A
recent edition of the Atlanta Journal Constitution carried an AP wire story
about a London man who died after being struck by a turnip in a drive-by
vegetable throwing. A gang in the East
End drives about hurling vegetables at random passers=by. The victim suffered a broken rib and ruptured
spleen in the attack. Another man
sustained stomach injuries when he was struck by a cabbage.
I
was saddened at first, then outraged. These incidents illustrate exactly the
kind of tragedy that can happen in the absence of effective vegetable control
laws. Arguments like “Vegetables don’t
kill; people do,” simply won’t wash anymore.
Anyone with children will tell you that kids know, instinctively, that
vegetables are Death. The innocence of
the child is truly the Wisdom of the
Adult – or something like that.
Clearly
it is past time to get these deadly weapons out of the hands, mouths and salad
bowls of the general public. In this
task we may draw liberally from the philosophy of the gun-control movement.
Several of their most strident objections to gun ownership, adapted to the
vegetable control movement, are as follows:
1 1. Turnips have no sporting purpose. Using the
same statistical methodology used to justify restrictions on “assault rifle”
ownership (distortion, unsubstantiated assertions, outright lies), we see that
turnips have become the favorite weapon of street gangs and other
criminals. Turnips are twenty-five times
more likely to be used for criminal purposes than for any claimed “sporting”
purposes. You don’t hunt ducks with a
turnip!
2 2. Anyone
who has ever eaten a turnip knows they have but one purpose: to kill people.
Turnips are six times more likely to kill a friend or loved one than they are
to be used in self-defense.
3 3. There
is no individual, Constitutional right to own a turnip. The courts have never
struck down a law limiting possession of certain vegetables to the police and
the military.
These assault
vegetables should immediately be banned, for the good of society. Law enforcement officers throughout the
country report that their traditional coffee and doughnuts are no match for
such highly sophisticated comestibles.
Realizing
that Congress may lack the intestinal fortitude to deal with the powerful
growers’ lobby and the fanatical NRA (National Rutabaga Association), it may
not be possible to pass an outright ban.
Still, certain reasonable restrictions can be implemented in the
interim:
A) Registration of all currently owned assault
vegetables. What, exactly, this will
accomplish is uncertain; we want it anyway.
B) A
15-day waiting period and background check on all potential purchasers. Currently, anyone with cash in hand may
purchase one (or more!) of these vegetables with no questions asked.
C) A
limitation on magazine capacity.
Currently, commercially available magazines (called “crates” or “bushel
baskets”) holding twenty or more of these instruments of death and destruction,
may be purchased by the general public. Law-abiding citizens do not need more
than five turnips at one time.
Our position is not an
extreme one, and we are willing to compromise. Those who lack the intellectual
capacity to hate and fear an inanimate object would still be allowed to possess
less lethal vegetables (mashed potatoes, pureed asparagus, tomato sauce) but
only at an approved restaurant.
The President has
promised us a “softer, blander America.”
Banning the importation of assault vegetables, and supporting Federal
legislation banning their domestic manufacture and sale, would be an important
first step toward keeping that promise.
Thank you for your consideration!