Reactionary Gun Rights

So this latest shooting in Connecticut, and my response to others' responses to it, have gotten me to think about reactionary gun rights. I think I was a bit aggressive in my pro-gun reaction, just as perhaps others were a bit aggressive in their anti-gun reaction, and that probably isn't the right way to go about this. But before we get more on that, let me go over my position.

 

For one, it's probably too easy for someone to buy a gun legally and sell it second-hand to someone else illegally, although that will be a tough problem to fix. It's also pretty problematic in light of the recent event, where the rifle was purchased legally, but used by someone else to commit the atrocity. I think there needs to be stronger licensing, and I wouldn't mind reasonable gun registration. I also think we need stronger background checks, mental health checks, more range time, and more training. Ultimately, I think I am fairly committed to safe gun ownership.

 

Here's the problem, though: most people who are supportive of the measures that I outlined above aren't committed to safe gun ownership. They're committed to curbing gun ownership, and that's my problem with much of this regulation. Gun registration is fine unless we're using this registry as a stepping stone to tracking down gun owners and going for a gun grab. More background checks and stronger mental health checks are fine unless we're using this as an excuse to make people wait longer for their licenses. More range time and training is great too, so long as these are paid for opportunities for gun owners, rather than barriers that must be overcome with private expense. Our policy should be committed to, and even encourage educated, safe gun ownership, and I'm totally in agreement with that. It's just that usually, this isn't what the policy is aimed at; instead, it's aimed at discouraging gun ownership by any means necessary.

 

But that isn't what this post is about. This post is about my reactions to others' reactions to the CT shooting, and it's made me realize, in a strange way, why people are paranoid of racism and the "white, heteronormative society". Bear with me here, because this is a pretty tenuous link, but it impacted me a lot.

 

See, when someone posts about CT and starts discussing gun control, I immediately feel the need to, as a gun owner, jump into the conversation and debunk anti-gun rhetoric. But the thing is, the policy issues being discussed are probably ones that I agree with, based on what I just posted above. Really, what I take issue with is that, among most of the people I know, gun ownership is not the norm. Instead, gun ownership is viewed as some sort of "why would you ever want to do that", and that provokes a reactionary response from me because I see this as a sort of "me vs them" fight, where I'm being otherized as a gun owner.

 

And I certainly don't think it does great for my case to come out and respond in a reactionary way; that probably just makes me look like an even kookier right-wing nutjob (even though my own political leanings are much farther left). Given my own policy in regard to AAPI issues of just "laughing it off", I really should stay consistent and focus on having a reasonable conversation on the issue.

 

And I'm seeing how tough that is to do, now, and more understanding why something like otherization is such a big deal. The real best way to further the pro-gun cause, in my eyes, is to make people understand that guns are no big deal, that gun owners are reasonable, cool people that are just like everyone else, and that they are responsible and won't just go nuts, just because they have a gun. Similarly, in my opinion, the best way to further the AAPI cause is to show people that Asians are cool people just like everyone else, and that getting offended and complaining only serves to enforce negative stereotypes of Asians being uncool. This whole experience, though, made me realize just how hard that is.