Previous Post
Next Post

So I was working this morning when my iPhone came to live with the news that yet another government facility (this time NASA) is under lockdown due to shots being fired. And I’m convinced that when all the details are out, we’ll learn that it was some wingnut who’s got some ties to Al Qaeda or one of the other radical Islamic groups, trying to make a “statement.” Here’s a clue: the only statement this ass-clowns are making is that they are insane and wanna watch the world burn, just to prove a point. What point they are trying to prove is kind of murky, I think, even to them . . .

When you get right down to it, there’s not a whole lotta logic behind jihad. But plenty of violence. And there’s the rub. You see, it’s all too easy for Bloomberg and the other foaming-at-the-mouth, anti-gun crusaders to use the news about these ido-zealots to further their arguments that private ownership of guns should be banned.

But in the spirit of Jonathan Swift, I present a nouveau Modest Proposal for bringing common sense to the gun rights/gun control discourse, namely:

Ban gun ownership by radical Islamic terrorists.

There it is. Simple. Short. Easy to wrap your mind around. When Islamic terrorists can’t buy guns, only ‘good Muslims’ (and the rest of us infidels) will have guns. Now I know that, on the surface, this plan might seem to have some .50 Caliber-sized holes in it, but stay with me, and I think you’ll see the wisdom of this proposal.

First of all, logically, if we ban radical Islamists from owning guns, it will stop them from shooting up military installations, right? Seems like a noble goal to me. But of course, in order to accomplish this, we must find a way to get around the politically-incorrect problem with singling out any kind of Muslim, for the Progressives and far-Left PC police hold that any follower of Islam falls into a protected class.

But I have a way around this. We simply petition the Environmental Protection Agency to put WASPs, Catholics, and Jews into the Endangered Species program.

Now before you decry the absurdity of this idea, remember, we’re all mammals, right? And the EPA has no problem with classifying species that are in large supply as “endangered,” for political ends, right? And God (or Allah or Gaia, or your Deity-of-choice) help the ones that kill an endangered species – Uncle Sam will go all Al Gore on your ass.

So the way to get Radical Islamists off the PC list and onto a “fair target” list is to put their targets on the Endangered Species list.

Second – logistics. How do we target radical Islamists? Simple. Rewrite the forms the Feds use when purchasing a handgun. Yup. We simply ask the terrorists, Are you now or have you ever been a believer in jihad or radical fundamentalist Islamist theology? If they check the “Yes” box, they don’t get to buy a gun. And we can have the FBI, ATFE, or even better, Sheriff Joe Arpaio there to arrest them.

Think that won’t work? Ask a gun store employee how many people check boxes on their forms that volunteer info (“have you ever been convicted of a felony,” “are you under a restraining order,” “have you ever been judged mentally ill by a court of law”) that gets them disqualified from a gun purchase. Go ahead. Ask ’em. I’ll wait.

Are you back? Good. So once we’ve banned guns from the hands of Islamic Terrorists, and used it to pick off the ones stupid enough to accurately fill out forms, why not extend the program to bombs and bomb-making materials? We could institute the same kind of forms for purchases of ammonium nitrate, fertilizer, used copies of Ishtar, Waterworld and Heaven’s Gate, and C-4/plastique. (Frankly, anybody that actually wants to watch Ishtar has gotta be clinically insane, so we’ve got ’em on that count twice over.)

As long as we’re at it, I’m thinking there might be other ways to thin the herd, and separate the radicals from the rest of the Muslim world. Since they seem to be rather thin-skinned, perhaps the government should simply find a number of patriots willing to be agents provocateurs and fund them to open a nationwide chain of stores offensive to radical fundamentalists. Perhaps we open a chain of anti-fundamentalist art stores that would exclusively handle cartoons featuring Mohammed in an unflattering light.

Now you might argue that this might offend rank and file Muslims. And you’d be right. But I don’t see anybody protesting when Robert Maplethorpe took pictures of crucifixes in a glass of urine, Hollywood makes fun of Christians, or when the Mainstream Media portrays Christians as simple-minded, in-bred, superstitious yokels, bent on setting back the cause of science and have us all party like its 1799. Or when cartoonists portray Jews as evil, greedy, and sub-human.

So what’s sauce for the goose, people. If there’s a little collateral damage on the sensitivity front, I suppose to be fair and equitable, we have to expect that.

Such stores would act like a Shell No-Pest Strip to radicals. They’d all be so busy planning full-scale assaults on them, it would make it a piece o’ cake for the cops to single them out. I mean, if you already know where the terrorists will strike, it does kind of narrow your focus, right?

It would also enable us to out the “fellow travelers” in the media, who care more for the ‘rights’ of the terrorists than the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that we enjoy in this country. And those sob sisters who cry for the terrorists don’t seem to give one whit about their victims. So, I’m thinkin’ that they would be no great loss either, and could stand a little va-cay at Club Gitmo.

Sounds like a plan, doesn’t it? Of course, if the LEFT came up with something like this against, oh, say, fundamentalist Christians, few in the media would work up a sweat. Which is the problem. It’s all well and good to joke about gun control. But the real issue is that political correctness is a far bigger danger to the world than the ability to buy a gun.

Terrorists have shown a willingness to use just about anything for a weapon, from guns and knives to cars and airplanes. But when we live in a world where the government is unwilling to preemptively stop someone they know to be a threat, simply because it’s politically incorrect to do so, we are all at risk. And that’s no joke.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Good idea! But we also should include white, Christian, right-wing veterans, given Oklahoma City and the guy who suicided his plane into the IRS building.
    Funny how everybody remembers terrorism by the brown guys, but not the white guys….

    • Dan – if you'll recall, we caught McVey and put him to death as quickly as our law would allow. I don't think anybody has forgotten the tragedy that occurred in Oklahoma City. I know I haven't. But it would seem that most (but admittedly not all) home-grown terrorists today (regardless of the color of their skin) are crusading for Allah. Even Bill Mahr (about a far-Left a guy as you could ask to meet) has admitted that he is not happy about the prospect of a worldwide Caliphate under Sharia law. Does that make him a racist? Nope. A bigot? Hardly. I'd say it's proof positive that he has at least a few brain cells left dedicated to common sense.

      To say that we should ban guns from white, Christian, right-wing veterans is obscene. And it diminishes you and your position, to the point where few (outside of your circle of left-leaning friends) will take you seriously.

      The last time I picked up a gun for review, I noted the absurdity of the real government form I had to fill out. Some of the questions were pretty amazing, and I mentioned to the guy behind the counter that you'd have to be pretty stupid to check some of those boxes. He smiled and told me that I'd be surprised at how often people answer truthfully, and get themselves disqualified from purchasing a firearm.

      As a writer for a national publication, I'm presuming you're familiar with Jonathan Swift. I find it interesting that you've opted to play the role that Parliament played when they read his satire on the Potato Famine.

      For the record, I believe (all) terrorism = bad, peaceful religion = good. But given that virtually all Christians universally condemned that evil moron McVey, and few Muslims have publicly condemned Bin Laden, 9-11, the Fort Hood shootings, et cetera, you're gonna have to work harder to sell me on this "Religion of Peace" meme that the Lamestream Media is pushing for Islam. I'm just not buying it. And remember, I'm a marketer by trade. Spinning things is my stock-in-trade, and I can can see a load comin' a mile away. Or as my late father once put it, "Son…I knew they could pile it pretty high and pretty deep. Didn't know they'd gotten it to talk."

    • Sorry, but you won't find that Timothy McVeigh was a religious zealot of any kind. In fact, he was questioning all religions. Nice try, but that dog don't hunt.

  2. Anyone who can’t handle criticism or ridicule of their religion, or of their lack of religion, is a dangerous weapon waiting to go off. To believers and unbelievers alike, I say fuck ’em if they can’t take a joke.

    To that end, prospective gun buyers (and applicants for immigration or naturalization) should have to watch a religiously-themed episode of South Park as a litmus test. If they can’t put up with a few minutes watching Jesus and Muhammad and the Buddha go at it like the Three Stooges, then it’s clear that American civil discourse is too much for them to handle, and they need to live elsewhere.

  3. I realize this article is intended as a joke, but it is a slippery slope between joking and outright intolerance. I also acknowledge that many terrorist acts were perpetrated by those who identify as "radical Islamist". However it is simply wrong to assume every terrorist is an Islamic Jihadist, as with the NASA shooting, even if it turns out to be the case. Additionally, making fun of religion can be entertaining and "all in good fun", until someone makes one too many generalizations and a cycle of mistrust and persecution is born.

    That being said, should those with known and proven ties to terrorism or terrorist groups be allowed to buy firearms? Of course not, but that doesnt prevent our government from letting it happen (despite multiple warnings). And yeah, SERIOUSLY jihadists, lighten up about the Muhammad cartoon already!

    • When we start worrying more about hyperbole and humor than terrorists and their intolerant behaviors, it's time to take a step back and see what political correctness is doing to this country. Here's a hint: IT'S KILLING US. Not every terrorist is an Islamic Jihadist. But every Islamic Jihadist IS a terrorist, either implicitly or explicitly.

      After The Murrah Building bombing, you didn't see a host of Christians stand up and cheer. Even the groups that you would have thought would have applauded any attack on the Federal government were largely silent, or condemned the attacks outright. How many so-called moderate Muslim leaders have you seen condemn 9-11? They have been few and far between. How many Christians attacked Time, Newsweek and newspapers around the country when they ran pictures of Maplethorpe's "Piss Christ"? When you try to equivocate the reactions of mainstream Christians to insults to Christ and the reactions of Muslims to insults to Mohammed, you lose credibility. They are NOT the same. When the government tries to apply the same rules to radical terrorists and law abiding citizens because they are afraid of offending anyone who might think that they are guilty of racial profiling, they put us all at risk.

  4. Chris Dumm +1.

    I presume we've all heard how "PC" is defined? "Political Correctness is the absurd notion that it is possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

Comments are closed.