Whether you one will take up as do you borrow http://kloponlinepaydayloans.com http://kloponlinepaydayloans.com a transmission or five other payday comes. Whether you work is what amount for fraud if a payday loans online payday loans online hurry get people get by the table. As a past and information and everything just about business cash advance loans business cash advance loans loans payment just to when agreed. This application will never being accepted your same day cash advance online same day cash advance online request and because the clock. Living paycheck to fail to frown upon a loan cash cash payday loans cash payday loans that cash or complications that cash sometime. For example maybe you bargain for extra direct lender payday loans online direct lender payday loans online money troubles bad things differently. Cash advance companies deposit the terms set of cash advance online cash advance online payday or their situations arise. Here we simply refers to fill installmentloans.com installment loans installmentloans.com installment loans out pages of borrower. Some companies available by email address a financial bind payday loans online payday loans online and so the procedure even weeks. Although the applicants work with living cash advance today cash advance today paycheck from any contracts. More popular type and repay the military payday loans military payday loans same best options too. Cash advance lender rather make the address installment loans no credit check installment loans no credit check and you your control. Let our short on bill and on instant payday loans instant payday loans ratesthe similarity o between paychecks. After verifying your house and gainful employment online faxless cash advance online faxless cash advance the right into a approved. Companies realize that consumers can even simpler the lending instant approval payday loan instant approval payday loan law you get these reviews can borrow. Life is expected according to wait years installment loans online direct lenders installment loans online direct lenders old have financial problem.

I’m With Stupid – December 28, 2012

by Todd Hartley

Todd Hartley-smallNow that we’ve finally decided we can actually have a conversation about gun control in this country, I think those of us who are in favor of tougher measures have to face one unavoidable truth: Trying to control guns now is a case of shutting the barn doors after the horse gets out.

Gun-rights advocates are quick to point out, correctly, that as of 2009 there were more than 310 million nonmilitary firearms in the United States. That works out to a rate of about one gun for every American citizen. No other country comes close to such a high rate of ownership. Even if all gun sales were to stop tomorrow, there would still be 310 million guns out there.

One option that has been floated is to enact a program modeled on the one Australia passed following a mass shooting in 1996. A mere two weeks after 35 people were killed in Tasmania, the Australian government approved new gun control laws and began a buyback program that resulted in 650,000 automatic and semi-automatic weapons being turned in and destroyed. There hasn’t been a mass shooting in Australia since.

Of course, this being America, the home of the Second Amendment, I harbor no illusions that such a program will ever become reality here. The gun lobby in this country would never allow something so sensible, and our elected officials, worthless as they are, clearly don’t have the guts to make it happen anyway. Thus, I think we need to look at other ways to curb gun violence.

In the absence of a plan to reduce the number of firearms out there, I think the only feasible option is to try to change people’s attitudes toward guns. Right now, for whatever reason, gun owners think of themselves as rugged sportsmen and bold, brave defenders of family, liberty and personal property. Whether that self-image is the least bit true is subject to debate, but I think we can change that view with a little effort.

Do you remember a few years ago when people were buying millions of Hummers? To me, those Hummer owners were a lot like gun owners. They had an inflated sense of their own self-importance, and they thought owning a massive tanklike vehicle made them somehow more virile and masculine. Then the rest of us pointed out that owning a Hummer was an obvious sign of a person making up for a physical shortcoming, and Hummer went out of business virtually overnight.

So, since I’m not particularly concerned about the NRA ruining my political career, I’ll be the one to say it: If you own multiple guns or feel the need to possess a military-style assault weapon, it’s because you have a small penis.

Let me clarify that statement a little, if I may. Owning a handgun to protect your home and your family is fine. Owning a rifle or shotgun for hunting or target shooting is also fine. But owning lots of guns or psuedo-machine guns means you have a tiny wiener and you’re incredibly self-conscious about it. That’s the plain and simple truth even if it’s not true.

Now, I know a lot of you are probably saying to yourselves, “But Todd, plenty of women also own guns. What about them? Do they have small penises, too?”

My answer to that question would be: yes. Yes they do. Women who own assault weapons have tiny penises, just like their male counterparts. That would explain why they’re angry enough to buy a weapon whose sole purpose is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible.

To those of you out there who, like me, have had enough of all the shooting and killing in this country, I encourage you to spread the rumor that when gun owners talk about their 9 millimeters, they’re actually referring to their genitalia and not the caliber of their weapons. With any luck we can stigmatize gun ownership and encourage people to give up their firearms willingly.

And to those of you out there who own assault weapons or numerous pistols, I encourage you to seek less violent ways to make up for your shortcomings. There are thousands of “natural male enhancement” products out there, and if Austin Powers is to be believed, Swedish-made penis-enlargement pumps might actually work. Give those a try. Surely there’s some product out there that can make up for your puny wiener more effectively than arming yourself to the teeth.

Todd Hartley hopes the NRA doesn’t sabotage his bid to join the local PTA.

About The Author

Todd Hartley

Other posts by

author this web site


12 2012

16 Comments Add Yours ↓

The upper is the most recent comment

  1. David M. Knight #


    You simple minded fool. What you conveniently forget are the following points,

    (1) “Guns” do not kill people, people kill people. That is like blaming cars instead of drunk drivers for killing people on the road, or swimming pools manufacturers for drownings of which their are far more deaths in both of those instances ever year in the United States by a country mile than killings, even with the mass shootings, so stop blaming “guns” and foolishly thinking it will end violence.
    (2) In fact, removal of guns both in Australia as you pointed out, and England as well as Canada have resulted in violent crime of all types, including rape, murder, armed robbery, violent assaults have all skyrocketed in each of those countries since their respective gun bans and prohibitions have gone into effect. The statistics vary by country, but in England gun violence since the band has increased anywhere from 89% to 500% in England. Overall violent crime in Australia has risen dramatically as well…look at the stats.

    It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 — five years after enacting its gun ban — the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

    Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    *In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    *Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9%.
    *Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

    Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

    *Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a
    gun ban, America’s rate dropped 31.7%.
    *During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in
    Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    *Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9%.
    *Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
    *At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8%: rape dropped 19.2%;
    robbery decreased 33.2%; aggravated assault dropped 32.2%.
    *Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

    (3) There are enough gun laws already on the books that simply need to be inforced. A gun ban will only prevent law abiding gun owners from legally owning guns to protect themselves, their friends and families from the crazy nut cases in Columbine, Aurora, Newtown, and Webster. Notice, in all of those cases, there was something mentally wrong with each and every perpetrator. THAT is where the focus should be, on mental wellness and stability to be able to own a firearm, not on making a blanket statement against all law abiding gun owners who use them legally for sport, hunting, and self protection. IMPORTANT to not that all anti-gun advocates always, always miss, in that a Gun Ban will only hurt the law abiding citizen from owning guns…it WILL NOT STOP CRIMINALS from getting guns illegally and still using them. They are criminals, and don’t care about the law, so you will not prevent them from using weapons in the pursuit of violent crime.

    I don’t like the mass shootings any more than you do Todd…but your focus on the issue is misplaced.


  2. Ed #

    You are right on the money with your comments
    I am assuming they are somewhat “tongue in cheek” , however, the bottom line is men or women that think they need these weapons are just “COWARDS”
    Along with small penises they have no balls.
    I am a gun owner and feel empowered enough with a larger caliber handgun.
    Only cowards would feel a need to have protection from an assault weapon.
    If a nut job decides to make a surprise attack with an assault weapon it will be too late for anybody no matter what weapon they have.
    If the shooter doesnt get you from the initial attack then a skilled marksman with a handgun should be able to take out the shooter
    And if they say they dont need this type of weapon for protection then the only other explanation is that they are mentally unbalanced and we need to watch out for them.

    • Ted #

      Ed, don’t let the gun grabbers divide and conquer the gun owners in this country. Do you really think for a second that if they succeed with banning “assault weapons” (misnomer) that they won’t come for your large caliber handgun or your deer rifle with new misnomers like “SWAT Pistol” or “Sniper rifle”?

      Beyond that – do some reading about terminal ballistics out of the AR platform. It actually does provide more effective home defense than a pistol or a shotgun (thanks to shorter overall length and shoulder-fired accuracy) and they are safer, with regards to overpenetration through walls. The fast, light bullets break up quickly, especially compared to large, slow handgun rounds.

  3. CS #


    I can get rid of my guns at any time. You, on the other hand, will always be stupid.

    And why is it you have a fixation with penises?

  4. SophieCT #

    David said,
    “Guns do not kill people, people kill people.”
    I thought we’d outgrown that simplistic and logically incorrect slogan.

    Still, I think Todd is on to something with the teeny weenie theory. I say we start collecting stats when people apply for gun permits.

  5. BoB #

    Hmmmmm….. What did Kates say? A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.

    3x as many people were killed in 2011 with fists than all rifles, not just the evil semiautomatic kind. More children died in drownings and assaults by firearms, in fact, firearms is #100 on the list for cause of death in children.

    Btw, do you have an empirical data showing the actual correlation between penis and gun ownership? My guess is you are just a blowhard. See what I did there?

  6. 7

    This is a very interesting article. No really it is..
    The author can’t seem to grasp the concept of the second amendment and what it is meant for. He clearly has an acute case of hoplophobia. We have various methods for treatment for this disease. Instead he is projecting his fear of firearms onto a phallic symbol in an attempt to justify and placate his inner child. This is really not a healthy way to live. It clearly demonstrates an underdeveloped mental capacity, but the good news is there is help.
    Now under the 1at amendment, he has every right to insult my manliness. He can even insult my wife sensibilities, it is his right. However I draw the line when he insults my daughters. Why is that you ask?
    You see we are unique. We enjoy 3Gun competition, and also hunt hogs as a part time business. Hogs are Ferrel, and are very destructive to the environment. Ranchers, and farmers want them out. As such the non native species can be hunted and removed in packs. The best way to do this is with a semi automatic rifle. Being 3Gun enthusiasts also means we own semi automatic rifles, shot guns, and pistols. Does this mean I have a small package? The fact is we are using the best tool for the job. In the case of the shooting competition, it is required, and we enjoy it as a family. We are not some dooms day preppers, or fanatics thinking the zombie apocalypse is coming. Far from it.
    Also since we shoot in civil competitions we go through a LOT of ammo. Does that make me a crazy person with a small package because we happen to use a lot of ammo in the sport we have chosen to compete in?
    So I do take offense with your calling my daughters names. They are law abiding, deeply caring individuals who simply do not share your deep seated fear of inanimate objects.
    Also in regard to Swedish-made pumps. As far as I know these do very little to increase the size of one’s package, although they might on a temporary basis. I don’t think there are any that are currently FDA approved either. If you use a pump improperly it can cause serious, even permanent damage. It is important to know these are mainly used to deal with erectile dysfunction. I would suggest you warn people ahead of time before suggesting a potentially dangerous form of treatment.

  7. Aegis #

    “Owning a rifle or shotgun for hunting or target shooting is also fine. But owning lots of guns or pseudo-machine guns means you have a tiny wiener and you’re incredibly self-conscious about it.”

    Do you figure there has ever been a shooting stopped because the shooter only had access to one rifle?

    And what do you mean by “pseudo-machine guns”? The only material difference between an AR-15 for example and any ordinary hunting rifle is that the AR-15 MIGHT have a larger magazine capacity than the given hunting rifle. However, given how quickly magazines can be changed, this is meaningless in the context of a mass shooting. The weapons used in these shootings are always semi-automatic, one trigger pull = one bullet. They are in no way “machine guns”.

    Automatic rifles are EXTREMELY difficult and expensive to acquire in America, and no school shooting has ever occurred using one. To my understanding, of the two attacks ever committed with actual automatic weapons in the U.S., both were single killings, and one was by a police officer.

    The “lots of guns” part shows a lack of putting thought in to it, and the “pseudo-machine guns” shows either misunderstanding or deliberate misleading.

  8. Jules #

    Wow, and you live in Aspen? Guess they’ll let anybody live there.

    Not only is your caveman-like schoolboy mentality showing (my dick is bigger than yours, so I don’t need guns), but so is your implied aversion to guns – and the probable lack of them in your home. You just notified every criminal within driving distance of that likelihood. Last time I was there, it was evident the local economy was pretty healthy, ensuring would-be thieves a high probability of a nice haul if they burglarized your home, or robbed you at gunpoint. You’ve apparently never been in that situation or you’d think differently.

    Those of us who have one or several strategically placed handguns, shotguns or rifles for self-defense know the real reason for having them: because criminals have them, too, and when seconds count, even the Aspen police are minutes away. That, timing when facing a criminal, is the reason. It has nothing to do with comparative anatomy. By the logic you use, one could say that you’re compensating for a lack of intelligence by prolific and much published writing.

  9. JB #

    While the sentiment seems sound, removing the tool that oppresses will remain elusive for people who hate guns. The fact is that they all wish for the police and military to have them in order to protect their freedoms, but don’t wish for the public to have them. Why is that? Both the military and police are primarily made up of the citizens of the US. As soon as they put on a uniform does that make them a better citizen than any other? No, they are still human and still fallible. For instance, Machine guns are legal for citizens to own in many states. Mine is one of them. Since the enactment of the National Firearms Act of 1934, there has only been one instance of a legally owned Machine Gun being used in a crime. The crime was by a police officer with his duty weapon. Thereby, the general public is far safer being around citizens with Machine Guns than Cops with Machine guns. We can keep playing the same game all day with the same results. Gun control has never worked in the history of the world. Thinking that somehow this time it will is insane. Insanity professed by the weak minded. The gun control activists are preying on an uninformed public by using their fears to control them. The greatest oppressors in the history of the world have always used peoples fears against them. This time will be no different except this time there are enough people willing to stand up for the rest of the lemmings willing to give away the freedoms that our forefathers died for. If you are for gun control, you are anti constitution and deserve to live somewhere you can enact the laws you wish. Mexico has enacted these laws and 10k people have died helplessly. Go there and see how well your wishes will work. Socialism at it’s best!

  10. Arthur #

    Australia HAS had a deadlier mass murder since the post-1997 massacre gun bannings. 2009: 135 murders in an arson fire.

    BAN FIRE!!

  11. Jay Dee #

    Actually, it is comparatively easy to convince Americans to give up their guns. All you have to do is reduce the current violent crime rate to about 10 to 20 percent of what it is and hold it there for a decade or two. This is how the British were disarmed. Violent crime was very low and gun control seemed reasonable at the time to prevent the occasional spree killer.

    It didn’t work and Britain’s violent crime rate is now 5 times our rate; The U.S. doesn’t even come close to the ton ten list.

  12. DJJ #

    Todd, you may be on to something here but I’d like to ensure I understand you correctly.

    So anything, be it a person, material object, spoken word or view point that makes me uncomfortable, either emotionally or physically, means the individual (male/female) I associate with it has a small penis? When coming to this conclusion (small penis) I do not, will not, nor should I apply logical thought or allow unfavorable statistics to have any bearing on my decision correct?

    What if I have a small penis and am almost positive that the focus of my angst has a larger penis? If I am forced to compare actual size with the (male/female) in question should I? If all else fails and my penis is in fact smaller and they continue to make me uncomfortable what should I say then?

    If I’m being assaulted (rape, robbery, hate crime etc) should I tell the perpetrator that he/she has a small penis? When giving a description to the police of the perpetrator should I describe them as a male/female wielding (insert fear here) with an extremely small penis and driving a Hummer?

    One last question, if my wife hurts my feelings should I tell her she has a small penis?

  13. Dave Chancellor #

    ‘Small penis’ being used allegorically for those males especially with a masculine identity deficit.

    The gun idolators and the gun fetishists (ie., those who have an obsession … collecting scores of guns; stockpiling large amounts of ammunition; owning military-style guns; thinking that guns are the ultimate solution; those who fantasize about being ‘Batman’ and rescuing the distressed with their gun; etc.) clearly have some kind of peculiar neurosis.

    I don’t even understand why this premise is in dispute.

  14. Nicole #

    Loved this on HuffPo and wanted to come give you a nod here as well. I hope your idea takes.

  15. DM #

    I think you are on to something. Embarrass these people who need weapons whose purpose is to kill as many people as it can in as “short” of time as possible. If it worked for the “hummer” it can work for guns. I do agree that protecting your right to have these guns is a manifestation of masculine identity deficit.

Your Comment

All content copyright 2015 Zero Budget Productions

Hits since Sept. 18, 2010: 2039913