Thursday, October 17, 2002
Does Richard Cohen even pretend to try understanding the people he disagrees with?
On the other hand, I also cannot see the societal value of ammunition such as the .223 bullet the killer has been using. It shatters within the body, causing catastrophic trauma -- and leaves a gaping exit wound.
My oh my. The .223 has several uses, but it's well known as a varmint round. I did a Google search on ".223 round" and here's what my very first result was:
"Five people, all apparently unrelated, random victims, were shot dead by the same gun, according to the chief," she [CNN reporter Carol Costello) said. "It was a high-powered assault hunting-type weapon with a .223 round."
[pro-gunner Charles] Chambers said the weapon Costello described doesn't exist.
"That is not an accurate statement. The .223 is a small game cartridge used for small game and varmint hunting. It is about half as powerful as the .30-06 or .308 caliber, which are the big game rifles for deer, elk, antelope, etcetera," he explained. "The .223 is not classified as a high-powered cartridge."
Now you can argue all day about how high "high" is, and the excerpt is from a Cybercast News Service (aka conservative news service) story. But the point is that it takes all of 10 seconds to find lots of information about this round's use for light game. If Richard Cohen cannot see this, he needs to visit the optometrist.
The rest of the column shows similar levels of research but it's just too easy to bother with today.
UPDATE: As always, and thankfully, 11-day attacks Cohen at length and with gusto:
Cohen: Look, gun nuts, this is not about taking away your weapons. Increasingly, I have become less and less convinced of the efficacy of strict gun control -- the English experience has been just awful -- and at times, such as the night a burglar broke into my house, I hanker for a gun myself. All that I and others like me want right now is to make it harder to kill and harder to escape apprehension.
11-Day:"Gun nuts?" Nice. The problem, Richard, if you'd bother to listen to what folks on the gun-control side say, is that it is about taking away guns, about subverting the Second Amendment. It's funny that a columnist who's acutely sensitive to the "slippery slope" argument and backdoor tactics of opponents when it comes to, say, abortion (and, funny, "abortion nuts" is not a phrase in common use. I wonder why?) is so tone deaf to the same ideas in the gun debate.