The Gun Makes Me Feel like God

In the spirit of kaveman's satire, The Onion published a wonderful article, capturing perfectly the feelings of gun owners. I think when irony and satire are mixed just right, it's difficult to tell where one ends and the other begins.

Believe me, I am not a gun person. Oh, sure, I played with cap guns and BB guns when I was a kid, but I never thought I would actually own a real one. But let me tell you, when I first felt the cold steel of this gun against my palm, it made me feel as if I had the strength of 10,000 charging centurions, as if I were capable of moving heaven and earth itself. I just hope I never have to fire the thing.

It is my earnest wish that this beautiful, beautiful gun and the godlike powers it bestows on its owner will stay locked away in a drawer forever, only to be used in the most dire of circumstances.

I will say, though, that this particular firearm is certainly something to behold. It has a mirror-polished stainless-steel finish and a "Python .357" insignia engraved on the chrome barrel that, to be honest, makes me feel invincible, as if the spirit of a warrior prince were flowing through me, urging me to punish all who lie trembling in my path.

Unlike the satire of kaveman, though, one wonders if the author of this piece might not be on to something. Exaggerated, for sure, but does it not describe the exact feeling and motivation of many a gun owner? What do you think?

Supreme Court to Decide

What will it be? Capital Hill Blue has a wonderful summary of what's at stake.

Lock and load…the Supreme Court will weigh in soon with a gun ruling that could open he door for more gun control by states and localities or it could slam it shut in the faces of advocates for stricter legislation.

The court will soon decide whether or not the Second Amendment — used by gun fanciers as the quid pro quo for packing heat — applies to states as well as the federal government.

Some Constitutional scholars believe it does.

The court is considering a case that could strike down handgun bans in Chicago and suburban Oak Park as part of a decision on whether or not the full Bill of Rights applies as much to state and local law as it does in federal cases.

On the surface, applying the Second Amendment and the Bill of Rights to state and local government would appear to be a clear victory for gun advocates but the gun-control crowd thinks a ruling could also allow state and local government to enact tougher laws.

Gun control opponents, of course, argue just the opposite.

At issue is the due process clause of the 14th amendment which says, in part, that no state shall create or enforce any law that curtails “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” The amendment also states that “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

The National Rife Association says the 14th Amendment reaffirms the rights of the Second Amendment. Those who disagree says the 14th Amendment also prohibits the states from doing things like legalizing guns that others can use to deprive a person of life or liberty.

Both sides are keeping their powder dry and waiting for the court’s decision.

One thing for sure, it's gonna be an interesting year for the gun debate.

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

The Immaculate Inning

I love baseball. The last time I followed it, though, Maury Wills was stealing bases and Sandy Koufax was striking out batters. But, I think what I love about baseball is its serenity and meditative, almost trance-like pace. I know they've had their moments, but compared to football and hockey, for example, baseball is a peaceful sport.

Wikipedia has the story about The Immaculate Inning.

Former California Cop Goes to Trial for Over-reacting

MercuryNews.com reports on the upcoming trial of a former Salinas California police officer who made a big mistake.

MONTEREY, Calif.—A former Salinas police officer will stand trial for shooting at an unarmed couple during a routine traffic stop.

Monterey Superior Court Judge Russell D. Scott says Christopher Swanson grossly overreacted when he and another officer fired 14 shots into a car.

Defense attorney Mike Lawrence says he is confident Swanson will be cleared at trail. He says his 37-year-old client fired after hearing a "pop" and thought he saw a muzzle flash inside the car.

Swanson was relieved of duty after the 2009 incident in East Salinas. He has pleaded not guilty and a jury trial is scheduled to begin March 24.

The city of Salinas last year paid the couple $260,000 as part of a settlement. Neither was injured in the shooting.

He thought he'd heard something and saw something. It can happen to anybody. I mean, let's say a gun owner, any gun owner, hears something and sees something suspicious. If he waits to be sure what it is, it might be too late. Naturally he wants to let his instincts take over, to react instantaneously. It's the survival instinct, after all.

Now let's multiply that by millions. Let's double and triple the number of gun owners and concealed carry guys. What do you think will happen? Certainly there'll be more of this, but I suppose all the thwarting of crime will more than make up for the increase.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

Days of our Trailers: Being one with Nature...

kaveman over at Days of our Trailers wrote a wonderfully humorous piece about the opinion of gun control folks .

Monday morning I woke up in a drunken stupor, which is par for the course so a quick trip to Starbucks was in order. Got a mocha with a shot of Hazelnut and some coffee cake for the extra sugar rush I was after. After pissing in the potted plant in the corner next to some guy who smelled just like I had crapped my pants, I whipped open my black trench coat, unholstered my Carbon-15(with the 120 round drum) and started waving it over my head like the American Flag while trying to slur my way the Pledge of Allegiance. I couldn’t remember most of the words so I just replaced them with some impressive cussing, some trademark worthy racial epithets and a few armpit fart noises for emphasis at the good parts.

It went on like that, good funny stuff, but what caught my attention was the last line.

"Make no mistake, this is how they view us. Keep that in mind."

I asked over there if he'd been serious when writing that, and I anxiously await his answer. My point is, this kind of exaggerated description of the gun control position is necessary in order for the pro-gun person to fully immerse himself into the role of grandiose victim. By claiming the gun control opinion of gun owners is a wild caricature described so well by kaveman, they can best live in that delicious fantasy of misunderstood patriotic freedom-fighter and intrepid defender of god-given rights who will lay down his life for the cause.

The truth is, gun control folks claim that SOME gun enthusiasts contain SOME of those characteristics.

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

The New Assault Weapons Ban

ABC News reports on the remarks made by Attorney General Eric Holder concerning gun control.

The Obama administration will seek to reinstate the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 during the Bush administration, Attorney General Eric Holder said today.

"As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons," Holder told reporters.

I'm not sure if I want to say, "Hooray, it's about time," or "Oh, brother, more empty promises."

Holder declined to offer any time frame for the reimplementation of the assault weapons ban, however.

"It's something, as I said, that the president talked about during the campaign," he said. "There are obviously a number of things that are -- that have been taking up a substantial amount of his time, and so, I'm not sure exactly what the sequencing will be."

During his confirmation hearing, Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee about other gun control measures the Obama administration may consider.

"I think closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent, would be something that would be permitted under Heller,"

Dare I get my hopes up? Could Obama turn out to prove himself worthy of a better report card from the Bradys after all? Would it be possible for the administration to overcome the obstacles, namely for the assault weapons ban, coming up with a proper definition, and for the gun-show loophole, applying it to private sales outside of gun shows?

What's your opinion? Is this the beginning of the end for the pro-gun movement? Are gun and ammo sales going to skyrocket again? Or do you think these are impractical initiatives which will turn out to be more empty promises?

What do you think? Please leave a comment.

The Amazing Ayn Rand

The Crone Speaks has a post about the fascination Glenn Beck and others have with Ayn Rand. After describing the attitude as "hate everyone but yourself," the article makes the following conclusion.

It’s not just the former CEO of BB&T that have strings attached to their grants in order to keep the Randian philosophy of selfishness and hate alive. Other CEO’s are doing the same thing, and it has taken hold. We are talking about the ultimate indoctrination of our children, even if some more reasoned folks see the caveat of teaching Rand as a bribe. As these young people enter the business world, they will become the CEO’s and CFO’s that will be fucking with our economy. They don’t need the Glenn Beck’s spouting selfishness or the Dr. Helen’s declaring you should be “Going John Galt!” and who calls liberals and progressives (paraphrasing from a recent post of hers) “parasites that are destroying this country” (a Randian reference to those that refuse to follow her ideas). The Glenn Becks and the Dr Helen’s are the cheerleaders for the next generation of Randian economic leaders.

Which is really quite sad, given Ayn Rand’s “hero” tortured, cut up and threw the body parts of a child he kidnapped at her father for a mere $1500. The me-only-and-only-me philosophy wouldn’t allow a Rand devotee to recognize someone else’s sociopathic traits, simply because someone else, anyone else, doesn’t matter. In other words, Rand devotees are all sociopaths.

That final link goes to an article which describes the length to which Ms. Rand went in her admiration of the Type A real man.

So what, and who, was Ayn Rand for and against? The best way to get to the bottom of it is to take a look at how she developed the superhero of her novel, Atlas Shrugged, John Galt. Back in the late 1920s, as Ayn Rand was working out her philosophy, she became enthralled by a real-life American serial killer, William Edward Hickman, whose gruesome, sadistic dismemberment of 12-year-old girl named Marion Parker in 1927 shocked the nation.

Rand filled her early notebooks with worshipful praise of Hickman. According to biographer Jennifer Burns, author of Goddess of the Market, Rand was so smitten by Hickman that she modeled her first literary creation -- Danny Renahan, the protagonist of her unfinished first novel, The Little Street -- on him.

What did Rand admire so much about Hickman? His sociopathic qualities: "Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should," she wrote, gushing that Hickman had "no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. He has the true, innate psychology of a Superman. He can never realize and feel 'other people.'"

This echoes almost word for word Rand's later description of her character Howard Roark, the hero of her novel The Fountainhead: "He was born without the ability to consider others."

What's your opinion? Is there a bit of the sociopath in Ayn Rand and her followers?

Please leave a comment.