In the introduction to my forthcoming book, Gun Curious: A Liberal Professor’s Surprising Journey Inside America’s Gun Culture, I mention listening to Michael Bane’s “Down Range Radio” podcast shortly after I shot a gun for the first time. In that particular episode (#194, January 2011), he talked about the transition from “Gun Culture 1.0” to “Gun Culture 2.0.” The concept of Gun Culture 2.0 immediately resonated with me.
I stole Michael’s concept and launched this blog in May 2012, giving him credit for the idea in my first blog post. I’ve also introduced the term into the scholarly literature on guns, notably here and here.
Given this theft, I was nervous when I first met Michael at the 2016 NRA annual meeting in Louisville. I sheepishly told him I had been using his Gun Culture 2.0 idea. He could not have been more gracious about it.
This week I came full circle with Michael Bane when he recommended Gun Curious, on his podcast, now called Michael Bane – On the Radio (Episode #222, May 28th).
Michael notes that he and I disagree on some things, which is fine by me. I am more optimistic than Michael about the possibility of engaging in civil and constructive dialogues across differences on guns. He’s been in this space much, much longer than I am so I take his pessimism and cautionary notes seriously.
We also agree on some things, like the fact that everyone should buy several copies of the book to give away to people who can benefit from its message.
Perhaps our biggest area of agreement is that I married up. Chatting with Michael at “Michael Buys the Beer” in Dallas was a highlight of that trip for both Sandy and me. He’s a great story-teller with a large cache of stories to tell, especially from his days as a music writer traveling with Hank Williams Jr. and David Allan Coe.
My gun curiosity certainly pales in comparison to the curiosity with which he has lived his entire life.
Gun Culture 2.0 
I had the pleasure of meeting Mike at a Lipsey’s event last month. He’s a solid guy!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will admit to admiring your ability and desire to have civil, constructive discourse with anti-gun people. Of course, we need to, but getting there is a torturous task.
With those who are not committed anti-gun, such as my graduate students who, while having accepted the academic position on guns are not rabid about it, I am often able to do so. Perhaps them getting to know me in a non-gun context helps them to see me as “normal” even though I am a gun owner. I suspect it helps if people know each other sin non-gun contexts, so that some sense of “normality” is already established.
One area where they often seek me out for discussion is in the notion of “means restriction” with suicidal clients. How do we introduce the idea of restricting their access to lethal means when in a suicidal crisis? This is especially true when working with veterans. That, and as I have mentioned here before, I have considered teaching a “Psychology of Gun Culture” seminar, although it would be interesting to see how it would be received by faculty.
But with most faculty, who are not only anti-gun, but anti the culture of gun ownership – and are consistently overconfident in the infallibility of their positions on all matters – it is more difficult. In essence, because we are a clinical psychology program, those attempts at discussion often begin with their failure to accept the possibility that “Guns are normal and normal people have guns.” They see the act as pathological. It is hard to have rational discussion without that as a premise. Hence, little discussion happens at all.
It is noteworthy that this is not in all cases, and some have asked me to take them to the range. These are usually those whose anti orientation is not solidly developed. But even they would not say that out loud to others.
Anyway, just some thoughts that occurred in reading this post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] Coming Full Circle with Michael Bane […]
LikeLike