A few say they are preparing to protect themselves in the event of a race war....
One expert sees a darker motive driving some post-election gun purchasers.
"Why are white people buying assault weapons?" said Ben Agger, a sociology professor at the University of Texas at Arlington who wrote a book about the Virginia Tech slayings. "I almost hate to say it, but there is a deep-seated fear of the armed black man, because Obama now commands the military and other instruments of the justice system. They are afraid Obama will exact retribution for the very deep-seated legacy of slavery."
45superman noticed this and
wrote about it. And he
wrote about it again.
I correspond with him regularly, and after he sent me the
Trib link, it took just a few minutes of checking around to confirm a few things. Here's the email I sent to reporter Howard Witt, including a copy to his "expert," a guy with an interesting background:
Obama win triggers run on guns
From: David Codrea (dcodrea@hotmail.com)
Sent: Wed 11/12/08 2:13 PM
To: hwitt@tribune.com
Cc: agger@uta.edu
Great job, there, Howard, selecting a Marxist academic to call patriotic Americans racist for buying guns. The nice touch was not disclosing his sympathies to your readers!
I mean, I don't need to send you Agger's CV or writings ("This is not to suggest that socialism is, or should be, dropped as a political aim, to be hoped for and fought for"), or reading list for his classes focusing on Karl Marx ad nauseum... Heck, as an "authorized journalist," I'd expect you to not only know all that--but to approve!
Funny thing about commies who employ citizen disarmament--and what commies don't? It generally is only a matter of time until their Worker's Paradise bears predictable fruit. Of course, by that time, the useful idiot academics and writers were long-ago dispatched as useless eaters...
We'll keep buying guns, if you don't mind, or even (especially) if you and Comrade Agger do.
Racists. That's pretty funny right there. You and Ben are funny guys.
Dosvedanya,
David Codrea
--------------
Here is Howard Witt's reply:
Thanks for your comments. Actually I was unaware of Prof. Agger's academic research into socialism, although other readers of the story have since pointed it out to me. I don't see, however, how that has any bearing on the truth or falsity of his observations about the gun-buying phenomenon. Or do you also think I should have "exposed" the countervailing right-wing ideologies of the pro-gun folks I quoted in the story?
Spasibo,
Howard Witt
Southwest Bureau Chief
Chicago Tribune
Houston, TX
--------------
The good professor weighed in as well:
David,
You are just engaging in name calling. You don't know the first thing about my interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, which might genuinely surprise you. The telling thing is that people of my political and social orientation don't typically write nasty emails to those with whom we disagree. We engage in reasoned and civil discourse--of the the kind typified by Obama's measured and respectful style. The fact remains that social scientists are called on to interpret the run on guns and ammo since Obama's election. The Chicago Trib journalist is doing his job by sampling a wide range of opinion. he is not endorsing my views.
Don't respond, please. Just think deeply about what I am saying about the norms of civility.
--------------
If I may:
Gee Howard, you think belief in the Constitution and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is somehow morally equivalent to being a communist? That to you is a "right wing ideology"? You
are in the right profession!
And yes, ideology is a much more relevant concept to explore than leveling unfounded charges of racism. It's not like prominent non-white Obama supporters in the media haven't broached the subject of "
race war." Along with
others from the left.
You let a Marxist race fluffer play that card as his only argument, and now say you didn't know what his qualifications and motivations were. I repeat my initial salutation: Great job there, Howard!
It's almost laughable for you to bring up the "truth or falsity of his observations." But you haven't determined that, have you, Howard? All you've done is allow a clearly agenda-driven creature to utter an opinion--and in the process disparage the character of every gun owner who opened up to you and gave you information for your story.
Political activist gun owners vote ideologically, Howard. I know Obama supporters (let me guess--you're one, right?) get traction from you in the media by claiming its a melanin thang, but it just ain't so, and it's actually quite insulting, presumptuous and irresponsible to imply otherwise to your many thousands of readers.
And now for you, Ben, or may I call you "
Tovarisch?"
Your only comment is to cast aspersions on the character and motivation of gun owners and
you're the one who's been called names? Are those names accurate, Ben? What else are we to make of your fighting for socialism advocacy?
As for where you stand on the Second Amendment, go ahead, genuinely surprise me.
Now it's funny you should bring up "reasoned discourse." Gun owners have
run into that from the left before. But you misunderstand me if you think I wanted to engage in that with you.
Nope. I'm telling you I know what you are, what you represent and what you enable, and frankly, I view you and all promulgators of your brand of subversion with the contempt you deserve.
And "Obama's
measured and
respectful style" when it comes to political speech? Good one!
Don't worry, Ben, I won't email you again. What was it you told
KABA commentator "Theaton"?
Has it occurred to you that I don't want to open up my professional email and read utter nonsense like this? Do not write me again.
I have nothing further to say to you, either. But if someone wants to send you and Howard links to this, I won't mind. You can even add comments if you like--unlike
The Chicago Tribune, which disabled theirs for some reason...
