In the late 1970's, Saturday Night Live ran sketches called "Consumer Probe" or "On The Spot" featuring Dan Aykroyd as the sleazy Irwin Mainway, President of Mainway Toys, Mainway Novelties, or Mainway's Kiddie Funworld, usually being interviewed by consumer reporters played by Candace Bergen or Jane Curtin (as Joan Face).
Aykroyd played Mainway like a con-man, complete with pencil-thin mustache, slicked-back hair, pinky ring, and tacky polyester sport jacket, whose "toys" and "rides" were some of the worst ever marketed to children.
Examples from the Mainway Toys product line included the "Bag O' Glass" for $1.98 -- which was just a plastic bag filled with pieces of broken glass. (Other products in this category were the "Bag O' Nails," "Bag O' Bugs," "Bag O' Vipers," and the "Bag O' Sulfuric Acid.") Then there was "Johnny Human Torch," a package of oily rags and a lighter, where the child was supposed to pin the rags on his body ("like a hobo," Mainway said) and light himself on fire.
The Mainway Latex Corporation featured the Halloween costume called "Invisible Pedestrian," a sack of black clothes meant cover the kid's body from head-to-toe, which made him completely invisible to oncoming traffic when out trick-or-treating.
Then, there was the "Johnny Combat Action Costume":
Joan Face: Alright, Mr. Mainway. But surely even you can see the danger in this next costume, which you call Johnny Combat Action Costume. This is an actual working rifle!
Irwin Mainway: An M-1, yeah.Joan Face: I mean, this is a deadly weapon, and you're selling it to children!
Irwin Mainway: The ammo's not included. I mean, this is a very popular item, you know? Give the kid a little something extra! Field glasses, a little helmet there, the gun, you know, it makes 'em feel like a real general! I mean, this product is very popular in Texas and Detroit!
These skits (you can find some of the transcripts here, here, and here) were funny precisely because they were so outrageous and unbelievable.
But now, in a case of life imitating "art," we read about a company in Wisconsin promoting "a rainbow of candy-colored paints" -- including bright pink, green, even something called "Barney Purple" -- to make guns look like toys. The company will even send you a kit to paint your own guns. Another report says a different Wisconsin gun dealer charged $200 to paint an AK-47 "Pepto-Bismol pink," and put the cartoon character "Hello Kitty" on the stock.
These stories are not jokes like those old Dan Aykroyd skits.
As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said,
Making a quick buck by coloring a handgun to look like a toy is craven and beneath any honest businessman. By coloring these guns, a real one looks like a toy, and a police officer won't be able to tell the difference.
No one benefits -- except maybe some "Mainway"-like businesses -- when we make our police officers work even harder to distinguish real guns from toy guns.
Painting a gun "Barney Purple" is something only Irwin Mainway could be proud of.
This entry, along with past entries, has been co-posted on bradycampaign.org/blog and the Huffington Post.
In the hands of anyone we may approach, bright and highly visible gun-shaped objects are definitely preferable to less-visible gun-shaped objects. It actually reduces the chance of tragedy, since it reduces the chance of surprise and increases the potential for adequate reaction-time.
Anti-gun folks who think we might be lulled into laziness by a real gun that looks like a toy are simply ignorant of military and police training and discipline. But then again, ignorance isn't exactly a quality they seem to be short on.
And BTW, poster tadees: I'm not here to post for your (or any other gun nut's) fancy or approval. Just so we're clear on that point. Enjoy your weekend.
K
Ahhh . . . this post by Paul smells like victory!
http://news.aol.com/health/story/ar/_a/drug-poisoning-deaths-on-the-rise/20080403073409990001
If Johnny Gangbanger flashes a fake gun or a real barney purple gun on 3rd and Crack St, and gets shot by police or a law-abiding citizen, Johnny Gangbanger deserves to get shot, in BOTH instances.
If a cop stumbles upon a group of kids playing cops and robbers in a residential neighborhood and shoots up a few kids because he/she was unsure whether or not the kids were playing with real or fake guns, the cop deserves to lose his/her job and face consequences because of a poor decision.
If an 8 year old finds a loaded and unsecured Lime Green SKS is daddy’s closet, and shoots him/herself accidentally, then daddy deserves to face consequences for having an unsecured firearm around a child, and for not properly teaching the child the potential dangers of firearms.
If a child saws their fingers off with a black and red Craftsman jig saw or a florescent yellow Dewalt jig saw, is it the color’s fault or the fault of someone who did not properly teach their kid to treat EVERY saw as if it were real???
And the "problem" has not gone away -- here is one of the companies offering gun coatings that provide "excellent resistance to fingerprints": http://www.robarguns.com/additional_finishes.htm
Before moving on to the colored gun coatings bogeyman, Paul Helmke or other Brady supporter should first explain: Why isn't the Brady group lobbying to ban gun coatings that provide "excellent resistance to fingerprints"?
Because in taking that position, there is no way the BC can work in the phrase "The Children(tm)."
What is the difference between OD Green and Barney purple? What is the difference between a regular blued handgun and a Lime Green one? The difference is PARENTING and EDUCATION.
If kids today were properly parented, this would be a non-issue (as would violence as a whole). If kids today learned proper morals in the home instead of on the streets from their thug friends, they would know a firearm of ANY KIND or COLOR is not a toy. If people like Paul Helmke, Bryan Miller, and Josh Sugarmann devoted as much time and resources into firearm safety and education as they do supporting frivilous and ineffective anti-gun legislation, maybe more of "The Children(tm)" would become aware of the dangers and benefits of legal and proper firearm ownership.
Is this what we want our society to become? A nanny society? Where people pass off society's problems on colors and objects instead of holding parents and individuals accountable for their actions? Where we personify inanimate objects instead of asking why our judicial system contributes to our recidivism problem? Please.
The Militarization of America
By Col. DAN SMITH
http://www.counterpunch.org/smith04022008.html
As has been pointed out, Duracote and Gunkote have been around for years. I am not aware of any miscreants using them to try to fool the police. Any Joyce Foundation stats on that, Paul? These are both good products. I had an old Ruger Mark II done in silver and flat black (Gunkote). But a criminal wouldn't go to the expense, when they can just buy a can of Krylon and paint their gun purple. Then there is the fact that it would just draw more attention to the weapon. That's why the Army isn't "painting" their guns pink, or purple, or magenta. They do seem to be fond of OD Green, though.
While I may personally find pink guns sort of revolting, I don't have any problem with someone else exhibiting poor taste in their choice of gun decoration.
So, this is just a big, fat "What if" argument, isn't it? I have another for you. What if this outfit had not put Bloomberg's egotistical face on their guns? Would we be hearing a peep out of him, or Paul about this? Nah.
The crickets have escaped from the hat!!!!!! Run away!!!!!!!!! Run away!!!!!!!!!
This is as dumb to me as legislation regarding orange tips. If manufacturers want to do it, fine, that's there prerogative and I would agree with them. Law enforcement should, and usually do, respond the same way regardless until THEY confirm the item is a firearm or toy, regardless of color.
You can't legislate common sense, Paul.
Um... I really can't get to worked up about losing this one.
Sorry guys.
I haven't seen the gun arguments on this column that I see on most of Helmke's columns. I guess most are neither strongly for or against this issue. I'd rather argue a more important gun issue but this is all Arianna gave us today. I just had too much time on my hands this evening. . I'm against the whole toy gun looking paint schemes but this is so far down the list of anti gun issues facing us that it's not a big deal with me. I do like to argue though. I hope these gaudy toy looking guns are a fad that never catches on but if it doesn't we'll have bigger issues after this upcoming election.
Some of you longtime pro gun commentors partially convinced me about the colored guns. This especially true of Berettasskeeters Marine themed skeetgun. I'm still against the toy theme but I guess that's all in the eye of the beholder.
I would like to welcome Tadees to the pro gun community. From the very bottom of his profile it appears he was undecided on the gun issue last month. Glad to have you on our side now rookie. Keep up on the legal stuff. Our society really is not going to collapse if we don't have firearms that look like the squirt gun aisle at Wal Mart.
Second, and I want to really get into this one. Do you think it's alright to legislate common sense? You see, that works under the premise that the paint scheme of an object ought to change how we react to it. Cops aren't going to treat them any differently until they verify whether or not the gun is real, regardless of the color. This doesn't change their job at all, nor does it cause any problems for the community. Even if you don't care about an issue, care enough to see the implications set forth by potential legislation of a paint job at best or common sense at worst.
Second. If you read my comments I never talked about police officers and the colored gun issue. My entire point was about making our guns look more like toys and the public perception of such a practice. Every gun owner ends up one day running into the idiot gun owner with no knowledge, unsafe actions and the loudly proclaimed theory that, "I'd shoot a guy on the front porch and then drag him inside." It's an embarrassment. These toy colored guns are that loud, unknowledgable, idiotic gun owner. It's an embarrassing cause. I'd rather fight something like SB 541 in which they are trying to encode and register ammunition. This colorized gun issue isn't even a cause.
Exodus 22:2: "If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him"
Since there's no need for me to copy the rest of the research (or the relevant Scripture), if you so feel inclined, read a through explanation here: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25442
If you can somehow read that and summarize the Bible does NOT defend personal protection and self-preservation (dare I use an X-term, by "any means necessary"), then you must reread it without your Brady blinders on. Nice try though.
I am confident in my position before The Throne. But thanks for asking. (or accusing really, but that one's on you, I guess.)
As usual with the anti-gunners, its not about color. Its about guns. Don't be fooled and don't give an inch!
Semper fi
USN: Have I done something to offend you?
USMC: No, I like all you Navy boys. Every time we've gotta go someplace and fight, you fellas always give us a ride.
/respectfully
Semper fi