Gentle Reminder: Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America Does Not Support the Second Amendment

Derek Flemming and daughter and  killer Martin Zale (courtesy inquisitir.com))

The idea that gun control advocates support the Second Amendment is as preposterous as the idea that Israeli supermodels support Hamas. And yet the antis repeat this lie on a regular basis. “Moms Demand Action supports the 2nd Amendment,” the “about” section of their website proclaims, “but we believe common-sense solutions can help decrease the escalating epidemic of gun violence that kills too many of our children and loved ones every day.” What part of “shall not be infringed” do they not understand? Why, all of it. So they don’t support the 2A, do they? While we wait for some enterprising journalist to ask MDA jefe Shannon Watts to outline her vision of gun rights, we feel duty bound to highlight the contradiction in their position. Here’s one of their usual bloody shirt waving Facebook postings that proves the point . . .

GUNS AND ROAD RAGE IN AMERICA: Last week, a 43-year-old Michigan dad driving to get his kids from school got out of his car at a stoplight to ask a man erratically driving a pickup truck, “Do you have a problem?” Without saying a word, the driver pulled out a gun and shot the man in the face at point-blank range, killing him. The driver pled not guilty and is expected to claim self-defense: http://po.st/zlI03y

Stand Your Ground laws in Michigan and other states feed into a mentality that encourages people to shoot first and ask questions later. JOIN US to stop the gun lobby from passing more laws that endanger our children and families: http://every.tw/momsjoin

So a crazy man with a gun shoots someone because his “mentality” was fed by Michigan’s Stand Your Ground law (MCL 780.972). A law that strengthens a law-abiding citizen’s right to counter a deadly threat – like the one posed by the crazy man. Specifically . . .

“[a]n individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if . . . [t]he individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death, great bodily harm, or sexual assault of himself or another individual.”

How does that law create a “shoot first, ask questions later” mentality? Especially as the “reasonably believes” bit is subject to post facto review by the police, a prosecutor and/or a judge and/or a jury? Besides, I’m thinking that the psychopathic homicidal maniac in question didn’t have any questions to ask before he pulled the trigger on an innocent man.

Anyone who’s kept an eye on Shannon Watts’ mob knows the answer to that question: because guns. “JOIN US to stop the gun lobby from passing more laws that endanger our children and families.” If this is an example of a law (created by the amorphous, nefarious “gun lobby”) that endangers children and families, then I’m dating one of the aforementioned Israeli models. Which I’m not.

But I am keeping track of MDA’s malicious misdirection and pointing them out here. Because the truth about these Moms is that they’re hoplohobes. They fear and hate guns. Period. They don’t want you to bear arms at Kroger, Target, Panera, Starbuck’s, your church, your child’s school, in public buildings or anywhere else, really. They would eliminate the Second Amendment in a heartbeat if they could.

Not that they’ll admit it. That would remove all but their firearms-freaked fringe supporters – assuming they have anything other than firearms-freaked fringe supporters. Of course, those members are a lot less careful about letting others see the tyrant behind the curtain than their Hoosier leader . . .

Richard Vesel Exactly the reason why we need to severely curtail this gun-loving gun-toting mentality! WAKE UP AMERICA! NO GUNS IN INCORPORATED AREAS!

MDA censors comments asserting that gun laws aren’t the answer to criminal predation, suicide, gang banging drive-bys and other firearms-related injuries and fatalities. They brook no dissent. But they leave up comments like Mr. Vesel’s. If only the firearms freedom fence straddlers could connect the dots.

comments

  1. avatar JasonM says:

    I support “common sense gun laws”, BUT I think there should be exemptions for any person who has never been convicted of a violent felony or adjudicated mentally deficient.

    1. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

      I support common sense gun laws too. As in, since none of these laws make any sense they should all be repealed. The only gun control laws needed are the ones that say it’s illegal to murder, rape, rob, etc….

  2. avatar Ralph says:

    They fear and hate guns. Period.

    They fear and hate us. Period. Even when they’re too old to have one.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      I say they don’t fear and hate us. They want to control us. The Evil Gunz are only props to them; it’s about control. Of everyone but them. Of people they don’t know and have never met. It’s a POWER OVER OTHERS thing, you see. “DO WHAT I SAY, OR ELSE! i’M A MOM!!!

      1. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

        You’re right about the desire for control, but you are wrong I the fact that they don’t fear us. They DO fear us. They fear us greatly. An armed population is the only real threat to achieving their desire of control.

        With society disarmed, there really is nothing to stand in the way of their full negation of the First Amendment. With the first two gone, then liberty falls.

  3. avatar Mark N. says:

    I am still trying to figure out where there is this “escalating epidemic of gun violence.” Suicide is not “gun violence” and violent crime rates are steadily falling everywhere except in the gang infested inner cities.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      They seem to be pretty good about packing multiple lies into one sentence.

    2. avatar Grindstone says:

      “gun violence” is the new weasel word to get around the pesky fact that banning guns does nothing to curb *actual* violence. So they qualify it with adding “gun”. Just like how they trumpet how the UK has very low “gun violence”. Of course it does. But it also has very high “knife violence”, as we all know. But they leave off those inconvenient tidbits. It only goes to show how it’s all about the guns, not about the actual violence or about actually solving real issues. Control. Control. Control.

  4. avatar Jon says:

    “Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America Does Not Support the Second Amendment”

    I can’t disagree with the above statement, but I don’t think the chosen cover picture reflects that argument. That title combined with the picture, may also be misinterpreted by gun control and disarmament advocates who simply glance over it, as showing support for the shooter.

  5. avatar Gregolas says:

    Actually, My historical research has revealed that Demanding Moms’ statement: ” We support the 2d Amendment.” , is , in fact, the second most believable political statement in the last 100 years.
    The first being: ” The Sudetenland is the last piece of territory I will demand in Europe.”

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      And the third is “We’re from the Government and we’re here to help.”

  6. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Let’s park Richard and Shannon on the train stop from the previous post…
    Let them “feel” safe.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Is soiling yourself a gang sign?

  7. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Actually, as I read that story, I was thinking the dude’s SD claim may not be too far off the mark. Warrant shooting someone in the face in that situation as described? No, probably not.

    But, getting out and approaching someone with “Do you have a problem” is an aggressive act. In that case, the car is likely the best SD…drive away if possible.

    This actually happened to me once. Had a reckless driver behind me get out at a stop sign and approach my car. He screamed a similar “What’s your problem?” because apparently I would not “let” him pass me. And then started swinging, trying to punch through the window. (Yes, I get that throwing punches IS more aggressive action than just yelling “What’s your problem”).

    I managed to drive away, so no real harm, no foul. I just remember thinking as he approached my car, “Hey, this dude is coming to shoot the breeze.” I saw no threat in the situation at all. Was young and naive. Learned a lot that day.

    Anyway…the real point of all this is that we cannot let Shannan, MDA or any gun grabber set the narrative as to what constitutes “justifiable” gun use. To them it will be zero gun use. In this case, that the deceased could have been beating the shooter with a tire iron, and they would STILL scream about SYG and gun violence and all their tripe.

    They want us unarmed. Period. All of us, and there is no DGU that passes muster with them. They don’t even acknowledge females defending themselves against larger attackers or elderly defending themselves against home invaders.

    1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      I’m with you on this one.

      Typically in a road rage incident the guy exiting his vehicle to “confront”: someone is the guy with the rage problem. If the issue was so worrisome then his wife who was in the car with him should have called 911.

      Sounds like dead daddy spun the vigilante wheel and came up a loser.

      Should be an interesting case to watch…

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Shooter gets off as insane. NEXT…

    2. avatar Josh says:

      I also agree. One of the absolute most provocative and foolish things you can do in a road rage incident is get out of your car and approach the other vehicle involved. You have no idea who you might be dealing with.

      Maybe this went down exactly like MDA said it did. Maybe there is a lot more to this story that will come out. Regardless, he would be alive if A.) he did not approach the other car or B.) He acted like an adult and didn’t engage in road rage in the first place. I drive quite a bit for work and see unbelievable things everyday. When someone cuts me off, tailgates etc., I get away from them at the safest opportunity and let them cause an accident or vent their rage on someone else.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        A decade or two ago there was a big story in Dallas kind of like this. Guy left his car and came up to another guy who was sitting in his own car, next thing the guy in the car knew he was getting beat to a pulp. Just before he blacked out he was thinking of his kid who was also in the car. How’s that for a bad situation? Fortunately the nut case left it at that and didn’t bother the kid. I would take anything coming out of MDA and similar environs with a large helping of the proverbial salt.

        1. That’s exactly what happened in the first DGU by a Texas CHL holder- after a fender bender, big guy gets out, pulls little guy out through his car window and starts beating him. Little guy, in genuine fear for his life shoots big guy.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          In that case it also happened that the shooter was blocked in, trapped so he could not drive away. The jackass AG prosecuted a charge of, I think, murder, despite all the evidence, and lost like a big dog, except the poor shooter was a lot poorer after his legal bills. Still, I bet “not guilty” sounded awful good.

  8. avatar Pillager1900 says:

    I love the use of “common-sense” solutions, yet none of their proposed solutions use any of that mythical “commonsense”. How about enforcing the laws we already have. Like prosecuting the criminals who try to buy a gun who are forbidden from doing so (violent criminals). How about we add gun safety classes to our schools. Maybe in the health class since guns seem to be a health issue according to our government. If teaching gun safety in our schools saves only one child’s life, it is worth it, right?

    I think they believe that ” common” in the phrase “common-sence” actually stands for “Communist”.

    1. avatar Jay-El says:

      If they want to toughen up gun laws, how about increasing the penalties for using a gun in a crime instead of persecuting lawful gun owners who are exercising Constitutionally protected rights?

      If the former doesn’t work to dissuade criminals, the latter never would. But MDA fans gullibly continue to believe that somehow guns can be legislated out of existence and criminals will somehow stop being criminals.

  9. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    Sure MOMs support the second amendment. They really do. Just like the lion supports the gazelles right to live that it is chasing down on the plains of Africa. 🙂

  10. avatar James Taylor says:

    I believe strongly in and am a proud supporter of the Second Amendment, however I firmly believe honest, American citizens should not have guns of any kind as guns kill millions of children every day.*

    *Sarcasm of course. This is the sort of propaganda, contradicting nonsense they are spreading!

  11. avatar Retired LEO says:

    Why would anyone with kids in the car and an ounce of sense get out at a stop light & approach another car. So they honked or flipped you off dial 911. MDA supports the full and total repeal of all rights except there’s and Bloomberg et al…

  12. avatar James says:

    If one incident is enough to paint with such a broad brush, then we should have all children taken away from all members of Moms Dishonesty Association because they have a member on their board who actually has had her children take from her by social services.

  13. avatar Dave357 says:

    My recollection is that in their early days, one of their goals listed in some online article about them was something like, “A proper interpretation of the 2nd Amendment”. Or maybe it was “reinterpretation”.

    So, don’t say they don’t support the 2nd Amendment – they wholeheartedly support a “properly reinterpreted” version of it.

  14. Pro gun control types will never give up. Look at all the new legislation that they are proposing!

    No mater what they say, just watch what they do. They are just trying to get us to lower our guard for the election and attainment of their long term goal of disarmament.

    Probably figure they are up against the wall now and are trying to get us to back off. Don’t let them lull you! Stay strong, fight the good fight, and go for national concealed carry. If this lulling thing doesn’t work maybe we can win it.

    We need something to stop that. Any ideas?

    Don’t forget to vote this November and that we still have that UN agreement over our heads, they aren’t forgetting.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      We’ll never win as long as there are deluded, gullible people and egomaniacs to take advantage of them. If we win “here” they’ll be back tomorrow from “there.”

  15. avatar Hal says:

    Does anyone else sense RF’s Israeli supermodel discipline slipping?

    1. avatar TheBear says:

      At least this time the random inclusion of the reference and link was not wildly inappropriate and creepy.

      I am going to chalk this one up as a win.

  16. avatar freezercharlie says:

    I’m sure he was just being inquisitive. . .

  17. avatar Davis Thompson says:

    Escalating epidemic of gun violence my tushie. I guess MDA never met a set of FBI crime stats they didn’t ignore. Gun crime down, down, down to 50 year lows. So if they’re lying there, they’re probably lying about supporting the 2A.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      As far as statistics go, the “Moms” would rather make up their own: “74 school shootings”, “16 Kroger shootings”, etc.

  18. avatar Robert Inguaggiato says:

    I asked them about the stats against everything they claim more gun control would fix. They have not responded yet. If they delete it I’ll just repost it it’s on Facebook go give it some likes before they delete it.

  19. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    so shall I presume Richard Vessel doesn’t have any guns in his home and voluntarily has rendered himself and his loved ones defenseless from a senseless brutal attack initiated by a violent gang intent on relieving Richard and his loved ones of any valuables and dignity they may have?

  20. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    Duty To Retreat is immoral, and Stand Your Ground is a bogeyman that gets invoked as a general attack on the right of law-abiding people to defend themselves while conducting lawful activities anywhere they have a right to be.

    1. avatar Retired LEO says:

      Retreat and get in a better posistion behind cover.
      This case instead of firearm Ford would seem the better weapon. More to the story wander what the tox & ba will show. Every time I have had similar happen or heard it’s been drugs, drink, nuts, or just a jackass. The one that exits & approaches is the aggressor 99% of the time for those that think poor man on his way to get the kids 3 weeks in and locally had 2 DUI picking up @ school. Not saying he was
      but would probably be breathing if he had stayed in the car.

    2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      I find it utterly fascinating that:

      (1) Our side argues for “SYG” and against “DTR” on moral principles as well as practical ones.

      (2) Their side “assumes” we all just itch to get into gunfights and mow people down for the slightest social infraction, such as cutting in front in line at that coffee shop or other such nonsense.

      (3) A tremendous amount of time in CCW classes, voluntary training, personal study, blogs and online forum discussions by gun owners and those that claim to carry is devoted to detection and avoidance.

      Once again, there is a disconnect between what they think about:

      (a) What SYG really is

      (b) What POTG believe

      (c) How POTG act

      Stand Your Ground is another red herring. It gains tractions because they can trot out all kinds of unsubstantiated nonsense about “gun owners” and folks, for some reason, believe it.

      The problem with propaganda is that it is only a matter of time before it is seen by people, with their own eyes, that it is a lie. There is not blood in the streets. People are not shooting others in the coffee line.

      No matter the facts in this case, the bottom line is that the shooter did not just shoot some innocent bystander just for being there, or over a spot in line at Starbucks. It was an altercation.

      By using this case as their great example, MDA are showing that they don’t care about the context….any gun use is bad in their eyes because any gun is bad.

      Where are the cases of innocent people killed by guns? Oh yeah. Those don’t fit their narrative, because in those cases, the killers are criminals.

      They support the Second Amendment is big fat lie. They don’t support jack squat that has anything to do with personal, individual liberty. They are Statists and they want one thing: control.

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:

        Every one of the Moms Disarming America is against “SYG” and for “DTR” until they experience a stickup or home invasion personally. After that, not so much.

  21. avatar Buzzlefutt says:

    The gun control fiends DO support the 2nd Amendment, but they also try to redefine the 2nd Amendment. They support it under their terms. They support that it does NOT apply to the individual, they support it does NOT include arms they define ineligible, they support that it offers NO limit to government restriction.
    Everything they claim is deceptive manipulation.

    I once had a Brady fiend tell me, “we only want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.” It almost sounds noble. Someone less careful may think they only mean convicted murderers, violent miscreants, or some other unsavory character. And they would agree, however, they feel it justifies disarming anyone and everyone. Because anyone can be unsavory, anyone can be an unimaginable demon, keeping guns away from criminals requires disarming the non-criminals.

    Also note when they claim, “nobody is coming for your guns.” Then they demand you bring your guns to them. OR they demand you never use them again. Render them inoperable. Destroy their features. And take away their monetary value. Never can you sell them. Never can you gift them. They say they will never lay a hand on them, and neither will you.

    It’s like a deal with the devil.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “Everything they claim is deceptive manipulation.”

      Yes.

      This needs to be repeated loud and often.

      They lie. They manipulate. It’s what they do. It’s what Shannon was HIRED to do.

      Give no quarter on believing what they say. NEVER assume they even intend good behind their comments. They are out to destroy our rights. Never forget that.

  22. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Anyone who gets out of car to confront another driver has no sense. Not saying he got what he deserved. I have been in traffic and gangbanger types jumped out with baseball bats and started smashing the windshield of the car ahead of them( in Chicago). I myself had a lunatic get out of his car start pounding on my windshield because I dared to honk at him. I came within an inch of running him over( on The Lake Shore Drive exit in Chicago-again). Whatever is the real truth anyones guess. Ohyeah +1 Chip.

  23. avatar rlc2 says:

    I don’t spend a lot of time believing MDA’s words, when their actions speak loud and clear.

    Bloomberg may make some inroads flashing his cash, with LIVs, but in the long run, anyone with life experience and real common sense is not buying what they are peddling.

    Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “in the long run, anyone with life experience and real common sense is not buying what they are peddling. “

      Absolutely right.

      Propaganda is lies. It always is.

      The problem the propagandist has is that he cannot hide observable reality. Eventually, the lie is exposed.

      I often wonder if we have data on relative rates of people becoming more “gun friendly” vs becoming more “gun control friendly.” Are we gaining numbers, are they gaining numbers or is it pretty static?

  24. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    I support individual rights, but I believe that we desperately need a Reasonable and Sensible Nazi Dictatorship which abrogates everyone’s’ rights so people will have Freedom from Fear and Freedom; for the children.

  25. avatar Paco says:

    Enough of this Zionist propaganda site disguised as a 2 nd Amendment site. Have fun folks.

    1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      An antisemite ragequit. Yawn.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email