Gun Control Advocates Hold Summit to Discuss Future Efforts

We heard about this little confab after the meeting had already taken place, but thankfully they recorded the whole thing. In the wake of the failed background check bill and the rest of the gun grabbers’ agenda in Congress, representatives from every major civilian disarmament organization met to discuss the future of their efforts to further restrict Americans’ right to keep and bear arms and how best to accomplish their goals. Naturally, the meeting took place at Newtown High School. They apparently couldn’t get into the elementary school to literally stand on the blood-stained floors while preaching their message, so they did the next best thing . . .

Panelists included Colin Goddard, activist for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence and a Virginia Tech Massacre survivor, Elliot Fineman, president and CEO of National Gun Victim’s Action Council (NGAC), Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) and a representative from Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns. In short, for gun rights advocates, it’s as if the Legion of Doom televised one of their meetings from inside the giant helmet. Enjoy.


About Nick Leghorn

Nick Leghorn is a gun nerd living and working in San Antonio, Texas. In his free time, he's a competition shooter (USPSA, 3-gun and NRA High Power), aspiring pilot, and enjoys mixing statistics and science with firearms. Now on sale: Getting Started with Firearms by yours truly!

40 Responses to Gun Control Advocates Hold Summit to Discuss Future Efforts

  1. avatarEagleScout87 says:

    Bloomberg just wants a decent pair of pants!!

  2. avatarJimD says:

    What happened to the video?

  3. avatarFred says:

    I can barely hear any of the speakers and then the applause is as loud as gunfire. They obviously just stuck a camcorder in the back of the room, another professional effort. Fits the typical gun-control MO, “the message doesn’t matter, just listen to the applause”, “look at all the support we have, never mind they don’t know what they’re supporting”.

  4. avatargloomhound says:

    Watching this made me nauseous and gave me diarrhea.

  5. avatarShenandoah says:

    Can’t these sons-a-bitches just go away and leave us alone? This is on par with holding a summit to nullify gay marriage in New England or strip voting rights away from wimmens.

  6. avataruncommon_sense says:

    Does it bother anyone that the panelists have absolutely no formal or informal education and nor work experience in matters like Constitutional law, common law, philosophy (in terms of rights), criminology, psychology, defensive tactics, or anything else relevant to the topic of citizen ownership and use of firearms?

    • avatarDirk Diggler says:

      Dianne Feinstein is no lawyer, but according to her, she is well-read on the Constitution, too . . . .

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        Feinstein: Do they need a bazooka? Do they need other high-powered weapons that military uses?

        My conclusion: this lady really is dumb as hell. We need term limits. When her claims of competence come from the length of time of her “service,” and not reason, I could care less about the content of her message, especially when she is factually incorrect on so many occasions. To wit: the military does not use the AR-15, and no one was arguing that bazookas should be legal. I’m also curious to see which gun control measures that she did not support.

        • avatarKen Hagler says:

          Have you noticed how the same people who say things like “do they need a bazooka” also like to say that rifles are useless for preventing tyranny because the government has tanks?

          In other words, they’re answering their own question, “yes.”

    • avatarPascal says:

      I’m sorry, have you not been paying attention?

      They do not give a crap about facts or the law, it is all about emotion. In Newtown, even what to do about the school has turned to people arguing that there is not a “emotional conversation” versus a logical one.

      They are delusional and fueled with irrational fear and emotions. They are fooling themselves.

      This is a prime example of why most things should not be considered when only emotions are involved.

    • avatarChip says:

      Bother? Yes.

      Surprised? No.

    • avatarTom in Oregon says:

      Yes it does. Just paid hookers, I mean lobbyists… No disrespect to those folks out there in the pleasure or pain business…
      And after gloomhounds post. I won’t be watching. That breakfast burrito tasted really good.

      I’d rather go back and watch Sheila Jackson Lee for a good guffaw.

      • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

        Definitely some well pain people in that room doing all the talking. Always look to the money.

    • avatarneiowa says:

      The problems with our gov’t do not result from any shortage of (damn) lawyers hanging out in DC.

  7. avatarJPD says:

    Before any rational discussion, we must carefully choose the correct title. This is NOT gun control, nor is it gun rights, or civilian disarmament.

    It is VICTIM DISARMAMENT. By taking away the means of effective, equal defense tools, the anti crowd will achieve their main goal. A nation of helpless victims, to criminals, government control. Ultimately, no rights whatsoever.

  8. avatarMartin says:

    I think Jack said it best in a few good men.

    This is how I few about gun grabbers

    Col. Jessep: Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinburg? I have a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago, and you curse the Marines. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know. That Santiago’s death, while tragic, probably saved lives. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don’t want the truth because deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall. We use words like honor, code, loyalty. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post. Either way, I don’t give a damn what you think you are entitled to.

  9. avatarDougR says:

    Interesting statement by the first presenter, what are they going to do about the “out of control epedemic” referring to gun violence. Guess they haven’t read the latest reports from the Justice Department.

  10. avatarWR2A says:

    Point of Order:

    Two of the “experts” on this panel *cough* have been affected by handgun violence, NOT the evil AR15 variety of violence that Newtown is famous for.

    So the question I have is this: Is this a new effort on the part of the anti-gun cultists to eventually have handguns banned in CT? Time and again we have pointed-out that illegal handguns are used to murder more people than the evil black rifles of doooom, but the AG cultists have dismissed us because their focus was on banning the AR15 platform for civilian ownership in CT. (It didn’t fit their narrative at the time) Well, now that they have successfully done this, (banning AR15s in CT), is their next push to ban semi-automatic legal handguns in CT as well?


    • avatarAzman says:

      If one had a family member who had been shot by a musket wielding maniac they’d be there as well. That’s how it works

  11. avatarjwm says:

    There’s never an errant meteor around when one is needed.

  12. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    How can so many people have their hearts half in the right place and half in the wrong?

    Freedom, liberty and a sense of personal worth are things of the heart just as much as is childrens’ “safety.”

    What is their major malfunction? I just don’t get it. And no, it’s not “Blue Fever;” that’s an oversimplification. It’s almost as though they’re not quite human, having utterly abandoned tooth and nail, sipping life through a power-assisted straw.

    Whiskey tango foxtrot, over?

    • avatarrosignol says:

      Their heart might be in the right place, but their heads are stuffed somewhere warm and very, very dark.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      You’re far too trusting. I don’t believe any part of their hearts are in the right place. They don’t give a rats ass about stopping violence, they merely want to disarm anyone who could stand up against their “utopian” agenda. The easiest way to promote disarming people is to claim it’s for “public safety”.

  13. avatarSalvatore says:

    Around the 106 mark they discuss their strategy for appealing to the senators that will not come to their side. He mentions “showing them love” and then he mentions “showing them the emotion as the Sandy Hook families did.” How interesting, no mention of showing them facts! Oh, I forgot, they have no facts or statistics to back them up, only love and emotion.

  14. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    There’s NO WAY I’m watching even one second of this. What could they reveal about themselves that I don’t already know?

  15. avatarRalph says:

    How bizarre — a wingnut circle jerk at a crime scene. I’m sure they’ll have their next one at Ford’s Theater.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.