You have to be a spinmeister to belong to one of America’s anti-gun organizations. Spree shooting in a gun free zone? Spin: it’s the easy access to guns, ammo, accessories, etc. LEO shooting bystanders while attempting to shoot lone gunman? Spin: see, if highly trained officers cannot hit the target, how can some rube of ordinary, gun clinging, self reliant persuasion hope to do any better? Defensive Gun Use? Spin: huh? According to the spinners, researchers Kleck and Lott obviously just made up all the stats demonstrating the value of defensive gun use, the CDC is mistaken about firearms safety, and Vic Stacey was shooting at point blank range. Meanwhile, lurking in the background . . .
The more prominent names in the gun grabber alumni secretly pack a gun, oblivious to the fact that their gun isn’t doing the thinking, or making choices, or simply discharging while in their possession. That example alone escapes them. I guess a weapon in my hands is a different proposition.
No more!
I will not suffer the fools who think there are too many self defense shootings in the Stand Your Ground, Castle Doctrine states. I will not sit back quietly while people in Chicago, NYC, DC, California get gunned down or maimed because some pasty politician fantasizes that disarmed means safer.
Anti Gunners! If you wish to walk through life without a spare tire, first aid kit, health insurance, condom or gun, feel free. Better to have it and not need it; the lesson learned is so much easier to absorb than the lesson taught. You push abortion as a woman’s right to choose. Think may be I can choose to rely on myself for my self-defense and my families?
To all those faltering pundits who hate guns because they exist: you are out of touch with the American People. Black, White, Hispanic, all the ethnic diversity you wish to site. They get it. They understand the nature of police and EMS response time. They understand that they are the first responders. They have the first best opportunity to influence the details of an unfolding crime to their advantage.
History and case studies are on my side, and many are aware of them. All the anti gunners bring to the table is the spin, lies and deception. That will work for them only as long as we let it.
Bill Frady is a honey-toned gun rights advocate who podcasts for Gunowners Of America Radio. Click here to download his latest show. TTAG’s RF will join Bill Wed 7pm EST.
Just words. Words I agree with and respect, but still just words nonetheless. Until gun rights advocates take real action, all we have is words.
you are sadly right but most major changes have come from one person saying enough………
We are taking action continually. But you must realize and acknowledge, we are at a disadvantage. Legislatures can pass restrictions that are unconstitutional in a single session and the bill becomes law. But to get it overturned, someone with standing must go into harm’s way to challenge it. It may take years for the right case to emerge. Years to pursue it through appeals. And the outcome is uncertain.
Words can sway public opinion. The fear of being on the wrong side of public opinion can prevent an unconstitutional restriction from being made law in the first place.
If “just words” didn’t matter, the MSM would not dominate the political dialog and warp our nation the way it has.
Touche
Clowns like Marx, Hitler and Mao sure got a lot of people to rack up quite the pile of stiffs with “just words.”
The old saw that “the pen is mightier than the sword” isn’t true when you’re in a one-on-one encounter, but in the broader sweep of history, it certainly rings true.
Yup. And at the same time they quietly took the guns.
Dyspeptic Gunsmith said, “The old saw that ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ isn’t true when you’re in a one-on-one encounter…”
That all depends upon who is holding the pen and who is holding the sword! If I remember my ancient history, when Cesar was set upon by sword-wielding assassins, he held them off with his stylus for a considerable length of time. Had the encounter been one-on-one, odds are good his “pen” would have won!
So you’re saying it’s time we just start shooting the bastards?
For almost any other thing being advocated, you always hear about protests, sit ins, demonstrations, etc. Personally I’ve never thought any of that does a lick of good (Occupy movement) or are counter productive (response vs GLBT Chicfila kiss-in causing CFA’s single biggest sales day ever). Introduce firearms into the picture, and magnify this by a million. When I hear about AR15 open carry protests in CA to protest the ever continuing march of gun control there, all I think about is how it’s fanning the flames against us. All it does is scare the sheeple. The same sheeple we need to vote in our favor each November. Keep in mind the gun control ball got rolling after the Black Panthers’ armed protest at the CA State Capital. The tide has started turning in our favor because of grass roots activism trying to normalize firearms to society. Here in GA, organizations like GeorgiaCarry have chipped away bit by bit at gun control in only a couple years, where as the NRA’s simultaneous efforts have been at best counter productive (either because they overshoot, or the baggage they bring with them to the table).
TL;DR
Public protests with firearms = more gun control laws. Take a lesson from the progressives, use community organizing = convince the sheeple = win the vote.
Sheeple is such a derogitory term. I dont want to convince people to vote in my favor. I want people to be educated and to vote for things because they really matter, not because the MSM told them to or because it gives them a warm fuzzy to think they did something good.
If we had people who voted logically and ignored the b.s. emotional arguments and political spin, then we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re in now. Unfortunately, you live in America, where elections have become more akin to popularity contests than to the job interviews they originally were.
Loyd’s right. I don’t like it anymore than you but the reality is that a significant portion of the voting public is flat out ignorant. Voting from bias, or a whim, or thinking one’s a better speaker or more attractive. Actually believing ridiculous campaign ads, liking their clothes, or their sense of humor (I crap you negative, I’ve heard “That guy’s hilarious.” as a reason); you’d be surprised and depressed how many people consider these legitimate reasons to select one candidate over another. I’m perfectly comfortable comparing these people to sheep. I’m also perfectly comfortable “convincing” them to vote in my favor.
The fact is, this is the game. We can’t simply refuse to play because we don’t like the rules. Cards you’re dealt and so on.
I’m not saying we should refuse to play, I’m saying the more people we can get out of that ‘sheep’ mindset, the better off we all are.
Agreed.
i do take action. i vote and i have turned i don’t know how many newbies into “people of the gun”. it’s a lifelong fight that i have trained the next generation to fight also. i doubt we’ll ever have an absolute victory, but we’re doing better now than 20 years or more ago. 1 person, 1 victory at a time.
Or you could push for people to individually own guns, as I do — and as TTAG does. The more the merrier.
Health insurance / spare tire / first aid kit philosophy is excellent. You are your own first responder – so ill steal the Boy Scout motto: be prepared.
I have always found lies to be offensive, and the anti-gun crowd needs to have their lies refuted as often as possible.
As an Eagle scout, I usually rely on “Always Be Prepared” when confronted with questions about guns.
“I’d rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it” is also a go-to for me.
Fire Extinguisher also works well with spare tire/first aid kit/insurance. For some reason, it clicks really well with people – maybe because they see a fire on the same level as a DGU in terms of Badness, whereas car trouble tends to not carry enough weight. It also allows for a nice police/fire parallel to be drawn, which helps the “take your life into your own hands” aspect sink in.
“Black, White, Hispanic, all the ethnic diversity you wish to site. They get it. They understand the nature of police and EMS response time. They understand that they are the first responders.”
I have stated this before and I am glad to hear someone else say it. I mean no offense or to belittle emergency responders. I am simply stating fact. Citizens are everywhere and are always the true first responders. I wish more people understood this.
It brings to mind sayings like “The average police response time is 3.5 mins. The average response time of a .357 is 1300FPS” and “it takes 10 seconds to dial 911 and only 0.1 seconds to dial 1911”. My buddies who are cops tell everyone that they are just there to clean up the mess and write the reports for the insurance adjustors.
As a member of the LGBT community I agree that we shouldn’t take it any more. Come out of the closet. Demonstrate protest write letters make your voice heard!
P.S. my LGBT is Lasagna Guns Beer and Tobacco ! 🙂 🙂
LMAO welcome to the club Tommy!!
you ain’t right lololo
I hate living in the People’s Republic of New York. Damn “assault weapons” ban.
The AWB is secondary. How do you get a carry permit? That’s the real problem.
bingo. the simple right to carry a pistol about your daily life is what i want. we should have the right to buy “modern rifles” but most of us will be carrying a pistol with us if shtf.
True.
What the post fails to address is that spinning takes place on both sides. But it’s the pro-gun side that has more at stake, therefore their spinning is worse. When it comes to biased and close-minded opinions, you guys win hands down.
Spinning surely does take place on both sides. We can all argue forever about who has more biased and closed-minded opinions, but the cold, hard, unspinnable facts only support one side: the pro-gun side.
If you look at all the evidence and weigh the numbers equally (no spin, just the truth as best it can be found), the evidence points to gun ownership being overwhelmingly beneficial to society. I used to be moderately anti-gun, but over the last 2-3 years as I bought firearms of my own and did my own research, I’ve completely changed my mind. If objective evidence means anything to you, then supporting the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms is the only place you can end up.
And it’s not just numbers: it’s principle, too. Part of the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to guarantee the fundamental individual right to defend self and nation against tyranny — whether governmental (as in the Revolutionary War) or personal, as in criminal threats to life and livelihood. The government keeps us safe on a state/national level, but on an individual level it’s just not practical or ethical to turn our right to self-defense over to the state. Russia, China, Cambodia, Germany, Mexico: 20th century history is full of sad proof of what can happen when government says “we know best, just do exactly as we say and we’ll protect you.” Our individual rights are ours to defend individually — and if we ever lose the means to do that, we might as well have no rights at all.
the truth is not in you. if it wasn’t for spin, you wouldn’t have a side, mikeybnumbers.
let me say a thing or two about close-minded opinions; where is the logic or common sense in abscribing human frailties to an inanimated object????
man, for some reason which eludes me, is above been judged evil but a gun/ a piece of metal is evil and most be control/ but man the actual cause of the evil is exonerated. Doh!! I must have lost something in the translation. Down here we just put away one of those killers that blow the mind, ran his car into his girlfriends apartment, stab her 27 times and finish his work by bashing her skull in. A car, a knife and a rock, where the weapons used by this sick b*****d/ was a word said about the items used, nope, it took very little mind power to realize that the evil was not on the weapons used but in the heart of the killer. That’s where the two sides collide; those who believe in the 2A, find a solid rock to stand on, those who despise the heritage from our forefathers use emotions and propaganda to push their point of view, not a right, just a point of view.
A government of the people, by the people and for the people, is what I learned in school. The people has the right to defend themselves from tyranny, which amazing enough hasn’t changed that much in two hundred years or in 5,000 years. Walk the streets of countries that have a government that controls all the guns and you will know it and feel it. Wrong, very wrong, that government just became god with power of life and death at a whim.
PS: do a google search for Charlie checkpoint, West Berlin Germany, 1973, you can start reading there or not.
Geez mikeyb, why arent you proud of the pro-gun children you and your ilks actions birthed? You brought us into this world, raised us, taught us how to play the game, and now you are upset that we play the game better than you and gasp, we have facts on our side.
You are the epitomy of why the family unit is declining, refusing to have pride in those you created, such unintended consequences eh Mikeyb, LOL!
You’re really funny, Jarhead.
Yeah, really sucks when the truth hurts, and since you have such a hard time understanding basic english word meanings like “No”, “Shall not be infringed”, etc, etc, etc, thats not humour, thats a dripping form of “Sarcasm”. Sarcasm is “a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter jibe or taunt”,[1] usually conveyed through irony or understatement.
Based on your prediliction for abuse, as evidenced by your coming back to this and other blogs like it to get data and ideologically whupped on a regular basis, you really should be intimately familiar with such a style of “Sarcasm” being thrown back at you.
Guess you really arent that smart, then again, hows that different than before, LOL!
I am a disabled VET, and ” I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY FIREARMS !!! “, i will defend my wife, home, we dont have much, but what we have I WILL DEFEND THEM TO MY DEATH!!!!, i VOTE AND I TOTE, i’m not some crazy man with a gun running around shooting at will, i do belive in gun control, IN MY EYES THAT IS HITTING WHAT I AIM AT,!!!!! just say if i, or my wife is in a parking lot like, WAL MART and have some FOOL come and TRY TO TAKE WHAT I JUST PAYED FOR, well you just MEST UP,!! thay just came up to the WRONG CAR AT THE WRONG TIME !!! I WILL NOT TAKE SOME FOOLS CRAP,!! NOT IN THIS LIFETIME,!! i’m not a radical man, i belive in GOD AND COUNTRY, AND THE 2ND ADMIT.,
thankx, have a good day, go shoot a target, REDBIRD RETURNS,
FLAME DELETED
Most of the gun grabbers are NOT fools. Most anti gunners are tyrants who want you disarmed for their own power grab or their corrupt agents in government and media. They show you anti-gun crime victims in the news to throw you off their trail. The real gun grabbers don’t hate guns, they hate YOU having guns. Those who actually hate guns would never get the job done taking your guns, they just don’t have that much organization. Behind every gun hate group is a hidden power group of tyrants.
exactly EricD; might be talking to the choir but the only thing you see in the msm are the crimes/ never the use of weapons on self defense. Then you read the rants of the fellow above about spin and no mental capacity and your point hits home. In Russia during their days of socialist utopia, they had two news services; one was called The Truth and the other The News, not much imagination. But the people of the Rodina/little mother Russia/ had a saying; there is no truth in the news and no news in the truth. Are there defensive use of guns happing in the nation, daily??? You bet, and that’s what we need to push.
“Turn the other cheek” is NOT in the Bible. Jesus never said that. What Jesus said was, “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” That is in Matthew 5:39. This occured in a different time and culture from today. But part of that culture still exists today in the Middle East. In the era Jesus lived there were laws against violence also that applied to Romans, Jews and other nationalities. A Roman soldier or a high influencial Roman citizen or Jew could not strike another citizen with out being charged with assault and pay a fine. To strike someone on the right cheek one would have to use the left hand or the back of the right hand. Using the left hand was not culturally or lawfully allowed. The left hand was used for unsanitary means as wiping your butt. To strike or slap someone with your right hand was considered an assault. But to strike someone with the back of your hand was not. The act of slapping someone on the right cheek with the back of your right hand was showing superiority over another; wife, children, slave, subordinate, ect. What Jesus was saying was if slapped on the right cheek don’t strike back physically. Give them the left cheek as well. In doing so if you put them on the spot. If you were struck on the left cheek you could file charges against them. The fine was quite steep. A Roman soldier could get in trouble for striking someone without justification. The laws were quite explicit in that era without much leeway like today. Striking someone on the right cheek with the back of your right hand was legally not condidered an asssult. You might not have liked it and wanted to fight back. This was also used provocative someone to strike back in anger thus giving the authorities to give out more punishment.
Comments are closed.