The smear campaign has begun...

The Sunday Herald, a Scottish newspaper, is accusing gun-rights activists of conducting a hate campaign. But the facts don't stand up to scrutiny.

Here's what the article has to say about the "hate campaign":

A Scottish-BASED couple who launched a campaign for gun control in Turkey after their two-year-old son was shot dead have become hate figures for US pro-gun groups.

David and Ozlem Grimason, whose son Alistair was killed in 2003 as he slept in his pram in a Turkish cafe, have been targeted in a web campaign by the American gun lobby.

One posting describes them as "idiots" who should stop meddling in the affairs of other countries. Another labels them as "emotionalists [who] want to force Turkey into the same miserable gun control failure that was implemented [post- Dunblane] in the UK".

So what do we have here? We have a couple living in Scotland but who are apparantly Turkish nationals. (How exactly does that work?) Their child is killed by gunshot in Turkey, and so, from Scotland, they are trying to pressure the Turkish government to implement gun control. As a result, they are labeled "idiots" and "emotionalists".

I confess that I don't find those labels at all inaccurate. They are called idiots because gun control doesn't work. They are called emotionalists because they are emoting about their personal tragedy rather than acting rationally. Nor do I find those labels particularly offensive. The couple were not addressed in that manner because of their race, religion, or any similar characteristic; they were addressed in that manner because of their actions.

Moreover, the couple is guilty of exactly the same thing:

Yesterday David Grimason told the Sunday Herald that the couple had found the campaign upsetting but that they may now lend their weight to the fight to introduce more restrictive gun laws in America. "America would be a challenge," he said. "The country needs a lot of help. But how do you change the minds of lunatics?"

Does he realize that he just did exactly what he accused the "gun lobby" of doing? I doubt it.

He added: "To see people agreeing that guns were good was a very hard thing to take, especially since a gun took our son away. It was a disgusting thing to read. Ozlem read it at the time and was also angry."

No, a criminal took your son away when that criminal shot your son. The gun did not fire by itself. As for disgust, well, I find the use of a newspaper to publish smears and accusations against "the gun lobby" disgusting. I'm a member of "the gun lobby". I didn't take the opportunity to call these people idiots or emotionalists earlier. But I've now been lumped into "the gun lobby" and blamed for the actions of individuals.

Notice a pattern here? This couple started a high-profile gun control effort for a country they do not reside in. They are labeled idiots and emotionalists as individuals on the basis of their actions. In other words -- they asked for the publicity and attention they got.

Yet in return they accuse "the gun lobby" as a whole. It's the same pattern of thinking as that behind gun control. Rather than blame the criminal who shot their son, they choose to blame not just the gun the criminal used, but all guns, everywhere, and all members of the "gun culture".

If the "gun culture" was an ethnic or religious minority group, the news media would call that prejudice. But it's OK to hate gun owners, apparantly.

But that's OK. Now that I've become aware of this gun lobby "hate" campaign, I'll join it. I think gun control is idiotic, and I think this couple are idiots and emotionalists for trying to push it on a country that has enshrined firearms rights in its founding documents, especially a country that they do not reside in.

"I'd love these people to come and stand at the graveside of a child that had been shot. It's just insensitive."

Trying to take away the rights of people who have done nothing wrong is a lot more than just insensitive. Could I cordially invite the Grimasons to stand with me at the graveside of a child who was killed because no one had a gun to protect him? A woman who was raped because her state does not allow her to carry a gun for self defense? We can play dueling victims with violins all day. I would bet that gun control costs more lives in the end, though -- probably without needing to invoke Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

After Alistair was shot, his parents launched a high- profile campaign to change Turkey's gun laws and violent culture. They collected 200,000 signatures for a petition that condemned the country's gun culture, which experts believe leads to more than 12,000 crimes every year, and were instrumental in persuading the Turkish authorities to increase the sentences for gun violence.

So, were those Scottish signatures or Turkish signatures? Or signatures of Turks living in Scotland? I don't really suppose it matters. Except that Turkish law is more properly the concern of people living in Turkey rather than people living in Scotland.

As for gun crimes, violence, and gun culture.. I don't know what "experts" the paper is referring to, but experts in the US say that gun control doesn't work. I don't see anything wrong with long sentences for violent crimes, but I see a lot wrong with long sentences for violent crimes only if they were committed with guns. Dead is dead.

So what exactly did this "hate campaign" consist of?

But the couple's actions have enraged the US gun lobby, which has long supported the right of individuals to bear arms and believes that "foreigners" should not campaign for firearms restrictions, despite the fact that Ozlem Grimason is a Turkish national. The website of Keep And Bear Arms, a self-declared "grassroots movement for the people" that demands the repeal of all gun laws, includes a number of scathing attacks on the couple.

Aha! The truth comes out. We don't have a "hate campaign". We have individuals posting comments to a gun-advocacy website. In America, we call that free speech. It's a vital part of our culture of liberty, because it means that the media cannot play the role of gatekeeper, choosing selectively what information to print and what information to conceal. In America, everyone can advocate for their point of view and call their opponents idiots in public.

There's a reason we tossed the British out of our country, and this is a big part of it. The editorial doesn't even allege people harassing the Grimasons directly (whether by telephone, email, or in person). All it has are inoffensive comments from spokesmen and a website that allows anyone to post their views. Not a single alleged threat. Some "hate campaign" this is.

Want to give them a piece of your mind? The author's email address is Paul.Hutcheon@sundayherald.com. and the paper's editor is editor@sundayherald.com Do remember to keep it polite; if they call normal political discourse in the US a "hate campaign" they won't react well to anything stronger.