Gun Shmucks: Right-Wingers Joke About Knife Attacks In Texas

You would think that it’s bad enough that innocent people at Lone Star College near Houston were assaulted by a maniac with a knife, but the last thing they need is some right-wing jerk-holes exploiting the tragedy to make an idiotic political point about gun control.

Sadly, that’s exactly what happened yesterday as aforementioned jerk-holes like Michelle Malkin, Fox News commentator Todd Starnes, Glenn Beck flunkies, and others made light of the horror experienced by the victims of the attack. The common theme addressed in their juvenile attempts at humor was that Obama would propose some sort of “knife control” now that there had been a mass-stabbing at a school.

Malkin: Coming soon: Limits on length, serration & sharpness.

Starnes: Does Obama have Air Force One gassed up and ready to head to Houston to launch his “War on X-acto Knives”?

Beck Flunky: Will there be calls for stricter knife control following today’s horrific attack?

Alex Jones: Government, Protect us! Ban knives now!

The problem with their non-funny, non-logic (aside from the rank insensitivity) is that there is a glaringly obvious corollary to this story that they are incapable of comprehending.

Fox News

As tragic as it is to be a victim of a crime like this, there is some solace to be had by having survived. That’s a sentiment that is surely shared by friends and relatives. I’m pretty sure that every one of the people who were stabbed are grateful that they were not shot and killed. And the simple fact that there were no fatalities in Houston contrasts vividly with the deadly consequences of last Decembers shootings in Newtown, Connecticut.

If anything, the results of this crime spree are an argument in favor of stricter regulations on guns. NRA apologists are fond of saying that criminals could simply use knives if they were unable to get guns. Well, as we’ve seen here, that would be step in the right direction if your objective is to save lives.

Unfortunately, the objective of the NRA, their bought and paid for legislators, and the dupes they have deceived, is to sell ever more guns and ammo. They work for the firearms manufacturers, not any rank and file constituency of citizens. And they are advocating a policy that guarantees more grief and suffering. It’s time to do something about it and, but for the efforts of the gun worshipers, we could pass sensible legislation that would make our society safer without imposing on anyone’s rights.

By the way, there already is knife control, as well as restrictions on many other dangerous weapons. It’s a pretty sorry situation when the American people overwhelmingly support legal solutions to the problem of gun violence and can’t get it, but silliness like “shoe control.” is imposed in all of our airports.



11 thoughts on “Gun Shmucks: Right-Wingers Joke About Knife Attacks In Texas

  1. Except that this is EXACTLY how the anti-gun nuts sound when they do the EXACT same thing against guns. They exploit a tragedy involving a gun (or guns) to further their own anti-gun agenda. Pro-gun ownership types make comments like the ones in the article as a way of pointing how just how stupid the anti-gun arguments sound to them. All those involved with the writing of this article are hypocrites at best and are just as bad as the Fox News nut jobs on the other side of the political fence.

    • It is not the same thing at all. Knives have many pruposes, and none of the INTENDED uses are killing people. And, again, NO ONE WAS KILLED IN THIS KNIFE ATTACK OR THE ONE IN CHINA.

      In shootings, however, people usually ARE killed, and assault rifles make it MUCH easier TO KILL A LOT OF PEOPLE.

      Assholes who want to compare gun violence to knife violence, or to car deaths, or to anything else, are THE BIGGEST problem in this debate (a debate that should not even be happening).

      Knives ARE NOT GUNS, and GUNS ARE NOT KNIVES. Knives are designed, produced, and intended to cut things up. Guns, especially assault rifles, are designed, produced and intended to KILL PEOPLE.

      This stupid false equivelancy is literally killing people, and it needs to end. Now!

    • Looks like I’m not the only one who thinks you’re a hypocrite – clearly you didn’t like my initial comment which states the same thing – but it needed to be deleted obviously – coward.

      • I did NOT delete any of your comments. You, of all people, know better than that. Why would I?

        You should think before you go making accusations you can’t support, because that sort of bullshit WILL get you banned.

        • 2 things – 1 – you have in the past delete comments of mine (2 times) – not often, but it did happen.
          2 – maybe i didn’t’ hit the submit button on my comment and therefore it wasn’t listed, so i could be mistaken on this one specifically. Maybe on those other 2 I noted the same thing happened, so it may have been me. I certainly not perfect.
          Yes, you have been pretty tolerant (maybe more than tolerant) of me, so I’ll thank you for that.

  2. It is deplorable what the right is doing. Horrible events like these should not be used as a political football.

    We should all look forward to a future where this kind of violence is relegated to the history books. However, we do live in violent world.

    Going off topic, my partner told me the ban on switch blades was due street-hoods using them in a movie called “West Side Story”.

    In regards to gun violence, Tommy Guns were outlawed due to their cinematic and actual use by street thugs and crime bosses, such as Al Capone. It was kind of a knee jerk reaction.

    Most violent acts committed with a gun are committed with hand-guns. Most gun deaths are from hand-guns, a 9mm. You may find this website interesting:

    What I find in these type of debates is a feeling of vengeance. The killer killed himself, so we need to hit any would-be mass-shooters where it hurts, their guns. However, we cannot expect our legislature will get gun-control right. They rarely get anything right. More than likely, they will turn a third of the US population into Federal criminals.

    If we truly cared about why these types violent acts occur and how to stop them, we should focus all our energies on attacking the source of the problem, not the symptoms. It is not difficult. It is very well documented that these problems begin in the workplace and at school. “Murder by Proxy: How America Went Postal” and “The War on Kids” are good places to start.

  3. Forgive me. The outlawing of Tommy Guns came in the wake of the St. Valentine’s Massacre, Gun-Control-in-the-Age-of-Al-Capone.

    One could say support for gun control was building due to the synonymous image of a gangster holding a Tommy Gun. The St. Valentine’s Massacre was the tipping point.

    There is an interesting snippet I want to share from this website:

    “It is notorious that when restrictions are put upon the possession of firearms or any particular kind of weapon they never are effective against the criminal classes but only put the peaceable man at a disadvantage or in a false position before the law. The prohibition does not bother the enemy of society but it makes a technical offender of the decent citizen. The man who would not misuse a weapon is the man who is injured. The drive for public security is thus given the wrong direction.”

    “In other words, when Tommy guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have Tommy guns, and the peaceable citizen will not have the ability to return machine-gun fire when needed.”

    • I think the point is criminals don’t care about laws against the use of weapons, they’ll do what they want because that is their nature. In addition, the vast majority of people who are law abiding citizens will, because they believe following the law is the right thing to do, will purposely chose not to buy an illegal firearm, leaving the law abiding citizen defenseless against those criminals that have the superior firepower regardless of the law. I’m not convinced that is how it will be going forward as is happening in New York state.

      • How about this: If a law abiding citizen’s gun is used in the commission of a crime, that law abiding citizen will share some of the legal responsibility for not securing his or her weapon in a safe manner? You get to keep your guns, but you are put on notice that if someone breaks into your home and takes the gun from your nightstand and then murders a cabby, you’re partially responsible?

        • That is a point I love to make, but it is rarely taken up.

          We all share responsibility for each other’s actions. When a deranged young man takes up arms and attacks innocent people, it concerns me. It means we all bear the weight of his actions. Our system has failed him, and it led to some egregious consequences. John Donne, For Whom the Bell Tolls taught me this.

          However, people do not react this way. They do not take responsibility. Instead, Sammy, they use the exact same kind arguments you made to bolster their side.

        • Your are correct in your reasoning Sammy.

          However, that responsibility will always be there, gun or no gun. Legislating to remove that responsibility, no matter how heavy, is not the right thing to do. It makes one feel as if we cannot make adult choices even though we are compelled to.

Comments are closed.