Barry Snell in his last opinion piece for the Iowa State Daily, writes a scathing diatribe against anti-gun people and gives multiple reasons why there can never be reasonable debate on the issue of gun control.
Snell starts off by talking about the differences in the media coverage of two recent disasters, the bombing of the Boston Marathon and the explosion at the fertilizer factory in Texas. Interestingly enough, the disaster in Texas resulted in more deaths and injuries than the bombing in Boston, but has and will continue to receive short thrift from the main stream media.
To understand this, one need only look at the difference in coverage between theTexas fertilizer plant explosion, which killed at least 14 confirmed people and injured 200 more at the time of writing this, versus the coverage of theBoston Marathon bombing, which only killed three and injured a hundred others. Texas was on TV for a day, tops, while we’re still hearing about Boston and will for many weeks to come.
Where the media really didn’t care too much about the Texas incident, once a kid was killed at a race, the Boston bombing is now a foil for everything from gun control to immigration in the wake of Sandy Hook, with both sides of the political spectrum using it against the other. What about Texas, you ask? Nothing but crickets chirping from the mainstream media at the moment.Recent studieshave shown that people who consume large amounts of mass media often feel more insecure, areless informed, or can’t distinguish between news and what passes as news, whatwith all the opinion you’ll find in news today.
It must be hard to be a conservative journalist surrounded by a plethora of liberal left leaning peers.
We have a lot of liberal columnists working for the Daily. As a conservative, I’m fine with that; they’re the ones who apply for the job, and conservatives usually don’t. Free market, baby, deal with it. But many of our liberal columnists are my friends, with whom I have spent time outside of work, too. And they, along with everyone else it seems, have an opinion about guns, as you can see by glancing through thelast few weeks of the Daily’s Opinion section.
It’s been an eye-opening experience for me. As assistant opinion editor and friend, my columnists are important to me both professionally and personally. It’s all the more clear to me now after doing this job that people often opine a whole lot about stuff they don’t have any personal experience with or expertise on. Like guns.
Every time a gun issue comes up in conversation around Daily people or during a Daily editorial board meeting, opinion editor Michael Belding almost always tells me, “you should write a column about that!” I hesitate in doing so and have so far resisted the urge mostly; I wrote three gun-related columns back in2011andearly2012, and that was enough to brand me the “gun guy” by some folks who use such terms as epithets.
Well, if I’m going to read about guns and gun control issues, I’d rather read about it from someone who has actual experience with guns instead of someone who has never touched a gun in their lives. Mr. Snell then goes on to give a multitude of reasons why pro-gun people will never trust anti-gun people when it comes to discussions about guns and gun control.
In the gun debate, I’ve discovered that one cannot be expert enough about guns. Indeed, when it comes to the gun issue,opinion rules. There doesn’t seem to be any opportunity for any genuine, honest debate on guns, and even liberals would agree with that. I’ve often wondered about this over the years. Is it because my side of the debate is actually loony? I don’t think so; at least, I think I’m pretty normal. Sure, we’ve got some oddballs we all wish would go away, just like any group does.
And do you ever notice that a lot of the people most vocal about getting rid of guns weren’t even born in America, but sure do like the other freedoms afforded American citizens?
You might think that’s hyperbole too, but I’ve experienced it personally from people I considered friends until recently. And every day I see it on TV or in the newspapers, fromPiers Morganto the Des Moines Register’s ownDonald Kaul, who among others have actually said people like me are stupid, crazy or should be killed ourselves. YouTube isfull of examples, and any Google search will result inexampleafter example of gun-owning Americans beinglampooned,ridiculedanddemonizedby the media and citizens somewhere.
Below, find a couple of reasons we will never trust anti-gun people.
Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because anti-gunners always talk about 90 percent of Americans supporting this gun control measure, or 65 percent supporting that one, as if a majority opinion is what truly matters in America. We don’t trust anti-gun people because you think America is a democracy, when it’s actually a constitutional federal republic. In the American system, the rights of a single individual are what matters and are what our system is designed to protect. The emotional mob does not rule in America.
Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they keep saying they “respect the Second Amendment” and go on about how theyrespect the hunting traditionsof America. We don’t trust you because you have to bea complete idiotto think the Second Amendment is about hunting. I wish people weren’t so stupid that I have to say this: The Second Amendment is about checking government tyranny. Period. End of story. The founders probably couldn’t have cared less about hunting since, you know, they just got done with that little tiff with England called the Revolutionary War right before they wrote that “little book” called the Constitution.
Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they lie to us. President Obama directly says he won’t tamper with guns or the Second Amendment, then turns around and pushes Congress to do just that. We don’t trust anti-gunners because they appoint one of the most lying and rabidly (and moronically) anti-gun people in America, Vice President Biden, to head up a “task force” to “solve” the so-called “gun problem,” who in turn talks with anti-gun special interest groups instead of us to complete his task.
Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they tell us they don’t want to ban guns, only enact what they call “common sense gun laws.” But like a magician using misdirection, they tell everyone else they want to ban every gun everywhere. While some are busy trying to placate us with lies, another anti-gunner somewhere submits a gun ban proposal — proposals that often would automatically make us felons for possession. Felons, for no good reason. And you anti-gunners can roll up your grandfather clauses and stuff them where the sun don’t shine. If it ain’t good enough for our grandchildren in 60 years, it ain’t good enough for us right now.
Gun people don’t trust anti-gun people because they make horrifying predictions about how there will be blood in the streets, gunfights on every street corner and America will become the Wild West again if citizens are allowed to carry concealed firearms. We don’t trust anti-gun people because we know that despite the millions of Americans who have carry permits, those who carry guns commit crimes at a much lower rate than people who don’t. We know because we know ourselves and we’re not criminals. We know because concealed carry is now legal nearly everywhere, and guess what? Violent crime continues to go down. What a shocker.
You really need to read the rest. It’s a very good article and lists the reasons there will always be a lack of trust between our two different groups of people.
If the Koch brothers do in fact buy the LA Times, they would do themselves a favor by hiring Barry Snell to write for their new acquisition.
H/T to Smitty of TOM