Firearms and the Executive

Monday, August 31, 2009

Firearms and the Executive

For some reason, the reports earlier this month about citizens exercising their Second Amend­ment rights in proximity to President Barack Obama, attracted some strong Comments by OtBB regulars.

I have my own views on the subject, of course, but I am more interested in the panoply of re­sponse and debate.

(OtBB's sole entry related to the subject spoke to MSNBC's appallingly dishonest coverage.)

The gamut runs from the unthinking and hysterical... pardon my redundancy... the unthinking and the strident, or both sides of the issue.

And still it rages in the "national" blogs, and if my former neighbor "HW" or Ray Overton had some strong feelings on the matter, read the Comments to the following blogs.

Megan McArdle writes, in "Are Guns at Protests Really Dangerous?:"

"I think carrying guns to protests is entirely counterproductive. Indeed, I'm not sold on the general virtues of protesting, which work­ed for Gandhi and the civil rights march­er, but has a dismal track record on other concerns. But I think people have a perfect right to do it, including with guns, though I also think the secret service is within its rights to ensure that they don't have a sight line on the president.

But the hysteria about them has been even more ludicrous."

Do ya think?

And in "Guns and Presidents," Will Wilkinson concludes his own decidedly Libertarian views with:

"I’m pretty sure this attempt to be rational on the subject of privately-owned guns near the president is in vain. If we make a Venn diagram of the set of people for whom guns are bewitched totems of death and the set of people for whom the presi­dent is a majestic, semi-divine symbol of national identity, I think we’ll see a fat overlap."

Hell, I could've told him that!


1. Eileen Dover said...

I like my guns and have been trained how to use them. I feel the less people who know I have them the better off I am.

A low profile is the best security.

2. Paramarine said...

It’s remarkable how many people missed that the point was about MSNBC's decision to not let facts get in the way of a good story.

Sadly, it's likely that these are the same idiots who believed that the Lewinsky scandal was about marital infidelity.

Except that I, for openers, never thought that the story was a "good" one, even if it had been told honestly.

Email address is not published
Remember Me

Write the characters in the image above