Monday, July 07, 2008

One last thing for the day:

Generally speaking, I tend to look for improvement in things. Possibly a sign of idiocy on my part, but I do(I also expect politicians to tell me the truth, though I’ve gotten a LOT less likely to expect that nowadays). I also expect people to listen to an argument involving facts, and make judgements based on those facts.

Used to, anyway. Expect that a lot less than I used to. I’m thinking of a friend dealing with two subjects: global warmering and guns. I posted on the warming part before: I made the mistake of noting that lots facts point to man-caused global warming to be, at best, a small(very small) part of any warming. I specifically mentioned the amounts of sulphur dioxide emitted by Pinatubo- anywhere from 200 to more than 500 tons per day before the actual bigtime eruption- as demonstrating just how small we are in the scale of things.

In the days to follow, I found that I might as well have walked into her church and peed on the altar. “All REAL scientists agree, the ones who disagree are paid by the oil companies, “, pretty much every moonbat enviroweenie line you can think of. Finally managed to end it: she was convinced I was unwilling to read the ‘real’ truth, I knew she bought into the whole Man-Caused Globular Warmening line and flat refused to even consider it might not be correct.

A couple of years before this, she’d asked me to teach her to shoot. Her ex had left a revolver behind, and due to some trouble in the neighborhood she wanted to learn to use it. So I cleaned and lubed it, showed her how it worked, and then to the range we went. Several times, and she finally got the hang of it. Biggest problem was she psyched herself out: she’d fire, and then flinch dramatically AFTER the shot. Which usually hit right about where she’d aimed. But she got over it.

Then came(for me) a revelation: she bought into the whole ‘you don’t need a semi-auto/high-capacity magazine/machinegun/whatever for self-defense or hunting’ line. And limits on how many guns you could buy, and so on. “You don’t need a semi-auto, because a revolver will take care of it.” What if I want a semi? “You don’t need one, if people aren’t allowed to own one we’ll be safer.” Even if you are allowed a semi-auto, ‘high-capacity’ mags are out. Pointed out that most are not ‘high cap’, they’re the standard capacity for those pistols, well, that’s too many rounds, low capacity is all you ‘need’. And so on.

What really bothers me about this? She’s a teacher. 2nd grade, so at least not in as much of a position to affect the kids’ views(I hope), but still. The flat refusal to even consider something other than the ‘conventional wisdom’ she’d been fed by somebody does not give me hope. Somebody who’d asked to be taught, who saw the need for a means of self-defense that equalizes differences in age, size, health, sex, and still she kept that ‘only what means are acceptable to the socially-accepted experts’ attitude.

4 comments:

martywd said...

From my experience.  Outside their general area of expertise most teachers are, themselves, very poor pupils.

Firehand said...

This was my first direct case of dealing with it. It was just amazing to me how totally closed her mind was.

Shouldn't have been, I guess; when the kids were in school had to deal with some lousy teachers, that should have prepared me for the idea.

martywd said...

I don't know how far back you keep track of on going comments to your old posts but when I saw this entry over at the Overlawyered blog regarding a 2nd Grade teacher I immediately thought of this post of yours.   FWIW?

Firehand said...

I'll take a look.

Damn, that's just amazing.