I’m sure we mostly know that Chuck Connors TV series: The Rifleman, right? Well, isn’t it about time someone rebooted that TV show or made a movie based on it? I think so! And gun rights are so relevant nowadays; we could inject hyperpartisanship into the storyline and make it super divisive! And who wouldn’t want that?
Yes, in this reboot of The Rifleman, gun control activists surround the Rifleman’s log cabin in an agenda siege, picketing, threatening his son, etc., and all for his own good. You see, he owns a rifle and so must be taught a lesson. So, with no other choice, the Rifleman opens his front door, shoots all the protesters he can, and then hunts the rest of them down and kills them all in a blood-drenched act of Daniel Boone-style ass-kicking!
But the Rifleman’s victory is short-lived, for after massacring all the gun control advocates assailing his home, he runs out of ammunition and has to go get some more. But because of Michael Moore’s anti-gun advocacy, the Rifleman cannot find any ammo at Wal-Mart, K Mart, or anywhere else, because the EPA has bought it all up.
But it’s not the end, for the Rifleman takes an online course in Samurai swordsmanship and then he slices everyone up with a sword next! But then they have to change the name of the show, and that’s too much trouble, so the show gets cancelled, and now frustrated and unemployed, the former Rifleman, now the Samurai Assassin, cuts the heads off all the network executives who cancelled the show, and then he founds the NSSA: The National Samurai Sword Association, to lobby for Samurai sword rights. After all, maybe that’s what the Founding Fathers really meant by the right to bear arms, but they hadn’t seen the Lone Wolf and Cub movie series yet, so they didn’t know how much more awesome it would be for us all to have Samurai swords instead of guns.
Or maybe he could use a chainsaw. The public seems to like movies about people massacring with chainsaws. (I guess that's because killing with a chainsaw doesn't glorify guns like every other movie and TV show does.)
But he didn't need to kill the network executives, because cable news glorifies his killing spree with endless coverage of his bloody rampage, so he becomes a celebrity again, and he would have gotten offers for a new TV series about whatever weapon he decided to use for bloody massacres, but he killed all the people who were going to offer it to him. But because he doesn't kill with a gun anymore, the anti-gun activists now decide he's a hero for giving up his gun and push for a Presidential pardon, which he gets, so long as he never uses a gun again and he agrees to make public service announcements saying how evil and dangerous guns are, and that when you want to kill someone, always use a sword, or a power tool of some kind. (<But use one with a freshly charged battery pack, because your victim might run away farther than your extension cord can reach.)
Or maybe he could use a chainsaw. The public seems to like movies about people massacring with chainsaws. (I guess that's because killing with a chainsaw doesn't glorify guns like every other movie and TV show does.)
But he didn't need to kill the network executives, because cable news glorifies his killing spree with endless coverage of his bloody rampage, so he becomes a celebrity again, and he would have gotten offers for a new TV series about whatever weapon he decided to use for bloody massacres, but he killed all the people who were going to offer it to him. But because he doesn't kill with a gun anymore, the anti-gun activists now decide he's a hero for giving up his gun and push for a Presidential pardon, which he gets, so long as he never uses a gun again and he agrees to make public service announcements saying how evil and dangerous guns are, and that when you want to kill someone, always use a sword, or a power tool of some kind. (<But use one with a freshly charged battery pack, because your victim might run away farther than your extension cord can reach.)
