actualturnout11

There’s no surprise that the Los Angeles Times is heavily biased against gun owners. California is already a hotbed of civilian disarmament, and the idea of the peasants rising up against their rulers doesn’t sit well with the California elite. So, when the top brass at the Angeles Times saw tens of thousands of law abiding gun owners rallying to protect their civil rights, they damn near browned their pants. And in an unsigned editorial entitled Peril from ‘Patriots’, they’ve equated these gun rights supporters with terrorists.

There are, in increasingly frightening numbers, cells of angry men in the United States preparing for combat with the U.S. government. They are usually heavily armed, blinded by an intractable hatred, often motivated by religious zeal.

They’re not jihadists. They are white, right-wing Americans, nearly all with an obsessive attachment to guns, who may represent a greater danger to the lives of American civilians than international terrorists.

There’s no basis for that statement. The Southern Poverty Law Center (which is cited in the article) talks about an uptick in “patriot” groups, but is overly broad in their definition. And for an example of how dangerous these groups are, the LA Times uses the example of the Oklahoma City Bombings as these groups “showing their teeth” when that was in reality one guy’s lone wolf plot. In reality, I can’t think of a single instance of a “patriot” group ever actually attacking anything in the United States. But that’s not stopping the LA Times from spreading fear of gun owning citizens.

Patriot groups are motivated by a host of anti-government attitudes, but their primary focus is guns. They are convinced that the government is out to seize their weapons, even though most legislation is focused on keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or restricting the types of weapons that can be sold.

False. Gun control legislation has and will never be an effective means of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. By definition, it only impacts law abiding citizens. And yet, the LA Times doesn’t understand why people don’t agree with their “sensible” and “common sense” approach to civilian disarmament.

Many are also united by belief in an outlandish one-world government conspiracy theory positing that the United Nations is poised to strip away American property rights and impose socialism on us all.

Some do, but no more than Democrats that believe that crystal triangles hold mystical powers. I can trot out the crazies on each side of the aisle, but I try to keep from making sweeping judgments about people based on the people that agree with their point of view.

The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights, and in fact most patriot activity consists of venting steam by meeting with like-minded Neanderthals and firing off blog posts threatening civil war.

Nice. In one sentence the LA Times derides “bloggers” as not being journalists, and calls everyone who owns a gun a “Neanderthal.” Way to keep it classy, there.

Yet such blather tends to get under the skin of the Timothy McVeighs of the world. These groups should be closely monitored, with resources adequate to the task, even if it means shifting some homeland security money from the hunt for foreign terrorists.

Apparently gun owners need to be under DHS surveillance. Because infringing on our fundamental right to bear arms isn’t good enough, but because of our political beliefs we don’t have a right to privacy either. I guess civil rights are only for people the LA Times agrees with . . .

Recommended For You

61 Responses to LA Times: Gun Rights Activists are Worse Than Terrorists, Need to Be Monitored

    • “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

      – Edmund Burke

  1. How the hell can we respond to this, I’d say not to ever buy a paper from them, but never have and never will. “Not taking guns away” Nope just making you a felon if you refuse to hand them over… It’s funny about the crystal comment above I was thinking about pot smoking hippy crap…. When will San Andres fault line cut us a break and dump the biggest group of libtards into the Pacific? If you live in Cali and you are a gun rights activist you have my condolences…

    • Southern Poverty Law Center lists any group who opposes illegal immigrants as hate groups even if that group is for immigration reform. Any group that is pro-(name your religion) is a hate group. I guess they could not find enough KKK groups and Neo-nazi groups so they have had to slowly expand their definition of hate to those who have different views that are not like their views. hypocrisy at its finest.

      • Money at its finest. The SPLC found itself with millions and millions after its poverty law bit had wound down somewhat. They couldn’t figure whether anti-gun panic-mongering or trying to brand all white (non-minority white, that is) men with a big R was a more worthy goal. I think they have programs in both at the moment.

  2. Peaceful assembly and editorials… next logical step is suicide bombing! Terrorism is accomplished through the use or threat of violence. Aren’t the civilian disarmament types pushing their agenda by exploiting violence and using fear tactics to infringe on a right? Shouldn’t those expected to serve in a militia be familiar with the tools of service? Do you want to be the firearms training instructor dealing with recruits (or draftees) totally unfamiliar with the functioning of semiautomatic pistols and AR style rifles?

  3. increasingly frightening numbers : yes
    cells of angry men : angry at guys like you. i would call it perturbed.
    cells of angry men : don’t forget the wife!
    preparing for combat : god i hope not.
    heavily armed : yes.
    white : no you racist.
    right-wing : no
    obsessive attachment to guns : yeah, ok.
    represent a greater danger : nope
    like-minded Neanderthals : you started the name calling momma’s boy
    shifting some homeland security money : sequester b-i-tchez.

    • +1
      It’s 20% truth, 60% poeticly exagerated buzzword packed twisted truth, and 20% lies. People will believe the lies, imagine lies about the twisted truth, and think the good true things are actually undesirable.

  4. Nick,

    Giving credence to morris dee’s group, the splc, puts you in the same category as them….

    You guys are really starting to disappoint me!

  5. things have incorrectly been blamed against the “right wing” for decades. In the 1960s when the Yale hockey rink was bombed, it was blamed on right wingers. Conveniently, there were 13k+ left wingers protesting in New Haven that day. But of course it couldn’t be them.

    And Loughner was claimed to be influenced by Palin. He shot Giffords because he asked her a nonsensical question and she didn’t answer it up to his standards. In Colorado, the media tried desperately to connect James Holmes with the Tea Party. They did, but it was a 50 year old guy and not the college student James Holmes who committed the Aurora attacks.

  6. As an atheist libertarian anti-government gun nut, I resent being lumped in with religious right-wingers.

  7. Just another example of people who have never touched, let alone fired a firearm explaining to other people who also have never touched a firearm what typical firearm owners are all about. Kind of like me explaining microbiology to a deaf mute.

    • In another time and situation, the LA Times would be under congressional investigation for being communist for writing this. The writers and editorial staff would potentially be blackballed from work in the field of journalism anywhere in this country. Those that don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The LA Times hasn’t learned, but we have. We refuse to be made victims. We’re not the bad guys and can’t be made to feel guilty for our virtues. FOAD LA Times.

    • I mean if the media does not support my right to use the tools to defend their right to free speech and a free press how can I support them? I can’t support their right if they don’t first support my right.

      • The saying that is commonly attributed to Voltaire,
        I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” did not actually come from Voltaire.

        It came from one of his biographers, Evelyn Beatrice Hall.
        But I can’t, in this instance, say that I would defend their right to say it.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Beatrice_Hall

  8. There’s some journalistic integrity for you, not signing a name to an editorial. I harbor no illusions about the press these days. They have been the dogs humping the legs of the liberal establishment for a long time. It just amazes me that the standards of reportage and conduct has sunk so low so fast. Apparently the few people who still read “mainstream” news are ok with this. An allegedly serious newspaper resorting to name calling and hiding behind an un-signed editorial?

    • Every paper has one or more unsigned editorials every day. It means that the editorial board got together and decided that’s what their official position is. In other words, you can fairly hang this on “the left”, not just some random blogger. The only way it could be more of a “sense of the lefties” statement is if it came from the New York Times instead of the LA Times.

  9. What “OpEd”??

    That shit sounds directly like word for word Mark Potok of the $200million HQ Southern ‘Poverty’ Law Center founded by court cited child molester Morris Dees, who have merely taken over the FBI’s COINTELPRO to merely label govt’s political enemies, this time merely with a ‘liberal’ gloss all the while feigning its pretense as a third party NGO acting in ‘public’s best interests.’

    Really, Americans really need to know how Pravda operated. Because we’ve had the same shit here, for a long time. The only difference is those ‘ignorant naive’ Commies KNEW they were being lied to, the 500ch infinite news outlet available Americans have no friggin clue. Who’s the naive ignorant one, now?

    Lest it’s still not clear to all gunnies now, DHS was always set up to target the Americans, not Hajjis. Capice?

    Here’s GeoPolitics101:

    ‘The Right,’ when in power push xenophobia and set up mechanisms to target them. And the Left bitches about loss in liberties because those same mechanisms can be made to target them, too.

    ‘The Left,’ when in power push ‘domestic enemies’ hysteria, then proceeds to keep and expand EVERY SINGLE one of those mechanisms they criticized.

    Who’s the more deft player?

  10. Who gives a rat’s @ss what any Californian has to say? Your economy sucks, you have no fresh water, all your vegetables are genetically modified, and your beaches are cold!

  11. I feel left out. The media keeps reporting that it’s all Whites that are for gun rights and for the constitution, but I’m a minority, Mexican-American, and I am a registered Libertarian, a gun owner, for smaller government, and more Liberty and I’m neber counted. Lol. Just wanted to give you all a heads up that there are some dark skinned people on your side. Don’t let the media try to eventually turn this into a white vs everyone else this.

  12. And also, the anti’s may say that gun rights people are too powerful, especially with gun rights people not being the majority opinion out there, but The United States of America and we are a Republic, which means even the smallest voices get representation. We are not a democracy, they know that, they fear that, and the Republic is here to stay!

  13. So does this mean Occupy Wall St, was a terrorist action too? The cased more issues and disruption and any 2A rally so far.

  14. To the anonymous LA Times libellers of 2nd Amendment activists: Your paranoid hypothesis, that support of the 2nd Amendment presents a danger to our Constitutional Republic, is contradictory by its own terms. You are calling support of a constitutional provision a threat to the government. Is the government now operating under some other founding law? If so, please post details. Thanks.

    Let’s you and I share an open secret, OK? Bombers and shooters have as typically been garden-variety weathermen, Bill and Bernadine Ayers types, and devoted Obama-Biden partisans, as much or more than fringe right wingers. They may be core Chicago socialites and academics now, but basically they’re bombers, and generally unrepentant, if I read Bill’s autobiography carefully. They’ve also been liberals and jihadi-leaning Army Officers and ex-LA Cops. They’ve been skinny young Koreans and Hmong. Disaffected reaks come in all flavors. I have yet to see a mass shooting by a group of OFWG 2nd Am. supporters. Agreed?

    LA itself does in fact face a large number of armed violent conspiracies, and the LA Times is aware of this: These are active conspiracies shooting actual people every week. Latino gangs conspire to beat and shoot (i.e. terrorize) black people out of neighborhoods the Latino gangs wish to occupy, to take. The Times has done little to help when Latino gangs openly drive black residents out of Central LA neighborhoods with beatings and shootings. You have no OFWG groups doing this sort of thing. We OFWG’s and Young Slim Multi-Ethnics purchase and train with guns and we don’t use them for crime. This worries you? Fix your racist gangs, blacks hating Latinos and Latinos hating blacks (your words from earlier articles). They hate. They have guns. They’ve been shooting people. It’s still going on. Drugs are part of it. Race war is a big part of it. The facts have been covered by the NYT and WaPo repeatedly, borrow their reporting if you need some facts. Then write us a letter, OK? Maybe we can do lunch.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/us/17race.html?pagewanted=all
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/…/melt0407a.ht

    • You are calling support of a constitutional provision a threat to the government.

      Why, yes, they are.

      If they held elected office, instead of selling birdcage liner, this would be what is known as a ‘Kinsley gaffe’.

      • Yep. Still, they speak as if there’s some other governing document, so they might as well let us know what they think it is. Laugh.

  15. In the interest of not saying that which cannot be said here I will simply intimate that the LA Times and the SPLC must be sharing the same ‘Pillow Talk’ following what some might term a form of intimate relationship. Let’s hope they use protection!

  16. The author of this editorial is the type of person who cannot be reached. Sadly, there are people on all sides of any issue who do not use reason to come to their beliefs. The more there are of such people, the less certain our form of government becomes.

  17. It isnt a big stretch from this artcle to the arguments that: 1) paranoid mentaly ill people should not be allowed to keep or bear arms, and 2) People who want guns are both paranoid and mentally ill. Catch 22?

    • Which also leads logically to adjudging the Founders as paranoid mentally ill people, so scrap the Constitution completely: This is a popular line of thought lately in DC, Chicago, and LA. It stands to reason. Why would a political party want, after attaining hegemony spending other people’s money, to be constrained by mere rights? I think Prof. Louis Michael Seidman has a new text out arguing for exactly this transition to unconstrained democracy. He opines it would be an improvement. He’s forgotten why some of his recent ancestors were chased out of Europe, apparently.

  18. TO: All
    RE: Typical Approach

    Step 1 — Demonize
    Step 2 — Disarm
    Step 3 — Destroy

    Enjoy,

    Chuck(le)
    [Be Prepared….the ‘fun’ is about to begin in earnest…..]

  19. So most pro gun activists, are law abiding citizens, police officers, sheriffs, Veterans (Who fought for your rights). Who are protesting under the protections of free speech and wish t protect an amendment in the bill of rights that some have sworn to protect. Yet they all should be monitored and are worse than terrorists?

    Yet, Criminals, the mentally ill, politicians who infringe upon our rights, corporations who commit white collar crimes and steal from the above. Should not…. Goes to show you the anti gunners are pro criminal, stand with the Adam Lanza’s of society, are against the constitution, and support Diane Feinsein’s push to discriminate against veterans.

    This is the mind of the anti gun liberal…

  20. Let’s just hope that the lies of the people who run the LA Times will eventually destroy their credibility to the general public.

  21. “The typical patriot acts within his free-speech and 2nd Amendment rights. … These groups should be closely monitored.”

    Imagine the outcry if a newspaper called for the government to closely monitor other groups acting lawfully, within their rights of free-speech and assembly, such as a labor union, an anti-war group, a Muslim student association, a black student association, or the “Occupy” movement.

  22. Morons. I need to be monitored? The fact that my government already feels the need to do this justifies, in part, my attitude towards them.

  23. Shows that California is run and the rich media are pure scum who are living in a bubble and dont know the real world.

  24. this is coming from higher up than the media; look to those who own both parties, the media, everything. a disarmed population suits their needs, especially as things get worse w/the economy & knowledge of some of what’s really happening slips thru the cracks. follow the money. qui bono?

  25. I see a simple and bloodless solution to this rags worries. The US government and the MSM support a return to respect for and adherrence to the Constitution and BOR. No more angry people gathering to protest. Problem solved. JWM should be in charge.

  26. And why would you be surprised by this? Its sister rag, The Chicago tribune greeted the Heller decision with a front page editorial that said “repeal the Second Amendment.”

  27. They really are paranoid. But even before 9/11, and long since, the Hating Left in this country was more worried about patriotic Americans, Southern Baptists, veterans, and of course gun owners, than they were worried about Islamofacists flying planes into office towers, or setting of the suitcase you-know-what in Manhattan.

    If we’re more dangerous in their minds to the country than people who actually attacked us, either the LA Times and their pals have put their collective brains in a blender, or they’ve got their own diabolical plans for the country.

  28. I love articles like this. Shows they’re getting scared, and they should be.

    “Terrorist” is the new “racist.” When a guy has no logical argument or support for their beliefs, but feels that bubbling cauldron of hatred for opposition anyway because he’s mentally and emotionally unstable, just blurt out “racist” or “terrorist.”

    Keep wetting your pants, fascist bootlickers. I’m loving every second of it.

    Truth be told, the LA Times just advocated for the destruction of multiple civil rights of people they don’t agree with. I call for them to be arrested on hate crime, inciting violence, and they should all be monitored by DHS.

  29. What about me? I’m black, non-religious and I think the Federal gov’t is to powerful and you’re Dam right I love my guns! So where do I fit?

  30. The language coming from the gun grabbers has reached disgusting levels of absurdity. They lost the “national debate” (that never really took place since they didn’t bring anything to the table beyond appeals to emotion) so they’ve been reduced to juvenile trash talk. I’m seeing this sort of garbage rhetoric everywhere, and it scares me to think that it might actually be getting through to some people.

  31. We are in the middle of a takeover of our Government, they have thrown the Constituion overboard.Bush and Obama work for the Banking Cartel and Multinational Corporations , look these up. Stand for you Constitution!

Leave a Reply

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