‘Sensible’ Discomfort With Freedom

A popular slogan of the Left in regards to gun control laws is that they only wish ‘sensible’ restrictions. Everything they want is ‘sensible’, thus by proxy it connotes that those who oppose such ‘sensible’ restrictions are witless, rash, out of control or dangerous. English really is a remarkable language isn’t it?

Well, the same battle cries have come flying fast and free from a variety of journalists (all who obviously know better than you or I) in regards to Indiana DNR Commissioner Kyle Hupfer’s 1-year lifting of handgun restrictions in Indiana state parks. The first rumblings came from the Democrats, no great surprise there. Matt Pierce of Bloomington suggested the move was political, aimed (no pun intended) to win the support of the powerful NRA in a time when the governor’s numbers are sagging. For the record, I’m not a member of the NRA, but I used to be. They’re often demonized as the quintessential lobby or special interest group, but they are one of the only ones that tries to protect a fundamental inalienable right and one of the only ones that can boat around 4 million members who have no interest other than seeing the continuance of those rights. Would that all lobby groups were that representative of the people.

The Brady Bunch, known in their headier days as Handgun Control Inc. (doesn’t that sound like a 70’s comic villain group?), had their own quote from their current chairman who the Indianapolis Star likes to remind us was a “Republican” mayor of Fort Wayne. Paul Helmke, who apparently although he is a leftist, because he was Republican we’re supposed to assume he’s the final authority on the matter (didn’t these people ever hear of Rockefeller Republicans?), interjected the following crass statement.

“I know I won’t feel safer going to a state park thinking everyone could be carrying a gun.”

Well, thankfully Mr. Helmke doesn’t speak for the majority of Hoosiers who do feel safer, especially the ones carrying. See, it “makes no sense” to him why anyone would feel safer. Nor does it make sense to the likes of the Indianapolis Star’s own Jane Lichtenberg, who in Sunday’s Expresso section of the Star informed her readers that:

“…this goes too far. And please don’t insult our intelligence by suggesting that this wasn’t timed to nail the votes of the National Rifle Association. Members attending a forum on gun rights in Lawrenceburg. It sure won’t win votes of families planning visits to state parks.”

See? Families = Sensible. Then she plays the murder card. Indianapolis is currently experiencing a horrible string of murders, mostly drug related, but obviously it’s because people can legally carry guns, if you just follow her logic.

“Hupfer’s decision was especially dubious considering the recent epidemic of murders and gun violence in Indianapolis. Kids can’t play safely on many inner city streets. Will their parents now have to worry about visits to Harrison State Park too?"

This relativism and refusal to see that downtown Indy’s drug-ridden crime-filled neighborhoods are no different than a state park are disingenuous if not downright purposefully misleading. And, not to stereotype, but having lived in such neighborhoods for a time (where I was very glad to be able to carry a firearm for protection), not many of my neighbors were planning vacations to Harrison or any other state park that I recall. Most were just happy if all their utilities got paid on a given month. Maybe Jane should get out more.

And don’t forget accidental shootings. ‘Sensible’ people always remind us that there can always be accidental shootings. And you can also get cancer, get hit by a bus, struck by lightning or drown in a bath tub. Accidents happen. Responsible adults, especially responsible parents, do their best to minimize the chance of such accidents. I’ll take ‘responsible’ over ‘sensible’ any day.

It might be worth also discussing exactly what all this hoopla is about. Consider what our reality was like before the Commissioner’s decision. Previously, carrying a firearm beyond a small and limited class of calibers and models which were expressly for use by hunters with a license was prohibited. You carried what you were going to hunt with and no more.

There were problems with this equation. Having gone out hunting myself, I can tell you there still are such things as poachers. The DNR Conservation Officer’s plaque of those who’ve died while active officers, includes an officer lost to poachers. They are a serious threat. Poachers can even poach another’s kill. This itself is not unheard of, especially in the more “remote” parks. If you’ve just fired, you’ve identified where you are and worse, you probably didn’t reload as you moved in or tracked your kill. This can possibly leave you on the wrong end of someone else’s weapon who hasn’t had that good of luck that day or who’s luck is very good, depending on if he was looking for a buck or someone like you. Having the ability to protect yourself against poachers or as Commissioner Hupfer noted, from meth producers that litter the rural areas of the state, is a valuable and more relevant-than-ever right.

Then there’s the small matter of what to do if you're not going hunting, but still want to go to the state parks. What do you do to protect yourself then? Have there never been robberies in parks? What about coyotes or their half-dog hybrids that have no fear of humans and have been known to attack dogs and children? Are we to exercise our duty to retreat then or should we be allowed to defend ourselves? How about the aforementioned meth labs? Should we run from those people as well or perhaps engage them in a philosophical discussion on the vices of the illicit drug trade? Frankly, I’ll take the more “aggressive” form of diplomacy any day.

I applaud Commissioner Hupfer’s decision in this regard, and am glad to see Indiana now one of the leading states in reestablishing these freedoms to its citizens. Although the voices arrayed against him don’t have the strength they once had, they’re still ‘sensible’ enough that this issue still deserves much attention and scrutiny. Eternal vigilance isn't just a catchy phrase.