A modest proposal

This is a discussion on A modest proposal within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; washingtonpost.com A modest proposal By Al Horne Tuesday, November 17, 2009 With Congress tied up over health reform -- legislation whose initial, much-discussed goal was ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: A modest proposal

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    A modest proposal

    washingtonpost.com

    A modest proposal

    By Al Horne
    Tuesday, November 17, 2009

    With Congress tied up over health reform -- legislation whose initial, much-discussed goal was to extend health insurance to as many as 47 million uninsured Americans -- this may be as good a time as any to propose another, less divisive reform.

    The FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimated in 2008 that more than 250 million guns were owned by U.S. citizens. Since President Obama's election last November, newspapers and electronic media have reported a sharp increase in U.S. gun sales, spurred by rumors that the new administration had secret plans to block gun sales to law-abiding Americans. Normally, about 4.5 million guns are sold in the United States each year, so this surge in sales means that Americans own roughly 260 million guns, in a population of nearly 309 million.

    Surveys indicate that gun ownership is not spread evenly across U.S. households. In fact, chances are that a substantial proportion of U.S. gun owners have more than one weapon, so it's quite possible that fewer than 200 million Americans own those 260 million guns. That means there may be more than 100 million citizens left unprotected against their gun-owning fellow citizens.

    Surely everyone can agree that this is an outrage. Moreover, it is an outrage that Congress can easily fix, without months of committee meetings, town halls or tea parties. All that is required is a bipartisan, pro-constitutional bill to extend the Second Amendment's protection of gun ownership to all Americans, whether they like it or not.

    Under such legislation -- let's call it the Gun Insurance Act of 2009 -- every American would be required to buy some kind of gun. Those who cannot afford even the simplest weapon -- say, those whose 2009 annual income is less than twice the federal poverty level -- could be issued $500 vouchers that would be valid only at gun shops or gun shows, and would have to be used before the 2010 Census. (Just think: What a stimulus to private enterprise all these gun sales would provide, and how many new gun-selling jobs would be created!)

    How would the law be enforced? Census takers could verify that everyone they count has a weapon in working condition, and those census takers who survive could report all non-complying Americans to the FBI so it could notify local police departments, which would issue citations for whatever fines Congress chooses to impose. (Note that this proposed legislation would not require creating any new bureaucracy, public option or death panels.) Of course, illegal immigrants would not receive vouchers, would not be required to buy guns and would not be counted in the Census.

    So there it is: a modest proposal even Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley can agree on. If we're willing to require people to buy health insurance, why not require them to buy guns? Sure, maybe the Congressional Budget Office could overestimate its cost, and some wimpy liberals could file a court challenge, but the Supreme Court would slap it down on a clear 5-to-4 vote. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, here's one issue where you can count on at least a couple of Republican votes.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,849
    I can't believe this was in the Washington Post!

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array Madcap_Magician's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    1,757
    Sounds like some people are not getting the clear satirical and sarcastic meaning of the Washington Post's editorial board, which means this editorial in the same sense that Jonathan Swift meant his.

  5. #4
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by SamRudolph View Post
    Sounds like some people are not getting the clear satirical and sarcastic meaning of the Washington Post's editorial board, which means this editorial in the same sense that Jonathan Swift meant his.
    Bingo!

    What's not clear to me was is it more pointed at health care or at 2A.

    OTOH. It might be just aimed at those who "cling to...." -- i.e., a different opinion in general.

    WWIIW -- in my experience folk who write a piece like this are showing a level of frustration -- a subconscious/suppressed need to show their "brilliance" and to try to put down those who don't see how "brilliant" they think that they are -- e.g., those who disagree with them.

    IMHO, it is a "If you can't dazzle them with your "brilliance", baffle them with your bovine excrement."

    When they find they are losing, they resort to an effete form of argumentum ad personam e.g., involves insulting or belittling one's opponent.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  6. #5
    Distinguished Member Array PastorPack's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    1,572
    How would the law be enforced? Census takers could verify that everyone they count has a weapon in working condition, and those census takers who survive could report all non-complying Americans to the FBI so it could notify local police departments, which would issue citations for whatever fines Congress chooses to impose.
    That was definitely satire. But funny all the same.
    God is love (1 John 4:8)

  7. #6
    Moderator
    Array buckeye .45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    7,597

    A modest proposal

    I'm still digesting this to determine my thoughts, as I'm not sure how I feel about how the article was written, but thought I would share.
    Last edited by JD; November 17th, 2009 at 05:48 PM. Reason: Remvoed story as it's posted above.
    Fortes Fortuna Juvat

    Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
    NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor

  8. #7
    Member Array chenemf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    335
    “It is not necesssary to understand things in order to argue about them.”

    Caron de Beaumarchais
    My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.
    - Thomas Jefferson

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array farronwolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    4,768
    Wouldn't it be an eye opening experience for all the census takers when those of us that carry came to the door.

    Census taker: Sir/mam do you have an operational firearm in your household?

    Homeowner: Without a word, takes his carry piece out of the holster and points it at the forehead of the census taker, then says "you want to find out?"

    Census taker: After messing his pants, runs like hell to the car or down the street.

    I say, have them start asking, we all need a good laugh every once in a while.
    Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.
    www.ddchl.com
    Texas CHL Instructor
    Texas Hunter Education Instructor
    NRA Instructor

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array Madcap_Magician's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    1,757
    Quote Originally Posted by PastorPack View Post
    That was definitely satire. But funny all the same.
    I would disagree in the sense that the WaPo editorial board clearly means to smear gun owners as violent and murderous.

    By the way, the title is the same as a Jonathan Swift satire from the 19th century, which essentially proposed that the solution to world hunger was to eat all the surplus children.

    I am with Dave in wondering if this article was anti-2A or anti-healthcare 'reform.'

    I would be surprised at the latter, given the source.

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    There was a senator from Vermont who had proposed penalizing households that don't have a gun, citing that they are more costly to the state in terms of police protection, investigation, and "clean up" after a crime. This figure can be multiplied by the number of crimes that can be committed by an offender who wasn't stopped with the first crime (yes, I'm paraphrasing a bit).

    While it's an entertaining notion, the real power of the 2A lies in the government NOT knowing who does--and does not--own a firearm.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array agentmel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    509
    While this was clearly satire, I actually don't find the idea to be strange or illogical at all. More guns, less crime.

    Mel
    The Ethics of Liberty
    LewRockwell.com
    The Survival Podcast
    How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?

  13. #12
    Member Array beaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Germany for now
    Posts
    139
    i'm confused at this article. but being that some of you say its satirical... kinda makes sense when i read this part...

    "That means there may be more than 100 million citizens left unprotected against their gun-owning fellow citizens."

    are they saying here that we gun owners are out to kill the 100 million who don't own guns??? i had to think about this one for a minute. like are they really an advocate for everyone being a gun owner when they think we're just out to kill people with our guns?? like do they think we won't kill people who buy guns.. had me scratching my noodle for a minute. its very true that more guns=less crime.. but i don't think they were looking at it that way.

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA
    Posts
    5,124
    My take on it, possibly not the same as the author:

    We are going to require all citizens to take health care, which is NOT a right, but we do not require citizens to partake in certain other rights. Not exactly an apples to apples comparison, since who would want every American to speak loudly from a street corner every day. Oh well.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  15. #14
    New Member Array YaNi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    O-H I-O
    Posts
    4
    Under such legislation -- let's call it the Gun Insurance Act of 2009 -- every American would be required to buy some kind of gun.
    This has to be a joke. This is where we lose people.

    I meet people everyday that aren't mature enough/capable of safely owning and operating a gun. Some of them even say they don't own a gun because they couldn't stop from busting a cap in someone they didn't like. Owning a gun is not for everyone.

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array Madcap_Magician's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    1,757
    Again folks, this is called SATIRE.

    Meaning the author actually thinks that people like you and I are nutjobs.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. My modest small collection (pic)
    By rainyday in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: February 17th, 2010, 01:02 PM
  2. my modest collection...
    By bryman in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: November 4th, 2009, 01:33 PM
  3. Marriage proposal
    By dukalmighty in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: July 21st, 2008, 06:01 PM
  4. Michigan proposal
    By Mainspring in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: March 1st, 2007, 10:02 PM