I’ve had intelligent conversations about gun control with rabidly anti-gun people. They can be reasonable and intelligent, analyzing new facts as they’re presented and sometimes even changing their opinions. But when they start the conversation believing false information, that discussion becomes unproductive to say the least.

Misinformation and lies are the best way to ensure that there will be no “conversation” about guns, gun rights and how they’re currently regulated in America. Just more yelling and polarization. Based on Shannon Watts’ latest tweet that seems to be exactly what she wants.

Since the Sutherland Springs massacre, we’ve learned that the shooter was a prohibited person — discharged for bad conduct from the Air Force after prosecution and incarceration for domestic violence. That prohibited from (legally) purchasing or even owning a firearm.

Shannon Watts, Michael Bloomberg’s paid sock puppet for gun control, took no time in pointing that fact out to her Twitter followers.

That means he’s prohibited purchaser, but there’s absolutely no regulation of long guns (AR15s) in Texas. No background check required.

You see the problem here. Well, a few, actually.

Shannon’s statement that “there’s absolutely no regulation of long guns” is a blatant lie. And as someone who’s been working to restrict Americans’ access to firearms since 2013, she knows it.

Texas State penal code chapter 46 specifically regulates weapons such as firearms, including rifles. Beyond that the Gun Control Act of 1968 (revised and expanded over the years) regulates the possession and sale of firearms within the entire United States, Texas included. So there are regulations in place which restrict firearms sales, and specifically prohibit individuals such as Devin Kelley from owning them.

But the situation got even more problematic for Shannon’s argument once it was revealed that the rifle was purchased from an Academy Sports store, where the purchaser filled out an ATF form 4473 and underwent the required FBI NICS background check.

So the idea that Kelley strolled in off the street and purchased a rifle without a background check is very definition of fake news. The biggest of big lies.

How did Shannon respond?  She doubled down on her statement, pivoting to the non sequitur of the “gun show loophole” argument.

You are WRONG per usual. Private sales of long guns in Texas are totally unregulated: no background check, no training, no age limit.

Her second tweet at least brings her closer to an actual grey area, but it’s still false. Devin Kelley bought his rifle from a federally licensed gun dealer. All sales which take place from a gun dealer, whether at a gun show or at their place of business, REQUIRE a background check thanks to the 1993 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

Texas is a state where sales from one resident within the state to another resident within the same state are legal. But even then, had Kelley bought his rifle privately, the sale would have been illegal if the purchaser is a “prohibited person.” Even then, though Texas might not have a specific statute regarding prohibited firearms owners, 18 USC 922 still applies.

It’s hard not to conclude that Ms. Watts simply doesn’t care about the facts of this (or any other) case. Advancing the narrative she’s pushing — that Texas is the “Wild West” without any regulations on the sale of guns — is her only concern.

Her lies and distortions, however, will be taken as truth and repeated by some in the media, spread and repeated until they become part of the narrative on America’s alleged “gun problem.” Which only serves to make it more difficult for all involved to have a constructive discussion about guns based on actual facts.

When the NRA and gun owners are always portrayed as enemies and made the targets of hate, there’s no willingness to listen. When the effort required to educate those who will listen is so daunting, we all fall back into our usual echo chambers, perpetuating the polarization.

I’d love to have an actual conversation about guns with those who favor further restrictions on Second Amendment rights.  But too often there’s just too much effort involved in re-educating the gun-haters, trying to reverse the programming they’ve already received. It’s simply easier to adopt the stonewall approach, blocking any new proposed gun laws. And there’s still far more of us than them. For now.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

53 COMMENTS

  1. “Shanon Watts: “There’s Absolutely No Regulation of AR-15s in Texas. No Background Check Required.””

    More lies from the anti-gun crowd…

    • Shannon milliWatts: There’s absolutely no regulation of mass media in Texas. Any liar can say whatever they want, with no background check on the facts required.

    • If the fool ever tried to purchase an AR-15 here in Texas, she would know better. But then she already knows the truth
      She’s just lying through her gun grabbing teeth.

    • Actually it’s not “MORE” lies, it’s just the same old lies over and over. There is no doubt that this braindead twat, shannon, has been corrected, shown the facts, and been proven wrong multiple times. What we need is a law that makes it a crime, for anyone who is in a position to influence public opinion, to BLATANTLY and knpwingly lie. It’s not a violation of “freedom of speech” because they are free to say what they want, but they need to be held accountable for pushing their lies. ALL of these asshats need to be in jail, including Hil-LIAR-y and obastard!

  7. If you have been able to get anti gunners to listen then you’re a better person than I. I have a few friends whom I’ve mentioned here from time to time. Ive never had them engage with me in honest discussion and I’ve received every tactic under the sun, but never actual discussion. I’ve been told that if only I knew the stats and data they knew then i’d agree with them, when I ask them to share that information with me they stop talking. I’ve been lectured on how people can buy machine guns with no scrutiny, always from a position of ignorance. I’ve been lectured on the capabilities of various firearms and when I remind them that i am a gun owner and actually own one of those specific guns myself and I personally know what they say about it is not true I get accused of buying into NRA propaganda or they stop talking. I mention the reality of the statistical data that in the UK and Australia homicides reversed a downward trend and rose in the aftermath of their landmark legislation while the decrease continued in the US with no gun control of any note and I get accused of buying into NRA propaganda. When I point out that the stats I cite do not come from the NRA but are nothing more than the government published stats put out by each nation, which I then plot in excel, they stop talking.

    I have never had an anti gunner engage with me honestly in the discussion instead of deploying tactics. Must be me.

    • These people do not think, they adopt beliefs and this is merely one of those beliefs. If there was thought involved…

      But there isn’t and so we get this.

    • Australia homicide did decrease since their 1990’s peak. So don’t be like Watts and say things that are not true. The point with Australia is it saw roughly a 50% decrease in homicide after reducing guns, while the US saw near 60% decreasing homicide since its 1990’s peak as the US increased guns (from 250-300 million to 325-400 million).

      IE the US and Australia both saw big drops in homicide, the US significantly more of a drop, whey did completely different things on gun law policy and gun prevalence/.

      What we both did that was the same is the question since we both saw huge drops. Both the US and Australia greatly increased incarceration rates.

      • If memory serves, Australia did see a significant increase in violent crime after the “buy backs”, correct? Perhaps that is what he errantly was attempting to convey.

        • here in australia suicide is included in the homicide statistics. prior to 96 about 70% of suicides were with firearms and made up more than half the gun homicide figures. that figure plummeted but overall suicides went up. as the homicide rate with firearms did not drop significantly enough to account for the significant drop made up from suicides the actual crime rate with firearms did go up regardless of the continual drop in firearm deaths that has actually been on the same average decline since the 60’s.

      • One theory about that is that it is (at least partially) due to the 60M or so legal abortions that helped keep unwanted kids off the streets and out of gangs.

        • “One theory about that is that it is (at least partially) due to the 60M or so legal abortions that helped keep unwanted kids off the streets and out of gangs.”

          About 50 developed countries, including the US and Australasia had abortion law and access changes at the same time and also also reduction of blood lead levels. It is the US that saw the largest reduction in homicide,about a 63% decrease since the 1990’s peak (while increasing guns). Australia saw about a 50% decrease since their 1990’s peak (while decreasing guns). Quite a few other developed democracies that also legalized abortion and reduced childhood blood lead levels saw nowhere near those decrease.

          What the US and Australia have in common with their large decreases is very large increases in incarceration.

          We know that this is CAUSAL to drops in violent crime — and we know why. Study after study shows that not only are 93% of murder perps are prior criminals, and 80% are “super predators” with more than 10 arrests, but about 91% of murder victims are criminals. Locking them up with appropriate sentences vastly decreases murder.

          The issue with this texas shooter is not merely the Obama administration DoD failing on NCIS, but being soft on actual punishment. In 2012 he committed two severe aggravated felonies. That should have been ten years at Leveneworth and he would have not only not been able to have a gun, he would have been in prison today

    • I’ve run into the exact same emotion based “arguments” when talking to libtards about gun-control. This afternoon, I was listening to various news-show talking-heads drone on and on about the “necessity to do something” . . . like ban “assault weapons” and limiting the “bullets” in “magazine clips”. As I heard this kind of witless blather, I wondered by none of the various “news” sources—regardless of whether they were supposed to be liberal or conservative—address the simple and quite glaring fact that trumps any gun-control argument: an armed populace that can defend itself is the best antidote for spree-killings. But, of course, that’s one solution to gun-violence that The Left can never even acknowledge. While banning or outright confiscation of enough guns to permit real safety from gun-deaths is impossible, encouraging American citizens to arm themselves for their own self-defense is something that is definitely possible.

    • It isn’t so much that your friends and acquaintances aren’t honest, they have joined a religion and that religion demands unswerving dedication to the dogma. They just can’t help themselves.

    • My experience is exactly the same! Lots of hate and anger and zero facts. Just an insane belief that they should have the power to control gun ownership (no gun ownership except for the authorities) and that I should just shut up because they are outraged that I own an evil gun. There is no reasoning with someone who has a closed kind.

    • I’ve been fortunate, then. I’ve found a few, on Facebook, no less, that have actually listened to what I have to say, have taken the evidence I’ve presented and considered it, and walked away unsure about the position they previously occupied.

      I’ve even managed to get an old high school teacher of mine to look at what I present, and his rants against guns have gotten much quieter since.

      I did it all civily, too. Although a couple of them didn’t start civil, and I got caught unaware when my facts started finding a purchase in people I was being…not so polite to. To one, I actually had to say “waitaminnit…are we actually TALKING? Because I really wasn’t ready for that.”

      Sometimes, you just get lucky.

  8. only her followers can read her tweets. i’m assuming her followers are regurgitating her on social media and then getting schooled by their friends.

  9. I knew this was going to happen, this exact headline. Spoken like a true libtard with her head so far up her ass they have to insert a feeding tube in her esophagus. They always make a twist to serve their best interests, regardless of the truth. They knew he was banned by the federal government but they went there anyway. Their logic is the same in politics: They don’t make laws by taking logic into consideration, they use emotions, misinformation be damned.

  10. She is nothing more than a well paid corporate shill. That anyone would listen to her and take her seriously speaks volumes.

  11. The Hysterical Mother is a paid propagandist. She puts out (lies) for Sugar Daddy Bloomberg’s cash, preaching a dark gospel of anti-civil rights bigotry, intolerance and hatred. Bigots do not spread hysteria with facts, they fabricate statistics and demonize others in their attempts to manipulate public opinion.

  12. Her twitter feed is protected and she has 35 followers. Honestly, how is this foolish woman the voice of a movement?

  14. Spreading falsehoods like this only undermines her cause in the long run. Even though her and Mickey’s disciples might believe every word they hear from them, they ultimately will get frustrated over the lack of action the gubmint takes to enact laws that already exist. They’re still fretting over the total lack of regulation for automatic weapons even though those exact regulations were enacted 83 years ago. It’s no wonder the left is having a meltdown.

  15. Let’s all pray and hope nothing bad happens to the dear woman, like stepping off the curb in New York and getting hit by a speeding bicyclist and beaning her empty skull on the ground. That would be just awful to get seriously injured wearing ugly shoes.

  16. What Watts depends on is her endless repetition of outright lies. The rifle used this killing was bought with a full background check no different that “universal background check” Watts hawks as the solution.

    But “Everytown” and “Moms demand Action” put out complete lies over and over. They have claimed Newton and a dozen other “high profile shootings” would have been prevented by “universal background checks.” That is just a complete lie

    In fact the two mass shootings that were affected by policy were CAUSED by Hillary Clinton created policy (Va. GTECH health privacy mess written by Hillary) and Eric Holder created policy (Roof being able to pass a background check directly due to his offense being downgraded by Holder DOJ guidance from a prohibiting offense to a non prohibiting offense).

  18. I am confused…I thought a DD resulted in a prohibited person, who could not legally have firearms, but a Bad Conduct was ok to still own firearms? This nut was BC – not DD. Please enlighten…..

    • A bad conduct discharge, which he received, does not qualify for being made a prohibited person. Apparently the military does not report domestic violence convictions to NICS.

      • DV results in all guns being prohibited…how could you be a soldier without any guns…???

        • He got the boot but under the Obama administration there were less full prosecutions and more “papering” meaning service members who committed violent crimes while in the service were more likely to get out without being reported to NICS

        • He wasn’t a soldier, nor was he a rifleman or even and infantryman. he didn’t carry or use weapons in the Air Force.

      • He was Court Martial, sentenced to 18 months sentence commuted to 12 months and then got a BCD.
        That precludes any ability to own a firearm.
        If the crime was over a year in a Brig then he was banned.
        He was charged with assault and battery with the intention to commit greiveous bodily harm to wit an infant whose skull he broke.
        Assault and Battery is a Felony He was an out and out bad guy.

  19. How can a subset of the population be designated as prohibited persons for an object that is completely unregulated? Prohibited by what, if not laws and regulations?

  20. Shanon doesn’t have a watt of electrical activity in her misshapen noggin’…but she knows she has to comment to continue getting Bloomiebucks😡😡😡

    • Ah yes, excellent pun. One could even state that she doesn’t have the current moral capacitance for honesty with a high degree of resistance to the truth.

      Now can someone work inductance and voltage into this?

        • Hmm, not bad. This one can dig it.

          Making electrical jokes from Watts her name’s name is quite energizing, as shocking as that may seem.

          She needs a white/grey strip of hair running down her head in the fashion of a lightning bolt. Do Stepford wives need to be plugged in from time to time to recharge?

          On the bottom of Shannon’s foot reads two things: Made In China and Property Of Bloomberg LLC.

      • Well, she certainly is revolting. I certainly wouldn’t want to take a spin on her ohm wheel if you know what I mean. If you ever found yourself with Watts on top of you you might end up divided with no power left to resist the civilian disarmament complex.

        Meh, I tried.

        • Revolting? Excellent!!!

          Nice touch working Ohm’s law in there also with Watts divided by Ohms equals volts. Quite clever.

          Now keeping in mind her capacitance to be a major pain in the ass, an induction is likely(to what this one doesn’t know). All this works out to being quite the impedance.

  21. You cannot argue with stupid.
    I give up on these types and simply laugh, say NO, and answer the only way they understand, Molon Labe, come and take it then, go start legislation to do what you wish or shut up about it.
    You cannot fix stupid.

Comments are closed.