Previous Post
Next Post

Prosecutors Against Gun Violence (courtesy

Over at, a report entitled Lawyers Band Together To Fight Gun Violence reveals “a new group called Prosecutors Against Gun Violence [that] has formed to find solutions to gun violence in the U.S.” NPR’s Arun Rath interview with attorneys and co-chairs Cyrus Vance Jr. (NY, above) and Mike Feuer (LA) uses the term no less than 13 times. A rose may smell so sweet by any other name, but “gun violence” is a deeply misleading term for “firearms-related crime,” which properly highlight the criminal rather than the method used. But don’t take my word for it. Look at the the PAGV’s Facebook profile pic above. And consider this from commentator Willy Roentgen . . .

There is no such a thing as “Gun Violence”. Would you call a injury inflicted by a drunken driver as “Car Violence”? Of course not. A gun does not do anything until it is picked up, loaded, aimed and fired by a person. Calling it “Gun Violence” deflects the responsibility from the real cause of the violence, the operator. It also obfuscates the path needed actions to ameliorate the problem by taking the spotlight off the person who does the assaulting. The present shooting are gang violence. We need to focus our efforts in that area.

To which anti-gun reader/listener Dharma Gates replied:

You ignore the gun culture. You ignore the ease of guns. You ignore the simple fact that a gun is a machine designed to propel a missile at great speed over a short distance with the sole intent of maiming or killing the recipient. You ignore the fact that a second of anger or bad judgment or impulse produces irreversible tragedy. People might stab or choke or beat but that takes a higher level of intimacy, strength, and effort than simply pulling that trigger. You ignore reality.

As Proverbs 18:12 points out, “a fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion.” Just sayin’.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. They ignore charging the criminals, for the entirety of their crimes as opposed to cutting deals with defense attorneys to lighten their workloads.

    • Prosecutors Against Gun Violence. Sound a lot like Mayors Against Illegal (really Legal) Guns, just a different elected position. Given the track record of the mayors, I’d expect this group to be comprised of DA’S who routinely drop/don’t enforce current gun laws, then bitch about needing new laws. For example, Milwaukee County DA John Chisolm and his office as a matter of routine, drop the felony in possession of a firearm charge at least half the time, then calls for more laws. He and his office delibrately make the county unsafe because they, along with the judges and politicians, have the criminals back, the complain when the peasants tell the truth about crime in the county.

      It’s almost to the point where we need to let the Milwaukees, Chicagos, Oaklands, Memphises, and Trentons burn themselves down, then maybe these folks would learn the lesson, but most likely they won’t

    • I am forcibly reminded of “South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut.”

      “We must blame them and cause a fus before somebody thinks of blaming us!” –Blame Canada, closing line.

    • Heh. Y’know its getting ridiculous when NPR editors apparently can’t even fact check and edit their own reporters, or maybe its the producers who are apparently phoning it in, recycling this phony MAIG clone PR spin, and giving them free agitprop airtime and fluffery, on the taxpayers dime, as if it were ‘news’.

      This looks like it was ghost written by an intern from CUNY comm major dept, looking for a next job at NYTs Joe Nocera, now that his last admin and site moderator, has admitted curating out the pro-2A commenters, while working same time for Bloomies sock-puppets at MOms Demand Action.

      Even the Fakebook site layout, colors, and logo has that familiar feel…

      Say, NPR, did you think to research Fueurs bio, before credulously peddling his talking points.
      Isnt NPR still trying to be known for “unbiased”…
      or is that just talk, just like the About page for this faux attorney group claiming ‘unbiased’…

      Here is a tip. If you are going to quote someone on a politicized story, the typical unbiased reporting technique is to include a blurb about the background of the speaker, especially if its relevant to the issue…

      Heres another tip your intern might havd missed in her classes on The NArrative:
      Google is your friend, use it, because your readers can too.

      Is this the same Fuerer who wrote the blatantly unconstitutional micro-stamping law while a legislator in Sacramento? The one being challenged in court as a deliberate attempt to deprive citizens of rights to 2A?

      Btw, did you even take a look at the FBI study you used as your proof statement and g to set up the intro? Its already bern debunked, by John Lott, the most respected academic ob gun statistics.

      Given thats so well known already in the gun rights community, how else could one interpret your writing, as biased. Well, an appeal to authority fallacy, but that doesnt speak highly of NPR either, does it?

      Think there might be more of a story there? How about who is behind this pathetic astro-turf org, so similar to Mayors Against Guns, where the Mayor members have ben bailing out in droves, calling it a gross misrepresentation of true intent, by its billionaire funder. Thats a shell, and example of collapsing credibility in these fake “against gun violence” shams.

      23 prosecutors from notoriously political and anti gun jurisdictions, with anti-gun activist backgrounds.

      Are you people at NPR so full of yourselves to think well informed Americans can’t see thru this shameful propagandizing? Its certainly not news, and any other explanation can only be incompetence, at best.

      • A most excellent fisking. Your comment is more like the full article I would have expected from Farago, if this had been some GM PR hack in 2008….

      • Sadly NPR has become (or may have always been) a PR outlet. Typical is the slickly produced “interview format” that flows so well it could be scripted, and of course it likely is. I drive though the New Haven area of CT every day and there are no less that 4 NPR stations that I can access on the FM spectrum during part of the drive, at times several will be running the same piece but off by some delay.

        The content is a more skillful rendition of 1984’s example of “Party” propaganda with the question being asked with rapid “correct” reply to the question.

  2. “People might stab or choke or beat but that takes a higher level of intimacy, strength, and effort than simply pulling that trigger.”

    So it’s more intimate to shoot someone from 25 yards away than plunge a knife into flesh? And it takes more strength to choke a grown person than pull a 5 lb. trigger?

    “You ignore reality.”

    You said it, woman.

  3. Silly me. I thought “gun violence” was the thumping noise in my safe when my rifle beat up my revolver, because…
    Oh wait.

  4. I guess that means those particular prosecutors are not against knife violence, club violence, bare-hands violence, etc? Where I come from, someone who only prosecuted “gun violence” wouldn’t have enough business to stay employed.

  5. Should say “violence committed by bad people with guns”. But, I suppose that would take too many words. Too many words to be correct so instead they try to be “politically correct” and mis-state the term every time it is written or said. That way they can ingrain into people’s minds that the gun is the problem rather than those bad folks pulling the triggers. Guns don’t commit violent acts. People with guns do that. Usually either a criminal or someone that is mentally ill that gets their hands on a gun. But, how about those who commit violence in the act of self defense to save others from the bad people and the insane people? That is supposedly “gun violence” too, right? But a good kind of “gun violence” because it stops the “gun violence” from the bad guys.

      • Whatever happened to Project Exile? I haven’t heard of it in years. Back in the ’90s a local shopping mall near Austin opened, and the first day one gang member stabbed another in the parking lot, over turf. Instead of a local charge, the cops called the feds and prosecuted under RICO, sent the offender to federal prison in, what, Nebraska? That mall had no further trouble. It works.

  6. What this country needs is a War on Car Violence, Prescription Drug Violence, Food Poisoning Violence, Death from Natural Causes Violence. Just make sure there’s No violence against the Muslims that want to kill us…
    Funny how our government seems to declare War on just about anything (poverty, drugs, racism, gender confusion), but never on the enemy (what if they get upset?).

    • Alexander, that is the point, the enemy they declared war on long ago is the Truth. And through the media outlets, NPR included, they take this war very seriously. Looking for any real information coming from these mainstream outlets is irresponsible and naive.

  7. Well if your doing a report on ‘gun violence’ it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the term is used. Talk about nitpicking about insignificant B.S. NPR is actually a very good source for news despite the nonsense that Fox News and other partisan twits attempt to present them as. They have far more people that would be considered conservative on than liberal. NPR has a lot of journalistic integrity. They are not ‘liberal’ oriented like some partisan asshats try to present them as becuase of a smidgen of public funding and an unwillingness to purposefully present them in a favourable light. Of all the news agencies NPR is the best place to get facts without a partisan spin and more often than not without an agenda. Using certain stories that NPR presents as an argument against them is no better than MSNBC using stories in which peope use guns to murder others without ever showing stories in which guns save lives. As far as the MSM is concerned NPR is as good as it gets, despite what your partisan gang has beat into your head.

    • National Progressive Radio is good journalism and doesn’t have an agenda? Foghorn Leghorn, what kind of Looney Tunes are going through your Merrie Melodies?

    • If you haven’t noticed that NPR is Progressive in the way it selects stories and frames them, then you need to pay closer attention.

    • I’ve listened to NPR daily for almost 15 years. Open your ears a bit wider, they are ridiculously biased on some issues. Guns are one of them.

      For instance, you give me topic and I’ll tell you their stance in it.

      Of course it depends a lot on your member station. NPR is national. Its broadcast locally. Mine is KCRW

    • “Using certain stories that NPR presents as an argument against them is no better than MSNBC using stories in which peope use guns to murder others without ever showing stories in which guns save lives.”

      So ignore evidence of NPR’s political agenda?

    • NPR, or National Propaganda Radio, is a misinformation vehicle with different accents and voice inflections. It’s. blatantly transparent….far, far from rocket science. Also many here use the word “progressive” to define NPR’s agenda, if so, then why is NPR consistent with the right in many of its positions?

      • Please name one subject on which NPR takes an editorial or news slant stance to the right of Nancy Pelosi.

        NPR never saw a cause that opposed property, family or tradition that it didn’t support.

        I’m not sure you could find anyone in the whole HQ in Washington DC who could even give a reasonable explanation for why HALF of the population of the United States opposes gay “marriage,” never mind agree with it. They have concluded that they are on the Right Side of History and the epistemic closure is total.

        • NPR is identical in its foreign policy stance. And more. It takes a strong, indistinguishable. Zionist stance along with the right.

        • @Pg2: Can you explain how NPR’s editorial/news slant is to the right of Barack Obama on the Israel/Palestine issue, please?

        • @john, it is inaccurate to use the left-right descriptors in my opinion, especially in the case you are referring to, both sides are identical and one in the same.

        • …you have the right to remain misinformed. Suit yourself.

          Misinformed about what? The conspiracies of Teh Joooooos?

          I think I’ll keep my own counsel in that regard, thanks. Antisemites aren’t even worth debating.

        • @Pg2: The Left, always and everywhere, opposes property, family and tradition, and the authority and order that these represent. There is a clear Left and right in the Israel/Palestine conflict, and just because the modern US Democratic party doesn’t take a position far enough Left to suit you on this issue doesn’t mean that the Left/right framework doesn’t apply here.

        • @chip, your ignorance is awesome. Zionism is not about the “Joos”; we have christian politicians on both sides labeling themselves zionists. At the end of the day it matters little what you believe, you have the right to remain ignorant.

        • @John, you are making false assumptions and putting the left-right labels on things because that’s what you have been conditioned to do. Try stepping and thinking outside the box that has been made for you.

        • @Pg2: Respectfully, you know sweet nothing about my “conditioning.” You know nothing about the household I grew up in, where or how I was educated, my religion or lack thereof, or my NPR listening habits. You know sweet nothing about the history of my political opinions or how many times I gave the Nolan test to others. I’m a name–and a common one at that–on a blinking screen in front of you.

          Now, I have concluded, with 90% of humanity, that political positions can be aligned on a left-right scale, with alternatives being so fringy as to be worth ignoring for the sake of public discourse, and this leads you hit me with an ad hominem attack when you know nothing at all about the man you are talking to? Color me unimpressed.

          And you still haven’t pointed out any NPR positions that are to the right of Barack Obama. If you want to argue that NPR “agrees with the right” that Israel should exist, but that this isn’t really a left-right position, then you could as easily argue that NPR “agrees with the right” that the sky is blue and that water is wet. You still haven’t made your point.

  8. Totally agree that 5-8 pounds of trigger pull is much easier than the up close and personal killing with a knife, bat, or ice pick. Gun takes little discipline or skill to operate and that’s why it’s an eceptional tool for lawful self protection. The failure of her logic is that if guns are controlled it would reduce violence. I can make an effective gun gathering materials at Home Depot and use it to threaten or kill anyone. Or if you will, ambush a officer and secure his gun to commit more crimes. And therein lies the futility of controlling guns. Any determine individual with the will defeats any ink on paper.

    • Yes, exactly. If only the police and the military have guns, the civilians will have access to guns either through luck, force, or corruption on the part of the military and police, i.e. a private with access to the armory will sell an M4 to anyone who can cough up $1000 for his troubles.

      That’s what the antis fail to grasp. In their utopia where only sworn and trained professionals have guns, there’s still a source for guns.

      Or like in the UK where the criminals turn to antique guns to do their deeds with. Antiques are usually not tracked hardcore over there and are easier to acquire. A Luger from the 1920s will still go bang in the hands of a criminal. And they know this.

  9. “Over at, a report entitled Lawyers Band Together To Fight Gun Violence…”

    “Titled,” man, not “entitled.”

    “Entitled” is how a liberal feels about free health care.

  10. “People might stab or choke or beat but that takes a higher level of intimacy, strength, and effort than simply pulling that trigger. You ignore reality.”

    So the level of intimacy is the main issue?

    • It’s almost as though they believed some level of violence and victimization should be tolerated. People who have no experience with violence outside of the rebellious teen years often revert back to this sort of schoolyard fantasy, where common misunderstandings can be settled with a simple fistfight. The real world doesn’t sink in until it refuses to “we’re cool bro” and instead finishes stomping their face into the ground.

    • No, they rightly think that some people don’t have it in them to kill people using more ‘intimate’ methods. While I don’t treat Grossman as the prophet some I know do his discussion on the different levels\ranges of killing and the psychological aspects is enlightening.

      Of course… those that are intent on doing harm to innocent people probably are more likely to be okay with stabbing than your average citizen.

  11. Of course Mr Zen Dharma rejects any rational discussion. Swallowing Camels and Straining at Gnats is the pre-requisite course for Gun Grabber 201.

  12. If they are so worried about “ease of use,” they should consider how easy it would be to vote for a draconian law and then kick back on the couch, watching their neighbors die on television as the government enforces it. Wouldn’t even need to show a drivers license…

  13. It’s interesting to note that this organization has only managed to garner less than 40 likes over the course of 3 months on their Facebook page. Now, I’m aware social media isn’t the only metric of influence, but in this day and age, it does have a fair bit of meaning.

    And aren’t “progressive” organizations supposed to be masters of social media?

  14. “Our growing membership includes 23 prosecutors from diverse jurisdictions throughout the United States.”

    So what you’re saying is that there are fewer prosecutors in this group than can be found on one floor of the DA’s office in Fort Worth, Dallas, San Antonio or Houston… Good luck with all that… And btw, very few prosecutors in any of these offices would likely join this group.

  15. Wow, the gun culture haters really don’t understand gun culture. I also really want to know how many people “just snap”. I am sure there are already indicators and it isn’t some out of the blue episode.

    • Diddo on the “gun culture”, people need to realize the importance of winning ideas depends entirely on the vocabulary used, and if you let your opponent define you in a negative manner, you’ve already lost. I suggest people supporting the 2a refrain from from using derogatory terms to define themselves which have been created by others to create a negative image.

  16. Funny I was just at the hardware store today and the machetes, hatchets, wood splitters etc. were all 30 dollars or under.. No background check, no waiting period. Do you need ammo for a small, concealable sledge hammer? Has a crow bar ever had a FTF? These people live in candy land where only guns are capable of taking a life.

    • No, not really, they don’t leave in the candy land. They know that knives and crow bars can kill individuals, but these implements are totally harmless against their KGB, ah, I meant Home Land Security forces. They are not concerned with protecting the lives of individuals, even if they happen to be children; they are concerned with protecting their lives if S ever HTF. Remember, the purpose of the Second Amendment was never against robberies and rapes, and not even for hunting Bambi’s, but for protecting the citizens from socialists despots like the ones that we are growing now.

  17. Michael Nelson “Mike” Feuer is a professional politician and lawyer currently serving as the eighth Los Angeles City Attorney. He was previously elected to three two-year terms in the California State Assembly, representing the 42nd Assembly District before he termed out. Future runs for public office should be anticipated. He has apparently advised the City of Los Angeles to ignore the 9th Circuit decision in Peruta that concluded that self-defense is good cause for issuance of a CCW. His positions antagonistic to the RKBA are well known, and he sponsored various measures in the legislature to ban or restrict firearms and ammunition.

  18. Actually, I think you’re wrong. The reason for the term “gun violence” is so that gun control activists can lump anything bad (for anyone) that happens involving as firearm together and talk about it as if it were all crime. That includes not just things like suicides but also accidents and even justifiable homicide.

  19. I just posted on their FB page. Let’s see how quickly the ban hammer falls for suggesting going after criminals, and actually helping (vs. pill-pumping) troubled youth. And challenging them on why Vermont is such a safe place to live despite having some of the most lenient gun laws.

  20. No way!! NPR involved in propaganda and pushing agendas? I don’t believe it!! They are funded by ‘you the listeners’….LOL!

  21. I remember watching a documentary about women and guns. They interviewed a woman who had shot her lover for threatening to leave. Her excuse was “if a gun hadn’t made it so easy I could’ve never done it. I could’ve never been able to stab her.” This was used as a reason why women shouldn’t have guns, too emotional. Anyone who would shoot someone would stab them, club them, or choke them. The decision isn’t to pull the trigger, it is to kill. The object has no choice in the matter, but I’m just beating a dead horse.

  22. I once had a colleague of mine tell me all about visiting her sister in Fiji. There are no guns. It is a tropical Eden. Except for the rampant sexism, and the fact she felt at the mercy of those around her.

    Violence is present with or without guns. Maybe NPR should do a story based upon violence without guns. Perhaps prosecutors should focus on the criminals not the tools.

    • “Except for the rampant sexism, and the fact she felt at the mercy of those around her.”

      What exactly is rampant sexism? And aren’t we all at the mercy of those around us, even if we are armed?

  23. …and the chances that this blue-ribbon panel of prosecutors will output any sort of reforms or proposed legislation that addresses crime and criminals, rather than merely proposing actions that have zero efficacy in preventing crime while adding further restrictions upon law-abiding citizens? Roughly equivalent to the chances of getting a concealed carry permit in New Jersey.

  24. Your “buddy” Dharma Gates has his liberal head up his butt, like the rest of his buddies. Libtards are great at renaming stuff to suit themselves when they want to make things SOUND better or worse than they really are.

    There IS such a thing called Car Violence, except it’s called Road Rage and it’s just as dangerous.

    • The irony for those employed by the government is that their future employment hinges on a need for their services.

      Both prosecutors and defense lawyers benefit from the proliferation of violent crime. Of course, lawyers in general benefit from all manner of human conflict and misery.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here