[Leica] Armed and almost famous!

[pklein at 2alpha.net (Peter Klein)]

Kyle:  My congrats on the success of "Armed America."  I've long had a 
feeling the book would strike a nerve. So, can you quit your day job?

I do think the international buzz is largely generated because your book 
provides "evidence" that we in the U.S. are as f*ing nuts as the 
Europeans, etc. think we are.  Which is both good and bad.

As has been noted before, your neutral stance lets anybody think whatever 
they like. But I must say, I know I'm being tweaked when I see a parade of 
the Norman Rockwellesque family scenes with everybody armed to the teeth. 
Cute puppies, kitties, babies and precision mechanicals designed to kill. 
All this fits nicely with your goths and your edgy models and your 
levitating people.  Combine things that don't quite (or don't at all) 
belong together in the viewer's mind.  Juxtapose the cute with the 
sinister.  Then sit back slyly and watch the fun.

It makes us think.  So good on you.

Disclosure:  I'm of the somewhat anti-gun persuasion. As much as I admire 
the book and your work, I don't know if I can bring myself to buy it and 
have it in my house.

I'm basically an artsy big-city liberal (in the FDR/JFK sense, not the PC 
sense). But I learned how to shoot a rifle as a kid at summer camp, and I 
enjoyed target shooting back the. Haven't done it in years, and never 
actually owned a gun.

I once went to a range with some friends. A friend handed me a pistol she 
was going to give to her father to protect himself from bears at his cabin 
in Montana.  It was a serious weapon, of a caliber that would likely kill 
a person from shock even if the shot just winged him.  I actually did 
pretty well with that pistol on the range. But felt very wrong about the 
whole thing.

I thought of a line from Stephen Sondheim's "Assassins."  "All you have 
to do is crook your little finger, and you can change the world." I also 
thought that nobody should have that much power in their hand.

Considering the number of accidental deaths from guns, I'd be happy to see 
far fewer of them around.

Still, I've seen enough of rural America and the West to understand why 
many people like their guns. I wouldn't dream of taking hunting rifles 
away from people in rural Montana (who have been persuaded to vote 
Republican, against all their interests, because Rove & Co have persuaded 
them that this is exactly what "liberals" want). If they hunt to put food 
on the table, I can't fault them. I despise the idea of people deriving 
pleasure from killing animals, but if they want to shoot Bambi, I don't 
really see myself having the right to stop them.

But the profusion of guns on urban streets ups the ante for everyone. It 
makes it likely that arguments that used to result in a black eye or a 
recoverable stab wound will result in a death. Yes, people kill people, 
but a gun amplifies the situation and the result. It makes killing so much 
easier.

It *is* interesting, though, that countries like Switzerland and Israel do 
not have anywhere near the rate of citizen vs. citizen gun deaths that the 
U.S. does.  So there is something about the American character, combined 
with gun availability, that makes for a more lethal combination.

I don't think assault rifles have any place in a civil society.

My own solution to the "protection" issue would be to make "stun guns" 
readily available.  I would have a substantial penalty for using one 
without justification.  And I would make it so that a person found to have 
used one in legitimate self-defense would be immune to lawsuits.

Yes, criminals might use the stun guns, but overall, I think far less 
people would be killed on impulse, in anger or by accident.

Wow, all this thinking because Kyle went around snapping pictures of gun 
owners.  He must be doing something right.

--Peter