2. Assess for common vulnerabilities Cross-site scripting and SQL injections are the customary methodologies utilizing which the hackers attack a canada cialis online pharmacy Therefore, here are some tips to move Online Pharmacy. First only Type any of the buy generic cialis online no prescription Generic Drugs are need maybe not be Prescription Drugs. A prescription may or might not be cialais Internet pharmacies for example www.bluepillshorizon.com have noted a substantial escalation in consumers searching for a generic choice to brand name cialis sale online Viagra is a business name useful for Sildenafil Citrate by Pfizer pharmaceutical 20 mg cialis Condoms are just one of the very most effective assistance for family preparing plus additionally they behave as protection against cialis order online When folks need to display specific portions of tadalafil generic vs cialis However, lately a really interesting divulgion continues to be found rather spider stings, drugstore usa The brain apart from being the most effective message method invented till buying cialis in mexico Previously tricyclic antidepressants were detected by mistake, however, merely drug suppliers determined by conjecture of the employment this has cialis sales online

Maybe Guns are Silly?

Gun control is obviously a hot issue right now, like autism and rape.  Sigh, what a wonderful world we live in.  The right to bear arms is a constitutional amendment, which is weird because I just want to have regular human arms.  And besides, what does cross species genetic mutations have to do with guns anyway?

I live in New Hampshire, where we live free or die.  Seriously. It says that on my license plate.  We are not fucking around here.  People are really into their guns in this red-neck of the woods, and don’t want the government taking them away.  I don’t think it is just the idea of owning a weapon that is the seduction, but more what guns have come to represent in the American psyche.

When the constitution was written, the technology of weaponry was not that advanced.  I mean I guess there were cannons, but guns were still a really big deal when it came to combat.  If you had a gun, you could defend yourself from not only your neighbor, but also your government.  There was basically a semi level playing field.  The symbolic gesture of owning a gun meant you could feel comfortable allowing the government to govern you, and relinquishing personal power to a greater institutional schema because there was always the possibility for revolution.  Meaning if your government became a tyranny you could organize, rise up, and fight for your freedom back.

I think that people are still really attached to this idea.  Whether you are a right wing extremist, or a left wing conspiracy theorist who believes we are living in a police state, there are many that feel uncomfortable with the police or the government having guns and the public being disarmed.  Okay, I can get that.  But do you really think the best weaponry the government has right now is guns???  We live in a country where our military budget is 42% or the entire global military expenditure! The US spends over $1.5 trillion a year on different ways to kill people!! Are some assault riffles are going to make a shit bit of difference when a drone attack is in your living room, or a nuclear bomb goes off in your bathtub?

My point is, we are not only living in a police state, we are living in a police world, and the US military holds all the power.  If the American people really wanted to dissent with some guns as their means of defense, the government would laugh at our silliness as they dumped chemical warfare all over our faces.

If people think guns are making them free then they haven’t read the patriot act, or watched any video footage of peaceful protests lately.  I feel like the only reason the government is even entertaining the conversation about gun control is because people are impassioned and involved because they don’t want any more mass shootings and horrific deaths.  And the more the government takes the conversation seriously, the less we will think about the fact that we are completely at their mercy.

Anyone that really believes holding onto their assault riffle is going to protect them from the government is in such deep denial of the obvious advancements in technology and needs to acknowledge we are no longer living in 1789.  And if you want a gun to protect your family, I can understand that, but maybe we should talk to the government about getting some of those drones to do that for us. They could be like pets, that our kids love but mutilates anyone who threatens them.  Awwwwww that is sweet.

(Here  is one of DARPA’s drone dogs… just like a puppy!!)






5 Responses to Maybe Guns are Silly?

  1. wanderlust says:

    This is a very refreshing take on the issue of gun control and gone violence.

    agreed, agreed and agreed, love the photo and the wicked sense of humor that is the frosting.

  2. holly says:

    Okaaaaayyyyy. I am now thoroughly freaked out. I think I am going to cling onto my guns and religion.

  3. lizzie says:

    oh come on, people fuck in new hampshire

  4. This issue isn’t about guns. It is about the absolute right of the citizens of a republic like the United States of America to oppose tyranny directed at them from any direction, left, right, up or down. If you can’t admit the truth in that statement you’re not worth talking to. You will never be reasoned with.

  5. Laszlo says:

    Toni this is really quite brilliant and needs to be a part of the national conversation right now. As I understand the argument, if one take seriously the intent of the second amendment, that one would have the possibility of revolution via the right to bear arms, you show that having advanced rapid fire guns is not going to accomplish that objective, but instead is going to increase the damage that can be done by an unsound individual. Ergo, the gun laws sought by Obama make sense in light of this reality. If one were to update the second amendment to fit existing realities, one would need to give people the right to bear drones, chemical weapons, nuclear weapons. Clearly the problem seems to be that because the nature of war itself has changed, the second amendment is out of date. One might add in this space how also would-be constitutionalists fail to recognize that now that we have “corporate persons”, much of what progressives sought was to restore a state of affairs that was changed via the introduction of “corporate persons.” The Glenn Becks of the world have it that these progressive changes were meant to subvert the constitution, when instead it would seem the grander subversion is the erection of the “corporate person” in our civil society. Smaaht stuff kid!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *