As you may recall, there was in the summer of 2009, a disturbing tendency for various disaffected right wingers to show up at political events openly carrying fire arms. When some of us on the left voiced concern about this trend, geniuses like Megan McArdle made the case for gun toting as a form of protest, entitled to protection.
I remember writing about this trend with alarm at the time; it didn't seem to require an abundance of prescience to see that this was all going to lead to no good end. Quoting myself is a bit crass, but a couple of things I wrote were said about as well as I can express them. First, with respect to McArdle and others mischaracterizing carrying guns as a form of politcal speech:
Let me explain the issue so even McArdle can understand it. The guns that people bring to these events are designed to kill people -- that is their sole purpose. When I strap one on and wear it to an event I am saying to my fellow citizens "if you fuck with me, I am willing to kill you." The gun is not designed to stimulate debate, it is designed to end it. It is not a symbol of civil liberty, it is an instrument of solipsistic incivility saying rather clearly that I intend to have the last word -- and not in the way that Megan imperiously proclaims from her perch on high in her blog post.
As for the dangerous interplay of guns, the fringe characters attracted to the tea party ethos, and their right wing cheerleaders, here was my impression from 16 months ago of what we were probably going to see:
What you see here is a lumpen mass whose inherent sense of resentment and suspicion has been turned up to eleven by right wing manipulators like Fox, NRO, Malkin, Instapundit, and their fellow traveling cretins. It's all well and good until one one or two or more of these armed rubes snaps and we have carnage on our hands. Then despite the inevitable protestations of shocked innocence on the part of the aforementioned shit stirrers, they will truly have blood on their hands.
I wish I had been wrong.
