CBS Goes All-In For Gun Control. Again. Still.


“Of all the artifacts that were aboard the good ship Mayflower, not a single gun is known to have survived,” CBS News “reports.” in their article/TV package. “But historians believe they were probably there, accompanying the pilgrims to Plymouth Rock.” Wait. What? Is CBS suggesting — even for a moment — that the Pilgrims weren’t armed? Hello? Myles Standish was the colonists’ military commander. Could it get worse? It could!

. . . were we really BORN a gun culture? Historian Pamela Haag says, not necessarily.

“Listen to how many sentences begin with something like ‘Americans have always….’ ‘They have always loved guns. They have always had guns.’ These things are much more complicated than that. The meanings of guns have changed.”

In her book, “The Gunning of America,” Haag says most settlers viewed the gun as a tool — as necessary, and yet as ordinary, as a plow or an ax.

“We think we have a gun culture because of this special exceptional status with guns, but really, commercially, the gun was extremely unexceptional,” she said. “It was very much treated like any other commodity.”

At the start of the Revolutionary War, we didn’t even have enough arms to outfit the Continental Army. Today, however, it’s estimated we have more guns than people.

Which proves what, exactly?

First that CBS News is pimping a book; basing their entire series around it, in fact. Second, that the “Tiffany network” has lost the plot. [Note: NPR gave Haag’s book not one but two huge wet kisses.] CBS’ thinly-veiled indeed explicit attempt to remove the importance of firearms freedom from American history is nothing less than loony-tunes.

So what’s CBS’/Haag’s theory? America’s “obsession” with firearms is all down to . . . wait for it . . . the gun lobby!

It’s not just a matter of salesmanship, but gun industrialists like Oliver Winchester and Samuel Colt did their level best to create a market for their wares. Out of their factories in Connecticut — what came to known as “Gun Valley” — they would soon produce firearms with the same speed and efficiency as Henry Ford would later do with the automobile.

Best known: the Winchester ’73 and the Colt Single Action Army revolver — two of the guns that won the West.

But as the frontier disappeared, so did the desire of many Americans to own a gun. They were not, Haag said, “flying off the shelf.”

So by the 20th century gunmakers started to market their guns not just as a tool, but a feeling. “What was once needed, now had to be loved,” said Haag.

While there’s no question that firearms marketing plays on its audience’s emotions — their desire to feel safe or empowered or part of a club — so what? Is it wrong? And that desire is hardly mutually exclusive with the Second Amendment’s intent.

Anyway, time to pivot!

“Americans have always had mixed feelings about guns,” said Haag. “So for as much as the gunslingers are part of our heritage, so, too, is disquiet and discomfort with guns.”

Haag’s cites our country’s gun control history — from Tombstone to the Gun Control Act of 1968 — without once mentioning civilian disarmament’s racist roots. Or the role gun control played sparking the American Revolution.

This serious omission demonstrates the dynamic in play here: cherry-picking historical data to “prove” that America’s love of firearms is a marketing scam perpetuated on gullible. weak-willed citizens. A perspective that CBS shares but anyone with real knowledge of history — or human psychology — rejects. Utterly.


  1. avatar formerwaterwalker says:

    Well they got ONEthing right-guns ARE tools. Really cool tools. I’m fairly certain most everything else is BS captrap. All the lame stream media(except most of the time FOX) is the same-they suck. At least FOX runs NRA commercials…

    1. avatar Doesky2 says:

      All kind of tools are cool because generally they increase the efficiency of ones work.

      The only uncool tools are the people that make TV propaganda like this.

  2. avatar Mr. 308 says:

    Isn’t there some famous quote about people living the history they failed to learn? Learning to live with the history that failed…

    Something like that, had to do with history and learnin, pretty sure.

    Someone said it, Trotsky perhaps?

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      George Santayan:
      Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

    2. avatar Ray says:

      “Most Americans, common sense, something, something, anything. – Hoplo Nothought

  3. avatar Gman says:

    All part of the liberal playbook. Kill God. Rewrite history. Re-educate the next generation. And slowly our Republic will die.

    1. avatar dlj95118 says:


  4. avatar Greg says:

    The media, filled with ultra-leftists are all too happy to keep banging the anti-gun drum for their leftist allies in the Central Government. They share the same dream of a Marxist state, and history shows that the surest way to achieve that is through civilian disarmament. This is why I stopped watching network news programs over 15 years ago. They’re nothing more than ideological propaganda.

  5. avatar Specialist38 says:

    And are we surprised?

    No. Not really.

    Before the gun, the common man (in England anyway) had the bow.

    England had laws mandating the amount of bow staves imported into the country as a ratio to other goods.

    Now of course, the government was more concerned with keeping the Kind the King. It was that countries considered other countries to be threats and prepared or it.

    Colonial America was subject to the crown and any unrest triggered restrictions on the import and movement of arms.

    Now we have a government that want to limit arms so that it free to make strident changes in American mechanics and social structure.

    History does not repeat itself, governments always turn to self-preservation to maintain power and control.

    1. avatar MouseGun says:

      I remember, when I was very young, my grandfather telling me that power is a living thing, and like all other living things, once it comes into this world, it’s soul purpose is self-preservation. Now, as an adult, it just keeps making more and more sense.

      1. avatar RidgeRunner says:


      2. avatar Specialist38 says:


        Like the IRS, EPA, and Corps of Engineers. There are little mini-me’s of the government.

        Their sole purpose is continued existence and expansion.

        Anything that threatens that gets squashed. (or made illegal).

  6. avatar Swilson says:

    Deja vu. Most of this episode of Sunday Morning featured the exact same segments they showed several months back.

    1. avatar Ed says:

      ya know, my wife kept on saying; We’ve seen this before………

  7. avatar Mk10108 says:

    American Indians at Plymouth Rock were armed with bow & arrows, tomahawks, and spears.

    From Origins and Development of the Second Amendment, David Hardy writes…In 1632, twelve years after Pilgrims landing, Plymouth Colony required a freeman to own a flintlock, a more expensive armament than matchlocks. This suggest the need for a higher volume of fire and reliability.

    CBS Sunday morning went all in with anti gun finishing with Aussie confiscation was a good thing.

    MSM is all in for removing your 2A. The next 98 days expect the assault to ratchet up. Keep your powder dry and light up the keyboards….going hot.

  8. Rhetoric cannot prove anything.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      This is true.

      However, for some segment of our population, rhetoric is all they know. It’s the ONLY way they can communicate. I don’t know if it is a physical limitation or one related to training and experience, but it is a fact.

      Rhetoric may not be able to ‘prove’ anything, but it sure can persuade those inclined (by biology or mere inclination) to respond to it.

      Therefore, rhetoric is a powerful weapon. And, the ONLY way to counter onslaughts of idiotic rhetoric is to fight back with our own rhetoric based on “truth.”

  9. avatar Amfivena says:

    Her argument that gun manufacturers used advertising to generate ‘artificial’ demand for guns is perfectly valid. Of course that applies to every other manufactured product as well. She is merely identifying a natural byproduct of the industrial revolution. If you make lots of stuff, you need to sell lots of stuff. One could write the same book to denigrate any number of industries – cars, beauty products, tobacco, baby formula, junk food…the list is virtually endless.

    Just because advertising makes it cool, doesn’t mean people wouldn’t need or want it anyway.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      Gun advertising is different from most other consumer good advertising. You pretty much have to seek out gun advertising in order to experience it. There aren’t gun ads on general audience T.V. or radio (except the occassional gun shop spot on conservative A.M. talk shows, or sponsors of gun programming on cable, which you wouldnt just stumble upon) You won’t see gun ads as popups on non-gun sites, either.

      Gun ads tend to show up on gun websites or in gun magazines, meaning you’re probably already in the markets and the advertising is more for product differentiation, as opposed to driving demand for new or existing gun owners.

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        “Gun advertising is different from most other consumer good advertising. You pretty much have to seek out gun advertising in order to experience it. There aren’t gun ads on general audience T.V. or radio (except the occassional gun shop spot on conservative A.M. talk shows,…”


        My local AM radio station here in central Florida has recently been running a *national* advertising campaign for FN firearms.

        No specific model gun, just the message of ‘Battle tested’, if memory serves. And it wasn’t tied to a specific local store…

    2. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      This CBS report is Michael Bellesiles and his fraudulent work again; America gained massive amounts of firearms only because of Civil War surpluses and post Civil War marketing.

  10. avatar Alex says:

    “We think we have a gun culture because of this special exceptional status with guns, but really, commercially, the gun was extremely unexceptional,” she said. “It was very much treated like any other commodity.”

    While I would guess that is somewhat true, I find it hard to believe the first Americans settlers didn’t enjoy going out for some target practice for the raw pleasure of it. Guns are fun to shoot. That is surely as true 250 years ago as it is today. They just often had a more practical need for it.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks. “ –Thomas Jefferson

      1. avatar RidgeRunner says:

        I wouldn’t entirely agree with ol’ Tom on this particular topic. Those two-a-days in full pads in 98 degree heat, while indeed rough on the body, did plenty for my character.

    2. avatar Robert w. says:

      Hah, the comparison of the gun to “just another tool, such as a plow,” is rediculus. Has she ever heard of someone mounting mounting a shovel over their mantle to keep is moisture free? Yes, a gun has always been “just” a tool, but no other tool is its equal when you need one.

    3. avatar Julian says:

      A lot more than 250 years. My 10th great grandfather arrived in Massachusetts ~1626, nearly 400 years ago. Guns were an important part of life then, too.

  11. avatar Davis Thompson says:

    The way I was seduced into the gun culture was by shooting a gun and realizing what an enthralling and valuable activity it was. No advertisements needed.

    1. avatar Ing says:

      Same here. For all the myriad reasons there are to own guns, the one that hooked me was the simplest: shooting is incredibly fun.

  12. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

    I am pretty sure that Diane Rehm is a desiccated lich. NPR had been going more and more with dead/undead hosts. Garrison Keillor and Tom Magliozzi being other examples. Dark magic is at work.

    1. avatar ATTAG Reader says:

      This says that NPR is as dead as paper newspapers, unable to compete with internet news magazines and blogs. By age my wife and I should be able to “relate” to these clowns but we cannot relate to their non-stop left wing propaganda and shut it off as soon as the opinions masquerading as news begin.

      1. avatar mk10108 says:

        I used to listen to NPR, I cannot recall show, blog, or post that ever changed anything. Sort of reminds me of a merchant ship steady rhythmic engine droning across the Pacific.

        1. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

          I used to think that they should change their name from NPR to JFL (Job For Life). Now I think JF(E) (Job Forever or Job For Eternity) would be more appropriate.

      2. avatar 16V says:

        When the current president took over NPR around a year ago, he made some moves to be more inclusive and less liberal-judgy about those of us who hold other opinions. That worked for a few months, but it never really took hold, he needed to roll some heads to get the staff to warm up to other views, and nice guy that he is, he didn’t do that.

        So after a few positive stories about new gun plants, and measured opinions about the 2A months ago, it’s back to panderdome.

        If only Hillary had an (R) behind her, they would be doing wonderful in-depth reporting on the corruption of the Clinton Foundation…

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          “If only Hillary had an (R) behind her, they would be doing wonderful in-depth reporting on the corruption of the Clinton Foundation…”

          That may get a jump-start when another WikiLeaks e-mail document dump happens in the near future…

  13. avatar formerwaterwalker says:

    Just watched the 700Club and they reported on EMP attacks. Guns and ammo WILL work without electricity-prepping looks pretty smart in this time in history(it always has-our ancestors were all preppers).

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Well, they’ll work without electricity until the “Smart Gun” requirements get a foot-hold.

      1. avatar formerwaterwalker says:

        I don’t think “they” will be able to smart-up 300000000 guns! 😉

  14. avatar dph says:

    People still watch CBS? Of the so called Big Three, the only one that gets watched in our house is ABC and that’s only because my wife likes Wheel of Fortune. Funny thing is that likely no minds were changed one way or the other after they watched the CBS report.

    1. avatar Mike J says:

      Yeah, my wife watches that Communist propaganda on Sunday morning, for reasons beyond my comprehension. I spent the time cleaning a pistol.

      This Pamela Haag woman sounds like a re-incarnation of Michael Belleseilles. See

  15. avatar Chadwick says:

    Two things… 1-HAAG! 2- Clinton(or commie) Broadcasting Station

    That is all

  16. avatar fishydude says:

    And the HAG leaves out an extremely important historical point. Civil society was possible, in part, due to the invention of the concealable firearm. That was the great equalizer over those who sought to enforce their rule through violence against unarmed people.
    Ironically, we see the same thing repeating today. In liberal run cities that severely restrict 2A rights, violent crime is high and street gangs and organized crime use violence to control their ‘turf.’ Extortion of protection insurance from lawful business owners. Protection from whom? From the gangs they have to pay.
    In NYC they have to pay the bureaucrats too. Cash tips.

  17. avatar ready,fire,aim says:


    enough said….

  18. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    “In her book, “The Gunning of America,” Haag says most settlers viewed the gun as a tool — as necessary, and yet as ordinary, as a plow or an ax.”

    Indeed, we have had a profound, engineered shift in the perception of guns, at least among some people(*). Somehow, this tool, “…as necessary, and yet as ordinary, as a plow or an ax.” is now the symbol of its own willful evil. And people who use, or have use for this tool are demonized. What’s up with that?

    The impulse among some citizens to regulate, restrict, demonize and ban, explicitly or by stealth, is the result of a relentless, long-term propaganda campaign, to make “guns”, seem particularly evil. Campaign by who, and why?

    “Pro gun” folks are constantly exasperated by the egregious nonsense of the “anti” positions. But why so nonsensical? Because the nonsense has been crafted with an end in mind, and need not make sense. “We think we have a gun culture because of this special exceptional status with guns, but really, commercially, the gun was extremely unexceptional,”

    Indeed. *commercially* the gun was extremely unexceptional. So why has it been made so “exceptional” politically, and culturally? As dangerous implement of personal agency a gun is distasteful, just like an ax. It’s about reducing what people can do for themselves.

    And the political status of guns, or specifically “arms”, is distinct from its commercial status. Guns were readily available. “Arms”, not a specific type of arm, are called out for their special status within politics and society, in the charter put together by descendents of the early Pilgrims, along with many others.

    Really in the end, it comes down to the same, endless agenda of diminishing individuals within the state:

    – You are too stupid, crazy, reactive, bigoted, and biased to wield this kind of power. (OFWGs, militias, religious fanatics, revolutionaries, drunk trailer-dwellers, and let us not forget “bitter clingers.” The smears are endless.)

    – This isn’t how we do it. (If it must be done, a bureaucratically managed agent of the state is the way.)

    – You aren’t worth protecting. (Some of you get killed, but all of us are over all, less harmed. Besides, I have big men with guns, sanctioned agents of the state, of course, protecting me, and my kids on their way to school.)

    – No agency for you. Who are you to grasp the terrible agency of wielding force in any circumstance? Even in your own defense.

    The state is not your agent, but you it’s. You do not have your own life and agency on your own, but only in terms of the group. The rest is just details, and distraction.

    (*) Some have called them “useful idiots.”

    1. avatar MarkF says:

      Yes, and you got me thinking…

      The entire idea of a “gun culture” is from the progressive left. Until the early 20th century, firearms ownership was pretty unexceptional. “It was very much treated like any other commodity.” Most places in America that is STILL TRUE.

      This is certainly still true for the people the left assigns to the “gun culture”. It is THEIR definition, not ours. They do this to provide a target for public shaming, their penultimate weapon, which is pretty useless against anyone who ever learned and internalized the whole .. words can never hurt me lesson from kindergarten.

      To us, the gun is simply a tool, and a damned useful one at that. And the only one specifically protected by the Bill of Rights. It is the left that assigns motive and action and negative value to simple machines in steel, wood, and plastic. THEY objectify the gun. Hell, we just use the damn things.

  19. avatar Cam says:

    CBS? Are they still on the air?

  20. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    What is this giant all-encompassing unholy marriage/alliance between Big Money and gun-control???

    It seem like ALL Big Money entities (Buffet, Gates, Allen, Bloomberg, Soros, Zuckerberg, etc. … as well as corporations like Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, YouTube, Google, Target, Starbucks, etc. … and of course all of Hollywood and New York news, television, and movie production companies) are anti-gun. I cannot think of a single Big Money entity who is pro-gun.

    What is the dynamic at play?

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:


      I thought it was obvious.

    2. avatar peirsonb says:

      Liberals make that argument on all fronts, not just guns. “Don’t trust our opponents, look how rich they are!”

      Yet, even with as screwed up as our government currently is, take a look at the net worth on the Democrat side of the aisle vs the Republican side.

      What progressives really don’t like about conservatives with money is that, by and large, conservatives earn theirs.

  21. avatar Shire-man says:

    I never saw any gun adds growing up. My family did not hunt or shoot. I didn’t watch movies and I was a child well before the age of Call of Duty.

    My first exposure to guns came from the Clinton AWB and the news it created. I concluded if a bunch of old people, rich people and control freaks didn’t want me to have a thing I probably should get my hands on as many of that thing as I possibly could.

    John Wayne (I hate Westerns) the NRA (I hate advertising/magazines) toys or games (played with erector sets and bikes) didn’t goad me into gun ownership. Asshole politicians and nanny-staters did.

  22. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    I could have stopped at “CBS goes…”. I usually do.

  23. avatar Glenn says:

    Oh, boy. I hope Haag’s book is as good as Michael Bellesiles’. But for an even better read, try Emory University’s report on it’s investigation of Bellesiles’ research.

  24. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    “..“It was very much treated like any other commodity.””

    Then why do so many of the anti-gunners try to treat gun like they are some kind of something special? Like this one is so much more dangerous than that one because of the shoulder-thingie-that-goes-up?

  25. avatar C.S. says:

    They have a point. So, as part of the well-regulated militia, I will now be giving an ar15 receiver to someone who does not yet have one. ooOoo

  26. avatar HP says:

    It’s not going to work. Guns are here to stay.

  27. avatar LarryinTX says:

    “It was very much treated like any other commodity.”

    And still would be, except for the fruitcakes trying to outlaw something as common as a plow, and as necessary. Forbidding something does have the effect of making it more desirable to some people, how many could be argued. I have even seen a treatise opining that if drugs were legalized, in toto, drug use would go down.

  28. “Of all the artifacts that were aboard the good ship Mayflower, not a single gun is known to have survived,”

    So that’s the origin of the “boating accident” story!

  29. avatar Henry says:

    Babe sounds like she’s gunning for a Bancroft Prize. Followed by unemployment.

    “Clayton? … Clayton?”

  30. avatar Kyle says:

    Very few swords of ancient rome still survive.

    They probably weren’t very militant either.

  31. avatar Anonymous says:

    In her book, “The Gunning of America,” Haag says most settlers viewed the gun as a tool — as necessary, and yet as ordinary, as a plow or an ax.

    That’s right. It is a tool and is as ordinary as a plow or an ax – except liberal progressive marxists screwed that up when you passed volumes upon volumes of gun controls that nobody even fully knows or has memorized.

    So what’s CBS’/Haag’s theory? America’s “obsession” with firearms is all down to . . . wait for it . . . the gun lobby!

    My dad didn’t buy guns because of the gun lobby. He bought guns because of the “gun bans” and other legislation that liberal progressive marxists continue to push today. I didn’t buy more guns because of the gun lobby. I buy guns because I like them, and because I like to stick it to the man when he demands I obey his commands. I buy more guns because of the continued “gun bans” and other legislation that liberal progressive marxists continue to push today. Any firestorm brought about by the “gun lobby” or other 2A rights groups and/or hoards of voters are just bonus to me.

  32. avatar HRColey says:

    Hoplophobes constantly quote the death toll of guns in our country as 33,000 people. Of course they never mention that over half of that 33,000 are suicides, nor do they bother mentioning that a great many are criminals shot either by police officers, victims defending themselves, or other criminals. The other thing that they never mention is that according to studies released by the Center for Disease Control guns are used between 500,000 and three million times per year in this country, usually without a shot being fired. That’s millions of potential victims of crime that the gun banners would leave defenseless. Guns do far more good in our society than harm and they always have – from the time of the Mayflower up until today.

    1. avatar HP says:

      After the Boston marathon bombing, I think it was one of the Bloomberg groups, they listed the deceased Tsarnaev brother as a “victim of gun violence” because he was shot and killed.

      There is no limit to the sick depravity of anti-gunners. These people are the enemies of human decency.

    2. avatar Henry says:

      Talking-point tip: Twenty years ago it was half. Now it’s practically two-thirds. And it’s not because suicides have increased.

  33. avatar W says:

    The president of CBS News is David Rhodes. His brother is Ben Rhodes and works in the White House, a high level policy appointee of President Obama. Ben cooked up many of the Benghazi lies. If David wasn’t anti gun, it wouldn’t take much for him to get there.

  34. avatar Dave says:

    Then what did the pilgrims kill the deer and turkeys with for Thanksgiving dinner?

    CBS is clearly going full retard on this one.

    Plus, the matchlocks they had were long since obsolete by 1776. They really are a pos compared to a flintlock.

  35. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    Im feeling rather alarmed…Is just me …As the days go on…Or will we all wake up one morning to militant marital law…and our American freedoms gone “through force of arms from our own government, and it’s guardians? “

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