Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Incorrect on So Many Levels
Handgun. This little noun seems to strike fear, nay incoherence, into seemingly rational people. Verlyn Klinkenborg, a member of The New York Times editorial board, is no exception to this observation.
This morning, Mr. Klinkenborg has opined on the subject of handguns, carried concealed, and the N.R.A., in a piece titled Once a Progressive State, Minnesota Is Now a Fief of the N.R.A. The title itself provides you with a fairly concise synopsis of what Mr. Klinkenborg’s views on are the subject.
Although Mr. Klinkenborg is not so far gone as to be advocating the removal of firearms from the hands of individuals; he owns a .22, a .270, and a couple of shotguns; he evidently considers a firearm which can be concealed and carried by an individual as an imminent danger to every other individual on the street.
Every concealed weapon, with very few exceptions, is a blow against the public safety.
Well, unless you’re a cop and are supposedly well qualified to utilize a handgun in your official capacity as investigators of crime, rather than preventers of crime,
I would leave the police work to the police, and they would leave the squirrel hunting to me.
Further into this oped, Mr. Klinkenborg ridicules the N.R.A. for advocating, for individuals, the right to own handguns and carry them in their day to day activities. Even going so far as to say this about what he believes is the N.R.A’s. actual agenda,
Sometimes I think the N.R.A. isn’t really about guns at all. It’s about making certain that the public — our political and civil society, in other words — has no ability to limit the rights of an individual.
I do not belong to the N.R.A., so I will not opine on what they’re actually about. But I will say this, if the N.R.A. is advocating for no limitation on the rights of individuals, I sincerely hope their stance regarding individual rights continues to rile Mr. Klinkenborg.
