Some thoughts on the coming gun debate

(Sign the petition asking President Obama to help start a national conversation about gun control.)

I served three years in the U.S. Army. I've fired bigger guns than the gun fetishists would ever dream of firing'from a .45, to an M-16, to an M-60, to an M-203 grenade launcher, to a .50 caliber, to ... one of these:

Each time I fired one of those weapons, it was in a controlled environment, with multiple layers of safety wrapped in. During peacetime, that made sense. But things weren't too much different during wartime. I didn't deploy, but when pulling guard duty at high-value targets in Germany during the first Gulf War, we weren't given ammunition. A sergeant kept that tightly controlled. Here we were, a potential terrorist target, the most highly trained military force in the world, and they didn't trust us with live ammo. And for good reason.

Down in Kuwait, those on guard duty were given live ammo, but even then safety barriers were erected to prevent accidental shootings, as former cavalry soldier John Cole recounts:

[I]n the middle of one of the most dangerous regions in the world, even with clear Rules of Engagement, every time I went on gate duty, there was a piece of tape over my ammo clip on my M-16 and M1911 .45. Why? Because the most heavily armed military in the world did not want accidental shootings. If a situation arose, I would have to eject my ammo clip, remove the tape, and reinsert and work the action before I could fire.

This was in a combat zone. Yet I have spent the last two fucking days dealing with armchair commandos telling me they need unlimited firepower to be safe in' Connecticut.

And that's the crux of it'a bunch of civilian gun fetishists who fashion themselves the front lines in the defense of freedom from tyranny of something or other. Black helicopters? The U.N.? Barney Frank?

The 'tactical' turn is what I want to flag here. It has what I take to be a very specific use-case, but it's used - liberally - by gun owners outside of the military, outside of law enforcement, outside (if you'll indulge me) of any conceivable reality-based community: these folks talk in terms of 'tactical' weapons, 'tactical' scenarios, 'tactical applications,' and so on. It's the lingua franca of gun shops, gun ranges, gun forums, and gun-oriented Youtube videos. (My god, you should see what's out there on You Tube!) Which begs my question: in precisely which 'tactical' scenarios do all of these lunatics imagine that they're going to use their matte-black, suppressor-fitted, flashlight-ready tactical weapons?

People don't really buy assault rifles to hunt. If you can't take down that deer with a single shot, then you have no business hunting. Learn how to fucking aim.

Of course, we can sit here and lambast this new "tactical" culture all we want, but what can be done about it?

(Continue reading below the fold.)