TexasCHLforum.com

If there’s a reason why Hollywood should just stay out of politics, especially gun politics, and this is your classic example. Ed Asner and Ed Weinberger, a screenwriter, decided to teach the National Rifle Association a history lesson on the left wing site Salon. It dropped a little before Christmas, and it ended with both men getting a face full of buckshot. They argued that our Founders were pro-gun control, which is odd given that the first shots fired in our American Revolution at the battles of Lexington and Concord, were in response to British soldiers trying to seize our guns. Still, let’s go through their arguments:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa ... n-n2423881

I can't bear to listen to leftists loon actors who for reason unbeknownst to me think they and only they know the 'truth'.

They are frauds and don't appreciate they're frauds...sigh.

Abraham wrote:I can't bear to listen to leftists loon actors who for reason unbeknownst to me think they and only they know the 'truth'.

They are frauds and don't appreciate they're frauds...sigh.

Did you leave out "attention starved" on purpose?

But these people are always so sure they are right. All their friends told them so. IMO, they just never sought out contrary opinion/facts to test their ideas.

There is a movement to portray early American "gun culture" as a myth and thereby undermine the conception that the 2A protects an individual right.

You may recall that Michael Bellisiles wrote an academic book called Arming America where he purported to show, largely from early probate records, that gun ownership was rare in early America. The academic community praised the book (without checking any of its research), and he won the Bancroft Prize for this. However a number of 2A scholars recognized this as baloney and began writing articles questioning the book's accuracy. The professional historian/academic community at first dismissed these as rightwing gunnut attacks by the NRA, but historians with a sense of morality kept plugging away. Clayton E Cramer in particular, although an amateur in the sense the he does not make his livelihood from his historical research, was familiar with the sources that Bellesiles claimed supported his book and knew that this was nonsense. He wrote detailed examinations showing that Bellesiles work was not just wrong, but probably fraudulent. Enough pushback occurred that finally Emory University convened a panel to investigate one small portion of the book, but even in that small portion they came to the conclusion that Bellesiles's research lacked integrity. He eventually resigned and the Bancroft Prize was revoked.

More recently another academic and writer named Pamela Haag has again proposed that early gun ownership was rare, and that American "gun culture" did not really exist until after the Civil War, when Colt, Winchester, and other manufacturers "created" American's gun market with their advertising campaigns. Her book is called The Gunning of America: Business and the Making of American Gun Culture. Clayton Cramer has just written a book, Lock, Stock, and Barrel, supported by an NRA research grant, that refutes this also. HIs book is due out in February, and can be pre-ordered at Amazon. It runs a few dollars as it is to be printed initially only as a hardcover with special paper for a long shelf life. Cramer says a Kindle version should be available later.

Here is the link to the book: https://www.amazon.com/Lock-Stock-Barre ... 9fc7c4791c

I think Asner's pitch at Salon is yet another prong of this effort to re-write history and airbrush out early gun ownership so as the erode academic and legal support for the 2A.

Self-Puffery Note: I am most pleased to have a very minor role in Cramer's latest book. When the book was in its nearly final printed state, Cramer asked (on his blog) for volunteers to each read a couple chapters and identify any typographical errors. I read the last two chapters and the appendices, and found three errors. My contribution to the advancement of the Second Amendment.

ELB wrote: Self-Puffery Note: I am most pleased to have a very minor role in Cramer's latest book. When the book was in its nearly final printed state, Cramer asked (on his blog) for volunteers to each read a couple chapters and identify any typographical errors. I read the last two chapters and the appendices, and found three errors. My contribution to the advancement of the Second Amendment.

JustSomeOldGuy wrote:

ELB wrote: Self-Puffery Note: I am most pleased to have a very minor role in Cramer's latest book. When the book was in its nearly final printed state, Cramer asked (on his blog) for volunteers to each read a couple chapters and identify any typographical errors. I read the last two chapters and the appendices, and found three errors. My contribution to the advancement of the Second Amendment.

For my small effort in eradicating typos, Mr. Cramer just sent me an autographed copy of this book. I was quite surprised to find my name listed in the Acknowledgements at the beginning. I was once a footnote in a rather massive government report, but being in the Acknowledgements is a step up, I'm sure.

I am rather chuffed, as our failed-to-control-guns-in-America cousins across the pond would say.

The book is at Amazon in both hardcover and Kindle formats. It is called Lock, Stock, and Barrel: The Origins of American Gun Culture, by Clayton E. Cramer.

Been awhile since I read Heller but I believe Justice Scalia gave us a history lesson on the Second Amendment and its impact on early America.

Why would some boring, washed up actor like ed assner be paid any attention? His opinions are just that, dopey, leftist opinions...

Hollywood in general is like the msm, foolish leftists who should be ignored.

They don't represent America.

If it's a collective right then so are the first, fourth, ninth and tenth since "people" is "people" and the left can't have it both ways.

That is a GREAT find, Andy.