Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Why Tea and Guns Don't Mix

You may have heard about the "Anti Tax" rallies that were held (coincidentally?) on April 19, the 10th anniversary of the Oklahoma Bombing (ie, major act of domestic terror).  I read some comments that were just so over the top that I had to ponder them for a few days. 

First, let's get it straight that I am not anti-gun.  I've shot guns, I've had to carry guns for work (bear protection!).  I am a-ok with the GENERAL idea of gun owership.  What I'm not ok with is completely unregulated ownership -- but then I'm such a commie treehugger that I'm not into unregulated anything....

So, the quote I read (over on HuffPo, if you want to see yourself) was essentially this (paraphrased): If you don't buy health insurance, they'll come to arrest you, and you'll need your gun then to resist.

Ok, let's just put aside the fact that it is COMPLETELY LUDICRIOUS that there will be roving squads of insurance-checking cops.  Seriously, this guy is advocating ARMED RESISTANCE TO ARREST??????

There are so many things wrong with this I don't know where to begin and remain civil.  Maybe I should explain to the tea-bagging nutters that the long and honored tradition of resistance is called CIVIL disobedience for a reason.  Perhaps I should point out that no sane human being, ever, has advocated fatal armament against lawful arrest.  Perhaps I should point out just how fucking stupid this is.

I know it's useless to ask, but exactly why is having a little screening on gun buyers a violation of one's rights?  After all, if one is a crazy motherfucker, perhaps he/she shouldn't be allowed to own a gun.  Maybe it's ok to allow, say, hunting guns, but not handguns and assault machines like AK 47s.  I mean really, do you honestly think you need either of those in your daily life?  Do you think that is what the Fathers envisioned?  I am pretty sure that Jefferson and friends would agree that such weapons are beyond the scope of Amendment #2. 

Of course, Amendment #1 protects your right to be a dumbass, so there you have it.

1 comment:

  1. Because those advocating unrestricted gun ownership ignore that pesky first part of t he Ammendment that talks crazy talk about well regulated militias being necessary to the defense of a free state.

    ReplyDelete