Lindsey, Get Your Gun: Sen. Graham’s Weird Survivalist Nightmare

Print Share on LinkedIn More


March 6, 2013; Source: Raw Story

Our impression of American behavior during disasters has been that people generally pull together, that adversity brings out the best in us. Sure, we know that people do very bad things, but the press often notes how people also go out of their way to help and protect their neighbors. In fact, that feeling of mutuality was what we thought undergirded the nonprofit sector in a democratic society.

It must be that we fell for some Panglossian view of America, if we are to believe Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing yesterday, Graham grilled Attorney General Eric Holder about the proposed ban on assault weapons. We haven’t seen the news reports that verify what Graham says happened—or sort of happened—to spark his support for carrying around military-style assault weapons:

“Can you imagine a circumstance where an AR-15 would be a better defense tool than, say, a double-barrel shotgun? Let me give you an example, that you have (sic) an lawless environment, where you have an natural disaster or some catastrophic event — and those things unfortunately do happen, and law and order breaks down because the police can’t travel, there’s no communication. And there are armed gangs roaming around neighborhoods. Can you imagine a situation where your home happens to be in the crosshairs of this group that a better self-defense weapon may be a semiautomatic AR-15 vs. a double-barrel shotgun?

I’m afraid that world does exist. It existed in New Orleans, to some extent up in Long Island [after Hurricane Sandy], it could exist tomorrow if there’s a cyber attack against [the] country and the power grid goes down and the dams are released and chemical plants are — discharges.

What I’m saying is if my family was in the crosshairs of gangs that were roaming around neighborhoods in New Orleans or any other location, the deterrent effect of an AR-15 to protect my family, I think, is greater than a double-barrel shotgun.”

As far as we can tell, Graham must be referencing a gang of white vigilantes in New Orleans’ Algiers Point neighborhood who, armed with shotguns and assault weapons, allegedly opened fire on African Americans “with impunity” after Hurricane Katrina; the militia was reportedly on the lookout for anyone who “didn’t belong” in the neighborhood, as reported by ProPublica and The Nation. If so, maybe Graham’s fears would have more of a basis in reality if he looked a little more like Holder and was facing a white militia armed with AR-15s. —Rick Cohen

  • Bill Bledsoe

    Graham’s a fool and the first person we should use his Mental Illness Bill to take his guns should be Graham.

  • Bob O’Reilly

    Mr. Cohen states, “It must be that we fell for some Panglossian view of America, if we are to believe Sen. Lindsey Graham.”

    Well, yes. As a matter of indisputable fact, you did. Contrary to the sanitized, “official stories” regurgitated by the MSM, there were many accounts of groups of neer-do-wells roaming both areas you name. Some were comprised of the locals, out to take advantage of the situation for various reasons. Granted, they were not pervasive, but they were definitely nowhere near as rare as the “gang of white vigilantes” who ALLEGEDLY committed acts of dubious necessity.

    I needed a machete to forge through that fog of hyperbole, it was so thick, Cohen. Well, modern urinalism being what it is, I should’ve expect no less than thinly veiled contempt from you toward the citizens of New Orleans. One side of the story fits your agenda, so no more to see there. Especially regarding those who would have had the audacity to repel looters and worse with a judicious use of firepower.

    I guess it’s just improper and politically incorrect for the MSM to mention that the majority of those misguided wanderers were of the darker persuasion. That’s not “racism”, it’s simply a fact. There are videos of them on the internet. But, of course, since you weren’t there, and some of my family continues to live in both the Katrina and Sandy disaster areas, you and your associates must still know better than they and I what really transpired. (Spit!)

    There were many other gangs in New Orleans, and there are far more videos of them as evidence of their existence. Your type even filmed them, so there is no disputing their atrocities. They were rampaging through neighborhoods, terrorizing the lawful citizenry, breaking into homes, and looting them of specific valuables. These criminal gangs were a highly organized and centrally controlled organization, for the most part.

    The sickening and revolting aspect of these thugs is that they wore uniforms and badges. They assaulted citizens, vandalized their property, and stole their weapons. That was purely shameful and disgusting.

    However, the citizens there learned a hard lesson in misplaced trust. So did the rest of our nation. Next time, such thieves will fail in any such endeavors, for they are vastly outnumbered and intellectually inferior to most of the populace. That is why the Americans will keep their weapons. An armed society is a polite society. At least that is the way it was until very recently.

    Not to be cliché, but there is just a thin veneer of civilization on our society. It won’t take much to strip it away. A Failure of Civility (read the book) would demand that rational people be well-armed among many other things. Failure to prepare for such an event in our near future is abject stupidity.

    – Robert J. O’Reilly

  • Larry

    I have to totally agree for once with Sen. Graham, and wonder what Mr Bledsoe would do should what he be in the situation portrayed by Graham and based on facts. If he chooses to be unarmed/disarmed and has to face a group of rioters or looters I extend my best wishes to him, and/or anyone who feels as he does. He’s going to have a hard row to hoe.