Loading

About: Chez Pazienza
Chez Pazienza is the CEO of DXM Media, an award-winning television news producer, editor of the notorious blog Deus Ex Malcontent and the author of Dead Star Twilight. Chez produced and managed daily content for WSVN and WTVJ in Miami, KCBS, KNBC and KCAL in Los Angeles, and MSNBC and CNN in New York. He has two L.A.-area Emmys to his name as well as a Golden Mic. He's been featured in and interviewed by The New York Times, The New York Observer, New York Magazine Online, U.S. News and World Report, The Village Voice, The American Journalism Review, NPR, the IFC Media Project, and Radar and Wired Online. In addition, he's been a regular contributor to Sirius XM's POTUS and Indie Talk channels and is the co-host of "The Bob & Chez Show" podcast with Bob Cesca.

Original Opinion

Joe Arpaio’s Posse Now Guarding Schools, Trying Not To Shoot Off Own Feet

By · January 24,2013
Print Friendly
| 743 Views | Politics

Screen Shot 2013-01-24 at 4.28.10 PM

Joe-Arpaio

I have this great image in my head of Joe Arpaio with a patch over one eye and wearing a long black leather coat, walking into a tiny dishwasher repair shop in a strip mall somewhere in unincorporated Phoenix. He approaches the aging owner of the place, seeming to appear from out of the shadows, and says, “You’re pretty good with your hands, so good in fact that you’ve become part of a bigger universe — you just don’t know it yet. I’m here to talk to you about a very special team we’re putting together.” He then repeats this same basic thing all across town at various used car dealerships, bowling alleys, Home Depots and blood pressure testing machines at Rite Aid pharmacy. And this is how he puts together his own personal Octogenarian Avengers Initiative.

In the immediate couple of weeks following the unimaginable shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, there were a lot of cries from conservatives about the necessity of escalating the arms race they saw developing on the front lines of our nation’s schools, all culminating with NRA head and raving lunatic Wayne LaPierre offering up his own organization’s official stance that armed guards should be posted at schools across the country — because more guns, not fewer, wielded by “good guys,” are the answer. Well, living cartoon character Joe Arpaio, sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona, was always one step ahead of the NRA because you could tell right off the bat that Sandy Hook left him champing at the bit to unleash the awesome might of his “posse” of deputized average old white guys from the nether regions of Maricopa onto the county’s unsuspecting schools. The man who dispatched members of this same Geezer Squad to Hawaii last year to supposedly get to the bottom of the Barack Obama birth certificate conspiracy would now use it to stand watch over thousands of children, all while armed with both a complement of small firearms and the delusion that they’ll someday be able to play the hero and take down an armed gunman.

If you’re saying to yourself right now, “Gosh, a 74-year-old private citizen locked, loaded and ready to get into a good, old-fashioned gunfight with a heavily armed maniac in the middle of a bunch of kids — what could possibly go wrong?” congratulations, you’re sane. To no avail, though — because Arpaio’s boys are now on the case at schools across Maricopa County.

I don’t pretend to have an FBI profiler’s knowledge of what makes your average school shooter tick, but I’m willing to place a very big bet on something that I haven’t really heard discussed yet: Armed guards in general, and certainly old guy “deputies” armed with a Glock and a shotgun each, aren’t going to be a deterrent to a thoroughly committed psychopath who’s likely been planning his shooting spree for months and who’s fully prepared not to leave the scene of his crime in anything but a body bag. In fact, the presence of someone able to fire back will probably just make the entire endeavor that much more exciting; it ratchets up the danger and creates a challenge, one, by the way, which can easily be dispatched by watching Deputy Dawg’s movements for a couple of days then surprising him with, say, a shot to the back of the head while he’s sitting in his car eating a bag lunch. Sound monstrous? Do you really think anyone contemplating a school shooting would be less gruesome in his planning and execution? What’s worse, I have no doubt that most school shooters would relish an armed confrontation with a mildly dangerous but in reality easily disposed of threat — particularly if he can draw the “guard” into the confines of a school building and start a violent firefight. Imagine the carnage possible with not one but two guys with guns popping off rounds all over the fucking place.

No matter what kind of firearms training he’s supposedly had, a retired salesman isn’t an honest-to-God police officer and he damn sure is no match for a kid or man armed with an assault rifle and a death wish. Believing that one of Sheriff Joe’s idiotic posse would be able to drop a fully invested school shooter without potentially hurting or killing a whole lot of other people is unrelenting madness. As usual, what Arpaio and those like him are suggesting is a case of gun fetishists attempting to live with the problem — or at least work around it without acknowledging the bloody price we all pay to satisfy their broad interpretation of the Second Amendment — rather than actually fixing the problem. Working to eliminate easy access to guns, particularly military-grade weaponry, has the potential to actually stop school shootings in the first place instead of leaving us in a position of having to defend against them.

If we admitted that guns aren’t the answer right out of the gate, quenched our seemingly insatiable lust for them, and made it much harder for anyone to get his hands on as many of them as his little heart desires, then we wouldn’t even need Arpaio’s ridiculous posse — and its members could go back to playing shuffleboard in Sun City and waiting to die of natural causes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1101712036 Elisa Vote Dem Velez

    This is why I love to love Chez :)

    Thanks for a brilliantly written piece w/the hilarious imagery.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1101712036 Elisa Vote Dem Velez

    Mmmm…

  • BH

    When the government knows where ALL of the guns are, then they will eventually be the only ones with guns. Seems that has happened before in history, most notably in the 1930s in Germany. But as to Arpaio, I feel safer with him around than I do with Eric Holder being the head of DOJ. And as to these shooters, it seems all of them kill themselves, or at least try, as soon as they are met with resistance. We have tried the liberal way, ie. no guns in school and lots of other public places, and it hasn’t worked. Why are liberals afraid to try something different? Are they afraid it might work?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1101712036 Elisa Vote Dem Velez

      “When the government knows where ALL of the guns are, then they will
      eventually be the only ones with guns. Seems that has happened before in
      history, most notably in the 1930s in Germany”

      Yeah! Except for the fact that Hitler loosened gun control. Facts are your friend. So is an accurate knowledge of history.

      • Christopher Foxx

        No, Elisa. Facts are clearly not BH’s friend.

        Facts show everything BH wants to believe is not actually true.

      • BH

        Actually, he didn’t. The gov’t. before Hitler started the control of guns and then Hitler increased it 3 years into his rule. The “sheeple” in Germany had fallen in love with Hitler and were willing to do anything he said, (humm, that sounds familiar).

    • Christopher Foxx

      BH: We have tried the liberal way, ie. no guns in school and lots of other public places, and it hasn’t worked.

      We haven’t tried closing the “gun show loophole”. Or having a full-time person in charge of the ATF. Or providing them with sufficient resources to monitor gun sales. Or required gun shops to actually track their inventory and report any discrepancies. Or requiring waiting periods and background checks on ALL gun purchases. Or requiring gun owners to pass a test and get a license as we do for car drivers. Or banning all semi-automatic weapons and high capacity clips.

      So, no, we have not “tried the liberal way”. On the contrary, the NRA and their ilk have been actively, ruthlessly (and, alas, successfully) preventing all of those things for decades.

      • BH

        It seems NY, CT, DC and Chicago have all tried those things. How has it worked out for them? We’ve been trying the liberal way for years, it has not stopped anything. Do you really think a criminal is going to read the sign that says no guns allowed and put his gun down? If you do, I have some ocean front property in WV to sell you.

        • Christopher Foxx

          Such insistent ignorance suggest it’s pointless too respond, yet I’ll go ahead anyway. Hope springs, and all that.

          It seems NY, CT, DC and Chicago have all tried those things. How has it worked out for them?

          First, you should go back and check your facts, BH. NY, CT, DC and Chicago did not try all of those things.

          But if they had, so what? For many, many years in NY the drinking age was 18 while in neighboring NJ it was 21. Which is why many teenagers would cross over the GW Bridge and enjoy an evening in Manhattan before returning across the river to their homes.

          The majority of guns used in crimes can be traced to a very small number of gun shops in the south. What NY may do has limited effect on a national problem.

          • BH

            Hey, mind-numb-robot, because that’s what I consider you Chris, an independent analysis has been done and the results published in the Richmond Times Dispatch on Sunday. It showed that gun sales in increased 73% and violent gun crime dropped 37% between 2005 and 2011 in Virginia. Virginia also has a right to carry and concealed carry. The horrible crimes committed at Sandy Hook happened even though extreme laws are in place in CT. They didn’t stop it. Nothing I can say will make you take an honest look at “gun control”‘ so I won’t try. But know I will continue to try to make sure our elected officials know the need to support and defend the second amendment. Not only is it the proper thing to do, it will be safer for everyone, even you.

          • Christopher Foxx

            Nothing I can say will make you take an honest look at “gun control”‘ so I won’t try.

            The feeling is mutual, except I’m willing to try. If, instead of insisting that we’ve actually tried reasonable gun control in the US, you took a look at the countries which truly have restrictions (England, Australia, etc.) you’d have a hard time honestly saying that American’s are safer because to the easy availability of guns.

            But know I will continue to try to make sure our elected officials know the need to support and defend the second amendment.

            The irony being that your understanding of why the 2nd Amendment was added is almost exactly the opposite of what it actually was.

          • BH

            So please, educate me on your “understanding” as to why the 2nd Amendment was added. I can hardly wait!

          • Christopher Foxx

            At the time there was no standing army. The gov’t had no way to enforce order and essentially had to rely on calling on private citizens to serve as a militia when needed.

            The newly formed federal gov’t didn’t say “We’re going to make sure you have guns so you can shoot us if you don’t like what we’re doing.” How to act when you do’t like what the gov’t was doing was covered in the 1st Amendment. “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Peaceably.

            Quite contrary to what NRA enthusiasts would have you believe, the 2nd Amendment was not made so that private citizens could protect themselves against a tyrannical gov’t. It was made so that the gov’t had a militia they could call on to stop armed citizens when they tried to rebel. Look up Shay’s Rebellion and the Whisky Rebellion.

            You’ll notice of all the amendments, only the 2nd actually states WHY it was needed. It’s the only one to give a reason. In this case “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…” Notice: for the security of the State, the gov’t.

          • Christopher Foxx

            The sound of BH’s crickets is deafening.

  • Christopher Foxx

    … the bloody price we all pay to satisfy their broad blatantly wrong interpretation of the Second Amendment

    Fixed that for you.

  • SexBobOmb

    Chez, congrats, I think you’ve finally found your surreal screenplay to write!

    I’m glad you targeted this loon. Not only is his idea exactly as you described, this man, in truth, is a black eye to AZ law enforcement. The scandal over not investigating sex crimes while forcing his inmate slave labor force to wear pink underwear….crap, this stuff writes itself.

  • loverofcoffee

    I think Joe is brain dead, he looks like a zombie and he acts like one too!

Most Read Articles Today:

Copyright © 2013 BanterMediaGroup, L.L.C. All rights reserved.