Metcalf vs. Korwin

[TarDevil]

In the Jan/Feb issue of American Handgunner magazine, Alan Korin has an article titled "Gun Rights." The following is a quote from that piece:

Even though some people like to think, "all those damn gun laws are illegal and should be repealed!" keep in mind many of the laws control the government. Law guarantees you can buy guns, own guns, sell guns, teach your kids about guns, buy machine guns, carry guns, use guns to protect yourself... and this is all good. You need laws. It would be controversial to not have them.

I see similarities and differences. Korwin advocates activism that makes those gun laws better. There's a little voice in me that says, "maybe Metcalf had the same intentions but lacked the ability to articulate as well."

I dunno. I'd love for you to read the entire article and offer some constructive comparisons between Metcalf and Korwin.

 

[rbernie]

What unadulterated crap - our Founding Fathers would weep for reading such nonsense.

Laws guarantee NOTHING, because that which can be granted by law can just as easily be removed. We are born with innate freedom and innate responsibility and innate choice. My right to BE, and to ensure my continued being through effective self defense, for example, exists regardless of the presence or absence of any law granting that right.

The bottom line is that the laws in question exist because it pleases some to control the actions of others. Yes, we need to make those laws as least onerous as possible. But we should never be so confused as to believe for one instant that we NEED those laws.

 

[yzguy87]

I smell a big load of crap too. If the Constitution really was the supreme law of the land we wouldn't have unconstitutional anti-2a laws. Our founding fathers inteded this country to be free. We need to see that it continues to be free!

 

[verge]

What unadulterated crap - our Founding Fathers would weep for reading such nonsense.

Laws guarantee NOTHING, because that which can be granted by law can just as easily be removed. We are born with innate freedom and innate responsibility and innate choice. My right to BE, and to ensure my continued being through effective self defense, for example, exists regardless of the presence or absence of any law granting that right.

The bottom line is that the laws in question exist because it pleases some to control the actions of others. Yes, we need to make those laws as least onerous as possible. But we should never be so confused as to believe for one instant that we NEED those laws.

I agree completely. The only thing that laws do is limit freedom and liberty. We don't need a government to GRANT us our RIGHTS they are OUR RIGHTS and are inherent to US.

More to the point regarding Korwin's opinion, anyone could buy a machine gun if it weren't for the laws limiting their transfer. Before the LAW the cost of a fully auto M-16 was a few dollars more than a semi-auto. A drop in auto sear is a $15 part. The LAW didn't grant us the ability to buy a machine gun it limited who could buy them and drove the price through the roof.

 

[TarDevil]

Two major gun publications in essentially the same market period.

 

[9MMare]

"Even though some people like to think, "all those damn gun laws are illegal and should be repealed!" keep in mind many of the laws control the government. Law guarantees you can buy guns, own guns, sell guns, teach your kids about guns, buy machine guns, carry guns, use guns to protect yourself... and this is all good. You need laws. It would be controversial to not have them."

Is this a direct quote? The last sentence, in bold, doesnt even make sense.

And I see what he's saying in the rest of it but I also disagree. Except about laws to protect yourself when using guns but that should not necessarily be about guns but about the ability and circumstances surrounding self-defense in general.

 

[MErl]

I dunno. I'd love for you to read the entire article and offer some constructive comparisons between Metcalf and Korwin.

Is there a way we can read the article without buying the magazine?

 

[TarDevil]

Try this, page 70...
http://fmgpublications.ipaperus.com/FMGPublications/AmericanHandgunner/AHJF14/

 

[taliv]

I think I might understand what Korwin meant, and if so I would agree in small part but he stated it very poorly and should not have included the machine gun part, as mentioned above.

And he mostly misunderstands. Laws limit people. The constitution limits the government.


Let me attempt to rephrase...

Some "gun" laws are good, for some theoretical examples:
a statute that limits the liability of gun companies so they cannot be sued out of existence
a law that keeps police from destroying confiscated weapons
a law that forces the military to sell small arms surplus and spent brass instead of destroying it
a law that prohibits discrimination based on guns (i.e. not serving someone in a restaurant because he has a gun, or is wearing a gun themed tshirt)


i'll add that my guess is out of tens of thousands of gun laws, the 'good' ones could be counted on two hands

 

[Romeo 33 Delta]

When "professional writers" reveal an inability to "articulate" what they want to say ... IT'S TIME FOR THEM TO BE ... FIRED! What a bunch of idiots!