Previous Post
Next Post


Once upon a time a derogatory comment on TTAG re: Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America jefe Shannon Watts (above right) showed up on a mainstream antis’ website. Dan and I quickly decided that we had to extend our “no-flaming” policy to the subject of our posts – not just TTAG, its writers and fellow commentators. We didn’t want to give the antis anti-gun agitprop ammunition. Although it’s proven difficult (I’m looking at you Dirk and Ralph), especially on our Facebook page, we’ve adhered to that policy. JK sent us this image making the rounds on Twitter. See? Our commenting policy is like that old adage everything in moderation. Except moderation.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Agreed. They love to poke at us, then take the flames and play victim. Why give them that?

      • Wow, pwrserge,

        It’s like you have no self awareness. That…that crap right there is exactly what we’re saying not to do. You need to have self discipline. Don’t leave you wingman, Don’t break formation.

        Stop giving them easy targets. People like you do more to hurt gun rights than the scant members of demanding moms.

        • Sounds like he was just saying what you were thinking.

          I seriously doubt anyone who was not squarely on their side of the fence would be influenced by such shameless hyperbolic victim mongering.

        • 1st Amendment is just as important as the 2nd ya AHOLE

          Anything WE say that’s pro gun, or anti them, is subsequent to be used as their ammo, blow me on the PC censorship horeshit. This is AMERICA!

        • Yes, it is America, which means the owners of this blog site can establish any rules of conduct they wish. And if you, or others, do not like them, then leave. Start your own blog site. Say whatever you want.

          It’s that simple.

        • The fact that you think that this is a debate that we can lose is the problem. You are fighting the war they want you to fight. The “gun control” debate is not a valid topic of conversation. There can be no “debate” on inalienable rights. Even acknowledging them as having a position worthy of anything other than blatant mockery is giving them too much credit.

        • we’re supposed to be better than them

          Better than whom? Instutionalised trolls.
          Better in what way? By being more sensitive and politically correct? In touch with our caring feminine side? Won’t work, I’m just an annoyed old grunt. I can’t sing kumbay-nuthing and in any case would cut out my tongue first.

        • The very fact that I now have to offer “smarter and savvier about the long-term benefits of the cause” as clarification of my use “better” demonstrates that I have to be politically correct to your personal views….

          It’s not about walking on egg shells around these histrionic nervous Nellies’ sensitivities, it’s about being smarter and more mature and not giving them exactly what they want to vilify us.

    • Who gives a rip. This site becomes more The Truth About Politically Correctness everyday and less TTAG. What goes up must come down though – I just didn’t figure it would be this quick.

    • Except, as MDA / ETFGC have shown, if you don’t say something that they dislike, they have no problem just making stuff up. They’re going to make the claims regardless of what you do or do not say, so cowering in fear of them is just silly. If the TSA’s existence is letting the terrorists win, isn’t censoring posts that might upset Shannon Watts letting the gun control advocates win?

      • +1. Acknowledging this as a debate rather than a blatant tyrannical power grab is already giving them too much credit.

      • ^this guy gets it. It doesn’t matter if you censor or not, they’ll find something innocuous and make it seem like “sexual violence” (wtf?) or just make stuff up.

        I’m not saying some really out there stuff shouldn’t be deleted but don’t do it for fear of what MDA will use, because then you might as well get rid of the posting section altogether.

        • Yeah but why give them evidence they can back up their accusation with? It’s a lot harder to paint these people as liars (which, if I understand Mina’s POV correctly, is something we should do at every opportunity) if they can link to something that proves their accusation.

        • Steve: I don’t propose to paint anyone as anything. What I propose is we use what we know about how our opponents think and behave to guide our parry/thrust with them, play to the audience and put the debate in a position whereby the opponent exposes him/herself for the liar, conniving, under-handed person they are.

          We allow them the opportunity to show their true colors. We do not announce, accuse or otherwise label. We just allow.

          Then step back, look at the audience and say “Is this the kind of person you want leading our nation’s policies?”

      • It’s not about “censoring posts that might upset Shannon Watts letting the gun control advocates win” which they won’t unless the flaming and trash talk overwhelms the logic and debate.

        I like to snipe as much as anyone, and I too have made my share of off the wall comments. But some level of decorum must be maintained to prevent too much degeneration into vulgar ad hominem attacks. If it regularly occurs TTAG may be appropriated by some commentators into a less relevant forum. I get that.

        The attraction of this site is the extensive dynamics of the armed intelligencia as they logically, meaningfully discuss and expose the fallacy, deception and political corruptness of the grabber’s efforts, and the politicians and media hoars who help further the anti’s goals.

        Unfortunately, too many *immoderate* sharp ad hominem comments can’t be allowed to prevail and take over the discussion to the point of distraction. That will degrade the site and give the antis ammunition to dismiss our relevance.

        Upsetting Shannon Watts or anyone else in the anti’s camp’s got nothin’ to do with it.

    • She is a PR expert, she will use whatever, whenever, to propel her agenda. It is absurd that Todd’s stunt did anything other than embarrass and anger MDA’s leader. Using the words “sexual violence against woman” is just another manipulation of the situation to grasp for donation dollars and publicity. Although it did prompt me to research her background in PR more. Fact is, she uses a lot of aliases, (can’t blame her, I do too) and she has quite a PR/Propaganda resume. We don’t need to be nasty, we just need to shine light on her manipulations and expose what is going on behind the facade.

    • You’re right. We should just roll over and let them do… whatever… Because, you know… Sticking up for your position in any manner is wrong and intolerant of letting the opposition’s determination to beat you down. And of course, no matter how many times you get frustrated at the sheer idiocy of the other guys, you should always remember to merely turn away and say nothing.


      Yeah… That didn’t work out too well for a lot of other people. Why not simply stop the pro-2a effort because we’re too afraid to say anything? Oh, I know. Because there’s people who are unwilling to let those who would weaken it from the inside weaken it at all.

      • Dave, Where in the above statement, did you see any of the things you just claimed. Are you so ignorant that you are unable to construct an articulate argument without the use of sexual innuendo and childish insults? Do you think the use of that type of speech makes your argument stronger? SMH… WE are supposed to be the people that stand for REAL values. Are those days gone?

    • I agree completely. They love to play the victim. I wish more pro gun people would berate her for being the phony she is and focus on that, leave the crude comments to the anti gun people since they don’t have any facts to rely on.

    • Yes, but damn does that woman get pissed and vindictive when somebody makes her look like a fool. It’s kind of enjoyable, actually. Anyway, I think the correct message to push here is this: Gun owners don’t hold women in contempt, we just hold this particular woman in contempt.

    • It’s like Kaleb doesn’t understand how spin and PR works.

      We are fighting for the minds of the undecided. Showing someone a gun can easily be interpreted as a threat. Don’t you remember how the parking lot confrontation was played out a few months back as the open carriers trying to intimidate the demanding moms?

      I know there’s no violence intended and YOU know there’s no violence intended, and most likely the moms know, but the middle ground people get fed images and quotes out of context or with false context and you make it too easy for POTG to seem like they’re out for blood.

      • You need to stop reading that failed RINO/Rove playbook. It is NOT about the middle of the road/undecided. The great myth (or lie) of the paid political consultant (gravytrain). See every major GOP candidate (other than Reagan) of the last 49.5years.

      • I do expect violence against the tyrants that her ilk incite and encourage. On that day, all that middle of the road hogwash won’t mean a thing.

    • Not even a little bit.

      If we want to play the game right, we have to do everything right all the time, period.

      And sad but true let the bad guys among us hang themselves all alone. No help.

      • If I read this right, Mina, you are saying it would be a Dumbsh*t Move for him to have shown a gun here, even though such would certainly be adequately shocking to a hoplophobe and make their amygdala glow a searing whitish color.

        So why do you apparently endorse juvenile sexual innuendo comments? That’s the sort of thing that is being talked about in the OP.

        • There is a wide chasm between stimulating someone’s amygdala into a hijack in debate wherein one uses logic and facts delivered in specific ways to cause hijack and physically threatening someone (how Shannon would see it) by displaying your formerly concealed firearm.

          Part of being successful using these techniques is understanding that difference and using it to your advantage.

          I don’t endorse what those few young guys were saying. But I’m not accountable for what they say either.

          I respect all people’s right to speak and well, if they feel comfortable owning up to what they said who am I to judge their right to say it?

        • And I think in every state, displaying a firearm in order to deliberately shock or frighten someone will get you prison time. The suggestion was funny, but no one should take it seriously.

  2. Something something free speech. Incorrectly invoke First Amendment. Shake fist at computer screen. Threaten to leave TTAG. Roll credits.

    • It seems like we get the same people railing against “political correctness”. It would seem they are unable to make an argument to support their position without insults and sexual innuendo. It is curious, however, that despite their continued threats to take their toys and go home, they are still here. Like it or not, this is about mainstream America and their votes. Even “inalienable rights” can be restricted, as per the Supreme Court. We need more responsible gun owners and less childish rants.

  3. In the past few days, we’ve read a person here announcing that liberals are “sub-humans” and wishing they would kill themselves. We’ve read numerous vile sexual remarks about Mrs. Watts, and other puerile displays of utterly sexist thinking and remarks.

    The utter disregard for even a modicum of common decency, let alone such short-sighted foolishness, not realizing how this is precisely the ammunition the left/gun-grabbers need to shoot us with.

    Get a grip people. Please.

    • “We’ve read numerous vile sexual remarks about Mrs. Watts”

      Please quote several. And if they fail the “vile” test, you lose 100 credibility points. And you have none to begin with.

      • “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

        Which part of that pertains to privately owned and operated websites again?

        *This is a response to the comment you made before your edit, regarding the OP’s apparent distaste for free speech, and your suggestion that they move to Communist China.

        • Shut your face tough guy, Im drunk and figured id change my comment cause it was rude.

        • The Prime Directive. If you don’t understand the spirit and intent of the 1st (and History) then you don’t. Which is sad,but indicative of the modern government “education”/indoctrination centers.

        • Why do we have the 1st Amendment? Whatever your answer is a good reason to avoid violating the spirit of the 1st even if you don’t violate the legality.

        • Well, when you sober up give that there constuhtooshun a read. If you’re gonna whine about it all the time you might was well be educated enough to stand up to tough intellectual bullies like me.

        • Ok blinky, you be an intellectual bully, I’ll be a physical bully. You send me your contact info and I’ll show you to your face might makes right. No? thought not coward.

      • I drive a lot of traffic to this site. . . . and unlike Shannon, I will accept a paycheck from y’all.

    • These despicable entities Shannon Watts, Bloomberg etc. (I won’t call them “human”) abuse us and attempt to deny law-abiding American’s their Constitutionally guaranteed “rights” referring to gun owners as “extremists”, “monsters”, “radicals”, “terrorists” and worse yet TTAG shows them respect protecting them? Where are your guts? Why has TTAG surrendered to these vile anti-2nd Amendment propagandists?

      • Because if we hurt their feelings or make fun of them as we have done in the past they will go straight to their room and post nasty things about us on the World Wide Web or the Internet or something.

      • Ah, I see. They called us names, so we should call them names, right? Haven’t we advanced beyond kindergarten? Is our position so weak that we have to lower ourselves to their level? The beauty of our position is that we have FACTS and LOGIC on our side, not to mention the Constitution! We don’t have to play to peoples emotions like they do. That is ALL they have. Let them play that losing game, we don’t have to!

    • Agreed. Even if the message they deliver is one with which I disagree and one that I hate, gun control advocates are still human beings, and deserving of basic courtesy and respect as such. I don’t think our showing a tiny shred of decency should be dependant on whether our opponents do the same.

  4. I’m sorry… I fail to see a single thing in any of those posts that’s inciting anything. The fact that Watts is a modern day Joseph Goebbels is not lost on me. In my opinion, she deserves nothing but scorn, ridicule, and humiliation for blatantly selling out human rights of others.

      • I’m sorry… Come find me when half of an entire generation of my ancestors did not wind up in unmarked mass graves after the last gun grab by rabid liberals. My grandfather died ten years ago without even knowing where the body of his father was buried. I call them as I see them. Godwin’s Law does not apply to people using the exact same tactics as the Nazi and Soviet Communist parties.

        • If someone wears a brown shirt, does that also signal the beginning of the 4th Reich? No, that’s stupid. And so is arguing that any one policy, short of exterminating an ethnic group, is comparable to the holocaust. If your point had any merit Australia and half of Europe would be flying swastikas. If you can’t make an argument without invoking the Nazis, you have no argument.

        • Actually, I was referring to the holodomor. That started with a gun grab and ended with the mass extermination of my ancestors by Obama’s spiritual ancestors (the major socialist power at the time).

          The Holocaust was awful, but Stalin made Hitler look like a maladjusted five year old.

    • Speak out against? Sure. Make jokes about the stupidity of some of their statements? Absolutely. Point out their hypocrisy? Have at it.

      But lame, grade school level sex/porn jokes? Do something better with your time. People who do this kinda stuff aren’t “patriotically” supporting the Second Amendment. You’re just being a troll who thinks he’s funnier than he actually is.

      Unless you think an undecided woman who’s never really considered guns will read that and go “This. This movement speaks to me.”

      • You make the mistake of thinking that such a hypothetical opinion matters. Inalienable rights are not subject to legislation, regulation, or the democratic process. Your hypothetical is entitled to their opinion, I don’t care what it is, nor do I acknowledge their right to dictate to me on fundamental rights. Even en-masse.

        • Moving speech, though I’d love to know how the defense of an inalienable right needs to include dick/porn insults. Oh, right, it doesn’t.

          But, you’re free to confuse crude trolling with actually doing something worthwhile towards supporting the 2A. Many might think you’re hurting the cause, but damn them. You’ve got this notion that it’s somehow doing any good, and you’ll be darned if anyone will talk sense into you.

          Keep fighting the good fight. Stories will be told of the legendary pwrserge and his band of merry juvenile insulters. Statues will be erected (try not to laugh) in your honor.

        • The internet is a place of VERY free speech and porn. Lots of porn. Maybe Shannon is just too old to “get it.” Her troll-feeding might just be good for us in the long term. She might sway a few fudds in the short term, but she’s probably losing millenials, as they lol at her online newbisms.

          Also, and more importantly, What ever happened to “sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me?” In my early childhood (mid 80s) I was always told not to let other people’s rude comments bother me and NEVER gratify them with responses. And I was raised in California, by California hippies! The kind of hippies that lived in communes (before I was born). Today, I don’t even bat an eye at the s**t I read online. I’ve got better things to do than cry over some s**t I read on facebook.

          Side note: I don’t know where the current progressive/”liberal” politicians in California came from, but I don’t think they were ever hippies.

  5. I don’t see anything that incites sexual violence, and certainly we could all have seen Shannon’s glacially thick layer of hyperbole coming a mile away, but it’s still a good idea to avoid language like this, particularly when it’s sexualized or sexist in nature. Doesn’t do us any favors.

  6. “MDA shops deception: Founder’s post promotes helplessness and incites criminal violence against all unarmed people”

  7. The first step to winning a debate is being the better person. That is why Piers Morgan never won. I use the WWPD (hat would Piers do) approach to commenting. If Morgan would say something as rude about a pro gun person, then I don’t say it about an anti gun person.

      • Logic and facts have no place in modern debates with liberals about control and freedom. (sarc/ somewhat). We have facts on our side, but people with raging emotions make people ignore facts and try to pass laws depending on what will make them feel safer. (proven after Sandy hook).

  8. Huh. Now that my grandma is friends with me on Facebook I usually try to avoid bringing up things like bestiality. At least this guy (or girl?) spelled it correctly.

  9. First, about 10,000 times more people just saw this post on TTAG than saw it on Twitter. Second, to anyone who’s ever been on the internet before, it makes MAIG/MDA/EFGS/Shannon Watts look downright petty. Everyone knows that the internet was made for two things, porn and flaming. And third, I believe we get more mileage out of this for pure entertainment purposes than they do for agitprop. But it’s not my blog, so do as you see fit.

    • I’m not sure about that. They have decided that Twitter is their vehicle for getting the word out and mobilizing their masses.

      Effectiveness aside, I think knowing what your enemy is doing and actively working to understand their strategy whilst subterfuging them is worth a few minutes of everyone’s day.

      Including TTAGs

      • While I’d agree it’s never bad to keep an eye on what your adversaries are up to, I think in this case it’s only useful function is for entertainment purposes. Twitter is in a death spiral. Give it another year and it will be about as significant as MySpace. Shannon’s Twitter army coupled with Daddy Bigbuck’s $$$ is barely enough to garner a couple dozen people at their rallies. Effectiveness aside? Effectiveness is everything. Go ahead, bait them with a little sexual innuendo and sit back and laugh at their feigned outrage.

        • I was referring to how generally “un-effective” they have been at “rallying the masses” using Twitter – witness their pathetic real life turn-outs at their rallies.

          My battles with them have been extremely effective.

      • The woman speaks truth. Intel prep of the battle space is worth every bit of effort put into it.

        Sometimes the strategy calls for a sledgehammer and sometimes finesse. I think finesse is needed here. I admit that I am guilty of piling on too, they make it so easy. But that’s part of the issue too. The rubes and cannon fodder they roll out for photos aren’t leaders. The leadership is professional spin doctors doing the role they are paid to. We can’t give them any additional ammunition. Because they aren’t winning on guns so they have to paint gun owners as chauvinist, racist,fear mongering bullies. They support the second amendment, just not for gun owners. That’s why they picked her. She doesn’t care about guns or kids for that matter anymore than she did genetically modified plants. They needed an attractive, Midwestern mom from heartland to speak against guns, because having yet another someone from NY, NJ, MA or CA would be pointless…oh yeah someone that happens to be a gun for hire that knows how this game is played.

    • I disagree with you.

      the internet was made for two things, porn and flaming

      The internet was made for porn. The flaming only started when the porn wouldn’t load.

  10. I’m not seeing the “sexual violence,” but if there is one trend that has the gun grabbers shaking in their boots it’s the surge in interest in firearms from women. Once enough women embrace firearms, gun control will be politically doomed. We should avoid any blatantly sexist language and honor RF’s painful sacrifice in refraining from posting Israeli models.

    • “honor RF’s painful sacrifice in refraining from posting Israeli models.”

      Which RF, and RF only, was the only one to ever post. Know what’s worse than a reformed whore or a reformed drunkard?

      Correct. Nothing.

      • Stopped clock theorem – he has a point. There is nothing more sanctimonious and driven that the newly converted. In some cults they will eagerly strap a bomb to their chest and run to meet 72 Virginians.

      • I was actually trying to make a joke. RF is doing a good thing by refraining from posting the links to models. I remember back in the day RF used to do the same thing when he was with the; it was just part of his shtick. It was more acceptable in that context; few complain about cars and scantly clad women going together. But guns are very political and we are in a war for hearts and minds and have to take the high road.

    • That girl in the yellow bikini earlier today was really pretty.

      I’d like a yellow bikini myself.

  11. Actually, this really isn’t a First Amendment issue (I don’t feel the need to explain).

    At first I thought her prominence on TTAG was a mistake but I now think it’s a good idea. The more people see of her the more they will actually start thinking.

    We MUST be professional. A tip of the hat to Alan Gottlieb. He is the most soft spoken man I’ve ever seen in action but he is a junkyard dog!

    Keep it clean, professional with no innuendo. A soft spoken person usually gets a person with an opposing view to think. A loud mouthed name caller is just trying to out shout someone and is not interested in changing anyone’s mind.

    Give it enough time and more will come out about Shannon, she will then change EVERY thing again and look like Bloomberg.

    • SHE’S the professional. 99% of us here are obviously not. So take that to some professionals, would you?

  12. With comments like that, those guys are no better than the antis who constantly wish we’d kill ourselves with our firearms.

  13. I think “hit that” would qualify as sexual violence.

    Insinuating rape or making sexual suggestions doesn’t do anything for our cause (or any cause). If you have to resort to such comments, then you might want to read more of RF’s posts to understand the logical arguments for the 2A.

    Let’s not forget one of the reasons (my primary reason) for why many of us own guns – to protect our wives, daughters, mothers, sisters, and any woman (includes Watts) from violence, especially that of a sexual nature.

    • “Hit that” is just slang for “would have sex with.” It doesn’t mean rape. Go to cafe press and search for “I’d Hit That.” You will find 82 results for funny T-Shirts. Look up the phrase in urban dictionary. At most the comment is crass, not violent.

      • And here lies part of our problem in the “New Media” battle. Us OWG’s generally speak a different language, a different slang, and have different norms and mores in social contexts.

        Personally, I never say stuff like “I’d hit that” about a female I don’t know (and not even then, but that’s not really part of my point). You say its crass, but in terms of the older generation….crassness like that is REALLY bad.

        Now, that’s not to say that our generation does not have it’s ‘crass’ statements in regard to looking at or desiring an attractive woman. The point is that our language is DIFFERENT (and not just social sexual stuff….slang in general).

        The New Media battlezone where the cultural gun rights war is being fought is foreign to a lot of us. Maybe that’s why they thought they could dominate it so easily? I don’t know.

        Said another way, I would not type some of those comments shown in the screenshot above not because I don’t want to offend Watts (actually, I don’t … my fight with her is ideological not personal) or I don’t want to “take the road” here on TTAG, but because I would not type those comments at all, for any reason.

        Talking to or about people (women especially) in that fashion is just not part of my vocabulary.

        With that, though, I am REALLY, REALLY glad TTAG has (for the most part) cleaned itself up.

  14. We need to fight fire with fire. When you see comments on NYT or USA Today with people saying they wish gun owners would shoot themselves or that they hope that our children die in a mass shooting, screenshot it, compile them, post them on facebook, send them to TTAG.

    We cannot let them own this type propaganda.

    • +10000 We should ABSOLUTELY compile their death threats. Send in your screen shots from FB, twitter, and comments sections.

      • The only problem with that is that we are debating with people with no shame and that the truth is not on their list of values. Secondly, our opponent owns 99% of the MFM and your list will only be seen by our compatriots at best.

        • What Mina said.

          What we want is for people to see Alan, Todd and others in positive, non-violent, threatening photos; it clashes with “their” story that we are all violent thugs just waiting to attack and victimize.

          What we want is for their histrionic factually incorrect over-the-top response to those photos to contrast with images of family men, every-day hard working young men, Mothers, wives, single women, children, etc shooting guns.

          What we want is for people to see our side engaging in reasoned debate and staying calm while they make death threats against us and our children.

          We want these two clashing images to stand on their own as contrast seen whenever a ‘fence sitter’ researches the issue. Every Google search related to gun rights or gun control will show both sides.

  15. Sorry, but you can’t believe what you read in the comments section of anything. Too may false flag/misinformation trolling going on. The MDA people may have made these posts themselves. It has happened before.

    • Been there, seen that. Many times. If you think they would never stoop to that, you’ve got another think coming.

    • Yup. It would be surprising if they didn’t send deliberate trolls here already, and powerserge you are starting to give that impression, frankly. No one can be that dumb.

      Everytown is plainly flailing and FAILING, and the proof of desperation is how they have already sunk to claiming victimhood, with the bald guys in suits and earplugs, and this twit on a pathetic huff over some odd-balls in an anonymous forum.

      Anyone with an ounce of common sense and any life experience understands that bloggers and news outlets can’t control what commenters say. You are always going to have some juveniles, attention-seekers, and the odd loose screw wander in. Thats just how it is, unless you shut comments down. Go to the comments at New York Times, the Washington Post, Daily Kos, HuffPo, etc to see what I mean.

      RF is doing better than most- set a policy that educates and limits the worst of it, and hope the adults in the room can ignore our own concern trolls, and hope the peer group can set the example for a higher standard, “the clean well-lit room” ~ Hemingway.

    • They do it HERE.

      They show up with foul, unreasoned garbage pretending to be gun owners and they stand out like a sore thumb…because that’s not acceptable here.

  16. Regardless of how wrong these antis are, we must never forget that they are still our neighbors and in some cases, even our friends. This is, and has always been a civil rights issue. Be strong, intelligent and kind and you will win over far more hearts and minds than harsh words and hatred.

      • John, most are not advocating for anything. They have jobs, kids and all the day to day concerns that we all have. For whatever reason, many have no experience with firearms other then what they see on TV and the movies. I have talked to several people who claimed to be anti-gun, but who really just turned out to be uninformed. Many Americans have no clue what current gun laws are already on the books. The left uses the media to make it seem like anyone can just go plop down $100 and walk out of their local gun shop with “fully automatic” weapons. It’s amazing how many people are open to talking about guns if you just take the time. Ranting about tyrants, dictators and the like is not how to reach these people.

        • Those I encounter regularly are indeed encouraging tyranny, even if a soft sort of tyranny in their own minds. A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state… this isn’t about hunting, target shooting, or even ordinary self defense. It’s about tyranny. If you allow antis to continually re-frame the question then the very intent of the the Second Amendment is lost. It’s no wonder that you are sucked into arguing “reasonable limits”. 😉

        • Kent, I think there are several stripes to the anti’s.

          Sure, there are absolutely ‘regular folk’ that are just ignorant of the facts because they’ve been misinformed. We can reach them.

          But John’s got a good point, too, because there are segments of gun control advocates that 100% absolutely want us subjected to tyranny. We are property of the State, in their minds, and serve the ‘collective whole.’ Individuals do not exist in their world view.

          Those in this latter group are unlikely to be swayed. They must be defeated. There is no compromise, there is no discussion possible.

          These groups have SOME overlap; there are rabid anti-gun zealots that have bought into the bill of goods sold to them that CAN see the light of truth and be converted.

          Even this post is an oversimplification.

  17. Other than the obvious things about giving the antis ammo against us, it’s also worth noting that it hurts our movement (beyond just making us look bad). If someone has a valid rebuttal against about a given topic, they should say that rebuttal. If all they do is throw grade-school level insults at the opposition, it makes it look like they have nothing valid to say, and thus, can’t rebut what was said, so they resort to name-calling instead.

    Now, picture someone without a strong opinion on guns one way or another seeing some of these idiotic posts. What do they think? I’ll give you a hint, it’s certainly not, “Wow. These people are clearly intelligent and good at arguing their side. Not to mention that they have all the facts on their side as well. I think I’m going to make a $20,000 donation to SAF!”

    And sure, you can tell me that it doesn’t really make a difference, that anyone who isn’t completely in favor of any and all gun rights, than they are a lost cause and nothing we do will make a difference. But that’s not the case. Rather than venting your anger on a public website, it is far more constructive to be intelligent and thoughtful rather than profane and angry. Remember this: Good PR is the best way to win over the fence-sitters, and bad PR is the best way to alienate them.

  18. I absolutely agree that we should be more literate, careful and respectful in our comments especially when we disagree. However, the fact is that the internet is filled with comments like these from every type of person. There are death threats, sexual attacks, lies, slander and outright hate on just about every forum and comment system in the world. That does not make it right, but just be aware that everyone acts like this,even the antis, although it should not be an excuse for those of us fighting for our rights to act this way. Leaders like Ghandi and King, Jr. were able to change the world by acting respectfully in their disobedience because they were right and their cause was just.

  19. I’ve seen just as bad and worse from their side. Maybe we should start whining about their wishes of death upon our children and comments about the size of our manhood.

    Oh wait, we’re adults.

    • Actually it would be nice to have something like that, to trot out at times like these.

      Mainly because usually what happens is when they disparage us they are flagrant, and violent, and don’t attempt at all to disguise their hatred and vitriol.

      However when we “disparage” them, it’s all imagined – they have to miscontrue, re-frame and blame-shift to make it seem like we are actively bullying them. But really there is never anything actionable.

      The contrast is really stark, if you could come up with a quick list like you suggest at the drop of a hat.

      • Mina, you have declared those whom you do not agree with to be subhumans, and have said you wish they would die.

        We do not need the kind of crazy you are selling around here.

        • Are you denying that Progressives who lie, cheat, subvert and scheme against the good people simply to deny them the ability to compete, succeed and progress are sub-humans?

          They have no values. They have no moral compass. They have nothing of value to offer society.

          Show me anything that Shannon R Watts has done that anyone should respect and hold dear. I’ll be here, holding my breath.

          and p.s. I have never, not once, wished death upon anyone. Copy/paste and provide a link and a date or you are a liar.

        • Read your own comments. You said they should take a long walk on a short pier.

          Now, seriously, you need to go away, “Mina” and find some other site to fill with your putrid, vile hatred.

        • In what world does saying someone can take a long walk off a short pier constitute vile, putrid hatred?


          Truly, you’ve got me. Vile, putrid. A sad excuse for a human being. All this stalking and creeping you’ve done and that’s what you come up with?

          Man, grow a pair. Please. Jeebus.

    • Even if you did, attempting to clean up the conversation on ANY Facebook page is a bit like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

  20. So…. photo bombing is now supposed to be kinda tangential to sexual assault…

    You know anyone that’s actually been a real victim of that should be livid.

    • They are trying to make the nasty comments by the younger guys the fault of SlideFire.

      Note that they hand picked the worst ones out of 500+ comments. There really were only a couple and most of them alluded to sexual things they wanted to do with Shannon (Dirk???)

      I reminded them, a couple of times, that expressing an interest in getting a BJ from someone doesn’t really indicate violence or sexual harassment – that didn’t get any responses 😉 Shocking.

      • That’s pretty much that I thought. This kind of makes me wonder if these people know anything about the internet. *cough* 4 Chan *cough*

        Beyond that this entire little incident makes me think of kindergarten. The proverbial ‘Bill ate the paste so no one can have any paste’ concept. As if the crassness of a fist full of a-holes should be transfer onto the guy from Slidefire.

        • I give it at least 3rd grade level – you kind of have to be able to use the mouse and right-click button to use Twitter and support the MDA

  21. BTW – Robert, since you are pointing fingers at me and my brother by another mother (Ralph) – has anyone VERIFIED these are legit posts or are these sorta like the MDA gun selling on FB with obviously incorrect references? Just saying it wouldn’t be beyond Shannon to paint herself a victim with fake posts COMMENT MODERATED

    • She would, and MDA almost certainly has in the past (I myself pointed out several discrepancies in a “for sale” ad on Facebook they shared), but Slide Fire seems to have confirmed this by posting a request on their page to keep things civil.

  22. Speaking of S. Watts,I went to find an update on CNN the Kennesaw Fed Ex shooting and it was…. buried under Sterling, Tornadoes, and OK death penalty case, a fatal slashing at a CT school. And over at the Shrill Gray Lady, Tornadoes, Supreme Court, Supreme Court, Voter ID, and OK death penalty.

    Boy I really had to work hard to find an update. Must be a really bad day for Moms Demand Attention when I have to work hard to find a story about a mass shooting in a state that just passed “the most extreme gun bill” ever. And, it’s below a CT school fatal slashing. Geez, we mustered up more than this for the Columbia Mall Shooting in Jan.

    Looks to me as though the mass shooting media craze has run its course, and Shannon Watts days are numbered. I’d say, fired in 2015. No wonder she is focused on trying to drum up silly stuff like this FB page.

      • Yeah, remember Cindy Sheehan? No? Don’t worry no one else does. The day Obama got elected the left suddenly realized war and drones were awesome and the media stuffed her down a rabbit hole. Easy to do when the activism is Astroturf.

        • actually, I do remember Cindy. She has run primary challenges against Nancy Pelosi but failed both times . . . .

  23. Being a husband, and father of two daughters, I know and FEAR sexual violence against women and the lines these men used do not qualify. At most the first posters comment seems to be a crude attempt to show his more than platonic interest for Shannon which really is a compliment as I and, I am sure many others, do not share the original poster’s excitement. It is a shame how everything gets warped these days, at this rate by grandkids will need lawyers before checking “Yes” or “No” on those “Do you like me” papers

  24. one thing I learned fighting in dog advocacy, you simply cannot take responsibility for the irresponsible and classless, even if they do bat for “your team” (of course, this is covered in detail in Ben Shapiro’s how-to video)

    arguing this one has been interesting all day, but my analysis is this:
    1. yes the guys are pigs but whatever it’s their thing
    2. SlideFire is supporting the Constitution by allowing them their free speech rights and not infringing even in the name of political correctness
    3. The irrational hysteria displayed by the Moms worked against them, 100% as they worked really, really hard to shift the responsibility for the comments from the pigs to SlideFire.

    I think we’ll see over the next week or two that it will go one of two ways: Nothing happens & We win and they become even more irrelevant ~or~ Someone blinks and tries to do something politically correct and they get to put that in the hat with their imagined Starbucks and Facebook wins.

  25. Whatever RF. It’s your site. Your rules. I don’t see a problem but hey I’m not an insider in any way. There are lots of other gun blogs and pro 2A who have much stricter policies. And won’t stand for criticism of police or Republicans.

  26. I’ve got a possible solution: less coverage of the freakin’ Mayors Against Illegal Moms Demanding Action For Sensing Guns in Everytown. Fewer posts about ’em means less opportunity for off-color remarks, and less moderating work for you guys. Everybody wins.

    I know, I get it: know your enemy. Keep track of what they’re doing. But does every brain-dead press release utterance from these morons need BREAKING coverage here? How about exercising a little editorial restraint and only posting about the Moms Demanding Attention when they actually do something that’s not just a calculated attempt to get us to talk about them? Seriously, I’m starting to feel like Shannon and her tiny crew of devotees are just trolling the gun rights community, and we keep biting at that hook. Every. Single. Time.

    • “I know, I get it: know your enemy. “

      No. It’s not that at all. Ok, maybe part of it is.

      The reason it is VERY important to keep these stories and comment pages coming is Search Engine popularity.

      When a fence sitter hears of them or sees ’em on TV or whatever, it’s very likely they will run to Google | Other to learn more.

      We want what they find to be the info posted and commented here that completely discredits EVERYTHING they say…from membership numbers, participation in rallies, overall relevance, effectiveness in making change (Staples, IN law, etc), etc, etc, etc.

      It is a very important front on which this particular war is being fought, and the ROE are a bit subtle.

  27. A self-identified victim demands that an innocent party (slide fire pres) accept responsibility for the inappropriate actions of others. Familiar story.

  28. BREAKING: outside of this blog and 20 peoples on the twitters, nobody noticed or cared. Shannon ain’t got nothing on some old racist millionaire franchise owner.

  29. The USA lost in Vietnam because we didn’t adopt the same tactics used by our adversary, TTAG is doing the same, in the end we’ll lose thanks to those who don’t have the stomach for the fight. Read the late Col. David Hackworth’s book and you’ll see what’s in store for those who support the 2nd Amendment.

    • You need to do some more read (better) history of the Vietnam “War”.

      Clue 1 if author was in the Weatherunderground etc return the book to the comic book store.

    • Really? You think we will do better if more of us act like the fruitcake liberal progressives?? Exactly how do you see that playing out? Not sure how abandoning logic and factual arguments for emotional outbursts results in a W for us…

    • I realize a lot of people think I’m a nut with my theories, but it’s all about understanding the enemy so that you meet him at the right battles and bring the right weapons.

      Fact is the Progressives don’t think like us; if we want to beat them we need to understand what they consider “victory” and what their goals are every time we engage them and then focus on bringing That to the Game.

      It’s not about lowering our standards, those must always be intact. Its about beating the enemy at their game by changing it to a game that suits us using what we know about how they think & behave.

      • I think the theories that you present are sound. Indeed, years back I often presented less detailed concepts along the same lines. Today, I understand it better than I explain it to others. IDK if it’s age, apathy, or a combination of factors but I believe some of us are simply tired of engaging on more civil levels. You won’t find me in the front row throwing down with insults or innuendo but I don’t have a problem with those who do. We’re blessed by those who can stand toe-to-toe and deploy debate winning tactics. It’s necessary and helps keep logic in the mix. Encouraging others to “keep it classy” is a good thing. However, I don’t think some of our tribe who castigate the less polished among us are really doing anything positive. They come off as appeasers and weak, IMHO.

    • We lost the Vietnam War because we didn’t not fight a Shermanesque campaign until it was too late. Had LBJ gone north after Tet the war was have ended in a decisive victory in 1968.

      • Or China would have stepped in the way they did in Korea. This time with Russian backing. Sort of like all the anti groups forming up under a common (maybe Bloomberg) umbrella to give us the full court press.

  30. In this day and age of internet anonymity, there’s something to be said for feeding fires by being a “double agent” or troll if you will. Either way, those kinds of comments about her do FAR WORSE DAMAGE than open carrying could EVER DO!!!!!!!!

    Our own worst enemy indeed.

    • You assert that open carry does “damage” and tried to use that in comparison to some other imagined “damage”. Neat trick but no substance.

  31. Blatant emotional outbursts, hatred and deception are the path they chose, there is no reason to imitate them lest we become like them. We should stay the course, and do so with honor and integrity. We own the ethical and moral high ground. We should call them out at every corner but do it with grace, logic and cunning.

  32. Internet trolling is inevitable, but it doesn’t mean we have to resort to it to win.

    I believe logic, facts, realism, and rational arguments are on the side of the 2nd Amendment / gun owning community. Why give our opponents an opening that makes us appear to be the emotional, immature, sexist, and foolish side?

    We’re our own worst enemy, sometimes. It’s chess, not checkers… and in a modern world, where PR across the interwebz can go viral, we need to make better moves. If you don’t believe in the power of the internet, why are you reading a blog about guns anyways? LOL.

  33. She is pretty good looking. I can’t imagine anyone saying anything awful about such a classy lady.

  34. I thought you had quit moderating, because in the last couple of days I’ve seen comments calling the MDAs twats, saying they need to get laid, etc.

    As a mom, no one hates the MDAs more than I do, but I attack them on their policies and lies, not their superficial attributes. I’m usually put off by shallow ad hom from either side, although I do admit there’s a time and place for venting anger

  35. And yet I continue to see comments, content, and headlines/post titles that contradict this stance.

    We might not agree with their position, but calling someone a twisted gun grabber or asking rhetorically how stupid a gun control group really is in the post title does not really help your case for this editorial stance RF and company.

    IMO, forget the editorial stance for the most part but get rid of the ones that directly advocate violence, make substantial/credible threats, etc. We are already demons to these people and they insert their ‘interpretations’ and claims on/into what ever we say no matter how nice and fluffy it is.

    For example, a few guys make obliquely sexual comments and all of a sudden Slidefire’s official position is inviting sexual violence on women and Shannon, all according to MDA? That’s laughable to say the least, and the only people who will fall for it are the ones who can’t think critically.

    Don’t forget that internet comments, especially from someone who is anonymous, do not represent you or the blog and don’t let the other side convince you they do.

  36. TTAG should just delete and ban. Plenty of warnings have been given. Let the few folks who want to continue violating your policies go start their own blog and do their thing there.

  37. Ooooh, Dirk and Ralph are getting yelled at. Neener neener.

    Seriously though, I do agree with Robert. We don’t have to stoop to their level (even though it is funny…except the weird comments about rape and stuff).

    • I hope so. This guy has been at times nothing short of insulting and disturbing; not just regarding the whole Shannon Watts thing either.

      • If the shoe fits I hope it pinches. So insults lies and disinformation pointed at 2Aers is acceptable? Nnnnnnaw.

  38. Shannon Watts is an attractive woman, who just so happens to be spearheading an effort that will eventually lead to the repeal of the 2nd amendment. She is the enemy, and must be respected to be fought off successfully. We are not in junior high school anymore. No more nasty comments about Mrs. Watts, or the other ‘Commie Girl Wonkette’. We are gentlemen, and we are the Armed Intelligentsia. In order for us to be that we must behave in kind. Some of what some of you people have posted here regarding these two ladies go beyond the pale.

    And for the admin staff at TTAG, I find it ironic that you have deleted my personal attacks against other posters(who deserved it entirely but I get your point) however you have not deleted other horrible suggestive atrocious comments regarding the gun-grabbing women in our lives. You just leave them up, so what. This is your blog and you should be patrolling it constantly, and deleting offensive commentary as it arises. The blame is entirely yours as in you own it.

    And ditch the autoplay ads Robert or I’m donating big money to the grabbers and voting Democrat next election. Tired of this sh*t.