Speaking of Handguns...and the NRA

"I'll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands," said Charlton Heston, the then President of the NRA.

That one photo opportunity was responsible for selling more guns and signing new NRA members than 9/11, Columbine, Newtown, and Aurora combined. Written by a top ad agency, a Philadelphia lawyer couldn't write a better nonsensical excuse why someone as innocent as a school full of children in Newtown, Connecticut were needlessly shot to death. There's no sane reason why twelve people died in Aurora, Colorado while waiting in line to watch a movie. Yet, are their survivors supposed to find solace in the fact that it wasn't the gun that killed them all, it was the shooter.

"Is that it? Is that right? So what whether it was the gun or the shooter? What difference does it make? They're dead. They're all dead."

Those innocent children are still dead. Those wanting to see a movie are dead. Don't blame the implement of death, blame the messenger. Is that it? Yet, if guns weren't so easily accessible, no matter if it's the gun or the shooter, we wouldn't have so very many people dying by guns whether illegal or not.

"Nothing personal. It's just business," laments the Mafia when having to kill someone, a friend of the family perhaps.

"Nothing personal. It's just business, big business," says the gun manufacturers when the fat bottom line fills them with jubilation.

Selling guns and bullets is big business. If we're shot to death, it's nothing personal, it's just business. We're nothing more than collateral damage in politicians getting their campaign contributions, the gun manufacturers selling their guns, and the NRA getting more new members to donate more money.

It's not the gun that's responsible for so many deaths, it's the shooter. So, advancing that logic a step further, if our government declared war on a foreign country not for the advancement of democracy but for their oil and no one showed up to fight this greed driven war, we'd have no more wars. Because...it's not our government, it's our military. Right? Isn't that the same premise behind, it's not the gun, but the shooter? I'm starting to understand the logic behind this now.

So...lemme get this straight. Let's think of it's not the gun but the shooter ass backwards. If a man violent rapes a woman, it's not the man who committed the crime, based on our logic that opposes the NRA reasoning, it's his penis or his sex drive, or his horniness, and/or his sexual frustration, or his abusive childhood.

Thereby, extrapolating that logic, if you rob a bank, it's not your fault. It's the money. It's the fault of the money. Yeah, of course. The money tempted you to steal it. Blame the crime on the money and not the thief. Right? Let's send the money to jail and not the man who stole it. Sorry, but just as I'm not making any sense at all, so doesn't the NRA's argument make any sense either.

"How dare they?"

They must think we're all stupid and we are for buying into their lunacy and buying even more guns and even more ammunition. Yet, we are stupid. Instead of selling less guns after the Columbine, Newtown, and Aurora shootings, wanting to grandfather their guns in, people bought more guns for fear that our government would pass stiffer gun laws to deny people from owning guns. Yet, give a man a shiny, new weapon to play with and he'll make sure that the NRA stays in power and in a position of influence to rule every decision that politicians make not on your behalf but on their behalf. Give a man bullets and he'll want to shoot them.

* * * * *

The outdated 2nd Amendment was adopted at a time when we had Indians, rustlers, murderers, and marauders. The 2nd Amendment was adopted at a time when we didn't have the protection of the city, state, and federal police, TSA, Homeland Security, SWAT, the FBI, the NSA, and the CIA. At a time before we had one ton bombs, jets, aircraft carriers, and a military armed to the teeth, the 2nd Amendment was added to the constitution so that citizens could take the law in their own hands. The 2nd Amendment allowed citizens to be the judge, the jury, and the executioner in their self-defense to protect themselves while out alone in the wilderness.

"Get off my lawn!"

"Get out of my house! I have a gun!"

Now with much of our wilderness turned into strip malls, Disney World, Las Vegas, and national parks, we're relatively safe without even having to fall back upon the 2nd Amendment. Unless we hide ourselves in our homes, crowded everywhere we go, we can't get away from people. There are so very many people in places, such as New York, that if you aimlessly fired a handgun, you're going to shoot someone and possibly even kill someone. Begging a tragic accident, handguns aren't designed for populous cities. Yet, an infestation, every city has nearly as many handguns as they do rats and roaches.

Before we continue, lemme ask a simple question. Why is the National Rifle Association called the NRA and not the National Handgun Association, the NHA? Begging a better and more descriptive name, why is the National Rifle Association not called the NMA, National Murder Association? Isn't that what they do? They encourage gun ownership and thereby are indirectly responsible for killing Americans.

Isn't that the sole purpose of the NRA to sell guns that kill people while they and gun manufacturers make huge piles of money? Are we supposed to believe that it's not the NRA and the gun manufacturers who kill anyone but it's the guns? Are we supposed to believe that it's not the NRA and the gun manufacturers who kill so very many people but it's the inanimate handgun? Is that the line that they've fed Americans to justify people to buy more guns and to join their sick and violent association? Again, how dare they think we're so stupid? Yet, we are that stupid to believe anything our politicians tell us. A good rule of thumb to follow, if a politician is speaking, they're lying.

Answer me this, admittedly a fruitless lawsuit that would cost more than it was worth and would go nowhere for the plaintiff, it they haven't already, why hasn't anyone sued the NRA and the gun manufactures for the untimely deaths of their loved ones? If there were no guns being made, sold at gun shops, at conventions, on the street from a car trunk, and promoted by the NRA, I wouldn't have to write this idiotic review and essay. I'd be writing something more sexually satisfying. I'd be writing erotica instead. Hey, don't blame me, the writer, blame this review and essay. I'm just minding my own business doing my job writing. It's not my fault. It's the fault of this review and essay.

Actually, I like the last name the best for the NRA, the National Rifle Association. The NRA should be more descriptively called the NMA, the National Murder Association. The National Murder Association sounds like a legalized murder for hire association, hitmen who don't have to pay their respect to a Mafia boss. The National Rifle Association, aka the National Murder Association and the extended family of gun manufacturers such as Smith and Wesson, Glock, and others, are hitmen who don't have to wear dreadful Hawaiian shirts over their fat, Italian bodies.

The NMA, Smith and Wesson, Glock, and others could have a slogan, a gun in every Americans hands so that we can kill one another at any time. Shoot first and ask questions later. As long as you say you're sorry for accidentally shooting someone to death, you're forgiven because it's not the gun, it's the shooter or is it not the shooter but the gun? I don't know now. I'm confused.

"The family that shoots together, dies together." How's that for a handgun slogan?

Seriously, I'm curious. If Congress passed a law that citizens of the United States could only own one gun, which gun would you chose to own? Being that you're the gun owners and the loyal members of the NMA, sorry, the NRA, you're the firearm experts. If anyone knows guns, you know guns the best. This is your time to shine. This is your time to educate and enlighten the rest of us by writing about your preferred and beloved guns. We the people with our heads in the clouds when our heads aren't up our asses, the minority who don't own a gun, are the peace loving pacifists who don't know anything about guns. We need you, the gun owners, to tell us why we all need to own guns and which guns to buy if such a law was passed that we all could only own just one gun.

Anyway, not to digress but if Congress passed a law that you could own only one gun, which gun would that be? If you could only legally own one gun, just one, what would that gun be? Would it be a rifle? What kind of rifle and why? Would it be a handgun? What kind of handgun and why? Would it be a shotgun? What kind of shotgun and why? Or would you go for broke, being that you could legally own only one gun, and buy that AR15 or that AK47, the most sold and deadliest automatic weapon in the world for the last several decades?

Yet, as always is the case, instead of reading and digesting this entire review and essay, there will be those gun owners and loyal NRA members who won't read past the first paragraph before writing their derogatory comment calling me un-American and threatening to shoot me. There will always be those gun owners who will take exception that I want to abolish the 2nd Amendment. They won't even read past that one line before they're busy writing their comment how I should be stripped naked by a bunch of home invaders and gangbanged with their handguns. There will be those who won't even take the time to read this review and essay, never mind understand the premise behind this review and essay. There will be those who will write their comment as to how I should die by a gun wielding home invader and pistol whipped before being shot to death.

"There, take that, Susan Jill Parker and remember, it's not the gun but the shooter."

As if it makes a difference who's responsible, if it's the gun or the shooter, when I'm dead.

"Susan should find solace in the fact that it wasn't the gun that killed her but the shooter," said the Reverend giving the funeral service after laying his Magnum .45 on the pulpit.

* * * * *

So, what's the answer?

In the way that we stopped making one-thousand-dollar-bills because of drug dealers, money laundering, and money launderers, do we ban the sale of all handguns because of criminals killing innocent and not so innocent people? Why not? The United Kingdom did it. Australia did it too. Yet...if it's not the gun but the shooter, maybe instead of banning handguns, we need to ban shooters. What do you think of that nonsense?

Yet, the argument will always be, if we banned handguns, made a law that banned all handguns, then the only people with handguns would be criminals, the police, of course, our military, and you're grandmother, who'd never give up her handgun. Yet, to make sure that criminals don't abuse the law by owning illegal handguns, we could pass a law that allows the police to shoot and kill any criminal who is in possession of a handgun. What do you think of that proposed law?

"Do you have any guns on your person or in your car?"

A policeman stopped a man for running a stop sign.

"I have a gun in my glove compartment officer," said the criminal.

The officer drew his gun.

"Let me see it. Open the glove box slowly but don't make a move to touch the gun," said the officer with his gun drawn.

As soon as the criminal opened his glove compartment and withdrew his hand and as soon as the cop saw the gun, he shot the criminal dead.

"Bam!"

The officer retrieved the man's illegal firearm before holstering his gun.

"That's what you get for owning a handgun. Under the law with me your executioner, that's my brand of justice without a judge, a trial, and/or with a jury," said the cop calling for backup.

* * * * *

Perhaps we can start by limiting the number of guns that anyone can buy. What do you think? Instead of just buying one gun, a person can buy more than one gun, as long as they're different in design. Any person can buy a rifle and/or a shotgun, and/or a handgun. That's it, just one of each. No one is allowed to have an arsenal of weapons. If you want to buy another gun, you must turn your old gun into the police or sell it back to the gun shop. You cannot sell your gun privately unless the buyer signs a sworn and witnessed affidavit that, even after buying this used gun, he still only owns one of each kind of gun.

"How's that? Will that law work for you? I didn't think it would. Why not?"

At least this way, it should stop the criminals from breaking in your home to steal your guns. Only and unfortunately, that law would never happen either. Actually, the real and only answer is to come down hard on these politicians who sell their votes by accepting multi-million dollar PACT money as campaign donations. Our elected officials who are supposed to represent us need to distance themselves from the NRA and from gun manufacturers. They need to do the jobs that we voted them in the House and the Senate to do and pass better gun legislation with stiffer penalties and that puts criminals in jail for the smallest gun infractions. The above is the only way we will stop people from being killed with handguns.

Only, just another pipe dream, none of that will ever happen either. If the Republicans can't even pass clean air and clean water legislation, if the Republicans don't care that oil pipelines, fracking, and offshore drilling pollutes our water, our fish, and our food, and if the Republicans refuse to do anything about climate change, we're all doomed. It's only a matter of time before the world as we know it comes to an end all because of money and greed. We may as well all buy guns and wait for people to run out of food and clean water and come to our house to steal our food and water.

"Get off my lawn!"

This is the real reason why people have guns. Gun owners are afraid for good reason. They're not as afraid of criminals as they're afraid that their own government can't protect them. Seemingly, in our self-defense, nothing has changed in America in more than four hundred years. Why should anyone trust any politician, whether Republican or Democrat, who sells their vote to the highest bidder? We can't trust our own government to do the right thing and to do right by us. We're low on that totem pole. It's up to us to protect ourselves by adhering to the 2nd amendment and bearing arms.

Most of us who live in the real America, who don't rub elbows with the superrich are excluded from witnessing their dirty deals. We're naïve to think that anyone in Washington is looking out for us. We don't have lobbyists to push our legislation, our causes, and our agendas forward. We don't dine with the President of the United States, with a Senator, a Representative, or a judge to ask him or her a favor. Sadly, all that we have to protect ourselves, our family, our property, and our rights, our freedom, and our liberty is to buy a gun.

"Get off my lawn," said Clint Eastwood in Gran Torino as Walt Kowalski. "Get off my lawn!"

As the world continues to go to shit for the sake of greed and money for the top one percent, the only thing we may have left is just a little patch of lawn and a handgun to protect it.

Sadly, the more that I write and ponder this mess about the 2nd Amendment, gun control, and a country that is out of control with guns, the more that I'm apt to agree with the average gun owner. As long as they're licensed to own and to carry a firearm and the guns are registered, they're exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Soon, we'll all have bumper stickers on our cars and trunks.

"Don't fuck with me. I believe in the 2nd Amendment. Now get off my lawn!"

The End

Please vote. Please give me the support of your vote. Please vote.