Quote of the Day: Gun Sense And Sensibility Edition

Abbey Clements (courtesy gannet-cdn.com)

“Gun sense is the idea that we can do much more to keep our families and communities safe from gun violence — that we can protect people, as well as their Second Amendment rights, by supporting common-sense measures that evidence shows will save lives. I’m talking about closing the deadly loopholes that allow minors and dangerous people like felons and domestic abusers to easily obtain guns. Promoting gun safety so American children are no longer exposed to unacceptable levels of risk in their homes and at friends’ houses. Supporting reasonable limits on where, when and how loaded guns are carried and used in public. And creating enforceable laws that address gun trafficking and fraudulent purchases to keep illegal guns off our streets. As a teacher getting ready to go back to school in a community where gun violence took an unimaginable toll, I believe the best way to protect our students and protect ourselves is by voting for elected officials who will lead with gun sense.” – Abbey Clements, Newtown teacher: Tighten gun laws to protect kids [via indystar.com]


  1. avatar Jeremy in AL says:

    Ma’am, which of those “loopholes” would have prevented Sandy Hook?

    1. avatar John in AK says:

      That would be either the “Gun Free Zone” loophole, or the “You Can’t Lock Junior Up Just Because He’s a Dangerous Homicidal Maniac As That Would Be Unfair!” loophole, I believe.

      1. avatar Michael C says:

        No. It’s actually the “I Say It So It Must Be So, And Damn Reality If It Refuses To Bend To My Omniscient Will” loophole. I’m not sure if the funniest part of that was the bit about their ‘common sense measures that evidence shows will save lives’ or the one about ‘creating enforceable laws that address gun trafficking and fraudulent purchases to keep illegal guns off our streets’. Once a gun leaves an FFL’s possession, the only way for the .gov to keep track of its movements among the private citizenry is for people to report sales and purchases or for it to enter into the possession of an FFL.

  2. avatar tdiinva says:

    To state the obvious what law has ever kept guns out of the hands of criminals?

    1. avatar ThomasR says:

      Oh pisha! tdiinva. One needs only to look to the gun free paradise of Chicago to see how well gun laws keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

      Ummm, well, no . Hmmm, don’t worry about it, I just know some law some how will work to stop a criminal from getting a gun. We just haven’t made enough of them. If you at first don’t succeed, try and try again. And again.

      1. avatar tfunk says:

        Did you mean “pshaw”? 😉

  3. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Hah, saw the phrase ” every town” a bit through the piece, and then at the end.. “She is a member of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.”

    I thought the stuff she was writing seemed canned. SOSDD.

    1. avatar Gyufygy says:

      You’d think they’d pull out a thesaurus every once in awhile instead of repeating the exact same phrases over and over and over again.

      1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

        The same phraseology is intentional, not the result of a limited vocabulary.


      2. avatar PhilWilson says:

        Lie loud, lie proud, lie repeatedly. Unfortunately, it’s quite effective.

        1. avatar John Butler says:

          “The history of our race, and each individual’s experience, are sown thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie well told is immortal.” – Mark Twain

  4. avatar Dickie J says:

    To me, gun

  5. avatar Dickie J says:

    To me, gun sense means scouring the internet for good deals on guns and ammo and being ready to “pull the trigger” when you find one. We’ve all gotta practice gun sense in these tough economic times.

    1. avatar General Zod says:

      Real “Gun Sense” is easy to summarize:

      1. Always treat a firearm as though it is loaded and ready to fire.
      2. Do not point a firearm at anything you are not willing to destroy.
      3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
      4. Be sure of your target and what’s behind it.

      Adherence to these four rules will prevent the vast majority of gun-related injuries and deaths. This is the actual definition of “common sense”, “gun safety” and “gun sense”.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Adherence to these four rules will prevent the vast majority of *UNINTENTIONAL* gun-related injuries and deaths. This is the actual definition of “common sense”, “gun safety” and “gun sense”.

  6. avatar RockOnHellChild says:

    Blah, blah, blah, rhetoric, blah, blah, blah, buzz word, blah, blah, blah, children, blah, blah, blah, vote liberal.

    Nope, no agenda here.

  7. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

    didn’t Mark Glaze admit that NOTHING they proposed for “common sense” would have worked to stop Sandy Hook ??? Where did this dumb a*s come from ??

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      The Newtown, CT MDA coven.

      Just another “educator” who exists in a sterile, “fair” sealed microenvironment that does not require any independent critical thinking skills, just regurgitation of predigested dogma.

  8. avatar brentondadams says:

    No thanks

  9. avatar Mike says:

    The term useful idiot comes to mind.

  10. avatar joe says:

    I don’t mind reading their point of view until they state some overused, debunked, and just plain wrong statistic, then I roll my eyes and stop reading

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      This ^^ . I tried pointing that out to a HuffPo blogger, after 3 days of exchanging e-mails she was quoting statistics to me that the day before I had pointed out were thoroughly debunked, by news outlets sympathetic to her position. So she started yammering about “quibbling over numbers”. It’s a mania that short-circuits their brains I think

  11. avatar Mediocrates says:

    why are we focused on Sandy Hook or any mass shooting as a counter to their ideas? They say we should try XYZ, and we say “that wouldn’t have stopped XYZ mass shooting”. Sounds distinctly like “for the children”. I think its a given that there is simply no way to stop every mass shooting unless there are “good guys” with guns present.

    We need to push ideas to help reduce gun violence with as much energy as we spend countering their less than sensible arguments. As I’ve said, we can either lead and be a part of the process, or we will be dragged along behind it.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Agreed. Whenever our side brings up or responds to “Sandy Hook”, the idea should be included that only one concept ever mentioned could have actually prevented it, as in the only death would be the perp and his mom, and that concept is “arm the teachers”.

  12. The only loophole I support closing is a noose around the necks of those who would commit evil. But even that “common sense” approach to criminals is also falling out of favor.

  13. avatar KingSarc48265 says:

    I think I just won liberal buzz word and catch phrase bingo.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Congratulations! Your a winner! You can’t win if you don’t play, unfortunately the only prize for this game is lost brain cells.

  14. avatar Thomas Reed says:

    Bla, bla, bla. She is wrong and we are right. Except I like my guns, and I really want to keep them. I am getting tired of you people saying, “But criminals don’t follow the law. bla, bla, bla.” Listen up, until we really start looking at methods and measures to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and nut bags, we are in danger of losing our second amendment rights. And no I don’t want to hear about how that isn’t going to happen and that we are not responsible for policing outlaw guns. We are the owners, it is our guns that are at risk of being lost and it can happen, and if conditions continue to follow the course it has been following, there is a very good possibility that we will lose our second amendments rights. Why do I say “We.’ because the anti gun groups method of gun control is to just simply make them illegal. So, if we want sane and reasonable gun control it is going to be up to us to find a way to make it happen. If we are not part of the solution then we are part of the problem. That is fact, now live with it. That big white light at the end of the tunnel is not the way out, it is the engine of a very large train and it’s headed right at us. So instead of telling everyone why it won’t work we better start looking at what will work and finding ways of presenting it to the left side of the house and we best do it in a way that doesn’t send them running like a herd of spooked deer. As for the morons that say. “You can have my gun when they take it out of my cold dead hand.” that is more than likely what will happen. You will not be seen as a hero fighting for the Constitution but a crazed gun toting criminal who has gone against the American people. And that is the way it will play out on the 9 o’clock news when the cameras see your body hauled off in a ambulance. Right now all we are doing is feeding the fuel that will help take away our rights. And some times I wonder if the more radical voices I hear are not working for the Left making us seem like knuckle dragging Neanderthals.

    1. avatar PhilWilson says:

      There is only one way to keep guns (or drugs, or anything else for which there is demand) out of the hands of criminals: An absolute police state, with constant and completely invasive surveillance. We would have to spend a significant chunk of our GDP to do pay for the privilege of an Orwellian existence, too. Given how safe you actually are here (if you are not involved in criminal activity), why would anyone give up more freedom?

      But all that doesn’t really matter in the end. Taking guns out of the hands of gang bangers and other criminals, even if it were practical, is of no real interest to the statists. They only want your guns. Crime and violent crime have been going down steadily. Has that caused them the let up? Has it stopped the media from creating the illusion that there is an epidemic of gun violence? Besides, Mom and Pop America don’t really care about gang violence, and wouldn’t really know the difference if it were wiped out over night. As to random crazies, that’s getting down to lightning strike probability levels for any given person, but there will always be a few (and the press will always be ready to jump on them when they happen).

      So, I’m all for tougher enforcement where practical. But we all need to understand that this will have no bearing on the civilian disarmament push.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I do not agree that a police state is the only way. With little trouble, laws could be mildly altered to allow the following concept; When a gun is presented in the course of a criminal act, the possessor of that gun should expect to be shot into dog food by at least six bystanders’ firearms blasting him simultaneously until his remains cannot be identified as human without DNA testing. Bystanders involved can then walk away, or stand around till police arrive in order to file claims for reimbursement for ammo used.

        Any other “common sense” gun control laws will simply not work.

        1. avatar PhilWilson says:

          I’m going to have to admit that I stand corrected, Larry. It wouldn’t keep guns out of their hands, but it sure as hell would be the best option for controlling crime.

        2. avatar gemalo says:

          + 100000000

    2. avatar Dev says:

      There is NOTHING more we can do in regards to any laws or regulations involving firearms that will keep criminals from obtaining weapons. Just look at the now 40-year old drug war, and how that has backfired immensely. The ONLY WAY to stop criminals from getting guns is to reduce crime, and that’s only possible by a complete economic overhaul and redevelopment in the world. Create good jobs and opportunities and crime goes down. However, that being said, crime will never, ever, ever, ever go away because we are humans. Look at the strictest dictatorships and police states throughout history and there still was crime and underground organizations and communities.

      1. avatar PhilWilson says:

        Yes, this is an important point, too. Unfortunately, the same force behind the civilian disarmament movement is the one perpetuating inner city poverty and lack of opportunity, the same force behind the deterioration of public schools. They will fight light hell, every step of the way, to keep these problems from being fixed. My favorite recent example is Bobby Jindal’s amazingly successful school voucher program, which is truly helping kids. Which of course earned him a lawsuit from Eric Holder’s Social Justice Department. Because programs that help disadvantaged kids are somehow bad for disadvantaged kids. Yeah.

        If we are to have any hope of winning on Constitutionally protected individual rights, we have to recognize the nature of the underlying illness, and fight that.

        1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

          Like a caner it must be treat and eliminated for of any parts remained it will return and destroy all gains made..

          Charter schools and School Vouchers are the best way to remove the caner of their mindset and prevent the infection of brainwashing of youth, which with out a new supply of pure minds to infect they like all parasites will die off.

          We are winning the culture war, have you seen how the youth love all things guns, all things rugged individualism, and freedom?

          We are winning the Info war, we are winning the youth and a large group of the aging leftist of the boomers are starting to die off..As long as we can avoid amnesty, our future is very bright.

    3. avatar Mike says:

      You have not been paying attention have you? The “left side of the house” is not one bit interested in taking guns from criminals. The ones providing miss “gun sense” above with her talking points are interested in one thing, making firearm ownership illegal. Period. They may be trying to do it incrementally, but they’re not going to stop until none of us is “allowed” to own a gun of any kind.

      If they were so interested in real ways of getting guns out of the hands of criminals (you know, like not letting violent offenders off on plea deals while they have mandatory minimums for victimless crimes like drug use) they wouldn’t feel the need to lie to try to advance their agenda. What we can do as gun owners is to fight the lies with truth and present reasonable people (you can’t convert the unreasonable) with facts to sway them from the middle (where most people sit on the subject) to our side. It’s not as difficult as it would seem.

    4. avatar Nedd Ludd says:

      Reply to Tom Reed,
      “Why do I say “We.’ because the anti gun groups method of gun control is to just simply make them illegal. So, if we want sane and reasonable gun control it is going to be up to us to find a way to make it happen. If we are not part of the solution then we are part of the problem. That is fact, now live with it…. So instead of telling everyone why it won’t work we better start looking at what will work and finding ways of presenting it to the left side of the house and we best do it in a way that doesn’t send them running like a herd of spooked deer. “

      I’m afraid you don’t understand the left’s actual goal.
      If you think you can compromise your way out of giving up your guns you are wrong.
      Look to England and Australia.

      You need to fight for every inch and never give anything without getting something better in return.
      Want background checks? – Then give us national carry permits in exchange.
      And of course if they really wanted just background checks for the buyer,
      why would you ever need to record the serial number and type of gun? –
      So of course the background check is just BS –
      It’s a gun registry by default, that also creates yet another felony for the government to enforce.

      While some of the left’s foot soldiers may genuinely care about preventing the next Sandy Hook, the leadership simply wants to advance their total civilian disarmament agenda. BHO, Bloomberg and the others have clearly expressed that England and Australia are their ideals when it comes to gun ownership by civilians.

      No one has argued against this better than Federal Judge Alex Kosinski.
      So I won’t try. Here’s what he wrote:

      ” All too many of the other great tragedies of history — Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few — were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. 570*570 Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. See Kleinfeld Dissent at 578-579. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.

      My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed — where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once. ”

      Read Kosinski’s whole great dissent here:

    5. avatar lizzrd says:

      You’re exactly right. Can’t believe the day started with a rational post and not “but, but…the Constitution…tyranny…Molon Labe”.

      1. avatar PhilWilson says:

        The comment sounds rational if you aren’t informed and don’t think about it too much, just like the MDA shill’s boiler-plate rant. If you are informed, and you do think about it, it’s pretty clear that the comment accepts the false premises of the enemy and agrees to play the game they have set up, by their rules. If you want to further the goals of the people trying to chip away at fundamental civil rights in America, it’s exactly the right course of action.

      2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        What “common sense” measures, exactly, would prevent nutjobs and violent criminals from committing crimes with guns? What evidence, exactly, shows that those measures have been effective when enacted?

    6. avatar John in AK says:

      I think that I can summarize this for you:

      In a free and open society, there IS no magic panacea. Unless you are willing to totally submit to an overarching government power and will accept the abrogation of all of your rights as a free citizen, there will never be perfect safety or absolute security.

      If that is too much, there is always the fallback: “Sh*t happens. Sh*t will ALWAYS happen. Life sucks, and then you die. Get over it.”

      1. avatar Jus Bill says:


      2. avatar Another Robert says:

        Ya know, I recall reading years ago that in Japan police can just walk into your home and snoop around for no reason at all, at least a couple of times a year (they call it a welfare inspection or some such). They have no long-term firearms culture like that of the US, the people have been acculturated for centuries to respect their “betters”, their firearms laws in comparison to ours, if I’m not mistaken, are positively draconian. And with all that, there are still guns there, and criminals still manage to get hold of them.

    7. avatar J from Texas says:

      It is definitely not my responsibility to join your version of the “something has to be done” crowd. No I am not part of the problem just because I don’t believe passing a law is the go to solution. We are not just one more gun control law away from satisfying either side.

      There is no such thing as sane and reasonable gun control through legislation unless it involves removing the many unconstitutional laws that currently exist. There has been no real compromise, one side continually takes and the other is lucky to keep things from getting worse or get back scraps of what they used to have.

    8. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      The only way to keep guns out of the hands of nutjobs and violent criminals is to keep nutjobs and violent criminals where they belong: locked up, away from access to guns. But we can no longer institutionalize nutjobs with violent tendencies, and we don’t enforce sentencing already on the books for violent criminals – turning one-time violent criminals into repeat offenders.

      But, hey: sure, go ahead and blame law-abiding citizens for the actions of nutjobs and violent criminals, and advocate for infringing upon the rights of law-abiding citizens in a futile attempt to curtail the actions of nutjobs and law-abiding citizens.

      Just go back to the Bloomberg camp and do it from there, where you belong.

  15. avatar Gregolas says:

    Ever since I was forced to take some education classes as a history major to be “allowed” to teach history, I have repeated my conclusion to anyone who will listen since: the best way to improve U.S. education would be to bulldoze every “college of education” in the country. This example of a mental vacuum only confirms my opinion.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      The problem with “education”, are the “education classes”. Note that most school administrators only have a degree in “education” or “education administration” and no real world management skills. They are born into bureaucracy and thus it is the only method they know.

      Good for you for seeing the stupid, I know there are some outstanding teachers who must deal within the utter stupidity of the system they are in , and there are some awful teachers who embrace the system as the penultimate with every gasping breath, and then there are others who are simply there to cheat the system.

      I agree with you, our school systems suck

      That said, good luck and just be the best teacher you can be

      1. avatar Gregolas says:

        Thank you for the kind wishes Pascal. Well, I taught for eight years(high school & Jr. high), then went to law school, later taught cops, then criminal justice in two colleges.
        Now I teach use-of force law to civilians, part of whom are armed church security teams.

      2. avatar Henry Bowman says:

        Burn the current system to the ground, replace it with vouchers and private schools.

  16. avatar David says:

    Let’s clear up those pesky freedoms of religion and speech while we are at it. That’ll solve all sorts of problems!

    1. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

      Hey, why stop there? The reality is that the other eight stand or fall on the integrity of the first two.

  17. avatar the ruester says:

    This is why sandy hook was so perfect for them; any one can see that only the most draconian gun laws (no guns for anyone) would have stopped it.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Except of course the mass killers may not obey those “no guns for anyone” laws. Surprise! OTOH, “every teacher is required to carry a gun and at least one reload” would have stopped Sandy Hook cold, even if 20-30% of teachers broke the law!

    2. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      …which is why, of course, there is absolutely no gun crime whatsoever in Chicago or Washington, D.C.

  18. avatar Hannibal says:

    Teaching the future of tomorrow… to be as vague and trite as possible.

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      There is very little teaching these days, it is indoctrination and often rewriting history

      Look at this if you want to throw up
      California law calls for schools to teach about the significance of Obama’s election

      1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

        Or how about this:


        “Acceptance and inter-cultural understanding can be fostered through the use of powerful texts, discussion, analysis, and exploration in the classroom. An English curriculum grounded in social justice rests on a belief based in equity—that each person should have access to resources regardless of race, gender, ability, age, socio-economic status, or sexual orientation.”

        English class is not used to learn to read and write better; it is for political indoctrination.

        Always remember this when someone wants to increase the already bloated budget of government school system.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Astonishing. Thanks.

        2. avatar Jus Bill says:

          Notice that nowhere in that course description is there even mentioned the ability to read.

  19. avatar General Zod says:

    So she proposes to impose an illusion of safety “…by supporting common-sense measures that evidence shows will save lives.”

    And yet when these people are asked for that evidence that their so-called “common sense” schemes will save any lives at all, all they have is their opinion that the evidence exists. When presented with actual evidence that disproves their opinions, they resort to insults, stereotypes, and projection of their own insecurities.

    And this woman who fails on so many levels of critical thinking…is teaching small children.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Said it before I did. It would really help their cause if that evidence that shows what she said it shows actually existed and could be cited. My teachers would flunk me for writing such sweeping assertions without citations. But then, I went to private school.

  20. avatar Jason says:

    Lady, and I use that term loosely as you are kind of homely, take your common sense knowledge and use it to make me a samich.

  21. avatar chuck (hates nj) says:

    Survivors are the best people to ask how to prevent a tragedy from happening again. Look at the survivors of flight 1549 that crashed in the Hudson river after hitting a goose. They provided such wonderful ideas on sensible goose reform to the media..oh wait no one asked them how to prevent another crash? Well that’s probably because surviving a tragedy doesnt make you an expert on something you knew nothing about before the tragedy.

  22. avatar Illinois Minion says:

    Why not just pass a law making it illegal to not follow the law? That way bad guys can be prosecuted for not obeying!!!

    Or better yet, make everyone live in a prison/camp. That way, we all live in a safe, LEO controlled environment where the cattle can be secure in their thoughts. I mean sheeple. I mean people…

    /back to reality

  23. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    “…by supporting common-sense measures that evidence shows will save lives.”

    That is an untrue statement.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      At least without an example, but those are secret. Trust me, though, they are “common sense”.

  24. avatar Dino1791 says:

    Your family IS safe from gun violence. Unless you are a young, urban male of color involved in gang activity, gun violence isn’t even a blip on the screen as far as risk goes.

    1. avatar lizzrd says:

      You’re saying that to someone who survived Sandy Hook?

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Sure! If the chance is one in a zillion, ordinarily, think how low a second occurrence probability would be!

  25. avatar Jay-El says:

    From the article:

    Since our elected officials in Congress have the power to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people, why haven’t they done so?

    Because they’ve been too busy trying to keep guns, standard capacity magazines, etc. out of the hands of law-abiding people.


    I noticed that the author repeats the MDA talking point about protecting people’s 2A rights. Shannon Watts always works that into her messaging too. But they never explain what they mean. I suspect that’s because their idea of the Second Amendment is muskets in the National Guard.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:


    2. avatar CarlosT says:

      They mean it in the same way Don Vito means he’ll “protect” your lovely Italian restaurant.

  26. avatar Taylor TX says:

    so basically she is saying TL;DR : we want to rewrite the 2nd amend however the fvck we feel like.

    Hey while were at right, why not just the whole bill of rights in general? /facepalm

  27. avatar Soccerchainsaw says:

    Sorry Ms. Clements but with the world practically exploding all around us, evidence suggests gun control (whether ‘reasonable’ or not) achieves the exact opposite of your stated goal.

  28. avatar Sian says:

    For those playing bingo:


    You’re not fooling anyone by pretending to respect 2nd amendment constitutional rights in one breath and calling for restrictions on them in the next.

  29. avatar Jim Barrett says:

    Honestly, instead of spouting vague things like “we need to close dangeous loopholes that let minors and felons get guns”, please tell me specifically, how such a law would be worded and exactly how it will prevent gun access to the wrong people.

    As a teacher, you should encourage your students to back up statements with facts and thoughtful analysis and I expect nothing more from you.

    1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      Or, better yet: start with a description of what loopholes, exactly, allow minors and felons to obtain guns legally?

      (I’ll not be holding my breath waiting for them to respond.)

  30. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Why not outlaw murder, rape and robbery and forget the little stuff?

  31. avatar SelousX says:

    Yeah, I don’t think so, lady. Your “great ideas” will never be worth my civil liberties.

  32. avatar Flyboy says:

    Silly liberals can’t solve a problem because they don’t understand it. They keep blaming the gun instead of the person who used it because he was bent on killing. Those who are determined to kill will use whatever means they have available. Removing the gun won’t remove their desire to kill. We need to address the reasons that these people have for killing. This is called root cause. Treating the cause fixes the problem, as opposed to treating the symptoms while allowing the cause to continue without rooting it out.

  33. avatar DerryM says:

    Sounds like a paid shill for MDA, but probably isn’t smart enough to have asked for $$ for her “parrot-work” on MDA’s behalf. Our POTUS and COTUS need, right now, to be focusing on the necessary war with the Islamic State [Caliphate] or “IS”…not on how to further infringe the right of the people to keep and bear Arms because we “…do not have a strategy for dealing …” with IS.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      The best way to deal with the Caliphate in the US is to arm ourselves. Put some REAL FEAR OF FAILURE in the hearts and minds of the would be “terrorists.” Give them a healthy dose of their own medicine.

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        Agreed! We may be in for a rude awakening when we find-out how heavily we have already been infiltrated. These IS terrorists will attack us in our homeland sooner than later. I think most Americans do not have the capacity to conceptualize how dangerous this situation is. These guys will establish new paradigms for cruelty, savagery, fanaticism and barbarianism. They are the NAZI’s, Mongol Horde and Anti-Christ rolled into one. We need to get that clear in our minds to grasp what we must do to defend ourselves. Realistically, we have to choose between being the victims of genocide or the perpetrators of genocide. We will not be given any other viable choices, no matter what Barak Obama’s Unicorns whisper into his ear as he vacillates over what to do next in this matter.

    2. avatar Another Robert says:

      She’s a “member” (whatever that means) of MDA , according to her article.

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        Yeah, I knew that…it was, as you so aptly point-out, the “whatever that means” part that caused me to decide to omit mentioning it.

  34. avatar IdahoPete says:

    “…safe from gun violence … supporting common-sense measures … closing the deadly loopholes ….. Promoting gun safety … American children are no longer exposed …at friends’ houses … Supporting reasonable limits …. creating enforceable laws … ‘

    yadda yadda yadda The anti-gun formula ad nauseum.

  35. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Common guys, cut this woman some slack. She is a liberal and thus has always placed a premium on feeling over logic, on top of that, she was nearby during a traumatic event. Her job has no requirement for courage yet she feels survivors guilt and that she must do “something” when her very nature rebels against acknowledging only an armed person could have stopped Adam Lanza. Pity her, for she is unable to reconcile her situation and must retreat into what she knows is an inadequate position in which she will be repeatedly mocked publicly.

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      “pity her”? i am sorry when you take your insecurities, emotionalistic views, and ideological drive actions that limit the rights and freedoms of other people who refuse to lay down and be subjects and slaves of the ruling class and the state, You are shit out of luck when it comes to me being sorry for you, and i will only take pity on you when you are sad on election day and your candidates lose and when you bills crash and burn as the tinder box of emotions and lies that they so clearly are..

      Fuck pity..You come after my unalienable, natural, civil, and Constitutional rights, my lifestyle, my heritage, my culture, my means of protect it and that of my posterity, be forewarned you are about to start a chain of events that leads to a massive change in this nation, one that restores liberty, freedom, limited government, and maximum government…And if that means we have to do it after defending our birthrights..So be it…It will end bad for most parties involved by really badly for the statist..They are playing with forces that are beyond their comprehension.

  36. avatar Marcus Aurelius Payne says:

    Guns are used more often to save lives that you take them, so common sense would tell you it’s more important to keep guns available for those who choose to own them than to keep them away from bad guys.

    The federal government has been explicitly denied the authority to legislate the topic at all, so common sense would tell you all gun control is illegal.

  37. avatar Dave357 says:

    “Supporting reasonable limits on where, when and how loaded guns are carried and used in public.”

    I would like to know where, when, and how this organization thinks it IS reasonable to allow the carrying of guns in public. The impression one gets is that they are opposed to shall issue permit systems in general. Is that not the case?

    1. avatar Henry Bowman says:

      They never give an answer because they never have one to give, their masters think up their “final solutions” and they being the mindless drones they are blindly support them.

  38. avatar Henry Bowman says:

    Don’t use biased anti-gun language (loophole, universal, assault weapons, gun violence) use these alternatives.

    *exemption not loophole: the private sales exemption, is not a loophole, the laws were written with the knowledge of both pro-gun and pro-victim-disarmament groups to provide exception for sales now erroneously described as ‘loopholes’

    *personal defense weapons not assault weapons: we all know the assault weapon term is bullshit, the DHS uses personal defense weapons.

    *universal background checks AND/OR universal insurance = registration: And registration always leads to confiscation.
    criminal violence not gun violence: Guns are a tool, not a sentient being.

    *victim disarmament not reducing gun violence: Even Biden admits nothing proposed will increase the public safety.

    *Rights vs Privileges: Rights cannot be taken away, privileges

    Add any other terms you have noticed?

  39. avatar Gs650g says:

    The regulations she favors impacts the law abiding with minimal impact on crime and criminals.
    Another naive individual.

  40. avatar SIES says:

    Consider as you may be so inclined that:
    ‘within the idea associated with ‘truth’ are at least two readily identifiable elements. ’Actuality’, implying what actually ‘IS’ — and necessarily including, but not expressly limited to, the occurrence of ‘actual’ events.
    In contrast, ’Reality’, may be defined as most closely associated with ‘Human perception’.

  41. avatar The average American says:

    >common-sense measures that evidence shows will save lives [CITATION BADLY NEEDED]

  42. avatar Greg says:

    Just had a curious thought. It would be nice if the comments here could be auto-posted to the web site where the article originated – assuming comments were enabled. We’re mostly preaching to the choir here. The majority of the comments are really good, and seem better served out where the “un-washed” could see them and hopefully realize they are being fed a load of BS.

  43. avatar Ralph says:

    “Common sense” gun laws for the gun-grabbers and their idiot enablers begins and ends with a smelter.

  44. avatar Another Robert says:

    Well, I just read her article, which duly cites that “74 school shootings” figure. Oddly, the statement links to another article that rates the statement “mostly false”. Someone at the Indy Star had an attack of either honesty or stupidity.

  45. avatar TK says:

    “I’m talking about closing the deadly loopholes that allow minors and dangerous people like felons and domestic abusers to easily obtain guns.”
    -Let’s make a new law, prohibiting minors and felons and domestic abusers from legally purchasing guns.

    “Promoting gun safety so American children are no longer exposed to unacceptable levels of risk in their homes and at friends’ houses.”
    -The anti’s hate gun safety programs, because such programs promote the safe USE and Existence of GUNS. Their only view of guns is…NO GUNS.

    “Supporting reasonable limits on where, when and how loaded guns are carried and used in public.”
    -Yeah, that didn’t work in the past either. We’re heading the other direction on that one, chickee.

    “And creating enforceable laws that address gun trafficking and fraudulent purchases to keep illegal guns off our streets.”
    -Then how about actually ENFORCING the laws we already have against what you’re complaining about now?
    Hot damn! Here it is!

    “Obama Administration Loves Restrictions on Law Abiding Gun Owners. Criminals? Not So Much”

  46. avatar rlc2 says:

    Oh, this is making me sick. I dont fault this poor teacher for deciding to make a statement- I can appreciate she needs to feel she is doing something, anything, to prevent another horror.

    The people I fault are Bloomberg and Shannon Watts, and those of the other MDA Chapters who know full well that making a gun free zone even more free of law abiding protectors of their own children, is only setting up the next Adam Lanza to kill himself and a bunch of kids with him, in some sick twisted need for attention.

    Mental illness is under-addressed, funded, and facilities hugely inadequate, and police training almost nil.
    The only question I have is why it doesnt happen more often, given the huge holes in common-sense, and all the attention spent instead on guns, the tool, and only one of many tools used to hurt innocents.

    Remember Elliot Rodgers, and the Santa Barbara CA area state assembywoman who claimed to be working on mental health, and cop training, and instead signed up for the Gun Rights Restraining Order b.s.

    I just saw something in a California healthcare newsletter- cops get 6 hours at the academy. There is another 40 hours available in POST, but most cops dont get it.

    Thats it. And the legislation to fix it? Still pending….while Sacramento dreams up more ways to satisfy MDA sordid need for attention, and fund-raising dollars, and power, ostensibly for saving kids, while demonizing “the other” – republicans, tea-partiers, bitter clingers, the EVILLLL NRA!, etc.

    I am asking this teacher, and her compatriots.
    Examine your beliefs, and actions, and outcomes honestly, for the kids sake. Not your fuzzy wuzzy ego need.

    How many more schizos and other deranged types will hurt themselves or others, simply because we in society, let ourselves be ruled by Progtards who care more about their power and glory, than simply taking care of kids and the sick?

  47. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    I’m talking about closing the deadly loopholes that allow minors and dangerous people like felons and domestic abusers to easily obtain guns. Such as the gun show loop hole where most sellers are FFLs which do have submit to the NICS system and form 4473.

  48. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Promoting gun safety so American children are no longer exposed to unacceptable levels of risk in their homes and at friends’ houses. So all schools are going to have Eddie the Eagle and Hunter Safety Programs?

  49. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Supporting reasonable limits on where, when and how loaded guns are carried and used in public. We already have “Gun Free” and “Safe Passage Zones” which are free fire zones.

  50. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    And creating enforceable laws that address gun trafficking and fraudulent purchases to keep illegal guns off our streets. Illegal guns on the street are part of the illegal drug trade. Legalize drugs and dry up the drug trade under ground river and begin to dry up the “River of Iron”.

  51. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    As a teacher getting ready to go back to school in a community where gun violence took an unimaginable toll, I believe the best way to protect our students and protect ourselves is by voting for elected officials who will lead with gun sense.” – So why do heavily armed rural areas of Indiana not look like Iraq? Why do areas where they have politicians with “gun sense” look like Syria ?

  52. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    we all must do our part. But after Congress failed to act this year despite support from 90 percent of Americans who want background checks on all gun sales. This is not what the survey stated .It did not say all gun sales.

  53. avatar JoshuaS says:

    This isn’t even about the issues they claim they a pushing. They are happy with CA’s expansion of its safe storage law, e.g. But that law only applies if the gun is loaded and the mino doesn’t have parental permission to access the guns. So in other words, as long as the parents are cool, the law doesn’t apply.

    But the perception of victory is what matters, because the end is probably something like Mexico…a vague right to arms in the constitution, but nearly impossible de facto legally. Changes along the way do not matter in their details, how restrictive they may or may not be…only a perception of movement, in order to move the political center. I see this with CA which isn’t as terrible in many laws as people perceive, but that perception is encourage by the politicians, because if you think the law is harsher already, you have already accepted a harsher law for the future

    1. avatar Raul Ybarra says:

      What you say is completely right, but it is also only a small part of the story. They are playing a long game for the hearts and minds of the future. That means they’ll take all the short term defeats we can dish out if it means they get the incremental victory of a press release. For example, if it appears that Kroger isn’t going to cave I expect them to make that story go away as quietly as possible.

      Probably the most Imortant area we see this kind of tactic is in the education system. I keep seeing the anti’s drop the hammer on a kid for something assinine, parents complain, community outraged, school backs off. Everyone then high-fives the victory.

      (Forgive me for shouting, but…)


      They can afford to back off. They got the true victory because even though they backed down, they still left the “guns bad” message in the kids’ minds. Leaving those seeds are the real goal.

      For us to win in these cases, we have to have the persistence to push the case until we something that is either an admission of fault or a declaration of wrong such as a lawsuit victory or legislation like FL’s pop tart bill. But even that is not enough. We have to publicize those victories loudly and broadly. In other words, every time they pull one of these stunts they lose ground.

      The best thing for us is that I don’t expect them to give up this tactic even if it does fail. You’re dealing with an enemy that is operating on their feelings, even if they are quite cunning. This is a case of using the enemy’s weakness against himself and not allowing them to use our sense of tolerance against us.

    2. avatar Jay-El says:

      Changes along the way do not matter in their details, how restrictive they may or may not be…only a perception of movement, in order to move the political center. I see this with CA which isn’t as terrible in many laws as people perceive, but that perception is encourage by the politicians, because if you think the law is harsher already, you have already accepted a harsher law for the future

      I couldn’t agree more with your first point. It’s all about movement, which is why the MDA crowd is all about intense non-specificity (an urgent sense to do something that they haven’t defined, and they interpret requests to define it as invalidating their emotions).

      I couldn’t agree less, however, with your second assertion, about CA laws not being as terrible as people perceive. In fact, they are significantly worse than most people perceive. Case in point : Elliot Rodger. After the Santa Barbara tragedy earlier this year, the common belief among the uninformed (fueled by clueless media) was that California’s gun laws are weak. (Hint: listen for the phrase “just walk into a gun store,” as in “We need stronger laws when anyone can just walk into a gun store and walk out with high powered automatic weapons.”) And most people, when they hear “keep unsafe handguns off our streets and out of the hands of our children” do not realize that the roster is in fact a slow-moving ban and political-legal gamesmanship that has little to do with safety.

      I usually counter this kind of hysteria with a comparison to alcohol. There are countless serial inebriates lying in the streets of pretty much every major city, and if you added up the numbers of people who die from alcohol abuse on a yearly basis, it would be staggering. But that sad number would not be reduced one bit by laws banning fine wines. And by the way, nobody “needs” wine. And a ban would keep it out of the hands of children. And if it saves one life it’s worth it.

  54. avatar jamesii says:

    ‘A lie can travel half way around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.’ Churchill

  55. avatar Vincent Suppa says:

    Children are forbidden from purchasing firearms. Felons & Domestic Abusers have been banned from firearm ownership ENTIRELY for 43 years.

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