Billy Johnson, For the Children

Billy’s back and he cares about the children. Which is why he’s pointing the metaphorical finger at domestic violence as a much bigger (if less photogenic and emotionally volatile) problem than mass shootings will ever likely be. The gist: if civilian disarmers really gave a flip about the chil’run as they profess, they’d be using their big bucks and bully pulpit to attack that problem – one with orders of magnitude more victims – rather than cynically exploiting a few discreet, if high profile, shootings. Billy makes his point in his customarily cogent, effective way. Alas, it will have precisely zero effect on those at whom it’s directed. More’s the pity.

comments

  1. avatar LJM says:

    Please, the next time the NRA receives a request from Meet the Press for someone to talk to ole’ 30 Round Gregory, pleasepleaseplease send Billy to pants their panel.

    1. avatar CA.Ben says:

      Or Mr. Noir. The more we can do to dispel the OFWG myth, the better. Plus, Mr. Noir is one of the most well spoken advocates we have.

      1. avatar Andrew says:

        Amen to that.

    2. avatar Roscoe says:

      Actually having either of the two you both mention depends on their ability to debate on the fly like a barracuda yet still come across as reasonable and matter of fact; Gov Christy style if you will (and no, that’s not an endorsement of Christy’s politics).

      I have yet to see these two engaged in an aggressive ‘debate’ setting of that type with loud, inconsiderate over speaking liberal antigun opponents to be confident that they could carry the flag once the arguments stray from prepared script.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        Whoever the pro gun representative is in debating and representing our position, that individual must have quick reflexive articulation in reaction to a fluid debate, and instant recall of facts and stats.

        Above all, that person must have ‘credence’ and ‘presence’.

    3. avatar Andrew says:

      Sounds vapid, but I like this guy. Why? He looks like me. Seriously.

      If this is the new “face” of the NRA, I’m much more tempted to align myself with them than Ol’ LaPierre and the videogames O’ Violencia!

      Now back to fixing my hair.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        Agreed on LaPierre.

        Between Johnson and Noir, Noir would probably hold up better.

  2. avatar disthunder says:

    Yeah, this guy’s becoming a fast favorite. The up and coming generation of the NRA is going to eat the anti-gun movement for lunch.

  3. avatar Roscoe says:

    Spot on by Billy Johnson, as usual.

  4. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    And thus we know that there can only be two possible motives behind the civilian disarmament movement:
    (1) Disarm the populace so that the elite can victimize them. Or,
    (2) Disarmament proponents are hysterical.

    Any rational (non-hysterical) person who really wants to help children will look at the greatest cause of harm and try to eliminate that first. That is not what has and is happening.

  5. avatar Ing says:

    Someone needs to condense this into an infographic so we can plaster it all over Facething and Pinterest and Twitter. And so we can shove it in the face of anyone who says “why don’t you care about The Children ™?” and say to them “well, let’s talk about why you’d rather punish gun owners than look at real problems.”

  6. avatar tdiinva says:

    Anybody care to guess where “intimate partner” and child abuse is most likely to occur? In the same cultural environment where other sorts of violence occurs. Women with “partners” are far more likely to be abused than woman with husbands. Two other groups who are more likely to suffer abuse from a partner are gay men and lesbians.

    1. avatar Nigil says:

      Rather than guess, do you have any facts to substantiate your claims?

  7. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Who here thinks the “other” side is going to give a ratsass about the facts and who presents them.
    They don’t listen to facts, that don’t agree with the same old refried nonfacts they keep bring up.
    It unfortunately falls on deaf ears when a person such as Billy presents cold hard truths.
    But.
    Id rather have Billy or Colion state the truths to a stone wall.
    Then Mr Lapiere who appears as much a political stuff shirt as the next guy in a suit.
    Wayne doesn’t get his points across to anyone but the choir. When he speaks to the “others” they don’t hear a word.
    Ive been an NRA member for 25 years.
    I don’t listen to Wayne myself.
    All hes doing is preaching to the choir when he talks. He repeats what we are all already thinking here.
    Billy or Colion might get someone’s attention, even if for just a minute.
    They both look and talk like an everyman should.

  8. avatar dumbfounded says:

    This dude is getting annoying. He should keep it short and sweet like his first vids. In those he collapsed complex ideas into meaningful and understandable points. In this one he’s taking a (good) simple idea and beating it to death… making it more complex than it needs to be. 2.5 out of five stars.

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