NY Times Publishes Blistering Attack On ‘War Profiteering’ Gun Industry

The New York Times continues to slam America’s poisonous gun culture with a scathing op-ed denouncing the gun industry for “war profiteering.” Specifically, for selling guns originally designed for military use to civilians:

Across recent decades, gun manufacturers, facing a decline in general gun ownership as demographics shifted and sports hunting faded, have cynically created a domestic market for barely altered rifles and pistols developed for the military. These are weapons designed for the rapid spray-shooting of multiple enemy soldiers in wartime, not homeland civilians living in peace.

The NRA and ammosexuals like to play semantics with the phrase “military-grade,” insisting that it’s a meaningless statement about guns clearly meant for warfare. They ramble on about stocks and barrel length and haughtily accuse gun control advocates of being ignorant about guns. And it might actually be true except for the fact that the gun industry markets them as…weapons of war:

“As Close as You Can Get Without Enlisting,” reads one tag line under a photo of a poised shooter aiming the civilian version of a military rifle. An ad for a semiautomatic shotgun promises security whether in “Iraq, Afghanistan, Your Livingroom.” An ad for an armor-piercing handgun shows an embattled infantryman above the line: “Built For Them … Built For You.”

Are you saying the gun industry is lying about these guns being military-grade? I may have to ask you to step outside and settle this with the .50-caliber sniper rifle the NYT helpfully points out that an 18-year-old can buy. Why would anyone ever need to own a weapon “designed to pierce concrete bunkers and armored personnel carriers?” I suspect the typical answer from a gun fetishist would be “freedom” and “protection from tyranny.” But, let’s be honest here, the actual reason is because it gives the civilian shooter a creepy sexual thrill.

The fact is that the gun industry has flooded our streets with weapons uniquely suited to mass shootings. They then profit, as the Times puts it, “off popular fears generated by the very shooting sprees made possible by their assault weapons” while bribing and bullying Congress into making it ever more easy for these weapons of war to be sold and carried everywhere. Not since the heyday of tobacco companies has an industry so aggressively sold a product with the full knowledge of how many deaths they would be directly responsible for.

Except it’s even worse now. The tobacco industry would be much happier if their product was not lethal. The gun industry, on the other hand, needs a body count. The higher, the better. The more blood spilled, the more guns they’ll sell. It’s possibly the most vile and cynical business plan ever conceived.

I hope the Times keeps it up. The only way we’ll ever end the daily bloodshed is if the screams of outrage from sane Americans are louder than the unhinged rantings of the ammosexual minority.

Featured image via Cagle.com