Author Stephen King is an advocate of, in addition to multiple other liberal causes, more stringent gun-control legislation.

In response the Las Vegas mass shooting, King reasoned it would be an effective argument to conflate the shooting with a proposal by Gov. Rick Scott (R) to place a 3-day limit on opioid prescriptions:

Sounds reasonable, right? Yeah, no. At least not to Twitter users who rushed to point to the obvious fly in King's opioid ointment.

“Gab” kicks off the festivities with the most obvious question, while suggesting King may think the Constitution is a menu from which one can pick and choose:

Obviously aware that opioid addiction and overdose has reached epidemic proportions across America, Rembert thinks King should spend less time trying to control guns and more time advocating for opioid legislation in their shared home state:

Ward asked a great question:

Hang on — gun-control advocate Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) answered this very question during an appearance on “Meet the Press,” Sunday:

“Well, I don't know. I would have to take a look at that and really study it. I'm not sure there is any set of laws that could've prevented it.”

Apparently, Stephen King has not “really studied it.”

Chris tweeted a chart, purportedly listing deaths by category during the first half of 2016. Whether they're accurate, or not, wasn't his point. But, hey, this is the internet!:

King, a gun owner, made a similar argument in the aftermath of the deadly Orlando nightclub shooting in June 2016.

Ironically, the author has battled both alcoholism and drug addiction. In brushing aside Gov. Scott's latest attempt to address the opioid epidemic, he appears to have forgotten the devastating impact of both.

Then again, that wouldn't fit into his narrative, would it?

Please note: This is a commentary piece. The views and opinions expressed within it are those of the author only and do not necessarily reflect the editorial opinion of IJR.

View Comments(14 comments)
@Vinuzzo(4 likes)His books blow, his movies blow and his politics blow.  He's a hat trick;  the triple crown of blow-dom.   Typical irrational bloviation from a guy who peaked by being an English major in college.
Angie Ellis(3 likes)I like Stephen King.  I enjoy his books and believe him to be an excellent writer.  I do not agree with him in this matter, however, that does not negate his abilities as a writer.  I think it would be more beneficial to point out the fallacy in his thinking as regards to this particular issue.  To do otherwise only demonstrates the weakness in one's own arguments against gun control.  The facts should speak for themselves.  There is no law that could have prevented this senseless murder spree.  The gun man was a multi millionaire who could have bought his guns illegally easily enough.  I am sure his having explosives in his possession was not legal.  I do believe there is an obvious connection between psychotropic drugs prescribed for various mental illness and the murders that have occurred in the U.S.  So, perhaps, those who have been prescribed these types of medications should not be allowed to purchase firearms of any kind. I think we do need to put these deaths into perspective of other things that cause far more fatalities.  Firearms kill 33,000 people each year a large percentage of these are suicides (which could be accomplished with other means) some are accidental and of course some are homicides.  Tobacco use in cigarettes and other modes is responsible for 50,000 deaths many of which is due to second hand smoke (these should be viewed in the same spectrum as those innocent victims murdered by gun shot).  Logic would seem to indicate that if saving lives is the motive of banning something then obviously tobacco should outrank guns.  We do, however, have some regulation on where it is permissible to smoke and I see no reason not to have some well thought out regulations on who may purchase guns and means of tracking those who seem to be buying large numbers of weapons. I personally do not like guns, but my father, my husband, and my youngest son were and are avid hunters.  I suspect this is how the largest percentage of gun owners use their firearms.  I don't believe any of them owned more than 5 or 6 guns at any one time, (probably less).  Why should these gun owners be punished for something that less than 1% are guilty of doing.  It makes absolutely no logical sense. 
@Otisamsonite(2 likes)Boo!! The only thing scary about Stephen King is that he thinks he is a voice worth listening to when it comes to policy or law and that he spends a great deal of time down here in Florida. People like him are what has turned this state into California 'east' and making us blue. Remain in Maine, you overblown hack.