Previous Post
Miss Sloane Gets Green Light">Next Post


When I was about 10 years old, I found a copy of Cracked magazine and though it was knee-slapping hilarious (the parts of it I understood, anyway). Unfortunately Cracked seems to still be alive and… well alive anyway, and providing the nutty social commentary that so tickled my adolescent funny-bone lo those many years ago. TTAG reader Pete directed us to the Cracked website and their opus, 7 Incredibly Biased Arguments Against Gun Control by Luke McKinney  . . .

I knew I was in for a treat when the very first line thanked me for reading the article. Having read the whole polemic in order to properly fisk it, I can see why he got the thanks in early. If he’d dropped that at the end, most readers wouldn’t get far enough to to receive his gratitude. But let’s set aside the gratuitous insults to get to the meat of Luke’s gratuitous insults cloaked as stupid arguments:

#7. Self-Defense Against Scheduled Rapists

Every time I mention guns I’m sent worryingly detailed descriptions of 10 murderers on their way to rape and kill my family in exactly 10 minutes and asked if I’d like a gun.

If I knew that so much as a single rapist-murderer [too long; hereinafter to be referred to as R-Ms) was on the way to etc., I wouldn’t bother with a gun; the nearest cop shop is less than 10 minutes away, so that’s where the wife and I would direct our feet. Terminator quips aside, a police station really is one of the safest places to be when someone is looking for you with mayhem on their mind.

What Luke conveniently deliberately ignores is those times you are forced to deal with an unscheduled attack; that’s when you want to have access to the safest and most effective self-defense tool in existence. But then he does address it … sort of:

… Because if you don’t sit fondling a gun aimed directly at the front door at all times, [the rapists and murderers are] going to win. And if you do, they can come after you’ve been locked up for killing postal workers.

First, why do so many antis sexualize firearms? I appreciate guns the same way I appreciate any well-crafted item, from musical instruments to automobiles, but I don’t find them erotic any more than I do a handmade hammered dulcimer or a beautifully restored ’64-1/2 Mustang.

Second, most home invaders either ring the doorbell (which is why I always answer the door with a pistol in hand if I’m not expecting visitors) or noisily break-in. Either way, home-carriers almost always have sufficient warning to greet intruders appropriately.

The gun fondlers suffer from what I’m going to call the Gunning-Kruger effect: the idea that they’re much, much better with their weapon than everyone else is.

Ooh, nice riff on the Dunning-Kruger effect, but the fact is that 90+% of defensive gun uses don’t involve shooting; merely showing or referencing the weapon will cause the vast majority of bag guys to flee.

I just realized if I thoroughly debunk each of Lukes “arguments” I’ll have penned a Master’s dissertation, so I’ll deal with the rest briefly….

#6. The Constitution

Writing for a First Amendment protected blog on a Fourth Amendment protected computer, Luke thinks the Second Amendment is as outdated as anti-adultery laws. He also states that “]f other technologies enjoyed the same legal stasis as firearms, you could commute in a tank as long as it didn’t shit on the sheriff’s boots,” apparently blissfully unaware of the facts that A) it actually is perfectly legal to own a tank, and if you can make one “street legal” you certainly could drive it to work, and B) tanks are no longer horse-drawn, obviating the whole manure issue.

#5. Hunting

Hunting is a common excuse for the easy sale of long-range killing machines. Skipping lightly over the part where you find people who say, “I enjoy killing things I don’t have to for fun,” and responding, “That sounds perfectly sane, have some rifles,” I’d like to ask: At what point does one person’s hobby overrule another person’s survival?

The same place the right to throw a punch stops; at the end of someone else’s nose. But when you write things like:

I’m omnivorous … but if I loved meat any harder they’d make horror movies about me. I love the taste of meat, my body is made of meat, and my only moral objection to cannibalism is that going to jail would reduce my net flesh consumption. I once chewed through a lamb’s face.

then you can just get the hell off your high moral horse about hunting.

#4. Drunk Driving

Every time you talk about all the gun murders … some asshole asks, “So should we ban cars because of drunk driving?”

Actually I think they probably ask something along the lines of, “So if guns cause murders then do cars cause drunk driving?” But that wouldn’t be nearly as easy a strawman to knock down. Luke goes on (and on) about how cars are for travelling and guns are just for killing (Really? Then why do cops keep statistics about arrests and convictions and not just killings?) He completely ignores the fact that DGUs save twice as many lives as are taken in CGUs.

#3. Knives Are Just As Bad!

… The thing about knives is that they have countless nonlethal intended uses, and they’re just chunks of metal, which can’t jump out and kill you. Making them the opposite of bullets. …

And there you have it; guns are bad because they can jump out and kill you.

After the deep thought Like invested inin #3, I can’t summon the strength to deal with numbers 2 and 1 because, to quote the great Ron White, you can’t fix stupid.

Previous Post
Miss Sloane Gets Green Light">Next Post


    • “Stop bad guys from murdering you in your home with this one simple trick!”

      “Criminals are angry at this mother! Learn why!”

      “Lower the cost of incarcerating violent sex offenders! Click here to find out how!”

      “Small bits of metal protect family of four! Find where to get your own pointy metal force projector!”

    • I remember when Cracked was funny. Now it is just Buzzfeed with the F-word. There is nothing the far left can get their hands on that they don’t totally ruin with politics.

  1. You really should have kept going. Number 2 has this line in it, and no I am not paraphrasing:

    “And going even further back, the ability to violently overthrow the ruling authority stopped working at around the caveperson level.”

    Apparently he’s never heard of the American Revolution. Or the Russian Revolution. Or…. well any revolution actually.

  2. It’s supposed to be a humor site, but the articles are rapidly transitioning from humor to political commentary that is neither funny nor well researched. It’s a shame because it used to have some decently funny articles.

    • They actually still manage to produce some funny articles, but you have to swallow a lot of ignorance, disdain, and contempt if you hold any conservative values.

      The writer in question got largely butchered in his comments section though.

  3. but the articles are rapidly transitioning from humor to political commentary that is neither funny nor well researched.

    I think they rapidly transitioned there over 10 years ago. Really…that site’s articles are completely devoid of logic and intellect. And often, their facts are outright wrong.

    So…just like any other progressive influenced collection of college pseudo-graduates running a “blog,” I guess.

  4. Dig a bit deeper into ‘Cracked’ and you will find more examples of the same.

    Now this particular fvckwit has the vile cranked up to 11.

    I used to really like Cracked, back in 1975 that is.

    Come to think of it, they were heavy on the Nixon bashing back then as well.

  5. I had been meaning to send this exact link in to TTAG’s intelligent analysts. (One rabbit trail: the article is titled “7 Incredibly Biased Arguments against Gun Control” but the link to the article is “”

    I became more and more incredulous as I read through the author’s eviceration of truth and barely made it to the end, but I’m glad I did. Not because the end of the article had any redeeming qualities (assuredly, it does not) but because some of the responses are incredible, particularly the response of a level-headed, kind-hearted man that took the time to write a well-seasoned reply in the comment section. After reading his near-poetic response to the lambasting, I reached out to him to ask his permission to share his comment on TTAG. (I’ve received no reply yet, possibly because nobody replies to PM’s on It is one of the best responses to liberal gun-snatching propaganda I’ve read. His comment name is “Styles828” and his comment is now hidden deep in the War Between Logic and Feelings that has now consumed the comment section under this article. Here’s his response to the article: ————-

    I am a father. I am a fisherman. I am a soldier. I am a member of my community. I am a voracious reader. I am politically involved. I am charitable.

    I am a gun owner.

    Behind the locked door to my basement are several safes. One weighs six hundred pounds, empty. It took six strapping people and a furniture dolly to move it down the stairs. Another is about two hundred pounds and is lag-bolted to the concrete foundation. I even cast and handload my own ammunition, for the same reason that motorheads modify and tune their own cars; precise control for precision results. It is also a very relaxing, enjoyable process.

    I had to attain a firearms license. This involves a safety course, a written and practical exam, a criminal backgroud check with continuous eligibility screening (which means the police computer automatically runs my name every day to check any offenses which would result in the immediate confiscation of my firearms) a mental health screening, several references who would be contacted to provide information and opinion, and last but not least – a list of previous and current sexual partners. What other licensing process would be this invasive?

    I own a plethora of firearms. From handguns and semi-automatic rifles, to hunting shotguns and scoped rifles. Some are a mixture of several possible identifiers. (I should add, there is no such thing as an assault rifle. Assault is an action committed by a person, not an or by an inanimate object. However, if forced to define it, it would be an automatic capable, select fire carbine, generally in an intermediate cartridge)

    Rifles typically labelled as ‘assault rifles’ are nothing more than a semi-automatic sporting gun. Realistically, there is little difference between a bolt action rifle and a semi-automatic rifle. Imagine the difference between an automatic and manual transmission to the average motorist.

    Hatred of hunting is ignorant and hypocritical at best. Wildlife management is part of Humanity’s obligation to the Earth. Furthermore, hunting garners one free range, organic meat. It is free of pesticides, roams freely it’s entire life and is harvested it the most ethical way possible. People who criticize hunting ought take a serious look at where their food comes from. This is to say nothing of the historical, cultural and personal significance of hunting.

    I have found the Anti-Gun argument similar to the ‘rape-culture’ arguments. Blindingly ignorant, smarmy, vitriolic to the point of a loss of credibility, and completely missing the point. It is not as simple as an object, or how a person feels about it, can analogize it, analyze it or write laws about it. It is about bad people doing bad things, illegally, knowingly. Cultural values and socio-economic divides, and mental illness. Guns aren’t a problem, they never were. Violence is. A glorification of thug life is. Abhorrent values and absent morals are. Not the gun. Various weapons have existed since opposable thumbs could wield them. That will never change.

    What can change, and if you take nothing else to heart please take this, is that violence can change. Those small but dangerous segments of society need not be fueled by hate and greed and lust. Unfortunately, those things have also been around since the dawn of humanity, so until those issues are solved, guns are here to stay. The IRA demonstrated quite clearly that a group of individuals cannot ever be disarmed.

    So long as violence exists, my five-foot-tall sister deserves the same security of person and family as does her six-foot-four husband. But she isn’t allowed. The government thinks she, like any other law abiding citizen, might gun down a bus load of nuns. Or something.


  6. The mental and verbal gymnastics people who can’t take reality as it comes are endless and sad, I have no idea if or when someone my attempt violence against me and my family, but if violence comes I want more options than cowering a clutching a phone.

  7. Well if Cracked is a commentary on our culture it’s spot on with the incessant need to be divisive in order to prove your point. Or maybe even just for the sake of it. We have to be more united than divided. You have to get past ideology and into solutions, which I actually think TTAG does rather well on a lot of the time.

  8. Cracked used to be great when it was stiff like 8 badass soldier who made Rambo look like a girl, or seven crazy sex toys, or 5 acts of bravery by everyday joes.
    Now the articles are more like 7 reasons why white straight men are useless, and 21 times men ended the world, and 10 times why government is always right and individual liberty is terrible, and my favorite 5 broad assumptions we’ve made without any facts to back it up.

    • I used to read it almost daily from when they stated running online til sometime in 2013. They used to publish well written and humorous articles. Historical weirdness, how close humanity has come to being extinct on almost a monthly basis in the 20th century, and badasses who’d wipe the floor with 80s action heroes. But after sandy hook they seemed to have gone full retard and jumped onto the sjw train. The writing was barely sardonic and mostly complaining about white privilege and cis societal oppression. I haven’t been back in more than a year now. Sadly I haven’t found a comparable site since.

  9. Ron White isn’t great. He was funny for about 3 months. He is a bumbler at best and that’s before he gets into talking politics…

  10. I re-post a comment made about another reply to the senseless rant on “Cracked”:

    You honored a foolish attempt at refutation of pro-2nd A. views by a well-reasoned reply that was far above the pitiful, emotional, insulting, immature rant provided by the gun-hater.
    Perhaps the only contribution of that senseless rant was that it provided the occasion for your reply.

  11. One thing the antis never seem to catch on to is that magazine capacity restrictions are essentially legislating the resolution of the caliber wars. If capacity isn’t an option, then you go for size, which was exactly what happened last time. If we can’t have 30 round 5.56 mags, we’ll use ten round .50 Beowulf. Even if we’re restricted from loading 5.56 in it, I’d prefer 10 shots of the latter over ten shots of the former, if that’s all I can get.

    • “One thing the antis never seem to catch on to is that magazine capacity restrictions are essentially legislating the resolution of the caliber wars.”

      It was also directly responsible for the Glock sub-compacts in 9 and .40.

      Congrats, gun-grabbers, you created new, smaller guns that conceal easier…

  12. About the only thing I liked on Cracked was the Afterhours series. Maybe OCPD. Basically, pop culture stuff. Trying to dip into politics? Nope. Unsubbed.

  13. Cracked is crap. They used to be a fairly humorous webpage about pop-culture but they’ve devolved into a liberal morass. And I’m not saying that as a conservative (I’m not, really). I’m saying that because they’re so far up their own ass in terms of politics that they’re no longer funny.

  14. Cracked huh?As funny/humorous/ironic/sarcastic/incisive as the ONION. I see THAT claptrap on my kids FB page. Little did I know National Lampoon was the pinnacle of humor over 40years ago(PJ O’rourke Nixon days)…

  15. I actually really like Cracked–their articles are often informative, often thought-provoking, often presenting interesting points of view. But this article was a serious shot in the dark[!]. Normally I act like the Cracked comments section isn’t even there, but out of curiosity I scrolled down to take a peek, and I was pleased to see that more than a few commenters were taking Mr. McKinney to task for how ridiculous he sounded. I’m not dismissing his point of view just because he disagrees with me, but it really comes off like he didn’t do the research and didn’t even bother talking to anyone who might disagree with him, at last not /before/ he wrote the article. My main gripe with Cracked is that they do make offhand anti-gun comments fairly regularly in their more politicized articles. Alas.

    • “their articles are often informative, often thought-provoking, often presenting interesting points of view. “

      Now that is funny. You should write for them. It would improve their product a few thousand percent.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here