Gun control: Bullshit?

Jesus locks and loads.

I’ve recently watched Penn & Teller: Bullshit! episode on gun control (one of the best shows on TV today, as I’ve written before) and, though I didn’t agree with their assessment on the issue at hand, it made me think. So this post will deal with a thorough evaluation of Penn and Teller’s arguments against gun control and subsequent judgment of said arguments.

So gun control: Bullshit? We’ll see. Brace yourselves, here we go:

P&T’s first argument against gun control is sport and hunting: some people like using guns to hunt or shoot stuff for fun. Now, I have no problem with this, for I believe that you should have the choice to kill your own food (hey, we allow people to have their own vegetable and fruit gardens, don’t we?) and, frankly, I don’t see anything wrong with shooting as a sport. I myself practice a martial art and can appreciate the dexterity required to use a weapon properly. So if you want to practice shooting as a sport I say more (fire) power to you, my friend.

So, so far, no problem here; hunt, shoot ducks, have fun. But, when I hear the nutcases at the NRA that’s when I really get pissed: these assholes claim that, in order to shoot a moose for sport or kill a duck for dinner, they need high powered guns like an AK-47 or an M-1 rifle loaded with armor piercing ammo. Who the fuck do they think they are kidding?! Do these nut-jobs really want us to believe that there are deer in the forest with bulletproof vests and machine guns going: “Bring it on, motherfucker!”? Do they think we’re that stupid? Don’t answer.

Also, if these guys say they want guns for sporting purposes, why do they want guns with a 50-round per minute firing rate? All sports have some sort of proficiency associated to them, marksmanship being the one associated with shooting. If you are doing this for sport, shouldn’t you at least have to aim? What I mean is this: if you feel you need a freakin’ bazooka to kill a deer in the middle of the forest you should get your head (and eyesight) examined.

So we move on to argument number two: self-defense. Now, I understand how it might be somewhat difficult to enjoy life with a bullet between the eyes, so I get the point when they say that if you have a gun you may be able to protect your family and friends from an armed attacker. So, sure, buy a gun… hell, get a shotgun while you’re at it; it’s fine by me. But, and it’s a huge but, unless you live in fuckin’ Bagdad you do not need an assault rifle or armor piercing ammunition.

I have a couple of questions for gun lovers everywhere: would you feel safe if you saw your neighbor coming home with a couple of shotguns the day after you threw your mutt’s crap over the fence and into his rare flower garden? And to bring some more perspective to the subject: would you feel any safer if your ex-con, child molesting, semi-psychopath neighbor got a couple of 9mm’s to protect himself (herself) from the repressed housewives that will try to kill him in his sleep to protect their obnoxious offspring? Once again, I don’t need you to answer.

P&T’s final argument, they claim, is the best one: we need lesser gun regulations in order to keep the government in check, that is to say, we need to pack heat in order to bring forth the violent overthrow of the government should it start to violate it’s citizens rights. Now, I’m pro coup d’état all the way, and I’ll gladly take a freakin’ flamethrower to the Venezuelan congress any day of the week; but there are some glitches in their plan.

If we are to fight against the authorities we need to assess the enemy’s firepower and compare it to ours: so I’ll give you your AK-47’s and your armor piercing bullets, and some fragmentation grenades for good measure. You think you’re badass now, right? Well, if you’re going up against the local cops, the Highway Patrol or the Venezuelan armed forces you sure as hell are; but let’s check what the U.S. Government has in store for you: thousands of supersonic jet fighters with missiles they can fire 150 miles away, tanks equipped with GPS guided projectiles, bombers that can circle the globe to throw laser guided bombs at their targets with a precision of about a foot, chemical and biological weapons that would scare Hitler shitless and oh, yes, nuclear fuckin’ weapons. Get the point? And if you tell me that they wouldn’t use those weapons against their citizens, all I have to say to you is: Reality check, asshole! They have power and a bunch of pricks with guns are not going to take it away from them!

So going against the U.S. Government is an exercise in futility and downright suicidal. To give you some more perspective (apparently, I’m all about perspective today) think Afghanistan: these guys had RPG’s tanks and enough machine guns to make Texas look like Disneyland. They managed to fend off the U.S.S.R. back in the days when the commies had the U.S. (and the rest of the world, for that matter) scared out of their minds with the threat of nuclear annihilation. Fuck, these guys fought wars and killed each other for fun! And how long did the Afghanis last against the U.S. government? About 15 fuckin’ minutes, that’s how long.
Ok, so what can we say after all of this? Think for yourself about gun control and make sure your voice is heard by those who make the rules.

And, sorry Penn, sorry Teller but your arguments against gun control are BULLSHIT!