Guns Don't Kill People; People Do.

This impressively crafted Internet meme was found on the National Rifle Association's facebook page, where the stated mission is, "To protect your Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and protect our country's hunting and shooting traditions."

First, I have to give credit where credit is due:  this is a great looking meme. It manages to to appear simultaneously somber, patriotic and factual.  After all, what greater authority on crime could there be than the FBI ? 

The statistics as presented in this meme are accurate, insofar as The FBI's  "Expanded Homicide Data Table 11" from 2011 does indeed show the column heading and the numbers cited:

Knives:  1694

Personal Weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.): 726

Blunt objects:  (clubs, hammers, etc.) 496

Rifles:  323 

Note, however, that the FBI does not add the qualifier "of any type", so it is not perfectly clear as to its definition of a "rifle".  

There is, however, more to this extensive table than the NRA shows in its meme.  Take a look at these columns, for instance:

Total murder victims	Total firearms	Handguns	Rifles	Shotguns	Other guns or type not stated
12,664	8,583	6,220	323	356	1,684
1,816	1,271	1,007	32	50	182
15	1	1	0	0	0
734	553	474	12	12	55

What are the "other guns or type not stated"?

If not for the NRA, I doubt I would have ever spent time perusing the FBI's website.  There are lots and lots of data tables available for public review.  That table 11 is pretty large, with lots of columns, but there's a smaller, simpler one, too, called "Expanded Homicide Table 7", which has only four columns:

Murder, Types of Weapons Used
Percent Distribution by Region, 20111
Region	Total all weapons2	Firearms	Knives or cutting instruments	Unknown or other dangerous weapons	Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.)3
Total	100.0	67.7	13.4	13.1	5.8
Northeast	100.0	66.0	16.0	13.9	4.1
Midwest	100.0	71.6	9.4	13.0	6.0
South	100.0	69.1	13.2	11.8	5.9
West	100.0	63.3	15.3	14.7	6.7
1 Virgin Islands totals are not included in this table.
2 Because of rounding, the percentages may not add to 100.0.
3 Pushed is included in personal weapons.

From this table, which lumps all firearms together under one heading, it is easy to see that when people do  kill people, the weapon most often used is a gun.

So what about the message of the meme, then, which suggests that the Obama administration is unfairly targeting semi-automatic rifles because the FBI statistics show that knives, hands, feet, clubs and hammers are the more dangerous weapons?  Is it truthful?  Is it a distortion of the truth?

Make of it what you will.  

You Didn't Build That!

This meme is both puzzling and frustrating.  The words of the quotation and the words of commentary are weirdly paired, resulting in dizzying discord for the logical mind.  Frankly, it pains me even to lay eyes upon it.  (No pun intended.)

The only way I know to make any good come from a meme as irresponsibly crafted as this one is to use it as a tool for investigative learning.  So with that in mind, here we go:

I have not determined the original source for the meme, nor do I remember how I first stumbled across it, except that I keep running into people online who are refuting it.  These debunkers are typically critics of President Obama's policies who reject the notion that the words of Thomas Paine are being used to support the recent words of the President.

The words inside the quotation marks are easily attributable to Thomas Paine.  They appeared in an essay from 1795 entitled, "Agrarian Justice".

What's odd about the quote as shown is that Paine is cut off mid-sentence and made to sound like anything but the eloquent intellectual he was.  Given that the meme's creator seems wanting to transfer the authority of Paine to this message, it surprises me that his words would be so butchered.

Note that Paine is clearly intending to present a simile of some sort.  ". . . and it is as impossible . . ." As impossible as what? We don't know because the creator of this Internet meme chose to truncate his sentence. Next, then, we have to ask ourselves what might be the purpose of this choice, which means that we need to examine the original quote and at least some of its context:

 "Land, as before said, is the free gift of the Creator in common to the human race. Personal property is the effect of society; and it is as impossible for an individual to acquire personal property without the aid of society, as it is for him to make land originally.

Separate an individual from society, and give him an island or a continent to possess, and he cannot acquire personal property. He cannot be rich. So inseparably are the means connected with the end, in all cases, that where the former do not exist the latter cannot be obtained. All accumulation, therefore, of personal property, beyond what a man's own hands produce, is derived to him by living in society; and he owes on every principle of justice, of gratitude, and of civilization, a part of that accumulation back again to society from whence the whole came."

So what's not to like about the rest of the sentence?  It seems to support the President's words fairly well, if we assume that the caption "You Didn't Build That" is meant to refer the President's controversial remarks during a campaign speech in Roanoke,Virginia.

Here's the portion of the President's speech which included that phrase:

    " If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.  There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.  Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges.  If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.  The Internet didn’t get invented on its own.  Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

The second caption, "Notice that Thomas Paine did not use the word . . . government!" is completely mystifying.  Where are we to notice this?  In the incomplete quote provided for us to consider?  And what does the word government have to do with the message presented here?

But wait.  What if  this last part is intended as the the meme's most important component? It is presented as an emphatic imperative, after all.  Perhaps the intended message is not to support President Obama's assertion, but rather to disagree with it.  Are we being directed to consider the difference between "society" and "government"?  President Obama is often characterized as supporting big government.  Is that what this is about?

But then how to explain this blogger's characterization of the meme as being circulated by leftists?  

The essay in which these words of Paine's appear was written in the midst of the French Revolution and describes in great detail a plan "To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property: And also, the sum of ten pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age."

The essay is all about government -- revising government, revising society, re-defining what it means to be civilized.

So who created this Internet meme and what is the intended message?

I have no clue.  But I did enjoy reading both Thomas Paine's essay and President Obama's campaign remarks. I particularly like this bit from "Agrarian Justice":

"Cultivation is at least one of the greatest natural improvements ever made by human invention. It has given to created earth a tenfold value. But the landed monopoly that began with it has produced the greatest evil. It has dispossessed more than half the inhabitants of every nation of their natural inheritance, without providing for them, as ought to have been done, an indemnification for that loss, and has thereby created a species of poverty and wretchedness that did not exist before."

If I were in the business of designing internet memes, and if my intention was to suggest President Obama's remarks were a paraphrase of Thomas Paine's, this is the one I would have made:

What do you think? 

Trading Liberty for Security?

This meme has been floating around for a while now. Most recently I saw it "liked"  by someone who "shared" it from someone . . .  who shared it from The Tea Party's facebook page.

The man pictured is indeed Benjamin Franklin, but he is misquoted.

Franklin's actual words were something more like this: 

"They who can give up essential Liberty, to obtain a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.", though there are several variations recorded.


By using the words of Franklin,in the context of the current gun control debate, The Tea Party seems to be suggesting  that those who are calling for gun control measures are willing to make a bad trade that will later be regretted, that being afraid of more gun deaths, they are willing to surrender liberty in exchange for security. Moreover, this sense of security they seek would be false because in the long run allowing government regulation of guns and ammunition will result in tyranny and then as a society we will have neither liberty nor security.

But I remember this same quote being used back when the Bush administration was implementing lots of security measures -- at a break neck speed, with some expressing concern that he was overstepping the bounds of executive power -- - designed, allegedly, to protect our society from further attacks by terrorists. Some at that time were worried about the wisdom of trading personal liberty for the promise of greater security.

Take a look at what one conservative publication had to say back in 2006: 

"The point is that situations to preserve public safety are seen as worthy of curtailing certain individual rights, contrary to what our loyal dissenters tell us. The founders recognized this, which is nothing more than observing the common sense principle that the Constitution is not a suicide pact."

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/meyer/060911

Quoting the words of our Founding Fathers is like quoting the Bible. Taken out of context and manipulated, the words of both can be made to mean almost anything, whatever suits the purpose at hand. 

Our society is searching now for a solution to a problem that everyone agrees is important. No one on either side of the gun control debate believes that it is good and right for unarmed civilians to be murdered. And no one on either side of the debate believes it would be good if the government had lots of guns and no civilians had any. All agree that we need to do a better job of securing public safety.

We need to treat the discussion with due respect and stop all the posturing and propaganda. One thing both sides have in common is fear -- the fear of losing something dear and precious. 

Because we are afraid and the problem is complex and there is no obvious automatic fix, we run the risk of turning our fear upon one another and mistaking each other for the enemy.

We can work toward a solution only when we become good faith listeners and good faith speakers.

The Problem with Socialism

The first meme I ran into this morning was posted by a not-for-profit organization called ForAmerica.

ForAmerica's mission statement as described on facebook is as follows:

". . .  to reinvigorate the American people with the principles of American exceptionalism: personal freedom, personal responsibility, a commitment to Judeo-Christian values, and a strong national defense. We believe in limited government with Constitutionally-enumerated powers only. We believe that the size of the federal government should be dramatically reduced and that government's regulatory stranglehold on the free enterprise system should be lifted. We believe in freedom." 

The woman pictured is indeed Margaret Thatcher, and the quote is essentially an accurate representation of the sentiment she was expressing, though not accurately quoted.  Thank you to Snopes.com for saving me a lot of research time.

The quote comes from a television interview in 1976, when Thatcher was leader of the Conservative Party, before she became Prime Minister.  She was speaking out in criticism of the Labor Party.  Here's  the exact quote:

". . . and socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess.  They always run out of other people's money."  She goes on to say:

"It's quite characteristic of them.  Then they start to nationalize everything, and people just do not like more and more nationalization, and now they're trying to control everything by other means.   They're progressively reducing the choice available to ordinary people."

I am a novice at generating memes, but here is one I created as an alternative to the one shown above:

The photo I chose was taken in 1976 and the quote is presented accurately.The two memes are not truly an apples-to-apples comparison. I did not find a color photograph from 1976 and the meme generator I used did not provide me with fancy text editing options. 

Nevertheless, it is obvious why the creators of the first meme chose to paraphrase in order to make their point.

There's nothing wrong with paraphrasing, of course;  what's not legitimate is putting the paraphrased words in quotation marks and presenting them as a direct quotation.

So why would the folks at ForAmerica want to circulate such a meme today?

Since their facebook page contains this imperative,"Visit http://www.ForAmerica.org/ and send a message to your Senator urging them to Repeal ObamaCare.", I think it is safe to speculate that they are using this meme to speak against the dangers of socialism, suggesting that ObamaCare is a socialist program created by a socialist administration.  They must believe that Margaret Thatcher is a well-respected figure and hope to convey some of her authority to their cause.

During Thatcher's administration, The National Health Service was certainly a subject of debate and reforms were proposed and some instituted, but Thatcher made no effort to abolish it.  

Peter Hoskin noted last fall in an article for ConservativeHome:

"Even between the covers of that contentious 1981 Budget there are sections that undermine the modern caricature of Margaret Thatcher. The levies imposed on banks, North Sea oil, petrol, tobacco and alcohol were booted skywards — testament to the fact that, if you want to cut the deficit quickly, then short-term tax increases are often an effective way to go about it. And the Budget’s targets for cutting public spending were subsequently missed — testament to another fact, that the best-laid fiscal plans can be battered out of shape by a jittery economy.

And on it goes. Did you know that defence expenditure actually declined slightly over the Thatcher Years, albeit driven by the decline of the Cold War? Or that health expenditure rose by around 30 per cent? Indeed, while she would go on to push controversial measures such as tax breaks for private medical insurance, the early Thatcher Years were much like the early Cameron Years in their careful regard for the NHS. There aren’t, after all, many stages of evolution between “The National Health Service is safe in our hands” and “I’ll cut the deficit, not the NHS”.

Hoskins concludes with a paragraph which demonstrates what I believe is likely the truth for most well-meaning administrations:

"The truth about Margaret Thatcher has more sides to it than many people, her admirers as well as her opponents, care to admit. This doesn’t detract from her political legacy; quite the opposite. It reveals it for what it is: a whole, and not just a jumble of parts."
In other words, Margaret Thatcher's beliefs and opinions are far too complex to be accurately captured by a sound-bite or an Internet meme.

But.

If I were mischievous by nature, I might be tempted to circulate this meme:

...just for fun.

What am I doing here?

Our social media platforms are inundated with memes.Words and images are merged to create persuasive messages designed to be consumed in a single glance. These messages run the gamut from clever to ridiculous, from cute to revolting.

Internet users 'like', 'share' and 'forward' these memes at lightening speed, with a single click of a mouse or the touch of a fingertip. Few users take the time to check the information presented, relying instead on the personal integrity of the meme's creator to guarantee its accuracy.

This blog is designed to interrupt the flow, to thoroughly analyze some of these Internet memes, working to understand their aims and origins while measuring the veracity of their messages.

Propaganda is not new and certainly not specific to the Internet, but since any device which allows memes to be displayed almost certainly provides access to a search engine, I believe that ignorance is a choice.

We can do better than allowing the wool to be pulled over our eyes by those who count on our being too lazy ever to check the facts for ourselves.

As the number of memes researched increases, this blog will become a repository for resources that are useful in debunking social media myths and misrepresentations -- a resource center, if you will, for independent thinkers.

As various Internet memes are examined, I look forward to spirited discussion on many topics. All viewpoints are welcome, but the language we use will be appropriate for general audiences and there will be no name calling.  Offending posts will be removed at my discretion.

With that said, Bring on the Memes!