This is humor folks. Laugh.
This is humor folks. Laugh.
Joe Wurzelbacher (a.k.a., “Joe the Plumber” at joeforamerica.com) writes:
Andy Parker is the father of Alison Parker, the Virginia newscaster. Ms. Parker and her cameraman Andy Ward were gunned down last week in a brutal shooting. Immediately after receiving the tragic news, Mr. Parker appeared on the mainstream media to tell the world that he wants gun violence to “remain in the news.” Mr. Parker vowed to fight for more gun control. Taking into consideration the trauma Mr. Parker has just endured, it needs to be made clear that his stated goals are, in effect, to make it more difficult for myself to protect my daughter from a crazed lunatic murderer, whose goal was vengeance against white people . . .
According to Chad R. MacDonald [quoted above], the NRA’s desire to protect Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutional right to keep and bear arms in order to defend against government tyranny – exactly as the Founding Fathers envisioned – undermines “the security of a free state.” I’m guessing that Chad doesn’t get the “free” part. But Chad’s confusion on the whole government vs. liberty thing is nothing compared to the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence’s Orwellian interpretation of Chad’s confusion. Translation of their caption: we must destroy the Second Amendment to defend it! (Sound familiar?) OK, they probably mean . . .
The NRA-ILA writes:
On Friday, August 28, 2015, the National Rifle Association filed an important amicus briefwith the United States Supreme Court in the case of Friedman v. City of Highland Park(No. 15-133). The case challenges the City’s archaic ban on common semi-automatic rifles that it pejoratively labels “assault weapons,” as well as standard-capacity magazines with capacities over ten rounds . . .
Everytown for Gun Safety’s #whateverittakes social media campaign throws the gun control movement’s fanaticism into stark relief. Whatever it takes to enact gun control laws, we’re committed to doing it! Enact draconian licensing and registration requirements that leave millions of Americans defenseless against criminals, crazies and the threat of government tyranny? Whatever it takes! Create a law that allows police and relatives to confiscate a legal gun owner’s firearms without due process (with a carve-out for cops)? Whatever it takes! Lie, misrepresent, mischaracterize, manipulate statistics, commission biased studies, sensationalize? Whatever it takes! And where does that lead? If you think about it . . .
Michael Bloomberg’s anti-ballistic bully boys are at it again. Unable to assemble more than a few dozen supporters in the real world, they continue to rely on their bloody shirt-waving social media anti-gun jihad to maintain the illusion that they’re a meaningful movement. The latest gimmick: a #whateverittakes hashtag campaign complete with TTAG-like “I Am a Gun Owner” selfies. Which just BEGS for a counter-campaign. Want to have some fun and win a box of the pistol ammo of your choice? Click here to print out the above sign, fill it in with your choice of recipients and your feelings on guns or gun control, selfie (SAME FORMAT AS ABOVE) and send it to us at . . .
Let me just say this from the beginning: this “study” is complete BS. And I don’t say that from an ideological point of view, I say that as someone who respects things like truth and logic. NPR is touting this recent “study” (published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology) as proof that people are racist and more willing to shoot a black person than a white person, but there are a few major issues.
“Had [TV news killer Vester] Flanagan lived in New York State, the story would likely have been very different,” nydailynews.com‘s Robert J. Spitzer writes. “I know this first-hand, because I applied for a state pistol permit two years ago. Had Flanagan been required to do what I had to do, it is highly unlikely that he could have legally obtained a permit, and therefore a gun.” Highly unlikely. Legally. Two qualifiers which tell the tale. Truth be told, criminals and crazies have no problem obtaining a gun illegally, which renders Spitzer’s argument moot. But let’s see how he came to that irrelevant conclusion . . .
By Robert B. Young, MD
Some weeks it’s hard to decide which new anti-gun “study” to dismember. The problem is that there is so much propaganda coming so fast and furiously. It’s like lobbing a lot of crude missiles at a target hoping to do some damage even though none of them are explosive. I can’t recommend too highly Chris Cox’s NRA-ILA report of August 26, “Weird Science” as a brief guide to the junk science that is the last resort of a cause sailing a leaky boat. As Cox says, watch out for “cherry-picking the data” to prove a point and for “garbage in, garbage out”. I’d add to beware when correlations are trumpeted as likely causation. To paraphrase W.C. Fields, we are being “dazzled with … b—s—“ . . .
Rare Gun Violence Erupts In Stockholm: 1 Dead, 3 Injured In Shooting And Stabbing In Sweden the headline at ibtimes.com proclaims, forgetting last March’s pub shooting in Gothenburg, the Malmö shootings, a more recent drive-by shooting in the same city and other firearms-related crimes. “After a rare case of deadly gun violence erupted in one of Europe’s safest capitals Sunday afternoon, three suspects entered a police station and were arrested on suspicion of their involvement. One person died, and three others were injured in Rinkeby, a neighborhood in the Swedish city of Stockholm, according to Swedish authorities, and just three hours later, three suspects turned themselves in, Swedish Television News reported.” As the Bard would say, methinks they doth protest too much. Like this . . .
In this interview with The Atlantic, Democratic New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu acknowledges that violent crime in his city is a cultural problem, an educational problem, an opportunity problem and never once says it is a gun problem. “Imagine if other big city mayors would do the same?” TTAG Pascal asks. Good question.
Not everyone who reads this site is a fan of Fox News. I get that. Fox’s “Interrupter-in-Chief’,” for example, is decidedly squidgy on gun rights. While Billious Bill O’Reilly may sit astride Fox like a cantankerous colossus, there’s plenty of firearms-freedom loving commentators down at the sharp end. Check out this clip of Dana Loesch giving Nomiki Konst what for. Ann Coulter takes no prisoners, gun rights wise. But the endlessly sardonic Greg Gutfeld is the best – least strident yet most passionate – of the bunch. This particular clip is remarkable only in that Gutfeld turns to Geraldo and says . . .