Archives for posts with tag: RKBA

Ron White, a very funny comedian, once made a joke about being busted by the cops while drunk: he had the right to remain silent, but “did not have the ability”. Not only funny, but instructive. We all have rights, but we don’t always have the ability to use them as the law intended.

Here is a very good example: a man exercising his right to openly carry a gun was robbed of said gun by another man carrying a concealed weapon. Pretty dumb move, to put a just-purchased weapon on public display without being prepared for what might happen:

William Coleman III was robbed of his Walter- brand P22 just after 2:00 a.m. October 4 in Gresham by a young man who asked him for it — and flashed his own weapon as persuasion.

Coleman, 21, was talking to his cousin in the 17200 block of NE Glisan St., after purchasing the handgun earlier that day, when a young man asked him for a cigarette, police said.

The man then asked about the gun, pulled a gun from his own waistband and said “”I like your gun. Give it to me.”

Coleman handed over the gun and the man fled on foot.

Once can debate the Second Amendment all one wishes (this writer is a proponent of RKBA), but just like any other right, one must use a brain cell or two when exercising it. When speaking freely, one should be aware that other people might disagree with their speech. When assembling freely, one should be prepared for someone else putting together a counter-demonstration. And when hanging a gun on one’s hip, one should be trained and prepared for how to responsibly handle it.

Mr. Coleman was NOT at all prepared. He could have carried his own gun as the robber did, concealed. That way he’d be equipped to defend himself without risking theft. Or he could have taken other measures to guard against theft. (Helpful hint: a gun is not a magic wand. It is a weapon that can be defeated, or taken away, by an opponent who has more skill than you have.)

Ya know, if it’s the possibility of armed conflict you are trying to cope with (as Mr. Coleman clearly was), you should learn something about, well, armed conflict. Only a completely uneducated idiot would allow the enemy to know the details of his own offensive and defensive capabilities (read Clausewitz and Sun-Tzu for the basics of military straegy and tactics). And a complete idiot is what Mr. Coleman surely was, because he did not bother to learn Thing One about HOW to exercise his rights: he just ran on out and started exercising them.

Too many Americans stop thinking once they get to “rights”. We all need to consider our responsibilities as well. But FIRST, we must think about our capabilities.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Pakistan just had its own version of the Newtown school massacre. Heavily-armed lunatics stormed an army-run school in Peshawar and killed lots of innocent children. And this writer has already heard more than one gun nut say this proves the need for more private gun ownership. They draw a parallel between the two killing sprees and smugly proclaim that more “good guys with guns” could have protected the kids in Peshawar.

There is a teeny-tiny problem with this “argument”: it is bulls***. Pakistan is full of gun owners, good and otherwise.

Pakistan barely regulates guns at all. Their gun culture is NRA Nirvana. In fact, the Pakistan government hands out licenses for automatic weapons to citizens who are afraid of being attacked. Hell, you can legally carry grenades and rocket launchers in some parts of the country.

Plus, the school in question is operated by the Pakistani military. Do the gun nutters really think that country’s army is a bunch of anti-gun activists? Puh-leeze.

No, Gentle Reader, what this despicable atrocity demonstrates is that guns aren’t the solution for every criminal problem. You can carry all the firepower you want on your person, and still wind up dead if some a**hole gets the drop on you. And your kids can still be killed by homicidal motherf***ers like the Taliban, Timothy McVeigh, or Adam F***ing Lanza, no matter how many guns you sell to the general population.

Security cannot be obtained by guns alone. It is a product of careful thought, law, justice, collaboration and intelligence. NONE of which the NRA bothers with.

Guns are a Constitutional right, and one which this writer believes in and exercises. Carefully and in a responsible manner, with a focus on varmint control and home defense.

The only way to keep our kids safe from gun violence is to have a society with less violence. We will never achieve that by pushing our citizens to own and carry more guns so as to be ready to commit violent acts of their own.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

Larry Pratt (if you’re familiar with Brit slang, you’ll know why his last name is hilariously appropriate) came right out and said it here: that the “healthy fear” of being shot will “make them behave”. Click the link, it includes a transcript and a recording of his statements.

There are words for what this wingnut is doing; threatening, coercion, and terrorism . But that’s pretty much what we expect from Gun Owners of America, a fringe group that is so loony-toony extreme, even the nutbars at the NRA are liberals by comparison. They cheerfully admit their propensity towards violence, asserting it as a “right”.

This real American gun owner has a reply to that prat Pratt: I don’t need to terrorize people to keep my right to keep and bear arms: the Second Amendment works just fine without terrorists and hucksters claiming to “speak” for me by playing the threat card. STFU, Larry, we Americans can speak for ourselves, f*** you very much.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

The arms industry makes a pretty penny by scaring us into thinking that the Eeeeeevil Government is gonna take away our firearms. Indeed, they and their pet politicos would have us believe that our guns are the only thing stopping said evil gummint from imposing some sort of Satanic tyranny. This is fertilizer of the finest, and here is how we know it’s bulls***:

Go look for active legislative, judicial, or executive actions that seek to take away our right to keep and bear arms (RKBA for short). No rumors, no CT, no crap you heard at the bar or barbershop, we are talking actual government actions to violate our Second Amendment rights. You found nothing, right? Neither did I.

Now look for government actions to limit or take away your right to VOTE. You found a helluva lot, right? Yeah, me too.

It’s not your bullets that the government fears, Gentle Reader: it’s your BALLOTS. Were they scared of our guns, they’d be trying to take them away, and they aren’t. Pretty clear, isn’t it?

Want to scare your elected “representatives”? Get on out and vote, and show them who’s boss.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky (proud gun owner AND voter)

You’d never know it from the wingnut screechers whose voices dominate the debate on gun rights and gun violence, though.  The Loony Lefties would have you believe that all gun owners are mouth-breathing conspiracy theorists whose lust for automatic weapons is matched only by their desire to kill people. The Raging Righties say that gun owners are the only thing preventing the ObamaBots from taking over the world, and that we need the right to keep and bear mortars and bazookas, as well as machine guns and cop-killer bullet to protect our freedoms.

The Blunt and Cranky Family are gun owners, and fit neither of these stereotypes: we have guns for practical reasons. For example: chez BluntandCranky is out in the country, and is thus primarily equipped for varmint control. However, we are moving into town soon, and we will be getting different guns for different purposes. We aren’t trying to overthrow a government, defend against tyranny, or any those fevered dreams of the Gun Nuts. We also aren’t much interested in making a bunch of weapons manufacturers even richer than they already are, so we’ll be getting what we need and then stopping. 

Kind of like a normal purchase that a normal family normally makes, wouldn’t you say? Like pots and pans, power tools, canned goods, or anything else people use in their daily lives. No ideology, no philosophy, just ordinary pragmatism at work. Other normal gun owners have guns to hunt, or to defend their homes, and other likewise practical purposes.

Now, there are Gun Nuts who fit the stereotypes used by wingnuts to a tee: in fact, this writer knows a fair few of them. They strike us as either collectors, or deluded fools who are being fleeced by the armament industry. Thankfully, very few gun owners fit that mold.

Gentle Reader, always remember that mass media images are not always based in fact: all too frequently, they are exaggerations used to make a political point or to create outrage. Said outrage, of course, helps to drive up ratings of the Infotainment industry, thus making more money: note that truth and accuracy are not significant business drivers for these companies.

Gun owners, like humans in general, come in all different shapes, sizes, and types. People who treat us like cartoonish media memes do NOT convince us. Instead, all they do is piss us off, and make us close our ears to their rants. Want our attention? Talk to us as individual Americans. Which is what we are.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky

And when someone from the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners says “hunt”, we can safely assume he means “shoot”: hunting deer = hunting humans.

Dudley Brown, whose organization was at one time judged too bats*** crazy for the NRA , said and we quote: “there’s a time to hunt deer. And the next election is the time to hunt Democrats”. That, people, is a threat, plain and simple.

You can say “Awww, he doesn’t really mean it“, but that would be very foolish. One recent example tells us why:

A few years back, Sarah Palin (also a devotee of shooting metaphors) published a picture of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords’ district in the crosshairs of a telescopic sight.. And as we all know, Ms. Giffords was shot and nearly killed soon afterwards.

Ms. Palin tried to pretend that her threatening language and images had no connection to the violent crimes committed after she published them. But that is very hard to believe. Seriously, folks, if politicos didn’t think their words had an impact, would they bother saying them? Of course not. They say what they say in order to accomplish a goal, and they mean what they say. The only time such slimy weasels pretend otherwise is when they are called on their violent rhetoric, or if there are consequences to the hate speech they spew.

Like Palin, Mr. Brown used language that strongly suggests shooting and killing people. And also like her, he’ll strenuously deny that when if a Democrat gets murdered. But he’ll still have blood on his hands.

And like Palin (or Pilate) he can pretend to wash it away. But the stain of blood can never be removed from the hands of a killer, or one who urges others to kill.

Mr. Blunt and Cranky