Was Canada ever really necessary? I don’t mean the Frog part, of course they have to be in a country of their own, even if I’m not quite sure why that country has to be on this continent. No, I mean English Canada, a.k.a. Not-Quebec. It’s not as though Great Britain had some big plan to form two English speaking countries or anything. It was all supposed to be one great big British Empire, remember? The only reason we have two countries now is because when things with south, some colonists said “don’t tread on me” while others said “thank me harder.”
But enough on Canada, at least for the moment. Recently a piece by Paul Helmke, a former Hoosier, a former Republican, a former mayor and the current head of the U.S.’s main gun-control lobby, has been getting fawning reviews from self-styled moderates who are either ignorant, or willfully ignorant, of the not-so-moderate positions Helmke’s organization also supports. As I’ve noted in other fora, it is disingenuous to talk of how reasonable one particular article is while ignoring the fact that Helmke has not repudiated any of his organization’s other positions, and lame to effectively give him credit for doing so solely because he managed to write one whole article without bringing them up.
This piece is not about that, though. Even if Helmke’s article were viewed in a vacuum, and we were to pretend that the National Council to Control Handguns / Handgun Control, Inc. / Brady Center to Prevent Gun Ownership / Whatever The Hell They’re Calling Themselves This Week had abandoned its support of every gun law not mentioned in that article, some would argue that even those controls would not be reasonable, as they unnecessarily burden the right to bear arms. I don’t necessarily disagree with these criticisms, but I’m going to argue a different tack:
Paul Helmke should withdraw from politics and disband his organization immediately. His own support for firearm regulation, and that of his entire organization, is absurd. It’s completely contrary to American traditions. It has no basis in fact, and for someone who represents a major American association to be pushing this agenda is particularly alarming, especially a man.”
If you’re an American, male or female, pro-gun, anti-gun, moderate or indifferent, then chances are that you find that argument downright retarded. But if you’re Canadian,* I’m sure it makes perfect sense. ‘Hat tip: Eugene Volokh.
*I realize I’m painting with a broad brush here, so my apologies to Sharon Gregson, Mark Steyn, Wendy McElroy, Rachel Marsden, Terrence, Phillip, Ike, the entire membership of the National Firearms Association (yes, both of you), the ghost of Gordon Sinclair, Rush, Triumph, any Canucks who happen to be reading this blog, and countless others I didn’t even know were Canucks ‘cuz y’all didn’t run around making a big deal of the fact. As with us lawyers, it’s too bad that 99% of y’all give all y’all a bad name.