Yes, Moms Demand Action member Leslie Ervin’s son is a paranoid schizophrenic. Yes, he legally bought firearms when he turned 18. Yes, she tried to stop him, but was told by the Austin police that they had no cause to do so. And yes, he later killed his father, believing he was a CIA-planted impostor. But contrary to the convenient A+B+C=D impression that she presented for a Texas Senate committee, guns had nothing whatsoever to do with the crime. Her son killed his father with a pipe wrench and a knife. It must be liberating to live without any perceptible sense of shame.   [h/t JD]

53 Responses to Moms Demand Action False Narrative of the Day: Leslie Ervin’s Texas Senate Testimony

      • “She will go far in either the Nazi or the Communist Party.”

        Why you don’t think she’s evil enough to be a democrat?

    • I had the same exact reaction. There’s absolutely nothing you can do with stupid that strong.

      • Oh, com on, there has to be SOMETHING! Can we bottle it and ship it to Iran? Nah, they’ve hit the limit on stupid a long time ago. Maybe it could be loaded into bombs! That’d be pretty scary.

  1. Wait, that’s good news for her–if Dad was killed with a knife and/or a bludgeon, he’s not really dead. Only “gun deaths” are really dead, right?

    • Yes, I believe that is correct, and apparently they’re even deader if the gun had been carried openly by an open carrier carrying openly.

      • She is looking past her son’s death and sees a brighter future under the wonders of National Socialism.

      • “I wonder where the son’s instability came from?”

        Good observation.

        Is there such a thing as ‘functional schizophrenic?

  2. My grandfather was born in 1903. He lived through World War I, the Great Depression and Word War II. Though he only went through the 8th grade he knew a lot. He explained this type of situation very simply to me. “If you are going to tell a lie, tell a big one, people might just believe it.”

  3. It must be liberating to live without any perceptible sense of shame. Most Nazi and Communist advocates have no sense of shame as it is worth the final goal of living in the wonders of a Statist utopia.

    • Do we know that the son ever actually bought firearms? That part of the story certainly sounded odd. As did his choice of weapons to attack his father, if such an arsenal was available to him.

      ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

  4. OK so what does her husband’s death have to do with firearm’s? Why is she a part of mom’s? Why is she even allowed to testify against gun rights? She and moms are all frauds.

    • Perhaps she’s attempting to convince the TX Senate that her son was influenced to kill her husband purely by the act of buying a gun. Because, you know, inanimate objects can possess humans.

    • @Frank–“OK so what does her husband’s death have to do with firearm’s?”

      It should have been a defensive gun use is what I think this lady is trying to wrap her twisted head around. The unwinding process takes quite a bit longer when the respondent is from a Yuppie Lifestyle(statist, materialist morals, and entitlement) and has never had personal responsibility, like most MDA cultists. The gravity of the situation is that she sacrificed her husband and her younger son, because she was in denial that her son was an evil monster, who the family needed to own a gun for protection from. The optics of how they are perceived by others meant more to this women than the life of her loved ones, because like most liberals facts are as foreign to them as self-defense and the Constitution.
      This lady is the same as the ghetto baby mamas(Not mothers) who say their son’s were just misunderstood, because they can’t except that their son’s are the evil we carry guns for.

  5. I’ve now read several different articles about “Lex” Ervin. The articles were released at various stages of the arrest and trial. Some things intrigued me:
    — None mention any purchase of firearms, or any involvement of firearms at all.
    — The son was known to have autism.
    — Despite the mother’s testimony in the video above that she needed an “incident” to get a court order, one article notes that the son had previously attempted to kill Mher by stabbing.
    — She was overjoyed and relieved that he won his insanity defense instead of imprisonment. That was just six months before her testimony above.

    ===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle

    • So call me crazy but I would not doubt if she was the one who convinced her psychotic son that his father was a CIA operative.

      As was previously discussed, she was “chipper and bubbly” during her testimony, she is clearly bananas, and her son tried to murder her. I’d be willing to bet that after the incident she began hinting to her son that it was his father that was the imposter and she was actually his real mom-knowing full well what would eventually happen to her husband.

      Hence her gratification of his successful insanity plea. She is happy that anything he says about how or why he believed his dad was a CIA imposter will be ignored and blamed on his mental illness. She just might be crazy enough to have used her son as a murder weapon to save her own life and rid herself of her husband and psychotic son.

      She knew about the violent crazy tendencies of her son and exploited them for her benefit. Oh and Gravity is a myth, just like the bible, and the holocaust.

  6. I remember years ago the then chief of DPD being interviewed after a murder with a knife stating that this just proves we need more gun control. Did I just hear what I thought I heard? Yes, that is what he said—gun control for a knife murder. Any excuse to push the agenda…..

  7. You know, if he really was that nuts, any competent shrink could have diagnosed it, and found that he was in need of commitment. That “we need an incident” biz was either just more BS on her part, or was BS on the part of some lazy cops who didn’t want to fool with the situation. She should have called a shrink, not the Austin PD.

  8. Lying by omission, nice…

    I can’t wait for OC to pass, then the dishonoring of her late husband’s death and memory will have been all in vain.

    The hate keeps me warm.

    • Unfortunately, no. Public testimony is voluntary for the public and not taken under oath. It is actually a misnomer, it is referred to as testimony, but it is actually public comments.

      Usually, the only ones who are required to be there are representatives from agencies as directed, to provide testimony (not sworn, but misleading the commitee has its different consequences) ON the bill. That is basically how it would impact the agency. What I find blantantly improper, is that state agencies, can only provide comments on, but local agencies, such as APD or HPD can provide comments for or against. I find it incredibly improper for any agency I support through taxes to take a position on legislation.

      Back to the topic. On occasion members of the public or organizations are invited to provide “testimony”, and though it’s added to public record, it’s not testimony with legal standing. This is the kind of stuff that needs to be sent out to the twittersphere to shame the offender. Particularly when hearings are happening. MDA does this frequently, posting comments about pro-gun testifiers.

  9. Are you guys trying to tell me that some lying beyotch lied? And got caught lying?

    Maybe she can join up with Sabrina Erdely for a creative retelling of her bullsh1t. Look how well it worked out for Jackie from the University of Virginia.

  10. Hang on – she spoke to the Senate in an official capacity? Isn’t this some sort of perjury?

    • “Isn’t this some sort of perjury?”

      At the very least falsely attempting to influence the legislative process.

      • At the very least falsely attempting to influence the legislative process.

        Or as it’s more commonly known, “politics.”

    • Be generous, the woman has already been sentenced to a lifetime of unbelievable stupidity, what else could we do to her?

  11. That is the problem with the Bloomberg financed socialist groups, Moms demand action, and Everytown for gun safety, integrity is not their strong suit. They wil lie, conive, twist or omit any part if the truth to suit their needs. It is why they are viewed as uncredible fringe groups . They are pest at best, you know not to take their whining seriously because most of their complaints are fabricated anyway.

  12. Wow. She truly embodies the phrase, “Never let a tragedy go to waste.”

    What is even worse is that most of the people around her both MDA and not probably knew the true story and what she was doing. Why do I get the feeling there are doll parts strewn all over her house?

  13. Well, if my “update” from the Lt Gov is correct, her deceit went for naught, and permitted OC will soon be the law in Texas. Still not all that excited about it myself–except a win is always better than a loss, and it is especially better when the “moms” stick their noses in and get brought up short.

  14. The guy should have been on the NICS as confirmed paranoid schizophrenic. Since he wasn’t, that was likely her fault.

  15. Im wondering if there is any way to have this story seen nationally?? Not to promote MOMs as most already know they are paid shills of Bloomies, Most people thankfully have the sense to pay no attention to them. But to show how they can out right be deceitful. Well hell, I say it out right liars as in this womens case.

    • Do you think, somehow, that she is more of a liar than the guy who jumped right on Sandy Hook as justification to slam through a Universal Background Check, even though the guns used were stolen from the killer’s mother after he murdered her? ie, UBC would have accomplished exactly nothing in that case? What was that guy’s name again? Oh, yeah, some turd called Barack Obama, like anybody would believe that’s a real name.

  16. True to the progressive mantras of…. Never let a tragedy go to waste. Never let the truth get in the way of your message.

  17. It doesn’t stop with the clip in the video:

    “… if they were not there to subdue him, before my husband died, who knows what would he would have done with that arsenal of guns. I want gun access to be stopped. And, I think there needs to be changes made so that a lot of innocent lives can be saved.”

    Talk about doubling down on the deception.

    Also, I’m willing to bet that his “arsenal” was maybe 3 weapons. Think about it: If he had, say, 19 firearms, she would have said he was able to amass an arsenal of 19 guns — 19 guns!

    Like her Bloombergian benefactors/scriptwriters, Leslie Ervin is against guns, period, and therefore in favor of anything that hampers legal access to them. She also believes so deeply in her crusade that she is willing to sidestep moral constraints against things like lying in furtherance of her goals.

    This mindset is deranged and makes about as much sense as instituting a ban on wine because of winos lying in the gutters.

  18. I have to assume the legal authorities understood the death had nothing to do with firearms and this woman was attempting to promote her own agenda. Not ALL people who get paranoid Schizophrenia become violent and kill, in fact very few.

  19. Where does an 18 year old autistic paranoid schizophrenic get the $$$ to amass an arsenal of weapons? I’m jealous.

Leave a Reply

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