A man tries to make gun-control proponents look dumb through his "smart" aleck experiment, but makes himself look dumb in the process
I just stumbled across a letter-to-the-editor published in the Hartford Courant which may have placed me in a permanent facepalm pose.
The letter is entitled "Guns Don't Kill People, Etc.," was written by one Donald K. Martin of Windsor Locks, and published on March 19th of this year.
The letter reads as follows:
"Yesterday I placed my shotgun on the front porch, gave it six shells, and noticing it had no legs, placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around. I left it alone and went about my business.
While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy across the street picked up my yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign near my house.
After 10 hours, I checked on the shotgun. It was still sitting in the wheelchair. It had not rolled outside and It had not killed anyone in spite of many opportunities that had been presented. It had not even loaded itself.
Can you imagine how surprised I was with all the hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people? Either the media is wrong and the killing is by people misusing guns or I'm in possession of the laziest gun in the world. So now I'm off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat."
While I give this man credit for seeming to have a sense of humor, the point he's trying to make is still a ridiculous one. It goes back to the old bumper-sticker slogan, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." Mr. Martin attempted to prove this very slogan in a rather smart aleck manner, so he could at the end of the day say, "You see? I left my gun outside in a wheelchair by itself and nothing happened. Like I've said all along, guns don't kill people; people kill people."
The thing is that guns aren't the lone common denominator when it comes to gun violence. I'm a gun-control proponent and not once have I said that guns are the sole factor in gun violence, which Mr. Martin and others like him seem to mistake me (us) for saying. I, and many like me, have always said that it takes both a person and a gun to shoot and kill someone. Those are the two common denominators in gun-related homicides - the shooter and the gun. So, Mr. Martin's poor attempt at appearing smart while making others look stupid through his smart aleck experiment now seems pretty pointless, doesn't it? I guess the joke's on him.
The joke really is on him and those with his kind of mentality. While I, and those like me, admit to the fact that the two common denominators in shootings are the shooter and the gun, Mr. Martin and those like him seem to see the shooter as the only common denominator in shootings. While I spread blame to both the shooter and the gun, they tend to solely blame the shooter. I'm sorry, but that logic doesn't work. In order for a gun-related homicide to occur, there needs to be a shooter and a gun for the shooter to shoot with. Shootings don't occur with a person's magic finger. In order for a bullet to pierce the skin of another, to penetrate the brain of another, and kill them, a gun has to be fired by a person. Someone should counter Mr. Martin's attempt at a smart aleck experiment by sitting in a wheelchair on the front porch of their home, with their hand formed like a gun. They should pretend to shoot people with it and even make sound effects as they do so. I can guarantee that like with the gun Mr. Martin placed in a wheelchair, no deaths will occur by way of this experiment either. Why? Because it takes both a person and a gun for an act of gun violence to take place.
In the future, I can see Mr. Martin conducting the following brilliant experiments:
Experiment: Leaving a car on in the driveway to see if it will drive
Martin's response: "You see? I told you that thing won't drive itself!"
My reaction: Congratulations! You just cost yourself some gas money! It'll make for quite the story to call the kids and say, "Sorry, I can't make it to the family dinner tonight. My car ran out of gas... How? I was just running an experiment, where I left the car turned on in the driveway, to show all the cars-can-drive-themselves enthusiasts they were full of crap. I sure showed them! Have fun tonight. I love you."
Experiment: Working the slot machine without moving a hand
Martin's response: "Ha ha. You see, junior? We have full control over these slot machines! They're nothing without a nice little tug by our right hands! This is why whenever I play these things, I always... crap... lost again. I must be pulling or stroking the lever wrong."
My reaction: Vegas must love this guy! He makes Clark Griswold look good!
Experiment: Making cookies by placing the dough on the oven and not in it
Martin's response: "It's not the oven that bakes the cookies; it's the person! This is proof of that!"
My reaction: Yes, a person has to place the dough in the oven, but the person isn't making the dough rise through baking - not unless the person has a temperature of 375 degrees (Fahrenheit). If so, then I think we could all literally describe the person as "the hottest piece of a** in town."
http://articles.courant.com/2013-03-19/news/hcrs-13129hc--20130316_1_guns-people-front-porch?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
The letter is entitled "Guns Don't Kill People, Etc.," was written by one Donald K. Martin of Windsor Locks, and published on March 19th of this year.
The letter reads as follows:
"Yesterday I placed my shotgun on the front porch, gave it six shells, and noticing it had no legs, placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around. I left it alone and went about my business.
While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy across the street picked up my yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign near my house.
After 10 hours, I checked on the shotgun. It was still sitting in the wheelchair. It had not rolled outside and It had not killed anyone in spite of many opportunities that had been presented. It had not even loaded itself.
Can you imagine how surprised I was with all the hype about how dangerous guns are and how they kill people? Either the media is wrong and the killing is by people misusing guns or I'm in possession of the laziest gun in the world. So now I'm off to check on my spoons, because I hear they make people fat."
While I give this man credit for seeming to have a sense of humor, the point he's trying to make is still a ridiculous one. It goes back to the old bumper-sticker slogan, "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." Mr. Martin attempted to prove this very slogan in a rather smart aleck manner, so he could at the end of the day say, "You see? I left my gun outside in a wheelchair by itself and nothing happened. Like I've said all along, guns don't kill people; people kill people."
The thing is that guns aren't the lone common denominator when it comes to gun violence. I'm a gun-control proponent and not once have I said that guns are the sole factor in gun violence, which Mr. Martin and others like him seem to mistake me (us) for saying. I, and many like me, have always said that it takes both a person and a gun to shoot and kill someone. Those are the two common denominators in gun-related homicides - the shooter and the gun. So, Mr. Martin's poor attempt at appearing smart while making others look stupid through his smart aleck experiment now seems pretty pointless, doesn't it? I guess the joke's on him.
The joke really is on him and those with his kind of mentality. While I, and those like me, admit to the fact that the two common denominators in shootings are the shooter and the gun, Mr. Martin and those like him seem to see the shooter as the only common denominator in shootings. While I spread blame to both the shooter and the gun, they tend to solely blame the shooter. I'm sorry, but that logic doesn't work. In order for a gun-related homicide to occur, there needs to be a shooter and a gun for the shooter to shoot with. Shootings don't occur with a person's magic finger. In order for a bullet to pierce the skin of another, to penetrate the brain of another, and kill them, a gun has to be fired by a person. Someone should counter Mr. Martin's attempt at a smart aleck experiment by sitting in a wheelchair on the front porch of their home, with their hand formed like a gun. They should pretend to shoot people with it and even make sound effects as they do so. I can guarantee that like with the gun Mr. Martin placed in a wheelchair, no deaths will occur by way of this experiment either. Why? Because it takes both a person and a gun for an act of gun violence to take place.
In the future, I can see Mr. Martin conducting the following brilliant experiments:
Experiment: Leaving a car on in the driveway to see if it will drive
Martin's response: "You see? I told you that thing won't drive itself!"
My reaction: Congratulations! You just cost yourself some gas money! It'll make for quite the story to call the kids and say, "Sorry, I can't make it to the family dinner tonight. My car ran out of gas... How? I was just running an experiment, where I left the car turned on in the driveway, to show all the cars-can-drive-themselves enthusiasts they were full of crap. I sure showed them! Have fun tonight. I love you."
Experiment: Working the slot machine without moving a hand
Martin's response: "Ha ha. You see, junior? We have full control over these slot machines! They're nothing without a nice little tug by our right hands! This is why whenever I play these things, I always... crap... lost again. I must be pulling or stroking the lever wrong."
My reaction: Vegas must love this guy! He makes Clark Griswold look good!
Experiment: Making cookies by placing the dough on the oven and not in it
Martin's response: "It's not the oven that bakes the cookies; it's the person! This is proof of that!"
My reaction: Yes, a person has to place the dough in the oven, but the person isn't making the dough rise through baking - not unless the person has a temperature of 375 degrees (Fahrenheit). If so, then I think we could all literally describe the person as "the hottest piece of a** in town."
http://articles.courant.com/2013-03-19/news/hcrs-13129hc--20130316_1_guns-people-front-porch?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
He was not saying it for people who think that it is both the gun and the person who are killing is saying this for the people who want to take guns away even from people who are totally capable with a gun. If you don't want a gun fine have it your way but I have every right by the law to have a gun and I would gladly use it in protection and defense of my family. Even so, if gun laws were passed the types of people who shoot up people, do you really think a law against guns is going to stop them it will hinder them but it won't stop them it just takes guns away from the people who would use them to protect themselves who would follow the law. And just so you know if my spelling is off I am a dyslexic 16 year old boy, so sorry.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your even-keeled response, and there's really no reason to apologize for your dyslexia. Actually, it's often thought that dyslexics are rather intelligent, and I had absolutely no problem reading your comment.
DeleteWith regard to your comment, though, I have just a few questions:
1) How would expanding background checks and the like take guns away from law-abiding citizens, as it seems you contend they would?
2) Are you in favor of written, vision, and driving tests before one is able to attain a license? If so, why shouldn't there be similar-type tests in order to entrust a person with another potentially deadly weapon, such as a gun?
3) If we go by the philosophy that there would be no point in strengthening gun-control laws because it's inevitable that criminals will break these laws, what point is there of having any laws? Isn't it inevitable that any and every law will be broken at least once? Given that, isn't the point of laws to lessen the likelihood, and with that, the frequency, that such unruly acts occur?
Hey Numbnutz. Do you also want to ban alcohol bc of drunk drivers that kill people? I don't see you arguing that point.
ReplyDeleteI have a hunch you didn't fare well in your Critical Thinking course in college. Speaking of "numbnutz"... Take your fallacies and 3rd-grade logic elsewhere.
DeleteYea, Roz. Perfect response to a sadly under uninformed individual.
Delete"Under uninformed?" In other words, I'm highly informed? Thank you. You're too kind.
Delete