Conservatives — December 21, 2012 at 12:21 pm

NRA: “The answer to gun violence is gun fights” – Gun fetishism IS a mental illness


Up is down. War is peace.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre just went on national television to tell the country that “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.” In other words, the only solution to gun violence is gun fights.

LaPierre also said, “I call on Congress, today, to act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation.”

What LaPierre and all of the other gun fetishists out there are saying to America is that their freakish desire to own and shoot assault weapons that can fire countless rounds without reloading must be preserved at any cost and their solution to the gun violence that results from the presence of these weapons in our communities is to turn our schools into armed camps with armed guards. Every. Single. School.

As so many gun fetishists do, he blamed it on mental illness. Putting aside for a moment that the very people protecting the gun fetishists “rights” have been the ones to eliminate funding for mental health services around the country, why are we not talking about the real mental illness here? Why is it not considered a mental illness to get obscene pleasure from owning and shooting weapon that has only one purpose: to injure or kill human beings.

THAT, I would argue, is a clear sign of mental illness.

One wonders what the impact of having our kids seeing armed people in their schools every single day will have. Does it not send them the message that the world is a dangerous place and that they should be afraid wherever they go? Will that not create even more unstable adults in the long term? Of course it will.

The NRA is losing this battle of ideas in American. The vast majority of us see nothing of value from assault weapons. We don’t need to have our “man card reissued” by owning a gun. We don’t get pleasure from shooting guns. We don’t strive to be Rambo or Dirty Harry. We see guns as something to be diminished in our society, not worshipped or held as more important than our right to safety and freedom from fear.

If you want to argue that the core problem here is mental illness, go right ahead. But never forget this one important fact:

Gun fetishism IS a mental illness.

Adding… The National Center for Education Statistics says that, in the 2009-2010 school year, there were 132,183 public and private K-12 schools in this country. Leave it to the NRA to come up with a solution to gun violence that involves putting over 132,000 new guns into our communities. The mind, it boggles.

  • Anna123

    That speech from the NRA was complete stupidity. Police officers at every school is not a solution to the problem. We need to ban assault rifles and 30 round magazines. Police officers are not going to make children feel safer in school. The NRA needs to keep their stupid mouths shut and let the VP Biden head up his think tank to come up with real solutions.

  • NeonVincent

    “Gun fetishism is a mental illness.”

    Currently, fetishism of any kind is a mental illness, but it won’t be for long. Here’s what Wikipedia has to say about the Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual’s (DSM V) reclassification of paraphilias, of which fetishism is one.

    “The DSM-5 Paraphilias Subworkgroup reached a “consensus that paraphilias are not ipso facto psychiatric disorders”, and proposed “that the DSM-V make a distinction between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders. A paraphilia by itself would not automatically justify or require psychiatric intervention. A paraphilic disorder is a paraphilia that causes distress or impairment to the individual or harm to others. One would ascertain a paraphilia (according to the nature of the urges, fantasies, or behaviors) but diagnose a paraphilic disorder (on the basis of distress and impairment). In this conception, having a paraphilia would be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for having a paraphilic disorder.” The ‘Rationale’ page of any paraphilia in the electronic DSM-5 draft continues: “This
    approach leaves intact the distinction between normative and non-normative sexual behavior, which could be important to researchers,
    but without automatically labeling non-normative sexual behavior as
    psychopathological. It also eliminates certain logical absurdities in
    the DSM-IV-TR. In that version, for example, a man cannot be classified
    as a transvestite—however much he cross-dresses and however sexually
    exciting that is to him—unless he is unhappy about this activity or
    impaired by it. This change in viewpoint would be reflected in the
    diagnostic criteria sets by the addition of the word “Disorder” to all
    the paraphilias. Thus, Sexual Sadism would become Sexual Sadism
    Disorder; Sexual Masochism would become Sexual Masochism Disorder, and
    so on.”

    Not all is lost, however, as there is an important criterion that is still met.

    “But a paraphilic disorder is defined: that’s when an atypical sexual interest causes distress or impairment to the individual or harm to others.”

    “Harm to others”–that’s what we would have to hammer home.

  • Sidney18511

    What is next, missiles? Then all the schools could have star wars setup in the parking lot?

  • kirke123

    no surprise from the nut leader of the nra. there’s enough fear in this country and now its time to take the fear leader down.

  • alan2102

    Yes, gun fetishism IS a mental illness.

    And we just put into office — as we do every two years — the same old gang of gun fetishists and murderers.
    We’ve had Cool Obama, and No Drama Obama. Now we have Weeping Obama. Does Weeping Obama “meet privately” with the families of those he has ordered murdered in Pakistan, or Somalia, or Yemen? Does he even acknowledge those murders — murders that he himself ordered? Does the “nation reel” in response to these regular, systematic murders of innocent human beings — many of them children? Does the “nation reel” in response to the Obama administration’s repeated public announcements of its Kill List and its Murder Program, a program which intentionally, repeatedly murders innocent people? Does America react with horror to the fact that Obama and his administration claim the “right” to murder anyone they want, anywhere in the world, for any reason they choose or invent out of nothing?
    it is more than extraordinary for Americans to claim they embody compassion and kindness to any extent at all, when roughly 120 million Americans recently voted for two candidates who support a program devoted to the unrestricted murder of completely innocent human beings. Moreover, one of those candidates is the man who has ordered the murder of such innocents on multiple occasions and seeks to institutionalize his Murder Program as a foundational element of national policy going forward. Such a country can be described as murderous, vicious, and evil with full justification; kind, just, and compassionate are not words that occur to a sane, healthy person when confronted with brazen, publicly declared evil on this scale.
    I have to confess that whenever I mention this issue, I am almost overwhelmed by the deeply felt need to begin screaming. I ask you to consider the nature and meaning of the Murder Program once again: the most powerful officials in our national government routinely and systematically order the murder of human beings whom they must know, if they are minimally honest for even a second or two, to be entirely innocent. These same officials have told us this is what they are doing on multiple occasions; their proclamations have been detailed in the nation’s leading newspapers. For almost all Americans, it is as if nothing at all has been said. I feel I have to scream because it seems there is no other way even to get people’s attention on this subject. The U.S. government commits profoundly evil acts every day — and almost no one notices. For several decades of my adult life, I have spent enormous amounts of time reading, studying and thinking about the varieties of methods people use to avoid and deny what should be shockingly obvious truths. Much of my writing here over the last ten years has been devoted to these issues. But I admit that avoidance and denial on this national scale, and particularly with regard to the plain meaning of the Murder Program, leave me feeling close to completely helpless and impotent. I am not sure there is any way to break through a wall of resistance that has been built and is maintained with such willful, deliberate intention. And I greatly fear that only spreading catastrophe will finally cause more people to begin to question the fabricated version of the truth they so fervently believe. If you reflect on this terrible predicament a bit longer, a further especially horrifying aspect of our situation should become clearer: this national exercise in virtually complete denial of what should be obvious — and what should be resisted with all the strength of which we are capable — all but guarantees that catastrophe in multiple forms will soon be visited upon us, perhaps much sooner than I myself had once thought.

    • Your argument seems to center around this statement:

      “[T]he most powerful officials in our national government routinely and systematically order the murder of human beings whom they must know, if they are minimally honest for even a second or two, to be entirely innocent.”
      I disagree with this so it’s hard to know where to begin conversing with. While I am, in general, a pacifist, I understand that the killing of terrorists who are plotting to kill as many Americans as possible is a national security issue and not just some cavalier game where our government goes out and kills people for some self-satisfying reason or another.
      When it comes to the killing of innocent people during the act of killing terrorists, yeah, I agree wholeheartedly that this is horrible and is blood on our collective hands. But you seem to suggest that our government’s leaders are doing this without care or conscience and there you lose me. I do not believe for even an instant that Barack Obama does this without thought or care or pain. I believe he does what he believes to be necessary to protect our country and does so with far more information and data on the situation than you or I or the vast, vast majority of Americans will EVER have.
      It’s one thing to criticize a president and his administration for entering a war for the wrong reasons but to suggest that the acts of war that take place when war is going on are done casually, particularly by THIS president is naive and uninformed, in my opinion.

      • Robin Donald

        In the face of documented evidence that the drone fly-by program is killing innocent women and children, President Obama denied it and said that the technology involved allowed for precise targeting and no civilians were killed.

        I understand your protestations over the idea that “our government’s leaders are doing this without care or conscience,” but they have and I believe are doing and will do such heinous and criminal actions again.

        I don’t know if you remember in 1996 when Judy Stahl interviewed then-U.N. Ambassador Madeleine Albreight and asked her about the 500,000 Iraqi children under the age of five who had died due to the U.S.-led sanctions against that country, “Is this [the sanctions] worth the price?” Albreight’s response, “This is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it.”

        Perhaps you remember the Gulf of Tonkin Incident which was the supposed-reason for the U.S. war against Vietnam; you surely remember the supposed existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction justifying the “Shock and Awe” war against Iraq; they were both lies.

        I have to say that the following comment you made reveals the depth of either your naivete or your willful ignorance, or both.

        “I believe he does what he believes to be necessary to protect our
        country and does so with far more information and data on the situation
        than you or I or the vast, vast majority of Americans will EVER have.”

        Thanks to Bradley Manning and Julian Assange/Wikileaks, the “vast majority of Americans” now have more information about the inner (and not so inner) workings of our government than we have EVER had before.

  • ME

    shorter: stop gun violence with gun fights should read

    shorter: let crazy man with gun kill as many unarmed victims as he wants until whenever a cop, ie a person with a gun, shows up to stop him.

  • talltales

    Your argument is worthless. Mental illness is the problem and needs to be addressed and solutions found to protect such individuals from themselves and our children. I’ll agree with you when President Obama gives up his armed protection.