Comments Elsewhere

“It’s not just for the possibility of revolt against a corrupt government, although that’s important. It’s also not just so the nation can defend itself without a standing army, something that sadly has gone straight out the window.”

Indeed. Also, just as importantly, an armed community can defend itself without an extensive professional paramilitary police force. (Not that the line between cops and soldiers is a very distinct one, at this point.) There’s a direct point of contact with history here: specifically, with the Black Panther Party. They armed themselves because they had a right to self-defense, and because if they could defend themselves there would be no excuse for the pigs (to use that term in its proper historical context for once!) to keep up their protection racket. Also because the cops were not only not protecting the Black community; they were often directly attacking it.

I think there’s a simple answer to why liberals and “progressives” are so keen on gun control. It’s because they’re comfortable with obvious coded racism. It’s unfortunate that that’s the only plausible explanation on offer, but I think that it is. Gun control laws have always been a tool of white supremacy, and when liberals start wringing their hands about how gangstas will be mowing their children down with Uzis and “assault rifles,” it’s pretty clear who it is that they have in mind, and who it is that they are scared of.

This isn’t to say that U.S. gun culture isn’t creepy and scary, or that it isn’t quite worthy of serious critique for its own racism and sexism. It sure is. But the answer is hardly disarmament.