Gun Amnesty?

I’m pleased to report that the civilian disarmament industry’s push to replace the words “gun control” with “gun safety” has failed to find favor amongst the Average [Non Morning] Joe. The most mainstream of the mainstream media—ABC, CBS, etc.—are sticking with “gun control” as well. As well they should. “Gun safety” means being safe with a gun. “Gun control” means controlling guns. Not that guns have a will of their own. Or do they? The term “gun violence” has wormed its way into common parlance, indicating that the guns are responsible for violence. In the same sneakily subconscious way that “assault rifles” assault. And now we have “gun amnesty.” What do gun grabbers expect these “guilty by their very existence” guns to do? Why they expect them to die, Mr. Bond. Obviously. I’m going with another catchphrase: a gun is a terrible thing to waste. They deserve a good home and a proper education. That’s just common sense.

comments

  1. avatar KY1911 says:

    Funny that you have this topic first thing this morning…on my commute I heard NPR refer to the Senate bill as “gun regulation” – and all I could think was, “Huhm…isn’t that a convenient phrase.” NPR has done a decent job thus far, but…

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      I recall some very anti-gun bits on NPR a few weeks ago.

    2. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      I wonder how the mainstream media would like free speech regulation with a 6-9 month wait for the permitting process?

      1. avatar Davis Thompson says:

        Speech control? Speech safety? I love it.

        1. avatar Human Being says:

          Correct speech.
          Good-speak.
          Barack Obama Thought.

    3. avatar Mamba says:

      NPR has a long history of leaning left.
      I ignore them like the rest of the alphabet soup networks.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        They’re known unofficially as “National Petroleum Radio”. But their stance says “Ford Foundation” and “Pacifica”.

  2. avatar Pulatso says:

    I would be more than happy to open my heart and home to these poor, neglected, unwanted guns.

  3. avatar Matt in FL says:

    Your right about being a waste, but I don’t really have a problem with the way they’re presenting this. Maybe it’s just typical midwestern understatement, but it seems like they’re presenting this much like the annual “get rid of your hazardous chemicals for free” week. They seem to be emphasizing the “if you don’t know what to do with it” angle vs. the “take back our streets” angle that many gun buybacks have (which this isn’t, by the way; they’re not paying for them). Again, maybe it’s just midwestern understatement. Yes, it’d still be a shame if something valuable went away, but this doesn’t get my hackles up.

    1. avatar Totenglocke says:

      OK, lets say that they want to view it as “get rid of unwanted objects safely” – why not institute a PSA for locations of FFL’s where people can turn in unwanted guns and the FFL’s can then ensure those guns find a good home?

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        I would enthusiastically support such a program.

  4. avatar Data McBits says:

    Who is that female interviewer?

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      Gina Glaros

      You’re welcome.

      1. avatar Totenglocke says:

        Pretty, but I prefer Melissa Theuriau myself.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%A9lissa_Theuriau

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          No doubt they were both hired for their brilliant minds.

        2. avatar Totenglocke says:

          Yes, their firm, smooth minds….

      2. avatar Data McBits says:

        Indeed, thanks.

  5. avatar IHATECT says:

    Don’t forget adding “common sense” to the narrative…it’s still red hot…and working. Facts be damned, what kind of moron can argue against common sense?

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Added.

  6. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    I’d rather argue gun control in Belleview mental hospital. I’m willing to bet I could get more critical thinking & reasoning there than the grabbers use. At least the people that “see things” like inatimate objects controling people are in one place, yes, the nut house, Randy

  7. avatar Frank says:

    It’s crap like this that illulstrates how truly disingenuous the gun control lobby is. If you really wanted to give justice to the families of those murdered/maimed by morons with guns, you’d prosecute the hell out of commiting those crimes. No amnesty. They say “Well, getting guns off of the streets is a good thing.” But as we know, rarely do crime guns ever make their way into these turn-ins/buy-back programs. It’s not that I think these are nefarious ideas in principle, but that they show an utter lack of planning, logic, effort and commitment to their stated goals. They just want people to think they are “doing something” about a problem that cannot be easily solved. It’s just shear laziness as a substitute for real police work.

  8. avatar Human Being says:

    Meanwhile, this site should keep labeling “gun control” as civilian disarmament. That’s what it is.

  9. avatar Human Being says:

    Speaking of which, Harry Reid screws up and honestly calls it “anti-gun legislation”:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345695/reid-anti-gun-legislation

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email