Jennifer Fiore (courtesy twitter.com)

“America is a first world country that has the gun violence problem of the third world. To end the epidemic of gun violence, we have to put the gun lobby in check, and we can’t do that without corporate partners. Money talks, and when we divest from companies that oppose our core values we send a powerful message. That message is starting to get through. Our momentum will reach the tipping point soon and we’ll see meaningful, lasting change.” – Jennifer Fiore, co-founder and executive director of Campaign to Unload in You’re Probably Spending Money on the Gun Industry. This Woman Wants to Help You Stop. [via magazine.good.is]

110 Responses to Quote of the Day: And What Change Might That Be? Edition

    • When money is worthless and technology obsolete and the grocery store shelves are empty and mealy mouth , over educated whiners are begging for a morsel of food , Guns , ammo , seeds and basic common skills will be invaluable and these people will trade their children for whatever they require . SAD

    • “America is a first world country that has the gun violence problem of the third world.”

      You can’t have a first world society with a third world population.

  1. If you don’t want third world gun violence problems, clean up your third world neighborhoods. We all know where the vast majority of the shootings occur, but political correctness prevents any meaningful solutions.

    • Good luck. One half of the Dem domestic platform is gun control and all the rest of it is additional welfare spending. The latter is paying people to fail, ensuring dependence on government economically and the former ensures dependence on government for any form of security.

      They want slaves, not constituents.

      • The problem is that the Republican platform is 50% trying to legislate the Bible and 50% giving handouts to old geezers who provide no benefit to society. Even if people are against gun control and welfare, they often end up voting Democrat because of the religious retardation in the Republican party.

        • Thanks for not using a single fact. Marriage, birth control, what kind of clothing you can wear, what kind of media you can enjoy – these are all things that Republicans want to control using a 2,000 year old book of fairy tales as their justification. Then there’s the never ending love of Social Security (which is HILARIOUS considering that Republicans like to lie and say that they’re against wealth redistribution and for small government). But I’m sure since today is Sunday, you don’t have time to actually make a fact based argument – you’re too busy ramming that cross-shaped dildo up your rectum and shouting “OH JEEBUS!” to be able to form a coherent thought.

        • Once again, I’d like to thank you for sharing your ignorance. But if you truly seek enlightenment I’ll give it a try.

          Gay marriage. The vast majority of Republicans don’t care with whom you cohabitate. However, most Republicans believe that you shouldn’t be coerced by the government to violate your conscience, regardless of what religious foundation your conscience is based on.

          Birth control. You’re really drinking the cool-aid here. No Republican wants to ban birth control, no matter how much Democrats want you to think so. Abortion is another issue, but that’s not a Christian – non-Christian issue, it’s an issue of science. Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in the majority decision of Roe v. Wade that if the ‘humanity of the fetus could be established it would void their decision’. Since then we’ve learned that every human gene you will carry until death is established at the point of conception. That 18 days after conception the human fetus’ heart starts pumping his or her own blood, often not even the same blood type as the mother. The Planned Parenthood videos have made it impossible to ignore the fact that these fetuses have fully formed intact organs to be harvested. Everything we’ve learned in the last 4 decades has pointed to the humanity of the fetus. If you don’t believe that the weakest of mankind deserve the protection of the government then there really is no point in government at all. The people are there to serve their elites, not the other way around.

          Social security. The Democrats were crafty bastards when they came up with this one. Since SS is a pay as you go plan, it’s nearly impossible to get rid of. The government has taken the people’s money from them, made promises to take care of them in their old age, and then squandered the money. I don’t know where you got the idea that ‘old geezers’ provide no benefit to society, but even if that were true we are not animals. We don’t rob people of their money and then let them starve. However, it is Republicans that want to push back the age of retirement and fix the system so that it’s solvent and the Democrats that scream bloody murder about the Republicans pushing grandma off the cliff.

        • Momma always said life is like a box of stupid .
          Reality is Pubic , the Repubs have mostly abandoned the Bible and the majority of the old Republican guard want big government too . Didn’t you see what just happened with Planned Abortion Hood . We have both major parties lobbying for a culture of death .

        • @Publius — ** The problem is that the DemoKKKratik platform is 50% trying to legislate fro the imagination and 50% giving handouts to the old geezers that got them elected who provide no benefit to society. Since people are against gun control, people end up voting Republican because of the Statist retardation of the DemoKKKratik party.

          Fixed that for you, Junior.

        • @Publius — Thank you for further exposing your support for antisemitism, just like the last time I factually corrected you under another article. Licensing your marriage, sex, control of your health care, what media you have access to, your private information, your guns, your money – these are all things that the DemoKKKrats want to control using their wholly unearned sense of moral and intellectual superiority as their justification. Then there’s the never ending love of Social Security (which is HILARIOUS considering that DemoKKKrats like to lie and say they want to keep social safety net programs solvent). But, I’m sure that since you’re still breathing, you don’t have time to actually make a fact-based argument — you’re too busy ramming Uncle Sam’s dildo up your rectum and shouting, “OH POL POT!” to be able to form a coherent thought.

        • Gay marriage. The vast majority of Republicans don’t care with whom you cohabitate. However, most Republicans believe that you shouldn’t be coerced by the government to violate your conscience, regardless of what religious foundation your conscience is based on.
          Using your office of government to enforce religious beliefs upon the taxpayers is tyranny, pure and simple. Do all the mental gymnastics you want, but the fact remains. It may be tyranny you support, but it is tyranny nonetheless. If you can’t perform your duty to provide taxpayer-paid services to the citzens as a government official due to religious beliefs, then perhaps you should step aside?

        • Grindstone, you may be atheist prick, but I actually agree with you on that. The only issue on that is that the woman you’re referring to doesn’t have an issue with issuing the licenses to gays, she doesn’t want her name on the license. When the supreme court issued their edict the governor of KY issued an executive order to make new licenses that removed the words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ and replaced them with ‘party 1’ and ‘party 2’. However, he has been unwilling to remove the county clerk’s name from the licenses. I don’t see that she should resign due to the governor’s unwillingness to facilitate her religious beliefs.

          Beyond that, I don’t think that activists should be able to use the courts to punish (persecute) Christians who don’t want to participate in gay weddings. Also, in the arguments in front of SCOTUS, one of Obama’s lawyers was specifically asked if their decision could lead to churches losing their tax exempt status, which he agreed that that could happen. I don’t care who you sleep with, but your alternative lifestyle doesn’t give you the right to strip others of their rights.

        • Grindstone
          I surmise you are referring to Ms. Davis in KY.
          I originally had the same ball jerk reaction as you but after more deliberation I have made this conclusion .
          1st , may I assume she holds elected office ? If so , she won her position by vote of her constituents before the supreme court ruling which changed her duties to include something she has adverse belief in . This was obviously not a topic of her election upon her campaign and she could not know it would become a criteria of her position later so it does not seem fair to force her to vacate her position that her fellow citizens elected her for , nor her salary and benefits that go with this elected office .
          I am under the impression that in these cases , the state should call for an immediate special election where she could step aside honorably , choosing not to seek an office that she can perform the duties required . It seems the problem lies in bureaucracy once again .
          I think people would have greater empathy for her if she didn’t look like a Jehovah Witness , Pentecostal , Church of Christ , holy roller . Not that there is anything wrong with any of these folks , it’s just a lot of secularist modern make you feel good church types today have disdain for those type Christians and of coarse , your anti God Christian haters , would be happy to burn anyone who looks like Ms. Davis at the stake .

    • Hey Sweet Pea,

      Here’s your epidemic that’s thirty times larger:

      http://www.propublica.org/article/how-many-die-from-medical-mistakes-in-us-hospitals

      Hospital Deaths: Now comes a study in the issue of the Journal of Patient Safety that says the numbers may be much higher — between 210,000 and 440,000 patients each year who go to the hospital for care suffer some type of preventable harm that contributes to their death, the study says.

      That would make medical errors the third-leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease, which is the first, and cancer, which is second.

      • So put your money where your mouth is, don’t go to the doctor or hospital if you or your child/spouse/parent is sick. After all hospitals are sooooo dangerous! Don’t make your point when you are healthy, do it when you find you have a cancer, or a pneumonia.

        I hate this argument because it chooses to ignore everything good that comes from the medical establishment to make the point that medical errors kill people, well, nobody is perfect and most of those doctors and nurses that you point the finger at save more lives than they kill. In addition, having now worked in the medical fields for over a decade, I can assure you, if we got rid of lawyers, politicians, hospital administrators and insurance companies, (you know, those people who feel that medicine is a business?) the overall medical error rate and morbidity/mortality rates would plummet like a meteor coming for the dinosaurs.

        Like in every situation, people tend to focus on the negatives, not the positives, because the negatives stick out in their mind as something that should not have happened (and we actually agree on that), but please take a moment to thank those who try to help, not only criticize them when they fail.

        Now in terms of doctors who are pushing for gun control, they suck, and just like a mass shooter doesn’t represent gun owners, they don’t represent the medical community as a whole. So stop painting us with the same brush!

        • Seems to me the exact same argument is used for guns. The lives that are saved are ignored. Even though by most estimates there are far more lives saved than lost by the use of guns. The fact that the Gun Grabbers choose to focus on the tiny percent of people that are killed with guns and ignore all other causes of death just points to the fact that their positions are based more on a political agenda than any real concern for human lives.

    • This part of the conversation should not be here, as it has nothing to do with guns. Plus everyone is acting like the other commenters are ass-hats while proving they are personally most qualified in displaying that they are all equally ignorant.

  2. There is no epidemic. If there is a gun violence epidemic, then what do you call the hundreds of thousands that die from car accidents? Yeah… worn out, tired argument and all that.

    Go ahead. Boycott the places that won’t bend to your antigun agenda. You think those places wouldnt thrive just off of the millions of gun owners and the fence sitters that don’t care? That’s laughable if you think that’s going to work.

    • Why can’t ‘ we the people ‘ who honor the second amendment with our support for NRA and other similar organizations , begin our own list of anti second amendment companies and groups and boycott them with OUR dollars and support ? I believe we are the stronger ones financially and could wreck the most havoc if we desired to and knew who to target .

      • If you boycotted all anti-2nd amendment companies, you’d have to live in a cabin and take up subsistence farming. You can’t use the internet, go to a store, or hardly even step outdoors without somehow benefiting a company that has contributed to the anti-gun crusade.

        • We could pick and choose , we’re smart . For instance , I don’t own a cell phone so why would I need to support their anti gun prop . I actually do grow about 60 % of my own food and supply about 50 % of my own grains and 100 % of my own meat so screw a lot of the food suppliers and meat di_ks . I don’t drink colas and I don’t eat fast foods , I don’t drink beer or alcoholic drinks , I don’t smoke tobacco and the only television I consume anymore is what I record . These are all things most people could do and will have their own do not list that they could boycott from . I would have trouble boycotting fuel refineries , manufactures of smokeless powders , brass cases and quality bullets and rim fire ammo and primers . I make my own arrows and have made more than a few long bows over the years . We could all unplug ourselves a little from captivity and empower ourselves more .

  3. A cursory search brings up the following info:

    Works at a DC PR firm.

    Formerly associated with MDAG (Shannon Watts)

    Recognized by the UN as a (somehow significant) driver of social change (for the better I presume).

    So, she seems to be someone who has a career pushing PR campaigns. My personal take on this whole new “campaign” would be that it’s just another project she has taken up, you know; because that’s what she does to earn a living.

    Piffle.

    Just wanted the rest of you to know where she might be coming from.

    More of the same old same old.

  4. Let see, over reaching government with corrupt officials. Military style police force. Large debt. Rampant drug problem. Destroyed middle class. Looks like we are third world so we better keep out tools of self defense.

  5. 97% of the USA is a first world country. 3% of the counties in America are 3rd world enclaves where 70% of our murders take place. These counties are wholly owned and run by the Democratic party which runs them like corrupt little tin pot dictators. Good luck convincing the 97% of America that it’s them that have it backwards.

  6. Oh, come on – Some PR hired gun wants you to make investment decisions for non-ecpnomic reasons? How gullible do you have to be to fall for that scam? It’s more public than the “secret stock tips” pump-and-dump e-mails, but it’s the same principle at work.

  7. Here was are, back at the #lookatthisbaby.

    Another hyper emotional rant from a Bloomberg funded “mom” that just so happens to be part of the opposite-side lobbying group of what she opposes.

    Is this the new Shannon Watts? Maybe with the new Star Wars soon to be released, the Anti-2nd crowd is feeling a little padawan’ish and this is the newest student of the FORCEd Disarmament of America?

    Ohhh, and she wrote a book………………..that no one has ever heard of.

  8. Selling your stock in an industry that is booming? I don’t know much about the stock market but isn’t that a lose lose? If they sell their stock doesn’t that mean someone else is going to buy it? Doesn’t that mean this is a non-story?

    • “I don’t know much about the stock market but isn’t that a lose lose? If they sell their stock doesn’t that mean someone else is going to buy it?”

      If a big chunk of gun stocks are suddenly dumped on the market, the share price will take a dive. The sellers could end up eating a loss.

      The dumped stock will be a bargain for buyers, so it’s conceivable POTG who buy it will do very well in the long run.

      Personally, I’ll be happy if POTG were the majority shareholders in gun companies.

      My .02 and worth every penny…

  9. I say again, shouldn’t she be baking a pie or doing something else useful for the world?

    But nooooooo, she’s got to be coming up with yet another idiotic organization to take guns from the law abiding in order to stop the criminal or mentally disturbed from killing us.???? How exactly will that work?

    Just strictly enforce the laws already on the books, stop with the plea bargins where the perp is let go and concentrate the policing efforts where the shootings occur.

    Leave the rest of us alone, we’re not hurting anyone.

    • Just strictly enforce the laws already on the books

      There are too fucking many laws already on the books, a point which seems lost on the NRA (which is responsible for, and proud of, many of them), whose bumper-sticker rhetoric you appear to be quoting here.

  10. This tactic is something I am in complete agreement with and more PotG should as well.

    Vote with your wallet. Give money to good companies that share your values and avoid those that don’t where possible/feasible.

    I still refuse to do business with Spike’s after they announced a preemptive, “Presidential price increase” anticipating Obama being elected.

  11. Given that her “financial advice” consists of selling stock in profitable companies… I suggest she go back to a slightly less mentally taxing profession. Like making me a sandwich.

  12. And she still does not mention, or even hint at, just what those “lasting, meaningful changes” might be. I can think of a few that might actually be effective, but I wouldn’t even mention them *here*, they are so vile. The best I have seen is the “stop and frisk” campaign in NYC, clearly unconstitutional on its face, but it takes 10 years to get that ruling, during which time crime dropped dramatically. See? All you need is to approve a police state and give up all your rights and freedoms, then your government will tell you that the crime problem has been solved. Whether it is true is a different question, even then.

  13. Stock Leftist phrases: tipping point, meaningful lasting change, epidemic of gun violence, gun lobby, gun violence, these tell you that her answer for every perceived issue will be straight out of the standard Democrat playbook. She is nothing but a younger, nicer looking version of Hillery Clinton.

  14. So ol’ Jenny doesn’t understand how markets or securities work.

    Well that means some others don’t either so here you go: You know what happens when someone sells their stock in Freedom Group? Someone else buys it. When that someone else buys it they do so with the expectation that FG will make a profit from their actual business and return a dividend to the owner of the stock. Divesting this fund or that fund of ownership of FG stock doesn’t stop the stock being owned, the mission of the company to make a profit for their investors or their investors keen interest in letting those things happen. It’s a lot easier for FG to deal with a couple holders of enormous amounts of stock than it is to deal with thousands of smaller investors and just because Fund X divests itself doesn’t mean Fund Y will. What you’re asking fund managers to do when you make politically motivated decisions about what stocks should or should not be part of the portfolio under management is to neuter your fund manager and make it massively more likely that your fund will not perform as you thought it might, losing yourself and others huge amounts of money.

    • And if what you want to do is throw your own money in the crapper for altruistic purposes (listen up, Mikey) you should direct such fund managers to buy more and more of FG, rather than sell, until you achieve a controlling interest, then enforce corporate actions which will bankrupt the company. Then celebrate as you learn that you have lost every nickel you had.

    • Nice writeup, but for two things.

      Freedom Group isn’t publically traded; their IPO was withdrawn and never happened. But there are several publically traded firearms and ammo makers you can buy.

      The other thing is, heavy selling by major investors can depress the stock price, and that can have two effects. First, it can impact the savings of employees who have stock in the company. Second, it can make it harder for the company to take out loans, or force a technical default of terms on existing ones, as stock price is often a condition of loan terms. But it would take a big, sustained selloff to do a lot of damage in either case.

      More damaging, actually, would be pushing for investors to not buy their corporate bonds, eg stop loaning them money. But that’s an area of the market most people know much less about, even though it’s bigger than the stock part. And I’d guess trying to explain this to her target audience wouldn’t go well…

      • Bondholders are the real owners of a company, if the company has sold paper.

        If we look at the three major trading markets (futures, stocks and bonds), the bond market is the dog’s body and head. The stock market is the dog’s tail. And the futures market is the hairs in the dog’s nose.

        The nose might interest the dog to turn left or right, but in the end, the body is what predicts where the body will go. The tail is just along for the ride, and the tail wags when the body is happy.

        • If you followed the bailouts of GM and Chrysler, you may have noticed it was the bondholders who were royally screwed, when according to everything I learned in school, stockholders should have received absolute zero until every bondholder was paid in full. Something has changed! And then, the stockholders received billions of taxpayer dollars, several times the market cap of the company (I understand we lost 25 billion on GM, market cap at the time was 6 billion.)

  15. Huh?
    I thought were were New World, as in Old World, New World, Third World. Wouldn’t that make us Second World and not First World?

    • No FedUp. You could have googled this and not seemed willfully ignorant:

      First world is US/NATO aligned. Countries like Australia, Japan, England, etc… Everyone that was with us after world war 2.
      Second world is the former Soviet Union, China, and Warsaw Pact aligned. Everyone that was directly against us after world war 2.
      Third world is unaligned which is places like all of africa, south america, India, malaysia, indonesia, etc… Places we could have given only one less damn about.

      New world is western hemisphere. Old world is everywhere except the western hemisphere.

      • I think there are probably only 2 hemispheres, like, by definition? Which would mean that other than the Western hemisphere, everyone else would be in the Eastern hemisphere, other than the Northern hemisphere, everybody else would be the Southern hemisphere, etc. Just sayin’. But since I didn’t Google that, I guess I’m willfully ignorant or something.

      • Odd. When I was in college, “First World”, “Third World”, etc was based essentially on economic condition. First world was the industrialized, economically stable countries, wherever located, but for some reason located primarily in North America and Europe. You didn’t hear much about “Second World”, but that was countries that were somewhat industrialized and economically stable–European countries like Spain and Portugal. Third world was the pretty much non-industrialized countries that still managed to support some kind of economy. Below that were the “international basket cases,” countries in hopeless economic and political chaos, like (at the time) Bangladesh or (more recently) Somalia.

        • Hey Fedup , you are correct sir , but we gun owners and gun right advocates and second amendment defenders and our 300 plus million firearms and stock piles of trillions or rounds of ammo are the thorn in the side of the
          NEW WORLD ORDER folks . There has been a concerted effort for over a hundred years to even the resources of the worlds general populace ( the cows ) into a WORLD ORDER , by the elite of wealth and power brokers
          ( the shepherds ) and darn that old constitution and bill of rights of the USA gets in their way every time .

  16. Well that is a laughably stupid strategy. The month of August 2015 saw the highest number of firearms sales ever (if internet sources are to be believed). Show me another consumer product that moves as fast or in equivalent quantity as firearms. If there is on thing us dirty capitalists are good at, it’s math.

  17. Gun haters-Hear here:

    Dump your gun stocks
    They WILL be picked up
    By someone else.

    So you accomplish………….
    What? ……,exactly.

    • What would be accomplished, if she could pull it off, would be to drive down the price of the stock. Then someone else would pick it up for a lower. Eventually the stock value would return to where it should be. Don’t think she has nearly enough power to do that though. But, if she did, it would not really affect the companies that much. Other than to create a temporary fire sale on the stocks. Pretty obvious that her expertise is not in economics.

  18. All good to say but your forgetting one thing. This is America and most gun owners collect guns, it’s thier hobby! They don’t think about killing people. Now, it’s not the anti gun lobbies hobby so they want to control the gun lovers hobby! It’s not the guns, it’s not the hobby, if you want to fix something then stop the violence on TV! Our children are brain washed by violence. They have become immune. They see heads being cut off, rape murders of all kinds! PG13 lol. When someone want to kill they will kill. Don’t decide on what guns we can have as a hobby because your frustrated with all the killing. Stop the problem where it is. People are killed with knives to! Thousands are stabbed every day. Let’s limit the knives in the kitchen to 6″, this was we can stop the stabbing! Oh! Don’t want to give up your 6″ kitchen knives? Why, can you be trusted? Stupid right? We feel the same way. One last thing, if there were a button to push and every gun would disappear, every gun lover would push it but if there is going to be one left then we will push the button when they all disappear until then I am an American, guns are my hobby and my right to protect my family. Don’t tell me what guns I can collect please. It’s my hobby!

  19. Their current campaign focuses on Cerberus Capital Management because of its holdings in Bushmaster and Freedom Group, but they’re a private equity firm. If I as a little guy wanted to follow their diktat, I could only take action involving the very few publicly traded civilian firearms stocks: OLN, SWHC, and RGR. I don’t see any of those on the Campaign’s target list. So how can I personally Do Something beyond writing an email?

    • Look up the one with the lowest market cap and buy it, lock, stock, and barrel, then close it down. That company is now gone, your billions are gone, and you can pat yourself on the back while another company picks up the business, buying your company’s assets at fire-sale prices to increase their production. Good luck, best wishes and all that, sucker!

  20. Violence is only at third world levels in underdeveloped portions of urban areas. Areas as underdeveloped and poor as third world countries, with as few job opportunities. Jeez, who runs these hell holes?

    • P.S.: Here’s the current rankings based on U.S. Census and FBI data.

      Top 10 poorest cities (2015)

      1. Detroit, Michigan – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1961
      2. Milwaukee, Wisconsin – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1908
      3. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1952
      4. Memphis, Tennessee – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1915
      5. Tuscon, Arizona – Almost 50/50 between (D) and (R) since 1871
      6. Baltimore, Maryland – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1967
      7. Fresno, California – Almost 50/50 between (D) and (R) since 1885
      8. El Paso, Texas – Has never had a Republican mayor
      9. Indianapolis, Indiana – Almost 50/50 between (D) and (R) since 1854
      10. Boston, Massachusetts – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1930

      Top 10 most violent cities (2015)

      1. Detriot, MI. 2,137 violent crimes per 100K – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1961
      2. St. Louis, MI. 1,857 violent crimes per 100K – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1949
      3. Oakland, CA. 1,681 violent crimes per 100K – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1977
      4. Memphis, TN. 1,583 violent crimes per 100K – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1915
      5. Birmingham, AL. 1,481 violent crimes per 100K – Run by DemoKKKrats since 1975
      6. Atlanta, GA. 1,433 violent crimes per 100K. Run by DemoKKKrats since 1937
      7. Batimore, MD. 1,417 violent crimes per 100K. Run by DemoKKKrats since 1967
      8. Stockton, CA. 1,408 violent crimes per 100K. Has never had a Republican mayor
      9. Cleveland, OH. 1,363 violent crimes per 100K. Run by DemoKKKrats since 1989
      10. Buffalo, NY. 1,238 violent crimes per 100K. Run by DemoKKKrats since 1966

        • Thanks. I love placing the blame precisely where it belongs, which is always the opposite of where Statists like to say it belongs. They manage to do it by doing the exact opposite of what actually works. In their own little bizzaro world, their policies don’t work simply because they haven’t applied them strictly enough for long enough. So, really, no amount of failure will ever justify trying anything else, which is why nothing has been tried in at least the last 60+ years.

          It would almost be comical if they weren’t also deliberately dragging the rest of us down with them.

  21. Oh, she wanted to equate gun ownership with levels of gun violence that approach third world stats?

    OK, sweetie, you wanted to go there, so let’s go there.

    Which are the states in the US with the lowest levels of gun violence? The states with the highest white populations. Wyoming, Vermont, the Dakotas, etc. Curiously, they’re also the states with some of the highest levels of gun ownership. Wyoming is positively awash in guns, with almost no gun violence. And we’re vastly whiter than most dazzling urban areas of the US. Vermont, despite electing doddering socialists to the US Senate, has a very low level of gun violence, despite being the only state that allowed you to conceal carry without a permit for decades and decades.

    If you’d like to see how a country with high levels of violence with strict(er) gun control laws works, look at Sweden. They now have one of the highest rates of violent rape in all of western Europe, over twice the rate of rape of the US, and most of those rapes are committed by men of a distinctly non-white skin tone who bang their heads on carpets five times a day.

    If you don’t want third world levels of violence, then don’t import people from the third world to a first world country. Seems pretty simple to me.

    • Allow me to supplement this with more precise data. Below are the murder rates committed with guns, side-by-side with reported gun ownership rates.

      Alaska: 12 total for 1.63 per 100K || Ownership rate: 61.7%
      Arizona: 184 total for 2.78 per 100K || Ownership rate: 32.3%
      Arkansas: 110 total for 3.72 per 100K || Ownership rate: 57.9%
      California: 1,224 total for 3.19 per 100K || Ownership rate: 20.1%
      Colorado: 88 total for 1.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 34.3%
      Connecticut: 60 total for 1.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 16.6%
      Delaware: 33 total for 3.56 per 100K || Ownership rate: 5.2%
      D.C.: 81 total for 12.53 per 100K || Ownership rate: 25.9%
      Georgia: 411 total for 4.11 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.6%
      Hawaii: 6 total for 0.43 per 100K || Ownership rate: 45.1%
      Idaho: 15 total for 0.93 per 100K || Ownership rate: 56.9%
      Illinois: 364 total for 2.83 per 100K || Ownership rate: 26.2%
      Indiana: 238 total for 3.62 per 100K || Ownership rate: 33.8%
      Iowa: 18 total for 0.58 per 100K || Ownership rate: 33.8%
      Kansas: 78 total for 2.7 per 100K || Ownership rate: 32.2%
      Kentucky: 111 total for 2.53 per 100K || Ownership rate: 42.4%
      Louisiana: 356 total for 7.70 per 100K || Ownership rate: 44.5%
      Maine: 12 total for 0.9 per 100K || Ownership rate: 22.6%
      Maryland: 268 total for 4.52 per 100K || Ownership rate: 20.7%
      Massachusetts: 78 total for 1.17 per 100K || Ownership rate: 22.6%
      Michigan: 440 total for 4.44 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.8%
      Minnesota: 60 total for 1.11 per 100K || Ownership rate: 36.7%
      Mississippi: 110 total for 3.68 per 100K || Ownership rate: 42.8%
      Missouri: 273 total for 4.52 per 100K || Ownership rate: 27.1%
      Montana: 9 total for 0.89 per 100K || Ownership rate: 52.3%
      Nebraska: 39 total for 2.09 per 100K || Ownership rate: 19.8%
      Nevada: 87 total for 3.12 per 100K || Ownership rate: 37.5%
      New Hampshire: 5 total for 0.38 100K || Ownership rate: 14.4%
      New Jersey: 291 total for 3.27 per 100K || Ownership rate: 11.3%
      New Mexico: 59 total for 2.83 per 100K || Ownership rate: 49.9%
      New York: 362 total for 1.84 per 100K || Ownership rate: 10.3%
      North Carolina: 315 total for 3.2 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.7%
      North Dakota: 4 total for 0.55 per 100K || Ownership rate: 47.9%
      Ohio: 309 total for 2.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 19.6%
      Oklahoma: 127 total for 3.3 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.2%
      Oregon: 43 total for 1.09 per 100K || Ownership rate: 26.6%
      Pennsylvania: 440 total for 3.44 100K || Ownership rate: 27.1%
      Rhode Island: 18 total for 1.71 per 100K || Ownership rate: 14.4%
      South Carolina: 224 total for 4.69 per 100K || Ownership rate: 44.4%
      South Dakota: 3 total for 0.36 per 100K || Ownership rate: 35.0%
      Tennessee: 223 total for 3.43 per 100K || Ownership rate: 39.4%
      Texas: 760 total for 2.87 per 100K || Ownership rate: 35.7%
      Utah: 31 total for 1.07 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.9%
      Vermont: 5 total for 0.8 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.8%
      Virginia: 225 total for 2.72 per 100K || Ownership rate: 29.3%
      Washington: 86 total for 1.23 per 100K || Ownership rate: 27.7%
      West Virginia: 30 total for 1.62 per 100K || Ownership rate: 54.2%
      Wisconsin: 103 total for 1.80 per 100K || Ownership rate: 34.7%
      Wyoming: 9 total for 1.54 per 100K || Ownership rate: 53.8%

      https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013

      http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-ownership-by-state-2015-7

      • Whoa, BS flag. AZ has a 32% gunowner rate? Methinks they have learned to lie when asked such a stupid and intrusive question, I’d guess closer to 92% actual.

        • @LarryinTX — Hey, man, I just go by the available data. I wouldn’t be surprised if the actual rate was 50 – 60%. This is only to more thoroughly disprove the “correlation = causation” low-information neoliberal Statists love to pitch, and using their own so-called “studies” to do it.

    • Arranged by homicide rate, the findings are as follows.

      Florida is not included because it does not appear in Table 20 of the FBI’s UCR Data Tables.
      Alabama is not included due to limited homicide and supplemental weapons data.

      Most dangerous states, homicides committed with firearms

      Top 10

      1. Washington, D.C. – 12.53 per 100K || Ownership rate: 25.9%
      2. Louisiana – 7.7 per 100K || Ownership rate: 44.5%
      3. South Carolina – 4.69 per 100K || Ownership rate: 44.4%
      4. Maryland – 4.52 per 100K || Ownership rate: 20.7%
      5. Missouri – 4.52 per 100K || Ownership rate: 27.1%
      6. Michigan – 4.44 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.8%
      7. Georgia – 4.11 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.6%
      8. Arkansas – 3.72 per 100K || Ownership rate: 57.9%
      9. Mississippi – 3.68 per 100K || Ownership rate: 42.8%
      10. Indiana – 3.62 per 100K || Ownership rate: 33.8%

      11. Delaware: 3.56 per 100K || Ownership rate: 5.2%
      12. Pennsylvania: 3.44 100K || Ownership rate: 27.1%
      13. Tennessee: 3.43 per 100K || Ownership rate: 39.4%
      14. Oklahoma: 3.3 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.2%
      15. New Jersey: 3.27 per 100K || Ownership rate: 11.3%
      16. North Carolina: 3.2 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.7%
      17. California: 3.19 per 100K || Ownership rate: 20.1%
      18. Nevada: 3.12 per 100K || Ownership rate: 37.5%
      19. Texas: 2.87 per 100K || Ownership rate: 35.7%
      20. Illinois: 2.83 per 100K || Ownership rate: 26.2%
      21. New Mexico: 2.83 per 100K || Ownership rate: 49.9%
      22. Arizona: 2.78 per 100K || Ownership rate: 32.3%
      23. Virginia: 2.72 per 100K || Ownership rate: 29.3%
      24. Kansas: 2.7 per 100K || Ownership rate: 32.2%

      Bottom 25

      25. Ohio: 2.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 19.6%
      26. Kentucky: 2.53 per 100K || Ownership rate: 42.4%
      27. Nebraska: 2.09 per 100K || Ownership rate: 19.8%
      28. New York: 1.84 per 100K || Ownership rate: 10.3%
      29. Wisconsin: 1.80 per 100K || Ownership rate: 34.7%
      30. Rhode Island: 1.71 per 100K || Ownership rate: 14.4%
      31. Connecticut: 1.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 16.6%
      32. Colorado: 1.67 per 100K || Ownership rate: 34.3%
      33. Alaska: 1.63 per 100K || Ownership rate: 61.7%
      34. West Virginia: 1.62 per 100K || Ownership rate: 54.2%
      35. Wyoming: 1.54 per 100K || Ownership rate: 53.8%
      36. Washington: 1.23 per 100K || Ownership rate: 27.7%
      37. Massachusetts: 1.17 per 100K || Ownership rate: 22.6%
      38. Minnesota: 1.11 per 100K || Ownership rate: 36.7%
      39. Oregon: 1.09 per 100K || Ownership rate: 26.6%

      Bottom 10

      40. Utah – 1.07 per 100K || Ownership rate: 31.9%
      41. Idaho – 0.93 per 100K || Ownership rate: 56.9%
      42. Maine – 0.9 per 100K || Ownership rate: 22.6%
      43. Montana – 0.89 per 100K || Ownership rate: 52.3%
      44. Vermont – 0.8 per 100K || Ownership rate: 28.8%
      45. Iowa – 0.58 per 100K || Ownership rate: 33.8%
      46. North Dakota – 0.55 per 100K || Ownership rate: 47.9%
      47. Hawai’i – 0.43 per 100K || Ownership rate: 45.1%
      48. New Hapmshire – 0.38 per 100K || Ownership rate: 14.4%
      49. South Dakota – 0.36 per 100K || Ownership rate: 35.0%

      National average: 2.54 per 100K

      https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/5tabledatadecpdf/table_5_crime_in_the_united_states_by_state_2013.xls

      https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-20/table_20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls

      http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/early/2015/06/09/injuryprev-2015-041586.full.pdf?keytype=ref&ijkey=doj6vx0laFZMsQ2

      As we can see, there is absolutely no correlational relationship between gun ownership and homicides committed with firearms whatsoever.

  22. This woman’s economic theory is aimed at getting the stupid people to do as she suggests so they will lose money and thereby “re-distribute wealth”, which is another Democratic Socialist goal.

  23. Why is every one of these women who are anti gun so freaking ugly? This woman Chose her lipstick off the side of a bus Looks like your face got hit by a damn 18 wheeler and drug behind it. Looks like a fruit cake if you saw one of these people out in public you be like what is wrong with that person they look retarded. Plus I love the fact that they say that our gun violence problem in the United States is as bad as in a third world country Have they not read the friggin news articles coming from Mexico about people getting their heads chopped off for just wanting to defend their own communities against cartels What a freaking joke! These people really really really need to go back to school and learn how to read Pie graphs charts It may help them s*** it might help them in the future when they actually get a job and work Bunch of stay-at-home soccer moms and have nothing better to do but progressed their liberal rights Activism. Completely unAmerican the way these anti gunners are going after the Constitution They need to spend some time in a third world country and actually see the violence that goes on there And compare that to their Little BS lives they live As progressive liberals Politically correct to the death Absolutely The most stupidest group of people I’ve ever come in contact with in my life Of almost 50 years here on this planet.

  24. Quit importing en masse the least educated, lowest skill people from the highest violence, most corrupt cultures and you won’t have these problems.

    It’s not the drug war. It’s not poverty. It’s not even exclusively race. It’s culture. There are millions of people in this country who hold beliefs that the world owes them something, right here, right now, and anything short of instant gratification justifies immediate violence.

    These people have no stake in the present, no sense of the future, and no perceived responsibility for earning their own prosperity. Only easy violence provides some simulacrum of success in life.

  25. America is a first world country that has the gun control problem of the third world. To end the epidemic of gun control, we have to put the anti-gun groups in check, and we can’t do that without corporate partners. Money talks, and when we divest from companies that oppose our core values we send a powerful message. That message is getting through. Our momentum will reach the tipping point soon and we’ll see meaningful, lasting change.

  26. Every taxpayer is spending money to have babies chopped up and their body parts sold by Planned Parenthood. Let’s see this marxist fool spend the same amount of energy to stop that.

    • Taxpayers also pay for all these illegitimate children that are born by teenage moms And that’s an 18 year debt right there so you also have to think about it and that term not just in a religious conservative form But also in a form that represents our community and do we want these children to begin with Raised by inadequate parents They’re just tomorrow’s criminals

      • You are so right. Expand Planned Parenthood, install drive thru abortion clinics. Offer free IPHONES to every pregnant teen to get a McAbortion. Send the male teens to work cleaning up Fukushima. Problem solved.

        • If we can not muster the compassion and resources to protect the most innocent among us then we will burn . I would kill a baby killer if I witness it happening before me , would you not ?

  27. Having spent almost half my life in the military and parts of it in third world, I think white liberals should spend a year in Africa and see just how well gun control works. Civilian possession of guns has never legal. During the colonial period only the white people had guns.

    This modern day white woman and others like her are dangerously stupid.

  28. Who said America is a first world country? Large parts of the big cities would fit squarely into Guatemala or any other third world hell hole. And many if not most of the small towns are struggling to keep their heads above water financially, and many states are now practically bankrupt. Money flows uphill, and is concentrated in the areas of conspicuous consumption, such as NYC, Chicago and parts of LA.

    The poorer parts of the USA have the kinds of crime one would expect.

  29. Her whole theory is flawed from the beginning. There are plenty of “First World” Countries that have as much or more violence than we do. And let’s not just talk gun violence because if you die from violence it probably does not make too much difference which tool is used to kill you. Guns are probably more humane than many of the alternatives. Check out the maps on Wikipedia for rates of violence and the other one on gun ownership rates. The correlation is pretty much non-existent. I think we should all invest more in gun manufacturers to make up for the people selling their stock. Pick the good ones though. And BTW who is keeping Mikey Bloomberg, the Billionaire, in check ? The Liberal Press never talks about the lobbying power of HIS money. The NRA and some of the gun lobbyists are probably the only people watching out that the freedoms we have left don’t disappear in a Socialist Black Hole.

  30. Nothing says cognitive dissonance like a leftist depending on financial salvation from the one-percenters they love to diss.

Leave a Reply

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