Craziest Republican of the Day: Ron Johnson

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Yes, it goes to the junior senator from Wisconsin, the Tea Party Republican who beat incumbent Russ Feingold in 2010 (largely because he got caught up in the Republican wave and because no one knew what he was really about politically, having never run for office before -- and because Wisconsin was crazy, as is frequently the case). From The Raw Story:

Tea party-backed Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) says that the right to own high-capacity ammunitions magazines like the 100-round drum that was used to kill at least a dozen people in Colorado last week is a "basic freedom" that is protected by the U.S. Constitution.

Fox News host Chris Wallace on Sunday asked Johnson why people needed military-grade weapons like the AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and large ammunition clips used by the shooter in Aurora, Colorado where at least 12 were killed and 58 were wounded.

"The left always uses the term 'assault rifle,' and they're really talking about semi-automatic weapons that are used in hunting," Johnson explained. "That's what happens in Wisconsin. These are rifles that are used in hunting. Just the fact of the matter is this is really not an issue of guns. This is about sick people doing things you simply can't prevent. It's really an issue of freedom."

Really? Hunters use these weapons? If that's really the case, how insanely fucking ridiculous.

And, really? It's a "basic freedom"? Because the Founders were worried about the defence of a new and vulnerable nation in the late 1700s, that means they approved the private ownership of weapons beyond anything they could have imagined at the time?

"Does something that would limit magazines that can carry 100 rounds, would that infringe on the constitutional right?" Wallace wondered.

"I believe so," Johnson insisted. "There are magazines — 30-round magazines — that are just common all over the place. You simply can't keep these weapons out of the hands of sick, demented individuals that want to do harm."

First, you can't entirely prevent these weapons from getting in the hands of dangerous individuals, but you can certainly make it extremly difficult. But crazy (and crazed) pro-gun absolutists like Johnson are against even that -- against even trying.

Second, it's too easy to write off what happened as the actions of a "sick, demented" individual. That's not to say that James Holmes isn't sick and demented or was acting as part of some concerted effort, or that he was motivated by specific ideological attachments. No, it's just to say that he didn't act in a vacuum, which is to say, that he acted within a certain culture -- in this case a culture of violence that while not exclusively American is certainly more prevalent in the U.S. than in other Western countries. It's the culture of the Second Amendment, the culture of the NRA, the culture of extremists like Ron Johnson.

There won't be nearly enough examination of that culture and its political underpinnings in response to the shooting in Colorado, largely because the right screams bloody murder whenever it comes under scrutiny, and whenver it looks like there might be momentum towards meaningful gun control, but we won't achieve any meaningful understanding of what happened, and specifically why it happened, until there is.