"'Is this everything you will be trading in?' I ask. "
April 10, 2021 8:59 PM   Subscribe

"Retriever" by Stephen Kearse is a short science fiction story about an employee of the United States Federal Gun Retrieval Agency: "I’m an agent of the 28th Amendment, the abolition of the 2nd." Published October 2020.
posted by brainwane (37 comments total) 22 users marked this as a favorite
 
Science fiction often asks us to overlook some impossibilities for the sake of narrative. Perhaps after centuries of scientific progress, we'll crack faster than light travel and artificial gravity. I'll concede that for my own amusement. But Americans ditching the 2nd amendment? Warp drives seem more likely.
posted by adept256 at 10:32 PM on April 10, 2021 [17 favorites]


Well, like so many things in the past 40 years, it starts with "If we neutered the craziest Republicans.."
posted by Jacen at 10:38 PM on April 10, 2021 [4 favorites]


Warp drives seem more likely.

There was an article recently on something like how it's easy to be all doom and gloom, but that there's a better way. So I offer this top search result on achieving the impossible.
posted by aniola at 10:39 PM on April 10, 2021 [3 favorites]


But Americans ditching the 2nd amendment?

The problem isn't the amendment, maybe, but the psychotic interpretation. Give everyone a musket, instead: There, you have your precious damn one-shot toy, as guaranteed to you by an edict written by slave owners with rotten, wooden teeth. Enjoy!
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:48 PM on April 10, 2021 [29 favorites]


I loved this story. Thank you for posting.
posted by mdonley at 10:52 PM on April 10, 2021 [1 favorite]


Ah, utopian fiction.
posted by benzenedream at 11:52 PM on April 10, 2021


The bit I’m not sure if it was meant to be as creepy as it came off was “to the military...and private industry.” So what, giving them to factory owners and stuff?
posted by corb at 12:43 AM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


He’s told this story before. The kicker is evergreen: “The gunner was white."

I laugh. In my brief tenure I’ve heard some form of this setup and punch across all lines: party, state, ideological. In every imaginable accent and dialect. All walks of life. Black lawyers, Latinx school teachers, Choctaw construction workers. Kenyan accountants, Cambodian sous chefs, Filipinx student athletes. Every gun has a story; every story has a white man, or boy. White men all the way down, Cayenne likes to riff. Over time it’s become hilarious. It’s had to.
Whew.
posted by mikelieman at 2:17 AM on April 11, 2021 [4 favorites]


The problem isn't the amendment, maybe, but the psychotic interpretation. Give everyone a musket, instead: There, you have your precious damn one-shot toy, as guaranteed to you by an edict written by slave owners with rotten, wooden teeth. Enjoy!

The historical context of the 2nd Amendment in America's white supremacist legacy aside, the problem with Constitutional Republics is that they are founded upon what are essentially legal documents, and one needs to be rational to understand how they fit together. I would suggest that many, if not most, of the -- let's call them "2nd Amendment Fetishists" -- are not rational, and thus can't understand simple concepts such as "Article I, § 8, Clause 16 says that Congress regulates the 'well regulated militia' the 2nd Amendment refers to"

In short, I keep making the mistake of expecting rational behaviour from irrational people.
posted by mikelieman at 2:25 AM on April 11, 2021 [17 favorites]


They've got that one covered. In the 18th Century, "well regulated" meant operating properly. I don't know if that's correct or not, but that's the argument that won.
posted by 1adam12 at 4:34 AM on April 11, 2021


I think this story is a really abhorent white wing fantasy, in that it gives them the mental images necessary to rail against the non-existence of even one of their precious, precious guns.
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:56 AM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


I meant "right wing" but hey
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:57 AM on April 11, 2021 [13 favorites]


Apologies for a slight derail but when (and whence) did the guns-rights crowd start making the "well-regulated meant 'operating properly'" argument? It's a stupid semantic argument, sure, and I don't want to parse it here but your phrasing, adam, captures exactly that which I've seen on Twitter after our most recent tragedies. I can't recall seeing that particular phrasing or meaning prior to now, and there's a camouflaged sophistication and consistency in its invocation that reeks of astroturfed propaganda
posted by DeepSeaHaggis at 6:02 AM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


It's been around since back when I was naive enough to think that guns themselves weren't a large part of our problem. That was a long time ago.

Of course, back then people didn't use it to invent an individual right to bear arms, they used it alongside a definition of militia that includes all able bodied adult males in the context of opposing the idea of banning certain classes of firearm entirely. The idea that Congress can't provide for the regulation of firearm ownership/possession at all is a much more recent invention.
posted by wierdo at 6:51 AM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


I was impressed by the way this took you through all the reasons people cling to or buy guns in the US and wove that into the historical background and the narrator's own voice.

The extremely creepy aspect of failing bunkers of preppers was as a framing device was something that didn't hit me until a while after I had read it. All those people who were going to be safe choking on their stale air and dying slowly...

(Off topic: this is a very well written piece I thought and one that deserves being the focus of the discussion, rather than another way to argue about what a well regulated militia might mean in general and so on.)
posted by lesbiassparrow at 7:37 AM on April 11, 2021 [5 favorites]


Kearse also has a novel out.
posted by brainwane at 8:26 AM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


They've got that one covered. In the 18th Century, "well regulated" meant operating properly. I don't know if that's correct or not, but that's the argument that won.

Usually accompanied with an infographic, to which I would respond:
A Dictionary of the English Language by Samuel Johnson, 1755

To Régulate. v.a. [regula, Lat.]

1. To adjust by rule or method.

"Nature, in the production of things, always designs them to partake of certain, regulated, established essences, which are to be the models of all things to be produced: this, in that crude sense, would need some better explication." -- Locke.

2. To direct.

"Regulate the patient in his manner of living." -- Wiseman.

"Ev'n goddesses are women; and no wife
Has pow'r to regulate her husband's life." -- Dryden.

posted by mikelieman at 8:51 AM on April 11, 2021 [5 favorites]


It's exceedingly rare for science fiction to be about something that both seems very unlikely to happen, but also has already happened (in Australia).
posted by joeyh at 9:41 AM on April 11, 2021 [4 favorites]


...and Japan, too.
posted by Rash at 10:57 AM on April 11, 2021


I feel like the larger ideological victory of the gun people is being allowed to identify themselves with the word "militia," as it is written in the 2nd Amendment.

The story doesn't even disabuse us of this notion, and imagines a future where white terrorists are still called "militia", no matter how many years it has been since the national guards were established.

What did they call gun nuts in Australia before their law passed?
posted by eustatic at 11:00 AM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


I feel like the larger ideological victory of the gun people is being allowed to identify themselves with the word "militia," as it is written in the 2nd Amendment.

The Right, and gun-folk in particular, have carved out a self-reinforcing mythology for themselves:
  • There is some notion of "American Values" that are constant, absolute, and implicit in the Constitution. Capitalism, Christianity, and white male dominance are among these values.
  • Unfortunately, there are elements in this country, while technically American citizens, are out to destroy these "American Values." They are not Real Americans.
  • Because of the democratic system put in place by the text of the Constitution, these Fake Americans can vote. In the process, they are creating a government that would do away with American Values.
  • The expectation of the Founding Fathers was that the citizens would rise up to overthrow a government that goes against these American Values. They are the spiritual successors the the Minute Men who won the first battles for Liberty.
Organizing themselves into what they call militias plays into this (as well as a need for marital displays of courage and "protecting others" (as opposed to, say, wearing a mask)).

The only way to really change this is for them to truly view all Americans as, well, Americans. Right now, at best, they tolerate that they have to share the same air, on occasion, with those who aren't really worthy.
posted by MrGuilt at 11:42 AM on April 11, 2021 [6 favorites]


The only way to really change this is for them to truly view all Americans as, well, Americans. Right now, at best, they tolerate that they have to share the same air, on occasion, with those who aren't really worthy.

At best "tolerate", but mostly not, given the day after POC voters in Georgia turned out to elect a Black man and a Jewish man to the US Senate, Republicans -- with no options left in the Courts -- lost their shit and Donald Trump sent a Republican lynch mob to the US Capitol, where they built a gallows to hang the VP and Congress and assaulted over 100 police officers.

Ideologically, these white supremacists are still indulging in the fear that without the slave patrols (militia) to keep the slaves (Black people) in their place (see pretty much any video of a POC being stopped by police), the slaves will rise up in insurrection to win their freedom and murder their families in their beds (whose defense against a non-existent threat requires an individual right to keep and bear arms).
posted by mikelieman at 12:44 PM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


The only way to really change this is for them to truly view all Americans as, well, Americans. Right now, at best, they tolerate that they have to share the same air, on occasion, with those who aren't really worthy.
But the object itself is both old and mass-produced. It is made by fusing the idea of an entitlement to privilege—which is being stolen from white Americans by traitors, Blacks, immigrants, and socialists—with the absolute distinction between real and unreal Americans. The concern is not, at heart, that there are bogus votes, but that there are bogus voters, that much of the US is inhabited by people who are, politically speaking, counterfeit citizens. Unlike us, they do not belong; they cannot be among the “we” who get to choose the king...

To keep the crowd from overwhelming its democracy, that idea of a variousness that does not imply or justify inequality must at last be given real substance. Only an America that is a true multitude can be safe from the mob.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 12:56 PM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


I'm not going to be that excited about reining in private gun ownership unless and until we've quelled the absolutely rampant fascism of urban and rural police authorities.

But we are seeing a recrudescence of a crucial development which helped make an assault weapons ban possible the first time around: Black people are buying guns, lots of guns.
posted by jamjam at 2:11 PM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


recrudescence

What a great word.
posted by Mitheral at 2:22 PM on April 11, 2021


What did they call gun nuts in Australia before their law passed?

I don't recall that there was any particular name for them other than, perhaps, “gun nut”, although I suppose the Sporting Shooters' Association would have wanted you to call them “sporting shooters”. But we came out of a very different situation than the one obtaining in the US: guns were already at least somewhat regulated and licensed by State legislation and IIRC the licenses already restricted particular categories of firearm to particular classes of license holders. The new legislation simply tightened this, and made some firearms illegal altogether. In contrast, the US has a much weaker regulatory regime and substantial national change would require (as in the story) a Constitutional amendment.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:10 PM on April 11, 2021 [2 favorites]


thank you, that is helpful info.

I think if US americans looked to black communities for leadership on the issue, they would see many buyback programs around; but they are smaller, sub-municipal scale efforts run by churches.
The effort in New Orleans ran out of money. The next step would be to take buybacks to the state level in the states.
posted by eustatic at 6:19 PM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


...and white male dominance are among these values.

That is free, land owning white males whose slaves, for the sake of tally, in a state would be counted as three-fifths of the number of whites in a state.

see the trick there. Dominance for both non-slave and slave owners...keeps it equal.


militia thing is by state now so reserves which the president can commender at anytime. Woo, where's the militia, now. So what's the rub, if your gonna overthrow the government, guns are an option kinda out there but?
Damn, dredge a river in that story and you'd make bank. The kalashnikov part is accurate for specs. They can jam easy depending if you use it right and not good for close range simply to much hop. cool story thanks for posting it. As to buy backs, yes but destroy the guns, it's a profit loss but the optics of re-selling nightmare guns is not good.
posted by clavdivs at 7:20 PM on April 11, 2021 [1 favorite]


Not that this matters because the """originalist""" justices took a sharpie to the front end: I believe the NRA crowd tries to hang "militia" on the "its everyone" definition.

If you then try to assert that the gravy seals are not a "fit-for-use gun owning public", the NRA argument typically devolves into focusing on words independently or crutching on the above redaction of the amendment.

Rules as written in the way they were written, the 2nd amendment should set the states up to determine who is a fit-for-use member of the state and what gun they need to be fit for use (which in a nuclear age is nothing, really).
posted by Slackermagee at 9:28 PM on April 11, 2021


Proposal: require that all members of the "militia" (i.e., gun owners) attend regular firearm and drill training sessions, e.g. a couple of weekends a month. I'm not even proposing anything that would be a major obstacle to gun ownership, just something that would encourage gun safety and reduce social isolation.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:16 PM on April 11, 2021 [4 favorites]


It's exceedingly rare for science fiction to be about something that both seems very unlikely to happen, but also has already happened (in Australia).

Australia had about 17 civilian guns per 100 people and reduced that to about 13 guns per 100 people.

The United States has about 103 civilian guns per 100 people.
posted by straight at 12:11 AM on April 12, 2021


Fusion power, eat your heart out!
posted by ryanrs at 1:13 AM on April 12, 2021


In the topic of guns, Australia and the US, here’s your obligatory Jim Jeffries
posted by gottabefunky at 9:22 AM on April 12, 2021


The historical context of the 2nd Amendment in America's white supremacist legacy aside, the problem with Constitutional Republics is that they are founded upon what are essentially legal documents, and one needs to be rational to understand how they fit together. I would suggest that many, if not most, of the -- let's call them "2nd Amendment Fetishists" -- are not rational, and thus can't understand simple concepts such as "Article I, § 8, Clause 16 says that Congress regulates the 'well regulated militia' the 2nd Amendment refers to"

For all the benefits of constitutions, one of the downsides of constitutionalism is that it turns many debates that should be about democratic legitimacy (what do people actually want?) or policy (What would X,Y,&Z do in practice?) into sterile legalistic arguments. Actual lawyers arguing is boring enough, constitutionalism turns politically engaged people into incompetent play-acting lawyers.
posted by atrazine at 9:25 AM on April 12, 2021


The United States has about 103 civilian guns per 100 people.

About 22% of Americans report that they own a gun. The average gun owner owns five.
posted by box at 11:09 AM on April 12, 2021


Making discussion of this piece focus on the unlikeliness of Americans giving up guns outside of its own world (which alludes to, but does not dwell on how that happened), seems to me like making a discussion of the The Intuitionist all about how very impossible it is to imagine a world where elevator inspecting is a well-regarded, profitable, and powerful position to have.

This story reminded me a lot of that novel in how it deals with issues of race (here in relation to guns, not elevators, obviously) and presents its narrator and the past of its world. It's an interesting piece of narrative fiction, and I think it is a shame that this has turned now into a discussion of gun control generally without reference to it at all.
posted by lesbiassparrow at 11:25 AM on April 12, 2021 [2 favorites]


Good story -- thanks for the link brainwane.
posted by Rash at 8:08 PM on April 12, 2021 [1 favorite]


« Older Never Demolish   |   Stunt Cars and Reality TV Ain't Real, but tells us... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments