Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America (MDA) remains this country’s most active civilian disarmament organization. What they lack in size, they gain in media attention (adoration?). Given the paltry turn-out at MDA events, you’d be forgiven for thinking that their non-dues-paying “members” number in the hundreds. In fact, MDA has nearly 300k followers – on Facebook. Every now and then their FB page posts a link to something that freaks them the f out; the echo chamber’s denizens proceed to howl with sanctimonious outrage. For example, this story from Iowa’s wate.com . . .
An Iowa woman is leading a baby-wearing, gun carrying workshop.
“If you’re a mother, and if you’re an armed mother, they have to. You have no choice,” said Melody Lauer/mother-gun instructor.
Lauer is a mom and an expert in two entirely different worlds.
“I was actually working at both a gun store and a parenting center at the same time,” Lauer said.
She’s not trying to convince parents that they should carry a gun. Simply encouraging them to do it safely, if they choose to.
“We have seen a huge insurgence in young mothers – mothers of young children, wanting to get into firearms. And what’s happening is we don’t have instructors that are addressing their needs. So they just do it. They don’t do it right and then they end up having an accident,” Lauer said.
So as a firearm instructor and parenting expert, she’s going where no one has gone before.
“If you have baby on one side, it’s best to have gun on the other side,” Lauer said.
“To our knowledge, nobody is doing this yet. The interest was so great that she actually had to turn off or shut off the registration. Otherwise, we would have had two-three times as many people here,” said Barry Snell, Crossroads Shooting Sports.
You can read more about the class at yahoo.com. Meanwhile, not to coin a headline, OMG! Guns! Mothers with Babies! Mothers with Guns with Babies! OMG! No really.
At last look, the MDA FB post received 1125 comments, which is, it must be said, a whole lot of comments. Here are the two most popular.
We’ve been here before, right? Mr. Chandler projects his own fears onto concealed carriers, worrying about their supposed propensity for creating daily accidental homicides. Ms. Hincman shares her desire to eliminate Americans exercising their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms from the face of the earth. Thumbs up!
I wonder if Banu knows that ISIS is torturing, raping, beheading, crucifying and executing children? Or that hundreds of thousands of children starve to death in third world countries because of political corruption and civil war? Perspective, people! Get some.
Here’s MDA follower Susan Burke’s take; a woman whose Facebook page reveals that she’s a tin-foil hat wearing anti-gunner. Literally.
In some ways, I agree. The battle to restore our gun rights continues.
Idolatry, praying… suddenly a lot of religion among these folks.
Who many, I have no doubt, are also card carrying members of the ‘Right to Choice’ group. They have no problem killing children, just not with guns.
Sorry, a little venting there.
Yea, I had the same thought. 1 million abortions a year, no problem. A few kids die by accident, BAN GUNS. I suppose it’s only okay to end a life if it’s a deliberate choice performed by a medical professional.
Being anti abortion is the same as being anti gun. Both platforms are completely run on emotion.
You guys aren’t any better than these folks – you just have a different hot topic issue that tugs on your heart strings.
Actually, it is the pro-abortion side that denies basic science and relies solely on emotion to support their position. Nice try, though.
Which is exactly what the whackadoodle people who are anti gun say about their stance.
You can’t argue with belief using logic. “The babies!” is not a logical stance. Neither is, “OMG GUNS!”
Nonsense. Basic science: the product of fertilization of human egg and human sperm is a distinct human life. The entity developing in the womb, from conception to birth, is a living human being. Genetically, it is human. Biologically, it is living.
Anything beyond that is an emotional, non-scientific appeal to justify killing that distinct human life.
Sad world we live in where people can get rid of an unborn child because it’s seen as an inconvenience. Whatever happened to the world of responsibility? You have sex and get pregnant, you do the responsible thing and give birth to and raise the child. Only the selfish see a child as a hindrance to their life.
“Whatever happened to the world of responsibility? You have sex and get pregnant, you do the responsible thing and give birth to and raise the child.”
I used to think this way. In fact, I used to be anti abortion. I de-indoctrinated myself. It is a very Western mindset. People who think this way have been brainwashed by child-worshipping culture and the idea that sex is inherently wrong and there are negative results attached.
I don’t think abortion is cool or that anyone should do it lightly, but I can’t take most of the anti-abortion crowd seriously until they stop trying to simultaneously block cheaper and easier to get birth control options.
That sounds like an argument based on emotion/ideology, and not on sound science.
Science = we are all just meat puppets and women naturally abort all the time anyway. Science does not make any moral judgments at all. Scientifically speaking, other animals kill their babies after being born or even eat them, so who the fuck cares?
All this right to life, my sky friend told me so, my pastor/preacher/cult leader told me so, babies are special, life is sacred, etc. etc. ad nauseam arguments are based on emotion or belief, which I lump into the same category.
Gun control advocates and anti abortion people are all trying to control other people’s behavior and morality. I am against control unless the control stops people from infringing on other citizens’ rights.
I’ll leave you with this:
Such as the right to life of all living human beings? Again, the product of conception of human sperm with human egg is a genetically fully human, distinct being that is biologically living. It is a living human being. Human beings have the right to life.
In response to this, you invoke straw men and emotional arguments. Thanks for (yet again) proving my point.
@Chip – the lump of cells is not a citizen. Simply being alive and in the body of a human host does not make a parasite a citizen. By that logic a tape worm would have natural rights.
And like I said, in the grand scheme of things, who cares?
That’s twice in a row now that you continue to prove my point. Equating a developing human to a tapeworm or other parasite is an emotional, non-scientific argument. Claimimg that only “citizens” have the right to life is an emotional, non-scientific argument. Thanks, Bear!
Just because you say something is true doesn’t make it true. Yet another argument style of the anti-gun crowd…
I’m extremely dispassionate about the subject. You’ll never see me raising my voice or holding signs. Your continued claims that my disposition or arguments are emotional have to either stem from misunderstanding or willful misrepresentation.
Considering I think it’s obvious I don’t think abortion is a moral issue and can give a shit less how many would-be mothers abort every year, it’s probably the latter. The fact that you’re not actually rebutting anything I say now but rather just trying to undermine my arguments in general with silly straw mans kind of solidifies this for me.
I will admit there is also the distinct possibility there might be a cultural disconnect too, whether it’s generational or background-related is kind of irrelevant. At the end of the day, I know how anti abortion people feel because I used to be one.
What have I said that you claim is untrue? Specifically, do you claim that it is untrue that the product of conception of human egg and human sperm is 1) genetically a human being, 2) genetically distinct from both father and mother, and 3) biologically living?
Unless those three points are settled, I really don’t care about anything else.
Gotta love that Susan Burke. She moves out west from Connecticut and like the liberal metastatic cancer that she is, makes disparaging comments about the political climate in Arizona. I watched California turn from a relatively conservative, low tax state into the cesspool it is now because of scum like her. Jerk.
Unfortunately she moved to Tucson and fits in with the rest of the backwater NIMBYs here. If they had their way Tucson would be anti-gun, fortunately the state stopped that from happening.
Have MDA now officially jumped the shark? One one hand, their boss, Shannon Watts, came out on Twitter in support of unlawful assault against law-abiding people carrying firearms; on the other hand, MDA are hyperventilating over a class designed to teach mothers with babies how to carry safely and responsibly.
So, MDA opposes safety education, and supports unlawful assault.
The Fonz would be proud.
“We at Moms Demand Action For Gun Sense In America oppose moms taking action against senseless gun deaths in America.”
every time this group wets their panties i can’t help but laugh….
I thought the same thing, are we the only two amused at all the hand wringing? I giggle every time.
Nope, you guys ain’t alone. I used to go to Cracked.com for my laughs, but since it turned into Left-wing dribble, I just go to MDA’s or CSGV’s facebook pages to laugh at their unfounded hysteria.
Yeah I just checked cracked a couple weeks ago, what happened to that site?
Hear, hear about Cracked. The Onion, too.
Every once in a while Cracked has relatively unbiased pieces. It is admittedly rare, though.
So antigun groups are against things that will actually reduce gun deaths? Whodathunkit?
Many some of these fearful supporters of Moms Demanding Assassination of Gun Owners in America should be more worried about those they’d rally with since MDA’s supporters have a peculiar tendency to call for violence against those the disagree with.
It comes from the tone at the top since Shanny herself passively endorsed attacking gun owners unprovoked like the Florida Walmart situation
Idolatry?
Idolatry??? There is little doubt that CSGV and Moms Demand worship government and adore authority.
Last time I checked, (and I am a Christian) wanting to protect both yourself and your child IS NOT idolatry.
I’ve observed over many years of discussions with on-line leftists (mainly, but not always, cordial) that several trends often hold. One is that they tend to accuse conservatives and libertarians of having the vices that they exhibit. In this case, the accusation is of “idolatry”. They seem to be doing this (1) to reaffirm their own self-righteousness, and (2) generate negative feelings about gun-owners amongst those Christians who don’t own guns. In other words, it is more than a pejorative and name-calling, it is designed to keep people — including themselves — from thinking.
Interesting that all of a sudden MDA and CSGV are showing concern for moms and children after all the efforts to dehumanize gun owners families.
Showing outrage that mothers would dare to be prepared to protect both themselves and their children is hardly “showing concern”…
Like I said before, we need to pack our stuff and move to the central states. Since they are so intolerant of us and seek to forceably change our culture, we should divide the US into three separate countries:
California, Oregon (Sorry Tom), and Washington can unite and become the “People’s Republic of Californistan” (PRC)
The Eastern coast and north eastern states can merge and become the “Democratic People’s Republic of Konnecticut” (DPRK)
This way everyone can live in peace. Konnecticut and Californistan can embrace statism and the collective borg mind dissolving all aspects of individualism and individual responsibility, and the central states can get together and form their own free nation where people are punished for crimes they personally commit and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
I’m willing to give up one coast but not both. We would need to consolidate them to one side or the other. Besides, I’d rather not have enemies on both flanks.
Let ’em have both. I live on the third coast, and it’s much nicer.
Dear Anonymous,
Up yours. Your solution apparently is, “Just give up and move, the coasts are a lost cause.”. Personally I like where I live and will fight for my rights until I’m breathing dirt. Plus, think about this, if we won’t (can’t?) stop 10,000,000 illegal Mexicans from invading our country, how do you think you could stop a determined liberal from moving from California to Arizona? I hate you people whose answer is always “Just move”.
When your state bans your guns – you’ll likely “just move.” I’m just trying to be honest here. Honestly, I wish everyone could enjoy freedom, but many parts of the US just don’t tolerate “freedom.” And (to be honest), it may get worse in those areas. I encourage and thank those who continue to fight for rights and freedom. But what is your plan when your state goes “full Nazi?”
To play devil’s advocate here, what’s your plan when the COUNTRY goes full Nazi?
You want us to move out of our homes and away from our families to a state that may currently enjoy better gun rights, but that only works as long as the states can remain that way. When we give up that much ground the idea of the gun free utopia will fester even worse where we have abandoned hope, allowing for an even more unified attack on the rights of us all.
In guerrilla warfare the best strategy is to remain entrenched in and among the lines of the enemy. Like it or not we are in this type of war, it just happens to be a political one. If we allow a complete surrender of states it won’t be long before the rest of the country feels the wrath of their ignorance.
You didn’t wait for him to finish. Once there are 3 separate countries, two of which are disarmed, we declare war on both of them, conquer them at great cost in lives (theirs, they have no weapons to hurt anybody), and enslave the remainder, no votes for them, nor any rights at all. In order to petition for a return of your rights, you have to show up at a particular site, armed, and DEMAND your rights back.
Interesting fantasy. If you could get a Progressive to listen to it, you might get him to think about whether he really wants to be disarmed.
I think the more serious argument to contemplate here is the general trend in migration. The Blue States are failed states. The Red States are succeeding. Therefore, both liberal and conservative voters have a propensity to move from the Blue to the Red States.
Obviously, tens of thousands of Progressives leaving Blue States won’t make them any less Blue. They will make the Red States less Red.
Tens of thousands of conservatives making the same migration won’t make the Blue Sates more/less Blue. Blue is Blue. They will tend to make Red States more Red.
So, the real question is whether Progressive emigrants will outnumber conservative emigrants; or, vice-versa.
When you are young and Progressive you have fewer ties to the place where you are. The world is your play-pen and you can go anywhere. When you are old and established in your personal business or employer, you are less eager to move no matter what your sentiments might be. Only when you become retired are you a free agent again. I fear the emigration pattern favors Progressives turning Red States less-Red.
All things considered, the Senate is the keystone to gun rights. As long as the rural Red States control the Senate and the populous metropolitan Blue States control the House, the Red States are still the gate-keepers to the judiciary. We PotG need to act now to maintain and build control over the Senate before the risk of Progressive emigration corrodes our control of that key chamber.
If you look at my map below, I was surprised Alaska was so blue. Alaska of all places. I agree senate control is critical.
Your plan sucks.
How’s this for a version of “just move”? How about a few hundred thousand right thinking people “just move” to Washington state by the next election? Had that happened before the last one, we wouldn’t have I-594. Heck, we’ve had statewide elections decided by a few hundred votes before.
A lot of “blue states” are that way because of the city/rural population distribution. The edge is enough that on ballot issues, etc., blue wins all the time. However, it’s often pretty close in absolute terms and it wouldn’t take a lot to tip the balance.
So here’s a proposal: if you or someone you know is looking for a change, look at Washington. Bring your family and friends, and register to vote. If enough people come, then our politics will realign. And if you were one of those people who came, you’d be doing the realignment.
So – hypothetical question. Suppose your region is 51% “I hate freedom” and 49% “Please leave me alone”
How are you going to vote that one out? You aren’t. You’re going to pack up and leave or comply because that is how this nation currently works. Once long ago, people didn’t make arbitrary rules that only supported themselves or their constituency, they voted what was morally best to their knowledge and a great deal of their philosophy centered on individualism. In these days of extreme intolerance, what happens when the 51% vote to eliminate your culture? What do you do then? Just food for thought guys.
Haha. Come on guys – just a suggestion for debate
Map for more information:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0c6n0NEMSK4
Iowa should definitely NOT be part of Konnecticut. Instead of handing over the entire upper mid-west to the commies, they should just carve out Cook County, IL. Kind of like West Berlin during the Cold War only in reverse, Chicago could be the commie enclave.
Come to think of it, neither should the Carolinas or Virgina and Kalifornia should consist of just the western parts of the Pacific coast states.
Thank you! Virginia isn’t lost yet — not by a Jefferson mile. And South Carolina? Do you want Nikki Haley to open up on you with a SC-made SCAR?
I really wish people would stop dumping ME, NH and VT in with the ‘North East’ or ‘East Coast’. We have as many guns as any other state and a whole lot less crime. Heck, there’s a good chance all three could be constitutional carry by the end of the year!
Fair enough.
Got the distribution from this map:
http://www.geocurrents.info/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/2012-US-Exception-Election-Map.png
As long as the Mid-west doesn’t become “The Christian States of America”.
You’d prefer the Islamic States of America?
How about the Freedom of Religion States of America?
How about neither, Mel.
Grindstone is so blinded by religious bigotry that he thinks it’s Christians that threaten his freedom. But even if the most zealous fundamentalist Christians ran the country, the only way it would effect him is if he wanted to kill his unborn child or marry his gay lover. Compare that to the threat Islam or atheism constitutes to his freedom.
If Islamists ran the country he couldn’t watch his porn anymore, or drink alcohol. He’d have to spend half his time escorting his female relatives around since they couldn’t go out in public without a male relative. And if they found out about his gay lover he’d be tossed off a skyscraper.
State atheism was tried for 3/4 of a century. It’s called ‘communism’. Under communism he’d likely spend his days in a ‘gulag’ if they found out about his gay lover. If he managed to keep that secret, he’d be forced to work at an assigned job for a fraction of his current pay. If the state decided it was time to uproot him and move him to another region, say east of the Urals, they’d send the men with guns to escort him to his new residence. In either system he would have no vote. No say in how the country was run. No freedom of speech. No 2nd Amendment. No 4th. No 1st. We joke about places like California or New Jersey being ‘slave states’, but they are nothing like the states that don’t have their foundations in Judeo-Christian morality.
Interesting comment there, Grindstone. The idea was to form a country of freedom-loving folks separate from the statist sheeple. Why do you think the freedom-lovers might become “the Christian States”?
I give this country about 100 years before this becomes reality.
I say take them both back and make them Constitutional carry. If the bleeding hearts don’t like it, move to another country where hypocracy is embraced.
“To our knowledge, nobody is doing this yet. The interest was so great that she actually had to turn off or shut off the registration. Otherwise, we would have had two-three times as many people here,” said Barry Snell, Crossroads Shooting Sports.”
Whoa! Young mothers wanting to be able to protect themselves and their children! We can’t be having that in this age of victimhood! Keep this up and the left will suffer an untimely demise!
LOOK AT THIS BABY!!!!
Blessed be the Moms who give our cause the publicity we could never afford!
Imagine 2 mothers hearing about this controversy. One is appalled; she wouldn’t have been won-over to think about self-defense anyway.
Another starts to think. Hmmmm, I’m home alone with my baby. My husband is at work. What if an home invader attacked MY house? What if a mugger attacked me when I’m out giving my baby a stroll? (It could happen; it’s happened before.) What could I do?
Even if I couldn’t or wouldn’t do anything to protect my baby, I wouldn’t deny another mother her right to do what I can’t/wouldn’t do.
Motherhood is apt to concentrate the mind on self-interest and the interest of her progeny. Whereas 4 years of a proper liberal arts education may have made her a citizen of the society, a pawn of true civilization, that is nothing compared to maternal instinct.
Maybe we PotG ought to be thinking just a little bit less about how operationally-operative WE want to be carrying our Glocks and 1911’s in Condition 1. Maybe we ought to think more about what individuals feel comfortable with. This instructor seems to have found a nitch.
Mothers and oddly enough Liberals who carry are the way to win this fight. Dividing us along political lines only serves to continue the stripping of rights. While it’s true the Democratic areas tend to feel more at ease taking guns, changing Liberals into gun owners who vote in their party’s primaries for gun supporting Democrats rather than the anti-gun ones, and you will have two parties who agree on the fundamental right of gun ownership.
I can imagine getting a mother to focus on her personal safety; that of her young children; that of her adult daughter.
How do you think you could get a male liberal to make these connections. As a male, he is apt not to spend any time at all thinking about his personal safety. He lives in a high-rise with a doorman; travels during daylight hours, etc.
Even after you have converted a liberal, male or female, how do you get them to vote against a Democrat who is hostile to guns? The liberal will approve of just about everything else on such a Democrat’s agenda; they only mildly opposed to only his most draconian positions. They will still agree with his assault weapons ban, magazine capacity limits and so forth.
If you strap your children into a 5000lbs vehicle and barrel down the road at 70mph with only a small, white line between your vehicle and other 70mph traveling, 5000lbs vehicles you should not have vehicles or children…
God I love my state. Right now we have a big push for expanded gun owner rights going through our House and Senate. Currently in Iowa, it is illegal for anyone under the age of 14 to handle a pistol. That means I cannot take my boys out shooting .22 pistols. We are trying to fix that, and people’s heads are exploding! The bill also includes legalizing suppressors (The one thing I hate here, no NFA) keeping CCW holders information private, and a few other measures. I really do hope that all 4 paid people in MDA show up to protest around here. Good job Mrs. Lauer, keep up the good work!
No NFA here, but the carry laws are about as good as they can get without constitutional carry. Between the two I’d prefer not to have to ask the manager if the restaurant does more than 50% of it’s sales in alcohol before being seated. Suppressors would be nice, but unless you show up at the range at really odd hours you’re going to need your plugs anyway. What would really be nice is to get rifle hunting for deer back.
Gov. William J. Le Petomane,
As for deer hunting with rifles, start the push in your state to allow hunting with rifles chambered in pistol calibers — which basically means .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum, .45 LC +P, and 454 Casull.
Rifles in those calibers are good to about 150 yards maximum which is totally on par with shotguns shooting .45 and .50 caliber bullets in sabots out of rifled barrels. The main difference is that you get much less recoil and noise shooting something like a 240 grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 1,800 fps versus a 437 grain (1 ounce) slug at 1,600 fps.
Rifles in those calibers are also way more accurate than most/all shotgun slugs which is an important ethical reason to allow pistol caliber rifles. Oh, and .44 Magnum 240 grain semi-jacketed soft point ammunition is quite a bit less expensive than shotgun slugs — which range from $0.90 to $3 per shell.
I believe Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio all recently opened up pistol caliber rifles for their firearm deer seasons … why not have your state be next?
Good idea. The incremental approach works so good for the left we might try it on the right. Iowa is always slow to respond to it’s citizens wishes though, so it will probably take a few years.
Governor,
“Iowa is always slow to respond to it’s citizens wishes though, so it will probably take a few years.” All that means is that there is no better time than the present to start.
Another plus for you is the fact that other Midwestern states have already done it. They provide ample experience/data to show that hunters are using pistol caliber rifles every bit as safe — if not safer — than shotguns. That should seriously help speed the regulatory/legislative process since there is no need for a bunch of “studies”.
Moreover, legislative campaigns such as these will invite the Fudds to get involved in the gun-rights movement. They may start to see the connection between their hobby and the threat to the 2A.
In Texas the 51% establishments have to post a sign, and you can also look them up on the TABC website, but yeah, it’s still stupid to have to worry about the difference. I hope we change that law someday.
The only law concerning alcohol and firearms in Iowa is that if you’re BAC is over .08% your carry license is (temporarily) invalid, constituting an aggravated misdemeanor. Even then I personally know someone who got caught red handed at .14 and didn’t get charged, but then his keys were in the car with the engine running and he didn’t get a DUI either, so I think he got lucky. Anyway, you’re free to go to the bar and drink with your gat as long as you’re legal to drive here. And if there’s a no firearms sign on the door you’re free to ignore it too as long as you’re not asked to leave.
Wasn’t it not too long ago a young mother and her child in a stroller were attacked with the child being shot and killed by some thugs? So women packing heat and their babies makes sense. Evil criminals exist. Why not let mothers choose to carry or not Shannon. You are pro-choice, right?
Killing babies in the womb = good.
Protecting babies outside the womb = bad.
Yup–it’s what passes for logic in liberal-land.
Seems to me that Wec Chandler needs to stay away from cars and streets since he’s SO worried about dumb mechanical items causing death all by themselves.
As for Banu, he/they obviously see themselves as at the top of the elitist group that looks down on third world countries and don’t want anyone making harder to feel so elite. Who’s he kidding?? Americans, as individuals, are the most generous friends the third world has ever had.
Then when Banu started taking about baby killing, I had hopes, quickly dashed, that he was referring to the millions of babies aborted in this country. Haven’t seen anything on it but I’ll bet that Moms Demand Action won’t say a peep about the evil that abortion is! The left are such hypocrites. Not that they are the only ones, but they certainly are king of that mountain.
I have two words for the MDA supporters on FB:
‘echo chamber’
“If you feel a need to strap both a child and gun to your body at the same time, you should not have children or guns.” — Chloe Hincman
I invite Ms. Hincman to have a conversation with this mother and ask this mother if she was glad that she was unarmed around her children … as in the children who were home at the time that a violent home invader almost killed their mother:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU0EJS3cJIc
Against proper training for those moms that probably already carry ? Yeah, makes a LOT of sense…NOT ? Why do the idiots that oppose training like this have NO common sense? Suspect they drank too much of Shannon’s Koolaid.
Why do they oppose training like that? Because they oppose all firearms, period. This story simply gives them the extra emotional element (moms AND children) to really rile them up.
1125 comments for a group that is supposed to number 5 million (if it hasn’t grown another couple million while I wasn’t looking)–and that number based pretty much on their FB page? OK, I guess it is a lot of comments–but I think I saw more on a Yahoo Sports article about how Ronda Rousey is not gonna fight a man in UFC. Those guys yammer at each other on FB. Gun rights groups win law suits and elect politicians (yes, I know anti-gun politicos get elected too–but I think you can fairly say it’s more because they tend to be for “free stuff” than because they are against guns).
When your entire campaign is rooted in ignorance education is your worst enemy.
The last thing anti’s want is people to learn, train and share.
In case of emergency…
Step #1 – Grab closest MDA member
Step #2 – Use as shield between baby and assailant.
Step #3.a. – Use MDA member as sacrifice to assailant.
Step #3.b. – As a last resort, shoot through shield at assailant. Assailant will know you’re bad ass and leave you unharmed.
It is the MDA types who harbor fantasies of harm coming to their ideological opponents. False flag much?
(P.S. you watch too many movies, and spend too little time at the range. Defensive carry ammo is generally hollow-point, so your shoot-through-the-MDA-person projection fantasy is illogical. Run along back to the CSGV facebook page, now.)
And you, Chip, should be less of a sanctimonious ass. If I took myself as seriously as you take yourself, my head would explode.
Apologize for not using the sarcasm/hyperbole font, which everyone else seemed to get but you.
Or, you could stop taking samples from work.
Ah, “sarcasm”, eh?
When crass immaturity couched as sarcasm is indistinguishable from the rhetoric of the other side, it equally deserves to be called out – if for no other reason than it will be used against us by the other side.
“A culture that embraces reckless behavior and risk.”
Actually, I think they’re trying to REDUCE reckless behavior, by teaching people who are going to carry anyway how to do it safely.
We’re killing our children here too… On a weekly basis… except here, it’s condoned because America’s love affair with guns outweighs it’s love of children.
If we want to reduce numbers of children killed in this country, perhaps we should focus on a woman’s so-called “right” to kill her unborn child before we start persecuting everyone just because a relatively small number of people are irresponsible with their tools.
this Mom/instructor steps in to fill a much needed role regarding safety, and they are OUTRAGED!! Huh… and here I was thinking MDA was all about safety.
Just a little observation about their followers. I get on the Facebook page a few times a week to get a good laugh, even though I usually wind up banging my head on my desk. I have noticed over the last couple months their “likes” have gone up from around 225k to around 275k. It is pretty consistently another 1k every day to day and a half.
Just seems a little odd. I find it kind of hard to believe they are gaining almost 1k “likes” everyday. I am just calling BS.
As with most “popularity” things on the internet, they can always be spoofed by scriptkiddies. I never take likes or web polls serious.
Mother Kills Daughter & Nieces While Chatting On Facebook & Driving
http://hollywoodlife.com/2015/03/05/mother-facebook-chatting-driving-kills-daughter-nieces-car-crash/
Mom kills her 3 kids before killing herself.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/01/27/family-found-dead/22436723/
Prosecutor: Mom craved attention, poisoned child with salt.
http://www.newsday.com/news/westchester/closings-scheduled-in-case-of-woman-accused-of-killing-son-1.9978803
Somehow I think the MDA cult could not care less about these kids killed by their own mothers.
OMG! Mothers are taking a class on safety! OMG!
after all of the death threats from antis wanting our children dead, this training should be no surprise.
3, 2, 1..how long before this “faux outrage” from a demonstrably fake PR campaign, Moms Demand Action,
(paid for by proven fake shell .org: MAIG, losing members rapdly as they find out the hidden purpose, designed to misrepresent the mayors reason to join, for “safety” that instead promote laws that create gun confiscation.)
Gets a paid for mention in a intermediary progtard echo chamber, like Vox, Politico, Media Matters, who will “trade it up the chain” to Salon, HuffPo, and handed up to NYT, WAPO, etc as “news” for credibility….
Hey, its a small circle, and deadlines matter.
Haha, MDA is pissed because no one interviewed THEM, despite this story getting national coverage on YAHOO, Wash Examiner, Daily Mail, and hundreds of overwhelmingly positive comments.
Hey, Mike Bloomberg hows that former Monsanto GMO spokeswoman hired hack, faking ” For The Children Mommy” idea working out for you?
Getting any traction, are you? The “Destroy the NRA” meme didnt work out so good, and is it true you are being sued for slandering some small business people?
Well I just hope the woman teaching baby and gun carry doesn’t tell the moms to use the “tactical” purse like that poor lady who’s 2year old shot her. Having 4 kids I get how hard it can be to maneuver with a squirming baby. Yeah I know the moms demand murder hate children-gun protected children…
It’s just MDA demanding more victims. No surprise.
Now this is real gun safety. After the incident with that poor woman in Idaho, and a few other cases, those concerned about the danger of guns around children properly respond by teaching.
People are going to carry guns. Offering help in learning how to do so effectively around children does nothing other than make everyone safer. Whining about it because your pet solution is not to carry guns in the first place, is merely sabotaging actual efforts at safety. Even were the gun grabbers right, and everyone were safer without CCW, still this training would be an improvement, by highlighting the risks of kids getting a hold of the gun and teaching better ways to prevent that. So even a truly logical gun grabber would have to, recognizing CCW is not going away anytime soon, think this a good think considering the concrete reality that people do carry guns. A logical gun grabber would probably say something like “while children are safest when their parents do not carry guns around them, if they are going to this minimizes the risk and makes them safer”
But who said they were logical?
But, if folks were doing it more safely, they’d have less “ammo” to use to try to promote their agenda. Since all their HS about concealed carry resulting in “OK Corral” scenarios fell flat on its face, they’ll take whatever they can get… (Like they ever gave a real rat’s @$$ about saving the lives of anyone but “those poor, misunderstood, blah, blah, blah, …..” jack-asses, who give them even more of an excuse to try to turn this country into a police state by wreaking havok on the lives of their victims…)
AKA: More accidents = more drama/propaganda against carrying = fewer guns in the hands of well-trained citizens = more crime = more of a perceived “need” to further restrict liberty… ANYTHING to promote their actual agenda…
What they lack in size, they gain in media attention (adoration?). Exactly what my daughter has to sat about them. MDA is essentially a liberal media event.
Sorta like “Occupy”, no? And hopefully headed for the same fate.
I want to hear more about our “right to judge third world countries” not familiar with that one.
If people with little kids want to carry, more power to them; and if they are, I’m sure the classes help them be safer. That said, there is not a chance in hell I would carry around my kids.
How deluded is a movement like MDA that bans everyone who doesn’t toe the party line. What they end up with is a Facebook page where it appears that everyone agrees with their extreme agenda. Banning competing viewpoints is the ugliest of dishonesty.
How about we PotG create a web site named “Dads Demand Conversation on Gun Sense in America” where we post links to the Moms’ postings and then our rebuttals. The Moms can rebut us on our site; whereas, of course, we can’t rebut the Moms on their site.
I thought they were all for “reasonable” training and “gun safety” yet when young mothers go out and get it, they bitch about it. Funny how that works out.
Comments are closed.