Quote of the day—Josh Sugarmann

Across America, the firepower in the hands of gun owners of varying stripes is increasing dramatically. The reason: assault weapons. Drug traffickers are finding that assault weapons—in addition to ‘standard issue’ handguns—provide the extra firepower necessary to fight police and competing dealers. Right-wing paramilitary extremists, in their ongoing battle against the “Zionist Occupational Government,” have made these easily purchased firearms their gun of choice. And rank and file gun aficionados—jaded with handguns, shotguns, and hunting rifles—are moving up to the television glamour and movie sex appeal of assault weapons. The growing market for these weapons—coupled with a general rising interest in the non-sporting use of firearms—has generated an industry of publications, catalogs, accessories, training camps, and combat schools dedicated to meeting its needs.

Josh Sugarmann
Introduction to Assault Weapons and Accessories in America
[See also this quote from the same report that contains this infamous quote about deliberately taking advantage of “The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons” to push through bans on “assault weapons”.

I find it interesting that Sugarmann doesn’t talk about actual, measurable crime rates. He conjures up potentialities but not actual victims. This sort of tactic is no more valid than the sort of talk that came about when slave holders wanted to scare people about the problems that might occur from freeing their slaves.

Sugarmann might as well be talking about the hazards of people of color using the same water fountains as whites, black children in the same swimming pool as white children, and interracial marriages. He just doesn’t like it that people have guns even though he can’t show the actual harm and he certainly doesn’t want to talk about any potential benefits.

This 1988 paper is a classic and I can easily see it being a centerpiece in the evidence to be used at his trial.—Joe]


7 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Josh Sugarmann

  1. He really does sum up the core concept of “ban them because they are scary” impressively well… And yet people get so very cranky when we observe that their core argument boils down to irrational phobias and baseless fears.

  2. What I dis-admire the most in the quote is the parallel construction wherein drug traffickers, right wing paramilitary militias and “rank and file fun aficionados” are sequentially named as succumbing to the allure of assault weapons.

    Sort of like saying murderers, rapists and the law abiding are all likely to be at the scene of murders and rapes, yet also sort of like saying the first two groups are the moral equivalent of the third.

    False moral equivalency: used since at least 1988 by Sugarman, et al., as an illogical construct in defaming lawful exercise of gun rights.

  3. friends:

    actually, i hope all the lefties read mr. sugarman, and repeatedly.

    let the bastards know what they are up against facing an armed populace.

    quite frankly, i think it is time to let them know as a matter of fact, and not just conjecture and fear, what an aroused and actively shooting armed populace is all about. unless the 2014 congressional elections result in a reversal of political fortunes for obama, and reversal of a lot of pernicious legislative acts from the leftist congress, i think it time to take to the streets.

    cocked. loaded for bear. looking for bears.

    john jay

    • All of my congressional representatives, R&D, voted for the NDAA of 2012 -codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial. I believe that the only Republican Senators who voted “no” were Rand Paul and Tom Coburn. Are there a lot of libertarian candidates predicted to win in 2014? What do you expect is going to change?

  4. A wonderful example of what our self-proclaimed intellectual superiors consider to be “thought”.

  5. You need to turn on the “Crap for Brains” category for this post. ‘Cause Sugarman meets the criteria, fersher.


Comments are closed.