Makes sense. Rep Gohmert (R-Tarded)* has decided that the easiest way to keep high capacity semi automatic firearms out of the hands of crazy people is to arm more crazy people. Like the ones in Congress. Good idea. It is clear that DC suffers from an appalling lack of firearms. Even the NRA agrees that the clinically insane should be limited to single shot 22's and derringers. So Reps Shuler and Gohmert are going to make us feel more secure because they have the ability to trade rounds with their constituents at the next town hall meeting. I don't care how many pistols you're packing or how many Dirty Harry fantasies you got tucked in your cranium from reading multiple copies of the Armed Citizen, chances are you're going to be hugging the ground with the rest of us. The only ones standing may be a small percentage of cops, combat infantry veterans and Columbia Heights gangbangers and 2/3'rds of those aren't going to open up on a crowd of people anyway. Sweet Jesus, the one armed citizen who was there in Tuscon admitted he came close to shooting the wrong guy and how about Rep Franks (R-stupid)? - "I wish there had been one more gun there that day in the hands of a responsible person, that's all I have to say," How about saying something that addresses the problem of crazy people with guns, you dumb motherfucker, instead of being an NRA parrot? That's bullshit and the NRA is bullshit. That's why I quit it - the redneck politics were bad enough but the sheer stupidity babbling from the mouths of duly elected NRA hand puppets is too much to bear. Why is the dialog about hate speech instead of keeping assault weapons out of the hands of crazies?
*hat tip to Ironicus
This comment is a bit late, obviously, but there is a reason why there aren't more efforts to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill and the criminally violent: there's no profit in it.
ReplyDeleteThe only reason the National Rifle Association and its various clones exist is to sell us weapons. That's it. They don't care about the Constitution, and they sure as heck don't care about the Second Amendment — after all, they always seem to leave off the first four words, which are, "A well regulated militia." Someone's got to do the regulating. Who's gonna do it? You? Me? Some local-level government? Some elected body of responsible citizens?
I don't know. What I do know is that the founders of this nation, as divided as they were over the issue of the right to keep and bear arms even back in the 1780s, would question the sanity of today's debaters over gun control. Common sense dictates that yes, some people are too unstable and dangerous to be allowed to keep and bear arms. Some are mad; others have a habit of breaking the law and we call them criminals. They also recognized that the best defense against enemies both foreign and domestic was a well regulated, well organized, and highly disciplined fighting force. Individuals holing themselves up on their farms or in their houses, shooting it out with small armies of government thugs, are no match and are quickly put down. Only people acting together en masse can stand up to that.