is because they are sheep themselves. They live a sheltered “Ivory Tower” existence where no one ever threatens them. Mommy and Daddy and Big Brother Government has always looked out for them. So much so that, if someone so much as says a harsh word to them, they scream about “micro-aggression” and then run and hide in their “Safe Space”.
I admit that, when push comes to shove, the majority of people will fight back. The problem we have is that the majority of Leftists don’t really expect to ever have to fight. Violence is all play-acting to them. It is something that they see on a Television Show. It is not REAL for them.
As a result, if it ever does become REAL, they will be totally unprepared.
That is the main difference between the Left-Wing Sheep People and the Right-Wing Wolf People. The sheep always expect the Shepherd and this sheep dogs to be there to protect them. The Wolf People are willing to rely upon their own TEETH!
I stand by my first comment above. I have given these matters a lot of thought and what I wrote is ABSOLUTELY what I believe.
Therefore the simple solution is to put the liberals through an intensive re-education program, to include electroshock therapy if necessary, to make them good Americans. If that fails to cure them, then haul those unrepentant scumbags on a one way trip down to my alligator farm in the Everglades for proper disposal.
Tom, I’m hoping you said that tongue in cheek…
That is just Tom606’s “unique” sense of graveyard humor at work again. 🙂
Besides, I am afraid that “Re-education Camps” and “electroshock therapy” won’t change the worldview of a hardcore leftists. In fact, I think it more likely that the Leftists would emulate their ChiCom brethren and use such methods on us gun-owners and Conservatives then vice-versa.
No, the Nature vs. Nurture mode of thinking gets set during one’s formative years. It becomes “locked” into an individual’s subconscious mindset by the time they reach adulthood. It is not something controllable by the higher reasoning part of the human mind. That is why trying to logically argue with a Leftist is both foolish and useless. You can’t change their (conscious) mind because the mindset extends deep into the subconscious.
By the time a person reaches young adulthood, their subconscious predisposition toward being a Nurture (Sheep) person or a Nature (Wolf) person hardens like concrete. Once it sets, it seldom changes. Perhaps a truly traumatic event might change it but I doubt it.
Let me give a comparison. In October of 1991, a mass murderer pulled off what is known as the Luby’s Cafeteria shooting in Texas. One survivor of this incident was Suzanna Hupp. She lost both of her parents in this traumatic event.
Now we can classify Mr. Hupp as a “Nature” (or Wolf) person because we know that she had a handgun carry permit prior to the incident. She had “Teeth”. Unfortunately, in obedience to the Laws of Texas (at that time), she left her firearm in her vehicle (outside of the restaurant) and was unable to effectively resist the attack.
The second incident was the AZ shooting that seriously wounded Representative Gabby Giffords in January 2011. Now we know that Ms. Giffords is a Leftists member of the Democrat Party. We can safely classify her as a “Nurture” (Sheep) person.
Both these women suffered a traumatic mass-shooting incident. Please observe how each responded. Ms. Hupp responded as a “Wolf”. She deeply resented not having her “teeth” with her when needed. She entered politics as a Pro-gun spokesperson and worked hard to expand concealed carry laws both in Texas and nationwide. She did not want to be caught without her “teeth” ever again.
Ms. Giffords responded as a “sheep”. Fearful that someone was able to just shoot her and that the State (the Shepherd) was unable to protect her. Like the leftist that she is, she blamed the gun for her injuries and started an Anti-gun group that has since worked tirelessly to restrict firearm ownership and carry rights.
Notice that neither woman changed their nature despite the trauma that they suffered. Ms. Hupp did not suddenly become fearful of firearms and become anti-gun even though she saw her parents shot down right in front of her eyes. Nor did Ms. Giffords suddenly “see the light” and think “Boy, if only I had a gun on me, I could have shot that nutjob before he shot me in the head”. She did not suddenly become pro-gun.
No, both stayed true to their core, subconscious programming.
In other words, once a “wolf” then always a “wolf”. Once a “sheep” then always a “sheep”. Neither tends to change anymore than a leopard tends to change its spots! 🙂
Mas, FYI alligators don’t have tongues, or cheeks either 🙂
TN_MAN,
I like your comparison of the different responses to deadly attacks displayed by Suzanna Hupp and Gabby Giffords. Also, your casting doubt on the ability of Leftists to learn reminds me of Proverbs 16:22 ” . . . the instruction of fools is folly.”
My uncle who works for a major U.S. defense contractor met Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly at a launching of a Navy destroyer named for Giffords and told me that radically liberal couple was very snobbish and quite unpleasant, especially Kelly who was extremely arrogant. I’m glad I don’t live in Arizona.
Looking at this year’s use of fireworks as possible injury threats by various violent vigilantes. Wondering about court action concerning someone having fired at someone putting fireworks at them. Assuming that shooters perceived an intent to endanger them. Years ago certain people in Anchorage, AK, more than once threw fireworks uncomfortably close when I was out walking my dog in the evening anywhere along a particular snowy street. My feeling was that the firecracker-flippers were drug dealers who wanted to maintain a deserted street attractively open for buyers of illicit drugs. I never fired any shots, but I wonder if I had decided shooting to be necessary, what would one’s degree of legal justification have been?
Firecracksers are not particulalry lethal. Howeve,r many of these rioters had procured Class C commercail grade firewoarks, and those ARE very lethal. I’ve a good friend who is a licensed puro, does big city fireworka shows sending tens of thousand of dollars worh into the sky. I’ve helpted him stage and run many shows. Trust me, the stuff they were using in Portland and Seattle ARE lethal explosives. If someone were launching them in my direction, and I had no easy/sure escape route. I do believe i’d be justiified in resppnding wiht lethal force. BATF regulates those pieces, it requres an FFL for explosives to handle them, and people have died from their accidental ignition. Those larger aeiral display pieces pack aHUGE punch, both the lift charge, and the dispay charge can kill. I have been amazed that the LE in those places allowed those devices to be deployed with no consequences. I can guarantee absolutely that if PPB were aware of any private citizen dischargeing those devices in their neighbourhoods around Independence Day,, they would be making arests and charging wiht felony use of restricted pyrotechnics. If LE i Portland and Seattle did not have double standards, they;d have none whatsoever. Wheeler and Durkan should both be arreted.
Tionico, it is totally good to hear from your pyrotechnics expertise. One can’t imagine that the raging, anti-police “reformers” in the riots have applied for Class C licenses for their Mad Media-filtered terror events, of course. A clip did appear recently where apparently someone badly mishandled one of those virtual grenades, mangling one poor hand to a fare-thee-well. One mostly hopes that he wasn’t an innocent victim. A policeman, ironically, was likely the first to arrive with first aid.
The more anxiety that my constitutional ownership of firearms might cause in potential malefactors, the less anxiety from criminal thugs that I feel, if any. An ideally inverse ratio. Comfort CAN be a warm gun or two, especially faced with violent groups from our day that are infected with sociopaths and psychos, well-funded by so-called “elites” who have whatever dubiously “well-meaning” plan. Clockwork Orange criminal-coddlers in imaginary ivory towers, gun-grabbing politicians without conscience, Orwellian thought-police media, all are currently well insulated from citizens’ arrest or Tombstone tactics. To best defeat them we need to fight by using our extensive, appropriate political defenses while we can.
John,
The media say cops are killing blacks, but I think it may be the other way around. On June 22nd, 2020 Rudolph Giuliani said to Ed Henry that blacks kill more cops than the other way around. He didn’t give those statistics, however. I tried to find the right stats, but I admit to not being thorough enough. If I understand what I read correctly, in the year 2018 cops killed 9 blacks who should not have been killed. In that same year, blacks killed 15 cops. Even though I am unsure of those findings, I am sure that on July 7th, 2016 Micah Xavier Johnson (a black man) killed five cops in Dallas, TX. When coos are ambushed in their patrol cars, aren’t they usually ambushed by black criminals?
Speaking of disinformation, aren’t pandemics created by nature? If COVID-19 was created in a Chinese lab for the purpose of disrupting the economies of other nations, then we are experiencing biological warfare, not a pandemic.
The fake news is the enemy of the people, as President Trump told us.
The Left’s arguments are so bad these days, I have concluded they are not interested in winning any of us over to their side. My belief is they print crazy things, because their people will believe them and vote for them. The Leftist is content to lose the argument with us, as long as they win power. Not really such a bad idea. Which is more important, winning an argument or winning an election? I say “winning an election,” but I really mean “winning power,” because they lose a lot of elections, but they wind up being powerful and influential anyway. That’s because the media amplify their message.
One thing I admire about the Left, is that, in order to fund their so far bloodless revolution, they use our tax dollars against us. In other words, we the American people are paying for our own destrucrion. This is absolutely brilliant, and worthy of Sun Tzu. Taxpayers fund the schools which mis-educate their own children. George Soros has been able to use tax dollars for some of his ideas. I’m sure there are many ways our tax dollars are being used against us. It is evil, fiendish and devilish, but I must admit it is brilliant.
Notice how our search for oil made Saudi Arabia rich, and they used that wealth to fund Wahabbism and terrorism. American politicians and businessmen want to do business in China. China uses their new-found wealth to strengthen their military. What good is wealth if it will be used against us?
THE RIGHT WINS ARGUMENTS, THE LEFT WINS POWER.
The same people that yelled, all cop are bad, & all cop are racist, will now scream, that only the police should have guns! Classic cycle that keeps repeating.
According to Ryan Davis, “The good news is changing how you sound is easier than changing policy.”
In other words, for this liberal academician, lying, “how you sound,” is a perfectly reasonable course of action if it gets you what you want/where you want to be.
What do you want? To get the position of power you need to be in to do what you plan on doing, which is enacting your policy.
As for the second article. Whenever you see an academic journal of psychiatry opining on something you are pretty much assured that the article will be nuts.
I agree with all of the above discussion.
I hate to be the “Karen” of the range, but could we please have pictures of firearms in a safe condition when leaning against any solid or wire fence, specifically empty with open action? I will then presume for the purpose of the picture that the breach and tube are both empty.
I have seen too many shotguns fall to the ground from this position.
Everyone should know this by heart.
Unload your shotgun and leave the action open.
Hand your unloaded shotgun to your hunting partner, who has also unloaded theirs.
Climb over the fence with whatever dignity your physical condition allows.
Take both unloaded shotguns from your hunting partner.
Watch your hunting partner climb over the fence.
Return your hunting partner’s unloaded shotgun.
Resume a safe hunt.
and I hope you have your computer plugged into a GroundFaultCircuitInterrupter plug with a sufficiently low amperage breaker, not to mention your tin hat to prevent any unwarranted emf voltage generated toward your face as you view the screen … and don’t forget the WiFi signals that emanate around your head as you sleep.
The damn gun was likely set there as prop for the benefit of this bucolic scene … and isn’t likely to JUMP off the damn fence and shoot the photographer!
GEEZ!
I hope you’uns have a wonderful Christmas.
Likewise, brothers.
Comments are closed.