# Guns for me, not for thee. Million Mom Marcher arrested on firearms charge. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 2, 2005, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547 "2005-03-02T03:40:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/61 "2005-03-03T16:32:16Z")
> [@Duke of Rat](#): > > My point was, if the woman is the president of a chapter of an organization whose main purpose is to get rid of guns (again, ostensibly), then it would behoove her to be able have at least some inkling of how to accomplish that task. The “task” here for the organization is raising public awareness, not dealing individually with weapons. I don’t justify her specific actions, or in fact care much about them. I am speaking to the objection you raised, implying that knowledge of guns is a prerequisite for validity of one’s political opinion on gun laws. > [@](#): > > I do plead ignorance as to the objectives of the Million Moms. Maybe their charter instrutects people who have guns to wrap them up and place them in the cupboard. In that case, “Flirty” acted absolutely perfectly. Smells like fish. Looks like fish. Hmmm. Yep, red herring. > [@](#): > > I guess I underestimate the criteria for being president of a Million Mom chapter. Perhaps having a title and feeling good about yourself is more important than being able to actually _do_ something about the problem your organization (supposedly) sees as needing fixed. Or, perhaps the organization does not support the leadership’s specific action in this case. Perhaps the organization expected the leader to motivate, and attract a large popular support sector to express their desire for a more restrictive public policy on guns. In that case, her political and social skills, rather than her gun skills were more important. Perhaps the criteria for being president are more subtle than just “knows a lot about guns.” It appears the membership was wrong in their choice of leaders, but the error wasn’t in estimating her knowledge and familiarity with guns. ## Tris “It is when I struggle to be brief that I become obscure.” ~ Horace ~ ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/62 "2005-03-03T16:37:41Z")
OK, I’ll buy it. If public awareness was their goal, then they just chose a bad president for that chapter. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/63 "2005-03-03T16:44:02Z")
> [@catsix](#): > > As an NRA member, I find this remark to be really disingenuous and insulting. I, and every NRA member I know, care very much about reducing the number of deaths due to firearms misuse, such as what Ms. Graham did. We are not advocates of killing, and we should not be unfairly labeled as such. Hey, it’s _your_ (pl.) bumper sticker; if it unfairly impugns you folks, you know what to do about it. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/64 "2005-03-03T16:45:54Z")
"The Laws I want are for the Great Unwashed Massses, not the Elite. Since I am of the Elite, clearly they do not apply to _me_ . " :rolleyes: Not said in so many words, but… ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/65 "2005-03-03T17:03:45Z")
> [@Max Torque](#): > > Apparently, I have to explain every little thing, which makes the whole joke less funny. Well, if you’re riffing off some belief that you and your tribe share, but the rest of the world doesn’t, an explanation might be necessary. And then we can discuss whether that belief has any foundation in fact. > [@](#): > > Certain members of society have chosen to purchase firearms for home defense, opting to take personal responsibility for the safety of themselves and their families. These “gun people” are not easily distinguished from “not-gun people” (people who do not have firearms, but rather, mistakenly believe that the police can do more than merely mop up their scattered internal wobbly bits long after the criminal has come and gone). Because gun and not-gun people are not easily distinguishable, criminals have a more difficult time deciding who to rob, rape, and murder. Thus, not-gun people receive a spillover safety benefit as a result of the existence of gun people. This benefit is taken for granted by not-gun people. That’s because it’s largely overwhelmed by the effects of geography. The Southern Maryland section of the Washington Post weekly publishes the local crime reports. In my area, the big crime of the week is usually something on the order of someone’s car getting broken into, and a cell phone and CD player getting stolen. Is this because there are a lot of gun owners in northern Calvert County? No. It’s because we’re far from any concentrations of serious criminals. Or consider the part of D.C., west of Rock Creek Park, which is within walking distance (a longish walk, but still a walk; D.C. just isn’t that big) of some nasty areas. But west of the park is quite safe; when three people got shot and killed in a pizza parlor 10-15 years back, it made the local news in a big way _because such things never happen west of the park_. So when it happened once, it was a big shockeroo. (Meanwhile, across town, there were the usual complement of murders, in areas with plenty of guns floating around, that got negligible press. Guess the spillover effect didn’t help much, there.) Is this because enough Georgetown socialites are sufficiently well-armed so as to create a spillover effect that protects Northwest D.C.? Nope. It’s just that they’re far enough away from the lowlifes, even though ‘far enough’ is a mere hour’s walk for a healthy young man. > [@](#): > > If you’d like me to subtitle all my future posts for your benefit, just say the word. Nah, don’t bother. I’ll continue to assume they make no sense. ---
**Author:** ![GusNSpot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gusnspot/32/436_2.png) [@GusNSpot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GusNSpot)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2005, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/66 "2005-03-03T18:27:52Z")
Well, if there is no spillover effect, then why won’t you publicly display the fact that your house is gun-less? Well that would be silly I agree. But in an effort to protect my house next door ( he he he yeah I know but for the purpose of this discussion ) I think I should be able to put up a sign that your house has no gun and mine does because you publicly say you don’t have one and don’t need or want one. That will make me feel safer because I do think there is more to it than just location, location, location, and since you don’t, it will not harm you. The sign would not be a lie would it? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/67 "2005-03-04T01:59:59Z")
> [@GusNSpot](#): > > Well, if there is no spillover effect, then why won’t you publicly display the fact that your house is gun-less? Well that would be silly I agree. But in an effort to protect my house next door ( he he he yeah I know but for the purpose of this discussion ) I think I should be able to put up a sign that your house has no gun and mine does because you publicly say you don’t have one and don’t need or want one. That will make me feel safer because I do think there is more to it than just location, location, location, and since you don’t, it will not harm you. > > The sign would not be a lie would it? Actually, that would be fine with me. I would be delighted if you were to do that, if you moved next door to me. Because then you’d be the one violating the behavioral norms of the tribe, essentially saying to all the world, “I’M FUCKING CRAZY!!” And no matter what you said about me on your sign, nobody - even any larcenous teens in the neighborhood - would take it seriously. But your house, not mine, would be the one they’d egg. Needless to say, I don’t want any of that shit. So no sign in front of my house. But you can put up whatever sign you want on your own property; be my guest. ---
**Author:** ![GusNSpot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gusnspot/32/436_2.png) [@GusNSpot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GusNSpot)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2005, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547/68 "2005-03-04T04:57:59Z")
Isn’t this a wonderful country or what? 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-for-me-not-for-thee-million-mom-marcher-arrested-on-firearms-charge/292547.md?page=3)