Monday, December 17, 2012
Yet another "national discussion" about guns is under way here, and it's so anti-rational, so politically cowardly, so …unbearably stupid that you have to wonder how a nation that has enlightened the world in so many other ways could wallow in this kind of delusion.He's fed up with the stupid, and the rest of the world agrees.
Twenty children are dead, and journalists and politicians have assumed those breathy, semi-hushed tones that have become so much the norm in covering tragedies.
Everywhere, there is talk about "the grieving process," with pious asides thrown in about the need to "go home and hug your children," or pray.
As if that is going to accomplish anything.
The American audience is a giant emotional sponge looking for distraction from its collective gun craziness, and the media obliges, broadcasting endless montages of victims, with sombre, hymnal piano music playing underneath.
After the state medical examiner had finished talking about multiple bullet wounds in each young victim, all inflicted by the same Bushmaster rifle, one reporter asked the man to talk about how much he'd cried — "personally" — while performing the autopsies.
To repeat: the 20-year-old shooter used a Bushmaster .223 assault rifle, a commercial model of the military M-16, and the reporter wanted to talk about crying.
Recommend this Post at Progressive Bloggers | 3 comments
Most Canadians agree American gun laws are ridiculous but changing them is a lot tougher than some think. The reality is elections are not fought on a national level, but rather focus on swing states or districts and whichever way they tilt tends to determine the positions parties take. Also the 2nd amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed; so the issue becomes whether any changes are constitutional or not. Some argue the 2nd amendment only applies to well regulated militia, not average citizens and since a militia really only makes sense when you lack a standing army like the US did in the 1700s, the amendment is mute this tougher gun laws are constitutional. Others take the view it means every American has the right to own and carry a gun and any law restricting this violates the constitution. Off course I would argue they should just ditch the 2nd amendment but this requires 2/3 in both houses and 2/3 of states so highly unlikely to be done.
By 6:47 pm, at
All of which boils down to the fact that a great many of my fellow Americans are complete morons. I think it's about small penises. The bigger the gun, the smaller the penis. Unfortunately, all of America is being held hostage by pathetically insecure men with small penises.
The idea that regulating certain types of dangerous weapons is "unconstutional' is ridiculous. We already do this, and the efficacy of such regulation is demonstrated by the rarity with which schools are shot up with bazookas or tactical nukes.