Rep. Steve Stockman’s (R-Texas) statement that “If babies had guns they wouldn’t be aborted” sparked a bunch of mental images and thoughts that I, of course, had never before imagined.
The first image was that of a mini gun traveling up the vaginal tract to the fetus. I’m sure that profit-hungry-degenerate Wayne LaPierre is already looking into the possibility of manufacturing and “installing” this type of gun. The second image was of a full-term baby shooting his/her way out of the birth canal. Ignore that this could result in injury and death to the mother. We all know that “anti-choicers” (I refuse to call those that are beholden to the NRA and who support the death penalty “pro-life”) only care about human life up to the moment of birth.
But, anyway, I started thinking about Stockman’s statement and wondered if maybe something good could come out of it. What if we were to combine the two issues as Stockman did (but in a more intelligent and constructive way) to reach a compromise on abortion and gun control? Both sides would have to be willing to make huge concessions but it could work.
For example, the pro-choice camp could agree to limit abortions to the first 8 weeks of pregnancy, about 2 more weeks than the new draconian North Dakota anti-abortion law that “…forbids abortion once a fetal heartbeat is ‘detectable,’…as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.” In exchange, all assault weapons and high-capacity magazines would be banned, rifles would only be allowed for licensed hunters, and only one handgun would be allowed per household for personal protection. These gun-control measures would be retroactive so citizens would be required to surrender their assault weapons, extra guns and ammunition.
Right. I’m sure that by now my proposal sounds pretty stupid to both camps. However, when compared to Stockman’s idiotic statement, mine could be considered brilliant. Don’t you agree?