When Stephen Colbert launched into an emotional monologue about gun control on his show the day after the Texas church shooting, he didn’t think twice that the analogy he was going to use made an incredible case in favor of guns.
Colbert is frustrated over the “inaction” on guns after Texas and Las Vegas. “Doing nothing, as I’ve said before, is unacceptable,” he said. The late-night host just wants something done. He said we are in a deadly cycle of feeling powerless and buying guns to make us feel better:
“If you feel powerless enough, you know what might make you feel more powerful? Going to buy a gun. It’s a vicious cycle. Violence happens. Nothing gets done to get rid of the guns and people buy more guns to protect themselves. And now, there are just more guns out on the street.”
But his argument, which is bad enough to start with, completely derailed when he started talking about a village under attack from a tiger:
“Five thousand years ago, if your village had a tiger coming into it every day and was eating people, you wouldn’t do nothing. You would move the village, you would build a fence, or you would kill the tiger. You wouldn’t say, ‘Well, I guess, you know, someone’s going to get eaten every day, because the price of liberty is tigers.’ You’d take some action.”
Yes, you would surely take some kind of action. And if the first person who encountered the hungry tiger had access to a gun, he would shoot it and everyone would be safe. Further insulting his terrible analogy, somebody joked on Twitter, you could institute a tiger ban, but guess who would ignore it? The tiger! Perhaps, the funniest jab was the reply, “I would shoot the tiger, then cut it up with my new chainsaw attachment.”
And for a bonus fail, Colbert also made a fantastic case for President Trump’s wall. If a vicious animal is coming into your home and endangering your family, this elitist leftist says to “build a fence.” That’s exactly right! Careful, Stevie, you're getting a little too close to the Right.