What blue-region white liberals actually want is for the government to disarm the dangerous urban minorities that threaten their children’s safety. Red-region white conservatives, insulated by distance from the Crips and the Bloods, don’t care that white liberals’ kids are in peril. Besides, in sparsely populated Republican areas, where police response times are slow and the chances of drilling an innocent bystander are slim, guns make more sense for self-defense than in the cities and suburbs.
White liberals, angered by white conservatives’ lack of racial solidarity with them, yet bereft of any vocabulary for expressing such a verboten concept, pretend that they need gun control to protect them from gun-crazy rural rednecks, such as the ones Michael Moore demonized in “Bowling for Columbine,” thus further enraging red-region Republicans.The sense that it's the opposite of the old days, as the reader says, is that current gun laws do not prevent black criminals from getting guns, but do disarm white homeowners and Asian storekeepers. I covered this in a speech called Gun Control—Like Immigration Law, Enforced Only Against Those Who Obey It. See also New Gun Control Laws Aimed At “Bitter, Clinging” Whites, But Will Hit Blacks Hardest—As Usual.Weirdly, the "white liberals" of the New York Times are just wild to restrict normal Americans from owning normal guns in their normal communities, but condemn "stop-and-frisk" policies that get illegal guns out the hands of Manhattan criminals. See The New York Times Finds A Gun Owner It Can Sympathize With—A Convicted Burglar!