The runaway winner of my most recent online poll for best tweet of the week was this mock dialogue posted to Twitter by @TheNardvark:
“Can I get two boxes of Sudafed?”
“Sorry, by law you can only buy one at a time.”
“OK then, just the one box of Sudafed and these seven guns.”
The analogy between pseudoephedrine — the active ingredient in Sudafed and many other decongestant cold and allergy medications — and firearms is wry but apt.
Source: Controlling arguments: Sudafed control vs. gun control – Chicago Tribune
I seriously need to do a ride-along with a reporter and figure out how is it possible they can’t do a simple Google search or use two second worth of common sense.
How is it that Eric Zorn has not figured out one simple yet big difference between buying Sudafed and a gun at their respective stores? Felons can legally buy Sudafed but are not allowed by law to buy a firearm. Dear God, Felons are not even allowed to be near a frigging gun or ammunition!
But that is what happens when you do “journalism” based on Press Releases from Gun Control groups.
And next;
I believe that being shot should be requirement for gun ownership in America. It’s very simple. You need to have gun, like taking selfies with pistols, can’t live with out it? Then take a bullet and you will be granted the right to purchase the firearm of your choice.
Dear D. Watkins: If you happen to have a fire extinguisher, I wanna see your self-inflicted burn scars. Otherwise, stop talking nonsense out of your rectal exit.
PS: You can’t have sex unless you pass a bowling ball through the above-mentioned rectal exit. A man should not be allowed to have carnal knowledge with a woman until he experiences the pain of childbirth… without epidural.
Hat Tip on this one goes to Brad Torgersen via Facebook.
I think this illustrates the stupidity of the Sudafed law more than it says something about gun laws.
Agreed. Whenever people bring that up about Sudafed in the gun law discussion I mention that I’m also opposed to that, too. I also like to highlight that it has not appreciably curbed Methamphetamine production either, but in fact made large scale meth production by the drug cartels even more economically beneficial.
+2 It really shows what authoritarian boot-lickers the antis are.
Gun ownership is up, and violent crime is down. Gun laws are being repealed and the net effect is at WORST nothing, and often LESS CRIME AND VIOLENCE!
The Sudafed law is a pain in the ass, has HURT a lot of people (My wife and I are among the victims when on two separate occasions got a nasty sinus infection in very rural parts of the country and the drugs stores were open, but the Pharmacist was on vacation, or out for an extended lunch.
They HAD the stuff, but they just legally couldn’t sell it to us no matter how much pain we were in. (Both cases we drove to the next town and lucked out).
And Eric, the Meth trade has GOTTEN WORSE, because now the Mexican cartels simply buy raw Pseudoephedrine by the ton, cook it in cartel factories, and ship it over to the US.
I’ve heard there are less domestic meth labs for it, so you don’t have the fires and explosions that occasionally result from High School drop-outs playing organic chemistry, but you have more meth, more addicts, and more drug-related deaths.
Good job guys! What other plans do you want, let’s implement those too!
They can’t be bothered with consequences.
[…] But Miguel over at the Gun-Free Zone blogged about it this morning, and that gave me an idea. Miguel wrote: […]
And for people that say I am too harsh…. go read this. 😀
Eric Zorn is an idiot troll for the Chicago Crime Mafia…. sorry…. I misspelled, Chicago MEDIA. I probably don’t need to educate any of the readers of this blog, certainly not our humble host, but to by a gun in Illinois over the counter (like, ya know SUDAFED), you need the following:
1) A Firearm Owner’s Identification Card. Costs ten bucks. Download the form from the Illinois State Police, fill it out, mail it back in with your check and a passport size photo. IN FOUR TO SIX WEEKS, you’ll get your FOID card, as long as you aren’t a felon.
B) Go to a retailer that sells these items (BTW, there are exactly NONE gun shops in the great city of Chicago). Make sure you have your FOID card. You can’t even handle a gun in this state without it. Fill out our favorite for 4475. Get your background checked– again. Wait three days.
iii) Go back to the store (another long trip to the suburbs, if you’re a city dweller). Pick up your cold medicine. I mean, firearm. As long as you’re still not a felon.
Got your concealed carry permit? Too bad. Still need a FOID, the form and the waiting period.
By the way, I’ll bet a fresh $100 bill that Zorn knows all this. But most of his LIV readers don’t, and explaining it ruins the narrative and doesn’t make for as-compelling reading. So, we’ll just lie about all that. And they wonder why the mainstream media is dying.
Darn-it Miguel,
You beat me to another post again.
I read the Salon article and well… pretty much my interpretation of is was “kill all wannabe gun owners and if they survive, they can have one.”
We can talk about how survivable a gunshot wound is – currently the mortality rate of gunshots is 27.4%. But we never address the long term damage. Permanent physical injury is present in over 90% of gunshot wound victims, mostly because nerve tissue doesn’t heal well. That assumes you take a shot to a limb. A gut shot will be more potentially lethal, and assuming you survive, you get to spend the rest of your life pooping into a bag through a hole in your side. Of course, we haven’t gotten to the cost of a gunshot wound which is put at an average of $154,000 in medical treatment.
So what this guy is talking about is torture, permanent disfigurement, cruel and unusual punishment, in order to exercise a right. This isn’t “if you want a fireplace, burn yourself” this is “if you want to vote, cut off a hand.” This is beyond egregious.
Also (and I know I am treading into dangerous territory here) how dare this person, in his list of people who tragically got shot could put Martin Luther King Jr. and Medgar Evers and Tupac Shakur and The Notorious B.I.G. into the same sentence. “2Pac and Biggie, national treasures and pioneers of an original art form.” Um… you mean a one guy convicted of sexual assault in a gang rape, and responsible for the accidental shooting of a six-year-old, who was fired from the moive Menace II Society because he beat of the director, and the other guy who was crack dealer and petty criminal? They are your heroes to be stacked up against men who fought for civil rights?
On one hand you have a man who was awarded the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize and was assassinated by a racist. On the other you have a man who was killed as part of gang violence, who’s biography said:
“Tupac Shakur was, and is, a polarizing figure, not only in the rap world but in the media in general. As evidenced by his criminal record, he truly embodied the gangster or “thug” lifestyle that many rappers only seem to portray in their music. For many, this makes him the most genuine of all rappers.”
This guy’s moral compass is broken.
How about this: If you want to talk about firearms and gun violence, you should be required to have purchased a gun. Through a licensed dealer. I mean, it’s easy, right? Easier than buying a book or an apple?
“Want a gun? Take a bullet: Take this, gutless NRA cowards — you can have a gun, once you understand the pain of being shot” That is quite possibly the most stupid sentence written in the history of mankind.
This says a lot about the anti’s thought process,they are suppose to be against guns and gun violence but recommend people with guns to go shoot themselves is this not considered gun violence,or did I miss something.I still think the only reason they keep pushing for gun control is that they are on the side of the criminals and want to lower the population of the good guys.I would like to say thank you to all anti’s for not owning a gun,we have enough to deal with the bad guys that already have guns.