Language tools
The symbolic meaning of owning a gun is to reclaim political power, demonize minorities, distort the issue of crime in America, express contempt for women gaining access to power, and distract Americans from the real issues of democracy.
So says BuzzFlash in a review of a book I think I'd prefer not to read.

It's a sobering thought, though, to consider that there are people who read such evils into an important constitutional freedom, because it just never crossed my mind that gun ownership demonized anyone, much less minorities or women. I mean, don't plenty of minorities and women own guns too? Considering that disarming black people was the earliest form of gun control in this country, I think a good argument can be made that it is actually gun control which demonizes minorities, and gun ownership which empowers both minorities and women. Women have a long history of owning guns in self defense. Witness the muff pistol! And the famous "Equalizer" advertising slogan,

Be not afraid of any man,
No matter what his size.
When danger threatens, call on me
And I will equalize.
The appeal to women is obvious.

Speaking of ads, I have an Iver Johnson pistol that's over 100 years old which I was cleaning earlier. Searching online in an attempt to locate the model number, I found an absolutely precious ad, which indicates that there's been a bit of a change in both advertising and product placement since the gun was made:

iverbabyad.jpg

Somewhat disparagingly, the website titles it "Send Your Baby To Bed With An Iver Johnson Revolver."

I don't think that's exactly what the company intended to say, and I'd be willing to bet that the ad was never meant as a serious suggestion that babies be put to bed with handguns -- any more than this ad was meant to suggest that your American Tourister suitcase ought to be left in the hands of gorillas for safekeeping:

tourister_opt.jpg

Rather, the picture of the gun with the baby (while unthinkable today) was the company's way of pointing out that the revolver was designed so that the firing pin retracted after firing, and stayed inside so that it would not fire accidentally as the older ones did. Thus, a small child like the little girl in the picture would not have made it go off by playing with it or dropping it, unless she managed to actually pull the trigger (not an easy thing for a baby to do).

It its time, the hammer on the Iver Johnson double action revolver was considered so safe that the company also ran the following ad, advising customers that they could "hammer the hammer!"

Hammer-hammer.jpg

Nowadays, they'd probably have to say something like, "Kids, don't try this at home!"

I'm not about to try the hammer experiment, but looking at the diagram of the action, I think the "hammer the hammer" ad probably gets it right.

But beware!

According to one very insightful commenter, hammers are dangerous!

Statistics show that '3 million'children a year' are killed by hammers and that 'every three hours' someone dies as a result of being hit by a hammer.
To which I'd add,
The symbolic meaning of owning a hammer is to reclaim political power, demonize minorities, distort the issue of crime in America, express contempt for women gaining access to power, and distract Americans from the real issues of democracy.
And when they're combined with sickles, millions die!

UPDATE: Thank you, Glenn Reynolds, for the link, and a warm welcome to all!

posted by Eric on 09.25.07 at 05:00 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/5564






Comments

I'd prefer not to have read that BuzzFlash review, myself.

"Gets it", my ass. Sheer partisan ignorance.

Sigivald   ·  September 25, 2007 07:31 PM

I read the entire review and what a load of crap. What a bunch of idiots. Clearly the author and reviewer have no regard for the constitution. To claim that the NRA began supporting Republicans in 1980 is just insane. My favorite part is where she claims to have found "hate" literature at all but one gun show. Clearly then it follows that all gun owners and all Republicans are racists. I would be most curious what the existence of hate literature at all protest marches says to these people.
Astonishingly ignorant of guns and the people who own them.

buzz   ·  September 25, 2007 07:55 PM

I don't own a gun, but after reading that review, I kinda want one now.

I particularly loved the use of the term "white man" as a prejorative. That attitude will get a lot of votes come election time.

Percy Dovetonsils   ·  September 25, 2007 08:31 PM

Wish I could just mail one to you, Percy.

urthshu   ·  September 25, 2007 10:07 PM

Gawd! I loved the "combined with sickles" part, comrades!

Say, has anybody seen Leon Trotsky lately? He's not returning my calls.

Josef Stalin   ·  September 25, 2007 10:10 PM

Gawd! I loved the "combined with sickles" part, comrades!

Say, has anybody seen Leon Trotsky lately? He's not returning my calls.

Josef Stalin   ·  September 25, 2007 10:10 PM

Gawd! I loved the "combined with sickles" part, comrades!

Say, has anybody seen Leon Trotsky lately? He's not returning my calls.

Josef Stalin   ·  September 25, 2007 10:10 PM

Buzzflash has gone in for mind-reading before. "The symbolic meaning of owning a gun..." I often wonder if the anti-gun folks are projecting what goes on in their minds onto the screens of others.

Assistant Village Idiot   ·  September 25, 2007 10:59 PM

Buzzflash has gone in for mind-reading before. "The symbolic meaning of owning a gun..." I often wonder if the anti-gun folks are projecting what goes on in their minds onto the screens of others.

Assistant Village Idiot   ·  September 25, 2007 10:59 PM

Darn, we need a tax on bullshit.

Brett   ·  September 26, 2007 06:45 AM

The gun companies were monopolies? What? According to the Springfield Armory Museum, the Connecticut River Valley had 400+ manufacturers around 1900. Some monopoly.

Owen   ·  September 26, 2007 11:29 AM

There's a worse "symbolic meaning of owning a gun" than the one Buzzkill cited. Some of us gun bloggers have of late been discussing a recent flare-up of the counter-Freudian notion that we want guns because we are "consumed by crippling sexual inadequacy."

How exactly is this supposed to work? If a man feels inadequate will buying a firearm make him more masculine, and if a woman feels inadequate will buying a firearm make her feel more feminine?

triticale   ·  September 28, 2007 12:09 AM

Post a comment

You may use basic HTML for formatting.





Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)



September 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits