Skip to main content

AR-15: The Must-Have Accessory for the Well-Dressed Republican

For decades, a standard tactic of anti-abortion activists was to display, in as much gruesome detail as possible, photos of aborted fetuses.

It was a vile tactic — an easy punch in the gut to the gullible and squeamish — but it’s hard to deny its effectiveness, or the inflammatory role it played in the culture wars. It was, in a way, a harbinger of the death of Roe v. Wade.

Revulsion, whether we like it or not, is a real political tactic. An extreme tactic, to be sure, but it has its uses. Hold that thought.

I’ve been hard on The Washington Post for years, and it continues to irk me in many ways, but it, too, has its uses. The Post is one of a vanishing breed, a news organization with both the resources and resourcefulness to publish the kind of essential series it dropped last week: a deep dive into what can only be called the culture of the AR-15 assault rifle.

The series covers that culture from multiple angles — from the town that makes the rifles, to the people who buy them, to the experiences of those who’ve sustained appalling personal damage, losing limbs, loved ones, or both to this hideous weapon.

There are an estimated twenty million AR-15s in this country right now. Each can fire upwards of thirty bullets every second. Each can take out a small crowd in less than a minute. And when I say “take out,” I mean many will die on the spot, many will die in the next few hours or days, and many will spend the rest of their lives in a private hell, dealing with a cascade of life-altering injuries nobody wants to think about.

Nor does anyone want to think about the crime scene itself. Photos from these massacres are never made public, either by the press or by law enforcement. You might see a picture of a child's shoe or a Barbie doll, but you’ll never see a body on camera.

What they’re shielding us from is the “carnage” — a word descended from the Latin for ‘meat’ — which is, more or less, what these killing rooms are covered with. Raw remnants of human beings, some of them shredded, some with skulls exploded, some with legs ripped off, some with internal organs pureed, some only recognizable through their DNA. A lot of them children.

We hear plenty about the shooter, who usually enjoys his fifteen minutes of fame posthumously. We get the three-day media circus, which gives the next shooter delusions of grandeur. We get the fevered search for "motive," as if that matters. We get capsule biographies of the dead. We get thoughts and prayers from Republicans, and impotent rage from everyone else.

So for our own sanity, we move on. We leave the school, the town, and its traumatized residents to lick their horrible wounds. And still we remain clueless about the severity of those wounds — both physical and mental — and about the long-term trauma that sets in for the victims, their families, and their communities.

We feel lucky to be insulated from the reality of the devastation. We feel grateful that it hasn't touched us. And we feel scared that one day it might.

The Post, to its credit, tries to give the horror more dimension — some of it eye-popping — than we'd usually see. They show us, via animated simulation,  what these guns can do to a human body, but they stop well short of actual footage of the carnage.

The only ones who get to see it are the ones who have no choice — first responders, ER nurses, cops on the scene, jurors who need to assess guilt or innocence. Once in a while, you’ll hear one open up about it, and you realize none of them will ever be the same, either. Call them secondary victims. In the words of one surgeon, the body tissue “literally just crumbled in your hand.”

So nobody wants to look, and you couldn't if you wanted to. But what if we had to? What if we were forced to confront the grisly reality? What if revulsion were what it finally takes to shame this vastly over-armed population into sanity? What if the people who own these weapons could be made to understand how obscenely destructive they are?

Just as protesters brandished posters of fetuses at women entering abortion clinics, what if the people working in AR-15 factories saw pictures of puddled humans as they arrive at work? What if gun retailers had to be exposed to mutilated bodies before they could sell a gun that mutilates bodies. What if you couldn’t buy an AR-15 without seeing the gore it so efficiently processes?

Sometimes, the tactics of revulsion make sense. Sometimes, you can reduce a thousand words to one stomach-churning picture.

And the people who most need their stomachs churned — the ones who most need to see the blood, bone, and brain tissue they've inflicted on society — are Republican legislators.

If you haven’t heard, GOP congressmen have turned the AR-15 into, of all things, a lapel pin. It’s now a cute little fashion accessory, something they can wear proudly and without irony, to proclaim their patriotism, or at least their readiness to kill for their country.

This has finally superseded the idiotic flag pins that were practically mandatory political props in the twenty years following 9/11. If you remember, Fox stirred up three days of shocked indignation when Obama was spotted once without one, thereby confirming his Kenyan citizenship.

But that was about the American flag, another subject for another day. And those flag pins were never more than a tacky bit of symbolism, simple-minded but harmless.

The symbolism of an AR-15 lapel pin is anything but harmless. Every congressman wearing one is a walking billboard for violence, subjugation, and fascism. Every public figure flaunting that gun has blood on their hands. The GOP is, in so many ways, the party of death.

So how do we deal with people so depraved, so devoid of humanity, so infinitely tolerant of the accelerating rate of AR-15 atrocities?

Well, one thing we can do is rub their faces in it. Every congressional hearing involving guns should, from now on, be a show-and-tell. Democrats should use their time to show the enablers, in graphic detail, exactly what they've enabled.

Republicans, whose knowledge of the Constitution begins and ends with the Second Amendment, should be haunted by these images forever. May they never get a good night's sleep again.

And next time a gun case comes before SCOTUS — whose justices are reputed to traffic in several other amendments — the lawyers should enter the courtroom with briefcases full of AR-15 porn.

All these people need to see the real-world consequences of their precious gun fetish. And they need to see it in dying color.

 


Comments

  1. This is such a timely article. Today’s trump news has overshadowed the big news that Desantis quietly signed a permitless concealed carry law for Florida. (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/ron-desantis-quietly-signs-permitless-concealed-carry-law-rcna77934). As a merchant, I’m just waiting for the day when a gun-toter walks into my store with his fashion statement that screams, “I am powerful. Look at me. I can kill you.” You say, “What if the people who own these weapons could be made to understand how obscenely destructive they are?” THEY DON’T CARE!

    I propose a new fashion for legislators and congress people: Armor and helmets as they sit (like the sitting ducks in American classrooms) in their chambers without the advantage of magnetometers so that they will have to deal, like the rest of us, with the madness outside their safety zones.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You can't reason with these people. When classrooms of toddlers are massacred with assault rifles, they argue that the toddlers should be armed.

    I have a radical proposal. All elected Republicans must participate in a lottery. Whenever there is a shooting (death or not) of more than one person, a Republican is randomly selected to be euthanized. If they truly believe in America and the 2nd Amendment, they will willingly give their lives for them. We can even build a "Gun Martyr" monument for them. And NO ONE can sit out the lottery. Not Senators, not judges, not Presidents.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

France and Britain Just Gave the Finger to Fascism

There is now ample evidence that people with democratic systems of government actually like them, and would just as soon keep them, flaws and all. There seems to be a strong backlash occurring in several European countries, a trend toward shoring up democracies threatened by toxic authoritarian forces. In Poland last year, then in France and Britain last week, actual voters — as opposed to deeply compromised opinion polls — gave a big middle finger to the fascists in their midst. I don’t pretend to understand the electoral systems of these countries — let alone their political currents — but I’m struck by the apparent connections between different elections in different countries, and what they might be saying to us. I’ve spoken before of Poland , where ten years of vicious minority rule was overturned at the ballot box. A ban on abortion was the galvanizing issue — sound familiar? — and it brought an overwhelming number of voters to the polls, many for the fir

Don’t Let the New York Times Do Your Thinking

  My father would not live any place where the New York Times couldn’t be delivered before 7:00 a.m. To him, the Times was “the newspaper of record,” the keeper of the first drafts of history. It had the reach and the resources to be anywhere history was being made, and the skills to report it accurately. He trusted it more than any other news source, including Walter Cronkite. Like my dad, I grew to associate the Times with serious journalism, the first place one goes for the straight story. Their news was always assumed to be objectively presented, with the facts front-and-center. Their op-ed writers were well-reasoned and erudite, even when I thought they were full of shit. But there was more. The Times became — for me, at least — a sort of guide to critical thinking. It helped teach me, at an impressionable age, to weigh the facts before forming an opinion. And many of my opinions — including deeply-held ones — were formed around facts I might have read

Democrats, Step Away from the Ledge

  Anxiety comes easily to Democrats. We’re highly practiced at perceiving a crisis, wanting to fix it immediately, and being consistently frustrated when we can’t. Democrats understand consequences, which is why we always have plenty to worry about. Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about consequences — which is, let’s face it, their superpower. I wasn’t intending to write about last Thursday’s debate, mostly because I post on Tuesdays, and this could be old news by the time it gets to you. But then the New York Times weighed in with a wildly disingenuous editorial calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race, and the rest of the mainstream media piled on. In the Times' not-so-humble opinion, Biden needs to consider “the good of the country,” something their own paper has repeatedly failed to do for almost a decade. And since this is now the crisis du jour for virtually every Democrat who watched that shitshow, I thought I might at l