We keep hearing about more tragedies involving guns, yet there seems to be a fundamental unwillingness to regulate them. Whether it's pressure from lobbyists or belief in the right to bear arms, it seems only one avenue is left to us as ordinary citizens. And that is to start saying that guns should be allowed to marry. We know how divisive it can be to suggest that anything besides a man and a woman would be permitted to engage in the sacred sacrament of marriage, so this last-ditch strategy is worth a try.
We might be able to make it work. Politicians are very busy people, and as we know, many of them would not hesitate to sign something that takes away basic rights from any group seeking marriage equality. Sure, it just so happens that we would be advocating on behalf of inanimate objects, but since guns don't kill people and people kill people, we should be able to trap your average dull-witted House Member or Senator in a cycle of syllogistic logic that will have them reflexively signing legislation to regulate a potpourri of deadly weapons before you can say homophobia.
And by the time we're finished beating the drum for the equal rights of guns to marry each other, those opposed to same-sex marriage will be so outraged that they will do anything to prevent the open sharing of guns from having any kind of corrupting influence on our children. Gun-on-gun relations would be frowned upon, and right-thinking religious organizations will ban the purchase of any ammunition -- for fear it may contribute to the wanton spreading of deadly gun seed.
Granted, we're counting on a knee-jerk reaction here, but let's look at the dictionary definition of knee-jerk reaction:
An automatic or reflex reaction; an immediate action made without examining causes or facts.
Damn, based on how things have been done in this country lately, we shouldn't have any problem at all.
James Napoli is an author and humorist. More of his comedy content for the Web can be found here.