Quote of the Day: Tautological Edition


“Expanding open carry is just an attempt by the gun lobby and its supporters to make it okay for anyone to openly carry anywhere. This is the kind of extremism we don’t want see go unchecked and this sort of behavior isn’t what we want people to think of when they think of Texas.” – Moms Demand Action’s Claire Elizabeth in Open Carry Crowd Makes ‘Ghost Guns’ for Texas Lawmakers [at dailybeast.com]


  1. avatar mark_anthony_781 says:

    That’s EXACTLY the behavior I want to think of when I think of Texas.

    You know… freedom.

    1. avatar Daniel Silverman says:

      Agreed, and watching MDA’s heads explode is fun too!
      To that end even MDA lied again about being at the capital on opening day. They can’t seem to get anything right!

  2. avatar Skyler says:

    I understand the need for ads and fully support capitalism. But I would really like to browse this site without my kid asking why a man’s fingers are making boobs in.a business card or other ads that are simply grotesque in an attempt to attract notice. I notice and I am repulsed. Isn’t there a way to make ad revenue without losing all class?

    1. avatar MamaLiberty says:

      Download an adblock program to your computer. You have the choice and control of what you see. Don’t expect others to do it for you. You really wouldn’t like the results ultimately.

      1. avatar Former Water Walker says:

        Just IGNORE it-like when Barry Soetoro blathers on.

    2. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

      You’re not interest “20 unbelievable prom photos” or “the best eyelash volumeizer” or even the “dinner hack that has 20 something ditching delivery”…?

      Say it ain’t so…

      1. avatar brentonadams says:

        It works. I finally did it.

        This site has some of the best content on the worst platform Ive ever seen. I mean it really is one of the most obnoxious sites I visit. The fact that I come back in spite of all that says something.

        How can other sites provide good content without being borderline unreadable? Is it a revenue thing? Is it possible to get money from sponsors instead of pornographic shills, juvenile vulgarity and vapid celebrity gossip? What am I missing?

        1. avatar CGinTX says:

          Maybe because Proctor and Gamble and Coca-Cola make sure their ads are not shown on sites like this. Because guns, don’tcha know? The Top 20 prom photos and “one weird trick” crowd don’t give a flying frack who drives their click count.

        2. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

          brentonadams says:
          What am I missing?

          You are using the internet wrong. I don’t see any of the stuff you are talking about. The only content on this site are the posts. Heck, the videos don’t even work until I click on them.

          Browser Extensions–learn how to use them.

    3. avatar Another Robert says:

      By way of encouragement, let me say I am a technological atavism, but I did find a free ad blocker and downloaded it in a matter of minutes. Mostly because the ads at that time were keeping the page from loading and keeping my keyboard from working. Every so often the ads still come up with the page, but if I refresh it they go away again. But the point is, if I can do it, pretty much anybody can. I just googled “ad block” or some such and went from there.

      1. avatar Timmy! says:

        I’m a borderline Luddite and I managed to load an adblocker as well. I feel guilty depriving the site of… wait, no I don’t.

    4. avatar JimmyDelta says:

      Yes. It’s called Adblock Plus and it’s blocking 7 ads on this page right now.

  3. avatar John in Ohio says:

    make it okay for anyone to openly carry anywhere

    Sounds good to me.

    1. avatar Chadwick P says:

      Yep! Anybody else notice the buzzword of the week? “extreme” or “extremist”. The regime is pushing hard on that one. I guess “domestic terrorist” wasn’t polling well. Progressive idiocy that wants to strip a man or woman of his/her rights is as “extremist” as one can get. Our founding fathers were “extremists” and I’m glad to wear that title if it is given to me through the mouth of a tyrant. Orwell was a warning not a step by step how-to.

      1. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

        “Our founding fathers were “extremists” and I’m glad to wear that title if it is given to me through the mouth of a tyrant.”

        Exactly. John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington. All were considered “extremists” and “domestic terrorists” in their time.

  4. avatar the ruester says:

    ” This is the kind of extremism we don’t want to see go unchecked…”

    I see, this must be one of the “other forms of extremism” the white house spokeswoman was going on about the other day. Cause you know TX gun enthusiasts and muslim radicals are regular peas in a p (hit by brick for saying “muslim…”)

  5. avatar Wiregrass says:

    One of only six states that forbid open carry. I don’t think adding one more that does allow it qualifies as extremism.

    1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Sorry to nitpick, but it’s way more than six in realistic terms. There are eight states that have “may issue” (which usually means no issue) concealed carry laws. Add to that Illinois and Texas which are shall issue but concealed only. There may be others.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        And others (or at least regions of others) that prohibit open carry in practice through police harassment. Though the poster’s point remains. OC is legal in more states than not. So, by definition, certainly not extremist in the USA.

    2. avatar MamaLiberty says:

      Anything that doesn’t fit their agenda for the rest of us qualifies as “extremism.” They are extremely displeased and frustrated that so few will accept THEIR extremism as the right one.

      Ever wonder how many of these “moms” become victims, one way or another, and finally see the delusion? Likely more than we’ll ever hear about.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        Yep, and I can understand that at some level. You live in a quiet part of the burbs, have grown up never seeing real violence except in movies, it’s hard to accept at a gut level that human predators actually exist. What really blows my mind are the ones who experience it first hand but continue to prefer their fantasies, the ones who have accepted some set of narratives and cling to them even in the face of cold reality.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          For them, denial ain’t just a river in Egypt. It’s a way of life.

        2. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

          Denial and fantasy are coping mechanisms. They deserve our pity, but also our contempt. Do not judge them; they cannot help themselves. But DO NOT EVER let them drag those of us who live in reality into their pity party victim fantasy world.

  6. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    “This is the kind of extremism we don’t want see…”

    Last week, in the disarmed utopia of Paris, France, we saw a different kind of extremism.

    Take yer pick, Claire.

    1. avatar DickDanger says:

      Your statement answers your own question. It’s socially acceptable to be gunned down by jihadists, just so long as us inbred common folk in fly-over country aren’t aloud to own them there scary guns. /sarc. off/

  7. avatar Rokurota says:

    “Passing laws that restrict guns is just an attempt to restrict guns. We don’t like that.” Two can play that game.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      What they have really done is admit that it isn’t about public safety at all, it’s about establishing norms. We support open carry for the same reason, but at least we are generally honest about it.

  8. avatar Paul G says:

    Letting people do what the Constitution guarantees them a right to do = extremism!

  9. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    How about an open carry rally where everybody has just a lower receiver slung. No other parts. Just the serialized part.
    That could be a public education on stupid laws.

    1. avatar Dave says:

      I think that is a brilliant idea. Especially for TX, where the open carry protests are actually protesting the ridiculousness of being able to open carry long guns but not handguns. The only problem might be that an AR lower, if it hasn’t been assembled, can end up being either a long gun or a handgun; if you eventually assemble yours into a handgun, would you have retroactively been violating the open carry of handgun laws?

      1. avatar Chrispy says:

        According to the ATF, it’s all about how you intend to use it.

  10. avatar James says:

    Extremism. This is hilariously redonkulus coming from a member of a group whose supporters routinely pine for gun owners to be killed. Hence why I call them Moms Demand Assassination of Gun Owners in America.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Excellent point.

      And, I like your interpretation of their initials. It is certainly more informative.

  11. avatar Jan Pierce says:

    Not a huge fan of the in your face tactics of the open carry movement, but you could say the same thing about any marginalized minority. Once you know a few (gay folks, blacks, Muslims, Jews, etc.), you might start to think of them as human beings – just like you. Oh, the horror!

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      That’s true. Especially Jews, Christians and gays in Muslim countries. They are routinely and with extreme prejudice murdered.

      It is against the law to import bibles, and it is death sentence to be caught as gay in Saudi Arabia which is the acknowledged protector of the heart of Islam.

      Also it is a death sentence for a muslim to convert to another religion or to become an atheist.

      Yep. If you are not muslim, gay, a woman, a Jew, a black christian, or a muslim practicing a form of Islam not considered “orthodox”, you are much better to live in the US or western Europe.

    2. avatar ThomasR says:

      I was reading your post again Jan.

      I would have to say your bigotry, intolerance and just plain hatefulness is breathtaking.

      It is the gun rights community that actually acknowledge the inherent dignity of all human beings the right to defend their lives from depredations by human predators.

      There is no one on this site that would deny any law abiding human being that right.

      It is the liberal/progressives that deny all of those “oppressed minorities” this basic human right that actually are the real “haters”.

      Liberal/progressives hate all people that are not rich, or powerful or not of the government.

      In the end, it is we that defend all peaceful people their right to KABA that are the true egalitarians; the true liberators of all humans from the oppression of the powerful over the “common people”,

      1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

        Methinks Jan’s sarcasm flew clear over Thomas’ head.

        1. avatar ThomasR says:

          I’d hope is was sarcasm. But I’ve seen this type of hatefulness from anti-gun people too often.

          Usually liberal/progressives accuse gun owners of being racists; meanwhile, it is they that show their hatered and absolute contempt for all people, especially minorites, by denying them the right to defend their lives; unless they belong to the privileged class.

          To show without doubt or obfuscation, in it’s purest form, if you truly respect another human being is if you support their right to KABA.

          If you don’t, no matter what smoke you’re blowing about “empowerment” or “justice”, you are showing absolute hatred, absolute contempt for that person and their right to life.

          All these politicians that don’t support the “common citizens” right to KABA are showing that they see us as non-entities, as dirt, beneath contempt. They see us as only fools to be used to be put into power over us, the “useless breeders and eaters”.

          But in the end, we get the government we vote for. If a majority of people want to be treated like peasants, peons and outright slaves. So be it.

        2. avatar Paul G says:

          No, so be it NOT. You are confusing our republic with a democracy.

        3. avatar ThomasR says:

          Yeah Paul G, but the reality is that the Constitution and our Republic are just words on a piece of parchment.

          Unless people as a majority decide to defend it as a republic; then we go the route of Greece and Rome and fall into a morass government hand outs to the dependant class because people have found out they can “vote themselves largess from the public treasury” and the fiscal irresponsibility that ensues as the Powers That Be inflate the money supply in an attempt to keep giving handouts to stay in power.

          Oh, wait a minute, that’s what is happening now.

          The reason we keep repeating the mistakes of history is because we don’t learn from history.

        4. avatar Paul G says:

          Mainly because people like you continue to think like you.

        5. avatar ThomasR says:

          Interesting PaulG.

          I would like your thoughts on how my way of thinking or believing leads to the collapse of a Republic into tyranny.

        6. avatar Paul G says:

          I bet you would.

  12. avatar PeterK says:

    This is the kind of thing people ALREADY think exists in Texas.

    Or is that just me?

    Need to fix this. It’s a crime against Texans, and all of humanity.

  13. avatar Juliesa says:

    Since a majority of states allow open carry of handguns, it’s extreme NOT to allow it. Current TX law is extreme, and we are just trying to change that so TX can be like most states.

  14. avatar pun&gun says:

    People need to ditch the notion that extremism is inherently bad. It just means you’re following your worldview consistently and passionately. Yeah, some suck, but not all, and I’d daresay not most. The implication that the right path is always the moderate one is how liberalism has moved the goalposts of political normalcy gradually left over the last century.

    1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      Wow, well stated.

    2. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Yep. Very well said.

    3. avatar Ralph says:

      “[E]xtremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And . . . moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

      Barry Goldwater

  15. avatar Fuque says:

    All the while these “Moms” are exercising “Extremism” of the 1st…trying to prevent the Exercise of the 2nd.

  16. avatar DerryM says:

    Gosh, and here I thought all along that “extremism” was denying people their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear Arms. *face slap* DOH!

  17. avatar preston says:

    while i don’t really ” support ” open carry i don’t think it should be illegal. i think we should have both options. if they want to make higher restrictions or qualifications for open carry, i wouldn’t really have a problem with that either. I know the crazies like RF on here will lose their minds at a comment like that but some of us don’t let assumptions and conspiracies drive our every decision and thought.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      “I know the crazies like RF on here will lose their minds at a comment like that but some of us don’t let assumptions and conspiracies drive our every decision and thought.”

      I recognize this. It’s a common, tried and true Progressive tactic.

      “What I say is reasonable and common sense. The other guys, those that don’t agree with me are extremists or not as smart as I am since I don’t let assumptions and conspiracies drive my thoughts.”

      The short version of my response is: I don’t care what you think. I don’t care if you “agree” with OC or not. I don’t care if adopt the “it’s legal but I don’t like is” safe position.

      You either support RKBA or you don’t.

      Qualification of support, especially qualification of the type that says “I should be the arbiter of the line between okay and not okay” is weaseling out of the ENTIRE concept of “personal liberty…not just for me, but for the other guy, too.” The concept includes the responsibility to leave the other guy alone.

      But, I guess I’m just a conspiracy nut who can’t not let assumptions cloud my thinking because I disagree with you.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      “I know the crazies like RF on here will lose their minds at a comment like that but some of us don’t let assumptions and conspiracies drive our every decision and thought.”

      Translation: people who fail to embrace the “enlightened” worldview are either stupid, crazy, or corrupt … and by extension they are irrelevant and only have rights that the “enlightened few” bestow upon them.

    3. avatar John in Ohio says:

      What you’re supporting is moving open carry from the realm of right to that of privilege. In doing so, regardless of your own cognizance of the fact, you are supporting the elimination of the right to bear arms.

  18. avatar Daniel in NC says:

    “Moms Demand Action’s Claire Elizabeth in Open Carry Crows Makes ‘Ghost Guns’ for Texas Lawmakers”

    Open Carry Crows?

    1. avatar MamaLiberty says:

      Well sure! I just love to see crows with their little six shooters strapped to their bodies. Don’t you?

      In a cartoon somewhere, I think. It’s been a long time. 🙂

    2. avatar bobmcd says:

      Typo. Should read “Open Carry Crowd.” That’s the headline on the source article.

      1. avatar Daniel in NC says:

        Absolutely. I too followed the source article, I followed it in hopes that the Mom’s Demanding Action were that intellectually unsound. Typographical errors make one’s argument and/or statement less palatable to an audience. Unfortunately for us, it is our side that looks less professional in print.

  19. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “Expanding open carry is just an attempt by the gun lobby and its supporters to make it okay for anyone to openly carry anywhere.”

    That works for me!

  20. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “This [open carry of firearms in public] is the kind of extremism we don’t want see go unchecked …”

    Translation: you can only do something if the ruling class says it is okay. That is NOT a free society.

    1. avatar Chris (not one of the other 2 chris's) says:

      Note the pronoun, “This is the kind of extremism ‘we’ don’t want see go unchecked and this sort of behavior isn’t what ‘we’ want people to think of when they think of Texas.”

  21. avatar Jus Bill says:

    To paraphrase the Mayor of Rotterdam:

    If Claire Elizabeth and her friends believe they are in so much danger, they can pack up and get the fsck out of Texas.

  22. avatar Ray Ficara says:

    Looks like Abbey Road with FREEDOM SAUCE.

    Ray from Bloombergia

  23. avatar Buzzlefutt says:

    Gee I thought they supported the 2nd amendment and they only wanted to keep guns away from the bad guy.
    This sounds like they are trying to prevent good guys from getting guns too. This can’t be the Moms(r) must be some other group, right?

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      Their thinking:

      There are no good guys with guns.

      Every gun owner is a bad guy. He/she may not know it yet, but it’s only a matter of time.

      Thus, to them, they ARE attacking the bad guys…all gun owners.

  24. avatar Scott says:

    Just because you can open carry doesn’t mean you should. I am as pro gun as anybody, but when I see a video of an idiot carrying an AR15 through a department store I can only assume the person needs an attitude adjustment.

    1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

      ” the person needs an attitude adjustment.”

      To match YOURS?

      Interesting how your post brought this to mind, courtesy of dictionary.com:


      noun, plural liberties.

      freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.

      The opposite is telling others how to do, think, speak, etc., forcing no choice.

    2. avatar Paul G says:

      So, you believe in the second amendment, BUT…….

  25. avatar BDub says:

    I see Captain Obvious has taken a wife.

  26. avatar Marcus (Aurelius) Payne says:

    She is absolutely correct in her assessment. This is also the only type of carry her ilk will agree the 2nd amendment applies to.

    So to recap, the message has been “I support the second amendment, but it only allows for open carry. We can’t allow a law that allows open carry!”

    Same old same old. This is further proof that they don’t have some bizarre interpretation of the Second that they do support, they have here revealed that they do not want the one thing they have claimed it allows for.

    This is literally “we are against the last remaining thing that is logically consistent with our statement of support for the second amendment!”

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email