Wayne LaPierre Is a Paranoid Maniac. Like a Fox.

Excerpt from my Thursday column:

I’m becoming increasingly convinced that when the NRA was looking for an executive vice president and chief spokesman, they discovered Wayne LaPierre in a filthy backwoods off-the-grid cabin where he wore tissue boxes on his feet while reciting conspiratorial right-wing manifestos to an assembly of creepy mannequins. Details about his personal life are mysteriously difficult to find, and he seems to be encased in an impenetrable bubble, impervious to objective reality.

As such, LaPierre penned a three-page screed for Tucker Carlson’s The Daily Caller and you’d never know that the NRA and gun zealots just won a key victory last night, in spite of the emotion, standing ovations and oratorical crescendos. It’s a captivating read for its complete disconnection with reality, not to mention its underdog conspiratorial paranoia. [continue reading here]

This entry was posted in Guns, The Daily Banter and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • JimmyAbra

    Interesting gun protection story:

    South African Paralympic athlete Oscar Pistorius has been arrested over the fatal shooting of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp at his home, local media say.

    Police said they have charged a 26-year-old man with murder, but did not confirm it was Mr Pistorius.

    The precise circumstances surrounding the incident are unclear. Reports say he may have mistaken her for a burglar.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-21455453

    details are sketchy, but risk of being a little too trigger happy on any “buglar”, but she may have been trying to deliver a “Valentines Surprise”. Couple that with the dad in Wisconsin who shot his son trying to give him a “Halloween Scare” I might assume people with guns need to be trained in how not to be too trigger happy.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      These kinds of accidents happen all the time. And the gun nuts won’t acknowledge that they exist or if they exist, it’s always going to happen to “someone else” and never them, because they’re responsible and never, ever make mistakes. /eyeroll

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/LeShan-Jones/100000478051440 LeShan Jones

        Or they’ll insist that there are way more incidents of people using their guns to fend off an attacker…they’re just never covered by the media.
        The way the media is structured, if such incidents WERE common, they would definately be broadcasting them.

  • GrafZeppelin127

    I still can’t get gun fans to stop denying that guns are dangerous instrumentalities, whose existence and proliferation creates risks to the public. Which is strange, because the fact that guns are dangerous and represent public-safety hazards does not defeat the argument in favor of gun rights or against gun controls. Neither does acknowledging the right to own guns, or the importance and necessity of doing so, defeat the argument for gun control.

    Two more things I wish gun fans would consider:

    1. Guns can turn people who would not otherwise be killers, into killers. How? Because guns make killing far easier, quicker, more efficient, and most importantly, far less risky. Without a gun, it’s very difficult to kill without exerting significant physical effort, without (literally and figuratively) getting one’s hands dirty, and without putting oneself at risk of serious injury or even death. In other words, people unwilling to risk trying to kill someone without a gun, might be willing to risk killing someone with a gun.

    2. Along those lines, guns make “crazy” people and “criminals” more likely to be willing and able to kill, for essentially the same reason: less risk. They also make it possible for “crazy” people and “criminals” to do far more damage than they could do without guns. Adam Lanza could not have killed 20 kids and 6 adults in under a minute with his bare hands, a knife or a baseball bat. Oswald could not have killed JFK from the Book Depository by throwing rocks at the motorcade.

    What may be the cruelest irony of all is that gun fans are unwittingly putting themselves at greater risk by denying the existence of that risk, and focusing instead on their own personal virtue and heroism. They’re so busy congratulating themselves for being gun owners, for being “responsible” and “law abiding” and for “believing in the Second Amendment” and “cherish[ing their] rights” and “freedoms” and yada yada yada, that they fail to realize they’re also arguing on behalf of people who are far less virtuous and heroic than they make themselves out to be. Whatever they can own, anyone can own; whatever they are not required to do, no one is required to do; whatever they are not prohibited from doing, no one is prohibited from doing. They take the law personally, which is always a mistake.

    We’ll never make any progress until gun fans acknowledge the risks that guns represent.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      “….until gun fans acknowledge the risks that guns represent.”

      You mean acknowledge reality? Pshaw!

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/LeShan-Jones/100000478051440 LeShan Jones

      This is when the gun-nuts start claiming that other devices are just as deadly and will insist that more people died from hammers or something.
      You can tell them over and over again ythat a gun is not a tool, it’s a deadly weapon. You can point out to them that the only function of a gun is to kill, and they will argue with you and deny that that is it’s only ability. Claiming you can go target shooting with it, I pointed out that if anyone went down-range during your target shooting it would end in tragedy. The gun nut I was debating came back that the same could happen in an axe or knife throwing competition.

      • GrafZeppelin127

        I don’t remember where I read this, but a good retort to that first comment might be, “Then what are you worried about? You don’t need guns to protect your family or fight government tyranny; all you need is a hammer.”

        Most sane people realize that different things represent different risks. Which is really the only relevant point. Different risks call for different risk-management measures, including laws, regulations and enforcement thereof.

        The only function of a gun is to use explosive force to propel solid projectiles through the air at supersonic speeds. That in itself is inherently dangerous. Combine that with the sole purpose of propelling solid projectiles through the air at supersonic speeds being that such projectiles strike distant objects, creatures or people with enough force to damage, destroy, wound or kill them, and you have a significant and substantial risk created by the mere existence of the instrumentality.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    Bob, your column is not only correct, it’s downright depressing.

  • muselet

    Yes, nothing helps a man survive a tornado like an AR-15 assault rifle.

    Hey, sometimes, ya just gotta shoot those mofos. Show ‘em who’s boss, y’know?

    –alopecia