Gun Control and Linda Chavez
Geez, Did anyone catch Linda Chavez’ column printed in Sunday’s D&C? Here is the source from the syndicator because the D&C doesn’t have links to syndicated columns.
Jeez -
Her husband gets mugged prompting her family to purchase a .357 magnum to keep at home. When the D.C. law was changed she failed to follow the options for reregistering her weapon and instead moved it to a cottage outside D.C. She confronted an intruder after he entered one of her homes (I can’t tell from the article which one or if she had access to her weapon) and she called the police. D.C. is still unsafe and the gun ban didn’t help the situation in D.C.
What a piece of drivel. Look, I’m not sure where I personally fall on the Supreme Court ruling earlier this week. - not that I got a call asking for my opinion. I have no problem with “guns” or as I prefer to call them “weapons”. I don’t hunt or target shoot but know plenty of people who do. Personally, I feel there should be some level of control on purchasing a weapon.
But this post isn’t about gun control. It is about the drivel that passes for logic as Linda Chavez relates her personal story to justify the Supreme Court’s decision. She uses a mugging as justification for purchasing a weapon, but the weapon was never really available in the situations she describes. The implication is that if she had a gun those situations wouldn’t have arisen.
First off, A .357 magnum? Anyone ever fired a .357? Full grain? The ones I’ve fired were heavy and powerful. Certainly not a pocket pistol.
But Chavez is using anecdote as the basis of her column. Anecdote and assumption do not justify implication.
If I only had a gun.
If I only had that gun with me
If I could only get to the gun,
if I only had the training/nerve to aim and fire it in anger.
There is probably a name for a hypothetical hypothesis masquerading as the foundation of an argument. Whatever it is, it doesn’t belong in a column.
There is probably a name for a hypothetical hypothesis masquerading as the foundation of an argument. Whatever it is, it doesn’t belong in a column.
yeah, its called reaganism
Using individual examples to prove a point is something that is done by politicians on both sides of the aisle, and people on every side of an issue.
My favorite is the one about people who died because they were wearing seat belts. Another is the person who was shot with their own gun because the crook took it away from them. Probably happened at some point or another, but not often enough to change the law.
So does that make it right Elmer? Maybe “right” is not the correct word - acceptable.
The point here was what was, in my opinion, the drivel that passed for a column.
It is absolutely not right - but somehow it has become part of our political discourse.
But certainly not acceptable correct - so we as voters should call them on it rather than ignore it right?
Maybe we are spliting hairs but if something isn’t “acceptable” we should “deal with it” rather than learn how to tolerate it.
[...] the RADAR screen as GOP County Chair nominee. This interesting ad from a German Car Rental Company. Linda Chavez on Guns . Apparently the Iraq war was about [...]
stol7,
I’m not sure I can totally agree with you on this one.
Albeit the report, muzzle falsh and recoil of a .357 magnum pistol can be harsh, much of it depends on the weapon of choice.
Certainly a small or medium frame revolver can be difficlut to handle but a large frame revolver with barrel porting can be quite manageable.Nevertheless, the homeowner had best hit the “target” on the first shot as muzzle balst and report will certainly leave them temporarily blind and deaf.
That said, size is not a factor in choice of a home defense weapon. Thus the popularity of the Remington 870 as a home defense weapon.
Although I believe the choice of a full-size handgun slower sub-sonic round and laser sights is tactically better.
The muzzle blast and report factors are of course a primary reason law enforcement agencies abandoned the .357 in the 1980’s in favor of 9mm pistols.
Oh, am I on the right blog?
I thought this was MR or Loonesbury for a moment.
never mind…
My favorite part of using deadly force to defend my castle is asking the intruder to wait “just a minute” while unlock my gun safe, remove the trigger lock, and load the weapon.
Now stand still so I can shoot you.
I have a gun safe with a push button combination lock that I can open in the dark in about three seconds…safe and secure.
I got it at the American Sportsman Gun Shop years ago.
Well, after writing that I think I’m gonna eat soem red meat and drink some beer…