Ted Nugent, Idiot

So Ted Nugent is saying that “Gun-free zones [in schools] are recipe for disaster“. Because you know what? If more people had guns in schools they could take down the shooter instead of running away defenseless. Nugent then starts a long list of examples where guns prevented additional(!) bloodshed because somebody with a gun took down the initial shooter. Wow. Am I the only one who thinks that this is so incredibly backwards that it hurts to think about? Here’s a quote from the article:

“At an eighth-grade school dance in Pennsylvania, a boy fatally shot a teacher and wounded two students before the owner of the dance hall brought the killing to a halt with his own gun.”

Uhm, HELLO? How did an eight-grade boy get hold of a gun in the first place?! And is nobody noticing a trend in these stories? Almost every one of Mr Nugent’s examples start with “Somebody killed X number of people - and then a hero took down the gunman with his own gun.” So people died because somebody had easy access to guns – but that isn’t bad. No, easy access to guns is good because it prevented additional killings!

This is madnass. It’s as if somebody was saying “Okay people, we’re living a very dry forrest, and the danger of wildfires is extremely high! But we will let you all carry flamethrowers because it’s your constitutional right. Just don’t use them! Please don’t use the flamethrowers! (Pause) Everybody having flamethrowers is a great idea, though – because when some psycho does start torching a tree everybody around him can use their own flamethrowers to burn down the madman!”

I don’t know about you, but the above sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. The entire forrest would be burning in no time. Here’s a thought: how about we don’t allow flamethrowers in the first place?

“Everybody who really wants to get guns will get them anyway”, I hear people say. “Tough gun control laws wouldn’t have prevented VT or Columbine, because if a criminal wants a gun, he’ll find a gun.” And my response to that is simple: Bullshit. People who commit killing sprees at schools are not criminals. They are sick. Cho Seung-Hui, the Virginia Tech shooter, has been revealed as psychotic, depressed coward. Does anybody honestly think that that guy would have gone into the illegal underground to obtain his weapons? His crime was one of convenience – he was depressed, had a huge inferiority complex – and he had easy access to guns. Boom – that’s when the mix became potent. Cho Seung-Hui living in a world of tough gun control laws – he would probably have gone to jail for stalking later on his life, or committed suicide. But he wouldn’t have shot 32 people, because a person like him doesn’t go out of his way to obtain weapons illegally. He wouldn’t have known how to! I wouldn’t know how to!

There, my hat is now in the political ring. I know that the right to bear arms is deeply rooted in American history, and taking that right away would have far-reaching implications. If the government can strip that right, what other rights are fair game? But arguments like Ted Nugent’s are ridiculously backwards. If that’s the official NRA line we’re in deeper trouble than I would ever have thought. And somebody ought to get that into America’s head.