The Kind-Hearted Smart Aleck

Just this morning, I read the following post on Facebook from a Tea Partier: "Nikko Jenkins was released from prison on July 30th for a ten-year stint for felony assault and burglary. Now he's in custody for the murder of a young mother... He had guns and ammo....Tell me again how gun laws protect people? ..." First thing's first - based on the minimal information provided in the post, it's virtually impossible to put forth a strong argument for or against stronger gun laws based on this one case. However, if we just look at things from a surface-value standpoint, this post sounds ridiculous. "He had guns and ammo.... Tell me again how gun laws protect people?" Let's see here - if we had stronger gun laws, it would have been more difficult for him to obtain guns and ammo, correct? If a person who once had a suspended license got into an accident which killed somebody, would this individual then say, "Tell me again how traffic ...

About once a month I'm greeted with a lovely response to a blog of mine which includes so many right-wing talking points and bumper-sticker slogans, it presents me with the challenge of, "Can I think of any more?" Often times I give up after about two minutes of thinking over that very question. Just this morning I was greeted with such a comment - this in response to a pro-gun control blog I wrote in wake of the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. This individual, who came across as a high school NRA member, responded to the blog with this: "liberal lackies know they are saying stupid comments but do so to take focus away from the real issues.... the fact is that no gun law will take guns away from criminals... we already have a law that says a criminal cannot own/possess/have-access-to firearms yet every day, in every state of the union, crime is being committed by criminals, many with stolen, smuggled, or otherwise illegally possessed weapons t...

Last year, the state of Louisiana passed an amendment which made the right to bear arms a "fundamental right" in the state. In light of this, New Orleans District Judge Darryl Derbigny ruled that it's unconstitutional to outlaw felons from purchasing and possessing firearms. That's right - while felons are unable to vote in Louisiana, they're able to purchase and carry around firearms. That makes sense. If a person commits a felony involving a gun, he or she will have their voting rights stripped from them, but the right to own a gun which prompted the felony in the first place? Ah, they can hold on to that one. It reminds me of a fictional dialogue between two friends I'm about to concoct: Jerome Buckwheat: "Who are you voting for?" Bobby Babblebreath: "I didn't register in time, unfortunately. How about you?" Buckwheat: "I can't, remember? All those gun crimes. I just got out of jail not long ago." Babblebreath: ...

Where have gun control debates been in the past 5-10 years? Where has just that term - gun control - been in the past decade? For as many awful gun-related crimes and killings as there have been over these past ten years, it feels as if the term and potential legislation surrounding it have decided to hibernate for a decade, and only now is deciding to awaken. Whenever I get into a debate regarding gun control, it feels as if a majority of the country look at me in fear and simultaneously shout back, "It's our 2nd Amendment right! ::mumbles something:: ...militia... ::grunts:: Yeah!" What many of these people have had implanted in their brains is that ANY form of gun control would be another step toward the government talking over - that it'd be the start of tyranny. However, if you break things down with these people - don't refer to it as "gun control laws" - and specifically go through different forms of action concerning gun control, most see...