If you’re offended by references to dildos, make the jump now. “A dildo is a dildo because you use it that way,” Amanda Marcotte writes at rawstory.com. “It’s a tool. But if you’re not using a dildo as a dildo, what is it really, then? What is it for? The image of a dildo sitting unused in a drawer is funny to us because it breaks one of the unspoken rules of what makes something a ‘tool’, which is that you use it to perform tasks. That, and dildos are inherently funny, but that’s neither here nor there.” And there you have it: a familiar anti-gun argument wrapped-up in an edgy metaphor. You don’t need a gun so you shouldn’t have one. So anyone who has a gun is paranoid/delusional. And worse. Let’s get to the worst part first . . .
“Guns are a tool.” It’s the mantra of gun lovers. But in order for a thing to be a “tool”, you need to use it. The problem is that the function of a gun is to kill people. Unfortunately for gun nuts, murder is illegal. The only, in theory anyway, legal reason to kill someone is self-defense. But, realistically speaking, the “opportunity” for self-defense simply doesn’t come up that often. The gun industry lobby would love you to believe people are banging doors down all the time and, if you are patient, one day that gun will come in handy. But I think most gun nuts know, deep down inside, that the odds that they will ever use their tool for what it’s meant for are very low. Most of us simply will never have a legitimate reason to kill someone. No big surprise that some assholes, like George Zimmerman and Byron Smith, therefore go out of their way to create “self-defense” scenarios so that gun goes to use.
Translation: gun owners are homicidal maniacs. The fact that tens of millions of American gun owners don’t shoot anyone ever because A) they don’t want to and B) they don’t have to, is neither here nor there. Even though this collective non-event is the article’s point of embarkation.
Gun owners are wishing (hoping? praying? scheming?) for a chance to kill someone. Why else would we have a gun? Oh wait. Hunting! Sport shooting! Marcotte grabs a pair of parentheses to fill in the gaping hole in her argument – other than the obvious (better to have a gun and not need it than to need it and not have it).
(I’m not talking about hunting weapons or even people who are legitimate sport shooters. Most gun stockpiling in this country is stockpiling of weapons meant for human-to-human violence. And while going shooting is fun, it’s not an all-encompassing hobby that would make someone as fanatical about guns as our current stock of gun nuts are. They refuse to see guns as toys, but more as identity.)
It’s always nice when an anti-gunner who knows little to nothing about guns presumes to know the motivations and mindset of those who do. Or not. It’s the same willful ignorance on display in the recent Mother Jones article Spitting, Stalking, Rape Threats: How Gun Extremists Target Women (click here to read our post on that hit piece). An article which inspired Ms. Marcotte to unleash to dogs of war on Americans peaceably exercising their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.
There’s a lot going on in that Mother Jones article, and I have more thoughts coming next week on it. But what struck me was how pathetic the open carry crazies profiled in it are. They walk around toting guns and spend hours every week haranguing people who want even the mildest restrictions on gun ownership. They live their entire lives around guns. And it all seems like an elaborate rationalization. You spent the money on this damn thing and learned to shoot it. Since you’re never going to actually get to kill someone, instead you run around brandishing it, hoping people look at it and feel afraid. It’s a small solace, but at least you get something out of this pointless hobby of yours.
It’s sad, really. I think a lot of them would be happier with a dildo in a drawer. At least then you don’t have to pretend you use it for something. You can just say you like knowing it’s there.
One wonders if Ms. Marcotte makes a proper living at her writing, and how she would feel if someone (e.g., the IRS) considered it “hobby trading.” Meanwhile, we can be thankful that Ms. Marcotte didn’t start talking about gun owners’ alleged penis envy, as so many of her fellow antis do when they run out of anything remotely resembling a factual argument against gun ownership.
As for Marcotte’s misandrist characterization of gun owners, it’s clear she hasn’t spent any time talking to America’s armed intelligentsia. Which she should. If you read closely, the qualifiers in her dietribe [sic] – “doesn’t come up that often,” “very low,” “likely never use,” etc. – indicate that Marcotte understands that there are times when you do need a gun. Let’s hope she has one if she does.
[Note: all ad hominem attacks will be deleted, including dildo jokes aimed at Ms. Marcotte. So to speak.]