Prime Trolling – Arm The Homeless With Shotguns


The point of politics, in that ethereal state of perfection which does not actually exist, is to propose and then enact collective solutions to problems which cannot be solved through individual or voluntary action. Then we’ve got the usual grasping monstrosities who actually get elected. But still some do try, however fitfully, to offer actual policies which will solve actual problems as a means to their gaining the office enabling them to enact such policies. Naive rubes of course, but still some try.

Which brings us to this chain of logic. The homeless suffer violence at the hands of the more evil or opportunistic among our society. Well, OK, American society. The police, that societally approved and paid for method of limiting violence against the citizenry aren’t much use here. So, therefore, arm the homeless. Further, use crowdfunded money to pay for the guns to arm the homeless.

We can also note that this plan is properly thought through. In order to own a handgun you must have an address. Not something that homeless people tend to have. Therefore we should buy them shotguns:

A US Senate candidate is campaigning to arm “victimised” homeless people with pump-action shotguns so they can defend themselves against violent crime.

Brian Ellison, a Libertarian Party candidate in Michigan hoping to run in November’s midterm election, believes the proposed initiative would help reduce violent offences against the homeless.

The former US Army veteran, who served in Iraq from 2003-04, believes America’s homeless population is “one of the most marginalised and victimised groups” in society and are “significantly more likely” to be victims of a crime compared to the general public.

As I say, properly thought through:

Mr Ellison told The Guardian that the ideal weapon would be a pistol, however a registered address is needed under US gun laws, while no permit is required to openly carry a rifle or shotgun.

This is perhaps better thought of as trolling of course. A Libertarian candidate in the US is, despite the honourable existence of candidates like Mike Munger, only a short step up from Canada’s Rhinoceros Party, or Screaming Lord Sutch over here. Once we’ve excluded the Randian nutters they’re honest, principled and often even right but with about as much chance of being elected as David Edward himself even from the grave. Thus the electoral tactic of such prime trolling.

Still, better than the Momentum tactic of promising everyone free everything but they’ve not the courage to stand as their own party, do they?