Skip to content

Mel Gibson Loses Custody…of His Guns

July 17, 2010

I’m sure you’ve heard of all of the crap Mel Gibson is going through right now. If you haven’t, have you had your face buried in the sand for the past couple weeks? The latest development in the story is that now Mel Gibson has to turn over all of his guns because he’s too dangerous to have them.

I was originally tempted to do this entire post with nothing but terrible movie puns (we wouldn’t want him to turn someone into the man without a face, the m4 Patriot, Mel Gibson – here’s your sign, etc.) but the more legitimate news sources took care of that for me (LA Judge strips Mel Gibson of his lethal weapons, Mad Mel). So, in keeping with the slightly political leanings that I have going on, time to comment on how I feel about Mel and his firearms.

This is a good example of where I draws the Line of Sanity between libertarianness (not a word) and craziness. I consider myself really pro-gun, but as soon as someone starts threatening someone with it who doesn’t deserve to be threatened their 2nd amendment rights are forfeit. As a pro-gun guy, why should I let some idiot who is clearly mentally disturbed ruin it for the rest of us? Mel has problems, and the last thing the gun lobby needs is some stupid insane guy accidentally having the safety off with a round in the chamber and therefore blowing off some innocent girl’s head.

I’m good with my guns. Very good. They’re always locked up, always clean, and the ammo is stored separately. When they’re out of the cabinet I don’t know if I could take more precautions than I already do. I’ve practically memorized the gun laws just so that I know what is illegal and how not to do it. If there’s such thing as a model gun owner, I think I’m it.

That’s why Mel Gibson shouldn’t have guns. I have done nothing wrong; he has. Prosecute (or crucify, Passion of the Christ joke, I know, I’m hilarious) the people who deserve to be prosecuted. I’m not one of those people, so don’t treat me like one.

Two final notes – if Mel ever goes to jail they should torture him by screening every single one of his past movies for him in his cell. And, once he’s in jail, the greatest irony ever would be if he was raped by a pack of N-words.

One Comment leave one →
  1. Aptronym permalink
    July 19, 2010 7:21 pm

    I suppose if he’s been making legitimate threats with his guns, he’s forfeited the right to have them. I just think that it’s important to make clear (and make sure) that the confiscation of his guns is a consequence of his actions and not his character. Actually, the more I think about that point, the more I agree with it. “Slippery slope” territory begins when the state passes judgment on an individual and abridges their rights based on assumption rather than observation. Ignoring Mel for a moment here, “You are a disagreeable loudmouth who owns firearms.” is a far cry from “You are a disagreeable loudmouth who has threatened others with firearms.” Until the former transitions into the latter, his or her civil liberties should not be revoked. (It doesn’t apply here as from the looks of it, Mel falls clearly into the latter camp, but in general it’s a distinction that needs to be made clear.)

    On an unrelated note, there seemed to be a lot of sensationalism in that article (not counting the brain-melting site design) for what was ostensibly just a news post. I have enough reasons not to follow the news already…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: