Welcome to "The Gods Are Bored," where we welcome deep questions from our commenters!
Wow. Should we be passive in the face of danger? Would you feel better walking around if you had the trusty Glock tucked inside your jacket? Or that black belt in karate?
Given the choice of the two, I'd take the black belt. But then again. One of my high school classmates is buried in the cold, cold ground. And another is doing life in the pen. Why? She pulled a black belt move on him. He yanked out the handgun and shot her at point blank range.
Perhaps the better rhetorical question would be, "Would you feel more comfortable if you knew two out of every three people were carrying concealed handguns?"
If you are more comfortable owning a gun, you have a bleak view of your species. As perhaps you should. But you'd better be sure the person you're shooting really deserves it, and the cops aren't confused by the action, and your gun works, and you don't misfire and hit some kid playing on a curb.
The majority of violence is domestic. If my diagnosed psychotic mother had owned a gun, she would have killed me, my father, and my sister during one of her manic episodes. Or, conversely, I would have killed her. And then I'd have been stuck at the age of 16 trying to prove self-defense, and living with the guilt of popping my mama.
Take it from someone who lived in Baltimore four years, Detroit four years, and the environs of Camden, New Jersey for 20 years. It is possible to avert danger by taking a middle ground between passive and aggressive. Once I was being followed at night in Baltimore. I started singing at the top of my lungs, bluegrass songs. I don't know if that is passive or aggressive, but my pursuer cut off the chase.
Here at "The Gods Are Bored," we don't like "either-or." And we stand by yesterday's premise that doling out Glocks pell-mell will not cut down on gun violence.
If you disagree, rock on! Or should we say, Glock on?
THE GUN-SHY MERLIN OF BERKELEY SPRINGS