you're reading...
domestic violence, violence

Getting the NRA to protect my right to bear biological weapons

There’s been lots of talk about how the right to own semi-automatic guns and rifles is protected under the 2nd Amendment. The NRA and many gun aficionados feel that owning a semi-automatic weapon is a right of the people not to be infringed upon. And anyway, according to many people who support semi-automatic weapon ownership (or at least the ones who send me nasty tweets) these guns are very safe, because it’s not the gun, or the magazine that holds the 33 bullets, or even the bullets themselves that does the killing, it’s the person who pulls the trigger.

I’m calling bullshit, because I’m an infectious diseases aficionado and the NRA isn’t talking one bit about protecting my right to own biological arms. After all, many governments, including Uncle Sam, feel that a stock of biologics is part of a well regulated militia. I know biological weapons aren’t specifically spelled out in the 2nd Amendment, but neither are semi-automatic weapons and hey, arms is arms.

I’d like to start my collection with small pox, anthrax, and that heavy duty non-medical grade botulinum toxin (the cosmetic grade stuff is for pussies). I’m fine with getting a permit, a 72 hour wait, and even a background check, but since no test is needed to show I know how to handle a gun that can kill 33 people a minute and I’m not required to lock up a semi-automatic weapon, I shouldn’t need to prove I can handle small pox. I mean, it’s only dangerous if I take it out of its vial in uncontrolled circumstances in anything less than a level 4 microbiology lab and I just want to collect it and compare potency with other super bug and toxin aficionados.

And long as we’re interpreting the 2nd Amendment this way, I’d like my right to carry concealed biologics protected as well.

20121220-183259.jpg

Discussion

12 thoughts on “Getting the NRA to protect my right to bear biological weapons

  1. You are absolutely right, the constitution does not limit the type of “arms” the people of the United States can or can not bear as the term “arms” is all encompassing and meant to provide the people with a means to arm themselves with anything comparable to what governments (Not just ours), have at their disposal. If the Governments have biological and chemical weapons, tanks, rockets, bombers, fighter jets, battle ships etc. etc. at their disposal then so should we the people. Also read Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution about the purpose of the militia.

    Oh and the “Shall not be infringed” part of the US constitution and “shall not be called in question” of many state constitutions means background checks, forms and registration are all violations of US and State Constitutions. And Nothing in those Constitutions says anything about type of arms nor do they exclude felons, mentally unstable persons or anyone under the age of 21 from acquiring, possessing or bearing any weapon they so choose.

    Posted by William | December 20, 2012, 9:41 pm
  2. Dr. Jen, you sound as pissed about all of this b.s. as we are. We came into existence in March of this year and have spent most of the year talking about traditional women’s issues (reproductive rights, pay equity, etc), but we cannot restrain ourselves on this, it’s too much for a normal person to take. I fully expect you will get a lot of comments from butthurt gun people over it. Well, take it to ’em. We’ll be re-blogging this.

    Posted by womenriseupnow | December 20, 2012, 9:53 pm
  3. Reblogged this on and commented:
    Dr. Jen does it again. The lasso of truth indeed.

    Posted by womenriseupnow | December 20, 2012, 9:54 pm
  4. You are right on, Dr Jen. The sad fact is that very few people now trust our government as far as normal civil liberties because of the NDAA, the Patriot Act and the Presidents policy of being able to detain Americans without trial indefinitely. The federal government itself is fueling the rush to weapons while feigning innocence. We need a conversation about 100 years of endless warfare and now surveillance. It may be too late to get people to have any trust in government at all.

    Posted by Lois | December 21, 2012, 8:41 am
  5. Jen, hey whilst were at it lets ban gasoline and laundry detergent (Napalm sticks to ….). Ok, now without being emotional. As a professional soldier (US Cavalry-Recon) there are many things that are household items that are easily made into highly effective mass killing devices. There are also many other things that kill people other than guns, the argument can go on forever. So the REAL question becomes what are we trying to ban? is it really the gun, any gun? The argument that it is easy with semi auto and high magazine capacity makes it easy, that’s actually false but it makes for good TV. (if the shooter was really that capable the death toll should have been way higher than it was and he used the wrong tools to do the work, he is not as bright as they make him out to be) What we are really trying to ban is mass killings or any killing for that matter. Truth is we are not going to stop folks from killing, BUT we can attempt to minimize the risk. also “WE” all already know Banning anything does not really work no matter what it is your trying to ban unless it has highly effective and easy ways to enforce the ban, otherwise it just goes underground and then becomes even harder to control. so what, if anything can the collective “WE” do to provide REAL solutions that really minimizes the risk. First lets make the effort to effectively implement the laws that we already have in place. we currently do not. Secondly, lets stop with the “NO–(insert what ever here)— ZONEs” it advertizes that its a good place to commit a crime there, as no one can easily or effectively enforce it( because they are also obeying the rules). This at least gives the doubt that someone already there might be able to stop you. hesitation/doubt delays action way more often than not. Third, just like having fire extinguishers and hoses, there should be sadly several someones armed or quick access to arms at schools or wherever large groups of people gather. if we go with the approach of how we address fires we will be effective in mitigating the risk . Why this approach, if mis-used it is deadly, but used properly it is a helpful tool. but because “WE” don’t know when the accidental mis-use or purposeful mis-use may occur there are back ups to quickly attempt to minimize or eliminate the problem. From extinguisher to back up hoses to the volunteer firefighter to the professional firefighters. but it also starts with prevention and safety whilst still using fire. fire is neither good or bad its how we use it or mis-use it that is what we are concerned about. the same is true of any fire arms. also just of note assault weapons(full-auto) have been banned since the mid 60’s. your argument about bio and chem really? Jen.

    Posted by Robert | December 21, 2012, 10:37 am
  6. Ya know as usual all those who do not understand, never fired a weapon, never took training, no nothing about guns, or the US and State Constitutions, and how any weapon, be it a gun, bomb, vehicle, knife, sword, billy club, bow & arrow, crossbow, match, lighter, whatever, it first, and I do mean first unless any of these items all of a sudden become alive with a brain, arms, hands, fingers, legs, feet, and a thought process, it first and foremost takes a Person, an individual, a living breathing human being to pick up any of these items, or get in a vehicle, put the key in, put one’s hands on the wheel of said vehicle, put foot on gas pedal, and aim the vehicle, pick up the gun, pick up the bullets / magazine, load the magazine, load the gun, aim the gun, then pull the trigger, pick up a bow, pick up an arrow, place arrow in the bow, and then pull back and let the arrow go, pick up a knife, a billy club, a sword, whatever, an individual first has to go to the weapon, pick it up or get in the car (a car can be a weapon and has been used so to kill people), and then use it. Any of these items by themselves, do absolutely nothing. If you people can’t wrap your brain around the truth, then I feel sorry for you as you have absolutely no clue. People are not always good, people are thinking individuals and there are those with mental problems, people with evil thoughts, insane thoughts, no care for a human life, gee how about the millions of unborn children that are killed every day under ‘laws’ because there are those that don’t feel a fetus is a human being, and until they see a head, arms, legs, etc, they feel it is not human. An amoeba is a life, sperm is a life, and when 2 sperm come together to make one human, it is 2 life forms that are coming together to produce the miracle of a human. Oh yea, then there are those who think they have the right to make the determination of who should live. If they discover that the baby inside an individual may be deformed, or have some sort of problem(s), these should be aborted. This is murder by all definitions so don’t try and make yourselves feel good by trying to blame guns.

    If you’re going to go after gun rights, 2nd amendment rights, the argument that someone else posted about ‘arms’ means anything that one chooses to use as a means of defending themselves with is a weapon / arms and it falls under 2nd amendment right to bear arms. That means, all you who like hunting and use rifles of all sorts to kill defenseless animals just for sport, not even food, all you who choose your weapon of choose bow & arrow, crossbow, knife, short sword, whatever, all those who belong to SCA and choose to use swords, short swords, knives, and the like, all fall under this 2nd amendment and if you start limiting 2nd amendment against guns, you are also going to have to go after all other forms of weapons.

    Maybe we should put limits on and/or ban all these items:
    knives, butter knives, forks, pencils, pens, anything with a sharp point, paper clips, cars, SUVs, trucks, detergents (can be used to make homemade bombs – ask anyone who is in the military); rat poison, any type of poisons, drugs, prescription drugs, needles, plants with needles, matches, lighters, swords, short swords, bows, arrows, crossbows, billy clubs, nail files, scissors, sheers, machetes, TV (shows on them depicting all the crime and ways to harm people); movies all depicting crimes and how to do it, games, role playing games, video games, and I can go on and on and on.

    What none of us can do or control is the mental capacity of any one individual at any given time. We cannot determine what their ‘trigger’ is in their mind to send them off the deep end. Our Sheriff here just stopped a mass murdering of children in a school by a female who has mental problems. Her weapon of choice? a Bomb! not guns, but was going to use a bomb. Tim McVey used bombs, Charlie Manson didn’t use guns, Jeffrey Doehmer didn’t use guns, Jim (?) who used poison, actually used his capacity to get people to follow him to commit suicide all together, and back in 1927, the most horrendous crime ever in the history of the US involving children it was dynamite that was used.

    There are those who try to depict gun owners as bad people, and try to twist the truth, but the truth is that countries, and states with the heaviest gun controls are the places with the highest crimes. The News Media who are the real predators and perverted individuals preying on the innocent do not reveal all the news that involves mass murders in other countries that do not involve guns. Their agenda is to be against guns and will only report those crimes involving guns and they exploit the crimes over and above their realities. They sensationalize everything involving guns. They speak nothing of crimes that do not involve crimes. If we just shut up the news media, we will all be better off. Then those poor unfortunate people with mental issues will not see these people who have done these horrendous crimes as some sort of ‘hero’ in their eyes, and will not look at it as a way to get noticed, or their name in the books, and/or plastered all over the news should they not commit suicide and stay alive to see themselves in the papers, magazines, tv, and on the radio. They will not look at the news and the crimes as they themselves being able to do more better than that person did. Stop the News from sensationalizing all this stuff. Start actually taking a good look at the mentally ill, the reason why people become who they are, helping people be better vs drugging them into mindless zombies. I worked at our State Behavioral Health Department facilitating some of the meetings of those with mental disabilities, worked with a gal who was taking 10-15 different drug medications a day. She was like a walking zombie. When she took less of these drugs, she actually functioned like a real person and was able to do her job and do it well; Did she need a couple medications, yes, She was bi-polar. So yes, she did need something to control her ups/down swings. Not 10-15 different medications that kept her in sleep mode all day long though. Start really looking into bottom line problems vs going after that which you do not know or understand. Get rid of your fears by taking classes and learning.

    When some crazy person attacks you, your family, your child, breaks into your home, destroys everything, starts beating you, you’ll be glad you went and took a class, and had something with which to defend yourself and your family and take the bad guy out. Many woman I know and met at Concealed weapons classes were rape victims. They are no longer victims. They know how to defend themselves and defend themselves well and safely.

    Posted by Francine Romesburg | December 21, 2012, 12:17 pm
  7. right because Nancy Lanzas guns kept her from being a victim….oh wait….

    Posted by Sgaile-beairt | December 21, 2012, 4:03 pm
  8. Even a moron could pull a trigger. It at least takes some intelligence to build a bomb. It’s just a simple matter of reducing the odds. To take it one step further, these chemicals exist for a purpose other than being an instrument to maim or kill. Guns exist for the sole purpose to kill. So banning gasoline and laundry detergent is not even an argument. Even explosives are used for other commercial purposes like demolition. The counter argument to ban household chemicals makes no sense at all.

    Posted by Andy | December 21, 2012, 6:22 pm
  9. Stuff bioweapons, I want nukes. Big nukes. Many many megatons, no, gigatons of. boomballs.

    For all the “I’m derailing by picking at tiny errors, and blaming everything but guns, like ebil Big Pharma, doctors, car manufacturers, seasonal fruit, and an overabundance of soft furnishings” – we’re not buying it.

    My country has guns, the same meds, a panoply of fruit, and plenty of cushions and sofas. But we have strict gun control, and no mass shootings for nearly twenty years.

    Weird, huh?

    Posted by boostick | December 23, 2012, 9:25 am
  10. I could do quite well without a 2nd Amendment.

    http://bgladd.blogspot.com/2012/12/force-majeure.html

    Posted by Bobby Gladd | December 30, 2012, 3:04 pm
  11. Two sperms make a life?? Mmm – as soon as that appeared I thought this was a sensible post.

    Posted by Catherine Voutier | January 9, 2013, 9:02 pm

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Pingback: Dr. Jen Gunter: il 2° emendamento mi dà il diritto di detenere anche armi biologiche, no? « Sbagliando s'impera - December 21, 2012

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Recent Tweets

%d bloggers like this: