Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« If it would save even one life... | Main | nothing in Heller today »

Calling Dr. Freud

Posted by David Hardy · 15 June 2008 10:52 PM

From the Boston Globe":

"The naughty thrill of reaching under the socks, the shock of actually touching the thing, finding it cold, as if on ice. Such is my memory of furtive encounters with my father's handgun. At the time, Dad was an FBI agent. Where he stowed his weapon when off-duty was absolutely out-of-bounds, which defined its appeal.....

Even at age 4, I was hypnotized by a gun. The gun was a mystical object, with significance that far transcended any imagined use. Fear, but also consolation. Awe. Trembling. That the gun was my father's was a first clue to potency. Hidden away, yet the gun sent a pulse through the whole apartment, a psychological electromagnet around which my awareness swirled. Long before I tasted the temptations of sex, I yielded to an irresistible prurience by opening that drawer. ,,,"

I must admit that, at age 10 or so, I handled my father's deer rifle, a converted Springfield 03, without permission. But I knew the code. Open the bolt, check the magazine, peer up into the chamber, stick your little finger in to make sure. Never trembled nor had some strange pulse thru the entire house, nor in later years considered it like sex (nevermind the comparisons to full auto, let alone those to full auto fire).

Can't help but wonder if the antigunners' argument has some Freudian resemblance to rather puritanical arguments about sexuality. The rationale isn't that something is sociallty harmful, or that the harm could be averted by restricting harmful misuse, but that someone, somewhere, is having disapproved fun.

(With recognition that this does injustice to the puritans, who had nothing against drinking -- witness Cromwell, who loved good wine, nor shooting, nor sex at least in marriage, witness their enormous families and also prosecutions for fornication ). Actually, esp. in places like modernday Boston, the puritans' real views come off as quite libertatian.

9 Comments | Leave a comment

Parrothead Jeff | June 16, 2008 12:01 AM | Reply

My dad was California Highway Patrol for 31 years. Nothing like this ever crossed my mind and I think someone needs counseling.

Graystar | June 16, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply

But what was so enthralling? That it was a gun or that it was forbidden? He would have felt the same if it was a cheerleader’s baton. Is it the gun’s fault that he was a disobedient child?

The rest of the article is more of the same...inferring relationships that don’t exist. And what was that pseud-psycho babble about shame moderating the use of weapons? Why do anti-gun liberals think we would all kill each other if only given a chance? Well, at least we know how THEY think! Congress should amend the NICS Improvement Amendments Act to include those who indicate in their writing their uncontrollable desire to kill everyone, if only given a gun.

Jim | June 16, 2008 12:31 AM | Reply

When my daughter turned 8 I took her to the Jr. Rifle program up the road at the gun club. For a couple of years she would outshoot the boys pretty well, and I got her a rifle of her own.

She lost interest long ago. She knows I have handguns and has never indicated any interest in fooling with them. Her rifle is sitting here, waiting for my nephew to hit 8.

Robert | June 16, 2008 6:32 AM | Reply

Dear Lord, spare us from a description of the first time they smelled Hoppes!

Jim | June 16, 2008 7:52 AM | Reply

"In despair over unchecked gun-carnage in Chicago schools, Mayor Richard Daley asked, "Why is America turning its back on its children when it comes to gun violence?" "

The question Daley should be asking is why can't he control the gangs and thugs in his city that make this so. Why have some parts of Chicago been turned over to the gangs? Why is his police department so ineffective in control these criminals? A gun does not usually go off without someone's finger on the trigger, it is those pulling the trigger he should address his attention to.

One day we will have to admit that the gang members are nothing more than a waste of humanity that need to be disposed of.

Jeff | June 16, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply

This is what head shrinks would call "projection." The author of this article realizes that there is something wrong and horribly deviant in his mind. He knows that he can't be trusted. And so he presumes to place this burden upon everyone else, asserting with boldness that you and I are actually the ones with the mental disorder. I'm not sure what would help him more--a good therapist or a good butt-kicking.

Ryan | June 16, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply

That is by far the most disturbing article I have ever read. Jeff is correct, this is projection, but I have a feeling that it is a fictional tail through which the author is trying to connect (misguidedly) with gun owners through a anecdote that is a parallel to what he believes our experiences are/were. He his trying to establish a rapport with gun owners before trying to sway them to his opinion. The only problem is, he and others like him, are the only ones with a perverted sexual view of guns, gun owners (at least all the ones I know) just view them as tools.

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | June 16, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply

A whiff of Hoppes?

Schwing!!!

Just kidding.

Anon | June 16, 2008 6:38 PM | Reply

One day, it was just like BAM! we had guns. My parents apparently always had guns, they just didn't bother telling me until I was twelve.

Leave a comment