Comment on CSGV Facebook page

The above comment hails from the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence’s Facebook page. Obviously, the average gun control advocate isn’t this blood-thirsty. Right? Clearly, the majority of people in favor of civilian disarmament don’t truck with this “extreme” view, that gun rights advocates’ children, grandchildren and significant other should die in a hail of lead. Right? I mean, it’s not like most of them believe that the NRA is a terrorist organization and that someone should cave-in the skulls of open carriers? Oh wait . . .

Screenshot_2014-06-20-22-38-38-1

Note: there are plenty of pro-gun commentators who go so far over the line they have no idea what the word “line” means. TTAG’s been the landing place for pages and pages of obscene, offensive, threatening and generally abusive comments by gun rights advocates – a term whose gentility belies their belligerence by a factor of 10.  We delete these comments as fast and as best we can.

Why wouldn’t we? The antis have used our commentators’ pro-gun aggression in their anti-gun agitprop posting. All of which leaves me wondering: do we want a “look at this ugly comment” war? Should we make finds like the ones above a regular feature? Gun Control Bully Comment of the Day? Or should we ignore the loons and concentrate on the goons?

Your thoughts?

205 Responses to Housekeeping: Is Turnabout Fair Play?

        • Agreed. We need to show these pro-murder anti-gun psychos to the world. Spread it all over social media. The reason the anti-gun lobby doesn’t want to do anything about mental health problems is because so many of them are bat-poo crazy.

    • This. I’m done trying to debate them and thinking they’re capable of rational thought. Guess what? They’re not.

      Mocking them is LOADS more fun and has the added benefit of really pissing them off.

      • Ahh so true… I have a few friends, while good people, swing a little too far to the left on some stuff for me. Its good times just to troll them when they start getting stupid.

      • We don’t even need to mock them. Just show unaltered examples on a regular basis and we’ll have a way to mitigate the die-hard anti-gunners. We can debate rational people, but for the uglier side all we need to do is show it in all its hideousness. It’s worth a try at least. I say feature it.

  1. Unfortunately, I think the gun rights team needs to see these comments to better understand what we are dealing with. We should also work to restrain or emotional responses to view points like these above, so I don’t disagree with the TTAG policy of removing comments that give the anti-gun crowd leverage to push their extreme opinions.

    • I think of TTAG as a learning center for gun friendly people, and for people wanting to learn more about the whole “gun thing”. So I would hope people here would act the same as they would in a classroom, or pubic debate.

    • Does that mean that the worst of the comments here are what “they” are dealing with?

      I’m not up for that level of hypocrisy, thanks. Judging them by their worst is stupid. Judging them by their logic and tactics? Sound.

      Let’s leave the moronic comments on both sides out of the real debate though. Internet morons gonna fling figurative poo. That’s just how they roll.

      • Heck no. A free-for-all board discussing a controversial issue worked in the history of never. In a matter of weeks, this board would be a wasteland of immature trolling from attention-seeking children and the conspiratorial rantings of irrational cranks.

  2. Let me get this straight, these people want to attack (with blunt objects) firearm carrying law abiding citizens minding their own business?

    This is gonna end so well :/ (Sarcasm…incase no one got that)

        • If he did that, the crime is assault. You “felt” threatened by a properly holstered firearm? I’d certainly press charges, assuming he hit me, and my girlfriend wasn’t there as well. If she is, he might be perforated.

        • If someone hits me in the back of the head without a damn good reason, the only thing I am pressing is my trigger.

      • He’ll do nothing of the sort. Pure bluster–and incredibly ill-informed, stupid bluster at that.

        • I agree. A whole lot of internet bravado from a person who is most-likely a real-world coward. He wouldn’t do a darn thing more than complaining and maybe posting a photo on the internet in a vain attempt to shame the gun carrier as soon as he could whip is iPhone out.

    • He seems to be under the impression that because we’re law-abiding gun owners, we can’t shoot him…..well, he would be wrong, it’s exactly the law that ALLOWS us to shoot him when he attacks us. Dumb, dumb man.

      I can’t wait to see the news: Deranged Citizen Joe Hall Shot in Self-Defense.

      “There isn’t a jury in the world that would convict me for assault and battery….”
      Another dumb statement. Saying and believing it, doesn’t make it so – adding “on someone who could have been about to commit mass murder” to that doesn’t make it either. I wonder if your friends are as dumb as you, Joe.

      • Don’t forget, posting his plans on the internet like this represents premeditation so its not just an assault against a gun owner its a premeditated assault. Which ups the charges.

        • Do many off-duty LEO’s open carry? I’m in Illinois, where open carry is a no-no (and would seriously freak people out) so they don’t do it around these parts. I did see one guy open carry at a grease joint last year. He wasn’t wearing a badge or marked uniform either; just a white polo and black nylon tactical pants. Turned out he drove an armored car–state-certified security companies were the only ones besides cops that were allowed to carry guns prior to the recent change in law–and stopped for a quick bite to go. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t legal for him to do so; but he did it anyway. No body freaked out. We’re 40 minutes from Chicago, where folks actually do own guns.

    • He’s the reason for ccp, to protect ourselves from those who would commit a violent act…the next time we read about this moron is when he actually assaulted a ccp holder, and was given the punishment he deserved.

  3. I say highlight the loons who salivate over the idea of someone dying violently because they hold different beliefs. They try so hard to paint us as extremists, let’s throw some light on their own extremism and hatred.

    • Yes!
      Shine a thousand bright lights on them.
      I am sure there are LOTS of people who read TTAG and do not leave comments.
      Maybe, just maybe, someone will recognize or know these hateful dregs.

    • General Zod’s got a nice idea. Why not have a section of TTAG dedicated to that? We could call it “Dumb/Intolerant/Ignorant things Anti-gun people say”

      Keep screen shots of their name and whatever hate speech they wrote toward us.

      What do you all think?

    • Since these people seem to have so much trouble controlling their violent impulses, they can chose to never carry a weapon. See? Problem solved.

    • I’ve seen soooo much of this from the grabbers. Calls for violence, wishing for peace. Wishing harm upon pro-gunner’s children, the NRA, and Congress for their action. Wishing for death to those who do not share their political belief. Remind me again who the terrorists are?

  4. These comments being made by internet tough guys like Joe Hall should just be ignored. Is he really going to risk his life attacking someone who is carrying to make his point, and maybe die in the process?

    The truth is most of these people would not say or do the same things ‘IRL’.

    • My thought. They have keyboard commandos too. How about this. Let’s get a forum going where our keyboard commandos can face off against theirs in an internet grudge match. One difference, given past history, when a leftist threatens violence, they probably have a higher chance of actually meaning it.

    • “I tell you what…” yeah, Mr Tough Guy has basically announced his intent to commit assault with a deadly weapon against an innocent person who is doing nothing illegal, simply because Joe Hall doesn’t like what they’re doing.

      • Given the level of tactical disadvantage with which Mr. Hall proposes to engage in this hypothetical attack, I’m not thinking he was burdened with an overabundance of smart.

        A statement that ridiculous, in oh so many ways, is impossible to take seriously.

      • Hmmm……… heres a thought. Wouldn’t his post count as “Threatening Bodily Harm” or “Communicating Threats” An since its open ended that would make it a threat against every gun owner that reads it. So it would be Multiple Counts….. muahahahaha

    • Guy doesn’t seem to realize that many concealed carriers are far more situationally aware than most people. He’d need to be a ninja to overcome that situational awareness most carriers have to even have a chance of pulling his little stunt off without getting shot a bunch of times.

    • This is not a video game, there is no “IRL”…. there simply “IS.” If someone makes threats on the internet that they are going to shoot someone, do we not take them seriously? Even if they probably won’t? It doesn’t matter if they never act on their words, they made the threat. They need to be held accountable. Not owning a firearm doesn’t make them any less responsible than a person who does, and if they think they can get away with it for that reason, they need to be shown they can’t.

      • Exactly, he needs to be reported to his local police for threatening bodily harm and internet bullying. Let the local constables and prosecutor’s office figure it all out. It might just wake him up (a little) hopefully!

        • +1 He committed a crime, when he posted that threat. Tell his local police about him, and let them prosecute him.

  5. Why not? It’s always good to have a reminder just how vicious the other side is. If this starts a “ugly comment war” it says a lot about us that we’re trying to moderate our own while their side has no issue with calls for blood and death.

  6. They misunderstand and frankly I think the whole “Your dead doesn’t trump my rights” shouldn’t be quoted without the YouTube video of the young man who first said it. No one else has been able to state it so eloquently.

    Maybe a better phrase should be “Your beliefs don’t trump my rights”. I’ve also been happy to point out to people that they do not have a right to “feel safe” or be “comfortable”. That’s what I hear all too often. “I feel unsafe” or “guns make me uncomfortable”. Well, great. Seeing a teenage couple play grabass in Chipotle doesn’t seem appropriate to me, but it’s not of my business and they’re not hurting anyone. Wait? Did I just compare carrying a gun to teenagers groping each other? You bet I did. Legal gun owners aren’t the ones causing problems and they aren’t huring anyone.

    On that note, no turnabout isn’t fair play. We need to take these comments and shove it back in their face. “Why are anti-gunners so violent?”. In the meantime, those of us who say we have a right to bear arms need to tread carefully as it is known we actually have the firepower to back up any threats regardless of how real those threats are.

    • Logic dictates that if Guns and Gun Owners were as Violent as Anti-Gunners CLAIM, there would be no Anti-Gunners still Alive!

    • What gets me is that criminal defense attorneys, like the guy who inspired Joe W’s remark, and many a lefty ” civil liberties” advocate, have been using essentially that same argument (dead people don’t trump another person’s constitutional rights) since–well, since forever. They just applied it to other rights–right to counsel, right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure, right to avoid self-incrimination.

  7. Funny… I’d be very tempted to draw on someone coming at me with a blunt striking object, especially if I knew that their intent was to hit me in the back of the head.

  8. Keep posting them for 2 reasons:

    1. When the unions went bat guano crazy in Wisconsin in 2011, their over the top rhetoric, histrionics, and uncivil behavior turn many people off. It ultimately hurt their cause and doomed the recall. We can use the overheated emotions against them in the eyes of fence sitters or ambivalent folk.

    2. We need to know what is out there because sometimes words turn into actions. Some will not be able to keep their rage and hatred bottled up forever so these serve as a reminder to always be vigilant.

    • Agree on both counts. There may well be some genuine whack jobs that mean what they say about violence against lawful carriers. This is one reason I carry concealed, even though I wish I could get some of my neighbors used to seeing an average, peaceful guy carrying a gun.

    • Completely correct.

      I think it also would be instructive to post the followup tweets to Shannon’s twit screeds. Let people know just what hate and bile Bloomberg is paying for.

  9. Considering the the entire idea of anti-gun groups is to paint gun owners as evil baby-killers, I think it is not only fair, but right, to out the crazies on their side. Their bad apples are no less violent or hate-filled than ours.

  10. I’m ambivalent. There isn’t really anything to be gained. We know a lot of the anti-rights crowd hate us and posting their hate won’t teach them anything. I don’t think it would hurt us but I don’t see a a clear benefit either…

    • “posting their hate won’t teach them anything.”

      It is not to teach them anything.

      It’s to expose them for what they are to any fence-sitters that happen to cruise by here to learn “The Truth About Guns.”

  11. Keep it coming!

    And if possible, notify the person to tell them that the violence they have openly advocated for on the internet is being pointed out as innapropriate.

    • Even better – point out to them that it’s because hate-filled psychos like them are allowed to walk around free is simply one more argument in favor of gun rights. I need to be able to protect my family from dangerous nutjobs like Joe there.

  12. So basically, anti gunners are hoping pro gunners & their families suffer violent deaths, to prove we don’t really have the need to protect ourselves from violence?

    I say expose their hypocrisy for all it’s worth.

  13. I could go on a diatribe to respond to those morons who wish death on me or those I care about simply because I carry.
    I already lost my mom-to an a$shole with a gun.
    I however refuse to allow the same to occur to my wife, daughter or myself.
    So I carry.

  14. The Lefties want a set of tactics they get to use and we don’t and a set of rules applied to us they don’t have to observe.

    Having said all of that compromising principles (i.e. climbing into their gutter) only lowers us.

    More fun to point out their Glass House behavior and highlight their continuous projection / hypocrisy.

  15. So anti-gun people are going to attack plain clothes LEOs from behind? How can they see the badge or credentials? This will end well.

    /sarcasm

    • Just like their political leaders all they can do is talk, and they love to talk big, especially online in controlled echo-chambers.

  16. Given that LEO’s normally open carry, I’d treat that kind of statement as a credible threat and arrange for a psych screening. A bit of time in a padded cell, followed by adding them to the NICS and suspected terrorist lists will help keep us all safer.

  17. Make it a daily feature and award them a Gun Control Hypocrite of the Day (GCHOTD?) award. These lunatics undermine their “cause”; give them all the infamy they deserve.

    “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
    -Napoleon Bonaparte

  18. You guys need to make this a regular feature. You are so polite to them and delete inflammatory comments that they use to paint us in a bad light, you need to do the same to them. Make their mods work just as hard to eliminate the comments on their side so they either become more civil or we go nuclear.

    as for internet commando Joe Hall, I am sure his tune would change if he watched his family being attacked. . . .

    • What was that in their play book about making the other side live up to their morals. Rules for Radicals had something to say about that. It’s about time we start making them live up to their so called passivity.

  19. I used to be conflicted on this issue because I assumed the anti-gunners at least had good intentions; that their hearts were in the right place. That conflict has faded. Some of them may be simply misinformed, but many of them are downright malevolent. I question the intellect and the motivations of anyone who truly believes that only cops and soldiers should have guns. They don’t see how quickly that would turn dark for us all. It confounds me.

  20. There isn’t a jury in the world who would convict me . . . .”

    True, Joe, because you can’t go to trial after you’re shot dead in self-defense.

    • Even if he was merely arrested, I have a feeling (with his convenient announcement of premeditated intent on Facebook) that he wouldn’t be found guilty of assault. Any prosecutor worth their salt would go for attempted murder.

    • my thoughts exactly. our job is to remain rock solid in the face of extremism on both sides of the issue.

  21. Post them in a separate forum. Let all the hateful posts pile up so people can see how rabid anti gunners are.

  22. Re: Let it be theirs…..

    Fine, we’ll let you have NY, CA and several other anti-freedom zones you’ve created all to yourself so you can live in your gun free utopia. Meanwhile we can make due with the rest and take our chances.

    I can only imagine the hardships we’ll face. Horrible things like freedom, balanced budgets, lower gas and utility prices, an actual market driven economy, the right to defend ourselves, lower murder and violent crime rates, etc…. The mind shudders at the thought of a world where people are held accountable for their own actions.

  23. I’d like to know where people like the one in the first example got the idea that gun ownership is unregulated in this country. They talk as if federal, state, and local laws about guns don’t exist.

    Two people in my life recently expressed outrage that, because of the efforts of the gun lobby, there’s no system of background checks in place for gun purchases. Combating that level of ignorance is an uphill battle.

  24. How about a “Hall (or Wall) of Shame”, a page with their names an insane ramblings? Sort of a one-stop shop we can send people to where the full lunacy of the left is on display in all its hateful glory.

  25. a) WE should *ALWAYS* take the high-road — sarcasm and mockery is very OK — counter threats are unacceptable and will hurt all of us.

    b) Item: Error of “unlimited, unchecked, unregulated” — and the accompanying error that limited, checked and regulated would “Save Lives!”.

    >>>>C) But MORE importantly — there is something much more basic here — that is not being properly identified: The text in the initial image is *clearly* saying: THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. This is the OPPOSITE of all of the core concepts and axioms of secular ethics. To posit that “The End Justifies the Means” and to work around “end state principles” is the very definition of AMORAL thinking.

    Once you decide that the End Justifies the Means — then all bets are off — and it is OK to do whatever you like — to achieve the Grand Great and Just ENDS. (And we all know how THAT ends.)

  26. 1. Expose those kind of people on the anti-gun side for what they are – roaches.

    2. Ban the people who are just as bad on this side of the argument from ever posting here, again, instead of just deleting their posts.

  27. That is hatespeech. It should be hignlighted as such. If a disgruntled teen said that on facebook we’d lock them up before they could stab three people, and then run a few more down in their BMW….right! Right?

  28. I think you should highlight both sides. Civility is paramount, as I have been proclaiming from a few comments sections here. Shame both sides for being irrational and abusive. Elevate the rational.

  29. Give them the platform they need to show people who they are and let people judge who is extreme and who is not. I say make it a feature.

  30. This Free Speech moment brought to you by the lives of countless sons, daughters, fathers and mothers that have paid the ultimate sacrifice for your freedom to say whatever you want on Facebook.

  31. GUN VIOLENCE needs to include ALL people incarcerated for weapons / ammo / magazine “possessory” laws and all people charged, being tried or incarcerated for VICTIMLESS “CRIMES” related to “gun-control” laws.

  32. These people against guns and that don’t believe in protecting our 2nd ammendment are not using their brains. Do they really think criminals are gonna open carry? And we pass FBI background checks to prove we are not criminals. I’m sick of these punk mf. Let the government take away their freedom of speech that way they have something to cry and bitch about. And does it not say in bible to not Judge. It’s our right to carry open or concealed.

  33. Please show them. About a year or so ago members of Coalition decided to track down mine and my families home address and distribute it throughout their group, along with personal information about my children. These people are dangerous and need to be called out on their threats. They love to paint gun owners as “crazy” but I’ve never stalked anyone, let alone an entire family.

  34. In my opinion, I’d leave most of them off the radar. When I read anti or pro comments written at that level, it just makes me frustrated and tired. But I would highlight any such comments coming from senators, congressmen, mayors and federal officials as well as mainstream media people, so that we can counter by replacing those public office holders, and boycott public celebrities. Not that these people are more important than Joe Schmoe, but if they are in a position to set future policy, then we need to know who they are, what they stand for, and replace when needed.

    • Oh, I would collect them (with links) and save them to include in testimony the next time “common sense gun safety laws” are up for debate.

      This is war. Understand Sun Tzu.

  35. I don’t think this should become a “____ of the Day” thing. I think you should maybe create a new page titles “The Extremism of Anti-Gun-Rights Advocates,” take screenshots of those comments including their name, picture, and the city and state they’re in, and post those comments to that page to create a collective of these people, to immortalize what they said and to expose them to the world. Then forward any comments of theirs that contain threats to both Facebook and their city’s police department.

  36. Good old Joe got at least 17 thumbs up. I understand frustration. I am often frustrated by them. But, jeepers, I don‘t wish them or their children dead! Just leave me alone, please.

    They read here. We should show some restraint and at the same time show the bile in their ranks.

  37. Another vote for making it a regular feature. I think it is important to both expose them for what that are to fence-sitters and to keep readers here informed as to what is being said.

    Maybe not “of the day,” though. I don’t necessarily think we need to see this feces every day.

    A weekly summary of some of the worst ones perhaps? I don’t know.

    • Yes, a collective – and not just on here, it should be somewhere even people who aren’t pro-gun can read it. People who are anti-gun already put people who own guns into a group and call them monsters, so we should also place them into their own group. Up until now, placing them in a group wasn’t possible because they didn’t didn’t all share one specific thing, so you couldn’t define them. Now we can show how they are joined by their hate of people who are are following the law and their rights.

  38. You can’t ignore the loons. Many of them are running the country right now. Highlight the hypocrisy.

  39. Ignore them. It’s a waste of energy.

    If we want to demonstrate that firearms and POTG are worthy of our collective culture, let’s focus on the good stuff like recreational shooting, DGUs, etc. What can we possibly gain by giving spotlight and attention to fringe voices like the ones here? We’re not going to change their minds, and we’re not going to learn anything new ourselves. Hateful comments have been floating around the Internet since long before cat videos and memes showed up. Don’t feed the trolls.

    We’re all better served to spend our time and energy on positive things like guns & gear (I learned a lot from the Beretta 96 post, for example), current events, training and education, swapping range stories, etc. Time spent gawking at a-holes is time wasted not winning the culture war.

    • We’ve been trying to do that in the Atlantic Coast states for years. Hasn’t worked out too well.

      You can kill more flies with Thermite than with honey.

    • “Time spent gawking at a-holes is time wasted not winning the culture war.”

      Huh?

      This IS the culture war.

      It’s not “gawking” at them; it’s exposing them for what they truly are. The more people see online posting like Hall’s, the better.

      Think about it this way. When Yeager started up with some of his more egregious tripe, POTG were out of the gate to muzzle him.

      Their side does not do that. They ENCOURAGE remarks like Joe Hall’s. They fuel it. While calling US extremists and terrorists.

      They lie about everything, including their own beliefs.

      Expose the lies. Let people decide which group has more honor and integrity.

      • I disagree. Hall isn’t Yeager or Alex Jones or anyone else who already has an audience and is presumed to speak for people. He’s not Wayne LaPierre sticking his foot in his mouth about video games. He’s a nobody who likes to type big on the internet, and he didn’t have a voice until we gave him one.

        We already know there’s vitriol and hate out there, so pointing it out to ourselves doesn’t teach us anything constructive. Pointing it out to the antis isn’t likely to get them to police themselves (especially if you believe, as you said, that they encourage this hate speech). And the people who go about their daily lives not thinking at all about gun politics until another mass shooting happens won’t even notice. Meanwhile, the people who spew hateful bile will continue to do so as long as anyone’s paying attention. Right now Mr. Hall (if he’s aware of his notoriety) is probably thrilled that he upset some gun nuts. There’s zero chance we’re going to change his mind or the minds of anyone who cares about him by shaming him for being an idiot. It’s a waste of time.

        We each have so many hours in the day. We can spend them getting riled up over the Joe Halls of the world and getting into shouting matches with these people, or we can spend them reaching out to people who might actually listen.

        I’ve lost track of how many people I’ve taken shooting or otherwise engaged in sensible discussions about guns, gun laws, etc. Heck, just a few weeks ago I flew up to WA for a wedding and brought a few firearms to go shooting with a friend of mine who lives up there. Not only did his wife decide to get him a 1911 for his graduation party, but I also had a really interesting conversation with a TSA agent in SEATAC who admitted being afraid of guns; I told her why they’re not scary to me and encouraged her to go to a range. Right now I’m working on setting up a range trip for my wife’s massage therapist and her kids (she, the massage therapist, wants them to learn how to hunt). These are real people who have changed or opened their minds about guns and are coming over to our side of the fence. That’s the real culture war.

        As a bonus, when I spend my time teaching people about guns and taking them shooting I feel good and energized all day long. When I get absorbed in the hate-mongering it gets me riled up & frustrated, and in the end I think it makes less of a difference to our cause. I’d rather spend my time and energy doing what I know makes a difference. Joe Hall can yell at the wind.

  40. BTW, please forward Joe Hall’s threat to the police department of whatever city he’s in!

    If he ever does attack someone, it will be good for the police to have a record of his intention on file.

  41. Please someone tell me what the problem is with guns in the right hands. I’ve owned guns for over 30yrs and raised 2 kids. My guns never harmed anyone. So tell me what is wrong with guns? All mine are legal and I carry everyday.

    • The problem is they want to be the ones who decide whose hands the ‘right hands’ are – and I guarantee they won’t decide that yours are.

  42. The name of the website is THE TRUTH ABOUT GUNS. We’re here to provide the truth and dispel the lies. Show them as they are; hateful extremists. Call them out and embarrass them for their stupidity at every opportunity.

    Violent acts are violent regardless of the instrument. Educate them when possible. Lead by examples that we are not violent but will stand up to defend ourselves.

    Remind them of 9-11. Prior to that the norm was to aquiese. Let the bad guys have what they wanted and they’ll go away and we’ll be safe. Since then we realize the inherent flaw in that logic. The new paradigm is to prepare for and stand up against evil. Not to take cover and hope the wolf eats the other guy.

  43. I would love Sheva Golkow to say that to Nikki Goeser and Suzanna Hupp’s faces.

    These people sicken me.

  44. Highlight it when it’s tolerated by the anti-gun crowd. Internet tough guys on both sides say stupid stuff, but if TTAG is deleting the crazy comments on its side, there’s no reason not to hold the platforms and groups of the other side to that standard.

  45. Let the crazy antis spew their violence and mal-directed hate. Remain stoic, don’t stoop to their level, and let everyone see that the average gun owner is a normal person while the average anti is left to speak for themselves. We shall police the members of our community to our standards, let them police theirs to their standards. Let fence sitters judge each community.

  46. I believe it would be a good idea to post these up on a forum that every gun shop owner, private seller, gun owner and possible employers can see it. This way if they ever do go to buy a firearm, that business could refuse service to the ones who threaten. Not to mention you may be able to ostricize the threat maker from business opportunities or future employment. Make them understand that with certain words or actions come consequences.

  47. Is it worth invoking more comments to delete just to showcase stupidity that we are already acquainted with?

  48. Hypocrisy is ripe on both sides of the gun debate.

    The peaceniks threaten violence to defend their feelings and suppress your rights. Gunnies threaten your rights because they feel you aren’t exercising that right in a manner they feel appropriate.

    I think if you are going to make a feature out of calling out hypocrisy and vitriol it should be equal opportunity.

  49. There has been alot of talk about anti gun activists saying to stop violence we need to ban guns or make it almost impossible to own them but even in this guy’s own post he is suggesting to beat someone down for just open carry. This is the exact problem with their argument, they want to hurt a person who is doing absolutely nothing wrong and they wonder why people want to protect themselves? The real question they should be asking is how do you figure out who’s going to use violence with or without a weapon? If you actully look at the trends of violence with a weapon over the years as a whole it’s actully dropping not going up but uneducated just listen to the media and repeat what they hear not what’s true. Just my to cwnts

  50. Delicately, firmly, convincingly, politely, keep the facts in front of the “anti.” Stay focused on the facts, call that person back to the facts. Remind this uninformed person that name calling is not a useful fact. Again —
    Politely and firmly keep it on the FACTS.

  51. I say don’t publish their comments. The media already gives this minority of people a larger voice than they need and we don’t need to make matters worse.

  52. If they make specific threats turn them over to Law Enforcement to deal with. Post em all

  53. I’ll take up Sheva Golkow’s guantlet. I lost a son to gun violence. However, unlike Sheva, I recognize that the inanimate object (the gun) didn’t commit the killing. The person with severe mental health issues, who was denied the legal purchase of the gun, was responsible. Eventually, he bought a gun from a gang-banger who obtained the gun by stealing it from a police officer’s home.

    I find it hard to recognize the credibility of people that refuse to see the root cause in gun violence is not the gun, but the person using the gun.

    More people have been killed with hammers than with long rifles, yet these gun-grabbers aren’t out campaigning against carpenters using hammers.

    IMHO, these gun-grabbers have mental health issues of their own as it is obvious that they can’t think for themselves. They continually sing the same sour song.

    WARNING: Once the Second Amendment falls, there’s nothing left to defend the Fisrt Amendment and the rest of the Constitution.

  54. I can see some turnabout. I could reverse that first post and ask why I must leave my family vulnerable for their peace of mind. If they want to expose their own family to danger because they fear weapons that is their right…but why must I sacrifice the security of the ones I love to make them feel OK?

  55. Turnabout is fair play, but tone is important. The two examples in this post would be perfectly highlighted in a daily feature. The first with a commentary pointing out the statistics pointing out the low crime rate of legal owners and carriers of guns….with more statistics about mental health issues and gang issues to back it up.

    The second example would be a good launching pad for an open carry commentary about tactical disadvantages as well as realistic commentary on laypeople reactions to OC…and a good healthy lesson on what distinguishes a threat from another dude OC’ing.

    This is The Truth ABout Guns and we are here to discuss the issues. We are not here to win Internet pissing matches with keyboard commanders. Take the comment in context and present evidence for the opposing view and you might start a real discussion and win hearts and minds in the process.

  56. Collect all the hateful emails and post them in a packet to show the world just how many violent and hateful “peaceniks” are really out there. Then politely forward all this rubbish to every gun control outfit on the planet and ask them to explain how their supporters are more rational and civilized than us low brows.

    Just for a lark, of course.

  57. Posts from anti gun supporters like this prove my assertion that gun control supporters are not really anti violence. In fact they embrace violence and deadly force, but not one of them will volunteer to enforce gun bans, nor would you ever see them in a stack to kick down a door. These are people who are completely blind to the law of unintended consequences.

  58. I think it would be effective in not only highlighting hypocrisy of those preaching that law abiding civilian gun owners are violent, but also it would serve as a subtle reminder to fellow gun owners that venting frustration and hate towards others doesn’t win converts like being respectful and informative can. Also inviting people to the range of course helps too.

  59. “If ye love wealth better than liberty,
    the tranquility of servitude
    better than the animating contest of freedom,
    go home from us in peace.
    We ask not your counsels or your arms.
    Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
    May your chains set lightly upon you,
    and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” – Samuel Adams [http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote/samuel_adams_quote_428d]

    If we (gun-owners) lived up to the hype [if anti-gunners really believed everything that they are spouting about us and guns] then they would kill themselves before ever allowing us to do it in the manner that they profess that we would. So . . . I say (tongue firmly cheeked, selector to safe, finger off the trigger, smiley face, smiley face, kissy face, XOXOXO, wink) let them go-on. To my friends a toast and know that when they come for you, they will have green dots on the backs of their heads, and we can laugh about it later while desecrating the bodies. again wink

  60. Sheva Golkow seems a bit confused:

    “leave the rest of us the hell alone.”

    Um, Ms. (??) Golkow, which side of the debate is calling for more laws in attempt to control what private property other people can own?

    Is her (??) implication that we are all stalkers? Isn’t this a page from the Shannon Watts Failed PR text book?

    What exactly does one person owning a gun or carrying a gun actually do to NOT leave her alone? Is she equally offended by the keys in my pocket or the fact that I own a stereo?

    My suggestion, Ms. Golkow…follow your own advice and leave other people alone. Stop trying to be the world’s nanny. Stop trying to act like you magically get to decide what is “right” for other people. Stop acting like you know more than everyone else, especially given that your worldview is a complete and utter failure.

    If you mind your own business and butt out of ours, we would ALL have a happier time.

  61. +1 Will & Dirk. There needs to be a price paid. Why oh why do the lunatic fringe threaten heavily armed men? Watch your backs POTG. We should NOT ignore this evil speaking.

  62. I dissagre with these nasty coments about us ppl that carry what if i carry an there were a loony killer bout to snap an i was there to take action an saved dozens because just we have guns doent mean we are killers ppl kill ppl not gun ppl should not judge you dont like it then walk the other way

    • Well, carrying a weapon is not something you need to justify to Joe Hall – in fact, it’s not something you need to justify, period – Joe Hall doesn’t actually believe that open carriers are going to commit mass murder, he just wants to bash their heads in and crack their skulls – as he stated.

  63. No. If we put up every stupid thing said in the comments of news articles, well, you’d have to create a whole new family of websites to hold them.

    Ask yourself this question: do you really want to devolve this debate even further? Because that’s all that will be accomplished. People say stupid things on the internet, its a fact of life. Its different if its an actual statement someone made IRL, but I don’t want to hear what xxxpacifist4life420noscopexxx thinks about the gun rights debate.

    My feeling is this: we don’t want them to scrutinize every comment we make do we? Why would we engage in similar behavior then?

  64. I feel sad. I am new to the gun world.I have a S&W 640-1 .357 that shoots .38s. I was very happy and proud getting my CC card. I felt the weight if responsibility that I am allowed to carry a deadly weapon on my person 24/7 in public. So I study and go to the range. I read your articles. But now I find by no action of my own only buying a gun, in the middle of a nasty mud slinging battle between gun pros/antis. I am not a blood thirsty gun touting woman.

    I don’t like or agree with the anti-gun people. But I don’t after with these open carry riflemen. Yes we have the right to carry open. But it is a very irresponsibility. The people lack good judgment and wisdom. In the wake of all the massacres, people are still on edge. Poor timing. Unless it is the work of the antis. Then it is pure genus. Because their lack of judgement is really working in their favor. They really need to stop for our sake.

  65. It’s funny, usually I’m one of those guys who can’t argue because he gets so mad he just starts sputtering and spouting obscenities as quickly as they come to mind, but today I was overcome with the strangest urge to kill my enemy with kindness; somewhat passive aggressive and disingenuous kindness. So I found joe on the old Book o’ Faces and sent him this:

    Mr. Hall, you don’t know me, but I just read a rather strongly worded comment you left regarding someone openly carrying a firearm. In case you don’t remember, you basically said that if you saw someone carrying openly in public, you would bash their head in with the nearest blunt object, and that nobody could fault you because that person could have been a murderer. Now, I could make the obvious joke about bringing a blunt object to a gunfight, but I’m not about to fight your senseless violence with, well… Far more effective senseless violence. You might not know this, but depending on which state you live in, open carry might very well be perfectly legal. You’ve basically announced that you have a plan to kill a man who is breaking no laws and has no intent to hurt anyone because you don’t like what he’s doing and you thought maybe he might do something bad. Well maybe I’ve just decided that I don’t like your face, and I have a very powerful hunch that you’re secretly a serial-killer/rapist/puppy-kicker, with a body count in the low hundreds. Now, as an American, I’m entitled to my very strange opinions, just as you’re entitled to yours; but neither of us has the right to kill the other because of them. Sorry that got a little aggressive & crass there at the end, but I’m just trying to point out some massive holes in your logic, man. I can tell you that I own several guns that have been fired thousands of times over the years, and not a single one of them has ever taken an innocent life (or any life for that matter) as long as I’m around, none of them ever will. Guns and shooting are not intrinsically violent, friend. I invite you to educate yourself about firearms and join the shooting community, you can never have too many range buddies

  66. mock them as they mock us. its is a bit childish if you ask me. but i think Shannon Watts will be the winner with material

  67. RF, with screenshots of comments like these, will their name show up in a google search?

    That might be of use for anyone who’s researching a potential employee, babysitter, etc.

  68. I am very much pro gun , but common sense must be used to retain our gun rights. A ladge majority of people have neither pro or con but can be frightened into going anti gun by this stupid tactic.

  69. All this credible threat of violence from anti-gunners, yet somehow, I’m the bloodthirsty child-murdering terrorist? Checkmate

  70. Why aren’t comments like the second tweet, or whatever it is, considered terrorist threats or at the least intimidation? These are threats of physical harm.
    And 17 up votes? God help the pro 2a advocate who espouse such actions

  71. May I also (carefully) add that this is another reason I prefer concealed carry any day over open. I love open carry and I wish everyone did it, but since everyone doesn’t do it, and some people hate it so much, and others who are neutral on the debate could be swayed to “anti” side of the argument by an unnerving presence of firearms when they are not used to them are comfortable around them, I keep my gun hidden. It’s still there when I need it, but it’s not in anyone face. I see open carry as a risk to our gun rights. Just being honest.

  72. People need to be careful about posting hateful and violent things on the internet. Three minutes of searching and cross referencing details from Mr. Joe Hall’s facebook account gave me his exact address in Elgin, IL. I don’t wish the guy any harm, but if anyone did, they’d have no trouble tracking him down. Be safe, and never post in anger. It’s increasingly possible for threats and violence posted online to spill over into the real world.

    • What’s really ironic is that because of his choice of words on Facebook, the DHS Illinois Fusion Center probably already has his bona fides too. They keyword-search social media for potential sociopaths and terrorists.

  73. Unfortunately we can’t be silent on this. Despite the stupidity level of the comments, the fact is if you say it enough it becomes a commonly held belief, one that could affect our rights and literally change the meaning of actual legal arguments based on vague ideas such as “reasonably believe” and what not. The fact is stupid people vote and if we don’t get our side of the story out there with facts in a non-demeaning manner, than the stupid people will vote with the loudest opinion, which right now is anti-gunners. You don’t want to leave our rights in the hands of voters – they’ll be gone before you can blink. The NRA knows this, which is why they fight so hard to kill legislation in committee.

  74. Imagine if local gun owners started filing restraining orders against this guy because he openly threatened them all.

    I also agree with a “wall of shame” or something of the sorts.

  75. The reason TTAG is my “go to” blog is because the meaningless drivel has been edited out. Please continue.

  76. What you need to do, is push the anti’s terrible comments out front, DO NOT IGNORE THEM! For the past 30 years I have watched people on the right try to take the ‘moral high ground’ in political discussions, it doesn’t work. The upper classes will ignore your message, the middle classes will distance themselves from those perceived as ‘uncivilized’ and the lower classes mass to messages with impact and ‘showmanship’. You most certainly should publish their bile as much and as often as possible, doing this will distance moderates from that message. It is about god damned time that we start using the progressives tactics against them.

  77. Publish the anti-gun daily or weekly (or both?) comments as you find them. Let their voices and words be the petard they have been hoist upon. Keep deleting the dumb crap the pro-gunners leave on the site. That the anti-gun side does no housekeeping to expunge this hateful and bigoted collection of screed is not our business.

    • It’s not exactly “stooping to their level” to reprint their own comments. As long as the “no flame no ad hominem” policy stays in place, we can still maintain the relative high road.

  78. “Should we make finds like the ones above a regular feature? Gun Control Bully Comment of the Day?”

    Yes.

    This is all part of The Truth About Guns. These “loons” are part of the gun control establishment. If we really want a thoughtful discussion – if they really want a thoughtful discussion – then the loons on both sides need to be muzzled.

    The gun control establishment has tried to muzzle all gun rights advocates by publicizing the extremists’ comments far and wide. So why not publicize what the gun control activists say? Why not expose the gun control extremists?

  79. If the debate was actually between guns existing and not, at least there could possibly be some pro vs con discussion. All this dumb broad is babbling about, is whether regular, decent, non scummy people should be able to buy a basic defensive tool. Or whether such things should only be available to criminals and tax feeding leeches (morally redundant, I know..)

  80. If you want a ready supply of this stupidity, go to reddit dot com and look at the “gunsarecool” sub. It’s nauseating.. And will show EXACTLY the antis position… Oh, and they ruthlessly edit comments, just like others we know…. Go figure

  81. The Base of the gun confiscation movement is the same base as OWS, Nambla, CPUS, they are the disappointing dregs found in all societies, their leadership is dedicated in it’s callous drive to disarm and destroy those who value Liberty and Life because they know it is their only road block to totalitarian oppression and the genocide that entails. Do not engage these people in any way as it is equal to telling the Gestapo that you are not a big fan of Hitler, the man who turned his Private Army loose upon the German population, murdering a recorded 40,000 people in 30 days.
    Like you, they did not believe it could happen to them, either.

  82. I think periodic posts would be a good idea. We do however need to remember that there are those among us that are pretty crass in their own right and the game could probably be played by both sides. In fact showing idiotic comments from our side might be instructive as well.

    JSG

  83. I’ve heard of people going to federal prison for cyber bullying. This guy is talking about murdering a random innocent person. He’s the type of person I carry a firearm to protect my family from. Anyone live in Portland that can forward this to the local authorities? How great would that be?

  84. These people are brainwashed main-stream media psychos. Gullible and swallowing up every morsel of liberal propaganda offered for consumption.

    If dead children don’t trump their rights – if that’s the price that must be paid – then let it be their children. Let it be their infant son, their five year old daughter. Let it be their first grandson, just taking his first steps. Let it be their beloved spouse, of five days or fifty years. Let it be their best friend. If they are so convinced that human life is a reasonable price to pay for completely unlimited, unregulated, unchecked gun ownership, then let those who so fervently believe in the justification of that price be the ones to pay it. Pay it, and live with it, and leave the rest of us the hell alone.

    #1) Recommend the writer read the “if it can save one life” article here:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/337324/if-it-saves-one-life-charles-c-w-cooke

    #2) First and foremost, the needs of the many do not in fact outweigh the rights of the few. This is the reason why our country was not constructed as a direct democracy – but as a constitutional republic where people (the few) have rights that cannot be infringed. Strongly recommend the writer read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

    #3) Crazy people will do crazy things. Criminals do criminal activities. Regulated gun ownership will not stop criminals and crazy people from stealing guns (from LEO or Law abiding citizens) and using them to kill children. Regulating gun ownership will not stop a crazy child from killing his parents, taking their guns, and then go shoot some kids. However, armed resistance against deadly force used to harm kids can be used to reduce or eliminate the violence action.

    #4) We would like you to leave us the hell alone. We are not putting a gun in your hands. You are trying to take the gun out of our hands. You are also trying to rain bureaucratic red tape, fees, paper work, and government oversight all over us to regulate a right expicitly granted to us by the constitution of the United States.

    #5) If you don’t like the constitution, you don’t like rights, and you don’t like freedom – maybe another country is better suited for you as this country was founded on certain principals.

    When are we going to declare the NRA a terrorist organization?

    Sure. If fighting for your rights is terrorism. Think of all those civil right’s terrorists. Inalienable Rights… BAD. Socialism and blind acceptance of political statements… GOOD.

    I’ll Tell you what… If I walk into a store or theater or other crowded public place and see a man or woman walking around openly with a weapon, I’m going to assume that the worst is about to happen, and I will take action. The first blunt object I can get my hands on will be used to fracture the back of the gun toter’s skull. They will hit the floor, and I will hold that person to the floor until the police arrive. there isn’t a jury in the World that would convict me for assault and battery on someone who could have been about to commit mass murder.

    Fascinating. So much fear. Maybe you should get a underground bunker built and stay there where it is safe and never come out. Crazy Joe bashing someone’s head in because he felt “threatened” when action was undue. What if a guy walked in a 10 gallon white bucket? Would Joe bash his head in? There could be a bomb in there. That bomb could wipe everyone out. But walk in with a holstered weapon and Joe is going to bash your head in. The typical brainwashed new-englander fear and loathing.

  85. wow who needs te psych test now its like a few chapters of a nut case manifesto.. i hate you and your violent fire arms so badly im gonna non violently bash in your skull with a blunt non fire arm type weapon confirms my belief in the 2a

  86. Sounds like Joe Hall is trying to get into the new “Knock Out” game played by youngsters nationwide.

  87. Okay, lets critically treat Mr. Hall’s thesis for a moment. And lets use New Hampshire as our example…first, because I am more familiar with the gun culture and the laws here. So this “Free Stater is open-carrying…Its a warm day…he has on shorts and a T-shirt. He enters a business to “patronize” that business…to pay this business money…to buy a coffee or whatever…and then BLAM! some person cold-cocks him in the back of the head for no other reason than that person observed in plain view, a holstered firearm. He hold the person down waiting for Police to arrive. The Police ask all the usual questions: why did you hit him? What was he doing when you hit him? See, the free-stater is breaking no laws…in fact, most folks around here are accustomed to open carry, even the police. so…guess who goes to jail? And…guess who gets sued? And, guess who ends up on the pages of TTAG and Granite Grok? Yes. Citizen Hall, for his rabid action…No, this is just a rant…unless Mr. Hall is a complete and utter fool.

  88. These people are violent and all one has to do is look at all the mass shooters and criminals in prison, most are all anti-Gunners.
    They hate Guns because its a barrier against them acting out their violent fantasies.

  89. Mental illness has gone so mainstream: while these people should obviously never own a gun, I have to pity their sad, sorry souls as fellow residents of our great nation. I would like to help them, but like section 8 ghetto whores, they are too far beyond redemption to be worth the time and effort.

  90. Thanks for the information Barry. Being part of a public pro gun forum is probably not wise either jus…we are all targets with a big bullseye on our backs.

  91. This guy has a death wish, does he think he is not going to be seen by the head bashee?? If some one tried to bash me I would shoot him in the knee and he would never walk right again, but being the good shot I am I would probably shoot him in the head so he could not be a bother to any one else but then I might just shoot him in both hands, ever see anyone wipe their ass with no hands or work a keyboard or smart phone with no hands, he obviously likes to use his computer for threats, PERIOD!!!!

  92. For the comment from Sheva Golkow, replace “gun ownership” with “tobacco use” or “alcohol use” (both of which kill more people each year in the US. The #1 and #3 causes of preventable death according to the CDC.) and these same people would most likely throw a fit. It just goes to show the hypocrisy of these people. They don’t care about people dying, they are just hoplophobes.

  93. Ok if guns kill so many people and need to be banned what about cars they kill way more people and there for should be banned only the disabled should be able to own one and the
    rest of the physically able body people should be for to walk around then maybe we wouldn’t have all these fat people. Or even better we should ban religion. Millions of people have died over religion but nope we don’t ban that. What about fishing billions of fish and other water dwelling animals that live there die so we need to ban fishing. What about slaughter houses and eating meat many land based animals die there so we need to ban slaughter and eating meat. Ok how about farming billions of plants die each year so that needs to go too. Shit how about swimming lots of people die from drowning so no showers or swimming.

  94. What is this person going to cry if the one he beats down is a veteran or a LEO who is off duty or like others have said just a law abiding citizen, he thinks he wont be arrested and convicted of assault and battery or even attempted murder he is sadly mistaken, he will go to jail. And the person he beats could turn around and sue him for the same charges he is already in jail for.

  95. No one is going to give you a gold star for playing by a losing set of rules, Abbie Hoffman told us Media is a Weapon Media is everything almost 50 years ago and he is right, we are in the place we are because we did not take the Progressives seriously. Some part of our side needs to face them head on and hit back.

    It’s the like terms Gundamentalist and Ammosexual that are being used by the left to degrade gun owners, the terms need to be taken back and redefined because words do have power. How often have you heard them cry that we love guns more than our children? How often have we been subjected to the bigotry of the left in ways that would never be tolerated for any other group? It cannot be ignored or left unanswered.

Leave a Reply

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