September 7, 2000

7:23 AM

A historical rebuttal to the currently rabid NRA. Michael Bellesiles analyzes gun culture throughout American history and finds a number of points that disagree with Chuck Heston's version of 'Merica. Not surprisingly, the NRA is livid. At the risk of posting flamebait, will people ever be able to approach this issue from a reasoned, educated perspective, rather than responding with knee-jerk reactions?
posted by solistrato (5 comments total)

err...i think you got your answer, solistrato! :)
posted by lagado at 6:52 PM on September 7, 2000

No!

(grumble grumble fuckin' pricks mumble... :-)
posted by baylink at 6:57 AM on September 8, 2000

Very nicely done piece, actually. I hate when there's no author email link, and the letters box is a *form*...

One rebut, though: on the topic of 'whether shooting makes you a man or not', I find ESR's Ethics from the Barrel of a Gun, which I've linked here before, compelling.

As he puts it himself: "If you're politically correct, this will give you hives. Read it anyway."
posted by baylink at 7:14 AM on September 8, 2000

Wow, baylink, that's a great link. Speaking of compelling writing on that subject, have you read Snyder's "Nation of Cowards"?
posted by dcehr at 10:37 AM on September 8, 2000

Interesting link there, Bay. While I agree with the ethical dilemna of holding a gun in your hands, I disagree vehemently with the conclusion that firing a gun is the only true way to train oneself ethically.

Which is a shame, because his analysis of the dilemna is right on, but the conclusion that he draws I find seriously wanting.

Furthermore, his invocation of the Founding Fathers tends to undermine any credibility on any subject. Blind reverence in the aristocratic landowners who defeated their British counterparts does not inspire confidence in me.
posted by solistrato at 11:45 AM on September 8, 2000