Brian Malte, Mobilization Director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (courtesy nastyjackbuzz.blogspot.com)

“I think there are a lot of folks on our side fighting against the ‘guns everywhere, anytime for anyone’ thing that the gun lobby’s doing. And in quite a few states our advocates have been able to defeat some of that stuff, like bringing guns on college campuses. I think focusing on what we want is long overdue in our movement and is a big focus now . . . We were fighting on their terms in states across the country, now they’re fighting on our terms.” –  Brian Malte, mobilization director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence quoted in What’s next for the gun control movement? A Brady Campaigner lays it out [via washingtonpost.com]

41 Responses to Quote of the Day: Brady Campaign vs. “Guns Anywhere, Guns Anytime” Edition

      • This has ALWAYS bothered me, HOW CAN THEY KNOW THAT?

        To my knowledge, any time you buy a gun from an FFL you have to have a backgorund check. And, because they’re business people, there is going to be some record of the transaction as part of their business receipts. There is information available to build statistics from.

        If I buy from a private party there is no background check, no registration (at least on long guns in MI), and most likely no receipt. There aren’t any records, anywhere, of the transaction every having taken place. So how do they KNOW that 40% are sold without a background check?

        • old “statistic” from a pre-Brady poll with about 1,000 criminal respondents. essentially worthless

  1. You know, it strikes me that the anti-gunners are really quite lucky we aren’t the viscious, foaming-at-the-mouth nascent terrorists hell-bent on eliminating all who oppose us flat-eyed killers we’re often portrayed as. (Did I miss a caricature? Feels like I did, but… *shrug*)

    Not that the clip above says that, specifically, but it’s a thought I’ve had for some time now.

  2. “I think there are a lot of folks on our side fighting against the ‘guns everywhere, anytime for anyone’ Constitution thing”

    Fixed it for him, just to cut the crap.

    • I don’t indulge, myself, but I have zero problems with legalizing marijuana … especially as it became illegal originally as a means to eliminate competition from hemp ropemakers.

    • I think you’re confusing bad Washington (DC) with good Washington (State). We (Washington State) did, and the crime rate has gone down, and there are fewer stupid but harmless people wasting tax money in prison.

      • Give it some time and I think you see fewer stupid people in total. I know plenty of people who indulged in the MJ for at least a few years and to varying extents along with many other not so smart vices (most of them not being de facto felonies though) but of their own accord moved on to become everything from hard working laborers to capable professionals, mostly with families and all the responsibilities of adulthood firmly in grasp.

        I also know quite a few who did nothing different to begin with other than get caught and pulled into a broken criminal justice system. Yes there is still free will and many pull through regardless but just by the sheer numbers of people passing through the system there will be a significant number being disenfranchised to the point of deciding that for them there is no straight and narrow path to a decent life.

        While each of those individuals owns a healthy portion of the blame for their decisions when it comes to social policy we should take into account the truth that the wrong policy WILL result in such outcomes and that we all suffer for it.

  3. “Here’s something that you’ll hear even Sarah Brady say: It took six years, seven votes, three presidential administrations to pass the Brady law. And we’re not going away; we’ll be here until we finish the job.”

    Interesting choice of words, “finished the job.” So what, pray tell, will it take to make the Brady Campaign feel their job is done…?

  4. “I think there are a lot of folks on our side fighting against the ‘guns everywhere, anytime for anyone’ thing that the gun lobby’s doing.”

    Now re-read that sentence and replace the word “guns” with something else like sunglasses, umbrellas, or cars. For example, “I think there are a lot of folks on our side fighting against the ‘umbrellas everywhere, anytime for anyone’ thing that the umbrella lobby’s doing.”

    Why do we even argue the “merits” of having a firearm in certain locations? The merits of having a firearm in a particular location are just as irrelevant as the merits of having an umbrella or sunglasses in a particular location. If I want to have an umbrella at some place, that decision is mine and only mine. No special interest group or government agency has any legitimate authority to tell me I cannot have an umbrella in some location. The same applies to whether or not I have a firearm in some location.

    What we have to do is start telling the civilian disarmament advocates and government that it is none of their business what personal property we manufacture or purchase, period. And it is none of their business what personal property we possess at home or in public, period.

    • uncommon_sense,I think you have made an important point and it’s a conclusion I’ve come to as I encounter more and more liberal policies. Most of what they stick their nose into is none of their business. It doesn’t matter whether it’s what I pay my employees, what my health care insurance covers, what I choose to eat or drink. It is not their business. No we are not going to have “a conversation about that”, it’s none of your business.

      Every time we go to the table, we lose something. We need to tell them we won’t do that and instead simply tell them it’s not their business.

  5. Anti-gun Organazations is an industry. If they didn’t have that, they would all have to get real jobs and actually work for a living. Panhandlers have more of a work ethic than these, self promoting grant grabbers.

  6. screw this guy. His compensation in 2011 was $242,963. I’m sure he’s in it for the children. total donations for the BC were 2.8 million. almost 10 cents on every dollar donated goes right into his pocket.

    information for public charities is available on their IRS form 990 for 501c tax exempt corporations.

  7. This Brian Malte clown reminds me of Baghdad Bob. You guys remember Baghdad Bob. He was the Iraqi Minister of Information who made outrageous statements during the early phases of the Iraq War. “We have the non-believers nearly defeated! The imperialists are being slaughtered by the brave, heroic Iraqi army!!!” All this while an Abrams tank can be seen in the background driving down main street Baghdad. Lol. So congrats to the Brady Campaign and there many, I mean millions, of victories across the Nation in 2013. I can only hope, for our sake, that 2014 is as “successful” for the Brady Campaign as this year was.

  8. This headline should be titled: “Brady Campaign Mobilization Director Has Big Plan, Send Money Now.” Because, that’s what mobilization director are supposed to do. Coaches always have plans to win games.

  9. I find it funny that they have Hollywood, the msm, the democratic party and Bloomberg on their side the gun rights movement has mostly just the regular Joe’s that go out and do recall elections and they believe they have not been fighting on their terms — ha! They have always been fight on their terms, the issue is that we gun owners have are invested in the fight and their side has a lot of PR.

    • We are fighting on their terms. And winning. In spite of the rigged playing field(They have the media on their side) we are taking back our rights.

      • Nope, sorry we are not winning. 49% of the public still supports more gun control. At best, its a draw. We are not winning until a super majority of Americans (65%), especially those in urban areas, sees gun and drug prohibition as a failed policy and wants to unwind it.

        • While I don’t disagree that we need to get more minds changed, especially in the urban areas where the people (most of us these days) are naturally more dependent on the authorities and infrastructure it is important to realize that the numbers circulating about gun law supporters are based on answers to the wrong questions.

          If you or I were polled we would recognize the questions as being loaded and either offer our clearly expressed view refuse to take the poll or answer in the negative even though that preference is presented in such a way that we are meant to feel bad about it.

          To the uninformed masses especially in the denser populations these polls tend to be taken the answers to the questions seem like commonsense.

          I highly doubt any of these polls asked responders for specific views on the subject, rather the questions were presented as do you A: support laws that allow felons and diagnosed mental health patients to buy guns or B: support laws designed to protect your children by preventing dangerous people from owning guns.

          The answer for many will be A, naturally. While others will know that no laws can prevent criminals from getting guns and that getting even close to that goal would mean severly oppressive laws that would effect them negatively even if they have no interest in firearms.

        • Yes, we are winning. More states now have shall issue than when I was a young man. More states have become constitutional carry. The AWB died and was not renewed. Along with it’s silly mag limits. Illinois got bitch slapped in court.

          And after Sandy Hook(which because of the age and number of the victims was viewed as more horrific than Columbine) no national gun control laws could be passed. Not even UBC’s, which would have been a slamdunk in the Clinton era.

          Nationwide we’re winning. There are a few dark spots. As a CA resident I live in one of the darkest. But even I have a safe full of guns and bins full of ammo.

          As long as we remember that our enemies fight a national campaign and we stick together and do the same we’ll win.

  10. Gun Free Zones exist because dead babies make anti-gunners rich. Follow the money. Gun owners don’t want this. Anti-gunners need it or they’re irrelevant.

    If not for the children they set up to be killed, they’d have to get a real job.

    Safety in numbers. They’re willing to kill their own children, but they’d prefer YOUR children be mixed in, too… And why not kill their own children to give the welfare administration more power? They only had the kids so they could drive an Escalade anyway, they don’t care if the kids live or die, it’s only money. They can always have more kids and get more government checks… Keep voting!

Leave a Reply

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