Previous Post
Next Post

We called this: since his “death to gun grabbers” YouTube video, Tactical Response jefe James Yeager has become the poster child for those who would see Americans disarmed. As has been said many times before, the only cure for hate speech—even “ours”—is good speech. The Firearms Policy Coalition and the NRA are launching PR campaigns (post next hour) in the next few days. And we’re here, nearasdammit 24/7, reporting on the efforts to extend and defend your Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. And you’re there, doing what you do, promoting safe and responsible gun ownership by word and deed. Will it be enough? For Mr. Ed nothing will ever be enough to convince him that the Second Amendment means what it says, and for good reason. For the fence sitters, well, we’ll see . . .

 

Previous Post
Next Post

213 COMMENTS

    • Yes, I think the former is much closer.

      He has backpedaled, lawyered up and realized that his original video and statements were a HUGE mistake.

      Making ridiculous statements, ranting empty threats and posting hyperbolic statements only harms our cause.

      Think before your speak/write/post. I’m sure Yeager wishes he had acted more wisely.

      -RJP

      • Hey rob I thought you and yeager were tight buds. Together calling people ass clowns and such

    • I vote the latter. He is a poster child for mental health issues being reason to revoke the right to own weapons.

  1. That’s it. We’re boned. We aren’t allowed to express any outrage at all, yet the anti-gunners can scream and shout and rip their clothing in anger.

    Anger is a luxury afforded only to those who would disarm us.

    • Classic Saul Alinsky…right by the book. Hold your enemy to standards to which you don’t hold yourself. What about all the leftist asshats wanting NRA members to be shot, or all gun owners rounded up and put in jail? I bet for every Yeager we could find 100s of leftists shouting for violence. That’s just the way they play, and have always played. If you haven’t read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, you should. It’s the Progressive bible, complete with a dedication to Satan in the intro. I kid you not.

      • My understanding is that in recent printings of RFR, they’ve scrubbed the intro hat-tip to Lucifer. I’ve also heard they scrubbed references to Frank Marshall Davis in “Dreams from my Father” about the same time. So get a used copy a couple of years old or more.

        • Newtown CT is the east coast headquarters for the Church of Satan.

          30 days have passed and there is not ONE picture or video clip of Adam Lanza arriving at or entering Sandy Hook school.

          The press reported Lanza “played violent video games” non stop but later admitted his computer hard drives were all completely destroyed, rendering such a statement impossible.

          Locals have said Lanza didnt drive, his mother drove him everywhere.

          What there has been from Newtown CT the headquarters of the Church of Satan is an INCREDIBLE amount of conflicting un vetted “information” from “officials” and the overwhelming demand for gun confiscation.

          Doesnt take a tin foil hat to think something is wrong with this picture, even if you buy into the “official” story.

      • I’ve never seen anything that stated anyone thinks gun owners need to be rounded up and jailed or wanting NRA members to be shot. You need to stop letting others do your thinking and start doing some for yourself. IF you’re still capable of independent thought, that is. I have my doubts.

        • @Mike Aguilar Just because YOU didn’t see or hear of it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. You may be important in your mind but in the real world or even here on TTAG you’re a nobody. It looks like the only one here that is incapable of independent thoughts is you. Not everyone is as ignorant as you are. Perhaps you need to research and get up to date before spouting off ridiculous comments like that again.

          • Ok. Show me the proof that any of what I doubt occurred did in fact occur. PROOF. Not “”I saw…….” Show me that actual links. Until then, you’re full of the proverbial male bovine excrement product.

        • Hey Mike Aguilar, google Don Kaul, a liberal journalist out of Iowa, he calls for the killing of gun owners and the senators Boehner and Mconnel be dragged behind a pick up truck.

          • Yeah, couldn’t find anything about that on what I consider a trustworthy source. Just the hate- and fear-filled right wing bullshit blogs and so-called “news” sources. |

            But, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. ONE person. Yet, you say that ONE person speaks for everyone, that everyone thinks the way that ONE person does.

            Think about it. How STUPID is that?

            That’s like me, as the grandson of a Mexican that came her completely legally, saying that because *I* think all illegals should be deported immediately, no matter the cost to the gov’t, ALL Mexican-Americans think that way. Would you say that that would be a correct statement? Or that I’m even in the majority of American citizens of Mexican descent? Or do most Americans of Mexican descent side with illegals?

        • It was not just one person that has called for some sort of violence. There are several stories out there and they are not from other sources, you can read them straight from the horses mouth. All this information out there on the Internet yet you “Couldn’t find anything about that”. I had always assumed the Internet was a fairly simple tool to use, I guess it’s just too complicated for the mentally challenged like you.

          • Oh, so you’re actually talking about those wannabe terrorists that said something about teaching people “a second amendment solution” ? Gotcha

        • mike aguilar is right. right on the money.

          just because they do it, doesnt mean we have to do it.

          we all know we should be different people with our guns, hold ourselves to higher standards. there’s no such thing as angry rhetoric or rash decision making. when you are armed your behavior should be scientific, rational, and objective.

          my only regret is that i laughed at james’ behavior, denouncing it. the implications are potentially severe for all of us and WE know that the media is lopsided.

        • You’d bet. And you’d lose.

          Let’s start. We already have Yeager. So we need your list of 100 so-called “leftists” or “liberals” shouting for violence.

          And a couple years ago there was the Tea Party activist saying he wanted a 2nd Amendment solution to people that wanted to take his guns away.

          So, now we need a list of 200 VERIFIABLE instances where “leftists” or “liberals” have been shouting for violence.

          • Really?

            John Wilkes Booth: Southern Democrat right winger. From before the time when GOP and Dem switched left and right.

            William McKinley was shot by Leon Czolgolz, an anarchist, not a leftist.

            JFK was killed by the CIA for failing to live up to his promise of air support for the Cuban rebels. Last I heard, the CIA was pretty freaking right wing.

            I’d call that a failure to understand history, pat.

        • Wrong. Lets keep it to the 20th century, when communism and marxist crap really got cooking.
          Your masterbating with history by not assigning at least some (most, if not all) to your commie boy Lee.

    • There are many ways to get a point across without sounding like a nutjob. We all laugh at Piers Morgan because of his behavior. He has toned it down because he figured out people thought he was a nut. While we may agree with some or all of what James said we don’t go around posting videos of it because it wouldn’t end well. The net is a double edged sword in that while it is easy to get information out it is also easy to publish work that isn’t our best. He hit publish without cooling off first and now he is paying for it. Sadly it will cost him for a long time. Not very many people are going to get training from someone whose made themselves a liability. Sad because while I don’t agree with all his methods he does have a lot to offer the firearms community.

    • You can rant and rave all you want, but when you start threatening violence against other people, it becomes a felony known as terrorist threats. Plain and simple. A 5th grader with a brain can see that.

      • Even a Dem Politician actually tweeted that NRA members should be shot. There was a post on this very site about it a couple weeks ago.

        We are subjected to a double standard. Yeager makes one video, it goes to MSNBC. Hundreds of tweets calling for the death of firearm owners and NRA members? Why cover that?

        • i dont give a shit what dem politicians and anti-gunners do. theyre not the ones with guns LOL.

          but we are. that means we should hold ourselves to a higher standard.

        • Oh. So, I’m supposed to believe something from someone that think bullshit is actually nutritious? Ok. But,I’m sorry, I don’t have enough to buy that bridge you’re selling in the desert.

      • There are numerous instances, Piers Morgan with Buzz from the daily beast, as well as others. It is really not difficult to find if you choose to.
        Go on to CNN and read the responses from individuals. While this is not considered an accurate source, but it certainly describes a sentiment.
        We here in TTAG were the first to state the rant was not in the best interest of gun owners or the public in general. James Yeager’s statement was generalized, and heated, but it was not directed to any specific individual. A terrorist threat needs to be directed at something or someone. A threat to an organization or or individual. James’s comment was simply directed outward, but there is no definable target. Other comments made on national television and other places have been rather pointed and directed. Even if made behind some sort of quirk or scoff, it is a threat none the less.

        • Actually, no. Read the federal law. It states there only has to be a threat. I’m guessing that “I’m going to start killing people” qualifies as a threat.

          It REALLY helps if you know what the actual law states and what the SCOTUS thinks BEFORE you make yourself look like a real idiot. Then again, maybe you like looking like an idiot. I don’t know you,so I can’t be sure.

    • Not just anger, they also get to publicly promote murdering anyone they disagree with and that’s OK. But if someone they don’t like makes a similar statement, they’re a horrible person and have their life ruined.

  2. Ed is full of crap and anybody who agrees with him is already in the anti-gun crowd, but did anybody NOT see this coming? It was just a matter of time before the MSM picked up Yeager’s videos and used them against us. Thanks for nothing James.

    • I agree with Ed, but I wholeheartedly support the responsible private ownership of guns with a legitimate civilian use.

      • The “legitimate” use is specified in the 2A. Perhaps you should read some of the articles about what that use is.

        • As an ex-member of the military with an IQ of over 150, can guarantee I understand it better than you.

        • I’d explain the childishness of posting IQ numbers, but it’d likely go over your head. I’m a former Son of the American Revolution member just like I’m a former triplenine member – I get bored with clubs.

          Just don’t ever whip out that keen legal insight in a room full of lawyers, they’ll pat you on the head, chuckle, and then send you to fetch more scotch.

        • “Just don’t ever whip out that keen legal insight in a room full of lawyers, they’ll pat you on the head, chuckle, and then send you to fetch more scotch.”

          LMAO!!!

          I hate lawyers (im just kidding, dont offer to break my spine in half for that comment ((everybody hates lawyers until they’re fighting for their life in the courtroom)) and i thought that was funny.

      • depends on what you mean by legitimate civilian use.

        to have the arms of the military and defend from tyranny? that is legitimate enough for me 😀

          • You’d be bringing a knife to a gunfight. Thinking that your little arsenal is going to do any good if the government decides it wants to take over in dictatorial style and is able to convince the military to go get people like you, is stupid. Your 1 little gun versus an Abrams. Yep. That’s going to work. Or a Hellfire missile.

        • erm… we lost two wars in nations smaller than the size of california…to a few thousand insurgents with small arms and HME (thats homemade explosives for you civvies).

          have you heard of the snowball effect? 4th generation warfare (reference John Poole)?

          obviously not. this “2nd amendment and AR15 are useless against M1 Abrams tanks and B2 bombers” is a stupid argument that has been refuted countless times.

          anybody that has read a history book or served in the armed forces in any capacity in combat arms (especially light infantry reconnaissance and special operations) is aware of this.

          • Yeah. Ok. You play with your little toy against an Abrams. I’ll use my brain to think of something more effective. IF the time were ever to come. I highly doubt any US gov’t would be able to convince the military to attack civilians in the fashion you’re dreaming about. If the need arises, the military will be right next to us, because (GASP!) they’re citizens and in the same boat as we are.

        • Better to be a “liberal” than a Re-THUG-nican with no brains.

          Agreeing with obese Rush makes you an idiot with a less than room temperature IQ. At least Ed gives me room to think for myself.

          • I would guess that receiving training in countering it from some of the best minds in the field means I understand it better than you. But you just go ahead and keep that over-inflated sense of self-worth, Pat. It may help you some day.

        • You keep failing. In the statements above you keep harping about ‘the Abrams’ several times. Asymetrical (Gorilla) warfare dont need that, silly, and you would know this if you were such a Jedi master regarding the art of war. The semiauto rifle/detachable magazine interface is the backbone of any patriotic gorilla resistance against a potential future regime.

      • Then what the hell do you consider legitimate use? Hunting? Lets not lose track of the task at hand, with all do respect the 2nd ammendment isnt just hunting and self defense, its defense against a tyranical gov’t. Supporting any ati gun cause only hurts this country because people including the president wont stop at mags, or a full out A.W.B. They want an all out disarmed puplic, and the United States of America Will Not let that Happen! By the way I’m thirteen, young does’nt mean stupid.

        • Nobody outside police or law enforcement needs an assault rifle. They were designed with one purpose in mind and they are only good for one thing.

          For hunting and (maybe) home defense, a nice semi- or bolt action 5 round capacity.30-06. For home and personal defense a Glock or Beretta or, preferably, an S&W revolver.

          If you need more than 6 rounds to hit your target, you don’t need a gun, you need a fortress that’s impregnable, because you’re hopeless.

  3. It strikes me as curious that as a response to Yeager being a “threat”, they take away his little piece of paper. If he was really a threat and not just someone who talks, wouldn’t it be more logical to take away his guns? I’m sure a reason (BS or otherwise) could be made to support that if he was really threatening.
    Since they just took away his permit/license/whatever, this sounds kind of like a publicity stunt.

    • Yeager made no specific threat of any kind. All he did was exercise his First Amendment right to express his anger, for which he was punished.

      We have a First Amendment right to agree with the government, or to disagree as long as we do so quietly, humbly and while genuflecting like good subjects. In other words, the First Amendment means nothing.

      • Yeager made no specific threat of any kind.

        “If it goes one inch further, I’m going to start killing people.”

        Threat: an expression of intention to inflict evil, injury, or damage.

        Maybe not a “specific” threat…

          • What semantic crap are you trying to pull now, Ralph. It wasn’t a SPECIFIC threat, it was a GENERAL one? He didn’t say he’d kill a SPECIFIC person. Is that your game, lawyer?

        • As much as it’s pointless responding to mike, that’s the legal construct. It has to be an actual specific threat.

          Out in the real world, people say “I’m gonna kill you/her/him/them/it” all the time. It’s a figure of speech, with a certain dramatic flair, nothing more.

          One of the basics of law, and often the hardest to prove, is intent. Attempting to use those vids as mens rea of a real threat, is more than a bit of a stretch. Were some grandstander DA to charge him, Yaeger would either amuse a jury as a complete over-the-top tactifool, or scare them just because they actually fall for his schtick.

          • Wrong numb nuts. It really helps knowing what this little thing called “the actual law” has to day.

            Next time you DON’T want to sound like a room temp idiot, look up the law BEFORE you speak. That way, even less than room temp idiots MIGHT think you have something of a clue. Even if, like now, you don’t.

            Word to wise, DON’T try to argue with someone that has an IQ 3 times yours.

        • Did we do something bad to the genepool of ‘Mikes’ or what?

          I’m quite aware of the actual legal definitions of intent (there’s at least 3 of them depending on things you have demonstrated you aren’t even aware of, let alone understand).

          Once again rocket surgeon, do break out a Black’s (law dictionary since you are obviously clueless as to what intent or mens reas is ).

          BTW- Your IQ is north of 500? I am SO impressed!

          • Accur81: Are you white? Black? Asian? If so, you’re not really full-blooded American, now are you? You MAY have been born in the States to parents that are citizens, but unless BOTH of your parents are full-blooded Native Americans, like my dad’s grandmother, you’re not full-blooded, you’re just native born.

            Thank you for your service.

      • I do find it highly ironic when those among us try to defend the 2A with a complete lack of understanding of the 1A.The 1A doesn’t protect you from being punished for your speech, you have the right to heard, that does mean your words won’t have consequences.

        • Definitely. What Mr. Yeager is experiencing is a consequence. Posting “If it goes any further, I’m going to start killing people” in a Post-Newtown/Aurora world is incredibly stupid. Some might call that type of thing a warning sign. I agreed with the most of what he said, other than his last statement.

          Gun grabbers are waiting for us to make mistakes. Stay frosty.

        • Mike Aguilar,

          If you don’t think Feinstein is a gun grabber than I don’t have much hope for your powers of perception. There are many other sources such as the Brady Campaign, Bloomberg, and the entire Chicago political system.

          Unless you’re joking with me, and I’m telling you something that you already know.

          • Well, I’ve done this novel thing called actually reading the submitted legislation. It gives you a good idea of what the legislator is trying to do. I also do this novel thing called not letting a biased agency or organization for my thinking for me. I’m kinda doubting your capable of it.

        • racer x, you hit a good point

          “The 1A doesn’t protect you from being punished for your speech, you have the right to heard, that does mean your words won’t have consequences.”

          Similarly, the 2nd amendment doesnt guarantee protection from punishment after using force against the tyrannical powers to be.

          That is why Yeager pisses me off. he seems enthusiastic for going to civil war and Im personally not. Ive seen three different wars and i couldnt imagine the horror on my own homeland against my fellow americans.

    • Actually, they should have taken away his paper, his guns, and his freedom and locked him up in the closest insane asylum. For about a decade. A frontal lobotomy might have been a good idea, too.

    • Would it also be a giant misunderstanding if someone got killed because James thinks it’s okay to have a person downrange taking photos on a live fire range?

      The guy is a basket case, who unfortunately has a popular youtube channel.

      • Yes, he is a basket case. And unfortunately he has youtube channel AND a following of fellow basket cases.

    • Neither are true, unless by “sensible gun laws” you mean repealing the 1934 NFA, the Gun-Free School zones acts, and the 1968 Gun Control Act.

    • “We?” Who the f^ck are “we?” You don’t live here, you live in Italy, so you are not part of “we.” And don’t tell me that you’re an American. You’re as American as Benedict Arnold.