The Enticement of What is Forbidden

Over the years, I've heard a lot about how we shouldn't try to prevent kids from watching violent movies, having sex, or taking drugs because--human nature being what it is--kids will be more enticed to do something just because it's forbidden. I find it curious, then, that some folks react with such shock, anger, and dismay when similar bans are put on the purchase of personal weapons.

Let me start by laying out my experience with or interest in guns: up until a few hours ago, it was zero. I hadn't fired anything more vicious than a pump-action BB gun when I was 17 and the occasional Nerf dart gun up until, say, last week. but handguns of the made-to-kill variety? Never touched the stuff. Rifles, shotguns, repeating rifles? Likewise. Wasn't interested.

Then the government and some activists started getting a little too aggressive about wanting to curtail a clearly stated right in the U.S. Constitution. And yes, I'm one of those people who will act contrarily, just because because I don't like to be pushed or nagged, even if it's for my own good. Think on that, anti-gun fans. Your very vehemence--your pushiness, your meddlesome behavior, and your desire to tell me what to do--got me irritated enough to ask a friend to introduce me to a gun range and firing a handgun.

So there I was: I listened seriously and carefully through my ear and eye protection to the safety briefing from the gun range supervisor. I took what pointers he could offer, and asked what questions I needed to before I picked up the heavy black metal thing and fired 50 feet down a shell-littered concrete floor at a piece of paper mounted to an adjustable cardboard target. My hands shook so badly through the first magazine that if half my bullets hit the 7X9" paper, I'd be most surprised (nervousness combined with an essential tremor--a great combination). Even through the thick ear protection, I was startled by the noise and explosive force of the weapon (I'd rented a Glock .45 automatic). Nevertheless, after the first magazine, I understood more or less what I was doing, and started hitting the target often enough not to feel too embarrassed.

You professionals, go ahead and laugh. This was a first-time outing by a 43-year-old with glasses and shaky hands. Let me also point out that I was not the first one to fire at the cardboard--it had been there a while. I fired about three magazines' worth--36-42 bullets, depending on how well I shoved in the casings, which wasn't that efficiently.

I also fired my friend's 1911 Model .45 pistol and the six of us (the outing increased in size as word got around) took turns firing a rented Beretta at extreme range. Eventually I steadied down a bit and was able to understand what I was doing, even if I wasn't particularly skilled at doing it.

Here's what I came away with after that 90 minutes at the range:

• While I'm not enough of an expert to understand what exactly makes a good weapon, the easiest to handle and fire was the 1911 Model .45. It wasn't quite as heavy as the Glock and the trigger was tight enough that there wasn't any guessing or surprise as to when the weapon would discharge. The Beretta was the worst in that regard, the Glock about the middle--again, based on my very amateur standards.
• I finally understood the psychology of Frodo Baggins. I felt myself surrounded by terrible destructive power, and I felt the immense paranoia of being responsible for it--as well as feeling the very great wish that such power was not available to anyone and should be destroyed. Another new gun user in my group said, "After being in that place, I understand the need for more gun control!" That isn't quite the same thing I felt, but we shared a common dismay at the massive power of the weapons we fired. 
• And yet despite my above feelings, I didn't change my mind about buying a weapon (mind you,  a little more training might be in order). Skip Frodo for a moment, and consider Peter Parker (a.k.a., Spider-Man), who noted that "With great power comes great responsibility." Do I want only other people, some of whom might be terribly irresponsible (or evil), to have the power to wield such things? No. Am I eager to run out and fire such weapons with impunity? Absolutely not. The idea is horrific.

So there you go: I tried something dangerous and new, not because I particularly wanted to, but simply because some people wanted to take away my ability to even make the choice.

My Cold, Dead Hand

As I've remarked elsewhere, I get a lot of right-wing screeds in my email, some of which I laugh at, some of which I ignore, some of which I actually take seriously. An email I got from an NRA buddy at least had the backing of an internet link to a reliable news source: in this case, Reuters. The issue that caught my attention was the U.S. expressing willingness to support the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, which is a UN-supported organization designed to negotiate arms control treaties. While the emphasis is on strategic (nuclear) arms, the thing that has the NRA in a twist is that it also covers sales of conventional arms (e.g. guns and ammo) overseas, saying that this would be the "first major step in a plan to ban all firearms in the United States."

Come on, people!

The point of this treaty is to bring some law and order to the process of shipping arms to overseas customers--you know: like Iran, the Contras, or the Mujahadeen. Be that as it may, the U.S. Government has some of the strictest rules for sales of arms overseas, so we could only raise the tenor of debate. I do find it interesting that a staunch ally of ours, Israel, as well as two theoretical rivals, China and Russia, all abstained on this treaty last time it came up for a vote in the UN. They don't like the idea of American standards tying their hands on who they can sell weapons to.

On the flip side, do we want our decision to, say, arm pro-freedom demonstrators in Iran, China, Cuba, or elsewhere, subject to a veto by the UN, a body that has taken great pleasure in thwarting U.S. plans at every turn? So if you're going to oppose the treaty, pick that reason. It's a lonnnnng stretch to say that this is a ban on domestic sales of handguns, and I can name half a dozen people off the top of my head who would argue the point most strenuously if any American government even tried such a stunt.

Every year I get stockholder ballots that include arguments from the Sisters of Mercy (or somesuch group) complaining that Such-and-such defense contractor is making money selling [X weapons] to unsavory characters overseas. And every year I check the box voting No, occasionally adding the comment, "If you're so concerned about making money on weapons, sell your stock. That, or write your congresscritter complaining to them about who the U.S. Government allows to receive American-made arms."

Again, the point of this treaty is to bring the U.S. into the UN process for restricting how many arms we sell overseas. If the arms dealers are cheesed off about losing money because the government restricts how much money they can make selling overseas, they can lobby like every other Beltway Bandit. That is not the same as putting a clamp on the sale of handguns and other toys to American citizens. I don't even buy the slippery slope argument on this one. In this case, the NRA is barking up the wrong tree.

Potpourri XLII

Let's see...what's lurking out there? Tell ya what, before I dive into the usual space, politics, and technobabble, some good news in the world of my e-niece, Morgan. On Saturday, Darlene the Science Cheerleader hosted a benefit for Morgan, presumably to help her family with her medical bills. The benefit raised $23,000! Gooooo, Dar! Staying tuned for further medical developments.

Tip o' the fedora to Tracy for this: Astronaut (not the singer) Tom Jones wrote an op-ed in the New York Post.

For those of you wondering what NASA has done for you lately, here's an excerpt from a press release on NASA's efforts to support environmental research:

NASA ANNOUNCES GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE EDUCATION GRANT AWARDS

WASHINGTON -- NASA has awarded $6.4 million in grants to institutions of higher education and not-for-profit education organizations nationwide to enhance learning through the use of NASA's Earth science resources.

Some good editorials in Jeff Foust's The Space Review:

• To boldly go: the urgent need for a revitalized investment in space technology---NASA long invested in development of advanced technologies, but in recent years that effort withered as the agency concentrated on plans to return to the Moon. John Mankins explains why it's necessary for NASA and the nation to reinvigorate its technology development efforts. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1377/1
• The god that failed---In the mid-1970s articles and books promised a grand future in the form of space colonies, a future that has not been realized. Dwayne Day looks back at one such description of such a future, and why it hasn't happened. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1376/1
• Exchanging uncertainties---It appears increasingly likely that the White House will nominate someone for NASA administrator in the immediate future, solving one problem long identified by NASA's supporters. However, Jeff Foust notes that whoever is selected won't be able to make all the uncertainties surrounding the space agency go away. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1375/1
• NASA and the book of laws---Norm Augustine, picked by the White House to lead a new panel on the future of NASA's human spaceflight programs, is best known for promulgating a series of "laws" about management practices. Taylor Dinerman examines what those laws, and other experience by Augustine, could mean for the future of NASA. http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1374/1

Congressman Blair Holt's proposed bill to put additional restrictions on the Second Amendment. Or, as the bill's language puts it,

To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes.

Sounds reasonable, but as the accompanying email noted,

Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm. Any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:

• It is registered
• You are fingerprinted
• You supply a current Driver's License
• You supply your Social Security #
• You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing
• Each update change of ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25
• Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail.

Most of this is unnecessary and intrusive control of law-abiding citizens, since there are already laws on the books "preventing" criminals from purchasing weapons.

Another thought-provoking video from TED on "the sixth sense." Wow!

Boy, am I glad I read science fiction! It might be the only literature on Earth that helps the reader cope with "Future Shock." The techie in me says, "Way cool!" The neo-Luddite in me is thinking, "Uh oh, what next?"

Some additional thoughts from Scott on buying gold for that ugly rainy day at the end of civilization:

In your bullet point saying “Gold (http://www.swissamerica.com/ or http://www.golddealer.com/ were recommended to me at one point).” You might want to say “Currency, or something to use as currency. I mean the real thing, not paper or other fiat money. Everyone thinks of gold, which I recommend; but you’ll also want silver for those smaller purchases. When you buy a loaf of bread the seller may not be able to give you change from your 950-dollar (at today’s price) gold piece. Buy coins from a country people have heard of, don’t buy collector-grade, uncirculated, mint, or other coins priced at a premium, and don’t buy ingots as neither you nor your seller will know if they’ve been debased or not.”

New from Hu:

• The U.S. Army is looking at more Stryker brigades. The son of one of my managers back in NoVA was captain of a Stryker brigade. And from what I heard, his team was quite effective. Of course it helps to have the right people in command and on the ground...
• Some thoughts on the safety of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. This might be important reading, given that they're reported to be increasing their nuke stockpile.

Some interesting stats on the state of our education system/test scores.