What Gun Control Advocates Really Think: You’re Too Stupid for Guns

(courtesy Facebook.com)

As predicted, gun control advocates have taken to the Bundy + militia occupation at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge like a pig to swill. See? Gun owners are insurrectionists! Make that outdated moronic racist insurrectionists. Ipso facto, right? Anyone armed who doesn’t accept the federal government as their beneficent overlord – and views the Second Amendment as a bulwark against tyranny – is a dangerous idiot. A domestic terrorist. And, thus, deserves to die. Or rot in prison. This is the real face of gun control: 986 likes on the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Facebook page.

comments

  1. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

    Yawn

    1. avatar Turd Furgeson says:

      Wow 986 is a lot.
      5 Million is a lot more.

      1. avatar california richard says:

        330 million privately owned guns disagree.

  2. avatar pwrserge says:

    Oh that’s hilarious. An actual terrorist organization is accusing other people of being terrorists.

    I wonder if CSGV can cite how many CVS Pharmacies have been looted by these guys?

    1. avatar OODAloop says:

      No doubt. How is this any different than Occupy Wall Street? Oh, right. Not a Progressives accepted form of a SJW.

      1. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

        Well the way I figure it, the protest in Oregon has not damaged property, left trash everywhere, blocked public streets, looted, rioted, caused financial loss to local businesses.
        Yes the militia that is there has guns, but if we were as violent as they say we are there would be mass casualties.
        Of course there aren’t.

        1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

          Well said. The GUNS are not the problem(shall not be infringed). But everyone reading this blog already knows THAT…

      2. avatar BigDaveinVT says:

        Less poop on the ground.

        1. avatar Neiowa says:

          And on Cop cars.

          And no rape or drugs. Both progtard favorites.

  3. avatar michi says:

    Yeah. “It’s ($CURRENT_YEAR), WAKE UP AMERICA!” It’s just *uncivilized*! And as usual, everyone who ‘owns a thing’ has to answer for what a few people who ‘own similar thing’ end up doing.

    Eminent domain sucks, tacking on a longer sentence after time served is weird, but this isn’t really a gun issue – I don’t have a dog in that land fight. Nor do most gun owners.

    1. avatar RKS says:

      There weren’t guns involved (in any meaningful way) until the Bundy bunch decided to load up the truck. This potential miscarriage of justice had nothing to do with the 2A but now it certainly does.

      1. avatar Felix says:

        Really? The government had no guns?

        1. avatar Jeremy B. says:

          OMG, Park Rangers that enforce poaching laws and felony laws, have guns?

        2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Drug traffickers have been known to set up shop, either growing plants or running production labs, in state and federal parks/reserves. In some places, like Alaska, you could be the only officer for hundreds of square miles. I don’t blame park rangers one bit for packing heat.

      2. avatar Felix says:

        And the 2A has everything to do with systemic miscarriages of justice. What do you think the Declaration of Independence is, if not an indictment of multiple heinous miscarriages of justice?

    2. avatar Don says:

      Two federal agencies, the BLM and Fisheries and Wildlife participated in a long term plan to force the Hammonds and many of their neighbors off their lands, decimate their herds, make it unprofitable to farm and ranch there, with the avowed purpose being to take over all the land and lock it into their eco terrorist dream of totally non productive land use. These agencies have treated these US citizens worse than Hitler treated the jews and almost as bad as the US treated the native Americans. The BLM has created drought, followed by flooding to force people off their lands, and further have started fires or allowed them to burn out homes, barns, pasture land, etc. If you don’t think you have a dog in this fight, you’re not paying attention. I myself have only recently learned some of the facts in this case, and it’s a sad story. These white farmers don’t have Obama, Holder, Sharpton, etc. or the media to champion their cause or anyone to bring the truth to light. We have got to get the federal agencies out of the real estate business, out of the radical environmental business, and our of our business, bring these so called public lands back into use for the public, not lucked up where the public pays so some nature lover can hike it or bird watch without hearing a moo or whinny.
      http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/full-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-over-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/

  4. avatar Kapeltam says:

    I laughed hard at the comment about the IQ of gun owners being less than room temperature. While yes, there are those of lower intelligence on both sides, it seems to me those of higher intelligence and the power to apply that intelligence to get things done seem to be on the pro gun side.

    1. avatar Mecha75 says:

      In a recent Oxford study on US conservatives and liberals shows that the more conservative you are the higher your IQ. So gun grabbers just do not have the mental capacity to think when talking about the things that scares the bejeezus out of them.

      1. avatar n64456 says:

        Yeah, but, but, but…. liberal’s “feelings IQs” are so much higher than conservatives……. Bwahaha

        1. During Bubba’s administration, Hitlary exhorted progressives to rely on their “emotional intelligence.”

        2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          By definition alone that’s an oxymoron.

  5. avatar TravisP says:

    I love it when they insult our intelligence. That means they’re losing to people they think are dumb, what’s that say about them?

    1. avatar Mecha75 says:

      I laugh at all the comments on how these Oregon protesters are poor rednecks upset over not getting their welfare checks on time…. Um, not with that tactical gear.

      1. avatar MIkeP says:

        Or with land rights to protect.

    2. avatar daveR says:

      Well, I think most of our elected leaders are pretty stupid. Sometimes stupid can’t help but win.

    3. avatar Mike says:

      It also means they underestimate us, not a wise move.

    4. avatar John L. says:

      Yeah but, broadly speaking, higher intelligence & better educated folks tend to reproduce less than those that aren’t either.

      Ever see “Idiocracy?” It wasn’t a comedy so much as a cautionary tale…

      1. avatar anaxis says:

        In about 20 years (or less), “Idiocracy” will be considered a documentary…. except the most common names won’t be Upgrayed, Frito, and Beef Supreme; they’ll all be Mohammeds, Sayeds, Aliyahs, and D’Quans.

        1. avatar Brick says:

          There are two d’s in Upgrayedd. For a double dose of his pimpin’

  6. avatar ThomasR says:

    Finally!! The progressives have a very small group of protesters carrying the “fearsome black rifle” challenging the government In possible abuse of governmental power.

    Now they can paint all gun owners that believe in small constitutional government as insurrectionists.

    Whoo! That was close! Up till now, All the mass murderers and individual mass shooters were either muslims yelling Allahu Akhbar or leftists going postal.

    It was getting kind of hard to keep pushing the agenda that only conservative, gun carrying bible beaters were the danger to this country..

    1. avatar Pwrserge says:

      I fail to see how standing up to government injustice is a danger to the country.

      1. avatar ThomasR says:

        It depends. If Bundy’s group from Arizona has the support of the ranchers that are the ones being charged and general support from the community, then they are doing what the militia is supposed to do.

        How many of the locals are involved with the Bundy group? Did the locals call for Bundy’s assistance in this dust up?

        If the Bundy group is coming into these people’s territory without the specific request of the locals, and the ranchers being charged, then they are, in my opinion, on very shakey ground.

        Until I learn more about what is going on, I’ll reserve judgement as to whether this is an Operation instigated by government agent provocateur(s) with in Bundy’s group to cause a blood bath and be the impetus for a national assault weapons ban.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Do you think that they would risk supporting these guys and being brought up on accessory charges on top of their current problems? Really?

        2. avatar GusMac says:

          That’s a pretty creative way of reserving judgement.

        3. avatar AnyMouse says:

          Is this also known as “gathering the facts” ?

      2. avatar pg2 says:

        “I fail to see how standing up to government injustice is a danger to the country.”

        Says the guy who favors Government mandated medical procedures…..

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Huh? Which procedures would those be? You mean the harmless injections that have been shown in hundreds of studies to do far more good than even the most rabid proponents’ estimates of harm?

          Please. Grow up and read a few books. Opposing government overreach is not the same thing as opposing all government intervention.

        2. avatar pg2 says:

          You are either a paid liar or dangerously naive. Either way it’s funny watching you fall over yourself trying to support massive government overreach in one aspect while at the same time pretending to stand for individual freedom in another aspect.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Or I just have more than a high school education and understand basic medicine… Funny that.

        4. avatar pg2 says:

          Lol, your inability to defend your egregious contradiction gets funnier with each squirm-post you make.

        5. avatar Ben says:

          Are we really trying to compare vaccinations to slandering land owners in order to repossess their land?

          Really?

        6. avatar pg2 says:

          @Ben, pointing out the hypocrisy of another posters alleged respect for one right while supporting the governments usurping other rights. Why do you have a problem with that?

  7. avatar SelousX says:

    Gee, pro-gun control, statist bigots sounding off. Somehow, I am not surprised.

  8. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    900 and some odd likes, huh…

    Oh man, there’s somemore of that “vast majority” I keep hearing about.

    Agree with it or not, the fact of the matter is several hundred people, give or take, put their lives on hold, armed up, traveled to the Bundy Ranch, and stood a post during the first Bundy standoff. And these anti folks couldn’t even muster more than 1000 people to lift one, self-righteous freaking finger to click the “like” button.

    And the gun community is supposed to worried about them and their influence. I’m more worried about Scurvy, frankly, than these clown at CSVG.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      If indeed CSGV is the “real face” of gun control, we are in better shape than we think we are. CSGV is concentrated, unadulterated, barking moon-battery.

      1. avatar Ben says:

        Haha, you made a funny.

        Battery. It’s funny because it’s a violent crime, and CSGV are willing to advocate committing a violent crime in order to push their agenda.

    2. avatar Sixpack70 says:

      Scurvy is some scary stuff!

  9. avatar Joe R. says:

    Gun controllers are historically more likely to be communist, facist, or tyrannical thugs, than ‘gun-owners’ are at being a ‘problem’ to their surrounding populace.

    Ban Liberal, facist, Progressive, Communist POSs out there, and then they won’t have to suffer the typical requisite violence required to correct their f’d upness. History has already spoken, and human nature and physics have already decided.

  10. avatar pod says:

    This is another symptom of the larger culture war at play here in the US. Guns just come up a lot in it because, to the left, they are symbolic of the right. They can’t actually criticize the how and why we have guns, so they invariably attack at the purported level of intelligence of gun owners. And invariably the “compensation” argument gets dragged out at some point.

    Never understood that either. Why is it with any object that has a masculine theme attached to it (guns, pick-up trucks, Jeeps, etc…) the compensation argument comes into play? I’m almost tempted to ask a noted research university to do a gun-ownership-versus-c**k-size study. I’m willing to wager the statistics will mirror the general stats about such things in society as a whole.

    1. avatar Kyle says:

      Progressives hate the traditional image of the hard-charging male. That is why they encourage young boys to do girl things like play with dolls, take up knitting, etc…however they love the image of the hard-charging female who can do all of the traditionally male things. So the man who is “in touch” with his feelings, cries a lot, likes to knit, is flabby-built, and will readily admit he’s a wimp, is the liberal ideal, whereas the woman who likes martial arts, fighting, mechanics, etc…is the ideal for a woman.

      Now I am not against either of the above—to the contrary, I think it is good for men who are like that to be accepted in society and women to be accepted into traditionally male roles. But the problem with progressives is that they basically flipped the old 1950s view of how men and women should be on its head, so that now if a man dares to say workout and have muscles, drive a lifted 4×4 truck, is into martial arts, football, firearms, etc…well HEAVENS, then he must be an adult child who is clearly compensating for something.

  11. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

    Ok… It’s half right. The “protesters” would be dead IF the were in a Democrat controlled city with a history of Progressive abuse.

  12. avatar Sam I Am says:

    Finally.

    Some someones on the left get it. People are too stupid to have a constitutional right to own guns. Those same stupid people are too stupid to have a 1st Amendment to free speech, because they are too stupid to use it wisely. Some people are too stupid to have the protection of the 5th Amendment because they commit crimes and try to cover them up by claiming they cannot be forced to give testimony against themselves. Some people are too stupid to have full civil rights under the 14th Amendment because they lack the same skills, character, education, background as the elite leadership of the nation. Some people are too stupid to vote by age 21, and they should be delayed until some other time, or prevented from voting altogether. So there !

  13. avatar Kyle says:

    Every time a Muslim or Muslims commit (s) act of terrorism, we hear the following:

    Liberals: “This act is from a minority extremist faction of Islam. We can’t blame the whole religion. The vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving.”

    Now I do not know much about Islam, so I give it the benefit of the doubt that that is true (I know some do not agree with that and say that’s just politically-correct nonsense, but I don’t know enough).

    But yet, get a couple of idiots who decide to pull some stand-off with the federal government, and these same liberals/progressives want to use it to label the whole gun rights movement.

    1. avatar daveR says:

      That doesn’t exactly jive. Islam’s defenders would say that Islam is not a religion of violence and the violent ones are not representative of Islams as a whole.

      However in the Oregon case, the “milita’s” defenders seem to also mostly pro-2A folks. Heck, the number of positive (aka, pro-militia and anti-government) comments here on TTAG greatly outweigh the few negative comments. Therefore, by definition many vocal gun rights advocates (at least most gun owners here) view the Oregon standoff as being about them So we don’t need ” liberals/progressives…to use it to label the whole gun rights movement.”– a lot of folks here have already taken ownership of it.

  14. avatar Smitty says:

    Liberals love using anecdotes in an attempt to prove their self-assumed intellectual superiority…which proves their IQ’s are at room temperature.

  15. avatar Daily Beatings says:

    I was listening to Martin Kaste, the reporter on scene for NPR, and he was surprised nothing was really going on with the Oregon protesters as far as a standoff. The protesters were nice and courtesy to him. The entire segment was very nonchalant. Martin made them sound like, gasp… normal human beings.

  16. avatar Fuque says:

    Something I learned from a customer of mine who I worked for, for many yrs, He was a leading UN negotiator, on loan from the US Government to help negotiate safe routes into Bosnia to deliver Humanitarian Aid He said,
    …. “When the REAL protests begin, Americans are going to have to learn the hard way that if you want people to respect YOUR cause for protest.. you better respect THEIR cause for protest..

  17. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    CSGV are a bunch of Bolsheviks. Who cares what they think?

  18. avatar glenux says:

    Quoted above,
    “Anyone armed who doesn’t accept the federal government as their beneficent overlord – and views the Second Amendment as a bulwark against tyranny – is a dangerous idiot. A domestic terrorist. And, thus, deserves to die. Or rot in prison.”

    That’s OK with me. The feeling is totally mutual.

    Anyone armed who ACCEPTS the federal government as their beneficent overlord – and DOESN’T view the Second Amendment as a bulwark against tyranny – is a dangerous idiot.
    And, thus, deserves ONLY to die.

    Prison it too good for them.

    1. avatar StupidisNOTwithme says:

      Just curious…. you DO realize that the second amendment states “a WELL REGULATED militia” right?

      1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

        What’s your point?

      2. avatar ThomasR says:

        Maybe you have never heard this, so I’ll reserve the sigh.

        The “Well regulated” at the time it was used, meant that the militia was well trained and equipped. Not the current meaning of a bunch of government regulations.

        This prefatory clause was also just that. It gave a reason why having a well trained and equipped militia was a good idea, so it added to the primary ststement, but dodn’t modify it. So the primary statement, Says “The right of the people. (not state governments) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

        Let’s say that again. The right of the people. The bill of rights are about the rights of the people free from control by the federal government.

        At least, that was its’ intent. That meaning got lost along the way, for most of the rights enumerated and not, in the bill of rights.

      3. avatar Kyle says:

        The bit about the “well-regulated” militia is the prefatory clause, which is declarative. Think of it like this. Imagine an amendment that said the following:

        “A well educated electorate being necessary to the preservation of a free society, the right of the people to read and compose information shall not be infringed.”

        Now clearly such an amendment would not be saying that only those who belong to some government-determined “well educated electorate” have the right to read and compose information. Rather, it is just a prefatory clause stating an important reason for the protection of the right. Such clauses were common at the time.

        Note Article I, Section 8 in the Constitution, where it grants Congress the following:

        “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;”

        So does this mean that the government has no authority to grant copyrights, patents, etc…for things that do not promote the progress of science or the useful arts? For example, “Fifty Shades of Grey?” The Harry Potter novels? Videogames and music? Of course not. It is just a prefatory clause, i.e. declarative clause, that states an important reason for the granting of that power. But it is not a conditional clause.

        As for “well regulated” itself, that just mean well functioning. You can find references to a well regulated government, well regulated society, well regulated hair style, well regulated school, well regulated machine shop, well regulated drawing room, etc…in the writings of the time and into the 19th century.

        1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          Surely this cannot be right.

          You mean to tell me the Colonist didn’t ask King George which and how many weapons they could have for their rebellion… Can’t be true.

      4. avatar pwrserge says:

        You do realize that the right to keep and bear arms is expressly reserved for the people, not the militia. As for well regulated… These guys look well organized and equipped to me, thus meeting the 19th century definition of a regulated force.

      5. avatar Fuque says:

        From what I was taught, the ” well regulated” means they were civilized and governed men. That was of coarse back in the 70’s when grass was sold in Lids, and mags meant magnesium wheels.. I have recently heard the same, that it meant well equipped, and trained. There are people a lot smarter than I am that have debated this part and Im fine with either, as long as it’s on the side of the people.

  19. avatar John says:

    I really hope that this is some sort of Government sponsor hoax.

    1. avatar Fuque says:

      You mean like this one?

  20. avatar Jake Y. says:

    You would think that in the year A.D. 2016 people would know how to write the year before criticizing others for their intelligence…

  21. avatar William Ashbless says:

    Maybe they just think that we are their equals and have just as much fear and misinformation floating around in our skulls as they do. They fear guns and think we dangerous because we lack that fear and loathing.

  22. avatar Noah says:

    I’ll grant there are three things that frustrate me about this so far:
    That it happened at all.
    I get their point about individual rights, but armed protest rarely solved anything. Either start your own revolution or put the guns away and do a sit-in.
    That they’re characterized by some as “terrorists.”
    Definition of terrorism includes that it “involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law”. These folks have not yet acted in a way that endangers anyone’s life, unless possessing a rifle is that sort of action (and I suppose that some people would say it does, but that’s a different matter). Quite frankly, if the police fire first, I would think that return fire would be justified given the previously nonviolent nature of the sit-in
    That the government would act differently if they were black.
    Pure, simple bull. See The Black Panther movement for some proof. They were in several ways (aims and goals) similar to the ranchers we’ve got here, though far more radical (not only in gang-related activities and in ambushing police, but also in some cases, advocating both violent and total revolution as well as Marxism) yet law enforcement wasn’t particularly interested in firing the first shot then either.

  23. avatar Rich shade says:

    Wow the comments of the people on the post are funny the ignorance of people that call other peoples IQs are low how dumb can they be to agree with the left side I personally support the Bundy militia good job guys

  24. avatar GaPharmD. says:

    Just figured since we got called out about our intellegence and education I would start the rep:

    This gun “nut” has his doctorate.

    1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      I’m an Engineer and my wife has her Masters, but we are toothless, unwashed, mindless hillbillies solely because we own guns.

      Not like these enlightened folks, who clearly must be our intellectual superiors based one political standpoint.

      Your doctorate is a sham.

      1. avatar Swilson says:

        College-educated HR professional here (human rule book) married to a substance abuse counselor with her masters. We love our organic veggies, Prius and our rescue dogs. We also love our (my) Chevy pickup, guns, and fried bologna sandwiches. To quote Matt Stone, “I hate conservatives, but I really f*ing hate liberals!”

        1. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

          As an organic loving, gun owning, pickup truck driving, small town living, art loving, but would never own another hybrid, fellow dog rescuer, conservationist, and biracial Libertarian/Independent veteran; I approve this comment.

  25. avatar Kendahl says:

    It’s not just guns. Does anyone think that, if the automobile hadn’t been invented over a hundred years ago, it could be developed and marketed now? The nannies would have hysterics about two-ton vehicles moving at high speed with nothing by the competence of ordinary people to avoid crashes. Some time ago, I read about an Australian study that said crashes in modern automobiles were mostly survivable below 40 mph. The authors wondered how long people would be willing to pay a high price in deaths and injuries for the convenience of high speed travel by automobile. 40 mph national speed limit anyone?

  26. avatar Ozzallos says:

    “If this militia was black, they’d already be dead.”

    Last I checked, the Ferguson Riot attendees are all still alive in spite of destroying several square blocks while a large predominantly white police presence didn’t lift a finger to stop them.

    Nice try, though.

  27. avatar Paelorian says:

    There are many militia members who are black, and they haven’t been murdered by the government. There are also entirely black armed groups at least as “subversive” as these militias and they haven’t been murdered, either. I didn’t see any mainstream media coverage of the Justice for Michael Brown Brigade’s armed open carry demonstration demanding injustice on behalf of a dead scumbag, but it happened and there’s video on TTAG. Not to mention the “kill white babies before they become oppressive racists” types like the so-called New Black Panther Party are open about being armed. The government doesn’t just go around freely murdering members of armed organizations, even black hate groups. Nowadays.

    This charge that the only reason the government hasn’t murdered militia groups is “institutionalized white supremacy” is bullshit. At least, that’s what I think they’re saying. Maybe they’re actually calling for mass murder of militia groups and gun rights activists, and complaining that if the groups had more black members the racist government would have started murdering patriotic human rights protesters already.

  28. avatar John in Ohio says:

    From a FB comment in the screenshot: “If this militia was black, they would already be dead.”

    ORLY? https://youtu.be/UZHFjxTsMx4

  29. avatar PeterK says:

    In the mean time there’s probably a fair number of us evil gun owners who think the so-called Bundy militia are way out of line and being very stupid. But of course their actions are STILL somehow my fault because guilt by association or whatever. This is kind of the crux of their hypocrisy. Any bad thing done by a member of their group would just be that person being bad, but because guns are evil whenever anyone does something bad with a gun it proves that all gun owners are ignorant violent savages just waiting to beat the war drum. It’d be more pathetic if this wasn’t a very well-funded group with lots of mainstream support.

  30. avatar Fuque says:

    Watching MSM news last night, Im convinced that the claims made by the ignorant, that the bundy group was an armed group of malcontents waiting for a shootout is FALSE…. Had they been Armed and looking for a fight, CBS would have swarmed that fact like files on a hot pile.. But in Fact CBS made the claim that they didnt see any guns, or FBI activity, In fact there was nothing to see… Now, Im not giving CBS anything.. but you can be damn sure that if they were armed, CBS would have crucified them..

  31. avatar Fuque says:

    And now this AM, its all about the armed bundy group?… do these reporters even know WTF they are talking about??

    1. avatar george from fort worth says:

      i don’t think it is a requirement in order to be a professional journalist.

  32. avatar John says:

    Chico has a point about poorly educated white guys, at least in the great state of Illinois. Look at ISRA’s Richard Pearson for example. Pearson opposed concealed carry for 15 years and secretly fought it. He opposed the Gun Owner Lobby Day march in Springfield. When he finally figured out that concealed carry was a hot issue that could sell memberships, he conned Otis McDonald into signing on to the Supreme Court lawsuit, because they needed a black face for ISRA and NRA.

    When it came time to pass a carry bill, Pearson let NRA contract lobbyist Donald Todd Vandermye put Duty to Inform w/ criminal penalties in Rep. Brandon Phelps HB183 “NRA backed” carry bill, because to Pearson and the retards in southern IL,”the police are your friends” and “just tell the police you have a carry license and it won’t be a problem.”

    The vast majority of ISRA & NRA members in IL are racist baby boomers from all-white small towns who are too stupid to figure out that they were sold out by Pearson and Vandermyde. Lucky most of them can’t read. Yee-haw! Where do we sign up to send money to Chris Cox & Chuck Cunningham at NRA-ILA?

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