Moms Demand Action's Shannon Watts bodyguards (courtesy gunfreezone.net)

I make no apologies for [metaphorically] targeting Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America jefe Shannon Watts. Charting every misstep in her endless campaign of civilian disarmament is fun, educational, politically important and, yes, profitable. More than that, thanks to an obsequious mainstream media, Ms. Watts is America’s most prominent and therefore dangerous anti-gunner. But there are times when I tire of removing obscenities aimed in her direction – however much I understand the anger and frustration engendered by her anti-gun agitprop. This, however, is not one of them. At least not until the comments section. The following email, you see, is all about the obscenity . . .

I was reading about Shannon Watts’s armed bodyguards, and thought to myself does that make her a gun whore?  If the gun itself is evil then why is it okay to pay someone to be armed? Maybe my analogy is way off, but it seems to me like they are saying, “sex is bad, but if you pay someone to have sex it’s okay.” It is not acceptable to be armed yourself for protection against criminals; it is acceptable to pay people to be armed for protection against law abiding CCP holders. I understand this is the nature of hypocrisy, but there has to be a term we can use to help demonstrate that (incendiary as it may be).

Did I just publish that? I did. And I’d appreciate it of you keep your comments relatively clean. Somewhat respectful? Clever rather than smutty? Yeah, let’s go with that.

Recommended For You

222 Responses to Another Post About Shannon Watts After Which I Will Have to Delete Dozens of Comments

    • What I find fascinating is that Watt’s group targets moms. Pew Research indicates women (wrongly) believe that gun murder is not down at rates of about 90.

      Now women are not generally dumber, more paranoid or complexly clueless about most issues, but the objective data shows they are when it comes to gun issues.

      Watts and her puppetmaster Bloomberg are focusing on moms because 90% of them are susceptible to the science denial of the gun control movement

      • Women are by and large solipsistic, which means only their feelings and how they themselves process them or have experienced them matter.

        Facts, data and truth are very secondary maybe tertiary to their feelings. Deny it if you like, but it doesn’t change how it works.

        Shannon is working this angle and doing it only as a woman could do it to get other women on board. Its all very calculated and very devious. And very dangerous. However so far, men holding their ground have done an amazing job of discrediting and marginalizing them.

        More of that is the only way to win.

        • Interestingly enough, the pro gun mom groups use statistics and science.

          I wonder if this is because they are inherently more logical people, or because the statistics and science really only back the pro-2nd amendment side.

          Chicken or the egg?

        • There are probably two things at play there, and they are likely both happening at once in all pro2A women in some ratio (60/40, 70/30, 20/80, etc)

          1. Woman has good “feelz” about guns and pro2A folks due to her upbringing or current family make-up. On Twitter we call these pro2A fly-over country folks “The Redneck Taliban” This is a solipsistic position then, just the opposite “feelz” that the gun grabby girls have simply due to the culture they were brought up in and therefore the experiences they had personally in life w/ guns. That the facts lay out in complete support of their emotionally-derived position is just a happy coincidence.

          2. Right leaning women are able to work around/modify their inherent solipsistic behavior due to their more developed brain function (amygdala) as compared to Liberal women. Even myself knowing about women and solipsism can be solipsistic at times – I have to really sit down and think about things sometimes before I react (I am not always successful.)

          However to confirm solipsism is at still at play with a right leaning woman ask her about abortion or the use of cute puppies or kittens for medical experimentation (if you don’t like those examples you can think of plenty of others.)

        • Just trying to keep up here.

          “Mina” is now informing us that conservative women’s brains function at a higher level than liberal women’s brains…..

          Right? Er, I mean, correct?

        • Of course, and that’s because you “feel” this must be wrong and aren’t considering whether there are facts to support it.

          Like most women, you dismiss the premise because of your feelings.

          Solipsism.

        • ” Mina commented …
          in response to Mina:

          Solipsism..”

          No, I think that’s schizophrenia. 😉
          /just kidding! see the winky-smiley? Look at this baby.

        • … and I never said “feeble” – You are interjecting your own “feelings” into what I said with your words. (Solipsism again!)

          Just because the female brain is different and works different than a man’s doesn’t make it less, just different. It just biology.

        • I’d like to see some references to data from Chris B and Mina indicating that women “are susceptible to the science denial of the gun control movement” and “by and large solipsistic, which means only their feelings and how they themselves process them or have experienced them matter.” I know many women and none of them fit in either of these catagories.

        • Here is the very best way for anyone anywhere to understand Solipsism; there is no one on the planet that doesn’t see some measure of this woman in every woman they know.

        • Having put that out there this one is probably even better. As a bonus Rollo disassembles the out-take for you so that you can understand why Chelsea’s long and convoluted answer to “if you are driving 80 mph, how long does it take for you to go 80 miles?” is solipsistic. Read the analysis first, understand what parts of her answer to pay attention to: http://therationalmale.com/2012/03/22/solipsistic-logic/

          …and from the Red Pill Room, a definition of Solipsism
          Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one’s own mind is sure to exist. Solipsism as an epistemological position holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is suspect. The external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not even exist outside the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. As such it is the only epistemological position that, by its own postulate, is both irrefutable and yet indefensible in the same manner. Solipsism is a common subconscious philosophy adopted by many women who see the world only in the ways it will affect themselves.
          “Women’s solipsism and emotional wiring is generally the primary conduit through which problem solving and opinion formulation occurs. That’s not to say that women lack the capacity to be just as rational as men, but it is to say that this solipsistic logic is the innate filter that must be cognitively repressed when arriving at a rational solution to a problem.” — Rollo Tomassi
          Solipsism among women has led to the oft-quoted Red Pill maxim, “Never believe what a woman says, believe what she does.”
          and a long post about it: http://theredpillroom.blogspot.ch/2012/09/the-tangled-chains-on-swing-set-of.html

          In the land of the “Red Pill”, understanding the female mind is a #1, over-riding interest. Therein you will find they have plenty of field testing, experience and analysis to share. Read and learn; disregard and dismiss as you please. Just because you don’t believe it doesn’t make it wrong.

        • …and just allow me to point out, the statement: I know many women and none of them fit in either of these catagories.” – basically what you’re saying is “because I have never experienced this myself, or seen it in anyone I know personally, it cannot possibly be true”

          Men can also be solipsistic 😉 assuming of course that you are a man. If you are a woman, well there you go.

        • Mina? You da Woman! That video is one of the truest and funniest things I have heard in years.

        • Mina, you threw me for a moment when you started talking solipsism. I was thinking philosophically / epistemologically. You were speaking psychologically.

    • Hypocrite? Liar? Not at all. They are the elite, the natural and obvious leaders to show us what is and is not acceptable, right and just. We can not be trusted to handle such a power of life and death in hands of such emotionally unstable, rage filled and homicidal tendencies such as we, the general population is prone to.

      They can handle that power, we cannot. They need the protection against the general population, we are the general population they need protection against.

      See? It makes total logical sense. (in their own minds); which means it isn’t hypocritical or a lie. ( in their own minds)

      In other words, liberalism is a mental disorder.

      • It is a brain functionality difference: they cannot tell the difference between someone they should be afraid of and someone they should not, so therefore ergo everyone is dangerous.

        Unless you’re paying for a professional.

      • You’re absolutely right. I’m constantly amazed at how little understanding our side has of the enemy. They are NOT hypocrites, because they do not now, nor have they ever believed that they, the elite, are subject to the same standards as those of the great unwashed, the hoi polloi, the vast, uninitiated throngs of commoners. For them there are two classes, the enlightened ruling class (which is comprised of more than just politicians) and the “masses.” One class controls, the other obeys.

        • It is the theory that since most of us are rabbit-like, the rabbits should be in charge.

          Now, what to do about those fangs, claws and sharp senses of the rest of the planet? Hm.

    • The label “gun whore” is so wrong.

      Obviously, under the given facts, she is a “Gun Madam.”
      The men employed to carry guns just for the money are the gun whores.

    • The activity might be repugnant to _your_ principles, but the ladies whom I’ve paid for lovemaking have had the highest of principles, namely, honesty. And obviously they enjoy their work, otherwise they wouldn’t do it.

        • …I qualify for 2 out of the 3 conditions you allude to….however when I ran a huge bar in Hungary for the US Military…we had built this tent city on an abandoned Soviet Air Base…along with the bar…we had different restaurants etc….all of which had “service difficulties” from time to time, even though we had staffed them properly. One night I noticed my service at the BK Bus was very slow and I was missing half of my staff….so I mentioned to the Hungarian Supervisor that our “service speed” needed to pick up…and as long as Burgers and Fries were flying out of the facility, I didn’t care what went on, as long as it was sanitary and no one got caught….my sales tripled almost overnight…and the soldiers didn’t seem anymore bothered than they were before….so all ended well…Ha!

          RJ O’Guillory
          Author-
          Webster Groves – The Life of an Insane Family

      • In the immortal words of George Carlin (edited for TV) – “Selling is legal, f- is legal. Why isn’t selling f- legal?”

    • perhaps they’re like horses– they sleep standing up, but with shades on so you can’t see that their eyes are closed.

      • I mean, really, do the body guards all have to be overweight, bald and ugly? The jamokes are stereotypical.

        • “I mean, really, do the body guards all have to be overweight, bald and ugly?”

          Hey now, I’m overweight, bald and ugly. Does that mean I could pick up some extra cash being a bodyguard to an idiot, selling her 1st amendment right to the highest New York City bidder?

        • The point is intimidation. They’re at a serious disadvantage if they actually need to do some body-guarding. But they’re not there for that (if they were, they would be professionals, hiding in the crowd and watching without being obvious about it), they’re there as a meaningless show of force.

  1. Someone who has 24/7 armed security and lives in an affluent community can’t understand why someone living in Wyandotte County, Kansas (aka “The Dot”) might need a firearm to protect themselves and their property? Why don’t they just hire security guards?

    These people are clueless as to how the world works outside their “bubble”.

  2. I’ll save you some time and FLAME DELETE my own really nasty tasteless vulgar comments. I hope this helps.

  3. Actually, it would make her a John. Whomever provided the ‘hired guns’ would be the pimp.

    And the big bald guy with the gun? Whore. Totally.

    I denounce myself.

  4. “Ms. Watts is America’s most prominent and therefore dangerous anti-gunner.”

    What the hell has she accomplished? I look at the legislators in New York (Cuomo esp) and other states with recently passed gun control as much more dangerous.

    • Well, she’s going to get a bunch of politicians retired, if the opinion polls are accurate. The mask is off, in addition to all the other crap going on (economy, NSA, IRS, etc), Obama showed where he really stood on the issue after Newtown…. and riled up the gun owners.

      The way I see it, what Ms Watts is doing is effectively a GOTV campaign for the Republicans, so the least those of us who lean to the right can do is be polite about it.

    • She accomplished finding a sugar daddy to bankroll her enterprise to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.

  5. It is emblematic of those on the left to hire “front” persons onto whom (?) they lay the responsibility for their actions. Watts hires armed bodyguards and her hands are spotlessly clean should the need rise for a DGU be necessary on her behalf. It’s not the only way a mercenary is used. Harry the undead senator used and is using the BLM to do his dirty work. They are not that different from people who believe self defense they just would rather hire the trigger puller and feel pure of spirit. Ergo, they are the ultimate hypocrites. But we all knew that.

    • I assure you Harry Reid does NOT feel “purity of spirit”. Harry Reid feels NOTHING.

        • Oh, that is rude. Wonder if its a flame? Damn, I can’t stop laughing.

        • Your post is so full of win I cannot even begin to comprehend the level of it.

  6. She is a businesswoman, who through direct or indirect compensation, is serving as the spokesperson for a corporately sponsored political action organization. That’s all. She is doing what she has done for her previous employers and clients, spinning the story to reflect the corporate agenda.

    I think as time goes on we’ll see the core cadre in all of the key local chapters will be of similar pedigree…mass communications/PR as the leader/spokesperson surrounded by a group of volunteer crusaders who believe they are in a grassroots struggle.

    Is she an anti-gun “whore”…no more than the rest of us working for the man to keep the brothers down (sarc)

  7. What about a Reach around gunner?

    Edit: If you don’t know what a reach around is, urban dictionary can help you out.

    • No….

      “I bet (she’s) the kind of (person) that would (make love) to a person in the (behind) and not even have the goddamn common courtesy to give him a reach-around.”
      -Full Metal Jacket (but edited)

      • Ha! Doesn’t quite have the same ring to it without R. Lee Ermey’s… colorful language. For my $$ that might be the best 5 minutes of any movie.

  8. I pity her.
    She obviously suffers from an extreme anxiety disorder that renders her incapable of normalcy.
    At the very least, her children need to be taken away from her, lest her insanity cause them to suffer.
    Because, after all, it’s all about the children.

    Look at this baby

    • No. Wrong. She believes in gun confiscation like she believes in Monsanto Brand Poison Food.

      She’s a professional.

    • She’s a player. Happy as can be. Like’s her job.

      She’d gladly proselytize for limitations on “free but hurtful speech” if the pay was good.

      She might need a new man soon. She’ll manage. Always has.

    • Her children can’t be taken away. All but one is of the age of consent. Meaning the damage is already done…

  9. Her security detail look like a bunch of little boys playing dress-up. The bald heads and the suits arent fooling anybody. “Heys guys lose some weight and stop acting like a bunch of wannabe tough guys”. What self respecting person would work security for somone like her? If she is a gun whore and they work for her, what does that make them?

  10. Is this where point out how she is no “angel” and stole a married man from his wife and mother of his 3 children and quickly dumped her own hanger on for the riches of being married to a top exec at a corrput entity after being divorced only a few months? Yeah, she mastered that skill set. And when John’s $$$ runs out, well, you’ve seen this movie before

  11. Look, I dislike those that would deny us our natural, civil, and constitutionally-protected rights as much as the next guy, but this is getting tiresome. For some perspective: my wife enjoys guns, owns her own Ruger LCP, and accompanies me to the range often. She, like most of the populous, does not really keep track of the politics behind our 2nd Amendment rights. The other night I asked her if she knew who Shannon Watts was, and she had no idea. She had barely heard of Moms Demand Action, and had never heard of MAIG or Everytown. She does, however, know what the NRA is, and would have some interest in understanding more about what SAF and GOA are doing to advance our rights. How about a little less Shannon and a little more coverage of the pro-2A, pro-freedom groups? I am not saying nix Shannon altogether, but man, this gets old after a while, and she really is not culturally relevant.

    • Honestly, it seems like most of her publicity comes from TTAG. I’ve seen her face in the news a few times, but her name was never even mentioned.

      I’m getting tired of seeing this woman pop up every other article in TTAG as well. Most of it is just her saying one thing stupider than the last thing she said. Not to mention the comments people post that do nothing but cast us in a childish light.

      Maybe you should only cover a move of exceptional stupidity? I don’t know.

      All we’re doing by posting about her is validating her delusions of political power.

      • I haven’t seen Shannon in the news or the papers I read. I wouldn’t know who she was but for this web site.

      • You are basically saying that the only publicity she gets is bad publicity. How is that a bad thing?

    • Oh contraire!!!

      Know your opponent well; keep them close.

      Keep this judgmental, deceitful, wiggle worm of contemptuous condemning lies extra close to observe every movement, action, falsehood, every ‘thing’ she does. Keep her under the brightest light of the microscope; if a hair on her head bends in the wind, we should know about it.

      We must be constantly on our toes and appraised of this woman’s and by extension her group’s, activities. Know her motivations, her tactics, her friends to anticipate her false words and actions aimed at demonizing the POTG and disarming us.

      You’re doing a great job with Watts, Robert. She is the face of our adversary, our enemy’s primary spokesman.

      King Bloomberg is our ultimate enemy, but in the public arena, Watts is our primary adversary.

  12. Liberalism at its finest and our Countries loss of its core values!! In her own simple mind as long the weapon is in the hands LEO or trained professionals it is still for the Children and the MDA (MAD) Agenda. You cannot fix stupid or reason with it!! Anyone have an acronym for ( Cannot Understand Normal Thinking ) ?

  13. Democrats and hypocrisy are synonymous. Apparently, Shannon is a Democrat. Maybe that is redundant.

    • I’m registered Republican, but I find most R politicians fairly slippery, as well.

      All the two parties represent is a divvying up of the electorate by issue and ethnic affiliations, nothing more. On issues serious to big industry and big banking the CEOs go right to the politicians, and they don’t announce their party. They announce their wallet.

      Neither of them is consistently about ‘good government’ or the fiscal health and efficient effective defense of the U.S.

  14. I’m a bit confused by the analogy. The one who pays is actually the “john”, right? Or in this case, the “jane”, since she’s paying someone to carry guns in her stead? So no, I wouldn’t call her–ahhh, what it said in the e-mail, at least not in the context of her paying someone to do for her what she thinks no one should be able to do for themselves. Heck, I just want to ask her why she doesn’t just depend on the police and her cell phone for her protection. And then go on from there, one question at a time,

  15. Whorepocrit Gunletist?

    I feel that encompasses the money being funneled into this “grassroots” effort, the hypocrisy involved of having good guys with guns as protection, and the idea that only the elite and affluent who can afford the “trained and licensed” professional bodyguards deserve to be protected by firearms…not all the peasants out there who merely want to protect themselves and be left alone.

    And she is probably the most dangerous out there as she’s the spearhead of the emotionally driven MDA (or everytown….reminds about the time on The Wire when Stringer Bell said “when a product isn’t selling, change the name”) who try to manipulate the hearts and minds of those who don’t care enough about the issue to properly educate themselves about what is actually happening and what their agenda means in the future.

    • Not to mention their strong social media presence. Gun control advocates thrive in the space where extremely short messages are highly valued. They can spout off emotional phrases without backing them up (not saying it’s a new trick on social media, just that that space is perfect for their brand of emotional appeals).

  16. So, are we supposed to use this #shannonwatts every time we discuss how ignorant and uninformed she is? Or just when we want to discuss #shannonwatts how hypocritical she is?

  17. This is a job. She is making money and becoming some sort of celebrity. What she says or does publicly may have absolutely nothing to do with her actual, personal beliefs. The public hypocrisy is frustrating, but those who agree with her cause likely don’t see it, won’t admit it (even to themselves), or will justify it in such a manner that it actually furthers the cause. While to us it seems like a MASSIVE mistake that pokes holes in her credibility, to the news outlets who refuse to mention it (and therefore to all of the middle-of-the-ground people who never hear of it) and to the people on her side to whom the ends justify the means, it just doesn’t matter. As she had no credibility with us anyway, maybe there’s no harm done and she did it just to put us in a tizzy. Which it should.

  18. Yup ban guns “for the children!”

    Hand out coat hangers “for the women!”

    The left is insane.

  19. I don’t mind posts about MDA, Robert, but please…try to keep it in check. I really don’t think it is necessary to keep at it as incessantly (obsessively?) as you seem to be doing.

    I made a proposal on another thread.

    How about one MDA post for every five legitimate posts about firearms: reviews, shooting demonstrations, history, research, storied uses of the gun, history, R&D, ammo tests, range reviews, training techniques, training reviews.

    There are literally dozens of topics having to do with the “truth about GUNS” which could be written about.

    I just don’t think TTAG needs to devoted to what seems to be nearly every three posts on the latest from MDA.

    I think it gives them far more publicity and promotion than they deserve. The posts are always just preaching to the choir. They also are like dangling raw meat in front of hungry lions, aka, the TTAG regular commentators who, despite your MANY requests can not help themselves and engage in gutter, puerile behavior.

    My .02

    • You two cents aint worth much. There have been ten, count em, TEN posts since the last Watts rant. I guess reading skills are not your strong suit. Then again, maybe they are….
      BTW, I am NOT from Kentucky, never slept a night there although I have driven through it many a time. Its Kansas, which is where I exited the United States Military. Chose the Redneck moniker because after listening to and reading Jeff Foxworthy, I am convinced he got his material by spying on my family.

        • Obsessing on you ?No, you aint worth the effort. I just saw your comment and how stupid it was, and decided to mock you. Again. I guess they don’t teach math skills for you ELCA ministers?

        • I’m not ELCA.

          And, yes, you are obsessing over me. I’ve crawled under your skin and mind-melded with you. You can’t stop responding to my comments.

          It’s kind of cute, and I’m flattered, but I’m already spoken for.

        • I’m sure you are. I’m also willing to bet the peerless challenge of tolerating you has left her so jacked-up on antidepressants that if her blood touches a patch of bare earth, tulips will start growing there.

    • What’s really amusing is you thinking you rate enough to actually put requirements on RF as to what to post here, on his blog, where in past posts where others complain about censorship your answer is always: “Don’t like it? write your own gun blog and/or there’s the door.”

      So … on that basis … here’s my response to your post: “Don’t like it? write your own gun blog and/or there’s the door.”

      • Do you know how to read? He made a suggestion, and a rather reasonable one that was worded in a calm, rational way. He didn’t demand anything, and he certainly isn’t putting requirements on RF as for how to run his website. What, are reasonable suggestions now the same as ridiculous, self-centered demands?

        Idiot.

        • Did you miss his “suggestions” on this subject EVERY SINGLE TIME there’s an MDA or Watts related post?

          This one was more rational, true. But, it does not change the basic fact that only about 1 in 10 posts on here are MDA related, and all these people saying some variation of “it’s too much” just seem a little weird.

          Nothing like a good meta discussion to keep things lively…

        • You’re just jealous. I actually get to be one, you just get to dream about it.

        • I have a suggestion, Pope Paul. Mina will stop “pretending” to be a woman if you stop pretending to be a man.

        • I’d just like a general estimate on when you, the man who champions all causes “team woman”, is going to stop bullying the ONE woman who posts regularly on this blog.

          You are such a sanctimonious, infuriating asshole I cannot imagine how someone as repressed as you gets through the day without blowing his brains out.

        • Ah, nothing like some good ol’ schadenfreude to perk up my night.

          Ralph, Mina, I hope you two don’t lose the receipt, because I think you just owned his ass.

  20. RF, I just wish you’d get a thesaurus and look up alternates to the word jefe. I think you’ve used it, complete with italics, in virtually every single post that has mentioned Ms. Watts in the last couple months.

    I mean, you don’t have to. I only read about one in every five or six posts with her name in the title or first sentence anyway, so it’s not really a big deal. Just something I noticed.

    As far as the gun whore thing, well… I think that someone found a new way to be cute via mental acrobatics, but the question, the answer, the entire conversation is meaningless masturbation. It gets us nowhere, and deciding that she is a gun whore will please no one but the people looking for a yet another way to think bad thoughts about her.

    And I guess I’ll temporarily take the word “whore” off the moderation list, so that every second comment doesn’t have to be fished out of the trash.

    • More importantly, the usage is incorrect. She is anything but the boss of that outfit. She is at best a figurehead that’ll get the guillotine at the first sign of trouble.

      • Then shouldn’t that have happened a while back? Staples glares as an example, and an embarrassing one.

        For PR hack, she does not seem to be very good at swaying people’s opinion to the positive for her organization.

  21. Maybe we should meet her in DC on May 7th for her little “lobby” effort with 100 “mommies” (translation, women past child bearing age). I doubt they will get to 25.

    Shannon set loose in DC with the Diggles in pursuit. That sounds like a great movie

    • I’ll keep my eye out for them…after all how hard would it be to miss half a tour bus load of middle aged women in matching t-shirts in DC…on the hill…in May?

    • Wait, Shannon is coming to DC???? When is that? Maybe we can get her and the MOCO Estrogen Raiders to hold an information rally in Anacostia or NE around, say 10 p.m.? That should be entertaining.

    • Once again, I’ve screwed up. I could have joined Bloomberg’s menopause madness tour and had my trip to DC paid for. Probably be staying in a nicer hotel. Note to self, check the MDA website prior to next travel.

      From an operational perspective it makes sense…they can do a photo op on the steps of the Capitol and easily double the body count if they do it at lunch time or around five and count everyone leaving as “members”. Also it’s very unlikely to have those pesky Open Carry protesters hanging around in DC.

  22. No, I think this is half right. People who preach that regular people should not carry guns should themselves foreswear personal protection of any kind. Like, this woman here: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/daniel-zimmerman/quote-day-can-lead-horse-water-edition/#comments

    In Maryland, not even retired military with a security clearance can get a carry permit, that’s how ridiculous it is.

    If people really think gun safety (the real kind) is an issue in public: propose an objective set of criteria (e.g. hit a B-29 Silhouette at 21 feet 7/10 times from holstered); Foreswear the armed guards.

    Almost all crimes – from murder on down – are just as illegal for accomplices and criminal conspirators and the penalties as severe. If I hire you to murder my wife, or run into me (for insurance fraud) it’s as if I did the act myself.

    There is absolutely no difference morally, ethically, or legally between do-it-yourself personal protection and hiring someone to do it. As I said, if “quality” and safety were really an issue, propose an objective test. I bet several benjamins the guards she hires are every bit as competent as the average CCW holder.

    • Judging by the amount of actual risk of attack that she faces, her hired mopes could just as easily carry water pistols.

      • Well no, unless you fill them with urine. Then, that (in their minds) would be an appropriate response to an assault (in particular, an attempt at rape).

  23. The other side of the coin is that, once confiscation of guns is completed, there will be nothing to keep the antis from confiscating equipment used in other crimes, such as rape. So if you’re male, you happen to be walking around with tools that may soon be taken away, lest you suddenly decide to use them for nefarious purposes. This is a slippery slope with nothing soft at the bottom.

    • So right. I have brought up many times that the real target here is the balls, not the guns. The guns are just an “easily accessible” (their thought … i.e. “good start) variation of balls.

    • That he is paying her is beyond question. After all, she left a high-paying shill job at Monsanto to do what she’s doing now. Why can’t we find out her salary?

  24. Robert, it is good to keep an eye on Shannon Watts because her minions will be scouring pro-gun websites for any references to her and advising her of any particularly negative (ie: abusive) comments that could then either be used against us or to confirm her beliefs about gun owners. In reporting her activities we are watching for when she makes a major slip up. The stress and tension from the constant surveillance will eventually cause her to “lose it”, and hopefully where a camera is watching. But we must not let her release the tension, so lets keep the comments clean.

  25. She is a slightly attractive former mommie who resonates with lefty woman based upon emotional appeal. She is paid well to do so, and her hypocracy is notable. She is joined by a president and a host of politicians who would gladly deny you armed protection while standing in the shadow of their own armed guards. Therefore, any descriptor such as kiss@ss, hypocrite, lackey, mouthpiece, windbag, etc. seems appropriate.

  26. I would throw in my opinion of the lovely Ms. Watts and her campaign, but I don’t know how to accurately spell out a fart sound.

      • Can’t help it. You guys are using nicknames, possibly incorrectly. Every educated person knows there are only seven kinds; the fizz, the fuzz, the fizz-fuzz, the poop, the anti-poop, the tear-ass and the rattler.
        Sorry.

  27. MDA MAIG,EFGS or is it ETFGS. All hate groups.They offer no solutions to their percieved problems, and spew hatred at law abiding citizens.

  28. Objectively, Shannon is what she is, whatever that is, regardless whether anyone articulates that reality. Subjectively, Shannon is what people consider her to be, howsoever much that overlaps reality, also regardless of anyone’s expressing their view. You can’t change reality and, on the topic of Shannon, are highly unlikely to change anyone’s opinion. So.

    She may have value in sparking some interesting side debates, like the letter referenced here. “Gun whore”, is the proposed scurrility? Perhaps. After all, “Those who abjure violence can do so only because others are committing violence on their behalf.” Are we then prepared to launch that same invectice against every man here who passed on military service or a law enforcement career, as well?

    I know, I know, we all have guns by our bedsides and at our hips. All good and responsible, but let’s not pretend that renders us as ready to do violence as, say, kicking down doors in Khandhar or South Central L.A. That’d be as intellectually dishonest as TTAG pretending Shannon is jefe, rather than marionette, of anything, as opposed to pure red meat for the blogging and clicking crowd. Please.

    So go ahead with the Shannon articles and ensuing comments. There’s a little something there for everyone. Or don’t. Fact is, she gets more coverage here in a typical week than I’ve seen of her in all other media outlets, combined, in all of time. I’d never miss her were she to slither off into peaceful obscurity.

  29. You are right – she is a gun whore. A hypocritical gun whore. Paying for what she doesn’t condone.

  30. Don’t forget fellas, she has admitted to having cold sores and flare ups that affected her photogenic looks. Just saying – be careful out there and double bag it

    • My rule has always been that if you’re even *thinking* two-ply, then maybe you shouldn’t [engage in sexual intercourse] that [woman of questionable virtue.] But that’s just me.

  31. I wont comment on Ms Watts, since so many have said it so well for me. But I agree with you Robert in that if we lower ourselves to vulgarity, we harm our own cause by appearing low, classless, hostile, and in many other ways, the last people who should be trusted with the power of firearms.

    Our culture horrifies those who come from peace loving Japan when they hear such common phrases as killing time, or bombing an exam. And so, with much trepidation, I beg the people of the gun, when dealing with Ms Watts, to “kill her with kindness.” This hurts her cause far more than curse words.

  32. Actually in this analogy, Shannon is the John and the armed bodyguards would be the whores.

    And I do like it. Now … how to use it … Twitter here I come!!

  33. Just call her Shannon “Monsanto Mommy” Watts. People will research that and will learn a lot about her.

  34. Rob – I came up with an idea to fix the problem of MDA posts. You (and some readers) think it’s important to blog about every time Shannon takes a breath and a good portion of the readers don’t want to hear about her unless there’s a major event. So, why not have both?

    You can create a separate part of the site just the hourly MDA posts (also, to exploit the Google search algorithm, you can embed links back to your own posts to move them higher up the search results page). That way the posts are there for the handful of TTAG readers to see if they choose to (but people searching for MDA will find them quite easily) and the rest of the TTAG readers don’t have to see all of the posts about Shannon’s tweet showing her breakfast every morning. Everyone wins!

    Sorry for the slight hyperbole there, I’m one of the many readers who’s sick of hearing about every time Shannon farts and this really would allow both parties to get what they want.

    • Why on EARTH would there need to be a separate part of the site? The titles of the posts are always clear that they are about MDA or Watts.

      At that point…those that don’t like those articles can merely … not read them.

      What is so freaking hard about that?

      And they are not hourly MDA posts, for crying out loud. They average about 1 per day.

      Really…this sensitivity to these posts is starting make me wonder…

    • This is an excellent idea, as it puts the search results for MDA/MonsantoMommy on steroids. And you can heap in links to many other things, as well.

      RF? Go check out http://sayanythingblog.com/ and talk to Rob. Probably be easier to communicate with him direct thru his FB page. He set up his blog in the multiple topic format quite awhile back and it is working well. I believe he is a TTAG reader, although I have not noticed him commenting here.

  35. I’m still trying to figure out what Shannon’s overall goal is? Is it background check for all gun purchases?

    • Total confiscation. Why would it be anything less? That’s Bloomberg’s goal. Why wouldn’t it be hers?

    • Who knows what HER goal really is…it could be to take as much of Bloomberg’s money as possible and then move on to the next rube that believes she’s an effective front person for their cause.

      But, if she really believes at least one iota of the rhetoric she spews, her goal is the complete disarmament of all citizens in this country as well as the the effective neutering of all men.

      Her misandry is as troublesome as her words against males..though I suspect the two are intricately related.

      • That’s not fair. You have no idea what or how many services she performs daily for the fat old fart.

  36. Hey, who is this Shannon Watts character? The ONLY place I ever hear about this irrelevant twit is when reading TTAG,

    But she is a hypocrite. Just like Bloomy. Hey, if I could afford private security, maybe I would be advocating for banning all of the “little people” to be banned from owning guns, too. Just like Babs living in a gazillions square foot compound with a crew of maids doing her laundry advocates for the “little people” to live modestly and line-dry their clothes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    • She gets local and national TV coverage and coverage on popular lefty web sites (that I don’t want to mention).

      She also testifies before legislative committees and since those committee members’ constituents might read TTAG, RF’s coverage here could well be important.

      You may not see her anywhere else, but she’s out there.

      • Correct. The exact problem we have here is lack of attendance by the gun owners to the material that the Left is paying attention to.

        Sun Tsu: Know the enemy well enough to be able to lead him in battle and win.

        If you haven’t heard of Shannon R Watts and are not hearing about Shannon R Watts then you are not tuned into what the enemy is up to and that is how they flank you.

  37. Hey, if the money was good enough, I’d be her bodyguard! I mean, there is nothing to say I’d be any good at it. It’s a deal breaker though if I have to shave my head. I have my principles and pride ya know.

  38. She is a legend in her own mind.
    Is having a triple chin a requirement for being one of her armed guards
    because I could grow one.

  39. If you want to get rid of guns don’t hire people with guns. Why is her life worth more then mine? I’m just waiting for the porn tape to leak of all the mayors against guns tag teaming her………Oh no he didn’t just say that!!!

  40. Technically, her bodyguards are the gun whores because they are the ones who charge for gun services.

    Watts is the one paying for those services, so what does that make her? She apparently very much enjoys being constantly serviced by these extremely large gun whores.

  41. IMO, SW is simply a political opportunist who is creating a celebrity position for herself exploiting a niche she has discovered and is developing.

  42. Maybe we are going about this all wrong. Since armed hired goons are A-OK, what if hypothetically, an arm of the NRA became a private protection agency. Then they could hire all the members (at a salary of 1 dollar a year, taken out of dues) as private security agents. Since we then are for hire bodyguards how can moms demand our disarmament?

  43. That analysis does make sense.

    I think those who push disarmament are actually hiding from the true morality of the situation. They don’t want true disarmament – they still want private bodyguards, police, and the military armed to protect them. They’re still willing to kill just as long as they don’t have to drop the hammer themselves. As long as they can stay one step removed from the reality that someone may have to be harmed for them to be safe, they can sleep at night with a clean conscience. They’re perfectly comfortable with violence as long as they can have someone else be violent for them.

    I can respect a different point of view based on a conscientious objection, but I have no use for hypocrites who’d deny us our right to self defense even as they are guarded by hard men with select-fire weapons and 30 round magazines.

  44. Truthfully I don’t think she or her dozen or so followers has much influence in the majority of the country.
    She may get the press but who is actually paying any attention to her??
    Not many I know, knows who she is!!!!
    Those who do could care less, and just see her as another talking head one of many who just boar folks to death.
    I know Ive had enough of her and her “message”.

  45. She is literally an uninformed ,clueless to real life nanny,not a mom.Her organization means well in a horribly wrong direction.The folks that could save her and her children’s lives are the very people she is trying to torpedo! Gangbangers and criminals simply laugh at her as they know her success is their success!

  46. Perhaps it is time to have a citizens’ arrest of this lady, using the term very loosely, on charges of treason. Then have a citizens’ tribunal to find her guilty. Then take her and leave her without any defenses nor means of contacting help in a non-English speaking very deadly dangerous neighborhood with only the clothes on her back and no money.

  47. Maybe you should ask this broad out on a date. Its obvious you have a major crush on her with the nonstop blogging. Opposites attract and all.

  48. RF? Using the left’s precious social media against them is damned well the way to go. Publius has made an excellent suggestion for a force multiplier in this effort, and as I said in reply to him, go check out http://sayanythingblog.com/ and see how Rob has set up his blog for multiple categories of posts. Not sure how to go about it in wordpress, sayanything ditched WP several years ago.

  49. What I’d really like to know is how the armed Bald Fat Guys feel about protecting someone who is so hypocritical. Sure they’re getting paid so it’s just another gig to them but you still have to wonder if they’re really on “high alert” or just rolling their eyes at the hypocrisy surrounding them?

    • No, more like thinking about the idiocy of a woman that faces no more threat than pushy interviewers hiring armed guards. Or being a bit of stage dressing in a drama. (Or farce, take your pick.)

      But it’s the easiest gig they’re going to get in a while, so they’ll take the money.

  50. I just find it hilarious that she has ADOPTED the NRA suggestion of a “good guy” with a gun is the best way to beat a “bad guy” with a gun. Really! She is supporting the NRA’s program of having armed “good guys” available at events where “bad guys” might be around. The really REALLY amazing thing is, she does not see it!!!!!

  51. nothing upsets the DNC/Liberal/Hoplophobes like their Alinsky-ite tactics of ridicule and propaganda being used against them.

    Hit em where it hurts, their reputations. Show ’em we can read Rules for Radicals too!

    • I have a dumb question for you. When I look at this blog once the comments get > 2 levels, the “Reply” button disappears. Is that how it works for everyone else also? I am asking because you are the 2nd person to comment that I am replying to myself, which I am doing on purpose because there is no “Reply” button to the person I am trying to reply to.

      • ” Is that how it works for everyone else also?”

        Yes, replies only go 2 levels deep. That’s one of the reasons I like to actually copy and paste a quote of what I’m replying to. But they have to limit thread depth somewhere, otherwise they’d be scrolling off the right side of the screen. Go lurk some of the popular USENET groups, the threads there can get ridiculous.

  52. Shannon Watts seems like the type of mom who makes her kids PB&Js with the crusts cut off in advance, then freezes them for convenience. Pretty typical of an ambitious and narcissistic marketing/PR professional. I’ve known plenty just like her. Her children would likely be the kind to grow up mentally stunted and weird.

    Hey but she’s a great looking woman anyway! Can’t take that away from her. A large part of what makes her so dangerous.

  53. Let’s just call her Hanoi Shannon. She’s willing to sell out the Constitution for Bloomberg’s big bucks. Once she takes down the 2nd Amendment she’ll go after the 1st Amendment.

  54. Spanking Watts bare-bottom on PPV would do the trick, proceeds to go to Alan Gottlieb and GOA.

Leave a Reply

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