In my post Random Thoughts About The Superbowl and Guns, I wrote than an armed populace gives society a fighting chance against terrorists. That got me thinking: why would gun control advocates deny Americans a fighting chance against bad guys? Because they believe The People of The Gun aren’t trained enough to defend their lives and other innocent life – despite tens of thousands of successful defensive gun uses per year? That’s partly it. The deeper truth: gun control advocates don’t believe in fighting back with lethal force, personally. That’s law enforcement’s job. Or, in the case of the elite, bodyguards. What’s up with that? I can’t come up with any explanation save one: they’re cowards. Which would also explain the “comments disabled” policy on their websites and their refusal to debate me in public. Am I wrong? And if I’m right, what then? How do we get them to (pardon the sexism) man-up?
I want ever so badly to be in that zone of danger.
Thank God NYC has stringent gun laws! Think of the slaughter if the honest citizen had been able to carry a gun of his own. Why, that would have created a hostile work environment for the “panhandler”.
Morning wood…
Way cool.
Not to underestimate the enemy, some are much bolder than others. But for the most part the larger figures like Bloomberg and Fienstien are paranoid cowards scared of the hoi polloi. They are terrified of us, that’s why they fight so hard to weaken and separate us.
I disagree, at least as to why you label them cowards. The reason they want no discussion, no compromise and no opposition to their control agenda is due to hubris not cowardice. They believe that they and only they are right, that their opinions are more educated, more thought out and superior to any others. That their vision is so strong that when they have their control it will make life better for everyone whether the people realize it or not. If the people don’t conform, then obviously something is wrong with them and they are criminals and not sophisticated members of society.
The way they show their cowardice is to remove all fair discussion of their policies.
I made a post on the Facebook page of moms demand action – MI in which I paraphrased a statement made in a recent NRA News video… something to the effect that our constitutional rights are not something we have to justify… that they are not something someone granted to us… we are born with them and don not need to prove we need them.
I paraphrased my post so leave out all mention of guns or any specific part or amendment of the constitution. Within the hour my post had been removed and I was banned from their page.
It seems that every state has a Facebook page for this group. I wonder how many I can post in before they all ban me.
Yes, yes they are cowards.
The real problem to me though is the disconnection they have to TRUE common sense and the real world in which we lowly peasants live our daily lives. Many of them would likely change their tune if they didn’t have armed security, live in gated communities or rub elbows with elitist political royalty on a regular basis.
TTAG annual event. We pay the fees to hire 5 choppers. Formate over the gulf and come in low and fast while playing “Flight of the Valkyries” on loud speakers.
Aporkalypse Now?
Sheltered is a better adjective I think. They think the police can save and protect them from everything
Its easier than ever with this hyper-paranoid society to keep these lunatics chasing phantoms and harassing the overloads making fools of the system and buring through mountains of cash.
Why this isnt happening I do not understand.
Man up? You don’t. Not just cowards. Too arrogant and elitist to be open minded.
I’m still a fan of Inspector Sledge Hammer’s home made “loudener”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WKM9GDuX0Y
I think cowards is the wrong term. It implies that they are scared to fight back in the face of an imminent threat, which I do not believe to be any more true of gun-control advocates than anyone else. I think it would be more accurate to say that they believe it’s inappropriate for people to defend themselves, and that it should be the job of law enforcement. Of course, the validity of that belief is predicated on the idea that law enforcement’s job is to provide security to everyone, which is absurd even on its face.
The answer to your question is simple though: you don’t. If they want to believe that people should rely on the police for 100% of their protection, that is their right, and if they choose to live consistently with that belief, that is also their right. The only issue for “us” is making sure that their beliefs do not influence anyone’s ability to exercise their civil rights.
I agree with Kyle. Coward is the wrong term. I like using this definition of coward:
“someone who is too afraid to do what is right or expected : someone who is not at all brave or courageous.”
I think they almost all believe they are doing what is right and expected and they believe they are being brave and courageous by doing so. They just don’t have the same view of what is right as I do. They also don’t agree with me on what an individual’s role is in society and government’s proper relationship to those individuals.
That would be a resounding YES. That aside why are we even trying to have a conversation with them? The Constitution backs gun owners ,not them. Sorry but my feeling is the best defense is an OVERWHEALMING OFFENSE.That means ,politically,media wise ,educational and public support. They get away with blaming gun owners every time a nut gets a gun. Their solutions are redundant and simply DO NOT WORK as proven over and over again.Gun owners need to support lobby groups and shut these ignorant antis up once and for all.Hey if you don’t like the Constitution and it’s Amendments, get the hell out of America.For ALL YOU ANTI S-CHILDREN SHOUD BE SEEN AND NOT HEARD.If you are not willing to educate yourself on the topic of which you speak,then SHUT UP!
Short answer: YES.
Q. Abso-fucking-lutely yes. Why else would they obsess, in their minds at least, over our supposed “cowardice”?
A. They rely on the notion that they can not only intellectually project their deep personal and emotional flaws onto us, but a misinformed public (cultivated in large by them) will buy into it.
Q. Why else would they obfuscate, confuse, mislead, deceive, lie, project, twist, spin, skew, and gerrymander literally every word of every argument (from both sides) to make it all fit into their idealized dystopian world-view?
A. Because when people think for themselves, they see the utterly indefensible insanity of a position that goes against literally everything in Human nature, and the civilian disarmament industrial complex must shed the blood of its serfs in their “Gun-Free” Zones to slake their thirst for power.
Q. Why else would they instead of honestly and openly debating it [the keeping and bearing of arms], pit us all against each other and have their sock-puppet underlings do all the heavy lifting?
A. That’s racism, sexism, and classicism at its finest. An unholy trinity of schisms that are almost guaranteed to save them from having to defend their views and make sure the truth never gets into the mainstream. That’s what they do best: misogyny and race-hustling.
They literally live in their own little world. That explains how they’re so utterly disconnected, because they’ve never had to fight for their lives or have been in any appreciable way ever effected by the unintended consequences of their asinine and ass-backwards policies. Not in their sheltered, affluent little enclaves, gated off from the rest of the rabble they see us as. All they’ve ever seen are the unstained stucco of mansions surrounded by vast and lush manicured lawns through their rose-tinted lenses.
Would a bump feed stock work on it ?
I think it’s far more complicated than a simple “yes” or “no.”
We shouldn’t forget that there are people who are first anti-gun and later convert to a pro-gun position. There is no reason to paint all proponents of gun control with a wide brush in the same way that they paint all of us as lunatics waiting to explode in a fit of rage. Neither side name-calling the other is fair or appropriate.
Some people are against guns because of a bad personal experience (or an experience had by a friend or family member) and it has clouded their judgement. Some people have been conditioned to believe that guns should only be held by the police and military, either by their family or by outside influences. Some have been brainwashed by the news media and/or Hollywood.
And some have eventually learned that they were wrong, and changed their position.
Those who are unwilling to entertain an opposing viewpoint, and simply repeat their mantra unthinkingly? Yes, they are cowardly. Those who have never been exposed to an alternative viewpoint, and could be willing to learn? No, they are not. They may be wrong. But that doesn’t mean they’re a coward.
Shannon Watts, who appears to be so intimidated by gun owners that she ironically refers to proponents of guns as “bullies” – when she herself attempts to bully others into accepting her viewpoint – deserves the “coward” label. Others who behave in similar ways have also earned the title.0
The mothers and fathers who would be unwilling to defend their children by killing an intruder? They are cowards too.
The poor soul who grew up in NYC and has been exposed to nothing but anti-gun propaganda their entire life? I’m not willing to label them a coward … yet. If they refuse to even consider the possibility that they may be wrong … then that could change.
“The poor soul who grew up in NYC and has been exposed to nothing but anti-gun propaganda their entire life? I’m not willing to label them a coward”
I think the term coward still applies. I believe the age old phrases “ignorance of the law is no excuse” and “if your friends jumped off a bridge would you?” hold weight here when coupled with the fact that ANYONE can research ANY topic in mere minutes since the advent of the internet. Humanity is capable of critical thought and should be responsible for a certain amount of reasoned doubt about any views/beliefs we’re fed. My Grandfather used to tell me….”God gave you a brain boy, use it.”.
It’s the same with the propagation of utterly false meme based garbage on the internet/facepage/mybook. When it’s faster to find the facts than it is at times to read the offensively false meme and you pass it along anyway…… you look like an asshat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality
LAST week TTAG got its feelings hurt because someone called you a gun nut. This week you call those who disagree with you cowards. Get a grip, man. That’s no way to encourage a meaningful discussion.
Since most of them will never go door-to-door demanding people turn in their guns and instead want to use the cops and military as their bagmen/hatchetmen, yes, they are cowards.
Each time they succeed in getting a new restrictive unconstitutional law passed they erode their own power just that much more and they’re too stupid to even realize it. People who were law-abiding become criminals and suddenly they don’t give a **** about the rigged corrupt government anymore nor respect its decrees.
We’re slowly becoming Argentina, where the politicians pass laws and no one listens to them. They all do their own thing and ignore the thieves in power as best they can.
The problem with that is, until things are set right again, the nation will never be great.
I don’t like responding to myself, but I’m a firm believer in the idea that you should be willing to go all the way for your ideals. If you want to ban guns but you’re not willing to kick in doors and try to kill or capture people who don’t comply then in addition to being a disgusting lapdog of the tyrants you’re also a coward.
I’m pleasantly surprised that the politicians questions and concerns were so reasonable. I thought this article would be about someone wanting to destroy them.
Cowardice is not a driving factor. Grabbers overwhelmingly tend to be collectivists. The psychology that comes along with collectivism does not account for individuals possessing the will and capability that is common among western firearm enthusiasts. For example, I pride myself on my ability to defend my interests against encroachment and I respect my neighbors’ right to do the same. My neighbor is not me. The collectivist would see it otherwise and would shame me for thinking we are different entities.
If the town would like to display them that’s peachy, put em in city hall under glass. But take the money out of city’s halls budget and give it to the department, which is trying to be practical.
That’s a good solution. Threaten to take their money and the politician’s will shut up and slink off.
Physical bravery is universal; there’s not a mother in the world who won’t run into a burning building to save her baby. Pick up a cornered mouse or squirrel? No, thanks. My measurement for cowardice is what they do when they have a choice, not what they do when they’re in imminent peril. And by that metric I say yes, while not universal, it’s widespread on that side of the street, because to avoid the prospect of confrontation with an assailant they abrogate their protection to police. Worse than that, because of their avoidance of self-defense, they are willing to strip me of my ability to defend myself because they are afraid of being clipped by a stray round.
“because they are afraid of being clipped by a stray round.”
Which thankfully never happens with the police.
Cowards? Not necessarily. In fact, I’m sure that any of them would be prepared to scratch the eyes out of a bad guy’s head as an absolute last resort when begging, bribing, vomiting and urination fail them.
But gunhaters are definitely lacking in testosterone. Except for some of the gunhating women, who from all appearances have too much.
You gun-bully, you.
I’m currently reading Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms (Johnson) – I would highly recommend it if you are interested in the topic. It is enlightening to see the history of the black communities reversal on guns. Most illuminating was that civil rights leaders saw no conflict between the armed self-defense and non-violent protest – the current views are largely a side effect of the liberal high-jacking of the Black vote and the relative success of the civil rights movement.
Another interesting book is Negroes With Guns by Robert F. Williams, Wayne State University Press, June 1, 1998. Your library probably has a copy.
Yes, they are. They also live sheltered lives, isolated from the evil the real world holds. They are paternalistic, self-important loudmouths afraid of standing on their own. Their lives are so filled with triviality that they must invent issues to give themselves purpose. Yes, they are cowards. Simpletons, too.
Thanks for sharing my vids! 🙂 Appreciate it! Your posts on TTAG are awesome!
He is a young guy. He lacks the experience of watching government legislators tell him what he should believe and do when he disagrees with them and finds his ideas logically and reasonably more sound. He has not yet asked himself the question… should we have rights or should we not, and when he finally resolves a conclusion to these thoughts, he’ll look around and ask himself why all this injustice is widespread everywhere by even government officials. Then he can finally ask himself… maybe this isn’t a good idea. Then hopefully he’ll grow a pair and realize that people can choose the easy path… or they can choose the “right” path. Easy and right are typically mutually exclusive.
Hogs have become a destructive force down south. They breed at astounding rates. Their gestational period is 3.8 months. After a litter, the young can breed in as little as 6 months. That means one hog can have a litter of 8 – 12 piglets. in as little as 10 months each of those hogs will have 8-12 of their own .. in less than one year. That’s like 150 hogs a year… just from one hog. Amazing. They are consuming everything in sight down south.
Yes. Next question.
No drinking while carrying? So you go into an establishment that serves alcohol and you can’t have any if you are carrying? I’m assuming you mean a bit to much to drink.
What frost’s my arse, besides sub zero temperatures and record 15ft of snow in the snowmobile paradise known as upstate new york, is that the NFL and Fox both denied the Daniel Defense ad but I lost track of the number of ads for Fox shows that had people shooting each other. talk about hypocritical.
I wouldn’t call them “cowards”, I liken them to “fear biters”…
The amount of names in PA disgusts me… We ran that clown Ravenstahl out of office, but I’d put money on his hand-picked successor being just as bad.
“Made in Merika” is stamped on it.
FYI, Merika (pronounced Mehr-EE-kah, it rhymes with Eureka!) is a Mexican border town and a staging point for undocumented immigrants seeking to drown in the Rio Grande.
Nice review!
1. They are cowards everyone of them
2. they all believe incorrectly police will protect them
3 they are all racist or Uncle tom’s at heart, How many KKK believed in equal Gun Control!
4. they are atheists, they do not believe in religion especially the part about an Eye for an Eye, and you can protect yourself and kill them if they enter your house after Dark
5 The Democratic Party to which most of these advocates belong has done more too destroy our country in the last Forty years than any one else!
Vietnam, Benghazi, Health care. robbing Social Security under the Johnson Administration too fund the Great Society and finance the Vietnam War.
They are rich and want all the common people too kiss their ***!
6. Most of the politicians Are willful Toady’s too the people like Bloomberg, gimme money and I will sell you
my mother!
7. It is the intent of the Democratic party too establish a Nazi like dictatorship! Armageddon is fast approaching.
Think I would rather do the Texas hunt. More wide open. Damn that shooting thru the trees stuff. Rock-n-roll? Hell yes mam. Just FYI…the wild hog I shot a few years back and tried to eat got thrown away. The dogs wouldn’t even eat it. Nasty.
“How do we get them to (pardon the sexism) man-up?”
We don’t. We stand firm, at the bulwark of the Constitution, and let their feeble attempts at control fall by the wayside.
Where the hell did THAT thing come from? Somebody call ORKIN.
They’re certainly growing large this year.
“As things stand now, almost any of us can find ourselves in a nightmare scenario in almost any public place at almost any time”.
Precisely why I carry, madam.
Aljazeera! Now the left is holding up the Arab political organ (Sorry for the mental image) as a credible policy maker for “common sense gun control”? The only explanation I can think of is best summed up in the following hijacked post.
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their President.” – Unknown, November 12, 2012
The fourty percent number you cite here for people with a prior record is misleading for two reasons: First, the clearance rate for homicide, or the number they actually solve, is less than 50%; Second, the the 40% appears to include those arrested for robbery and other “felony gun crimes”. For homicide alone, you can see for example here: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2013-01-01/news/bal-demographics-of-2012-baltimore-homicides-20121231_1_drug-arrests-baltimore-homicides-gun-crimes
Please be very cautious about using stats from either the city of bodymore or the state of maryland, without checking independently. You are firmly in the vortex of the Maryland Democrat’s spin cycle.
Great review. I thought I’d add my experience with this holster and another in the appendix position for anyone on the fence. I have one of these for my M&P Shield. OTG definitely makes a good holster. The kydex is on the thin side, I prefer thicker kydex, but .06 is definitely strong enough for everyday use, I just prefer a little thicker. The clip designed by them is a great and sturdy clip and imo is one of the best on the markets. Definitely nice. Mine does not have adjustable retention though but the draw is smooth. Retention was on the loose side (subjective I know) but can be easily adjusted with a hair dryer. Price is on point. Turn around time is great and customer service is pretty good too. Rob always answers any questions I have pretty quickly. I have recently purchased a G-Code INCOG and now prefer it over the MKI, but the main reason for that is I got a high sweat shield on the INCOG and zero sweat guard on the MKI. The shields pokey points didn’t work for me with the no guard, so keep that in mind when ordering a holster. Had I gotten the MKI with a full guard I would have probably never bought the INCOG. The fuzz on the INCOG is a subtle improvement in comfort and holds the gun in place a little better but the difference isn’t huge. The INCOG clips are easier to put on and off but the OTG clip definitely stays locked the **** down once it is in place. Definitely a beefy durable IWB attachment clip. Overall I prefer the INCOG for its subtle differences but the MKI has a smaller footprint IWB if your main goal is that. The edges are much smoother and more polished than the INCOG which is also a nice touch. They make great gear and the only IWB mag pouches I will use are made by them. I carry a spare mag every day. Their single clip IWB mag pouches are extremely comfortable and concealable and can’t recommend them enough. Solid stuff coming from these guys. Plus its nice to see a business located in my home state of CA making such good gun gear.
Chris Farley had a cross dressing twin? Who knew?
Good to know that they don’t intend to charge the lake in which the gun currently resides.
I’m glad they included a picture, because I’ve seen a gun here in Seattle that looks *exactly* like that one. I’m going to call in to get that reward.
And if that’s not the gun, I’ve seen 200 other guns that look exactly like that that I can call in about.
Yeah, yeah. The dog “attacked” him.
BULLSHIT. I want to see photos of the officer’s injuries. Then and ONLY then will I ever buy into that line.
RIP. Chesapeakes are really nice, as well as pretty pricey, hunting dogs.
Owner needs to sue. Maybe press charges. Dogs are property and this is one good reason for them to stay in that category, so you can claim property rights violation.
“Unfortunately, they chose a pro-gun activist who has a history of promoting gun lobby propaganda.”
Oh come on Shannon! How can what you say be anything less than propaganda?
Do you even know what the definition of Propaganda is let alone how to spot it?
I do, and was actually formally taught how to spot propaganda, ironically (?), by a democrat.
I unfriended exactly two people in the last five years. Both over 2A issues. Out of my 315 FB “friends,” only about 60 have me in their newsfeeds at this point. I only have about 20 of them in MY newsfeed. Seems a bit useless. I am preaching to the choir at this point.
And still no nonresident permits except for those who own real estate in SC?
IMO there is no way for them to be forced to man-up.
Night, shadows, and the voting booth are their safe ares.
They are the, coupled with the lawmakers, killers in the children and unarmed victim scenarios! And they lie by denying it.
They do not want to stop violence for fear that they may become liable, or some other equally lame attitude.