Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau

Doonesbury

Comments (95) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. leftwingpatriot

    leftwingpatriot GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    “…and forget about a tip.”

  2. DavidHuieGreen

    DavidHuieGreen said, over 2 years ago

    just so you don’t shoot anybody for messing up an order

  3. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    Don’t businesses have the right to keep people out or not? Hard since they can’t be racist now.

  4. gkid

    gkid said, over 2 years ago

    I had to laugh at DavidHuieGreen’s post. :)

  5. KennyVon

    KennyVon said, over 2 years ago

    If starbucks lost the pro gun folks, it would Seriously Hurt their bottom line… and they are savvy enough to realize that. So there is Not a Big deal made about guns in their stores.

  6. Coyoty

    Coyoty GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    When you ask for a shot, be very clear you mean espresso.

  7. the old professor

    the old professor said, over 2 years ago

    I’m so grateful to live in a place where the concept of carrying guns in pubic is seen as insane.

  8. Jonathan Mason

    Jonathan Mason said, over 2 years ago

    What is it with Americans and guns? Why on earth should anyone other than the police or military be allowed to walk around carrying a gun? Crazy.

  9. FlyinHeavy

    FlyinHeavy said, over 2 years ago

    @Jonathan Mason

    Jonathan, a major point is that the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the police do not exist to protect individuals. That is the responsibility of the individual. Add to that a perhaps unique American thought that you shouldn’t just give a criminal what they want as that encourages them, and you can see where the thought process leads. See Castle Rock v. Gonzalez for the latest court case to address the subject.

  10. the old professor

    the old professor said, over 2 years ago

    @FlyinHeavy

    Court cases and interpretations of the law aren’t really the point, imo. Having more guns in circulation does not equal more safety, but more danger. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be much middle ground on this question. :-(

  11. Kara Kalel

    Kara Kalel GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    @Jonathan Mason

    I carry concealed, and I’ve needed it twice to stop robberies (or something worse)!

  12. Richard S. Russell

    Richard S. Russell GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    If donut shops banned people openly carrying firearms strapped to their hips, what would the cops do?

  13. Make Mine Marvel

    Make Mine Marvel said, over 2 years ago

    @theoldprofessor: “carrying guns in pubic” is seen as insane in a lot of places. I think it’s also pretty unsafe, but maybe that’s what floats your boat. Just don’t ask me to reload for you.

    I’ve been boycotting Starbucks for several months now over this issue. They may need the customers who carry guns, but I have plenty of alternatives for coffee.

  14. Doughfoot

    Doughfoot said, over 2 years ago

    In the 19th century, the law in most parts of America was that guns could not be carried within city limits, though you could have them in your home or business to protect them. Carrying a concealed weapon was banned in most states as “cowardly” and “unmanly.”

    Citizens were liable to a draft in time of war, however, and it was thought that competence with a rifle contributed to the security of the nation: conscripts might at least not be completely unfamiliar with the sort of weapon they would be called upon to use in wartime.

    Living, as most Americans did, in the country, guns were necessary. They were used for hunting, to kill animals that might threaten one’s own livestock, and in a pinch, be used to protect one’s home and family by warding off threatening strangers. In rural areas, the police were nonexistent or too far away to be of any immediate help.

    And then there were two other things: (1) The “frontier experience” that did so much to define the American identity. The American was the “white man in Indian country” who had to rely upon himself and the superior technology of his weapons to enable him to live beyond the compact village of European experience. To be a white man was to protect your women folk from the “red savages” … out there. And (2) Centuries of slavery, in which a white minority ruled over a black majority and maintained the upper hand by the superior technology of their weapons. To be a white man was to protect your women folks from the “black savages” that surrounded you. The very men who wrote the second amendment also approved gun-control laws: laws to keep guns out of the hands of blacks.

    Racism is mostly unconscious these days, but ask the biggest “self-defense” fanatics what sort of threat they are protecting themselves against, and, if they were honest, they would probably admit that the image that popped into their heads would not be that of someone who looked or sounded much like themselves, but the much scarier image of someone quite different, and most often, with darker skin than themselves. Generations of experience don’t disappear easily or quickly, though the ghosts of those days may reappear in curious form.


    None of this explains the current phenomena. Until the 1950s, handguns were, comparatively, rare. Rifles and shotguns, designed for hunting, were by far the most common weapons owned. For a hundred years, the NRA was really an organization devoted to field sports, and even supported early gun control efforts. Nearly everyone agreed with the laws to make machine guns difficult and expensive to obtain. In short, until the 1950s there was pretty much a consensus that guns were useful, sometimes necessary, in most hands harmless, though some sorts of weapons should be regulated, especially in crowded, urban areas.

    Then came the upheavals of the 1960s. The rise of African Americans, the deep cultural divisions, rising crime, urban unrest and all that. Americans wanted better protection from the perceived chaos around them. For half of Americans, that meant taking guns out of circulation one way or another. For the other half, it meant arming up as never before. Gun-control fanatics and gun-rights fanatics created one another. The more strident one became, the more strident the other became. The gun-toter in this cartoon is, to one half of America, the patriot standing up for his rights, preserving a culture of self-reliance, and protecting the children and women folk, and to the other half of America, he appears a boor, a thug, and a threatening bully, to say the least.

    Today Americans own more guns by far than they ever have before. But the number of gun owners continues to fall, as does the violent crime rate. A smaller number of gun owners own a large and larger number of guns. Manufacturers aggressively market guns to all sorts of people, including small children. Most gun owners already have the firepower to defend their homes against intruders, but not necessarily to fight a war. And that is why so much advertising talks about “tactical weapons” and so forth. Gun buyers who hate to think of their arsenals as just collections of toys or noise-makers (though they may never use any of their guns for hunting, competitive shooting, or self-defense), like to think they are preparing themselves to “defend liberty.” Gun-makers love people who want to ban guns, because every move toward restrictions tends to boost sales. Mass random shooting like the one at Newtown also boost gun sales: first because gun nuts fear new laws, and secondly because it feeds their desire (and that’s what it is) to see the world as a dangerous place and themselves as defenders of the innocent.

    The Supreme Court has ruled, pretty definitively, that Americans have a right to own firearms and use them for self-defense, and that legal regulation of firearms is allowable so long as it does not amount to an outright prohibition. At present most Americans, like Bill O’Reilly, favor universal and effective background checks to make it more difficult for people demonstrably dangerous to legally obtain weapons. Most Americans do not want to see the easy availability of fully-automatic weapons or things like rockets and hand grenades. Most Americans do not favor other kinds of restrictions. Polls suggest there is a fair consensus even today.

    But both pro- and anti- gun fanatics keep fanning the flames of division, and there is much money to be made in doing so. Everyone who puts up a “guns welcome here” or “gun-free zone” sign is contributing to the problem. Everyone who flaunts his weapons in public “just because he can” or sports a bumper sticker that says “an armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject” is contributing to the problem: they create emulators and opponents to an equal degree.

    At present we have too many, too complex, and too contradictory a set of gun laws, that vary wildly from place to place, laws that appear common sense in one place appearing batshit crazy in another place.

    We need laws that acknowledge people’s right to defend themselves, that acknowledge that guns are part of American culture, that right to bear arms is sacrosanct but not absolute, that guns are deadly weapons and that it is the nation/community’s right to have something to say about who gets their hands on them, and what sort of weapons are allowable to private individuals, and where and how they may flaunt them. (I doubt most NRA members advocate for the right to own anti-tank rockets, landmines, or nerve gas.) What we don’t need is the demonization of all guns or gun owners. Or an in-your-face paranoid sort of defensiveness from gun owners.

  15. FlyinHeavy

    FlyinHeavy said, over 2 years ago

    @the old professor

    I would question the converse to your statement that more guns necessarily equals less safety. Again if you feel so inclined I would encourage you to look up the Harvard study by Don Kates and Gary Mauser titled, “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?” The results are not exactly what is preached as gospel.

    I realize I can’t change your mind, I just offer some answers I have run across to your questions and points. Thanks for keeping it civil and have a great day. It’s bed time for me.

  16. Load 15 more comments. | Load the rest (80).