OMG! The NRA Hearts Guns! OMG!

David Tigabu a.k.a., %22Tigabeast" (courtesy twitter.com)

Back when the Dems were pushing for a federal law mandating an FBI background check for anyone buying or selling a gun anywhere to anyone for any reason, the party of civilian disarmament attempted to portray the opposition as “extremists” out of touch with “most gun owners.” Before that, they tried to drive a wedge between “gun nuts” with “assault weapons” and “hunters and sportsmen.” Or was that at the same time? Here’s an NRA-centric update on ye olde divide and conquer anti-gun agit prop from David Tigabu [above] at policymic.com . . .

NRA spokesman Wayne LaPierre made news again after his recent appearance on NBC’s Meet The Press when he discussed the recent shooting at the Washington Navy Yard. Parroting previous talking points, LaPierre called for more weaponry on hand at the location of the tragedy, and criticized the country’s health system. What’s striking about this television appearance, and every other one of his for that matter, is the NRA’s steadfast refusal to acknowledge their product’s culpability.

LaPierre’s call for more guns in military units is unsurprising. After all, the more guns the military buys, the better is it for the NRA and it’s corporate masters like Remington and Bushmaster. LaPierre’s call for increased arms as a solution for gun violence demonstrates a glaring conflict-of-interest. That this has not been brought up yet is shameful.

Quite how the NRA’s call for more armed security at military bases is a conflict of interest is beyond my powers of reasoning. And it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that the NRA is the gun manufacturers’ bitch, rather than a grassroots organization. But I see what Mr. Tigabu’s doing. The gun control folks can’t have people thinking the NRA has grassroots support.

Nor can the American University Poli Sci grad (whose Facebook page lists Goodfellas as one of his favorite movies) have people believing that the NRA has any crime control ideas worthy of consideration—even when it does.

The call for an improved mental health system coupled with more armament is nothing more than a sleight of hand. The NRA’s “remedies” for curbing gun violence are similar to the cheesy yet effective Chick Fil-A advertising campaigns starring cows pushing people to eat more chicken. Of course, the NRA does not like tragedies like the recent shooting. It’s just more interested in protecting the manufacturers — er, I mean members — and they will stop at nothing to absolve their products of culpability.

Those nasty guns. I blame them! Well, someone does. And when you go down that road, well, you see what happens. You stop making sense. Whatever else you can say about the NRA—and I’ve said plenty—they’re logically (and financially) consistent. Their critics, not so much.

comments

  1. avatar Pulatso says:

    Wait, I thought NRA was the No Rifles Association. D’oh!

  2. avatar rip_vw32 says:

    Geeze… might as well blame McDonalds for producing fattening products and forcing people to eat there… oh.. wait….

    1. avatar CT Resident says:

      Or blaming Toyota for literally providing the vehicle that transported him to his crimes.

      1. avatar rip_vw32 says:

        Or how about blaming the EPA for ensuring that he had breathable air and clean water to sustain his life to that moment.. or how about blaming the grocery store and the FDA for providing safe food and drink.. or hell, let’s blame the Starbucks he bought his coffee at that got him awake enough to perpetrate the crime in the first place! Yeah, that’s it, let’s blame Starbucks…!!!

        Why do these people NEVER blame the guy who pulled the trigger…?!!?!?!?!

    2. avatar Doug says:

      Or cars for traffic accidents.

    3. avatar Andrew says:

      Mr. Farago –

      I feel the need to call you out on writing about somebody that really isn’t a worthy adversary. Policymic.com appears to be the stomping grounds for pre-and post master candidates with armfuls of paper and zero experience.

      I worry that you’re debasing yourself with this guy – choose somebody smarter, for cripes sakes!

      This guy’s writing reads like an angry high-schooler, and he’s got the haircut to boot.

  3. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    someone needs to tell him that the Kid and Play high top fade is so 90’s . . . . does he have job?

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      I was looking for a better picture to see if his pants and shirt were on backwards

    2. avatar jwm says:

      That’s where I’ve seen that ugliness before. And I know ugly hairstyles. My son went thru his rebel stage and he had a green spiked mohawk.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        When Jerry Rice had one, they called him “Fifi.”

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Didn’t Grace Jones sport that look too?

  4. avatar dwb says:

    More guns in the military. Imagine that. Maybe we should fight wars with sticks and stones.

    It is really rather beyond ridiculous that guns are prohibited on military bases. I mean, what would happen in time of war if they were actually attacked. I would expect that everyone would at least carry a sidearm. Oh, wait, the navy yard shooter actually did infiltrate and attack them. The whole no weapons on military bases thing is bizarre to me.

    1. avatar Nigil says:

      Situational irony is defined as being the opposite of what you would expect, given the details of the scenario. A single individual being able to take out armed guards and basically have free run of a military base (until outside enforcement shows up), is incredibly ironic. Who would think to attack a military base as an easy target? And yet, that’s what our government has gotten us. They even want to dis-arm the arm-y.

  5. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I can’t take him serious with that hair cut….

    1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      I have a dream that people will be judged by the content of their character and not by their hairstyles…

      I give him a “fail” on the character count, judging by the ‘logical’ hoops he tries to jump through to rationalize the taking of rights. The hairstyle, given my youthful style sins, who am I to judge?

      1. avatar Herb says:

        Eraser Head needs to work on his visual cred.

      2. avatar Luis says:

        He’s blaming NRA for all this, because a “brother” shot up the Navy Yard, and he can’t stand that. He also figures the Obama regime will NOT sound another clarion call for gun control – not after a Bantu went on a rampage. Obama tried it when a white shot up a school, because he figured whites would arch in lockstep with him. They didn’t. They sure won’t now, which is why the Obama regime has been largely silent.

  6. avatar Dominick says:

    Lt. Colonel Grossman, a Pulitzer Prize winner, is one of the worlds leading experts in the field of human aggression. In his studies he found one variable on the global rise of violence:
    “media being presented as entertainment”. Humans learn to kill through “abuse and violence in the home, and most pervasively, from violence as entertainment in television, movies and interactive video games”.

    It’s not the gun’s fault.(my opinion).

  7. avatar Matt in FL says:

    “After all, the more guns the military buys, the better is it for the NRA and it’s corporate masters like Remington and Bushmaster.”

    It’s not about buying the guns, you colossal nincompoop. The military already has the guns. It’s the fact that they’re not allowed to carry and use them that’s the issue here.

    1. avatar dwb says:

      I know, right? What do they think happens at a military base? Do they think is a Bronie con?

      1. avatar Ing says:

        Not sure what it is this guy thinks the military does, but even even if he did think it was some “yay, let’s hold hands” brony convention he’d still be wrong. I personally know several teenage bronies (three of them related to me, alas!) and a high percentage are also young People of the Gun — including (thank heavens) my three young relatives. So much for stereotypes, I guess.

        As for stereotypes, I’m still tripping on that guy’s hairdo. I try not to judge on appearances (really, I do), but anyone whose haircut makes him look like a human pencil eraser can’t be taken seriously.

        Besides, the bronies could destroy this guy’s weak-ass argument any day of the week.

        1. avatar miserylovescompany says:

          Uhhh…what’s a brony (bronie)?

          Tom

        2. avatar bobmcd says:

          Bronie = bros who like My Little Pony

        3. avatar VBS says:

          I’m a brony, there’s a pony on the right side of my AR’s lower magwell. I also read TTAG. Where does that put me?

        4. avatar dwb says:

          A pony on an AR. Hmm. Is the pony the cutie mark for the gun, or is the gun the cutie mark on the Bronie?

        5. avatar Dan A says:

          @VBS:

          Just out of curiosity.. which pony?

        6. avatar jwm says:

          Crap, I think I’ve lived too long.^^^

        7. avatar Wiregrass says:

          Live and let live, but completely perplexed.

      2. avatar VBS says:

        Rainbow Dash cutie mark. Rest is ATACS FG.

    2. avatar Pascal says:

      And they don’t have them because there previously progressive priest “Clinton” signed a law not allowing them to carry and defend themselves.

      A fact they seem to forget or deny

      Imagine if the Navy shooter had used another pressure cooker! Wal-Mart would be screwed!

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Clinton didn’t sign it. It’s a DoD Regulation, not a law. The SECDEF that Clinton appointed signed it.

        1. avatar ExNuke says:

          Not “Law” but an Executive Order from the Commander In Chief of the (Dis) Armed Services. He was afraid to visit HIS Troops unless they were disarmed and watched over by his ARMED personal security like any third world dictator.

  8. avatar Mediocrates says:

    LaPierre’s call for increased arms as a solution for gun violence demonstrates a glaring conflict-of-interest. That this has not been brought up yet is shameful.

    Evidently, this moron has been living in a hole. Standard practice, right out of the liberal playbook. Find an easy target (NRA) or two (corporations) that they can focus the simpletons in their constituency on and ignore the real problems.

  9. avatar Pascal says:

    Because we do not have a mental health problem?

    See the shooters VA Tech, Aurora, Newtown, The Navy Yard!!!! etc. Tell me we have no mental health problem and that there is just a slight of hand trick.

    As someone who has a family member who needs mental health assistance and the hell we have had to go through to get the right assistance, all I can say FOAD! you have no clue!

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      AMEN!

  10. avatar Shire-man says:

    Must be great to have a job where you can jump in, ramble off a bunch of lies and nonsense, then disappear believing full well that you did good.

  11. avatar James says:

    You are giving him way to much credit if you believe there was any thought put into this writing. Remember it is all about feelings for liberals and the cannot focus on the larger picture because you can only feel good by rationalizing something simplistic as truth. He hates guns, he hates the NRA, he hates corporations, and he hates those that think different from him. Hisbsimplistic rationalization of his hates is it must be a wink wink conspiracy for the NRA and corporations to steal more money. That is his “truth”. He is not too far from where Aaron Alexis was mentally.

  12. avatar DrVino says:

    Is that Kid or Play?

  13. avatar geoffb says:

    The gun controllers are another in the endless series of groups organized by the left to push a policy to “solve” some perceived and/or manufactured problem. The issue never matters only where the blame for the “problem” will be placed (corporations are one of their main evils, that is a tell) and where the solution to the “problem” will be found (more government control and power over individuals, a second tell).

    This is not to say that all corporations are good and all government actions are bad, it is that the great multitude of organizations on the left have only this one hammer as their tool to fix everything in the world. It is using the tool that matters to them not whether the “problem” can be fixed by it or even exists.

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    If I was Tigabu, the first thing I’d do is buy a gun. The second thing I’d do is shoot my hair stylist. No jury in the world would convict him.

  15. avatar Jus Bill says:

    That’s great – now Obama’s version of Bart Simpson is lecturing us on gun control…

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      Laugh!!

    2. avatar TSgt B says:

      Reminds me of Chris “Pookie” Rock telling us that we have to listen Daddy Sotero and MamaObama.

      Tell ya what; I think I’ll just retire to the reloading bench, and whip up an afternoon snack for the gun grabbers. Got some great recipes.

  16. avatar IdahoPete says:

    American University is located in Washington, D.C., and is a self-described liberal arts institution, with the following Schools and Colleges: College of Arts & Sciences, Kogod School of Business, School of Communication, School of International Service, School of Professional & Extended Studies, School of Public Affairs, and Washington College of Law. Notice – not a single hard science college?

    Washington University further describes itself as follows:
    “American University’s community members are active citizens, working toward global understanding through their contributions on campus, in Washington, D.C., and around the world. By participating in campus events, community engagement, and internships, AU students experience real-life learning and exposure to new cultures that promote the ideals of service, diversity, inclusion, and sustainability. As students work toward their career goals, they have the opportunity to learn from exceptional faculty and visiting world leaders.”

    Does that sound like a recruiting campaign for UN bureaucrats and Demo Party operatives? Sure does. Is it any surprise that someone who is an American University Poli Sci grad and styles his hair after North Korea’s weirdo leader would be anti-gun and hates the NRA? Nope.

  17. avatar Don says:

    I don’t think the military buys Remington and Bushmaster. And, the brand the military buys, they don’t need the NRA’s lobbying power.

    One thing is for sure, the military buys whether they have the money to or not.

    -D

  18. avatar Mark N. says:

    This is one my favorite lies: “LaPierre’s call for increased arms as a solution for gun violence demonstrates a glaring conflict-of-interest. That this has not been brought up yet is shameful.”

    Hasn’t been brought up before? Every time I read an anti-gun diatribe, there is a claim that the NRA is the manufacturer’s bitch–so this supposed conflict of interest is brought up EVERY time, and the reason it never goes anywhere is that the NSSF is the manufacturer’s mouthpiece. The NRA is its own corporate master. Why don’t people get that?

  19. avatar CK in CA says:

    “NRA’s steadfast refusal to acknowledge their product’s culpability.”

    To what product are they referring?

    Guns? The NRA doesn’t sell guns.

    Rights? Those rights were given to you at birth. The NRA only fights for you to keep them.

  20. avatar Kyle says:

    It is technically impossible for the NRA to be a front for the gun manufacturing industry. Gun manufacturing is a small cottage industry, about $15 billion in size. That is pocket change in comparison to the annual revenues of individual companies like Apple, Exxon-Mobil, Wal-Mart, Target, Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, GE, Bank of America, Goldman-Sachs, etc…where you’re talking revenues in the $15 billion to hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

    Your financial and banking lobby, the oil and energy lobby, the defense lobby, the retail lobby, the Wal-Mart lobby (so big that it is a lobby unto itself), etc…those are LOBBIES, financial-wise. There is no way in hell that a little $15 billion gun manufacturing industry is somehow going to be the backbone of what is one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington.

    Even if one adds in the other aspects of the gun industry (merchants, shooting clubs, etc…) one gets to around $40 billion in overall size, still too puny. And let’s also not forget that Michael Bloomberg, one guy, outspends the NRA.

    What gives the NRA the influence it has is that it is a huge grassroots organization, by far the largest civil rights organization in America at about four to five million members. Now some might say, “Four to five million people is still puny in comparison to the overall American population…” well yes, but the thing is, the membership isn’t solely who the NRA has influence with. There are a lot of non-members of the NRA who nonetheless support the right to keep and bear arms and who look to the NRA for basic leadership on this issue, and occasionally send it donations even. I am not saying they follow it like lambs or anything regarding who it says to vote for, but it is estimated that the number of such people is around 4-5X the membership number of the NRA, which would be around forty to fifty million people. That’s HUGE.

    And that is what gives the NRA its influence, it’s ability to pull out the votes. Charles Krauthammer said it best I think: “What makes the NRA so influential in America is that the NRA IS America.”

    1. avatar Luis says:

      Well said, paisan. In fact, there are many gun owners who think they are members of NRA, although they have never paid membership dues.

      There are some 100 million gun owners in America, I’d say. Since about 5 million of them are NRA members, that may not seem like a lot on the surface, but the millions of gun-owners who are not members tend to agree with NRA.

      Before Obama’s election in 2008, NRA had some 3 million members. Now, it’s around 5 million. I’d like to see NRA go to around 10 million members. Then if each of the members donated $25 apiece for fund-raising, promoting shooting sports, preserving the Second Amendment rights of all, etc., that comes to $250 million. Can the Brady Bunch pull in those numbers?

    2. avatar Kyle says:

      I meant to say there are, it’s estimated, about 10x as many non-members of the NRA who it has influence with, not 4-5x.

      1. avatar Luis says:

        @Kyle –

        I’m not disputing your numbers. There are some 5 million NRA members, as opposed to 3 million when Obama was elected in 2008. There are anywhere from 85 million to 100 million gun-owners in America now. Many gun-owners may think they are members of NRA, when they actually aren’t. They don’t pay dues, or otherwise meet membership requirements. But you’re right. The number of gun-owners who feel passionately about the 2A is HUGE.

  21. avatar Pat says:

    Libtards.

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