If you've watched thousands of B-Movies like I have, then you've experienced the, “Well, Why Not?” moment. In the middle of a bad Space Opera, a pack of Amazons on horseback attack. Why? “Well, Why Not?” Why is the girl in the black bikini suddenly wrestling the girl in the white bikini in a pit filled with jello? “Well, Why Not?”
In fiction this is a sign of a bad writer, one who just gets a few random scenes they want to see flash through their head and jot them down. Tyeing it to a plot, too much work.
When I watch these movies, those type scenes make me laugh my ass off. But even in the very cheesiest B-Movies, you have time to catch your breath in between them. So why doesn't the news maintain the same strict standards as Ed Wood did when writing a script?
How can “reporters” not burst out laughing when asked to interview someone who says the shooting at Sandy Hook was a hoax and asks, “Why?” The answer is usually, “Well, Why Not?” Followed by how it a secret plan by Obama to launch a program three times the size of the Apollo program, to take everyone's guns. Seriously, if there was zero resistance the cost of buying the 300 million guns in America valued between $200 and $10,000, not including collectibles, would easily cost more than the Interstate Highway System (the largest public works program in history). When asked “Why would they undertake that big of an investment?” The answer is “Well, Why Not?”
Except for Micheal Bay's, movies that have “Well, Why Not?” moments are shunned by the public. So how did we get to a point where we allow them on the News?
Someone said to me, “The pro-gun lobby makes some good points.” I had to laugh in their face and then apologize. They weren't wrong, even the NRA makes some good points, but those points are drown out by the incredibly stupid, “Well, Why Not?” points.
As far as lowering gun deaths while respecting legal gun owners property rights, the answer is simple. Get STOLEN guns off the street. If we had a crack down similar to the “War on Drugs” on STOLEN guns it would reduce gun violence in two ways.
STOLEN guns are used in most gun deaths. Cracking down on them would reduce gun deaths, that's a no brainer. Second, criminals break into houses to steal thing they can sell easily. A $6,000 AK-47 is a tempting target. Right now, a stolen one can fetch a high price. If you were a thief what would you take? 6,000 DVDs or a AK-47 if both brought the same price.
If a STOLEN gun brought the same response as an ounce of coke on the street, the market for STOLEN guns would get much smaller.
Not only wouldn't this cause an undue burden on legal gun owners. All they would have to do is report a stolen gun. It would make them safer as their gun collection would be less of a target.
So if you want to talk to me about a serious issue, gun violence or anything else, and don't want me to laugh in your face, don't say something so outrageous that it can only be backed up by, “Well, Why Not?”
By Darrell B. Nelson author of I KILLED THE MAN THAT WASN'T THERE