To paraphrase Groucho Marx, I’m thinking of joining the Gun-a-Month Club and hitting you over the head with it. But seriously folks, former Dorchester District Court Judge James W. Dolan attempts to bludgeon Dorchester Reporter readers into supporting Massachusetts moribund “One Gun a Month” law by deploying enough sarcasm to please the most asinine anglophile. Only one gun a month? A travesty! starts as it means to finish. “Guns are almost as popular as pets. Why limit yourself to one when you can have a family of firearms? Guns, after all, are social; they need the companionship of other guns. It would verge on abuse or neglect not to have multiple guns to promote constructive interaction. Like members of a family, guns complement one another. They have distinctive designs and application. You may wish to bring your small gun to intimate family gatherings where the risks are small; but a larger gun would be more appropriate at a sporting event.” And?

The one unifying element that makes guns a family is each one’s capacity to send a projectile into somebody’s body. However, that does not mean that “one size fits all.”

Like a tie or cuff links, there should be a gun for every occasion. You would never wear the same tie day after day. A wide variety of guns available permits an owner to accessorize, depending upon the occasion and threat level. To go out night after night with the same gun would be considered gauche.

Like people, guns have personalities. There are the manly, muscular, in-your-face firearms and the petite, delicate, stylish weapons perhaps more suitable for the ladies.

That’s the thing about irony: sometimes the irony lies in the fact that it’s not ironic, when the writer thinks he’s being ironic. Which he is, but not in the way that he intended. And sometimes someone trying to be ironic ends up being sophomoric. Or, better still, unintentionally moronic. All of which applies here. And here:

In my view, the only thing better than a lonely gun is no gun. As a Dorchester District Court judge, I saw too many instances of young people being shot. Guns are instruments of death. I believe that any attempt to limit and restrict their ownership will save lives.

Bulletin: Constitutional scholars recently discovered that the Second Amendment had nothing to do with firearms. It seems the founding fathers were notoriously bad spellers and the original intent was to preserve the right to “bare arms.” Yes! It was designed to allow people to go sleeveless.

Recommended For You

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *