Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Wayne LaPierre and intelligence

go together like ____________ (fill-in blank)

Actually, I don't mean to be making an ad hominem attack on NRA Executive Vice-President Wayne Lapierre here. I only mean to be hinting at one. Unfortunately, mere hinting probably takes me across a line I ought to be refusing to cross.

Never mind.

The NRA released a statement by LaPierre yesterday as a prelude to his testimony in front of some congressional committee today. After refusing, on behalf of law-abiding gun owners and toters everywhere, to "accept blame for the acts of violent and deranged criminals," the statement outlines the NRA's implicit position that government ought to keep out of the business of governing:

“Nor do we believe the government should dictate what we can lawfully own and use to protect our families,” [LaPierre] added.

(For all readers willing to risk right-wing cooties, here is the website from which I got the preceding quotes.)

Anyway, I'm wondering who else it is that Mr. LaPierre thinks should be determining "what we can lawfully own and use to protect our families." Because here's the thing, Wayne, if we mean to be "lawful," we need an entity that makes and enforces "laws." For the time being, at least, here in the United States, the entity that makes and enforces law is called "government."

So, either you're kidding about what you believe, or you don't actually intend to abide by the law, or the statement just doesn't make any sense. Or, maybe, all three.


  1. Only you could make Wayne LaPierre funny! Thanks for the chuckle. --The girl from Beaulah

  2. Dick Chaney and good will?
    Rupert Murdoch and the positive side of capitalism?
    A conservative irishman and sharing his own pint?
    Lindsay Lohan and will power?

    Seriously though, do you find it ironic that right-wing conservative calls for liberty are only asking for liberty from ideas that they don't agree with. John Stewart skillfully highlighted the ironic controls of Glen Beck's utopian town this week ( In the same vein, Rick Santorum's liberty calls assume you want choice of a weapon, but no choice on your own choice to have offspring. We're too big to please all of the people. Reaching consensus among 350 million people so geographically dispersed is a masochistic circle-jerk. Lots of this crap should be done at the state level, but that wouldn't work for the 24-hour cable news machine, would it. Neither would it be fair for these lobbying organizations with huge coffers to unduly influence local elections like the Koch brothers money did in 2010 and 2012 elections. We need major reforms or at least a huge individual awakening to the disproportionate leverage of organizations like the NRA. Unfortunately, I see the argument of gun control dying without action once again because we can't come to a consensus and they are just waiting for some bigger tragedy not related to guns to be able to sweep this under the rug.

  3. Ah, the girl from Beaulah. And from the Midwestern Road Trip. Fan of The Iliad. See you on some future odyssey.

    Thanks for the link, KP. John Stewart on Glen Beck is a timely reminder of what you risk when your sources of information are people like Beck or LaPierre.

    I'll go with Murdoch and the positive side of capitalism, but the "lighter" side would be good, too. And, yes, the NRA is probably counting on the American political attention span to lose track of what it is we were talking about, but let's try and stay positive. We might still come out of this with something closer to a real national firearm registry.