I have recently, and for about the hundredth time, been accused of being “obsessed” with firearms. This is one of the more curious accusations that have been hurled my way, for it is simply, and massively, untrue.
Now, for myself and very likely the vast majority of gun owners that many in the hoplophobe community would refer to as “gun nuts” or “obsessed with firearms” or some such, this definition really does not even come close to applying. Even on days when I wear a concealed firearm, I expend less thought on it than I do on, say, my cell phone or my wallet. Does that make me a cell phone nut or a wallet obsessive?
Ok, yes, I have multiple guns. But I have several orders of magnitude more books than guns. My collection of books cost considerably more than my collection of guns. My monthly expenditure on books (and book-like products) outstrips my expenditures on firearms and firearm related products by, again, several orders of magnitude. I bought a book two days ago. I made copies of several book-like items yesterday (and the day before). It has been *years* since I purchased a firearm. I am deep into the process of writing two fairly substantial books, and I’ve written probably a few books worth of other things over the years, and have plans for several more books and book-like products (but no current plans on carving an assault weapon out of a block of steel). Wherever I sleep there are a wide variety of books scattered wildly all over everywhere, within easy reach of theoretical; children, with not a book-lock to be found. So… does all of this make me a dangerous book nut? Will my obvious obsession with the written word cause me to go buggo and destroy a school? After all, assault books like “Mein Kampf” and “Das Kapital” and “The Little Red Book” have killed hundreds of millions of people. Books are dangerous!
I think where the problem comes from is that those obsessed with guns are, by and large, not the gun owners. Sure, there are gun owners who blow vast sums on guns, who stockpile them or make them themselves (as a hobby or a career). But it seems to me the larger number of “gun nuts” are those who are opposed to guns. After all, why would a guy like me mention firearms with respect to politics, but not, say, books in general? It’s really quite simple. Were I to take a stroll through downtown Manhattan, I doubt too much of anybody would give a damn if i did so with a paperback strapped to my hip and an Oxford English Dictionary across my back. But some people would freak right the hell out of I did so with a pistol and a SOCOM-16.
The hoplophobes seem to see *any* positive interest in firearms as the sign of dangerous obsession. For those of us who have firearms and see them not in the mystical terms that the gun grabbers do, but simply as the tools that they are, this is both inaccurate and mystifying. But it is, sadly, politically both popular and supported. For those of you who do not yet see my point, imagine a movement of anti-computer people arose that loudly proclaimed that anyone who wanted to have a computer, or who – GASP! – spent any time at all online or, worse still, discussed online topics, was, in fact, a “computer nut.” Not the people who stood in line for days to be the first goober with an IPad… just anyone with a low-end laptop used to send photos to Granny.
Were such a group of anti-computer goofballs to arise, they’d be soon seen as the nuts that they are. But sadly, if you simply replace “computer” with “firearm” or “handgun,” their position, which is based not in reality but in fearmongering, is politically supported and politically popular.
Here’s a hint: if you see someone simply discussing firearms, talking about which ones they like or would like to have, and your thought is “this person is a gun nut…” chances are, YOU are the gun nut with the unhealthy obsession.
