Previous Post
Next Post


This article originally appeared at and is republished with permission.

By Heather Marchese

“When someone accumulates more than 40 violations of law in mere minutes to perpetrate unimaginable horrors upon others, there are no laws that will stop him but the laws of physics.” 

We are 1 Million Moms Against Gun Control and we demand the Right to Protect. On December 14th, 2012, a nation sat transfixed in horror as the most tragic story in recent history unfolded. Every mother’s worst nightmare had come true. It didn’t have to be your children for you to feel the sick, cold grip of fear shatter into a bottomless sorrow scarcely felt in these, our comfortable and modern lives. Twenty children had been ruthlessly murdered in cold blood at the hands of, at the very least, a deeply disturbed young man—though many have perhaps aptly called him a monster, a madman. And where it happened—in their schoolroom, in such a familiar place—hit far too close to home . . .

Our hearts do and always will go out to those affected by that utterly senseless tragedy. There are no words sufficient to convey the shared sense of loss touching families in every corner of America. Something forever changed that day. Something real and yet undefined. More was lost than those precious lives. There was a common innocence among the vast majority of Americans that was snuffed out. A collective reverie was broken. And in the harsh light of reality, we were reminded, hard and fast, what a dangerous world this is, and how precarious our grasp is on it. An entire nation reacted. Vehemently. We all had to work through what we had just borne witness to. We all had to make sense of it and come to terms with it. How could this have happened? Why did it happen? Why didn’t someone stop him? Why didn’t someone protect them? How do we make certain this never, ever happens again?

We must all draw our own conclusions. The evil responsible for this will not provide them, for it was silenced with the shooter. In circumstances like these, closure must be created rather than found. We must answer those questions ourselves. And so the dialogue began. Almost at once there was a carefully choreographed cry for sweeping gun control measures. Ordinarily the silent majority would, in deference and respect, say nothing and abide the measures that would make everyone else feel safer and sleep better at night. But not this time. Something was different this time. For the first time in a long time it was simply too overwhelming to ignore: When someone accumulates more than 40 violations of law in mere minutes to perpetrate unimaginable horrors upon others, there are no laws that will stop him but the laws of physics.

There is no set of words on paper, on platforms, in speeches, no matter how fervently they are uttered, even were they written in blood—there are no words that will stop evil. There is no law without the arms to enforce it. Just as words cannot kill us, so it is that words cannot protect us. As mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles, grandparents and friends, as those who love and watch over children—our first duty is to effect their safety and protection. It is a moral imperative as intrinsic to our existence as breathing.

And yet there are, somehow, all of these voices crying out to strip us of that right, the right to secure our lives and the Against Gun Control lives of those we love, and to provide for the defense and protection of them. There are many voices on the other side of that coin, to be sure. But they are locked in socio-political debate. There are more talking heads than can be counted on both sides. But this is bigger than a Constitution, deeper than it’s framework of amendments, and further reaching than any ideological goals. This is the sanctity of human life, and what a family, a community, a nation will do to preserve it, to uphold its inviolability. And so the silent majority is standing up. As groups and parties and businesses and organizations all follow the piping of the TV news, dancing in the streets to the catchy tune being played for them, we rise up in righteous indignation to oppose them.

I am a mom. I am a dad. I’m a brother, a sister, an aunt, uncle, grandparent, daughter, son, and grandchild. I am black, I am white, Hispanic, Asian—I am American.

And I will be damned if someone is going to stop me from protecting My children….Your children….Our children.

I am – 1 million moms. And I am against gun control.

Heather Marchese publishes at as well as Facebook and Twitter.

Previous Post
Next Post


      • Not really a fair fight since Shannon’s group only has approximately 2-dozen actual non-paid members . . . I would say that million moms only needs to send out 1% to take care of the issue.

        • Ah…you forget that Bloomie, Shannon and their paid minions, crowd limited as they may be, have the conspiratorial amplification of the legacy liberal MSM to exaggerate and champion the antis’ cause, misleading and bogus as it is, and, more often than not, in bloody ‘red’ ink.

          I have not yet seen 1 Million Moms Against Gun Control get any national air time. Wonder why?

  1. Profound words here:
    “But this is bigger than a Constitution, deeper than it’s[sic] framework of amendments, and further reaching than any ideological goals. This is the sanctity of human life, and what a family, a community, a nation will do to preserve it, to uphold its inviolability.”

    Well written.

    • You are correct. The preservation of life, YOUR life, YOUR posterity IS above the Constitution. It IS above man-made law. It is a RIGHT & DUTY of every living being on this planet.
      It is a Right NOT GRANTED by the Constitution. It is a Right NOT GRANTED by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. It is a Right NOT GRANTED by the laws of man. It is an individual Right GRANTED and a DUTY DEMANDED by NATURE. An UNALIENABLE (God-given if you will) Right that supersedes man himself.
      To deny it is to deny the legitimacy of life itself



  2. I am robot.
    Good piece, but MDA doesn’t allow for contrary opinions. Maybe posting this on their facebook page would open a few eyes before it gets deleted.

  3. One thing I recognise in this discussion is that males usually adopt a task oriented frame of reference – i.e., what can we DO about it? It takes females a long time working through the emotional factors involved, before they move to the measures they consider will match their feelings. With Moms Demand Action they FEEL that everything about this situation is icky, so they leave it up to an authoritative male (Bloomberg) to pay them to think about their solution. Unfortunately they have been hijacked by an elitist disarmist whose main aim is to protect his money from an armed populace. He is afraid that if people knew how he made his money, they would march on his house, seize him and lynch him. Being a shrimp adds to his insecurity (and his security patrol is WELL armed).

    This article by Heather Marchese shows independent and confident thinking. This is the mindset that created America. MDA represent a craven submission to male authority, which is distinctly unattractive. I know which voice I prefer to hear.

  4. Am I the only pro 2A NRA member who has a problem with this? I see no difference between these people using tragedy to further a political agenda than any anti-gun group doing the same. This tome is written in the same emotion-laden amorphous language as any leftist creed I’ve ever read. “I am a dad. i am Hispanic.” Give me a break. Just replace a few words and you have the left’s version of the Mike Brown situation, global warming, ad nauseum.
    As a long-time gun owner I think this group is pretty despicable.
    K boys, pile on now…

    • Had this been unprovoked I’d agree with you but this is in response to the words and actions taken by others. We(gun owners) were called out so why should any of us refrain from using our 1st to defend the 2nd? Some people seem to be incapable of acknowledging the difference between feeling and fact. Why should we not try to defend our own principles using their own medium?

      • Why not? Because that’s a treacherous, unprincipled path. The facts are on our side, as are the morality, philosophy, and the flat out rationality. We mustn’t sink to their level and rely on manipulating emotions, because it would quickly degenerate into being our only tool, and then what have we become?

        What else of their aproach should we adopt? Should we support shall-issue, or even constitutional carry, but then spitefully deny carrying to hypocrite gungrabbers like DiFi?

        Beyond principle, the practical of it is that we’d lose. We can’t out liberal the liberals. We’re human beings and possess emotions, but they’re near inhuman and possessed by emotions. We can’t play their game, on their field, by their rules, judged by their referees, and expect to win.

        • There will be no victories without passion. A bloodless approach will lead to failure, and we can’t afford failure.

          But we can be passionate without threatening the lives of anti-2A wingnuts the way they threaten us. I didn’t see any threats in the post above, so I’m more than okay with the presentation.

        • The piece was passionate, but not pointlessly emotional.

          It was also fact-laden.

          That it doesn’t speak to you makes it no less valid.

          Further, that the “side” that “supports” gun rights (when it suits ’em) decries a thing does not invalidate that thing. That the “other side” acknowledges it does not invalidate it, irrespective of the pretty poetry of Genesis, the views of your pastor or whatever else. This is about guns, not the entirety of the National Debate.

          I guess I’m biased, because where I live guns are not a partisan issue. However, they SHOULDN’T be partisan anywhere.

          Watts is wrong in her ideas; she infects others using a set of linguistic tools. Do not blame the tools.

        • Ralph? Nobody, except you, ever said anything about being passionless. I said we’re humans and possess emotions. Nobody, except you, is referring to hurting anyone. Any more inane distractions, or have you shot your wad on those?

          I’m only addressing the immorality of craven emotional manipulation, and the futility of competing on that approach when that’s clearly the forte of the antis.

          Russ? What facts? Or at least what compelling facts? Other than mentioning the attack, body count and resulting crisis exploitation, what facts support her argument? Those three facts are essentially the topic itself, not a fact-laden treatment of it.

          The piece, or rather the pointlessly emotional cri de coeur, is invalid on its face, as fundamentally this is about an individual’s right to self defense. That’s an intrinsically intellectual postulate, one she barely and belatedly even touched upon.

          There’s nothing wrong with putting a human face on the arguments. Joni Ernst proved that, but she also proved that reason does the heavy lifting. Sugar may make the medicine go down, but on its own cures nothing, and by tablespoonfuls only makes one sick and rots your teeth.

    • If they were using tragedy to further a political agenda, I’d agree with you.

      Though the rhetoric is superficially similar, there’s nothing wrong with an honest emotional appeal. It’s an ethical defense against people who are unethically using the deaths of children to smear innocent people. With the full complicity of the Old Media, the anti-gun organizations are abusing emotion to strip their opponents of humanity in the court of public opinion.

      Pathos — emotion, imagination — together with ethos (trust, credibility) and logos (logic, reason) are part of Aristotle’s immortal three-part rhetorical framework. This piece is heavy on the emotion, but emotional rallying cries are often necessary; the art of rhetoric lies in balancing the three elements in a way that effectively counters your opposition and sways the audience toward your position.

      Facts and logic aren’t the reason why we care. Yes, facts and logic are essential reality checks — and they’re almost entirely on our side — but logic alone isn’t what motivates anyone to defend a position, much less change their opinion. Examine any subject that really matters to you, and you’ll find plenty of emotion packed around the facts.

      • Indeed.

        “This is SPARTA!” would work not nearly so well without capitalization and exclamation.

        “Give me Liberty or give me Death!”

        Any of Winnie’s speeches, Gettysburg et cetera…

    • “despicable” – I completely disagree. That is the word I apply to Bloombergs hired blood dancers at MDA.

      Read how to talk to a liberal, by Ben Shapiro at truth revolt. Or find the clip after him standing up to the berzekley islamonazis when they were railing against Isreal.

      Shapiro’s formula is passion infused with a moral narrative, based on the facts.
      It works. Wash rinse and repeat. (h/t to Mina, here for the original tip on Shapiro, who some may recall was a protege of Andrew Breitbarts, and is going far, IMHO)

      Thats what this One Million Moms Against Gun Control is doing in this piece. An emotional message to those who think with emotions. Not everyone is as logical and fact based as the typical gun guy. Read Dan Baums book, “Gun Guys” which he explains was partly to help his liberal friends understand the POTG.

      Learn, from this article, is my advice, and like it on Facebook, and pass it around to friends.

  5. What I love about their symbol is how both the mom and daughter are standing tall exuding confidence and power. Put a pistol in the daughter’s hand and it’ll truly rule!

    • Actually she is on Cam and Company and also NRA news on the sportsman channel with some regularity. We hope to increase the audience moving forward. 1MMAGC is also mentions in Dana Loesch’s new book, Hands off my gun.

  6. ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏ I sᴀᴡ ᴛʜᴇ ᴅʀᴀғᴛ sᴀʏɪɴɢ $5385 , I ᴅɪᴅ ɴᴏᴛ ʙᴇʟɪᴇᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴀᴛ…ᴍʏ… ᴍᴏᴍ ɪɴ-ʟᴀᴡ ᴀᴄᴛᴜᴀʟɪᴇ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴍᴏɴᴇʏ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ʟᴀʙᴛᴏᴘ. . ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ ʙʀᴏᴛʜᴇʀs ғʀɪᴇɴᴅ ʜᴀs ʙᴇᴇɴ ᴅᴏɪɴɢ ᴛʜɪs ғᴏʀ ᴏɴʟʏ ᴛᴡᴇɴᴛʏ ᴏɴᴇ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ᴀɴᴅ ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴘᴀɪᴅ ғᴏʀ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏʀᴛɢᴀɢᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ᴀᴘᴀʀᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘᴜʀᴄʜᴀsᴇᴅ ᴀ ʙʀᴀɴᴅ ɴᴇᴡ Sᴀᴀʙ 99 Tᴜʀʙᴏ . sᴇᴇ ᴛʜɪs………………………

  7. Blah blah blah…

    The REASON 20 children and 6 adults were murder at Sandy Hook is because legislators & school districts decided on there own there will be no arms at school. The delusional thinking that a sign would stop a murderer is the height of utopia arrogance.

    Parents shout break out the war hammers, arrive at a school board and Council meetings and start crushing the skulls of this idiots creating policies that kill their children.

  8. I’d like to ask any mother part of MDA:

    “What laws would need to pass so you can be assured your son or daughter can safely walk around Chicago or DC?”


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here