Sunday, February 10, 2013

Open Letter to Two Truckers

I’ve been sitting here listening to you guys for close to half an hour, while you go on and on about how President Obama hates America but loves the Muslim Brotherhood, about how he is turning the country into a socialist dictatorship (those two words don’t play well in the same sentence, by the by), and how he is going to use the murders in Connecticut to justify sending his stormtroopers into your homes to take away your guns. I have listened politely while you explained how he has it all wrong, that the surest way to keep what happened at that school from happening again is to arm the teachers. I’ve listened to everything you’ve said, and now I wanna talk for a little while, because I have a few questions for you, and a few observations.

First of all, let’s talk about the Second Amendment. The one you’re all twitterpated about. It says you have the right to bear arms period, right? Actually, not so much. Here’s the Amendment as it reads—the entire Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Now, since you are so very familiar with these cherished words, perhaps you could answer a few questions for me?

Great. Here goes…

Can I see your Militia ID cards, please? Also, which federal, state or local entity is sponsoring your Militia activities? Is it that same entity that provides your funding? And if so, I’d like to see your tax and payroll files (unless you are doing your “patriotic” duty gratis), as well as a copy of your leadership structure. Oh, and what are your mission parameters? Do you have the necessary permissions to cross state boundaries in pursuit of your…um…duties? And could I please get the names and contact information for your liaisons with local law enforcement, the US military, the White House, Homeland Security, the CIA the FBI and—dare I say it—the BATF?

While you’re getting all that material together, I’ll just press on if that’s all right.

Let’s chat a little bit about your central thesis—arming teachers. According to you two (and Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Wayne LaPierre, and other thoughtful, reasoned—and don’t forget frightened and paranoid—members of your tribe) issuing sidearms to America’s teachers will bring a halt to atrocities like the one that happened in Connecticut, because the minute some whack-job opens fire on the students, Nice Teacher Lady will whip out her trusty Glock 19 and wax the perp before he can fire so much as one round from his high-capacity magazine. Does that about sum up your position?

I’m wondering if you’ve considered a few things.

For instance, you do realize that you’re talking about one of those dreaded Federal Programs you hate so much, right? If the government issues a weapon to every teacher in the country (there are about 3.3 million teachers in public schools alone) someone is going to have to oversee it—budgets, certifications, re-certifications, ongoing monitoring, etc. Estimating conservatively (boy, ya gotta love that word, right?) we’re talking about tens of millions of dollars every year. And that, boy howdy, is simply a huge fucking burden on the national ledgers. Or the States ledgers, if the Feds pass the, so to speak, buck. Or maybe you intend to have the teachers foot the bill for their own weapons? Bet’cha a dollar the National Education Association will have a few choice words for you about that idea, and I bet you can’t say most of those words on prime-time TV. In fact, I bet those words rhyme with Yuck and Poo.

Moving along, are you going to force these teachers to carry sidearms? What if they don’t want to? And wouldn’t it worry you, just a tiny little bit, about a teacher who really, really wanted to go in amongst a bunch of first graders armed?

Which brings me to another couple of things. What happens when one of your armed teachers loses his sidearm? This happened in Lapeer, MI, just last month, except it was the school’s rent-a-cop who left his weapon in a bathroom. And furthermore, what is your response going to be when one of your armed educators loses his shit and turns his pistol on little Jimmy? Maybe even your little Jimmy? Because such a terrifying happenstance isn’t a might, it’s an ugly certainty.

Oh, but wait. If that happens, one of the other armed teachers will leap in, just like John McClane, and save the day, right? Sure. Sure. I mean, that’s what always happens in the movies, right?

And, hey: have you ever been a teacher? No, I thought not. I have, however, and I’m here to tell ya this. It’s fucking hard—kids with over-developed senses of entitlement, ungrateful parents, grateful parents who think of you first as day-care, and second as an educator, the bafflingly ridiculous menace of standardized testing etc., etc., etc. And now you want to add crisis management to their list of responsibilties? On top of everything, you want them trained in the same manner as police officers? I haven’t seen that movie yet, but I bet Mel Gibson is in it.

To sum it all up, you are in favor of massive governmental programs that won’t work (there was an armed guard at Columbine, remember, and that sure worked out exactly according to your plan), and at the same time you are in favor of letting criminals enjoy the same armed freedoms they enjoy today? Wow. You must also be in favor of cognitive dissonance, boys, cuz you got it in spades.

The only sensible solution is to get rid of assault-style weapons. Nobody needs them. You don’t need them for home protection, unless there has been a sudden uptick in paramilitary gangs commando-raiding suburban homes to steal Blu-Ray players and Keurig coffee makers. Which there hasn’t been. Nor will there ever be. And you don’t need assault-style weapons to hunt with. I get along just fine with a regular ol’single-shot Ruger. If you need 30 rounds to bring down Bambi’s mom, find a different fucking hobby, before you hurt somebody—because you obviously can’t shoot. I recommend continuing with what is apparently your other favorite pastime: cranial self-colonoscopy.

See, since your head is already up your ass, you might as well learn a few things about yourself while it’s in there.

I gotta go. It’s been a pleasure meeting you both.



  1. Ohhh, Rich, I own weapons, non military style, you are correct, there is no use for them as a civilian. If I cant drop a punk with my .38 S&W, I don't deserve a firearm. Military style should be just that..for the military. Cheers.

  2. I own weapons as well, Rich, and I've never wanted anything more powerful than the ones I have. You are correct about keep military weapons among the military.

  3. I don't even agree with some of your argumentation (specifically interpretation of 2nd amendment...but then again I'm a semantic nazi) but man was that a fun read.

  4. Okay Wine God, I understand you strict constructionists like to think the Constitution is a static document and that we shouldn't take liberties with our interpretation of the constitution. Take it at face value, eh? That's what constructionalist jurists such as Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice Roberts, and the Wine God want us to do! Take away our guns and put them in the hands of a "well regulated militia!".... I mean, Scalia wants to... um, er...uh wait a minute!, aren't those Justices aligned with general gun-nuts? well then,how do they reconcile constructionalism, and the more liberal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment these fuck-stick gun nuts espouse?