Earlier this week, comedienne Amy Schumer of Trainwreck (a movie she casually mentioned in the press conference) took to a podium with her second cousin once removed Senator Chuck Schumer from New York to lecture the nation about how much her heart is breaking for the people who were shot in Lafayette and how gun control is the solution to mass shootings.
What makes Ms. Schumer an expert on gun control and gun violence? Glad you asked, it can be a little confusing. The shooting at the Lafayette movie theater was showing Trainwreck. A movie in which she happens to have acted. So… there you go.
Both Schumers called for better, “stronger” laws like background checks and keeping guns out of the hands of the crazies:
“These are not extreme ideas,” Amy Schumer said. “No one wants to live in a country where a felon, the mentally ill or other dangerous people can get their hands on a gun with such ease.”
Riddle me this, Amy and Chuck Schumer: If criminals break the laws, how will more laws stop them? From breaking the laws? Hmmmm?
The problem with proclaiming from your celebrity high horse that “GUNS ARE BAD, WE NEED MORE LAWS TO LIMIT GUNS!” are the idiotic and condescending notions that:
- Guns are sentient beings which seduce people and turn them into criminals.
- Everyone who legally owns a gun must be an irresponsible, redneck moron.
- If we all just had more laws about controlling guns, then there would be fewer guns and thus less crime.
Sorry, Amy, but that’s the buzzer, you’re wrong.
Here’s an annoying fact for you: more guns mean less crime. Gasp! Why? Well think about it for a second, if you can. Take a break between sniffles. Where would you rather perpetrate crime? In a “gun free zone” like a movie theater, or somewhere that’s loaded with guns, like, say, a police academy’s gun range? A shopping mall… or the Pentagon? Notice a theme here?
Yet with every shooting comes the battle cry of the left: more laws on guns. Even though the areas where these crimes occurred don’t allow guns. Is there an echo in here? It feels like that’s been said before…
The real question is, will Amy Schumer and her cuz Chuck be giving up their armed security? Did the Trainwreck premiere have armed guards to protect her and the rest of her cast and crew? Does Senator Chuck Schumer have a security detail to protect him from crazy people, and is he willing to give up his guns in favor of tighter laws?
No? Oh, skunked again!
See, these tighter background checks, all these extra laws and restrictions on guns, they only apply to everyone else. The little people, the schmoes. Look, when the rest of us are in trouble, maybe we should just call the police. We all know how much the left adores the police.
When it comes to the Hollywood elite, what’s good for them is not what’s good for you. They believe in the good of the ‘collective.’ The only people exempt from the ‘collective’ is them. Leftists don’t believe in individual rights, therefore they could never even begin to understand all of the different individual needs for a firearm.
Like the woman who refuses to be a murder or rape victim, and packs heat, so if man attacks her, she can level the playing field with a well-placed .357 bullet. Or a mother and father who own a pair of Glocks so they can protect their property and family. Or maybe a concerned resident of Baltimore or Chicago who doesn’t want to be murdered. Maybe they need firearms? Just spit-balling here.
It’s going to take more than a few tears and a press conference to make criminals suddenly obey the laws, whatever your squishy intentions may be. But thanks for playing, Amy.