Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Ban AR-15’s. Obviously.

Rev. Nancy Wilson (courtesy theseattlelesbian.com)

“How obvious can it be that we have to ban assault weapons in our country. How obvious can it be?” – Rev. Nancy Wilson quoted in Omar Mateen Probed for Terror Ties but Legally Purchased Weapons [via nbcnews.com]

BFG-Long-Logo-Blue-JPG-220x39

comments

  1. avatar Bob says:

    So ban a completely legal class of firearms because someone used one to commit a horrible crime? Penalize millions of gun owners and manufacturers, of these completely legal items because of the actions of one criminal? Sounds a lot like bigotry.

    I could think of a lot of other circumstances where the actions of a few could be used to penalize the many. I don’t see those being paraded around as solutions to criminal acts.

    1. avatar 33AD says:

      It is exactly what they want.

      What was that “never let a tragedy go to waste” thing I heard about?

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” FIFY

        “If you haven’t got a good crisis, create one.” – anon

        In periods of crisis the people will demand that you do things that they would never consider allowing in other times.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Surely we can find a middle ground here. Isn’t there SOMETHING we can ban that will show our respect for the feelings of people who honestly want sensible gun-control? Maybe we could ban those handles or those shoulder things that go up. Can’t we do it for the kids? /sarc/

      1. avatar Desert Ranger says:

        Maybe we could ban Islam? Or just wipe away Muslims like we did the Native Americans? Fundamentalist Muslims believe killing gays is merciful… Wouldn’t the converse be true?

  2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    Almost a dozen Islamic countries handout death sentences for being homosexual…

    Are guns the problem there too?

    1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      How obvious can it be that we have to ban tall buildings in those countries?

      1. avatar CLarson says:

        If we knocked all the buildings in the Islamic counties down to 1 story, think of all the gay lives we would save! If it saves just one life…

  3. avatar Red in CO says:

    Shit, this moron needs to learn some history. New flash bud: we had a federal AWB and 10-round magazine capacity limit for a decade, and it had ZERO effect on crime.

    1. avatar James says:

      Not only this, but Nan would be equally intentionally obtuse to the fact that until Orlando, the deadliest mass murder in the US, was committed with………… (wait for it)…………………..two (2) handguns. Yes handguns with 10 round clips (I know it’s really mags, but I’m partially writing to the level of the bubble headed reporters).

      Sorry Nan, hiding behind some purported belief in JC isn’t going to shield you from criticism of your totalitarian ideals.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        I think the Happy Land night club arson of 1990, killing 87, probably holds that title; assuming we’re keeping to the single actor standard and not counting 9-11.

        Ironically, the killer in that case chose arson as his Plan B, when he found he couldn’t achieve his first choice of buying and using a handgun in New York. Had he been able to, the death toll would have certainly been much lower, likely in the single digits.

      2. avatar FedUp says:

        I think you mean ‘mass shooting’, not ‘mass murder’.

        The biggest school massacre tops that shooting you mention, and as mentioned above, the biggest nightclub massacre tops the school bombing and this weekend’s shooting.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

      3. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        And when someone uses a lever-action rifle chambered in .45-70 Government (loaded with heavy hardcast lead bullets) to kill even more people (each bullet will have no trouble penetrating and killing 3 to 5 adults), will gun-grabbers demand that we ban lever-action rifles (150 year old technology) and that caliber (nearly as old)?

        1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          Yes.

        2. avatar PeterW says:

          Wait, those are LEGAL?!?!? OMGFRULOLOl BAN!! GHFHFDh!!!

    2. avatar Art out West says:

      The apostle Paul (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) banned women pastors, but some churches don’t care much about the Bible anyway.

      1. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

        Did he Art? Ever see the word DEACON used with a woman? That is a position of authority. AND Paul(and JESUS) were financially supported by those vile women…

    3. avatar Jon in CO says:

      It had an effect, they call it Columbine High School. During the height of that ban. So, it obviously proves that it would work.

  4. avatar Greg says:

    Just read this woman’s bio at Wikipedia and you’ll quickly realize that she’s nothing more than a left-wing activist in cleric’s clothing. She’s supported the radical left’s agenda for most of her life. No surprise that she supports the disarmament of the civilian population. Easy to see why nbc news would choose her to push its anti-gun agenda.

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      I thought it was a dude from the picture.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        My God, so did I until you said it and I went back for a closer look. Had she been standing next to me at the urinal (yes, there’s a device marketed that assists females with that), I probably still wouldn’t have noticed.

        1. avatar J38 says:

          How do you know that. What are you keeping from us JH. Lol. There should be back ground checks and registration for preachers.

      2. avatar Another former water walker in CT says:

        I thought someone had photoshopped Bill Gates headphones into that picture.

        1. avatar Another former water walker in CT says:

          *head

        2. avatar FormerWaterWalker says:

          HEY! Welcome to the club-I used to do super-human feats…now not so much. Yeah this is a gay gal who preaches an apostate “gospel”…muslim terrorist and you want a gun ban.

        3. avatar Geoff PR says:

          It’s clear we need universal WaterWalker control….

  5. avatar 33AD says:

    Sad.

    Scared of a hunk of metal.

    Ignorant regarding hoardes of terrorists likely in wait.

  6. avatar DaveL says:

    The FBI interviewed him several times on at least two separate occasions, and decided he wasn’t a threat. He had a private security license from the State of Florida.

    I, for one, am done with the idea that every time the government screws the pooch, we ought to reward them with more power and less oversight.

  7. avatar Mk10108 says:

    Ban plate tectonics…its kill and destroyed more than an AR ever will.

    1. avatar HP says:

      We need to ban time. Time is the number one killer of Americans, it has a 100% mortality rate. Until we start a war on time, we are all doomed.

      1. avatar PeterW says:

        “On a long enough time line, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero”

  8. avatar Anonymous says:

    Ban AR15s??? Uh no. Ban suicidal Muslim extremists.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Better yet, just ban Islam. In its current form, it’s not really a religion anyway and thus does not enjoy 1st amendment protections.

      1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

        Better yet, don’t ‘ban’ anything and focus on fighting a problem when it arises.

        In this case, the root of the problem would seem to lie at a large swath of the population having head-in-sand syndrome by not recognizing a specific set of dangers the real world is presenting…self-professed murders confessions of continuing to murder.

        ‘Banning’ them probably won’t accomplish much more than banning illegal drug sales has done. The solution is a little more … definitive than ink on paper.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          I think it’s a lot easier to ban a religion than it is to ban drugs. After all, you didn’t see a lot of Jews in Berlin in 1944, did you?

        2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          I’m guessing the Jews in Berlin went along (to get along) with incremental policy changes over 1-2 decades a LOT easier than contemporary Muslims would do with a single-step “ban.”

          In other words, it was not announced to “ban Jews” in Germany. What you are describing is the result of a LONG effort subtly executed. That’s a far cry from “ban Muslims” and thinking they won’t, you know….fight back.

          Besides, I was speaking more on the essence of the concept of “ban.” My comment was aimed at the concept of the weak use of platitudes vice actual action. I doubt murderers will be stopped by “bans.”

          Further, “ban” implies government action…nanny statism. I’m thinking moving our solutions more toward individual sovereignty (ie, in this context, armed populace taking personal responsibility) is not only more philosophically palatable, but also more effective.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        First Amendment protects freedom of speech of all kinds (and hence also ideologies), not just religions.

        Of course, to Trumpist neo-fascists, constitution is just a piece of paper where it doesn’t concern their rights, anyway.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      It was mostly a joke. You don’t know who is going to be suicidal or extremists and you can’t ban all Muslims. My comment was to show that guns are not the cause of this problem.

  9. avatar livingintx says:

    Ban AR-15’s because the FBI, DHS, NSA, CIA, etc. failed in stopping another terrorist attack on US soil.

  10. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    If you’re willing to kill 50 people (illegally) you’re probably willing to break the law to acquire the tools to do it. And if you’ve got ties to ISIS you’ll probably have help.

  11. avatar Rick K says:

    Ban Political Correctness!!!!!

  12. avatar Angry person says:

    This hasn’t been the worst mass shooting….look what happened to blacks in the early 1900s around WW1 in East St.Louis (which is very close to me and still run down because of what happened back then). Whites (which I am) have perpetrated the most vicious crimes since coming to America starting with the Native Americans….but not all white people are killers just like how all Muslims are not terrorists….there have been white terrorists, black terrorists, Asian etc. That’s gives them no right to take away legal law abiding citizens right to defend themselves.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      [CITATION NEEDED] Take you’re race baiting elsewhere. The problem is not “terrorism” it’s Islam.

      1. avatar peirsonb says:

        You’re just being bigoted. I don’t see any way in which a religion that has been raping and pillaging for all of its nearly 1300 year history could possibly be the problem…

    2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      Who brought up race or color?

      Islam is not a color or race, it’s an ideology.

    3. avatar ThomasR says:

      Angry person? Better check your “white privilege” at being the most vicious ethnicity on the planet. The Aztecs would have been happy to cut your beating heart out of your chest, along with 10’s of thousands of others on top of their pyramids, before white man ever showed their faces on these continents.

      As for looking for equivalancy? Ah, the sickness of the progressive mind, to never accept that not all belief systems are equal, and to never accept that are few are belief systems that encourage the worst sides of human nature, that nurture the most blood thirsty and savage aspects of the human spirit.

      Two of these types of belief systems are Communism and all of it’s spawn with the hundreds of millions murdered in the last hundred years; and Islam, a belief system based on the teachings and actions of a mass murdering religious psychopath. A man that raped, pillaged and plundered and that would chop the head off of any infidel that would not convert to Islam or be subjugated.

      Wake up Angry Person, the only one you’re angry at is yourself for embracing the self hatred and self loathing as promulgated by the death cult called progressivism.

  13. What does she expect the ban to accomplish other than increasing the prison population even further?

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      She will accomplish one step toward disarming the freedom loving, law respecting population of this country while giving more complete control of those weapons to criminals (which set includes politicians).

      It’s a feature, not a bug.

      1. avatar Cliff H says:

        And should her church become the target of a similar attack, whether or not with AR15s, she will stand at her pulpit and calmly pray while she waits for the good guys to arrive with guns to take care of the situation. Right. She must feel that if you die a righteous, unarmed, death you go straight to whatever heaven she believes in and collect her denomination’s version of 72 virgins.

  14. avatar Chris Morton says:

    Not a week goes by when some religious person confirm the wisdom of my becoming an agnostic…

    1. avatar Chris Morton says:

      Let’s try that once again, this time in English:

      Not a week goes by when some religious person doesn’t confirm the wisdom of my choice to become an agnostic.

  15. avatar Cliff H says:

    If I am not mistaken, walking into a crowded nightclub, regardless of its usual patronage, with the intent of murdering as many people as you can is a fairly serious felony in Florida which does not relate to which tool or device you use to accomplish your goal.

    For some reason there is a federal law that makes it an even worser crime if you intentionally target a protected class of citizens (homosexuals, negroes, religious affiliation, etc.)

    Since none of that seemed to matter in this case, what the HELL good would banning AR15 rifles accomplish? He would us an AK47 instead, or a brace of Glock 19s with lots of spare mags. He was shooting fish in a barrel, for God’s sake! Nothing available in that location could or would have stopped him until he got tired, ran out of ammo, or ran out of targets, whatever weapon he chose. Right up until LEOs eventually stormed the place to confront him.

    And this was a “lone wolf”. If he had one or more partners, even if they just posted at the exits and handled the escapees, pistols would suffice. Gasoline fires to block exits would also work. In the case of a planned attack on a soft target no amount of unconstitutional gun regulation can, would or will make any difference other than removing all ability of the intended victims to mount any sort of defense while they wait an eternity for “first responders” to arrive.

    1. avatar BigDaveinVT says:

      Well said. Just one point of clarification: According to the reports I’ve seen and heard, the place had only one point of entry & egress. It was a barrel specially crafted for shooting fish. An attacker could have achieved just as much carnage with gasoline and a match.

      …and I thought it was a dude in the picture too.

  16. avatar Senior Gun Owner 1950 says:

    Nothing but more typical liberal leftest responses. SSDD (same stuff different day), It’s getting really old and tired. Ignore the criminal that’s the root cause of the crime and go after everyone else’s guns,

    To all those who call for a ban on AR-15’s and similar “scary looking guns” I respond clearly and simply
    MOLON LABE !!

  17. avatar Rick says:

    I would like her to define it first. I’m sure that would be worth a laugh as she is sure to be an expert on the subject.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      It’s easier than you think, even for them. It’s their version of the two-line postcard tax return:

      1. Did you earn any money last year?
      2. Send it to the IRS.

      Regarding guns:

      1. Do you own any sort of firearm?
      2. Turn it in or go to jail.

      1. avatar Senior Gun Owner 1950 says:

        If it come to that, I suspect that more than a few will choose to surrender just one round at a time and not the entire AR. Of course, this might make more than jail the inevitable consequence of the liberal ban.
        Just how do the leftest liberals propose to ban and then get 300,000,000+ guns out of civilian hands without sparking an armed conflict? This isn’t Australia or Canada folks. Banning guns or even a subset of guns like AR-15’s may have some unpleasant collateral consequences.
        Best think about that gun banners.
        MOLON LABE has some real meaning that you’d better take seriously.
        Respectfully
        Senior Gun Owner 1950

  18. avatar glenux says:

    To my fellow TTAG readers,
    in the next few days you are going to be bombarded by a rash of finger pointing and blaming and an avalanche of Reactionary opinions to so-called solutions.

    As a result, calls will be made increased restrictions on the liberties that could impact ALL of us.
    “We got to do something” will be clarion.
    This is human nature and is typical to react without thinking.
    If I may suggest what we must do hold back and stay out of the whirlwind.
    Remember, after the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, the American public put the Japanese in concentration camps.
    This was reaction out of fear.
    Ban Guns. Ban Muslims. Ban this. Ban that.
    Is it wise to take away the rights of people who are just “suspected” terrorists
    without Due Process? We ALL share in the right of Due Process.

    The worst thing we can do to ourselves it respond without thinking of the long-term consequences.
    Our worst enemy could be ourselves.

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Agreed. We shouldn’t be banning anything.

      1. avatar Klaus says:

        Even cottage cheese?

        1. avatar Timmy! says:

          Easy there Klaus. A blob of cottage cheese on a pear half can be mighty tasty.

        2. avatar John Barnett says:

          Yes we ban cottage cheese. Duh.
          We’re not barbaric.

  19. avatar Bob321 says:

    Lady, we have these guns so you will not end up in some sort of concentration camp or reeducation camp, or whatever. We have them so you have the right to say whatever you want and believe whatever you want. Lady, you are the reason I will never set foot in your church. I did not go to war to fight for the rights of people from another nation only to have 5th columns like you undermine my own rights. What would your God say if he knew you were calling for action that would eventually annihilate Christianity in America? What will you tell him on Judgement Day after leading his church onto ruin? Sorry everyone. The suicidal tendencies of the “religious” elite just pisses me off to no end.

  20. avatar The Hussar says:

    “Reverend”

  21. avatar Publius says:

    The only ban that would reduce violence would be to ban Islam.

  22. avatar Teddy36 says:

    Wasn’t Christianity banned for awhile? How did that turn out for people? Was it still practiced even though they did so illegally? Yes? Good then stfu about my firearms.

  23. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    Once AR-15s are banned and the next shooter uses a different rifle, they must expand the AWB to include that one, then the next and the next. Until every gun is labeled an assault weapon and airguns are assault weapons and weapons of war that must be taken off the streets. The end game is an all out ban because the definition of assault weapon can always be changed to include any gun.

    1. avatar Bob in Calif says:

      That sh!t is already happening here.

  24. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Well Rev. Nancy Wilson, it would seem to some just as obvious that we just have to ban religion….
    But I don’t really expect you to see that link.

  25. avatar Ralph says:

    For a gay minister who leads a gay advocacy church, the Holy Moly Super Duper Rev. Nancy Wilson sure is stupidly unaware.

  26. avatar WI Patriot says:

    “This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence,” said Gwendolyn Patton, speaking on behalf of gay gun rights group Pink Pistols before dismissing calls for gun control. “At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer’s guns.”

  27. avatar The Original JohnO says:

    That thing is female?

  28. avatar Joe R. says:

    “Gun control” is twerk-speak for “he he he, stupid doesn’t know I’m disarming them for the next Civil War”.

  29. avatar anonymoose says:

    This kinda crap is why I’m not a Presbyterian anymore. Also the homosexuality and SJW infiltration. They’re an absolutely disgusting and degenerate perversion of “Christianity.”

  30. avatar LHW says:

    We should just make murder illegal. Oh, wait…

  31. avatar PeterK says:

    I am so so sick of this crap.

    ~”BAN AR15s!”
    -“That’s dumb and wouldn’t do anything.”
    ~”No one needs a semi-auto, ban all the things!”
    -“Sigh…”

    But don’t worry, because no one is coming for your guns.

    Right.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
Blue Force Gear Quote of the Day: Ban AR-15’s. Obviously. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/06/robert-farago/blue-force-gear-quote-of-the-day-ban-ar-15s-obviously/" title="Email to a friend/colleague">
button to share via email