Some of the debate about the guns is proving very laughable.

NBC News reported that a lawmaker in Texas defended on Fox News Sunday morning the availability of high powered 'assault' rifles - as many call them - to protect Americans against a tyrannical government. I'm rushing now but I've gotta look this up and watch, for it may be as funny as it sounds.

I'm sure he's not advocating shooting police officers, the front line of the government (local, state or federal, yes, but officers represent law and order and hence government in general). Don't need fancy weapons for that... just ask the families of the many officers gunned down when responding to typical calls. One in East Grand Rapids was killed with a shotgun by a man lying in wait as the officer responded to a call for help reporting domestic violence.

Then there's Patrick O'Rourke's family, mourning the loss of their father and husband, a longtime West Bloomfield police officer.

But I get it, this Texas gentleman is referring to the federal government, which taxes us and interacts with other countries through the United Nations. So if wants weapons available to fight that government, he'll need to legalize surface-to-air rocket launchers and small nuclear weapons, because nowadays, no militia is going to go up against our U.S. military and do any damage.

If that fight is going to be fought, it will be unarmed people being killed in what we now call terrorist acts. Is this political debate becoming so irresponsible? (And I'm not even considering the ludicrous idea of requiring teachers and administrators to be armed and trained to fight off other armed militants.... you know how much more taxes we would have to pay for schools if that were mandated?)

Here are the comments of Texas, hm, er, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, as quoted by Livewire.com's Talking Points Memo:

"Well, for the reason George Washington said a free people should be an armed people," Gohmert said, responding to a question on why people need assault weapons. "It ensures against the tyranny of the government. If they know that the biggest army is the American people, then you don’t have the tyranny that came from King George. That is why it was put in there, that’s why once you start drawing the line, where do you stop? And that’s why it is important to not just look emotionally, our reaction, Chris, is to immediately say, 'let’s get rid of all guns.'" 

Gohmert argued that more guns would lessen gun violence, saying he wished the principle at Sandy Hook Elementary School that was attacked Friday had been armed. "I wish to god she had had an M-4 in her office, locked up so when she heard gunfire, she pulls it out and she didn’t have to lunge heroically with nothing in her hands, but she takes him out, takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids," he said.

Reminds me of the Simpsons, with Homer asking Lisa if she wants the king of England pushing her around. He's living in a fantasyland, where King George is still being fought and answers to problems are taking "his head off." Wow,

Of course, if we are fighting tyranny, I could use a nuke or two. I can be trusted. Believe me, I'm responsible enough to have a button to push.