After reading some of the comments on today’s earlier post and musings at other places, here are a couple more thoughts:
For the record, I don’t disapprove of the tool. As usual with guns and other tools, it’s the person who I’m not entirely certain about.
Here’s how I see it:
Best Case Scenario: A few people get a little educated about a few gun laws and a few voters (and maybe even a couple of politicians) realize that many Americans in general and some gun owners in particular are very serious about today’s issues.
Worst Case Scenario: Some nut job or agent provocateur does something very very bad. It could even be some sort of honest mistake. Very very bad shift in public opinion in the wake of the tragedy is followed by very very bad legislation. You know that a lot of gun grabbers are wild with anticipation over exactly this sort of thing.
The actual result is likely to be somewhere in between, which means that the upside will be barely noticeable.
Sure, points will have been made. Those points will be remembered for about three minutes, unless it’s a point good for the anti-gun crowd, in which case the point will be remembered forever and ever as a basic truth about guns. Like the basic truth about how guns are twice as likely to kill a family member as an intruder in a home defense situation and the basic truth about how no one needs a semi-automatic assault weapon for anything except killing people.
The media will decide how the story is told. For those that think the media is dead and a wonderful new age is here, look at who’s in the White House today and look at how he got there. It wasn’t Kos who put him there.
For what it’s worth, I also think it probably wouldn’t be constructive to carry swords, pitchforks, axes, spiked clubs, or baseball bats at these events.
UPDATE: Sebastian has a very good round-up of links on this issue and some good commentary. I weighed in in the comments section and don’t have time to rail on at length here, so go read.
Here’s one snippet:
As often happens in debates of important issues, arguing against one extreme position gives the impression that the arguer holds the other extreme position. That is not the case. If I don’t think it’s GREAT that people are doing this, it doesn’t mean I (or Sebastian, for that matter) think it’s TERRIBLE.
Over the years Murdoc’s been in countless debates like this. For the record, because those who disagree with my opinion on this seem to be insisting otherwise, Murdoc fully supports Open Carry.