The Anti-Gun Left’s Dropping All Pretenses About ‘Supporting the Second Amendment’

courtesy npr.org

Earlier today we asked what you think the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex’s reaction would be after Santa Fe, given that the murderer didn’t use anything that they can reasonably characterize as a “weapon of war.” The Santa Fe shooter managed to kill or wound 20 people using two “ordinary” guns; a shotgun and a revolver. Even Diane Feinstein isn’t stupid enough to hold a Model 629 up in front of the cameras and proclaim, “We can’t have guns like this on America’s streets!”

A number of you figured that the fig leaf would finally drop…that all the happy crappy about only banning “military-style” firearms or “just” semi-automatics would now be tossed over the side in favor of a little long-overdue candor.

As has been clear for decades, the long game goal has always been, at minimum, an Australian-style “buyback” of most civilian-owned guns and, ideally, total civilian disarmament featuring wholesale confiscation. It’s the secret, dearly-held dream that all the hoplophobic harridans, civic-minded billionaires and statist politicians have always harbored, but never dared to speak of.

We saw a few more furtive mentions of the idea after Parkland. A desiccated, retired Supreme Court justice here, an inconveniently honest post or op-ed there, but mostly the gun control crowd dutifully maintained the fiction that they really aren’t after all the guns. All they want is a few, common-sense gun safety reforms that, surely, reasonable people can agree to.

But as many of you predicted, if ever there was a time we’re likely to see that convenient fiction dropped, it’s now. Now that another psycho kid, looking to reenact the atrocities of earlier moral deficients, has shown that an AR-15 isn’t required.

Well it’s already started. Case in point, an open to the NRA from Esquire’s editor at large, Dave Holmes, entitled, ‘Okay, Now I Actually Do Want To Take Your Guns’  . . .

Hey there, NRA:

Listen, I know the moments after a gunman opens fire in a school are hectic for you. You have to get your talking points together, you have to mentally prepare to debate a traumatized yet sensible child, you have to look at yourself in the mirror and practice saying that more guns would have made the situation less deadly. It’s a busy time! And since we are always either in the moments after or the moments before a mass shooting, you’re pretty much always busy, I have noticed!

Anyway, I just wanted to drop you a line and let you know that I now actually do want to take your guns.

All of your guns.

Right now.

Read the rest here.

comments

  1. avatar Ironhead says:

    Well allow me to retort….
    Come and try.

    1. avatar Red says:

      A better reply: You apparently don’t want women to be able to defend themselves. You wish to throw them to the wolves. What will you say to the woman who is raped or killed and can’t have a gun to defend herself because you decided guns are evil?

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        She can walk around strapped with a chastity belt not a gun.

        1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          In Europe they actually have anti-Muslim chastity belts for the women to wear.

        2. avatar anonymoose says:

          That would be denying her sexuality! She should be able to trib with whoever she likes, whenever she likes, wherever she likes. The existence of penises and phallic objects is rape and oppression, and we need to teach men not to rape by emasculating them or…

          Sh!tlord.

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Liberalism is not only a mental disorder, but a death cult. Their grand wish is the other people die so that Liberals (of all gradations) can feel good about themselves.

      3. avatar CZ Rider says:

        These people can’t think beyond two or three words and have absolutely no concern for who or what is harmed on the path to satisfying their feelz.

        Your reply, while correct and well-intentioned, is far too long. Just say no.

      4. avatar Troubled Soul says:

        In England they give their women a whistle.
        That’s right a WHISTLE.
        i have no idea what caliber it is.

        1. avatar Laserbeam says:

          Prolly a whistle caliber big enuff that would require a sling to tote it around.

    2. avatar JasonM says:

      I’m sure we can agree on a compromise.
      They want our guns and ammunition. If they really press the issue, we can give them the bullets.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        They can have all my bullets first — one at a time at 3,000 feet per second.

    3. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Exactly,Come Git Some,one bullet at a time.
      Perhaps Barbra Fineswine and Chuckles the Effing Communist Clown will lead the confiscation squad,after all they are the movements leaders,only seems fitting.

  2. avatar Sam I Am says:

    “Anyway, I just wanted to drop you a line and let you know that I now actually do want to take your guns.

    All of your guns.

    Right now.”

    Oh, please. Oh, please. Do get your Demoncrat loonies to run for public office on that. Especially the mid-term elections for House and Senate. Please.

    And please, oh please. Do get your Demoncrat loonies to run on the humanity and human dignity due MS-13 members.

    Please?

    1. avatar Brian says:

      Pretty pleeeeez!

    2. avatar CZ Rider says:

      Or man up, come on over, and see how you do. You’re not welcome in my home, but if you want to forcibly enter and try to carry out your little crusade anyway, you’ll probably come away with at least nine little round souvenirs for your trouble at least.

  3. avatar cisco kid says:

    Well what did gun owners expect when for decades they did nothing as the mass shootings became not only more often but each more horrific than the last. When you let a problem get out of hand it becomes a crisis and people panic and want an instant fix which often is not the best fix but unfortunately the only fix now that the situation has got so out of hand.

    Sensible laws like vetting of all gun purchases, safe storage laws, more money for mental health care all blocked by the Republicans who guaranteed that they would become the anti-gunners best friends and best examples of what happens when you do absolutely nothing about a serious societal problem. Now its too late for sensible solutions as mass panic has set in and the majority of Americans all of who do not own any guns see the complete ban on guns as the only quick solution to the problem and sadly they are right it would be just as it was in Australia. It worked there and the American people know it did work there so look out Gun owners and Republicans you have already dug your own graves by refusing to do nothing for so long a period of time.

    1. avatar Robb says:

      Just like it worked for that family down under a week or so ago huh?

      Now, go away troll.

    2. avatar Pat says:

      Homicides rates in general, to include homicide rates by firearm, have dropped by roughly 50%. This despite the number of guns in the U.S. roughly doubling over the same time.

      Because the facts are not on the statists’ side, school shootings (which account for such a tiny percentage of total murders that they approach statistical zero) receive wall to wall, 24/7 coverage by the news media in order to manufacture the illusion of a spree killing epidemic in order to push their gun control agenda. And idiots like yourself buy it. Why are you so stupid?

      1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

        Have you seen all the airplane crashes in the last few weeks? Hundreds dead! We have an airplane crash epidemic, we must stop flying before everyone dies!

        1. avatar M1Lou says:

          The biggest mass murder this decade was done with an aircraft. The Germanwings pilot purposefully crashed the plane killing everyone on board (150). But that was ok, because it was an airplane right? At least they weren’t shot! This of course gets ignored.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

        2. avatar anonymoose says:

          If God had wanted man to fly, he would have given him wings, Mr. Kidd.

        3. avatar John P. says:

          Anonymoose wins the day with the “Diamonds are Forever” quote. Well played!

      2. avatar Scoutino says:

        You mean, when you have a problem which decreases in severity until it drops to 50%, it is NOT time to start running in circles, waving arms and yelling “CRISIS!!! We have to do SOMETHING!!!!”?
        Huh, when then, if the SOMETHING they want is to grab all our guns? Will they be tomorrow in better position than today? Will they in a year?

    3. avatar ThomasR says:

      Oh now Cisco Kid. You simply show your child like need for daddy government solutions by repeating the endless gun laws that ultimately would have stopped almost none of the mass shootings we have seen in the last few decades.

      Instead of talking about guns being the problem, why not the problem that the vast majority of these school shooters have come from broken homes. That these boys have no male figure to show them what a healthy man that deals with problems in a healthy way looks like. Like how to stand up to and be willing to fight a bully with their fists and not a gun? When I was in grade school back in the seventies and eighties, it was the expected norm that if I was bullied, I would not be punished for fighting a bully, both by my father and by the school staff. How horrendous it must be now adays, with zero tolerance policies, for these bullied loners, that they have no constructive outlet to stop a bully at the source, instead they would be punished for standing up to a bully. That would have driven me mad with built up powerlessness, helplessness and self-hatred. Combine that with the common use of Psycho-active SSRI’s that have as part of their warning label, “can cause homicidal/suicidal ideation”, and we have a toxic mix that I believe has more to do with these school shootings than the access to firearms.

      But then if we did that, we would be talking about personal responsibility and looking to intact families teaching their children to be mature and responsible adults, and not looking to government for the “solution”, which you as a socialist, would probably find unacceptable.

    4. avatar pwrserge says:

      I would argue that the gun grabbers are the ones digging their own graves. They will need them if they attempt to ban guns in the US.

      1. avatar cisco kid says:

        to Power Brain

        quote——————–I would argue that the gun grabbers are the ones digging their own graves. They will need them if they attempt to ban guns in the US.—————-quote

        Where do you live in a cave. California already passed a confiscation of assault rifles law and not even a ripple from the Sheep. Rectum gas is cheap, getting arrested and or blown away for non compliance separates the rectum gas posters from reality and what people really do when such a law is passed.

        1. avatar GS650G says:

          It’s going to take house to house round ups to really take in the ARs. You think that will happen?

        2. avatar bobo says:

          Crisco in the BUTT kid for lube

          “””Where do you live in a cave. California already passed a confiscation of assault rifles law and not even a ripple from the Sheep.”””

          I actually LIVE in cali since birth and….no they/we/or us did not pass a law on confiscation little lube boy!

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Funny, I know at least a dozen people in CA with “assault weapons”… funny how they didn’t rush to turn them in.

        4. avatar Big Bill says:

          Crisco Kid: “California already passed a confiscation of assault rifles law and not even a ripple from the Sheep.”

          I’m certain they phrased it that way, but in fact they didn’t do that. Maybe in your haste to think that politicians do what they say they will, you believed they did pass such a law, but they didn’t.
          Even in California, such a law would mean an end to a lot of politicians’ careers, loss of tax income, loss of subjects, and general hilarity from t he rest of the states, except for a few in the northeast.
          New York actually did pass a similar law to what you want, and the result was, shall we say, disappointing.
          If you really wanted to make a difference in the little darlings’ lives, you’d push for the abolition of alcohol, again. It causes much more harm to the lives of our children (and society in general) than guns. Granted, for the most part, it’s not as sudden in it’s consequences, but the damage is there, nonetheless. We tried it once,but obviously, we just didn’t do it right. Try again, and really make a difference.
          Or, we could tighten our drug laws. Maybe you’ve heard about the opioid crisis? It kills far more children than guns do, even considering suicide. Let’s ban all of them, so your friends and relatives can live in the pain God intended for them to have.
          How about cars? They cause more death and suffering than guns.

        5. avatar cisco kid says:

          Wrong Moron California is going to do it over a 2 year period and its already law. So there for your a liar if you say you live in California or you would be well aware of the new law

    5. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Why are these children preying on other children?

      Start with this.

    6. avatar David N says:

      Nice try, Cisco. Nothing but lies, but nice try.

      1. avatar kenneth says:

        Not a very good try at all. Now s/he claims to have been in grade school in the 80’s, whereas a few months ago s/he was claiming to be in his/her 70’s.
        Just for Cisco’s information, since s/he has shown that s/he’s math challenged, anyone 70 years old now would have went to grade school back in the 50’s, not the 80’s. Oh, wait, perhaps s/he didn’t manage to make it into elementary until s/he was in he/r 40’s….
        Never mind. I can picture that.

        1. avatar cisco kid says:

          To Kenny Bunk in the Port.

          Hey Idiot are you on drugs, go back and look at who posted the 80’s comment it was Thomas R.

        2. avatar Cisco kid 2.0 says:

          Wow good memory for the old version of me that hatred America.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Whelp… looks like someone got banned.

    7. avatar CZ Rider says:

      We expected it to be left alone while parents sorted out why their children have very occasionally been going on insane killing sprees. Their unfortunate choice of wrapon does not make it our problem, and you’re a fool if you think that these kids lack the creativity or resources to make these attacks any other way. The deadliest school attack in US history remains a bombing.

      Then again, it’s you, so who cares. You’ll just put up yet another barely-coherent block of dumb angry text and call it a day.

    8. avatar Kroglikepie says:

      Hey look everyone! The lying sack of shit socialist is back to tell everyone how much he is pro-rape and anti-freedom! Yay communism!

    9. avatar Sian says:

      Mass shootings are not our fault, and not our problem.

      Guns have been widely and readily available in this country since its inception, restricted in the 1930s, and further in the 70s, 80s, and 90s.

      Mass public shootings are a completely modern phenomenon starting largely in the 1990s, coinciding with 24/7 news and a number of other complex factors.

      It’s abundantly clear that the two things: Ready availability of guns, and public mass shootings, are utterly unrelated.

    10. avatar Hunter427 says:

      You forgot to mention gun owners vote, enjoy the mid-term.

    11. avatar Bob999 says:

      The trolls are certainly commenting today. Crisco Kid, why comment here if you are not willing to have an open and honest debate? We have already heard the leftist talking points and we have already debunked them. Do you have anything new? How about something remotely honest? If not, you are boring as hell, so go away kid.

  4. avatar Nanashi says:

    Now if only the fake gun rights supporters at the NRA would too. It would be so much nicer if they were honest about how they want to disarm citizens of all guns Wayne Pierre Laval doesn’t approve of, and disarm citizens they don’t approve of (who make up over 25% of the population) entirely.

    1. avatar Hal J. says:

      and disarm citizens they don’t approve of (who make up over 25% of the population) entirely.

      Which citizens are these?

    2. avatar Bob999 says:

      The gun confiscation crowd approves this message. Yep, turn people on the NRA, the only organization with the muscle to stop the gun confiscation industrial complex, so that they can end the 2nd amendment without even a whimper.

  5. avatar HEGEMON says:

    The plan has ALWAYS been to disarm America. Most of the time slowly, at times with speed, doesn’t matter to them, this is the “by any means necessary” crowd. They lie, they cheat, they connive, to dilute, diminish, and destroy the 2A. For some reason they are getting bolder in their statements, they don’t expect any push back, and are shocked to find out that most of the country isn’t willing to get on board their slow moving cattle car. These people are an insidious cancer to the body of the Constitution.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      I think they realize that most of the youth are on their side. They are hedging their bet by playing to the future voting populace instead of relying on the now very elderly. Get them when they’re young.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        If you think most of the youth are on their side, you’re delusional. This is the most conservative generation in over a century.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          Conservatives don’t mind big government, they are pro war and militarized police. They are fine with smashing down doors for drug violations. They are not really religious. They don’t mind having a nationalist socialist country. Basically, they want their form of socialism not theirs. Are they pro 2nd Amendment? Not based off their representatives actions.

        2. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Conservatives don’t mind big government, they are pro war and militarized police.
          NeoCons and RINOs for sure.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Conservatives don’t mind big government,…”

          You confuse “conservative” with Republicrat; not the same. Most Republicrats seem to be Dimowit-lite.

        4. avatar strych9 says:

          Polling would suggest that the best phrase would be “…the most libertarian…”.

          They support gun rights but also gay marriage and legal drugs. They’re the most live and let live generation since at least 1900.

      2. avatar HEGEMON says:

        No, not really. Most of America isn’t NYC, LA, or Chicago. Broward County, Florida is an outlier as a NYC colony. The majority of the servicemen/women are from the Midwest, southern and western states. So, no, the youth aren’t completely sold on gun confiscation.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          Like Trump’s tactic: go for bigger than what you actually want to get what you want. If you get more than you expect the better.

          Most kids don’t grow up around guns nor have they ever used them. Most youth don’t hunt. A lot of kids hang out indoors and on the internet. They don’t like fighting or competing. They don’t want anything challenging or conformational. They don’t need or want guns because their world is very privileged. So the right to keep and bear arms is not something they will defend with any vigor. The males are fine with being a beta if the women require them to be; they will lay down their guns to lie down with the ladies.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          All round polling at the national level has gun rights support among millennials higher than ANY other demo. ANY.

      3. avatar Kalvin in WI says:

        I’m 18. If you think I would EVER be on their side you are GRAVELY mistaken.

  6. avatar HP says:

    I must have missed the point where Esquire decided to become a competitor to MAD magazine. That article is a hoot.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      I LOL’d

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      A race to the bottom with Esquire vs GQ?
      But with little hope of either catching up to Rolling Stone?

  7. avatar DrewR says:

    One of the good things that could come from this would be the Fudds finally realizing that their 870s and model 92s are just as endangered as ARs and AKs. Can’t forget that the Clinton administration was looking into banning all scoped rifles along with the AWB and that the Brady campaign started with the goal of banning all handguns for all uses. These people hate hunters almost as much as they hate armed citizens.

    1. avatar ollie says:

      Looks like the “Biden” arsenal CAN be pretty effective.

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Too bad he is nothing but a useful Idiot,Bracula’s useful Idiot.

    2. avatar NYC2AZ says:

      Meh… If Fudds didn’t figure that out after the Navy Yard shooting, I doubt this one will wake them up either. Remember all the articles with “police-style shotgun” used as a newspeak word to scare the sheep?

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        When I hear “police style” I think:

    3. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Yeah, I am trying to figure out what the Fudds reactions will be to this, now that the Progtards are after Dad’s revolvers and shotguns.

      1. avatar CZ Rider says:

        Ignorance and disbelief as usual, I’m sure. “But this is a shotgun for spoooooort” as they impotently surrender their pump guns and over-unders. Technically an O/U is sort of semi-automatic…

  8. avatar MyName says:

    No. You can’t have them. Your turn.

    1. avatar MyName says:

      Ok, so I posted that before I read the source article. FWIW, the source article is nothing new and generally unimpressive. I did however want to respond to this line from the article: “It won’t happen, of course. So let’s meet in the middle. Let’s meet at…literally anything.”

      Ok, dude, let’s talk about your desire to meet “in the middle”. In the middle of what? You have just said you want all my guns – I plan to give you none – so what is in the middle? Half? Still a no from my end. I have a counter proposal: How about we make murder illegal? Oh, it is, everywhere, so I’ll add some stuff that should appeal to you. How about we prosecute murder as aggressively as the law will allow, regardless of weapon? Oh, we already do that, at least a lot of the time. Ok, how about if I commit murder you take away my right to own guns? Oh, we do that now, don’t we.

      Ok, I’m at a loss. What, pray tell, do you call the “middle”? You see, from where I sit, everything I can do with a gun that harms another person, aside from self defense in the face of an imminent threat, is already illegal. So, unless you have some “middle” that does not punish me for something I have not done that you want to explain in detail, I suggest that you shut up and leave me the hell alone!

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        I know you’re being rhetorical but I’ll just add this here. The “middle” to anti gun left revolves around the “Not Taking is Giving” philosophy. Meaning they won’t take all our guns, just some… and that means they are compromising by “giving” us the other guns that they still want banned. This is what really shows that they are starting from a position where they want all guns banned and confiscated.

        If they said they wanted all MSR’s banned but they would offer the legalization of suppressors or national reciprocity, they could at least claim to be trying to meet in the middle. They may even divide the pro gun camp to a large enough degree to get what they want.

        I think we’re lucky to have such irrational people to be up against. They are idealogically inbred and have no understanding of how bad another civil war would be to everyone; especially the Carmel Machiado swilling, Farm to Table types that don’t understand where the bulk of those farms are located.

        1. avatar MyName says:

          I think your observation about “Not taking is giving” is spot on. How many times have we heard antis say, when faced with the proposition of gun laws being loosened in a given jurisdiction, something to the effect of, “Why would we *give* everyone in the state/in the city/on the campus a gun?” As if permitting someone to do something, anything, was tantamount to enabling, or even providing for, them to do it.

          Interesting how selective their application of this ‘logic’ is. I’ve never heard someone refer to a change in the building code or traffic laws as “giving” anyone anything. I suppose some do exhibit a similar train of thought with respect to taxes. i.e. a tax cut is referred to as “giving” money to some constituency.

        2. avatar Sian says:

          ^ Well said, Namey McNamerson.

      2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        That makes too much sense,I can tell them where they can shove their middle,conversation,discussion,feelings or anything else that Infringes on my Natural,God given civil rights.

      3. avatar Scoutino says:

        In middle of what?

        They want to steal all my guns and my fundamental human, constitutionally protected rights.

        I want my rights back. All of them. Machine guns, supressors, over .50 cal. ‘Destructive devices’, short rifles and shotguns, non sporting imports, cheap surplus ‘armor piercing’ ammo, the whole nine yards…
        I want to get rid of gun free zones waiting periods, background checks, firearm owner ID cards, 4473s, registration, buying permits, carry permits, lists of approved pistols…

        See, we all want something. Now where is the damn middle?

  9. avatar dph says:

    My wife and I have already decided if push comes to shove we will turn in our guns……. right after we give them all of the bullets.

  10. avatar RA-15 says:

    The ramblings of yet another moronic , idiotic , fucktard. You ramble on & on about statistics . coming to a compromise and again blame an inanimate object for the actions of the psychotic individual using it. I could ramble on for an hour ,I won’t waste our time. You are just fucking foolish and ignorant about the facts of the gun, and p.o.t.g. decent people. Not people trying to gain notoriety , nor get their name in the news. You won’t take my guns , Asswipe !!!

  11. avatar ollie says:

    It would be a lot simpler to start lobotomizing anyone who exhibits violent psychotic tendencies. Meds obviously don’t work. Drill them out and send them home to their parents. The violent thugs on the left should be treated in the same manner.

    That’s how it was done until the 1960’s and it worked pretty well, until liberal progressives put the kibosh on lobotomies.

  12. avatar Mr Lizard says:

    Another brave article posted without a comment section

    1. avatar MyName says:

      Yeah, i noticed that too.

  13. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

    Another asshat making gay ex-MTV VJs/part time actors look bad.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      I am not being sarcastic, I do think he is ill representing that group. Alan Hunter should kick his ass;-)

  14. avatar Quasimofo says:

    I was wondering what the guy who lost out to Jesse Camp on “I Wanna be a VJ” thought about gun ownership…

    Stay in your lane, Dave: pop music trivia. Leave the serious and the important subjects to the real adults.

  15. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Let’s just hold votes in Congress to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Right now.

    “Go ahead. Make my day!”

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      Amendments (including repealing amendments) can only be proposed by two thirds votes of each house, they then have to be ratified 3/4 of the states via their legislatures of state conventions. The fact that it is a strait up vote of the states means WY gets the same 1 vote as California:-)

      1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        Oops I meant “or” not “of” state conventions. Anyway, it’ll never happen. He has a better chance of hitting 18 holes in one on a 72 par golf course.

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          They gotta first prove that they’ll
          AT THE VERY LEAST
          U P H O L D
          THE CONSTITUTION (not even support and defend it) before we let any of those stupid motherf_ckers propose an amendment to it.

          FTFY for now

      2. avatar Moltar says:

        which is probably why they’ll never go for that path (IF they’re smart). Right now, it looks as though they have at least 11 sure fire votes on their side (California, Washington, Maryland, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Jersey, New York, Illinois, Maine, Delaware) with a few questionable (Vermont and Florida namely). They know they are well short in most states as the Liberal City Dwellers are out numbered by the “Rural” Deplorables. However, that doesn’t mean they won’t try every thing they can short of a Constitutional Amendment to implement a de facto ban on guns before making a run on the Amendment process. With each state only getting a single vote they know they lose their biggest advantage, the super cities (think LA and NYC). Those cities run their respective states and give the Libs a MASSIVE advantage in the House of Representatives with their huge populations. However that advantage comes to naught when each state is given an equal vote (like in the Amendment process) or equal representation (Senate).

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          Might want to throw in Oregon, Hawaii and Colorado.

        2. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Colorado will go down fighting…

  16. avatar Phil Wilson says:

    The politicians running for office in 2018 will not come out in the open for complete civilian disarmament. Except perhaps for a few from the absolutely most leftist districts. But probably not many of even these.

    I wish they would, but they won’t.

  17. avatar Joe R. says:

    Might have to get in the truck and go over there.

    1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

      Hawaii?;-)

  18. avatar New Continental Army says:

    There’s a new version of the Gadsden Flag going around. The new version has the snake holding a grenade and it says:

    “Fuck around and find out.”

    Sums it up nicely.

    1. avatar K says:

      Please please please provide a link to this. I can’t find it and I need it in my life.

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        There’s a guy called Whiskey and Rebellion on Instagram. He sells the shirts with an old school cannon on them as well.

  19. avatar Rocketman says:

    Apparently, you only want the police and the military to have firearms. That’s been done before and there was even a movie made about it. It was called “Schindler’s List”.

  20. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “the long game goal has always been, at minimum, an Australian-style “buyback” of most civilian-owned guns and, ideally, total civilian disarmament featuring wholesale confiscation.”

    Always has been,always will be,anything else is just the Anti Freedom and Liberty Left trying to delude themselves.

  21. avatar GS650G says:

    I think it refreshing to just clear the air and stop bullshitting around what what they want and intend to do about it.
    And it’s adorable that they think we are going to stand around and let them do it.
    We sent messages at the ballot box a few times, maybe they don’t get it.

  22. avatar Bierce Ambrose says:

    Apparently all those doctors we didn’t get to keep are coming for our guns.

  23. avatar Bierce Ambrose says:

    Elections have consequences. Vote “anybody but them.”

  24. avatar Joe R. says:

    If there were a mass killing every second, until it got around to wiping out your government, you still might need to.

    Keep your guns for the end of America, so that you might have a say in what comes next.

  25. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Ever notice how these same people are the ones who reveled in calling conservatives who were in favor of the Iraq war “chicken hawks”, presumably because those conservatives were not personally volunteering to go fight? Well.

    When these gun grabbing media types demand confiscation and criminalization of private firearms ownership, whom exactly do they expect will go make the rounds of kicking down those doors? You can’t seriously expect to pry guns from people’s cold dead hands without incurring some return fire and taking casualties, can you? People whom you pejoratively describe as “gun nuts?”

    Hmm….chicken hawk? Ohhhh…..you mean *other* men with guns, not you? Ahhh…..got it, tough guy.

  26. avatar cisco kid says:

    Americans have settled into a routine were every day mass shootings result in a call for more guns. And when more guns fail to stop the next mass shooting its supposed that we have not yet arrived at the optimal level of gun saturation. Only when every American has a gun pointed at every other American 24 hours a day will we see the realization of this heavily armed non-violent utopia the NRA promises. Jim Jones made similar promises at his self proclaimed Utopian town in Guyana and we all know how that ended.

    1. avatar Hill Jack says:

      You are as dumb as you sound. Please proceed to the short pier for a long walk.

    2. avatar Jim Bullock says:

      Guns in tbe population have roughly doubled, while homicides roughly halved over a few decades. Meanwhile around 2.5 million times a year, people protected themselves with guns.

      Seems like people having the option to point a gun at need is doing some good, violence reduction-wise. I surmise that folks inclined toward violence get less inclined when there may be some violence in return. Then there’s the uncommon case when the violence continued until it’s stopped. Spree shootings work this way.

      We don’t have a “gun violence” problem in the U S. We have a violence problem, much mitigated, n sometimes amplified by people using guns. (Also “gun violence” is incoherent, but that’s the point of using the term, is it not?)

      How about we go after the people doing violence with guns or otherwise, n leave everybody else the means to protect themselves?

  27. avatar Ralph says:

    You want to take them, Dave Holmes? You? Hahahahah! I’m shaking on my boots.

    Jeez, I just love when these nancyboys go all Chuck Norris in print, and then run home to hide in a closet.

  28. avatar Tom W says:

    The Left’s age-old goal currently harnessing a well-established union-organizing tactic — “The ‘Corporate Campaign’ Against Our Second Amendment”:

    http://www.trevorloudon.com/2018/05/the-corporate-campaign-against-our-second-amendment/

  29. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    From the linked article:

    “…It’s happening. We tried it your way, and it really did not work. The ground is shifting. Get ready.”

    I’m sorry dear but you have that completely backwards. We tried it YOUR way and it has proven not to work. We used to have a whole lot of freedom in regards to keeping and bearing arms. Then your side came along and starting adding rules and regulations. Your side starting banning certain types or sizes or kinds. Then your side started to add places where guns couldn’t be. And all along the way violence continued to happen. And after each violent thing happened your side said we just need to add one more law, add one more restriction, add one more place where guns can’t be and yet the violence continued.

    It is YOUR way that has failed. And it’s time we take back that which you have taken. It is time for the ground to shift back. Are YOU ready?

  30. avatar MLee says:

    And then only the criminals and MS-13 scum and such would have them….well besides one helluva lot of red blooded Americans who essentially collectively say FU— YOU as it pertains to gun buy back, surrender, confiscation etc.
    Lawful gun owners are NOT surrendering firearms because society can’t fix the media cartel from plastering news about a shooting all over the news for months and influencing these idiot dweeble dick kids with screws loose from executing their own little claim to fame.
    The gun grabbers are so keen on violating our gun rights and the 2nd A, what about violating the 1st and saying the press can’t report this stuff anymore. No more glorifying these actions to make money with ratings.
    As far as taking my guns….EAT SH** not happening, not in this lifetime and I ain’t kidding.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “And then only the criminals and MS-13 scum and such would have them…”

      And, your point?

      Criminals and MS-13 do not shoot-up malls, theaters and schools. Besides, the gun-grabbers do not go places where criminals and MS-13 are likely to congregate, so those two groups do not pose a threat to “good people”. And, criminals and gang members are readily recognizable, so you can get away before the trouble starts. It is “normal looking” people, with guns, who are the threat. Which, by extension, means law abiding gun owners. If guns are removed from law abiding citizens, the mass shootings that matter will be eliminated. That is all that matters. Gun-grabbers are convinced to the core that they will never encounter a criminal or gang member, and gun-grabbers do not live in crime-ridden precincts. All this is why you cannot reason with gun-grabbers; you are the enemy looking to kill them all.

      1. avatar MLee says:

        Makes no difference. The gun grabbers will never succeed at disarming Americans. It won’t happen. Some blowhards get their 15 minutes of fame and that’s it. Bloombag is old and people don’t live forever.

        Gun buy back, gun surrender? It’s a joke and will never happen and no cops are going door to door to start taking guns. All the rest is page filler and Sunday entertainment.

      2. avatar Andrew Lews says:

        That actually makes a lot of sense.

        I’ve oft wished law enforcement would take a similar tactic towards crime. I don’t care about the mob boss, or the international drug smuggling ring. I care about the looser getting high in my alley and crapping in the middle of the street.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Agree.

  31. avatar Chris Morton says:

    HE is not going to take ANYTHING because he’s a sniveling coward.

    The REAL question is, what dope is he going to send in his place and what will he do when they don’t come back?

  32. avatar Parnell says:

    I wonder if Dave will come to my house. If you do Dave, I’ll be all ready to greet you with open ARMS.

    1. avatar Chris Morton says:

      I’m part Apache, and we’re all about hospitality.

      Now where can I find a big enough anthill?

      I may have to settle for a wagon wheel and s slow burning fire…

      1. avatar Gutshot says:

        You could skin them alive and stake them out in the sun. That’s a classic. I don’t remember if that was an Apache technique or not, but it sounds like a motivator at any rate.

  33. avatar Geoff says:

    No way to comment on the article at Esquire, but, here is the traitor’s email.
    [email protected]
    Be civil.

    1. avatar Andrew Lews says:

      Lol that’s downright evil.

  34. avatar Geoff says:

    “meet in the middle”? Compromise, right? We’ve compromised too much already.
    Cake And Compromise – Illustrated Guide To Gun Control
    https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2013/11/08/cake-and-compromise-illustrated-guide-to-gun-control/

  35. avatar raptor jesus says:

    Molan Labe you flaccid beta male.

  36. avatar Renov8 says:

    Abraham Lincoln said it best…

    “The people — the people — are the rightful masters of both congresses, and courts — not to overthrow the constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it.”

    –September 16 and 17, 1859 Notes for Speeches at Columbus and Cincinnati

  37. avatar David Keith says:

    The people commenting on this blog need to chill and just be clear about what you will do if someone comes for your guns. That takes a lot of the anxiety out of your otherwise mundane life.

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