Previous Post
Next Post


The Daily Beast‘s Dean Obeidallah is freaking out. Despite all of the coverage that the latest firearms-related murders are getting, the gun control crowd is still making as much headway as a Reliant Robin in an oil-covered roundabout. The usual suspects have demanded more “common sense” legislation (AKA “firearms confiscation”) but there’s no chance it will ever see the light of day. Ever since the defeat of the Toomey-Manchin bill, the realization has set in that there’s virtually no hope for new federal gun laws before the midterm elections, and things are looking bleak for Democrats beyond that marker. As a result, Obeidallah thinks that it’s time to go for the nuclear option . . .

The essence of his article can be summed up in one paragraph:

The reality is that the NRA will keep winning unless something changes in the approach by those like myself who desperately want to see a reduction in the number of people killed by guns each and every day. It’s either time we try a different approach or shut up. I’m not being rude, just being honest. Simply repeating the same arguments and hoping for a different result is a waste of time.

Dean puts forward three points to support his premise, a re-warmed re-hash of what we hear time and again from every gun control freak from Dianne Feinstein to members of my own family. They’re regurgitated so often that those of lesser cognitive capabilities or more limited attention spans are duped into believing them, no matter how patently false they are.

1. The existence of a “Gun Violence Epidemic”

Let’s be clear about this: there is no gun violence epidemic. The phrase would lead one to believe that the number of people being shot and killed is on the rise, but in actual fact the exact opposite is true. Firearms-related murders are at their lowest point in over 50 years and continue to decrease. Firearms -elated accidental deaths are declining, too. And suicides, as Bruce has pointed out, are independent of the firearms ownership rate. So in reality, the situation is getting better and better every day with increased firearms ownership and existing laws in place. The problem isn’t that there’s a “gun violence epidemic” — the problem is people like Obeidallah don’t take the time to look into the numbers themselves and learn the truth. Or don’t want to.

We’re already seeing a huge “reduction in the number of people killed by guns each and every day,” which is exactly what Dean says he wants. It’s been trending that way for almost a quarter century now. But the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex’s constant bleating and the reinforcement of their falsehoods by the media obscure the that fact and perpetuates still more clamoring for draconian gun control laws.

The notion of a “gun violence epidemic” is a convenient excuse for gun-grabbers to try to further their agenda. If it were known that there really is no immediate crisis, then the cries of “think of the children” coming from Michael Bloomberg and his paid harpies at Moms Demand Action would fall on more deaf ears. By manufacturing the perception of a crisis, the idea of gun control becomes more acceptable.

2. The NRA is evil and doesn’t care about kids dying

Every hero needs a villain. In order for gun control activists to feel like they’re on the side of purity and goodness, they need an equally evil opponent upon which to focus their hate and that of a disengaged public. The NRA has long been that lightning rod for gun control activists, and Dean is up to perpetuating that.

The problem with that approach is, again, the facts don’t support their conclusions. Following the Newtown shootings, for example, the NRA proposed a school safety program that actually had a chance of protecting children and saving lives. Instead of working with the NRA on their program, gun control extremists like Dean immediately dismissed the idea and ridiculed the announcement. The fact of the matter is that the NRA does indeed want to protect children, but instead of pushing feel-good, ineffective legislation and infringing on the rights of Americans, the NRA’s solutions address the problems head-on.

But Dean doesn’t want to acknowledge that. The NRA is evil and therefore everything they do is motivated by the need to kill children and feed on their blood. Just ask Dean.

3. Eliminating guns will solve the perceived problems

Let’s be clear Dean’s goal is to eliminate civilian gun ownership. He doesn’t come out and say it, but the purpose behind his writing is about as well-hidden as a fox in a hen house. All of his “solutions” to the perception of a gun violence epidemic are designed to demonize gun owners, push gun ownership into the closet, and force gun manufacturers out of business. The commonly-held belief is that more guns equals more crime, so the corollary is that less guns would equal less crime.

There’s just one problem: it’s utterly bogus.

Gun ownership has exploded over the last decade, and yet every indicator of “gun violence” continues to drop. Murders, violent crime, accidental deaths..they’re all sliding down the slippery slope toward statistical insignificance. And that’s with current gun laws in place.

In the United Kingdom, the gun laws that civil rights opponents say they want have been in place for decades. The result? “Gun violence” has increased 89%. The idea that gun control laws can curb “gun violence” is a belief held only by those who don’t won’t listen to facts other than those provided by their own echo chamber.

While articles like these highlight the simmering hatred for firearms owners that’s so prevalent among gun-grabbing extremists, it also points out the impotence of their cause. Gun owners and gun rights advocates have an advantage in the fight, namely the intensity gap. Sure there’s a swath of the population who would like to see more gun control laws, but it’s not the top of their list. They may sign a petition, but they aren’t going to spend any of their time actively working towards that goal.

Gun rights advocates, on the other hand, are highly motivated to protect their constitutionally guaranteed rights and they will spend countless hours working towards their goals. The effect is that there are a couple of orders of magnitude difference between the size of the two camps, with gun rights far in the lead.

So those are the problems as Dean sees them. The proposed solutions he lays out show exactly how desperate the ever-shrinking group of gun control extremists are getting.

1. Grassroots activism targeting corporations

The problem is that, at the moment, the only grassroots organizations making an impact are the open carry groups — and they keep scoring own-goals for the opposition. The most visible gun control group is Moms Demand Action, a wholly-owned Bloomberg front for Mayors Against Illegal Guns that has had virtually zero effect on corporations, despite their desperate self-congratulatory tweets. Sure, they may have gotten one or two establishments to politely request that guns stay outside their doors, but they’ve achieved no outright gun bans.

Grassroots efforts only work when the supporters are emotionally invested, not just well-paid shills.

2. Use the tactics of anti-abortion groups

Much like the grassroots effort suggestion, this one is doomed to fail as well. The anti-abortion crowd is only effective because of their common shared beliefs in the sanctity of life and the religious and spiritual source for those beliefs. Civilian disarmers are already appealing to those shared beliefs through their Moms Demand Action campaign to little effect. Sure their Facebook page has a mess of likes (we have more), but that has translated into precious little actual action. Even for their “major” rallies, Bloomberg has had to foot the bill to fly Moms in so as not to show how little fervor there is for their cause.

So the ethos approach has run its course. Parading around pictures of dead children won’t (and hasn’t) strengthen their message. It just shows them for the nutcase extremists that they are.

3. Repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

Dean believes that gun manufacturers should be liable for the deaths that result from the illegal or improper use of their products.

Does Dean also believe that soft drink manufacturers should be liable for every case of diabetes? That car makers should be liable for every drunk driving death? That pool installers should be liable for every drowning?

All Dean wants is to drive gun manufacturers out of business. He doesn’t give a fig how shady and underhanded the tactics may be, and he doesn’t care that he’s unfairly targeting a legitimate, legal businesses. He just wants to see the “evil” gone, much like the extremists who wanted to encase the H&K factory in a concrete sarcophagus. Guns are talismans of death which cause crime and therefore must be destroyed. Obviously.

4. Rewrite the Second Amendment

I agree. Let’s make it more clear so people like Dean can understand the meaning. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That first section about a militia seems to trip up Dean and his associates.

Dean sounds exactly like a KKK member who’s pissed off about the Brown v. Board of Education decision. The Supreme Court has clarified the law, and he doesn’t like the outcome. So instead of trying to find other solutions to the perceived “gun violence epidemic”, Dean wants to change the law and eliminate gun ownership entirely. Never mind that law abiding gun owners aren’t the problem.

Gun-grabbers like Obeidallah have an issue with target fixation. Their whole identity is wrapped up in the idea that the NRA is evil, guns are magical charms that turn good people into criminals, and the only way to reduce the “gun violence epidemic” is to attack law abiding gun owners. Facts and statistics don’t matter — it’s all about emotion, and at the moment that emotion is fear. Fear and the dawning realization that they are losing.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. ““The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    This needs to be dumbed down even further for the masses: “The right of the people to own and carry firearms, concealed and openly, shall not be infringed by the Federal government nor any state government.”

    Attempted infringement should be considered treasonous.

    • I would not use only the word firearms; be clear: arms is a synonym for weapons, and was chosen for good reason. Perhaps the term weapons itself would work, but firearms would result in another battle as soon as any weapon that did not operate in quite the same way as current firearms do came about. If you really want to limit it, perhaps man-portable weapons is sufficient.

    • Nah, Rabbi. It would need to be dumbed even further than that.

      “Neither the Congress, nor any State or Municipal government, shall make any law restricting right of The People to keep and bear arms.”

      • I hate that people like O’Reilly interpret the BoR and Constitution to mean that infringing on natural rights are reserved to the states. Like its OK for states to pass laws infringing our rights.

        • If the 2nd Amendment is the red-headed step-child of the Bill of Rights, then the 14th is it’s ugly duckling, cootie-infested sister. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;”…. this ain’t rocket surgery, here.

    • “The right to keep and bear ANY KIND OF ARM, save perhaps for some particularly destructiove WMDs, by anyone, anywhere, any time, ever, shall not……. for any reason whatsoever.”

    • Today’ translation using proper definition:

      “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be limited or undermined. This is because a well-trained and disciplined citizenry is necessary to the security of the nation.”

  2. The best example of the fact that there is no gun culture that unifies us is the dear author Foghorn’s reference obscurum to a “Reliant Robin in an oil-covered roundabout”. I’m not even going to Google it.

    Obeidallee, Obeidallah Life goes on Bro. SCOTUS has ruled. But you can still play at the state level.

      • I had planned on making a comment related to Clarkson rolling the Robin the second I read that line FTA.

        Well played sir. The first time I saw him roll the Robin seconds after taking the wheel is one of the hardest laughs of my life.

        • My favorite was when he rolled it in the parking lot, right in full view of the Reliant club. And they weren’t even salty about it. I would want one of these dopey three-wheelers as a conversation piece if nothing else.

      • Great video, really funny! When they mentioned about the population of Yorkshire going down, instead of up, it reminded me of a little town I used to go through, that never changed the population. Every time a baby was born, some guy would leave town!

      • This is hilarious. Even after a second viewing, I’m still not sure just what the hell I’m looking at, but it’s hilarious. Thanks for that.

  3. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again.

    One of the common tactics is to portray gun owners as rural, uneducated, violent, racist, and evil.

    As a college educated technology worker who considers the opportunity to work with people from all over the world a “perk” of my profession and as someone who does not go around looking for violent encounters I find their stereotype to be offensive.

    Also, when they say “gun control” all I and a lot of gun owners hear is “Ways to limit our ability to protect ourselves and our families.”

    Sorry, there are more gun owners than they realize and we are more diverse than the anti-gunners realize. They are losing because their cause does not have popular support despite their control of the media.

  4. @ Nick

    2. Use the tactics of anti-abortion groups

    You missed it on this item. The anti-abortion groups tactics is to use legislation – see this article:

    Anti-Gun Activists Adopt Anti-Abortion Tactics
    Using arbitrary regulations to restrict liberty

    Look at Chicago

    Yet Chicago clearly wants to do through zoning and similar means what it could not do directly: make it prohibitively difficult to buy a gun legally in the city. It’s doing precisely what abortion opponents are trying to do in Virginia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and other states. If Chicago succeeds, you can bet that other cities will embrace the same tactics.

    • That is unless such zoning restrictions can be successfully challenged in court. I’m not holding my breath for that miracle, though. We got lucky with the 7th Circuit once. I’m one to believe the old adage that lightning doesn’t strike twice.

    • May I point out that so far the anti-abortion groups have largely failed to achieve their goals, meanwhile torpedoing the campaign of many purple state Republicans?

      If that’s the model they want to follow……

  5. Obama is the best ally that gun rights ever had. Because of his mindless policies, inept performance and incessant lies, nobody in his or her right mind trusts him or the government. Those are good things, not bad things, and that distrust blows the gungrabbers’ agenda straight to hell.

    Without a gungrabber-in-chief, the antigun movement is deader than Kelsey’s nuts. Bloomberg would like to be that guy, but he’s even more despised and distrusted than Barry.

    Vote in November. Kick the Democrats in the balls. They deserve it.

    • nobody in his or her right mind trusts him or the government

      This is ‘Mericuh. We’re running a little short on folks in their right minds.

    • Its been rattling around in my head that Obama is Cersei Lannister. He thinks he’s the smartest person in the room and surrounds himself with morons to ensure it.

      • If he’s Cersei, then which one of them is Petyr Baelish? That’s the guy we really need to watch out for. Unfortunately, we’re not likely to know who he is until it’s too late…

    • Let’s be realistic, here, and acknowledge that Obama is definitely not a 2A ally. He’s getting so much push-back despite media control, etc, only because of how many people are already inclined to disbelieve that message. Our best ally is keeping our principles alive not just now but for future generations so that the next time this same scenario occurs, the people are still inclined to think for themselves and push back.

  6. How about working on existing law? What good is a background check if you don’t actually perform one? You just lie like this guy did and they take your word for it ? I’ve had over 40 background checks. Can you actually believe they can do one over the phone in under 3 minutes? That’s about how long it took the last few times I bought guns. It’s nothing but a money scam.

    • How long should a background check take? Ten minutes? A week? What length of time would make it not a money scam?

      Zero minutes is the only answer that makes sense to me.

      • At that point you have simply shifted the burned of proof to the purchaser, haven’t you? Papers, please.

    • My cynical take on it is they aren’t interested in doing a better job enforcing existing laws because it doesn’t give them more control and doesn’t give them an opportunity to further restrict gun ownership.

    • Background checks are a bit of a misnomer. What they have is a list of people prohibited from owning guns and that’s what the “background check” looks at – if you’re on the list, then you don’t get a gun.

  7. Yes, tactics of the anti-abortion groups. Those tactics have worked so well, abortion is mostly less restricted than it was in the 70s. With the result that abortion per capita is also down significantly. huh. funny how that works. Or, not. Yes, please adopt the tactics of the anti-abortion groups!

    • “Less restricted than in the 70s”? Well, yes, than in the era when the “Constitutional right” to abortion was created out of whole cloth by 5 jurists who couldn’t even find where this “right” was spelled out. But in many states it is a lot more difficult to get an abortion than in those heady days . Be careful what you wish for.

  8. Control the language, control the debate:

    As the enemies of America and its citizens would benefit greatly from the disarmament of America and its citizen, those seeking gun control and weapon confiscation may be being paid by a foreign entity / government to do so and it is something that needs to be investigated.

  9. It’s either time we try a different approach or shut up

    Can we take part in making that decision?

  10. I read Obeidallah’s screed. There’s no way he can rewrite the Second Amendment since he can’t write. No kidding. The guy’s a total illiterate. He couldn’t even lip-sync the Second Amendment.

  11. “Parading around pictures of dead babies shows them for the nutcases they are”

    Smile, you werent aborted….

    Agreed with everything except this. While rape, incest, and abuse are disgusting and horrible…a child never has a chance when the phrase “only in cases of rape, incest, etc” are used to justify murder. I as a concealed carrying person believe in the sanctity of innocent life, even if its the life of someone i disagree with politically. If you saw some gal being raped, pulled your gun and shot the prick dead, you are a true hero. But why does the child never get the same treatment as a citizen in distress?

    Your life is worth defending, just like a child with no vote or representation thats aborted is worth defending.

    The ideal that we gun owners an carry-ers believe in…”personal defense”… is hypocritical when we believe in murdering an innocent baby.

    Abortions would stop if babies were granted concealed carry 🙂 since we want anti gunners to consider our ideals, why not stop and concider what i just said.

    • You do realize that’s gun control nuts he’s referring to, not anti-abortion protesters, right?

    • Because a group of cells that has the cognitive abilities of a brussel sprout and just happens to have the potential to become a human being someday given the right conditions isn’t a child. Now can we get back to guns?

  12. When ever you hear a Leftist talk about Guns, Border Security, Tax Policy et al review your defensive counter moves for Marxist Critical Theory

  13. Let’s rip up the First Amendment so no one can write these “manifestos” that seem so popular with the lunatic fringe. It astounds me that there are so called Americans out there that have no problem dissembling our Country’s Bill of Rights. If freedom is not what you want move to a country like England, Mexico or Iran that has no rights for the citizen. There I feel safer already!

    • The gun grabbers have already introduced legislation to rewrite the First Amendment as well. It will go nowhere but it shows us what the Democrats think about the Bill of Rights.

  14. Please do gun control advocates. Don’t hold back, tell everyone what you really want.

  15. Has anyone explained to Dean that there is a federal militia and as an added bonus, a state militia for which he is AUTOMATICALLY a member of??? No, not national guard. They are the “regular” militia. The irregular militia is everyone else under age 65. Suck on deez nuts Dean

  16. “The NRA doesn’t want to make it easier for criminals to get a gun, it wants to make it easier for YOU to get a gun. Assuming you’re a responsible law-abiding citizen (whatever your political views), why is this a problem?”

    -Quote from Me.

  17. I have to disagree with one point. “Eliminating firearms will solve the perceived problems.”

    It actually would do this because if firearms are gone, they will stop perceiving the problem.

    Another formulation: the antis perceive guns themselves as the problem, so if they were gone…

    Seriously though, how many of the labour types in the UK acknowledge their current levels of violence? They already have all the gun control so lax laws cannot be blamed. The only logical thing for them to do is ignore it, much like American antis do when invoking the the island paradise.

  18. In other words, “Otherize, demonize, and dehumanize” *

    *But call it something else, since he’s far too enlightened and broad-minded to do such things.

  19. Let Deen Obey-the-Allah try to formally repeal the Second Amendment. Just like it says to do in the Constitution, either through Congress (two thirds) plus the states (three fourths) to ratify a new amendment, or by calling for a Convention of the States (the way they repealed Prohibition) to bypass the state legislatures.

    Either way, he would be fun to watch. In a pathetic way. Not even Obama thinks he can override the Constitution with his phone & his pen. In fact, he complains all the time that he cannot transform America simply with a stroke of his pen (the preferred method of Paul Begala).

  20. With respect to background checks, the reason it takes three minutes is, get this — computers. The NICS is only as good as the data entered into it, several mass public shooter that were loonier than a corn-baited lake in Minnesota passed NICS checks no problem. The fact that only a handful of criminals turned away by NICS are ever prosecuted in a given year should tell you plenty about how much the current administration believes in background checks as a useful tool. They are not interested in arresting criminals or maintaining the integrity of their database, otherwise they would send local PD to arrest a self-confessed felon, or at a minimum interview the rejected applicant and figure out how the misidentification occurred. Without that checksum the NICS is as much security theater as gun-free zones.

    I prefer to watch the human rights activists feed on themselves by bringing in privacy concerns with respect to mental health records. It is truly a thorny issue, and I am not sure there has been a consensus yet by the progs on the hierarchy of victims in this case. The conversation tends to stall out at that point.

  21. The only thing I can see in the short term is Barry saying “screw it” and firing off an executive order of some nasty type.

Comments are closed.