Stephen King: C’mon, let’s ban assault weapons
In the most personal section of his essay, King considers the current debate about the effect of violent media on young men. In the 1970s, he published a novel called “Rage” under the pseudonym Richard Bachman. It told the story of a high school kid who takes a gun to school, shoots his Algebra teacher and holds a class hostage. “Rage” sold only a few thousand copies, but starting in the late 1980s, King began to hear about teenage boys who were inspired by the book to commit similar crimes in their own schools. He does not think that his novel “caused” these young men to kill, but he says, “I saw ‘Rage’ as a possible accelerant.” In response, he demanded that his publisher pull the book from publication.
He concludes with what he calls “a trio of reasonable measures to curb gun violence”:
1. Comprehensive and universal background checks.
2. Ban the sale of clips and magazines containing more than ten rounds.
3. Ban the sale of assault weapons such as the Bushmaster and the AR-15.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I’ll never read another Stephen King novel (not that I was ever a fan to begin with).
The Rogue Tomato on January 25, 2013 at 2:22 PM
Wright books and shutup.
trs on January 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM
Not until we ban Stephen King novels.
Bitter Clinger on January 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM
Wright = write
Arghhhhhhh!
trs on January 25, 2013 at 2:23 PM
Man, Bushmaster’s really got a target painted on their back.
And seriously – he wants to ban the George W Bushmaster AND the AR-15? Whoa.
CorporatePiggy on January 25, 2013 at 2:24 PM
Ban 1958 Plymouth Furys.
And St. Bernard dogs.
forest on January 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM
Ahhhh yes, let’s make sure to ban the guns used to commit crimes the least. It’s only logical.
xblade on January 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM
Let’s ban horror novels with graphic scenes.
Honestly, don’t I love his novels and he’s a good writer. He also wants his own taxes raised to ostensibly help those not as well off as himself. Which is why he is one author I always torrent when I want to hear an audiobook from.
levi on January 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM
Back on the acid much, or is it a drop or two of 25-I in your nostrils nowadays, freak?
Christien on January 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM
Facts be damned these fools want to strip people of their natural rights.
gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 2:28 PM
“Comprehensive and universal background checks”: that would include everything in a person’s background including financial and medical records.
This “background check” language is bad bad news. And I hear stupid Republicans going around using it.
“Criminal conviction checks” is what sane people should be talking about. And even at that, the list of disqualifying crimes need to be specified and limited.
forest on January 25, 2013 at 2:30 PM
So his writing didn’t cause anyone to kill, but a gun did? These people really are tone deaf.
He put the idea in their heads, not Smith and Wesson.
CurtZHP on January 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM
And civil court filings too. that would have to be part of these comprehensive background checks.
Ever has an acrimonious divorce? Ever get sued? Well then, no gun for you!
If it saves one life, it’ll be worth it.
forest on January 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM
Makes more sense to ban the make and model of van that hit and nearly killed him.
Christien on January 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM
Those aren’t “assault weapons” dingbat.
darwin on January 25, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Wanting to take away the rights of others is probably a side effect of whatever the hell is wrong with that man. He is freaking DISTURBED.
MelonCollie on January 25, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Now if only he could actually define what an “assault rifle” is…more than 10 bullets, so an 12 bullets is a “killer” but 9 is not?
And what is an “AR” rifle, you mean everything built by Armalite? Colt? Smith and Wesson? Lewis Machine, which makes the receivers? Are the “receivers” killing receivers, I mean that’s one of the main differences between “loving” guns and “killing” guns, it’s their receivers…kind of like the difference between a four barrel carb and a two barrel carb, one has way too much horsepower and should be outlawed….sheeeesh, I wish these guys would be taken to task and ridiculed.
right2bright on January 25, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Check!
right2bright on January 25, 2013 at 2:36 PM
What is it with each and every infringement on our right of self-defense, the oppressives pretend that everything has been rest to zero ready for a new set of “reasonable measures”?
The government lacks the authority to do this and it can easily morph into a means to deny rights by political association.
It starts with 10 then goes to 7 (as in NY) then down to 1 then we all can use our guns as clubs..
There is no difference between these guns and the arms protected by the 2nd amendment – this is just another unconstitutional gun grab.
Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 2:38 PM
There he goes with the idiotic term “assault weapons”. So we better include baseball bats, steak knives, and hammers.
Bitter Clinger on January 25, 2013 at 2:38 PM
So all criminals have to do now is:
A) get clips of more than 10 rounds on the black market, which doesn’t give a flying sh*t about the Democrats gun grabbing laws, in order to out-arm their victims, and
B) assure that only law-breaking thugs and criminals will have AR-15s.
Yeah. That’s going to solve the problem of handgun violence, isn’t it?
Shut up and stick to writing chinzy horror novels.
Good Lt on January 25, 2013 at 2:39 PM
Drugs, alcohol, or the effects of the car accident on his cognitive abilities. Either way he is nuts. He’s been a democrat supporter for probably his whole life but I know for a fact since 1984. That’s wnen I got his autograph on my copy of Christine. He was working on Gary Hart’s presidential campagain in some capacity at the time.
D-fusit on January 25, 2013 at 2:40 PM
Why don’t we just make murder with any gun illegal?
Good Lt on January 25, 2013 at 2:41 PM
How about we ban awful dialogue and rehashed plots?
Nick_Angel on January 25, 2013 at 2:41 PM
May be something worse than all three. My lifelong Christian father is firmly convinced that King is beset if not possessed by demons. His books are THAT hair-raising.
MelonCollie on January 25, 2013 at 2:42 PM
right2bright on January 25, 2013 at 2:46 PM
The really funny and really sad aspect about that comment is that there will be those Low-information voters out there who will think that is a good idea and we should do it…
Galt2009 on January 25, 2013 at 2:46 PM
I don’t get it…why would they do that, if there are no guns to commit murder.
(btw, attempted murder should be the same as murder, don’t reward the criminal for being a poor shot)
right2bright on January 25, 2013 at 2:47 PM
That man just loves him some horror stories!
astonerii on January 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM
And of course this:
The pigs are more equal…
right2bright on January 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM
How many murders have been committed by AR-15s?
How many murders have been committed via abortion?
Liberals want a woman to have the choice to kill her unborn child but not the choice of her preferred firearm and ammunition capacity to protect herself and family.
gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 2:50 PM
Steven King is a racist. He didn’t write this essay after black kids were killed in inner cities (run by liberals). He didn’t ask to ban weapons used most commonly to kill black people.
gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 2:52 PM
I tend to agree, he is disturbed on some level I mean some of his writings are very very disturbing and others rather mundane. I’ve been reading him since my teenage years and happen to enjoy most of his works. I do own every one of his books in hardcover. Guilty pleasure I guess. Wish he’d just shut up and write. Can’t stand it when any celebrities offer their opinion on political matters just because they have the soapbox handy.
D-fusit on January 25, 2013 at 2:53 PM
1. Lanza failed background checks and was not able to purchase weapons.
2/3. Lanza also stole handguns. Even if he only had 10 round clips he still would have killed just as many people with the handguns.
Of course if someone at the school were armed he would have been stopped.
This will go the way that every liberal policy goes. Once it fails – which it’s destined to do – there will be calls for further infringement on natural rights.
gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 2:54 PM
curse me
The gun opponents are getting into my head!
gwelf on January 25, 2013 at 2:57 PM
He’s extremely creepy looking too. He could be the psycho character in one of hos own novels.
UltimateBob on January 25, 2013 at 2:59 PM
All guns need to be banned. If you must defend yourself, get a knife and some chili powder.
xblade on January 25, 2013 at 3:02 PM
Drugs for sure and he was an active protestor during the sixties.
Btw I have a signed copy of the complete and uncut version of “The Stand”
Garym on January 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM
So, you can’t sell all those pre-loaded magazines, now? Hmmm…. okay, I can probably live with that…….. *eyeroll*
(You would think that a writer would be more rather than less cognizant of their word choices……..)
GWB on January 25, 2013 at 3:17 PM
…says the master of devising unusual ways to commit murder.
James on January 25, 2013 at 3:18 PM
It’s not enough that they are rich and successful. Instead of just living their lives they think we want to be told how to live ours.
Once asked my lib daughter why she didn’t like me “bossing” her around but the government doing it was fine.
arnold ziffel on January 25, 2013 at 3:20 PM
Let’s not, and ban clowns, instead.
kakypat on January 25, 2013 at 3:24 PM
Ban such vehicles such as the Ford and the coupe.
fking idiots.
tom daschle concerned on January 25, 2013 at 3:25 PM
I see he is still writing fiction.
ProfShadow on January 25, 2013 at 3:35 PM
Well, this changes everything. I used to be a staunch 2nd Amendment supporter and gun control opponent. But, since noted constitutional scholar and world-renowned weapons expert Stephen King has sounded off, I have completely changed my opinion.
Hayabusa on January 25, 2013 at 3:35 PM
For a writer, Stephen King has not done his homework.
First, the term “assault weapon” is incorrect, they are called rifles.
Second, there is only one gun which uses clips(the M1 Garand), the rest use magazines.
Just these two mistakes demonstrate that Stephen King doesn’t know what he is talking about. He subscribes to the liberal notion that a criminal will follow laws.
Also the rest of his polemic is filled with assumptions about people. One assumption is that once people get a gun, they will use it invariably to kill people. Only in his novels do people kill once they get a gun.
Joel_The_Oneth on January 25, 2013 at 3:53 PM