Ben Stein on gun control

[beatledog7]

He wins with me simply by making the point that the issues revolving around gun control must be approached rationally and not through any sort of knee-jerk, emotional reaction to specific events.

Taking that approach will get anyone to the place where we want to be, so since he takes that approach, he must be pro 2A.

 

[Kingofthehill]

very nice video. Much respect for that man. Logically thinking like we all are. I know that NONE of us like hearing on the news that there is an active shooter. It puts all of us under the microscope.

 

[Deus Machina]

I don't really see his comments as Pro 2A. All he's saying is that it is a complicated issue and fails to take a position one way or the other.

He pointed out that states with lax firearms laws do not show more crime, and that states with tight laws do not see a decrease in crime.

... making the point that the issues revolving around gun control must be approached rationally and not through any sort of knee-jerk, emotional reaction to specific events.

Admitting and coming out to say that essentially makes him pro-2A. Most rational arguments, by virtue of rationality, turn out pro.

 

[Ryanxia]

At least he has hope

 

[230RN]

wiki spake thusly:

In 1999, during the height of Win Ben Stein's Money's popularity, Comedy Central gave Stein another show, a talk show with celebrity guests entitled Turn Ben Stein On. One of the mainstays of the show was Stein's dog, Puppy Wuppy, who had free run of the set.

Anyone who has the balls to have a dog named Puppy Wuppy can't be all bad.

Terry, 230RN

 

[susjam]

Great guy

Mr. Stein came to the university where I serve as a police officer. He was an incredibly nice, respectful man, who enjoyed having a conversation with anyone who would stop to talk.

 

[Shoju]

He was the valedictorian of H.R, Clinton's Yale Law class, and he DESPISES her.

That's good enough for me.

Anyone that despises HRC has to be on my side!

Shoju

 

[bogon48]

I like Ben Stein and was glad to hear him come out with a short, accurate synopsis of the facts concerning gun violence. He's smarter than I and, whatever his past, is still capable of thinking clearly and articulating his views succinctly. His short spots on Sunday Morning have covered everything from Economics (his father was a famous economist) to military pay and universal health care. I don't always agree with him, but I do agree more often than not.

This little clip will not change the mind of a rabid anti-gun proponent. However, it might help inform those people whose opinions have been based solely on the media's coverage of recent criminal acts. It would be nice to see coverage of even a fraction of the incidents where people used firearms to protect themselves from criminals. Never happen, though.

 

[230RN]

Welcome aboard, susjam!

 

[CoRoMo]

He would make a fine president for the NRA.

Oh heck no! He made a small statement in that video that you may have missed...

"...I'm not saying that people in Chicago should be allowed to just tote their guns in their cars the way many can and do in North Idaho..."

 

[wow6599]

Oh heck no! He made a small statement in that video that you may have missed...

Yep, I missed that one.

 

[22-rimfire]

I always considered him to have a liberal bent on things. But I think he is always truthful as he sees issues. In this case, his views match most of the forum participants views on guns. Hard to fix crazy. Hard to define crazy.

 

[barnbwt]

...capable of thinking clearly and articulating his views succinctly.

Regardless of whether we agree with him on everything (or even anything) you do have to respect the man's candor. Clear, concise, substantive arguments are severely lacking in today's discourse. It's nice to see a man who can express himself coherently for a change.

Ben is fairly liberal on many issues, but if what I've seen of the man in the past is any indication, he has based his opinions on logic, rational thought, and ultimately, his sense of morals. Can't fault him in the least for that. He's the antithesis of the "irrational, over-emotional partisan" that dominates the waves so much now. He is obviously not comfortable with lax gun control laws (see cars in guns quote from the video), but he acknowledges that he has no better alternative, and that they obviously aren't working as well as we'd all hope. He then postulates that, logically, additional restrictions probably won't accomplish much, either. That admission (as humbling as it may be) is what has been utterly lacking on the side of gun control advocacy; that we are all ultimately vulnerable to harm, regardless of any system's protections.

And then, unlike so many talking heads without real solutions, he suggests we hold off on any reaction-based proposals, so we can examine the situation more carefully and hopefully find an impactful solution. His argument is basically that we need to avoid the "Do Something" knee-jerk impulse, and instead look for something that will actually work. It's really neither pro nor anti; just an appeal for calm thinking.

He would make a fine president for the NRA.

Honestly, if he would be the least bit interested in supporting the cause, it'd be great to have him aboard. He was a presidential speachwriter, after all, as well as a very talented legal scholar, so he's probably one of the most convincing people on the planet. If you need a spokesman to articulate ideas, there are few better. There's no rule that says the NRA prez needs to be the most "pro gun" guy in the room; just an articulate, respectable leader (the respectable part is where he would into trouble because of, as has been mentioned, the "rough patch" earlier in his life).

TCB

 

[Sam1911]

There's no rule that says the NRA prez needs to be the most "pro gun" guy in the room; just an articulate, respectable leader (the respectable part is where he would into trouble because of, as has been mentioned, the "rough patch" earlier in his life).

No, but having many (ANY) statement in your past that run counter to the Association platform will come back to haunt.

It sure happened to Charlton Heston.

 

[beatledog7]

Ben Stein has had rough patches. OK, who hasn't?

My impression: Ben Stein says what he thinks, and when he's said it you understand what he said, and you know he meant it. Furthermore, you get the sense that if he was asked to talk about what he said he'd be able to do it without hemming and hawing around or shifting positions in mid sentence. That is an essential quality of leadership, one that's quite rare in this age.

No matter who leads the NRA, that person is going to be subject to intense scrutiny. Nobody's "clean" if enough people with an audience seek to make him look dirty.

 

[Sam1911]

Certainly, but if he has (recently, no less) made the public statement that, "...I'm not saying that people in Chicago should be allowed to just tote their guns in their cars the way many can and do in North Idaho..." , then he can't be brought out as the president of an organization which expressly seeks to ensure the equality and freedom of ALL Americans in every state and city to do EXACTLY that thing.

He'd either be forced into saying, "well, I've changed my mind," which would most likely be (seen as?) an untruth, or he'd have to say, "my Association promotes ideas I don't really believe in." Neither is going to be a tenable situation.

Sure, everyone has skeletons in their closet if you look deep enough. Some are unpleasant enough to make a person unsuitable for a given task. This is one.

 

[PT92]

IMO the OP was just concerning the interesting video with Mr. Stein regarding the incredible string (now including the nut-job yesterday in Bloomberg's Jungle) of shootings of late. A separate thread would seem to be in order pertaining to NRA Board Members.

 

[Sam1911]

IMO the OP was just concerning the interesting video with Mr. Stein regarding the incredible string (now including the nut-job yesterday in Bloomberg's Jungle) of shootings of late. A separate thread would seem to be in order pertaining to NRA Board Members.

Certainly so. We're just taking the discussion a bit farther than the, "Yup. Neat video. Cool", basic response.

Does he speak the truth? Does he understand the WHOLE truth? Is he a spokesman for "us?" Could he be put forward as a more official spokesman of our interests and interest groups? Would flaws in his reasoning cause troubles in that role? And so forth.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Well the movie-dood probably understands the issue more than most people, but that does not mean he should be in some office, as you note.

Sure, everyone has skeletons in their closet if you look deep enough. Some are unpleasant enough to make a person unsuitable for a given task.

Absolutely.

He apparently doesn't think Chicagoans should be able to carry guns in their cars like Idahoans because he thinks people in Chicago are crazy folks and he is for gun control of crazy folks.

 

[Sam Cade]

This is the same Ben Stein who wanted to ban video games for being too fun and sent his son to boarding school too keep him from playing Everquest.

He also did one of the most offensive films I have ever seen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed

 

[Hugo]

Ben Stein seems to base his opinions and beliefs on rational thought and critical thinking. If tests show something doesn't work or this policy is illogical, he goes with logic. The fact that he is saying 'Complex problems have no simple answers' is a huge help since he points out the fact that more gun control isn't the answer and knee-jerk responses make things worse. Good job Ben Stein!

 

[Tommygunn]

This is the same Ben Stein who wanted to ban video games for being too fun and sent his son to boarding school too keep him from playing Everquest.

He also did one of the most offensive films I have ever seen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed

That film wasn't offensive. It was too silly to be offensive!

 

[PT92]

That film wasn't offensive. It was too silly to be offensive!

Agreed--Moreover, if youths devoted more time to academics and less to the xbox and the like we are better country for it but I digress ...

 

[jrdolall]

Win Ben Stein's Money. One of the worst game shows in history but designed to be silly.
Ferris Beuller. Nothing more need be said abou that besides "Classic".
Get the Red Out. Visine commercials.

I don't think he is necessarily pro 2A or anti. I think he sees both sides of the argument and is firmly straddling the fence. Any time a Hollywood type straddles the 2A fence they appear to be ultra conservative when compared to the rest of Hollywood.

 

[barnbwt]

Aw, I'd almost forgotten about Win Ben Stein's Money...

I don't think he is necessarily pro 2A or anti. I think he sees both sides of the argument and is firmly straddling the fence. Any time a Hollywood type straddles the 2A fence they appear to be ultra conservative when compared to the rest of Hollywood.

Amen. It seems to take guts in this day and age to straddle such a contentious issue. I'm not talking flip-flopping or having it both ways either; but understanding both sides of a problem, and admitting a personal inability to resolve it. So many public figures (especially elder states-men) are more concerned with having a commited stance on an issue, than understanding the matter, and stubborn partisanship is the result. Ben is hardly "conservative" except in relation to his neighbors, perhaps.

...sent his son to boarding school to keep him from playing Everquest.

I'm not a parent, or anything, but many of my high-school and college classmates lost their lives (metaphorically speaking) to such RPGs. For all we know, it may have been for the best (in his case )

TCB