Moms Demand Action Phoenix (courtesy azcentral.com)

Everytown for Gun Safety and its wholly owned subsidiary Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America declared September 10 to be their “Day of Action.” Even before it began, we declared the campaign a damp squib. Unsurprisingly, we were proved right. Less than 100 non-dues paying “members” assembled on Capitol Hill to hear the gun rights group wave the bloody shirt for civilian disarmament. Out in the hinterlands, where the anti-gunners shock troops [sic] couldn’t organize any of the anti-gun brand’s matching red shirts, the turnout was even more spectacularly unimpressive. Needless to say, that didn’t stop the local media from giving handfuls of anti-gunners the oxygen of publicity. azcentral.com was there . . .

A small group of gun-law advocates rallied Thursday in front of Sen. Jeff Flake’s Phoenix office to demand reforms that tighten background checks on gun purchases.

The group was part of the nationwide “Whatever It Takes Day of Action,” highlighted by a Washington, D.C., rally to urge Congress to enact laws designed to reduce gun violence.

In Phoenix, roughly 20 people — some of them members of the Arizona chapter of Moms Demand Action — took to Flake’s office at 22nd Street and Camelback Road.

Yeah, I’m not seeing twenty. All the pictures from Silver State news org’s #WhateverItTakes rally photo gallery – save the image above – are close-ups. Putting it all together, I’m seeing maybe ten MDA activists, at least three of which seem unsuited to the biological demands of motherhood. And that’s being generous (numbers-wise). But so is azcentral.com. After mooting the Moms desire for universal background checks, the paper gave a single line to the one counter-demonstrator, Dr. Peter Steinmetz, a member of the Arizona Citizens Defense League.

Steinmetz said the efforts would be ineffective if people aren’t able to acquire guns for protection.

Wait. What? Oh, he means universal background checks would do nothing to stop criminals and crazies from acquiring firearms, but would pave the way for civilian disarmament, degrading and destroying Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, leaving them defenseless against criminal assault and government tyranny. Gotcha.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

47 COMMENTS

    • What base were you thinking? Octal (“10″=eight)? Ternary (“10″=three)? Or, maybe, binary (“10″=two)?

      • Of course MDA counts in binary, how on earth do you think they get to thousands when they claim how many people showed up. Whats that, you mean they just lie about attendance? Maybe they could get Bloomberg to offer extra large sodas and pizza to every one that shows up. What Bloomberg doesn’t like large sodas either, man that guy is a walking, talking, kill joy!

    • Yeah it’s a lot more than I expected in the Phoenix area since I’m from Phoenix, though I’m guessing they’ll only succeed in ostracizing themselves from the rest of the state. If they don’t want guns tell them to move back to California, they’re probably from there anyways.

  2. “…gun-law advocates”

    Is this what they are called now?

    Or is this one of those regional things like calling it soda or pop?

    • In some parts of the country, gun control “reasoning” is known as “bullcrap.” In other parts, it’s known as “horseshit.” Here, it’s called “bullshit.”

      • I just want to know where the term “red shirt” came from. Was it from the author or “Moms”? Either way, I think it’s humorously ironic considering it from a Star Trek point of view.

        • That depends on whether you’re thinking of it from a “Classic” Star Trek point of view (where the extras/peons/dead meat wore the red) or Star Trek the Next Generation point of view (where colors got swapped and the command staff wore red and the extras/peopns/dead meat wore gold).

          • Oh, always classic ST. I don’t think I’d see it as humorous at all if it were a reference to TNG red shirts.

        • I think in this case it means red with blood. As in they take the blood stained shirt off the person who has been shot and wave it around like a flag while calling for more gun control.
          I think they called it red shirt because they think some might find the word “bloody” or “blood” offensive.

        • Instead of red shirts they spread propaganda around more like a group in the 30s I believe were called the Brown shirts!

  4. I would love to infiltrate one of these and hand out placards that say “Ban the NFA!” and tell them it means banning national firearms 🙂 that would be a picture worth posting

    • Or, tell them it stands for “National Firearms Act” and it allowed us to keep handguns. Given that they almost put handguns into that act, there’s even some warped truth to what you’d be saying.

  5. You get no points for your “damp squib” prediction. Every campaign by the Hysterical Mothers and EveryClown for Gun Control has been a damp squib.

    The big news here is no red shirts. Maybe, just maybe, Shannon’s Sugar Daddy is tightening up his purse strings because of all those damp squibs.

  7. Well, bless their little journo-list-ic hearts there at Azcentral.com. “Roughly 20” apparently means “something less than 20, but more than 10”. Then, “some of them members of Moms…”. I’m gonna guess that means maybe half were the faux “moms”, and the rest were the media sycophants sent to cover this momentuous event. So, we have maybe half of a gaggle of less than 20 people being what the “moms” were able to muster for their big “day of action”. I wonder what a “day of inaction” would look like?

  8. They protested at Sen. Kelly Ayotte’s Manchester, NH office also. The newspaper article starts: ” A small group of protesters rallied on Thursday to demand that legislators consider new and stronger solutions to gun laws.” About a dozen according to the paper, and they used fancy preprinted signs. Grassroots my …

  9. These are the Mom’s you don’t want to be Mom’s. Why would any Mom worthy of the label want to give-up a self-defense tool which can protect their children? They do realize their actions lead to empowering criminals? These are the true people devoid of common sense.

    • Some people WANT to let others make decisions for them; they couldn’t cope with having to do it themselves.

      • Yep. Those are the ones who voted for Obama and will vote for Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden or whoever is on the Democratic ticket

  11. Would be helpful if TTAG would publish protest locations. Nothing like a counter demonstration. Or heaven forbid, 9-1-1 complaints about blocking public right-of-way, failure to get a permit, or other grave transgressions.

    • They deliberately make the organizing private to avoid counter protests. I found that out trying to figure where the Portland one was going to be.

      • I suppose their lack of publicity as to arrangements COULD explain the piss poor attendance. But then again, their (candidly expected) piss poor attendance vis-a-vis the counter protest, certainly DOES explain their lack of public planning!

  12. If they ever show up in my town, I will greet them with coffee and treats and blow their minds by treating them with extreme kindness. I mean, why aren’t more people doing that? Why not blow away all their preconceived ideas about evil gun owners and as a result, destroy their morale by not fitting their stereotypes.
    Yeah, I think I’ll do it.

  13. With no disrespect, i started reading this site months ago and admired it for it’s positive aspects towards firearm ownership in this country.now it seems that it concerns it’s content to negative bashing alternative opinionated Americans and being a drawn out commercial for after market parts and gizmos.
    I started reading these articles because back then it seemed they were written with a sense of higher purpose and dedicated to the positive use of firearms in our country.
    This seemed a respectful place for the folks of a like mind to encourage sound conversation with the other side about the importance of keeping our rights from being eroded over time.
    Even though i disagree with some Americans on firearm ownership, i still engage them with logic and calm level headed debate.
    I come from a long line of patriots and i know we get nowhere fast when we incorporate slights and lnsults into conversations about our 2nd amendment right of firearms ownership.
    Please accept my observations as intended….with the utmost respect to all here!
    James, oath keeper and patriot.
    Thank you for your time.

    • James, if you have truly been reading for several months then you know TTAG regularly calls out the fraudulent and misleading propaganda spread by Bloombergs sockpuppets at MDA and Everytown.

      He writes about the staged events put on by MDA and the credulous reporting by some in the press who should know better than to essentially phone it in, repeatiing lines and links from the MDA and Everytown PR announcements.

      Ms Tarangioli at AZ Central may be forgiven for being young, naive, and on a deadline, for her failure to give better more balanced and even handed reporting.

      I’d suggest readers complain to AZ Republic Editor Randy Lovely:
      http://static.azcentral.com/help/contact/

      • Observation not complaint ric2.
        I believe that rhetoric like sockpuppets do nothing but fuel a divide and offers no hope of convincing anyone to listen to reason.
        I observe a trend on the internet of people slinging mud at each other before offering comon courtesy in a debate.
        Thanks again for everyone’s time and thoughts.
        Honor and respect to all.

        • Groups like MDA are not alternate opinionated Americans, they are astro-turfiing propaganda outlets that engage in outright lies. For instance the inclusion of adult gang homicide victims up to age 21 in one instance counted as accidental firearms related deaths of children. Yes they actually counted homicide victims up to age 21 and claimed the resulting statistic was exclusively the result of gun accidents in the home.

          If someone were to write a column supporting gun control but being respectful of the gun rights stance instead of blaming us for the deaths of children I’d bet Robert would give that author a quite different treatment.

          In short: I do appreciate your respectful tone, but I don’t see what you see.

          What I referenced was a series of about 4 “studies” released by MDA, Everytown, the Brady Campaign and CSGV, all fairly close to one another. They did not provide the source data but the numbers these “studies” quoted could only be duplicated by including gun homicide victims up to 17, 18, 19 and 21 years old, which are quite clearly gang related. When those numbers were included the results came out not just very close to, but exactly the same as the numbers the anti gun “studies” came up with.

  14. A half dozen moms in Raleigh got multiple TV news tongue-baths on local TV stations. What a bunch of leftist BS.

  19. Every time we see a story, here or elsewhere, about MDA’s meetings, they seem to be hilariously underattended. I almost feel bad for them.

    Almost.

Comments are closed.