SITREP: January 2006
By Dan Shea

“Daniel Craig, the actor chosen to portray a tougher, grittier James Bond more akin to the cold-blooded killer conceived by the spy’s creator Ian Fleming, admits he is scared of guns. The 37-year-old actor, who was named as the sixth incarnation of the role a fortnight ago, said: “I hate handguns. Handguns are used to shoot people and as long as they are around people will shoot each other. That’s a simple fact. I’ve seen a bullet wound and it was a mess. Bullets have a nasty habit of finding their target and that’s what’s scary about them.” Quoted from the News Telegraph, 26 October, 2005.

That’s it, that’s the final straw. I won’t be watching any more Bond movies. Who the hell chose this sissified clown to play James Bond? Has he no understanding of the decorum, the conduct, the very presence necessary to act as Bond. There isn’t any way I can take him seriously now, and I was looking forward to more Bond movies. James Bond, 007, has always been a gun guy. He’s the top spy in the world, with Q at his disposal! It’s bad enough to listen to some Hollywood mental incompetent spewing rhetoric against firearm ownership while making a living off of the image of firearms use, but the man who will be Bond? Mr. Craig certainly has a right to his opinion, but whoever chose him for the part of 007 is certainly missing the proper thought process to be in charge of choosing the new Bond. As a non-drinker I am not really up in arms about Mr. Craig’s other faux pas regarding his martinis being straight up, no ice, neither shaken nor stirred. However, combining those two character flaws Mr. Craig brings to the job, Bond fans will be hard pressed to accept him as 007. Truthfully, fiction though he is, James Bond is a part of our masculine culture - an icon of days gone by, and casting someone as Bond who is not only scared of guns, but is an anti firearms person, is simply poor form. Rant mode off.

Debbie and I have decided to put off the SAR Show East for another year, until 2007. First we were looking at Dulles, Virginia, but the only open date was the end of July and the buildings couldn’t handle our show size in the future. We spent three months this year thinking that the Georgia State Fairgrounds in Perry, Georgia was going to be the right site. All the approvals except for the final one were in, and finally, the man who was supposed to bring the proposal to the board didn’t even bother. He said that “he” had decided “That” kind of gun show should not be at the Georgia State Fairgrounds. Pressed further on this, he said that the military nature of the firearms wasn’t keeping with the spirit of the fairgrounds. My head swirled when I heard that. The Heart of Dixie herself, rejecting the military history of these United States, rejecting as inappropriate the showing of military firearms? What’s next, instant grits at the Waffle House? Gas ripening Georgia peaches and pretending they taste as good as off the tree? Calling a Puh-cahn a Pee-Can?

The SAR Show West is in the Free State of Arizona, unencumbered by such small minded thinkers, and it is held every December at the Arizona State Fairgrounds in Phoenix. This year the show is expected to reach over 3,000 tables with 30,000 attendees over the three days of the show. This will make it arguably the largest gun show in the United States, a place where attendees and dealers can safely pursue their firearms interest. The Arizona State Fairgrounds is very, very happy with our virtually trouble-free event. We at SAR thank you for your confidence in the show we put on, and thanks to all who attend and display. We will continue to search for the right venue on the East Coast, and are thoroughly disappointed in the actions of one man in the great state of Georgia. - Dan

This article first appeared in Small Arms Review V9N4 (January 2006)
and was posted online on March 22, 2013


Comments have not been generated for this article.