Letter: Editor Dave Perry’s May 26 rant against gun owners

423

EDITOR: Columnist Dave Perry has yet again created another rant filled with errors of argument, as well as just bold faced lies and hyperbole. The overall criticism I have for his piece is that it is, again, made from the standpoint of a privileged person who does not have to face the potential of violence due to their living situation, poverty or by membership in a victimized group.

The column is repeatedly insulting to gun owners on a crude level, clearly intended to emasculate a presumably male gun ownership for the purpose of deriding the readership. Perry makes emotional pleas in order to exacerbate his hyperbole statements and stoke fear in the reader, while also repeatedly making pure hyperbolic statements that are grossly inaccurate, yet are presented as a statement of absolute authority from the position of the editor.

I’ve tallied the various errors of argument, to easily identify the specific statements Perry has made that are inaccurate and intended to manipulate the reader.

3 crude derisive statements:

“…pearl-handled pea-shooters or Testosterone 2,000 shell launchers…”

“…limitless freedom of ammophiles…”

“…weapons with a Viagra factor of three or more…”

2 Overt emotional pleas:

“…dogs to sniff out explosives, ammo and fear.”

“… protect our children from the right for anyone to bear arms any goddam place they want,…” (Think of the children)

5 Hyperbole statements:

“…limitless guns and military weaponry…”

“…limitless power of the NRA…”

“…Security dogs will be an important addition here, patrolling the halls regularly,…”

“…put steel plates over windows and install lead doors.”

“…the NRA running the show in Congress…”

1 Poisoning the well:

“…every hillbilly, liberal, vigilante, redneck, cop, mental patient and heroine…”

There are several logic fallacies that exist in Perry’s column.

– The premise of his column that gun violence is the only reason to provide security at schools, ignoring all other acts of violence, and social factors including drugs and correlation to population density, that logically necessitate some measures of school security.

– “…at least one metal detector, like the ones used in Congress that keep lawmakers safe from their constituents.” Metal detectors are not used to keep lawmakers safe; Armed guards are used to keep lawmakers safe, who operate those metal detectors. The wealthy and affluent are capable of affording the additional costs of security, such as private armed guards, Blackwater-style mercenaries, and expensive security monitoring. Affluent privilege that is not affordable to the impoverished and disenfranchised ‘constituents’ which are repeatedly maligned.

– “Tax the living hell out of the NRA faithful…” A further statement indicating that Perry’s opinion is that gun owners should be punished, and subject to financial penalties that he has deemed fit. This is another example of wealthy privilege expressed by those who have the affluence and wealth to live in bubbles of economically enforced ‘safety.’ Anyone with an income at middle class or higher could easily afford several hundred dollars more in annual costs, while a poverty family would not be able to do so. This further exposes the intent of such ‘gun controls’ to deprive minorities and the poor of the ability to defend themselves against the threats created in their communities by urban blight and economic exploitation by the wealthy privileged few.

– “I’m good with gun-free, but it’s not fair that I have to pay…” Access to a constitutionally guaranteed right is not subject to Perry’s concepts of ‘fair.’ Repeatedly groups on either end of the political spectrum have attempted to constrain or restrict the practice of rights they take umbrage with. Conservative and liberal groups have both attempted to restrict First Amendment rights, as well as the Fourth and Fifth amendments. The attempt to silence people, invade their private lives and seize their personal property at the whims of the elite has been a constant struggle, against which all American citizens have a vested interest in protecting against the degradation of constitutional rights.

– “…let’s talk gun-safety laws. Those are free.” Loss of private property, enactment, enforcement and value for impact is not ‘free.’ The very concept that a law, of any sort, is ‘free’ is itself either a statement of hyperbole, ignorance, or an intentionally misleading lie. There exists gun-regulations and laws into the tens of thousands and faces the problem of lack of enforcement due to either insufficient funding or a refusal to enforce the existing laws.

As long as people in privileged positions of authority, such as politicians, media, and business magnates make misleading statements from a position of authority, they deserve to be called out for this, to demonstrate that every person has the responsibility to think for themselves, and to draw their own conclusions, rather than accepting what others say as golden truth.

Yet it remains the common theme with Perry, and others like himself, to insult and deride their opposition, then decry how unwilling the opposition is to be ‘reasonable,’ even as they demand further and further concessions.

— JoNet, via SentinelColorado.com