No pity for columnist pushing guns for Christmas

Gun-loving Denver Post columnist Jon Caldara thinks we need more gun owners.

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

In his latest firearms-fetish marketing spiel, he tries to disguise his irrational fear of having all of his deadly weapons confiscated by demonizing those “cultural elites” and “bigoted urbanites” who don’t share his paranoia.

Then he decries “gun-phobe cultural manipulation” to stir up some more class hatred and manipulate others into buying guns or giving extras to their unarmed friends.

Not wanting to leave a divisive, dishonest rhetorical device in his arsenal unfired, he dismisses fear of guns as something “emotional” that is easily overcome by a little target practice, then really lets loose with a couple of absurd, insulting false equivalencies.

I quote:

Most Colorado gun shops now charge about $50 to do a transfer. If it cost a dime to transfer a Quran, the ACLU would rightly sue.

In the urban/suburban world, it’s easier to come out as gay than as a gun owner.

It’s hard to feel sorry for a guy who is so good at self-serving self pity.

Don’t give me a gun for Christmas. If you want to get me something, here’s my list.

Shop now, my friends. Shop now.

B.J.

‘Loaded gun in my purse? Silly me.’

Denver Post columnist Mario Nicolais writes here that officials made the right call by not pressing charges against Colorado State Rep. Lori Saine, who was caught carrying a concealed weapon through airport security.

I’m not so sure.

It was “an honest mistake,” writes Nicolais, who says he carries, too, and easily forgets that he’s doing so. He says the lawmaker shouldn’t have to defend herself in court for an honest, understandable episode of carelessness. Presumably he is now absolved, too, in advance.

Mistakes like Saine’s, however, aren’t much different from those that lead to the tragic deaths of children who find guns that parents or others forget to secure properly and safely.

Saine likely beat herself up inwardly, Nicolais said. Maybe even with expletives! He guesses that she asked herself within a second of being caught how she could be so careless.

Yes, how horrible that imaginary inner dialogue must have been for her.

An individual who is prone to forgetting he or she is carrying a deadly weapon should not be permitted to carry a deadly weapon, concealed or otherwise.

Still, forgetful Coloradans Saine and Nicolais could be carrying in any state soon if proponents of concealed carry reciprocity get their way.

 

“Armed = dangerous” explained

A few weeks ago, I posted a simple equation as a comment on a news story about toddlers and others who had been shot over the weekend.

Armed = dangerous

Just yesterday I learned that it isn’t simple enough for some gun-ownership advocates to comprehend. One asked me what it means. Another, if I understood the fuzzy thinking, took it to mean that I am for banning personal firearms ownership. When I said that I am for no such thing (I used the term “paranoid bullshit”), I was called a liar.

man-886601_1280The equation neither says nor implies anything about intent. It’s a simple statment of fact. An armed person is a dangerous person. If good guys with guns weren’t a danger to bad guys with guns, what would be the point?

Unfortunately, armed men and women with the best of intentions routinely prove to be dangerous to themselves and others by handling firearms carelessly, wrongly assuming weapons are not loaded, and accidentally shooting themselves and others.

Armed people who don’t understand that carrying a deadly weapon makes them dangerous need to learn this.

Responsible gun owners recognize the danger that is inherent in carrying firearms. They learn how to handle guns to prevent accidental discharges. They keep guns out of the hands of children who don’t have the knowledge, judgment or experience to handle deadly weapons safely.

You hear news reports of suspects at large who are described as “armed and dangerous.” That they are armed says it all.

Armed and dangerous litterbugs and vandals

Does this story really describe a “culture clash” as the headline indicates?

It isn’t so much a culture clash between gun owners and the rest of us who enjoy the outdoors, it’s a story about some nitwits that we would call something else in an urban setting: vandals.

Shooting trees and leaving bullet-riddled trash in the forests and mountains?

Shooting a couch? How much skill does that take?

Those aren’t responsible recreational shooters. They’re armed and dangerous litterbugs.

Keep his gun: Shooting the computer was just stupid

It’s hard to not laugh about the Colorado Springs man who shot his computer in an alley a few days ago, but let me apply the wet blanket.

Sure, computers can be frustrating. We joke about throwing them out a window, taking a baseball bat to them, even shooting them.

Browning 9mm
Wikimedia image

But actually taking one out to an alley in town and letting the bullets fly?

That’s one kind of guy who should not be allowed to own a firearm — one who proudly and openly demonstrated a dangerous lack of responsibility and good judgment, and says he has no regrets.

Don’t give the gun back.

P.S. To the headline writers and others who so gleefully wrote about the guy who “killed” the computer: Save that word for when actual lives are taken by such idiocy.