September 20, 2004

Suburban Gun Idiots

Are you a resident of New Bedford and worried about gun violence in your city? Where do those gangs get their fancy guns? If you answered “some shadowy out-of-state network,” you lose.

Only three hours after the Mattapoisett break-in, informants led city detectives to stop 32-year-old Timothy Gregory in his car in the South Central section of New Bedford.
State police recovered five handguns — four of which have been identified as among the 13 taken earlier in the day from Mattapoisett — and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
The others, presumably, were already sold or squirreled away.

Let’s walk it through. Some suburbanite who gets hot by playing with guns buys a bunch of revolvers and semi-automatic weapons. <sarc>Clearly the man relies on them for hunting purposes to feed his family.</sarc> Then a bad person comes and burgles his home, not only depriving him of a means of feeding his family the blown-apart carcasses of squirrels, bunnies and skunks but also giving said bad person the ability to generate some good old American gun mayhem.

But James, you say, Suburban Gun Idiots have the right to purchase guns!

Let me put it to you this way. I support a heck of a lot of rights. I support your legal right to do a lot of lame-assed idiot things, like own a bunch of lethal weapons you don’t need. Sometimes exercising your rights (cavalierly or to excess) not only makes the world a more dangerous place, but makes you a micro-cephalic ass clown.

If that sounds harsh, just think how harsh it might be to look down the barrel of a gun stolen from some Mattapoisettian home while you’re being victimized on the streets of New Bedford.

I refuse to tone down my language when it comes to this type of idiocy. Rights come with responsibilities. Often, there are natural consequences. But in the case of stolen weapons like these, someone else is paying for the fetish of the Suburban Gun Idiot. Will SGI be held at all responsible for his poorly protected arsenal, now in the hands of criminals?

Posted by James at September 20, 2004 10:49 PM
Create Social Bookmark Links
Comments

You go, James! SGI indeed.

I, myself, find it convenient to hunt deer with an AK-47. It's so handy to shoot dotted lines into the deer, thereby killing it _and_ carving it at the same time (or "dressing" it, to use the hunting vernacular).

If you use enough bullets, you'll have meat the consistency of hamburger, thus eliminating that messy process from your home.

Ah, technology--ain't it grand?

Posted by: Patti M. at September 21, 2004 9:18 AM

I like the idea of having legal requirements for gun storage. If a gun is stolen that was not secured, there should be consequences. Like jail time. That is not going to hurt responsible gun owners. So, the NRA should have no problem with it, right?

Posted by: briwei at September 21, 2004 6:38 PM
I like the idea of having legal requirements for gun storage. If a gun is stolen that was not secured, there should be consequences. Like jail time. That is not going to hurt responsible gun owners. So, the NRA should have no problem with it, right?

It sounds nice to me, simply because I think it is irresponsible to collect guns at all, but I don't think it would be workable.

Guns should be locked up of course, but if someone broke into your house, they're not going to be stopped by your gun cabinet. So what can you do?

I suppose you could require that guns be kept in a safe, but that defeats the purpose of owning a gun for home defense. The homeowner needs to have access to the weapon.

As much as I hate guns and disapprove of people collecting them as if they were collecting bottlecaps or comic books, I don't think you can hold someone responsible if their gun is stolen unless it can be proven they were grossly negligent (as in, I left my gun sitting on my stoop while I went in to get another Schlitz.)

Such a thing, I think, would be difficult to prove unless the owner just admits it... which isn't going to happen if he knows there's legal repercussions.

Posted by: Chuck S. at September 21, 2004 8:55 PM

Actually, Chuck, it would probably be easy, but not something folks would agree to. Couldn't a gun lock be constructed which is enough trouble to cut that it de-incentivises stealing the gun?

But such a thing would likely be expensive, and the NRA would never have it.

Posted by: James at September 22, 2004 12:53 AM

Copyright © 1999-2007 James P. Burke. All Rights Reserved