Slog

Slog Music

Music, Nightlife,
and Drinks

Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Gun Nuts Reach New Level of Nuttiness

Posted by on Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:08 AM

A gun nut in Arizona is threatening to sue the Tucson police over a gun-buyback program, claiming that the police have no right to destroy the guns that people sold them for the purpose of being destroyed. So these fucking crazy gun nuts—or at least this one fucking crazy gun nut—don't just think they have a right to own any gun they want, they think that guns have a right to life.

What about the little gun fetuses, I wonder. Would a gun that's taken off the assembly line at Smith & Wesson for a manufacturing error be considered a gun abortion?

Via TPM.

 

Comments (25) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Cato the Younger Younger 1
Not quite as crazy as the lady a few weeks ago who said we should train our school age children to rush anyone who tries to shoot them at school.
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on January 9, 2013 at 8:16 AM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 2
Kind of makes you realize that the thing where you make critical gun parts with a 3D printer is like artificial insemination. Or worse. Building a Frankengun with pieces you ordered from across the Internet, and then -- this is the part that makes baby Jesus weep -- printing out the last critical bit. It's downright unnatural. How many baby guns were murdered by gun abortionists to make those parts?
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on January 9, 2013 at 8:26 AM · Report this
sasha 3
So does that give guns a "personhood" on par with corporations?
Posted by sasha on January 9, 2013 at 8:52 AM · Report this
4
Breaking News: People in Arizona Almost as Crazy as Floridians.
Posted by NateMan on January 9, 2013 at 8:59 AM · Report this
5
Using tax payers money to buy guns and then destroying them is a waste. Why not sell them to Mexican war lords?
Posted by jeffy on January 9, 2013 at 9:02 AM · Report this
Dr_Awesome 6
@5 Srsly?

So tell us how you feel about the taxpayer money spent on things like first-responders responding to shootings, and taxpayer money spent on counseling and aid programs for shooting victims, and taxpayer money spent on lawsuits resulting from shootings, and taxpayer money spent amping up security at courthouses, and the latest idea from the gun nuts: Spend taxpayer money for armed guards at public schools.

Wadte of money, or money well-spent "protectin' our God-given Freedom!"
Posted by Dr_Awesome on January 9, 2013 at 9:10 AM · Report this
Fried Worms 7
Getting personhood status for guns is the endgame goal in promoting the "philosophy" that guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Posted by Fried Worms on January 9, 2013 at 9:17 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 8
Personally, I would rather know why that person believes the police have no right to destroy the guns, as none of the articles mentioned it.

Instead, they just put words into that person's mouth about guns having a right to "life."

Not that I think their reason would be any more logically sound, but this is just sloppy. I want to know the speaker's reasoning, not the reporter's.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on January 9, 2013 at 9:19 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 9
@6: Pretty sure #5 was making an ironic joke about "Fast and Furious."
Posted by Theodore Gorath on January 9, 2013 at 9:20 AM · Report this
10
Equally crazy? Thinking gun buyback programs will get rid of the "problem" of firearms.
Posted by treehugger on January 9, 2013 at 9:25 AM · Report this
Urgutha Forka 11
What @4 said.
Posted by Urgutha Forka on January 9, 2013 at 9:33 AM · Report this
12
@8: If you follow the links all the way back to the source article on NPR, they are claiming that the guns are "abondoned" and the police are required to sell abandoned guns to the highest bidder. (A total BS reading of the law). (http://www.npr.org/2013/01/09/168926749/…)
Posted by FormerSeattelite on January 9, 2013 at 9:34 AM · Report this
Max Solomon 13
@10: does anyone think that?

as mcginn said, if the buyback program prevents one firearm death, it will be worth it.
Posted by Max Solomon on January 9, 2013 at 9:34 AM · Report this
14
Also, there's another absurd quote from Rathner (the guy filing the lawsuit) in regards to if the lawsuit fails:

"We just go back and we tweak it and tune it up, and we work with our friends in the Legislature and fix it so they can't do it,"

So, if you can't win a lawsuit, just change the law... seems simple enough. I can think of plenty of things I'd like to be able to do that with...
Posted by FormerSeattelite on January 9, 2013 at 9:36 AM · Report this
15
So a gun and a corporation walked into a bar...
Posted by DJSauvage on January 9, 2013 at 9:52 AM · Report this
Knat 16
The problem with Rathner's interpretation (as I see it) is that he's saying the law applies to weapons seized by the police or abandoned. Fine. But neither is happening in this case. That the people are showing up on their own to willingly hand the weapons over to police means the weapons clearly are neither being seized nor abandoned. His interpretation doesn't apply, and something "being abandoned to the police" doesn't make grammatical or logical sense, despite how much he might wish otherwise.
Posted by Knat on January 9, 2013 at 10:04 AM · Report this
17
"Every gun is sacred, every gun is great..."
Posted by tiktok on January 9, 2013 at 10:16 AM · Report this
Cracker Jack 18
Won't somebody think of the [gun]-children!?!
Posted by Cracker Jack on January 9, 2013 at 10:29 AM · Report this
Will in Seattle 19
"If a gun is wasted, God gets quite irate..."
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on January 9, 2013 at 10:30 AM · Report this
Theodore Gorath 20
@12: Thanks, I try not to click through too much stuff at work...bad enough how often the term "gang rape" is ending up in my history these days due to this blog.

But yeah, the guy is nuts, as expected. Big difference between "abandon" and "give away."

So confused on why gun lovers hate buybacks. If people want to sell their legal property, they have the right to, regardless of the buyer or item. It is not like there is a shortage of guns. Who the hell cares?

"...let the Pagans spill theirs,
On the dusty ground.
God shall strike them down
for each [round]
that can't be found"
Posted by Theodore Gorath on January 9, 2013 at 11:01 AM · Report this
21
@Theodore: Some gun owners don't like the term itself, "buyBACK" implying that the guns were originally owned by the government.

Mostly, though, it's that all of the guns collected are usually destroyed. In any collection of back-of-closet guns there are often a few rare or collector pieces, but no exception is made for them. I've seen pictures of the piles of "unwanted" guns and thought "Hey! That looks like a perfectly good (unusual older gun)".

I think it'd be reasonable to allow dealers to bid on any items that met the BATF definition of "curio & relic"(antique).

Posted by lyford on January 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM · Report this
mikethehammer 22
I bet this jagoff also decries frivolous lawsuits. At least when he's not the one spearheading them.
Posted by mikethehammer on January 9, 2013 at 12:39 PM · Report this
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn 23
@21

Or gun owners could decide to take care of and secure their own guns instead of leaving them lying around like so many Legos. I tell my kids every damn day: "They're YOUR toys. You want them. You pick them up. Don't expect to get them back in one piece if you leave them for me to clean up." There wouldn't be one gun turned in to any buy backs if gun owners cleaned up their own act.

The root of the problem is that gun owners don't treat their own guns with respect. Gun buybacks are just a band-aid.
Posted by Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn http://youtu.be/zu-akdyxpUc on January 9, 2013 at 1:42 PM · Report this
McGee 24
Is there nothing these poltroons won't stoop to?
Posted by McGee on January 9, 2013 at 5:12 PM · Report this
25
@10 and @23 It worked for Australia and Scotland. I know we aren't doing it on that scale, but the idea of the buy back itself isn't useless.

And isn't trying to restrict the way guns are bought and sold a gun control measure? This guy is using the weapons of the enemy!
Posted by gnot on January 10, 2013 at 7:16 AM · Report this

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy