Each day we overwhelm your brains with the content you've come to love from the Louder with Crowder Dot Com website.
But Facebook is...you know, Facebook. Their algorithm hides our ranting and raving as best it can. The best way to stick it to Zuckerface?
Sign up for the LWC News Blast! Get your favorite right-wing commentary delivered directly to your inbox!
New York Times Suggests Stupid "New" Gun Control "Solutions"
The New York Times, or more specifically, DAVID K. BRAWLEY, OTIS MOSS III, DAVID BENKE and JOEL MOSBACHER (seriously, they list the authors names in all caps for no known reason), have come up with what they feel are brilliant new ways to effectively enact gun control in the United States.
There's so much stupid it hurts.
Let's break down their ideas and examine them, shall we?
1. Government should buy up the guns. Especially the right guns. Apparently, the brand name of the gun you buy could make you more likely to commit a firearms crime. Who knew? But not only does the NYT suggest the government buy up firearms, it also suggests using its purchasing power to stop buying guns from the likes of Colt, Ruger, Glock, and other big name brands.
Let us use the wisdom of founding father Noah Webster to remind the New York Times of one very important little fact about firearms shall we? "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
The 2nd Amendment is a stroke of American genius. Because when a government has guns and its people don't, bad things happen. Like, really bad things. See Nazi Germany, Stalin's Russia, Red China, ISIS, et al.
2. Produce "smart guns" that can only be fired by authorized users. In theory, that actually sounds like a good idea. But there are a few problems here. First off, computerizing firearms will make them more expensive, and therefore, less accessible to middle class Americans. (Oh, wait, is that the point?) Also, anything that has computer technology can be hacked AND, even worse, can malfunction. Hard to imagine anything more terrifying than being home alone, a masked man breaks in who's intent on raping/killing you or your children, and your husband's gun won't fire because A) you're not "programmed in" to the computer or B) the computer's just having a bad day and doesn't feel like recognizing you.
Also, uhm, didn't I read something somewhere about the government having access to all of our electronic devices? So what happens if we make guns an electronic device?
3. The government shouldn't buy guns that don't employ safety mechanisms. Protip. They don't. The only way to hurt yourself with your own firearm is by being stupid with said firearm. Since the New York Times has probably never attended an NRA class, let us be of assistance. There's this thing called a "safety" that's on, like, every single gun you can buy. If the safety is turned on, the gun won't fire. Genius, I know!
The problem with the New York Times, and most leftists, is that they simply don't understand the 2nd Amendment. We've created a little video that should help with that. Enjoy!