The New York Times Editorial Board is hyperventilating about “America’s Toxic Gun Culture,” in a series entitled “The Danger Within.” Meanwhile, Politico has published an even more unhinged piece by an academic who wonders if her preferred gun control measures will have to be imposed through a civil war.
I’m not exaggerating. Here are Professor Sheryll Cashin’s words, from an article that claims to examine “What the Debate Over Guns Tells Us About America”:
“Will it take civil war for us to become a nation that protects innocents from being sprayed with bullets? We are already in an uncivil culture war in which attacks on books, teaching accurate history, transgender children, drag queens and more are modern versions of an old politics of stoking fear and resentment among white voters about their purported loss of dominance.”
Meanwhile, the New York Times once again stoops to the smear tactic of associating gun-friendly politicians—Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie, this time—with mass shooting incidents.
Like Professor Cashin, the Times also tries to link gun ownership with alleged threats to the paper’s favored identity groups:
“As we’ve seen at libraries that host drag queen book readings, Juneteenth celebrations and Pride marches, the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms is fast running up against the First Amendment’s right to peaceably assemble. Securing that right, and addressing political violence in general, requires addressing the armed intimidation that has become commonplace in public places and the gun culture that makes it possible.“
The picture of American gun ownership presented by Politico and the New York Times is a defamatory caricature, and a grave insult to many millions of people.
Peaceable American gun owners bear absolutely no responsibility for the criminal conduct cited in these articles. Responsibility for criminal violence falls squarely upon the individuals who commit such acts—not on a vaguely-defined “gun culture,” and certainly not on gun rights advocates at large, who have done nothing to merit any sort of collective blame or guilt-by-association.
Beyond Exaggeration
While the Times claims to be targeting only a “small number of extremists,” their idea of a potential extremist plainly includes broad swaths of America—such as the estimated 30 percent of gun owners with “assault weapons,” and anyone opposed to what the Editorial Board deems “common sense gun restrictions.” These sizable populations are explicitly lumped in with supporters of political violence, in the Times’ bizarre idea of fairness toward gun owners.
Likewise, it is grotesque for Politico to publish an author who compares gun rights advocates to the Confederacy in her fevered speculation about a new Civil War. Professor Cashin should be wary of deploying apocalyptic, alarmist rhetoric against fellow Americans; this kind of rash talk is not appropriate from any political faction. Moreover, Cashin should be ashamed of likening self-defense rights to slavery, especially given the long and living tradition of black gun ownership and advocacy.
Americans should take pride in a culture of self-defense. No country is perfect, but ours was established with a basic regard for individual rights—including the right to protect ourselves and our communities with appropriate force. This is one of the sharpest distinctions between our nation and totalitarian states of the past and present.
Widespread firearm ownership served to keep America free during the twentieth century, when much of the world succumbed to mass-murdering tyranny. Amid the crime and chaos of recent years, many people are discovering or rediscovering the importance of the inherent rights protected by the Second Amendment.
No doubt, “progressive” elites will continue to demonize gun rights advocates—through identity politics, collective guilt-trips, crybullying, and all the rest.
While they chase an impossible dream of total collective safety, we will uphold a culture of individual rights and responsibilities.