It came as no surprise when the NRA released a brand new YouTube video that literally makes no sense whatsoever -- on any level. In fact, it's so off-the-rails that it's difficult to imagine even the most loyal NRA automatons buying into what it says.
The Purge had interesting ideas but ultimately failed as the horror film it was marketed as. But with Anarchy, the pretense of being a horror movie seems to have been abandoned, leaving something pretty unique: a political allegory dystopian action thriller that slyly attacks conservative ideology.
Technological advancements allowed cars to be what they are today: safer vehicles used for transportation that are "the first line of defense in an accident." It was a combination of movements that brought those technological changes to bear, however. The same could happen today with guns.
Some have appropriated the current gun conversation to ask "What Would Jesus Carry?" but I'd rather take it one step further and ask "Who Would Jesus Shoot?"
The August 2014 issue of Guns and Ammo has an interesting article on a new generation of gun safes. While this probably is not of interest to many of my readers, it tells a bit about politics as well.
We should be asking: Is the person is a danger to him or herself or to others if he or she had a gun? That is the question. The notion that we can use mental illness as a way to determine that someone is somehow more dangerous is just ill-informed.
As we have seen with other issues like drunk driving and tobacco, humor can be an important, if not essential tool to call attention to the most serious of issues, and there are few issues as serious as unsafe access to guns in the home.
The fact that the bill gives us the responsibility to protect people from using a gun to hurt themselves is something that the NRA wouldn't even understand, even though "We The People" is emblazoned on virtually every NRA poster that you can find.
Seriously, ladies, to what absurd level of fracking-depth lunacy do these bottom-feeding misogynists (is that redundant?) have to sink before you perceive, in your Limbaugh-inspired wisdom, that perhaps, just perhaps, your beloved Republican Party doesn't have your best interests in mind?
Collapsing the subcultural divides in our society through actual human relationship dissolves our political differences, because it reveals that much of what we thought were differences of political principle are really rationalizations of the suspicion we feel toward those whose experiences and pleasures we simply cannot imagine sharing.
If someone on Twitter thinks gays should not have the right to marry, my 140 retort back isn't going to change their minds. I've never heard anyone ever say, "Someone posted a .jpeg on Facebook and now I'm a liberal!"
One thing about the gun debate I find interesting is how quickly and easily gun owners get riled up when politicians, or anyone else for that matter, begin talking about taking away their guns.
A grieving parent makes a respectful effort to initiate such change, or at least to establish a healthy dialogue, and they are reproached by a prominent politician for their "grandstanding."
We are going about this all wrong. The folks on the left say with fewer or no guns we will have fewer or no more gun crimes. The folks on the right say with more guns we will have more safety from people who would abuse guns.
Bringing a Glock into Starbucks doesn't make you a freedom fighter. If you want to carry a weapon and wear tactical clothing, here's an idea: Go see a recruiter.
Seventy percent of kids under age 10 knew where their parents stored their guns, even when they were hidden. When curious kids and their siblings or friends find those guns, the results can be tragic.