By Becky Bennett

The Kyle Rittenhouse acquittal and the arrival of hunting season are making guns a topic around rural holiday tables.

Ive written about how guns are a normal, even necessary part of everyday rural life. But gun owners need to think hard about our reaction to the debacle in Kenoshain which Rittenhouse, a teenager with an AR-15, went looking for trouble and found it. Rural people who revere the Second Amendment, but feel joy, or improbably, vindication in the verdict, are in danger of undermining any legitimate place for guns in our society.

We all know theres a line between murder with a gun and self-defense. But the Rittenhouse verdict explodes that line into a vast gray area of twisted law, exploitative pundits, and rural conservatives hungry for any kind of victory over left-wing media.

So lets talk about the line and the need to etch it in granite before its too late (or later than it is already).

A refrain you hear when rural people talk about why they have guns, other than for hunting, is you never know. . .

There was a stretch in late October-early November when I was having construction work done on my house. It involved removing my garage doors and covering the opening with only a tarp for about five days.

I was concerned about security, and the contractor, whom Id known since high school, asked if I had a gun. I told him, no, but I had a cordless drill. He replied in all seriousness that I needed a gun because . . . you never know.

He recounted a local incident where a man in his seventies shot an intruder in his home. And he told me about getting a handgun for a female family member. Its not uncommon for men in rural areas to buy handguns for women in their families and teach them to shoot. Its part of taking responsibility for yourself and your loved ones. (Imagine if wed tapped into this sense of responsibility around vaccination.)

Because you never know, acquaintances often urge me to carry a gun while hiking. Its why, during an office security check after the mass shooting at a newspaper in Maryland, one of my colleagues gestured meaningfully toward her purse and assured me she was prepared.

The problem with Rittenhouse was that he knew exactly what might happen because his behavior provoked the attacks he then defended himself from.

Theres a difference between reasonable defense and a parade. Parades are intended to impress spectators and to make the parader feel big. In the past, no one bragged about owning guns or flaunted them outside a shooting range. They bragged only about hunting prowess.

Rittenhouse loved a parade. If he wasnt just feeding his egoif he sincerely believed that waving an assault-style firearm in a chaotic situation improved securitythen whoever taught him to behave this way with a gun damaged him immeasurably. No credible rural gun owner would teach children that guns are playthings or props (they teach constant awareness of a guns capacity for harm).

Unfortunately, in our presently unhinged society, allowing guns for responsible defense also opens the way for self-gratifying and provocative displays. Not to mention for exploiters like Gun Owners of America, which intends to award Rittenhouse an AR-15 like the one he killed with, as a thank-you for being a warrior for gun owners and self-defense rights across the country!

When pro-gun organizations and gun owners conflate self-defense and self-aggrandizement, they affirm the weak-minded and guarantee tragedy.

Rural residents, who claim to have their heads on straight about guns (unlike hand-wringing liberals), should know, and do, better. Anyone who cheers the Rittenhouse debacle betrays their rural values of respect for guns, responsible use, and responsibility for yourself and others.

They also risk undermining support for the Second Amendment. The National Rifle Association, untroubled by contradiction or nuance, quoted the amendment after the Rittenhouse verdict. Of course, well-regulated militia and security were the antithesis of the Kenosha debacle.

Similarly, gun-toting congresswoman Lauren Boebert hailed a great day for the Second Amendment and the right to self-defense. . . Glory to God! (although nobody ended up covered in anything like glory).

Rural gun owners used to take the Second Amendment seriously as the underpinning of responsible self-protection and the freedom that security brings. If we no longer believe these things, why should our urban counterparts support the right to bear arms?

Becky Bennett lives in south-central Pennsylvania and is a freelance writer and editor. She was editor of the Public Opinion newspaper in Chambersburg for 18 years and a journalist for 40. Across the Divide examines rural perspectives on issues facing Pennsylvania and the nation. Email her at rbenn135@yahoo.com.

View post:

Across the Divide: Using guns for self-gratification undermines the 2nd Amendment | Opinion - pennlive.com