Guns

Putting in his own words what people have been trying to say about this debate for some time, as well as offering so of the same answers that seem to be the most reasonable one out there. Speaking as a gun owner brought up by in a family of them who father was in vet I have respect for them but I know what they are for and they are not for. They aren't toys that aren't tools they are for killing. when you Hunt you kill something, King reminds us what guns are for, and what we should be thinking about.

"those who stand firmly, even hysterically, against any kind of control love their neighbors and their communities, but harbor a distrust of the federal government so deep it borders on paranoia (and in some case passes that border without so much as a howdy-do at the check point)" and "If Lanza had been reloading after shooting his way in, she migh have succeeeded. He was crazy, but he was also a scrawny wisp of a kid, the bushmaster was his equalizer, he had plenty of ammo left, so he shot and killed Hocksprung before she could get to him. I wish with all my heart that she had tackled him and beat that crazy little *beep* head bloody against the floor, and gotten a medal from the president on national tv. she was too brave to die the way she did"

This adds a voice to the debate that is well thought out and well done

Not what you would expect, given the source. It's actually the most balanced and reasonable argument I've heard amidst the current fervor. Direct, but not preachy. Definitely worth 45 minutes and whatever the token cost.

Christian Rummel reads this with the same passion King used to write it. While Mr. King's perspective as the author of Rage is interesting, and it is easy to understand his need to speak out, you are only going to like this if you already agree with him.

The fact that you can tell a person's political bent by the number of stars he gives this work is the saddest (and most telling) fact of all. In that aspect, Stephen King's stated goal of provoking a reasonable debate has failed. Not his fault, really, but that's "the way it shakes out".

This is just brilliant . An antidote to the: "You tube fodder" that the next Gen. seems to thrive on. (My kids included.)

If you have an opinion on gun ownership; listen to it.
If you hate guns; listen to it.
If you love guns; listen to it.

And hey ... it will only take 60 minutes of your time.

Enlightning, controversial, smart!

The writer's point of view

no

Made me really think!

Great article.. I just wish everyone would listen to and with an open mind!

Yes, brilliant writing as usual, very interesting arguments

Just an opinion that is measured and sensible and unbiased

Pleasant,easy,clear

I would have loved to hear Stephen King narrate this. Nothing at all to fault about Christian Rummel, but as a work of non fiction from Kings perspective, it sounded a bit odd with the wrong voice

I really enjoyed Stephen King's perspective on Guns in this essay. I'm not sure I agreed with it 100% but it wasn't presented in a way that made the reader feel like they must agree but rather presented a perspective and opinion that certainly was balanced with practicality. It's very easy to get emotional about this issue of Guns but unfortunately it's not an issue solution. I think this essay presents a constructive start to the dialog.

It was a surprise how "fair" Stephan King is in "GUNS". Although I do not agree with all he says, he is sympathic with gun owners.

Christian was very believeable and interesting.

I would reccommend it to gun owners as well as non owners.

It seems important to mention one's "creds" in writing reviews of Stephen King's "Guns" so I will start with mine: I served in the US Army, and was honorably discharged as a SGT/E-5. I qualified Expert with an M16 (the civilian equivalent is an AR15), and I'm still proud of that.

I also have a copy of "Rage", in the compilation of "The Bachman Books" that I purchased the year it was published, 1985. I remember reading "The Bachan Books" the same week I purchased it. I loved "The Running Man" and liked "Roadwork", and while the plot of "Rage" was intriguing, the writing was so sophomoric, it was painful. I found out later King wrote "Rage" while he was in high school, so there was an explanation. I read "Rage" once again, in 1996, when I heard Michael Carneal shot classmates in West Paducah, Kentucky. It sounded so much like the story I'd read 11 years earlier, I wanted to make sure I wasn't imagining the similarity. I wasn't.

King's essay "Guns" starts with a scathing social commentary, "That's How it Shakes Out." It doesn't matter if the first station you've got programmed into your remote is FoxNEWS and Ann Coulter is your dream date, or if you are so far left you contribute frequently to KPFK: the media cycle for mass shootings is the same.

King argues forcefully - and sometimes vulgarly - for gun control. King is a gun owner himself, and does not want to disarm the country - but he does want assault weapons banned, and large magazines banned; and he wants background checks.

What King argues isn't new or innovative, but the writing is vintage King. There are phrases I remember from "The Shawshank Redemption" (the movie adaptation, not the original novella "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption") and the unabridged edition of "The Stand." There's also a theme in the first and last section of "Guns" that runs through "The Library Policeman" and "The Ten O'Clock People." The theme was chilling in the stories, and the probability it's a reality is startling.

[If you found this review "Helpful", please push the Helpful button. Thanks!]

This essay is brief, salient and just a tad snarky. Stephen King is not anti-guns in general, he just exposes the truths about what they are, what they do and what really happens when you do or do not own them. He suggests a course of action that doesn't force Americans to give up their 'constitutional rights'.