Tag Archives: A Nation of Cowards

Courage to walk unarmed

A Nation of Cowards

Jeffrey Snyder suggests that carrying a handgun is both a right and a duty of every law-abiding citizen.

This is hard for me to relate to; as, for all practical purposes, no such people exist in my world.

Gun lovers’ slogans include, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Forget laws; in my world, only outlaws have guns now.

I have no impulse to join them.
Continue reading Courage to walk unarmed

Courage to walk unarmed

Having reblogged “Nancy Lanza, a mother tragic and infuriating” two weeks ago,
and “Nancy Lanza, chapter 2” last week,
it only fits now to link to the very substantial piece that concluded that discussion:

Courage to walk unarmed.

The post includes a significant discussion of self-esteem and the devastating effects of low self-esteem pertinent, for example, poverty and crime.

Courage to walk unarmed

A Nation of Cowards

Jeffrey Snyder suggests that carrying a handgun is both a right and a duty of every law-abiding citizen.

This is hard for me to relate to; as, for all practical purposes, no such people exist in my world.

Gun lovers’ slogans include, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Forget laws; in my world, only outlaws have guns now.

I have no impulse to join them.
Continue reading Courage to walk unarmed

* Courage to walk unarmed

A Nation of Cowards

Jeffrey Snyder suggests that carrying a handgun is both a right and a duty of every law-abiding citizen.

This is hard for me to relate to; as, for all practical purposes, no such people exist in my world.

Gun lovers’ slogans include, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Forget laws; in my world, only outlaws have guns now.

I have no impulse to join them.
Continue reading * Courage to walk unarmed

o lwk, help me out, here!

This is an unscheduled post.

As you may know, I’m working on a response to “A Nation of Cowards,” slated for release here July 19. It may appear at Yahoo! Voices sooner.

I am trying to understand this passage. Snyder says:

“Now, judging by campus speech codes, dignity requires that we never encounter a discouraging word and that others be coerced into acting respectfully, evidently on the assumption that we are powerless to prevent our degradation if exposed to the demeaning behavior of others. These are signposts proclaiming the insubstantiality of our character, the hollowness of our souls.”

Is he saying that decency and civility are to be despised? That bullying and hazing should be accepted without sanction?

This morning, I asked Brian Williard about this, and he said Snyder is referring to political correctness and “the self-esteem movement.”

Please advise!