Gun Control Agitprop: Speaking is Difficult

“The fear, chaos, and disbelief triggered by mass shootings have become an inescapable yet unbearable reality,” the caption under this YouTube video proclaims. “Speaking is Difficult represents five years of an American crisis.” The use of the word “inescapable” highlights the divide between gun rights and gun control advocates. One side sees the carnage and concludes that a legally carried firearm is the best chance of escape from deadly violence. The other side sees the “inescapable” need to disarm civilians. One thing both can agree on . . .

Violence can occur anywhere. Video journalist AJ Schnack’s film highlights the banality of evil in the sense that it shows bucolic scenes where mass shootings occurred. Again, how you interpret these images – and 911 calls – depends entirely on your perspective on Americans’ right to keep and bear arms.

At 12:46, Gabby Giffords weighs in with the only commentary provided. The former Congresswoman, shot during a rally in Tuscon in 2011, gives the film its title: Speaking is Difficult. “We must do something,” she asserts in Congressional testimony. Yes, but what?

The film closes with stats suggesting that mass shootings have become more prevalent since 2011. That conclusion depends entirely on who’s counting. Or, more specifically, how they’re counting. (Gun control advocates usually count three or more people shot as a “mass shooting”.) The more relevant statistic is this [via fivethirtyeight.com]:

(courtesy fivethirtyeight.com)

Also of note: the majority of firearms-related homicides are gang-related, not “active shooter” events. Make of that what you will.

comments

  1. avatar Mr. 308 says:

    “We must do something,”

    Ahh the calls for something that needs to be done.

    You know Lenin, Vlad, not John, got his start with a book – or pamphlet I guess, called ‘What is to be done’. Coming from Russian this might as well have been ‘Something needs to be done’.

    Now there’s a juxtaposition that will be lost on the western socialists looking at this arty little video.

    Something needs to be done indeed. Some reloading.

    1. avatar ATTAG Reader says:

      Appropos comment. Hillary’s speeches to her slum dwelling followers are sounding more like the Dictatorship of the Proletariat every day.

  2. avatar Don says:

    “But who’s going to bell the cat?” In this case they want to put bells on all us mice because they can’t stop the cat from killing us. Makes sense in their world.

  3. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    I guess Americans have become truly free now that the press filter has been removed and every message has to be interpreted through the lens of the people paying the bills for the speakers. It’s probably for the best, but…

    People that aren’t willing to work that hard will soon be slaves.

  4. avatar Bobiojimbo says:

    Listening to all of those 911 calls, just makes me angry. Angry at the criminals who committed these murders. Makes me wish I could go back in time, and stop them, but I can’t. All I can do is take responsibility for my own safety.

  5. avatar Jordan says:

    “inescapable”

    You keep using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

    1. avatar Rusty Chains says:

      Think?? They don’t need to think, they have inescapable FEELINGS! Just don’t ask them to think because that might cause them to question those feelings. Forcing them to face the cold hard facts of reality will likely send them scurrying for their Xanax and a safe room with teddy bears.

    2. avatar Rick the Bear says:

      No worries. I got your “Princess Bride” reference.

  6. avatar ThomasR. says:

    “We must do something”. I agree. And what is needed is obvious. Get rid of GFZ’s, make sure to have a firearm at all times, train as much as possible, and have good situational awareness.

  7. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    More proof why we need everyone to be armed. When seconds count, police are minutes away.

  8. avatar Martin says:

    Funny I read the name as A J Smuck the first time I saw it.

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    “We must do something!”

    I am doing something. I’m carrying a gun.

    1. avatar CRF says:

      By “do something” liberals mean “whine and stir up outrage on social media until somebody else does something”

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “By “do something” liberals mean “whine and stir up outrage on social media until somebody else does something”

        And, the problem with that is….what?

        I am of the Tom Sawyer school….get someone else to paint the fence. It’s a win, win. You don’t have to do something that is hard, and the person you got as a substitute does what they love. How can this be a bad thing?

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          Maybe we don’t want the fence painted. Maybe we would prefer to have it stripped. Or knocked down.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “Maybe we don’t want the fence painted. Maybe we would prefer to have it stripped. Or knocked down.”

          And your point is?

  10. avatar Sam I Am says:

    The chart is probably comforting to many, but is it something we should be cheering about?

    The average homicides by firearm from 1999-2013 seems 11, 680 (the chart granularity leads to some approximation). Is that something that supports the gun rights position?

    After 2000, the number never went below 11,100. Is that something to cheer about?

    For 2005-2008, the number averaged 12,500 (or so), and never went below 12,300. Is that something to cheer about?

    From 2009-2013, the number never went below 11,100. Is that something to cheer about?

    We have seen on this blog that gun homicides have declined since 1993, but the chart seems at odds with that (I don’t have the functionality handy, but a “best fit” line applied to the 1999-2013 data does not trend downward. Is that something we want to advertise?

    Factoring out gang and general criminal acts leading to deaths may make the stats look better, but the chart itself seems to support the anti-gun narrative (the public will not even do the cursory exam I attempted, and have no idea how to compare all deaths to criminal-caused deaths.

    We need a better chart to promote the claim that, “The more relevant statistic is this:” This one does us no favors.

    1. avatar Steve Day says:

      @Sam I Am + @2Asux

      The overwhelming majority of gun homicides are committed by thugs or gang members in Democrat controlled cities/regions. Democrats would rather disarm the law-abiding person than put blame where it belongs – on the shoulders of the families of these thugs who, after said thug is righteously shot, proclaim that little Dindu was an angel and studied hard (yeah, they majored in how to roll the perfect joint) at school.

      If something … anything, was done to crack down on the Democrat enabled thugs then I guarantee that gun homicides would drop dramatically. Instead we have a rogue President – himself a former and possibly current pot-head and cocaine snorter – releasing thugs from prison at alarming rates because he sympathizes with their criminal ways.

      What a sorry state of affairs the Democrats have created. Even more sorry is how they try to blame everyone else for what they’ve created.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        I thought about the total population represented in the chart. Unfortunately, there was no way to parse the data so as to eliminate the criminal content. However….

        If we point to the downward trend in overall crime since 1993 as a good thing, where do the criminal shootings appear in that trend? Is there a similar decline in criminal homicides during the period since 1993? The chart presented seems to argue against that. The average 11,000 is troublesome because if criminal activity is responsible for the high number, either criminal activity is going up (we believe defensive shootings are declining), or defensive shootings are going up, or both retain the same proportion.

        Just not seeing good news for gun rights.

      2. avatar 2Asux says:

        All I said was:
        “April 15, 2016 at 17:55
        Ahhh, even one of your own sees the problem pro-gunnies have using statistics to “prove” guns everywhere brings down gun related homicides.”

        I don’t think your reply to Sam I Am is germane to my comment about statistics.

        And for the record, I truly, firmly, cross my heart, believe gun laws prevent all criminals from committing crimes with illegal guns. Every story about criminal use of a gun is made-up to justify gun lovers having guns anywhere and everywhere. The law is the law, and by golly, everyone obeys the law !

  11. avatar 2Asux says:

    Ahhh, even one of your own sees the problem pro-gunnies have using statistics to “prove” guns everywhere brings down gun related homicides.

  12. avatar Alan Esworthy says:

    @Bobiojimbo:

    :… All I can do is take responsibility for my own safety.

    And there it is, all of it, in one neat sentence.

    The world is full of problems because the world is full of people for whom that world is not perfection. Some problems have solutions, many do not. Trying to impose a solution to an insoluble problem causes more problems than the one that’s the objective of the effort. So…

    All you can do is take responsibility for your own safety.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Haven’t we been spending a lot of time pushing the idea that we should all be ready to protect everyone in a mass shooting scenario (like Paris or Brussels)? My thinking (protect self and family only) gets lots of beat down here.

      1. avatar Mike in OK says:

        Your thinking is spot on. Protect yourself and your family. If someone else happens to benefit from your efforts then I guess it was their lucky day.

  13. avatar BDub says:

    “inescapable yet unbearable reality” implies a desire to commit suicide and/or a poor understanding of when to use “yet”. Either way, I don’t care enough to stop them.

  14. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    While I’m very sorry that a nice woman like Gabby Giffords was shot and injured, I also have to say that I reject entirely her attempt to use her injuries to establish a moral imperative justifying the denial of my constitutional right keep and bear arms. To put it more bluntly, her injuries don’t trump my right to use a gun to defend myself and my family against the very harm that befell her. I’m sorry, it just doesn’t.

    Gun controllers always remind me of the Irish monks on the island of Lindinsfarne who stubbornly refused to defend themselves in the face of the Viking raids that ultimately took their lives and destroyed their Monestary. In contrast, I always turn to The Battle Of Kings Mountain where frontirsmen decimated a British regiment that was threatening their settlements.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      She and her husband own at least 2 GLOCKS, with 33rd magazines. Which is OK because she is her and her is the right type person to have a gun.

  15. avatar Wrightl3 says:

    Proof we need more guns.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      And more ammo and accessories

  16. avatar Sammy^ says:

    “Speaking is Difficult”

    Only when your talking out of your ass.

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