Monthly Archives: May 2011

Grandma Got Run Over By a Gun Buyback

This piece about yesterday’s gun buyback in Buffalo has me thinking (a dangerous pastime, I know). This is the fourth of these buybacks, the last of which was held in 2009, and all told over 3,000 firearms have been purchased for $10 - $100 each. Of this year’s haul of 600+ guns, a third were non-functional.

Buying back nonfunctional guns could be useful, depending on what kind of guns and how nonfunctional they are. Unless firearms are properly disposed of, they can be broken down and the parts re-used. Your average suburbanite lacks the toolsto ensure their broken guns aren’t repairable - I myself can’t find any hydraulic shears or armored fighting vehicles in my garage, and I imagine most people aren’t any better equipped. So if the alternative is that the gun goes into the trash (which… what? is that even legal, even if you remove the firing pin?), I suppose it’s worth the $50 to ensure safe storage or disposal.

Only one of these is in my garage.

But the mayor’s take on the whole thing feels a little… off, somehow:

[Mayor Byron W. Brown] noted that seldom-used guns could unintentionally get into the hands of children or grandchildren—and that some could be stolen in burglaries. He also said some young people involved in crime might have a change of heart and want to sell their weapons, and that one community activist had persuaded some young people to sell their guns.

“At some of these locations, we’ve had mothers and grandmothers turn in sawed-off shotguns and assault rifles,” Brown said. “We know they are not the owners of those weapons. We know they’re turning them in for family members who might use them in a moment of anger or in a crime.”

It sounds good, but the article also says only three assault rifles were collected, so it’s not like the grannies of Buffalo are solving gang violence once and for all here. Basically, the whole thing sounds good, with a strong emphasis on the word “sounds.” But is it actually worth the time, effort, and money expended to get these guns “off the street”? I’m just not convinced.
Posted in GunsGunsGuns | 2 Comments

Libya’s Iced Lattes

Today Mahmoud Jibril Elwarfally, the Interim Prime Minister of the Transitional National Council of Libya, spoke at Brookings. I haven’t watched it yet. But then Max Boot wrote about Libya, and oh. I couldn’t help myself. I’m sorry.

_____

Jibril: Recognize us or Libya falls apart!

Obama: What? Who are you? How’d you get in here?

Max Boot: I think I have a solution to Libya, Mr. President. Just get it right.

Obama: Seriously, how do you people keep getting in here? Why do I even have Secret Service?

MBoot: You’re incoherent, Mr. P. You have no goals.

Jibril: RECOGNIZE US AND GIVE US MONEY OTHERWISE GADDAFI FOREVER.

Obama: What? No. This is stupid. Go away.

MBoot: Mr. President, I think you should take my advice: Just. Get. It. Right.

Obama: What does that even mean? I’m not refusing to get it right. It’s a complex situation…

MBoot: [cutting in] Recognize the Transitional National Council!

Jibril: RECOGNIZE!

Obama: … with a lot of moving pieces and no clear solution. What? You said it yourself, that’s just a symbolic gesture. What does recognition have to do with getting us out of this mess?

MBoot: Oh, Mr. P, you misunderstood. I don’t want us out of this mess. I want ground troops. Ground troops come with iced lattes. And I love a good iced latte in a desert.

Obama: … yeah I’m out.

Jibril: ICED LATTES!

_____

With gratitude to Max Boot for teaching me that if I just tell people to get it right,

I’ve done my job as a public commentator-type.

_____

(I swear this isn’t turning into a sad-attempt-at-comedy blog.

… okay, maybe it is. It’s been a rough week.)

Posted in War | Comments Off

Libyan Arms: They’re Not Staying Put And It Might Cause Problems

I sure wish somebody would tell me what is going on in Libya. “The situation in Libya poses quite some problems for West African countries,” a statement said.

An unrelated image of a Giant West African Snail
This tongue-in-cheek blog post brought to you by the letters S, R, S, L, and Y.

With gratitude to Tom Ricks for liberating me from word count minimums and the need to provide context.

Posted in Small Arms, War | Comments Off

From ‘America! F#@k Yeah!’ to ‘Everyone Loses’

Two notes before I jump in, since this is my first post here. First of all, thanks Diana for allowing me to post here. Second, apologies to those of you who come here expecting guns. I’ve never even held a gun. I know nothing about guns except what I’ve learned from reading Diana and C.J. Chivers, which come to think of it is probably more than a lot of people with my gun-free upbringing, but still.

I don’t have any policy prescriptions, nor am I the holder of the deepest, most nuanced insights on any particular aspect of bin Laden’s death. There are more knowledgeable people than I covering all of that territory. For reporting on the operation, see Marc Ambinder. For thoughts on U.S. – Pakistan relations, see Joshua Foust. Go to Glenn Greenwald for warnings on the self-inflicted wounds, to civil liberties, to the Constitution. To hear how this affects the future of terrorism and counter-terrorism, see Daveed Gartenstein-Ross or Leah Farrall. For insights into the corporate interests and less-than-idealistic motivations at play, see the work of Jeremy Scahill. For reminders of all the damage we have done in this pursuit, see Scahill again or the ever-controversial Nir Rosen. What I have to offer is just my own reactions, from the sort of middle place where I think many of us dwell.

I was up all night watching Twitter explode with rumors, news, reactions, speculations, jokes, celebrations, condemnations, and meme-creations. I found myself not quite knowing what to feel. I try to keep an open mind on issues, and major news stories always make me appreciate the diversity of the people I follow on Twitter. I have seen reactions that have run the gamut, and my own reactions have done the same. I can be slow to take a stance on issues. I try to see them from every angle, put myself in as many shoes as I can, inhabit them, before I really know where I stand. Hearing about the death of bin Laden, I felt the range of reactions, some visceral, some considered.

Like everyone who was old enough to know what was happening on 9/11, that day and the days immediately following it remain vivid for me, and there was an almost instinctive part of me that heard the news last night and said, “Good. Finally. All that devastation. All these years. We finally got the fucker.” As details of the operation were revealed, I also felt what I refer to as the ‘America! Fuck Yeah!’ response. Purely on the intelligence and special forces operations involved, this was badass: patient, precise, silent, surgical, and in the end, effective. You can’t help but admire the immense skill it took to execute this operation, no matter what you might think of JSOC or any of the tricky legal or political questions that arise. Having these reactions, I can’t bring myself to be sorry he is dead. I’ve seen many responses that have reflected these feelings: soldiers and vets who feel their sacrifices and efforts have been validated, people toasting to bin Laden’s demise, pure jubilation, dancing and chanting outside the White House and at the World Trade Center site. I understand how people can feel this way, I can see where they are coming from.

I’m not sorry he’s dead, but I’m not dancing either. Because the rest of the spectrum of reaction has something to say, too. From a practical perspective, many of the more measured commenters have been quick to point out (rightly) that bin Laden’s death does not mean the end of terrorism or of al Qaeda, and very likely does not even mean an appreciable change in our strategy or operations. Other pragmatists have pointed to the need to assess our relationship with Pakistan, or the way we are conducting our wars.

Then there are the ‘buzzkills’ inhabiting the opposite end of the spectrum from the revelers, those arguing that retribution is not the same as justice, that our pursuit of bin Laden has spread misery writ large across the world, that we let a criminal thug who deserved the treatment of a common gangster provoke us into a massive reaction all out of proportion to his worth. Much as my initial reaction was colored by an instinctive sense of satisfaction, I know better than to be ruled by that. It did not take me long to remember that while bin Laden dealt massive death and destruction, we as a country have dealt orders of magnitude more death and destruction in the name of pursuing him and his ilk. He doesn’t get a pass for his part in that, but we are responsible for our own actions and responses, and we have much to answer for.

Almost ten years ago, a terrible wound was struck against this country: thousands killed, our national psyche changed. Since then, tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - of people both guilty and innocent, combatants and civilians, Americans and allies and enemies, have been killed in operations both overt and covert in dozens of countries around the world; people have been displaced, wars incited; civil liberties have been eroded, international law flouted; it’s dark stuff, and I have a hard time seeing how any side has benefited, how anyone’s world has been improved.

I understand why some people are celebrating. I understand why others are not. I spent last night feeling all mixed up about this, but I was left with the lingering feeling looking back at the last ten years, that we all lose.

Posted in War | 1 Comment