Spoons Didn’t Make Rosie O’Donnell Fat


Andy Boden

 Undergraduate/Political Science

I got the idea for this article immediately after I finished writing my article about the Supreme Court decisions I disagree with. I thought back to the time when I saw a bumper sticker that read, “Guns kill people like how spoons made Rosie O’Donnell fat.” This is certainly one of the most scathing arguments I’ve heard against gun control, and certainly one of the more tasteless. The sarcastic tone of the argument implies that guns don’t kill people nor did spoons account for the corpulence of the former talk show host. To me, this is a silly argument that involves an ad hominem attack against one of the nation’s most famous and outspoken gun control advocates.

If this argument was a serious statement, I would only agree with half of it (hopefully you can tell which half). Think of it this way – bullets kill people just like how unhealthy dieting coupled with a lack of exercise causes obesity. Now, I don’t mean to go on a rant here and get extra technical about this, but when there is an argument that contains logic as flawed as what was printed on that bumper sticker, I have an almost uncontrollable urge to step in and offer my two cents. Whatever gets put into the body is what causes a change in the body’s biological activity. As far as spoons are concerned, they can be used as a dining utensil for unhealthy foods such as ice cream and mashed potatoes, or for healthy foods such as yogurt and cereal. There are several different foods eaten with silverware, many of which are healthy, and many of which are unhealthy. Food can be beneficial to health as it can be detrimental to health.

Bullets, on the other hand, are used for only one thing – killing. Whether it be the life of a human, the life of an animal, or the shape and form of a target, bullets are strictly used for death and destruction, and the only way bullets can be used are by being shot out of guns (and if they’re not being shot then they’re meaningless slugs of metal). And what are guns used for? Violence, and by violence I mean violence in a criminal sense as well for self-defense. Whether it’s for shooting bullets (which a good amount of the time it is), stabbing with a bayonet, whacking with the barrel, or threatening people, the intent of a gun is to bring about violence, which is very lethal for the most part.

Another logical flaw that is commonly brought up by gun rights advocates is that guns are a deterrent against criminals. While this statement in itself is not logically flawed, it becomes so when they make arguments that guns don’t do harm, but the criminals. What they’re basically saying is that when a gun is used for crime, it’s not the fault of the gun but the criminal, but when a gun is used for defense against a crime they accredit the gun. Obviously guns are a useful tool for both crime and self-defense, but gun rights advocates contradict themselves by saying that guns are a useful tool only in the certain instances that make guns look good.

So do guns kill people? You’re damn right they do, and even though it is ultimately the will of the person holding the gun, it’s much easier to outrun a maniac with a machete than it is to outrun a speeding bullet. Spoons didn’t make Rosie O’Donnell fat. However, guns kill people just like how Alzheimer’s made Charlton Heston lose his mind. 


The Flip Side is a publication dedicated to providing an alternative media outlet and forum on the UW-Eau Claire campus by welcoming the writings, views, and involvement of all students and community members. By reporting on news, perspectives, and opinions on all issues, we seek to develop and maintain our freedom of speech.

All published material remains the property of the individual contributors. Opinions of the writers and contributors are their own. Articles found within, in no way reflect the opinion of The Flipside Press as a whole. The Flipside Press rserves the right to reject any advertising, articles, letters, images, or other material submitted for publication.