Here’s an interesting article from the editor of US Concealed Carry.
As the editor of a national gun magazine I get lots of mail, email and the occasional phone call concerning something I’ve said or written. I like it. Feedback is good for the soul. But some of it I just don’t understand.
Recently a got a note suggesting that I lighten the mood just a bit and perhaps return to those halcyon days when I “wrote stuff that was funny.”
While it is nice to know that readers enjoy my wit and irreverence, lately I haven’t really felt like smiling, laughing and joking when it comes to what’s happening in the world of concealed carry and self-defense. Don’t get me wrong, I can find humor just about anywhere. Hell, I stood outside in gale-force winds and temperatures in high 20s for Media Day at the Range, the day before the 2013 SHOT show. Then, I walked an average of 7 miles per day the next four days, carrying piles of magazines around the SHOT show floor. Oh yeah, I have a sense of humor.
But when it comes to columns for Concealed Carry Magazine and the Concealed Carry Report, there really is no “humor” spigot I can just reach over and turn on. Yes, some of the things I have recently seen by way of gun control proposals are laughable, or they would be if they weren’t so deadly serious. But that’s not really fodder enough now, is it?
Nope. If you want real humor, you’ve got to look politicians right in the eye when they say something stupid. So, I did just that very thing last week. I was invited to attend a round table discussion on gun control at Milwaukee television station. I don’t think the producers really understood what they were getting into. I mean, I’m sure I was selected, originally, as nothing more than stage dressing. You know how superficial TV news is these days. Producers really just want a bunch of good-looking people on camera, so, of course, they called me. Right? You good-looking people reading this know what it’s like to get special treatment.
So, I drove down to Milwaukee, the belly of Wisconsin’s liberal beast, with a polo shirt, a winning smile and a bad attitude. The first hurdle was at the door to the TV station. No guns allowed. I went in anyway. After being buzzed past the high-tech electronic door without so much as a word, I was left to hang around the waiting room for about 15 minutes before someone finally came to say hello. That person immediately asked me if I was armed.
“Do you greet all your guests with the same question?” I asked in reply.
There was much bumbling and several “um, well, we…” I finally threw the person a line and pointed out, “I’m a working and certified police officer. I carry my weapon off-duty at all times.”
With the newsroom staff feeling completely safe, my host escorted me to the soundstage with two rows of chairs set in a semi-circle in front of several cameras. I chose the front row and just for good measure took the seat on the far right, chuckling to myself that no one else would catch the joke. I was right. No one got it. Even after I said, aloud, “I’m on the far right.”
When all the guests were seated, it was clear there was a nice mix of liberal and conservative commentators on the panel, but I was disheartened to make note that my original idea that I was only invited as stage dressing was pretty far afield. In fact, I remember thinking, “If these were the best looking people they could get, maybe they weren’t choosing guests based on good looks.” That made me sad for minute, but my moment of self-absorption evaporated when I heard the unmistakably whiny voice of the worst kind of spokesperson in the world; a liberal judge who had moved on to become a liberal lawmaker.
He was droning on about how we needed to restrict access to firearms because he had seen so many cases where people had been “innocently shot” by mistake. He referenced a paperboy “innocently” shot by a homeowner, and family members “innocently” shot by other family members, and finally I couldn’t take it any longer.
I said, “Representative Kessler, what you are describing is negligence. It is not innocent. The gun did not aim and fire itself. Someone, in each case chose to take out a gun and fire it, and in each case it was negligence. You cannot expect me to sit back and watch you restrict my rights because of someone else’s negligent behavior.”
Suddenly, I was the star of the show. Who knew how the final results will be edited, but from that point, people kept turning to me each time one of the liberal guests would say something stupid. It seemed everyone was looking to me to administer the appropriate verbal challenge and I was, it seemed, only too happy to oblige. It was fun.
Near the end of the two-hour discussion, the discussion turned to armed guards at schools and the protection of President Obama’s kids. One liberal commentator rolled her eyes and say, “For God’s sake he is the president!” as if that alone should make every one shut up. But one persistent pro-gunner demanded to know, “Are the president’s kids more important than mine? Are they?”
The host turned to me and I got to interject with what I considered my best sound bite of the day.
“Nazir,” I said, relishing the fact that my pro-gun instigator was also a Muslim man. “The President’s kids are not more important than your’s, but they are more likely to be victim of an armed attack. The Secret Service has determined the best way to stop an armed attack is with direct action by armed guards. If there were a better way to protect the President’s kids, the Secret Service would use it. No one on the protection detail holds up a ‘gun-free zone’ sign. They pull out a pistol and they engage the attacker.”
Even the liberal commentator sat stunned. She could not compete with my straightforward logic and for that one shining moment I was both the best-looking guy in the room and the smartest.
My life is back to normal now. But I have the memories of that day and soon I hope to see the event unfold on television, but I know I will be edited heavily.
Stay safe.
Train hard.
Kevin Michalowski
Source