No one needs guns (Woody said so!)

Woody Bass hates guns. Hates 'em. Despises, detests, loathes, and abhors them. It can even safely be said that he execrates them. Announcing to the world the depth of that hatred seems to have been the sole point of this column. I really have to look into that journalism gig--if people would pay me to write about my irrational hatreds, not only would I have a new source of income, but I would also have more opportunities to discuss how I really feel about the designated hitter rule in American League baseball.

In Woody's defense, he does provide readers with an explanation about what qualifies him as an authority on guns. That authority rests on the fact that (have I mentioned this before?) he really, r-e-a-l-l-y HATES them--in college, he even wrote three papers about them in one semester (riveting reading, I'm sure), and he "cannot begin to tell" us (I'm heartbroken) "how many extremely heated discussions I’ve had with friends and family about guns." Ahh--an expert.

But as far as I am concerned, no one needs a gun at all. Not you, certainly not me. Not good people. Not bad people

Like many people who share his hatred, he's a big fan of the argument that people don't need guns. Well thank you very much, Woody, for going to the trouble of determining my needs (and everyone else's--you've certainly been busy), but it seems to me that my needs aren't your determination to make. Furthermore, am I to understand that anything not needed (according to you) is to be despised? By that "reasoning," it would seem that Woody advocates a return to a paleolithic culture--after all, technology and civilization beyond that point isn't really needed for survival.

He then enlightens us with this odd (and rather alarming) sentence:

The general public has no reason to own firearms such as semi-automatic guns or assault rifles and should be completely banned and destroyed, along with all the other types of guns (as far as I am concerned).

Now I'm no professional writer, and I've never written three papers on guns and "gun control" in one semester of college, but I still cannot help but notice that careful reading of that sentence would seem to indicate that Woody advocates that the general public "be completely banned and destroyed." That's just not nice, Woody--even by caveman standards.

The rest of what he has to say is fairly standard "people do not kill people, guns kill people" (of their own volition, apparently) rhetoric--the usual shrill anti-rights extremist screaming. He does promise that next week he'll propose his plan to "eliminate some, if not the majority" of what he claims is the "irresponsibility" of people buying guns for self-defense without knowing enough about them (I wonder what constitutes knowing enough about them to satisfy Woody--writing three papers about them, perhaps?). I'm certainly waiting with bated breath to see that proposal.

Luckily, there's an easy solution to the problem of your obsessive aversion for guns, Woody--don't buy any. Problem solved. Don't thank me--I'm glad I could help. Far be it from me to contest your right to be voluntarily (enthusiastically voluntarily, even) disarmed.