Previous Post
Next Post

Jesse Jackson tells that “The issue is not only about gun control. It’s about automatic, semiautomatic weapons. The same weapons that was used to kill people in Aurora, Colorado could be used to bring down airplanes. This is a matter of national security. You do not hunt deer or elk or rabbits with these guns. They only kill people. and they should be banned.”

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. It’s always fascinating to me when people just make shit up. Exaggerations fall across the political spectrum, but what he’s saying has exactly zero basis in reality.

    • doesn’t really matter though, does it? Progressives will.never give up their dream of total government dominion over our lives.

    • The U.S has three gun homicides per 100,000 people. That’s four times as many as Switzerland, ten times as many as India, 20 times as many as Australia and England.

      Maybe easy access to guns is not the problem, but what is? Do we have more depressed people?

      As I write this, the news is showing pictures from another shooting, this time in Milwaukee. Every time something like this happens, the gun nuts get all upset that the government is going to regulate the easy access to guns.

      I haven’t got the facts yet, but, honestly, guns nuts should be worried. The government should regulate. I am sure the facts will eventually show that the gun was obtained legally, or whatever.

      But I am still mad. Why is it easier to get a gun than Sudafed?

      • It’s a big mistake to take the strict bean-counter, statistical approach to public policy.

        How does liberty find its way into the statistics?

        Even if your three gun homicides per 100,000 statistic does represent my chances of being gunned down on my way to Safeway. I am more than comfortable with those odds.

        Btw, guns nuts are very worried about brain-dead statistics-based social engineering. Everyone should be.

      • Anyone who thinks “it’s easier to get a gun than Sudafed” doesn’t know anything about firearms. Anyone who thinks someone can shoot down a plane with a .223/5.56 doesn’t know anything about firearms. Anyone who doesn’t understand “shall not be infringed” doesn’t know anything about the founding principles of The United States.

        • Seriously. That Sudafed line officially makes Low Budget Dave TTAG’s trolliest troll. I just can’t take anyone seriously after a comment like that.

      • Oh and regarding the difficulty of buying Sudafed. Look no further than the bean-counter policymaker who took that play straight from the playbook you advocate right here.

        USA has x methamphetamine deaths per 100,000. India has y methamphetamine deaths per 100,000. Y is 25% of x. India has no Sudafed. Hey, let’s ban Sudafed!

        Get it? Stop whining about limits on your liberty while advocating for limiting the liberty of others.

      • FLAME DELETED the problem is you know the answer, you simply refuse to acknowledge it.

        Firstly, demographics. If you took out gang-related violence and the “inner city” violence that government-worshipping progs like you helped create, the US’s gun violence stats would be reduced by a staggering amount.

        Second, like all gun-obsessed antis lacking the will and morality to see beneath the symptoms, you focus only on guns and not violence in general (because it’s not about guns, it’s about control). Go check the UK’s overall violent crime stats compared to ours.

        Lastly, as someone before mentioned, we in the US (at least true Americans) value the spirit of freedom and personal self-reliance, with personal liberty placed higher than the illusion of government-controlled safety. If you want to revert to living in an adult playpen with your government nanny controlling your life, go live somewhere else. Your efforts to turn this great nation into a soul-crushing police state are reprehensible.

      • But I am still mad. Why is it easier to get a gun than Sudafed?

        Where did you come up with that bull feces?

      • “Easier to buy a gun than a bottle of Sudafed?”

        By that comment, you’re admitting that you’ve never tried to buy a gun and that you have absolutely no idea what tou’re talking about.

        Nice fail, comrade! Giving you a keyboard is like giving that Jackass guy a skateboard and a can of whipped cream: hilarious and cringe-worthy at the same time.

      • Maybe easy access to guns is not the problem, but what is? Do we have more depressed people?

        I would say we have more black people than any of the countries you mentioned. And statistically, blacks make up a vast majority of both the victims and perpetrators in homicides. How about banning them instead?

      • “But I am still mad. Why is it easier to get a gun than Sudafed?”

        What an utter load of pigswill. For most it is not easier to get a gun than sudafed even accounting for face to face private gun sales. For most you walk up to the pharmacy, hand over your ID and bingo. I can walk into a state liquor store and buy $250+ of booze easier than a gun or sudafed.

        Do you perchance live in Oregon like I do? Then you might have a point. We have to pay for a visit to a doctor to get a prescription for sudafed. I’ve done the math, in most cases it is quicker and easier for me to make a 140 mile round trip to Washington state to buy it from behind a counter. I still have to follow fed laws and give up my ID to buy the 1-2 boxes I’m allowed. Oh, and in Oregon meth use isn’t down, the cost isn’t up, all its done is supposedly kill the local meth production, and raise the costs for law abiding citizens 300% or more.

      • What alleged value is there to counting gun homicides separately from other homicides? Aside from your anti-gun agenda, I mean.

        The most common murder weapon in Saint Lucia, where there are almost no privately owned guns and four times as many homicides per 100 thousand than the United States, is the cutlass (a tool for harvesting coconuts, not the pirate sword). To bad none of the hacking victims had access to a firearm. Or are those deaths less important because they didn’t involve firearms?

        Also, why do you think it is that North Dakota, a state with population density identical to that of Canada, has a homicide rate identical to Canada’s? Must be the lack of guns in North Dakota as compared to Canada, right?

      • Last time I checked (and I just bought some sudafed two days ago), all they do is ask for your ID to get sudafed (and a few places record sales). They do not perform FBI background checks or have wait times for nasal decongestant. Nor is there anyone crying for bans on “high capacity” sudafed boxes. You also don’t need a permit to carry sinus medicine in your pocket in public. Maybe Illinois will issue SOID cards soon (sudafed owners ID cards) :P. Sudafed also costs a hell of a lot less than a firearm.

        • It was just a joke, for heaven’s sakes. No one honestly thinks the regulation on Sudafed is worse than on guns.

          You read my entire post, and that was the only thing you disagreed with?

      • dave, stop trolling you ass hat.

        after you said the sudafed line, you pretty much discredited and highlighted yourself as one of those anti-gun idiots that doesn’t know jack shit.

        and no you were not joking. you were dead serious.

        • That is hardly trolling.

          Trolling is when I point out that it is always good to see people who write and talk like a third grade dropout (with a potty mouth) disagree with me.

      • While there are roughly 30K firearm deaths in the US, unfortunate, yes, but there are at least 2.5 million defensive uses of firearms in the US yearly of which most go unreported. No rifles in my state are sold without a background check, making it hard for anyone with mental illness or a criminal background to purchase them. Also, the police have no legal obligation to protect you or your property from criminal harm, i suggest arming yourself.

        • Mike, Kleck and Gertz’s claim of 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year is derived from a telephone survey of 5,000 American adults conducted in 1992. 56 people responded that they used a gun in the past year, so Kleck just multiplied out the numbers.

          There are several problems with this study, but let me take a moment to name three:
          1. Telescoping. My uncle drew his gun once when he thought he was about to be robbed. This happened about three years ago, but it is fresh in his mind for the obvious reason. In every such survey, he would report that the event happened within the year, without even meaning to lie. In the same survey, for example, Kleck estimated the rate of robberies at five times the national average.

          2. Political responses. People who support gun rights tend to over-report successful use of guns, because it helps support gun rights. If 1% of the survey responders gave an answer based on politics instead of actual fact, then the real rate of defensive gun uses in the U.S. is .0012, or about 240,000 per year. This is still a very high number, but the point is that the statistical margin for error is larger than the statistic.

          3. Outright lies. People tend to offer responses that make themselves look more important or more interesting than they really are. In a similar study in 1994, 81 out of 1500 people responded that they had personal contact with aliens from another planet. So if we believe 2.5 million successful gun uses each year, then we must also believe that 10.8 million people have communicated with (or been kidnapped by) extra-terrestrial aliens.

          From a 2A point of view, people should have the right to defend themselves, whether they do or not. And Gary Kleck can still argue that the number of crimes prevented is greater than the number of crimes abetted.

          But the 2.5 million number is hopeless. Any argument that depends on the Kleck/Gertz study for support is a losing argument.

      • Funny, as you are required to show the same ID for a Sudafed as to purchase a firearm. It’s not harder for one or the other, save for the forms to be filled out and for handguns, a database check.
        Now, the government DOES regulate firearms. The databases hold mentally ill persons names, but if the states don’t bother inputting that information, the system fails.
        So, that obviously means we need MORE laws to not follow, or something.

        Why are some so keen to punish the sane, law abiding citizens over the acts of a few insane people and criminals?
        Why aren’t those people screaming for knife control, since yet ANOTHER man attacked crowds in NYC with a knife?
        And baseball bat control…

      • The statistics that are offered in countries that have banned firearms are totally misleading. Gun crimes may eventually go down but violent crimes consistently go up. There are numerous examples, but I’ll just mention one for now. After the UK banned guns their violent crime rate went up by forty percent. You are four times more likely to be a victim of violent crime there than in the United States, even if you restrict statistics to our major cities. Now if you look in rural areas where the majority or at least a significant amount of the population owns firearms even per capita the amount of violent crimes are extremely low. The real statistics show that legal ownership of firearms prevents a tremendous amount of tragedy and crime. Also if you look at the cases for the last ten years of shootings where a large number of people were killed or wounded in the United States you’ll have a very difficult time finding a significant number that took place in which people could legally carry firearms. On top of all of that there is this little thing called the Second Amendment, which was originally created not to allow people to hunt, but to instead deter, defend, and if need be fully engage a potentially tyrannical government. This was meant to be another check and balance system when all of the others put in place had failed, and it has been the primary reason that there have been so few military attacks on our homeland in the past. Jackson, like so many other extreme leftists has no real idea about the truths and doesn’t care about them. That type doesn’t want the average citizen armed and able to defend themselves, but instead only want themselves to feel safe and secure, so that they can control others. One excellent example of this would be a past president of Handgun Inc, that shot an intruder with his illegally owned handgun. Another excellent example would be a very outspoken anti-gun rights Congressman who recently shot an intruder in his home. These people are selfish and arrogant, and they could care less about anyone else. Samuel Colt’s first advertisement said it all. God may have created man, but Sam Colt made them equal, and if there’s one thing that elitists don’t want is for other people, especially not the common folk to be equal to them.

  2. Never misses an opportunity to put his ugly mug in front of the cameras, right? Especially since here the shooter was white as were most of the victims.

    Regardless, not sure how a ban on semi-autos would stop someone from shooting at a plane with one…since if there’s a law against shining a laser pointer at a plane, I’m pretty sure you’re already banned from shooting one. Besides, I’m no pilot, but I’m thinking that it’d be hard to imagine someone’s semi-auto taking a plane down anyway…

    • It’s difficult to hit an aircraft with a fully automatic weapon. An average citizen with a semiautomatic firearm has precisely three chances of hitting a moving aircraft.
      Slim. Fat. None.
      Consider the documentary footage from WWII, when soldiers and sailors fired thousands of rounds and occasionally hit an incoming aircraft!

      Sorry, Jackson never misses a chance to get in front of a camera and get publicity.
      The good thing is, nearly nobody listens to him anymore. He’s discredited himself so many times in the past.

  3. heay Jesse, a 5.56 cannot penatreate the skin of an airplane, but my high powered bolt action 308 can. You have it backwards. By your definition my hunting rifle is more a threat to national security then an AR-15.

    • Actually, a 5.56mm FMJ round CAN penetrate the skin of an aircraft. Easily.
      Damaging something important with one is unlikely though.
      And that is assuming that the shooter COULD hit the moving aircraft. Something even the military has a hard time doing!

  4. jesse jackson is part of the establishment. armed peasents scare him and the rest of the faux royalty. it;s tough to rebel without the proper tools and that tool knows it.

  5. Not used to bring down airplanes I 9/11: AR-15.

    Used to bring down airplanes on 9/11: Box cutters.

    Shut up “Reverend.”

  6. Oh, yeah, and then there’s also the practical difficulty of even hitting the plane in a vital organ like an engine or a pilot. For that, I’m guessing you’d want a bolt-action “sniper” rifle to have the precision for such a shot…just the same kind you might take an elk or deer down with. Hmmmm… Don’t tell the Rev’rend or he’ll wanna ban those, too. (ya think?)

    • No guns for Negros, if it was successful, would solve most of the gun crime here in the US.

      I’ve only watched the first 30 seconds, and all ready know that video is full of shit. They are trying to imply that blacks became enslaved because blacks were disarmed by their government. When in reality the North Atlantic Slave Trade functioned in large part, because white kingdoms/corporations were giving black kingdoms guns in exchange for slaves.

      • This has nothing to do with slavery per se, but thanks for completely dismissing an idea before actually understanding or even hearing it.

        I always appreciate it when people disqualify themselves from intelligent discussions in such a thorough and immediate way.

        It’s a real time saver.

        • So I tried watching it again, I made it to 1:30 before I had to turn it off. The old black guy says:

          “Why is the gang banger who has a Saturday night special in his pocket given more rights than the average everyday citizen? Even though he is illegally armed, he has a right to defend himself, and you have not the ability to defend yourself.”

          Which makes me ask
          – What additional rights does the gang banger have?
          – If that known gang banger shoots someone and is caught, is he not treated worse by the criminal justice system than a average citizen? Such as being presumed guilty by the police, even if it was obviously self defense?
          – How does a gang banger with a gun make you unable to defend yourself?

          I really dont feel like banging my head against a wall for 20 minutes listening to that video. Its just what I expected from a org. called Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership.

  7. Reverend?? Says who? There is nothing reverential about this pig. Al Sharpton is another ass clown that likes the reverend title and is the furthest thing from the meaning of the title. Ministers of Satan get no respect from me. None. They are my enemy.

      • Sharpton: Ordained at 10yrs old.
        Jackson Sr: After claiming to be with Dr. King when he was shot (there’s evidence that says that he’s lying) and told everyone else around him at that event to keep quiet (while he himself opened up his mouth) he was ordained shortly after.

        They both have the right to use the term reverend, but from everything I see come out of their mouths, they are misguided at best, opportunistic wolves in sheep’s clothing at worst. Either way, they seem to ignore anyone who tries to correct them, and then make some issue out of it that makes them look good. They give both religion and equal rights a bad name.

        I refuse to support anyone who, takes their “faith” and “religion” and twist it out of context so much that it has nothing to do with it (even slightly,) but has everything to do with their own personal gain.

        They may be pastors, but the blood of everyone they’ve misled and fleeced is on their hands and heads.

        • I refuse to support anyone who, takes their “faith” and “religion” and twist it out of context so much that it has nothing to do with it (even slightly,)

          So its ok to think a burning bush talked to some guy 2,000 years ago, or to think some superior mythical higher being exists but can’t be proven? But its not ok to think that all white people are out to get you, or that semi-autos are a threat to national security?

          All religious people are crazy, the more they are in to it, the crazier they get.

        • Matt

          As getting into a debate about religion IS off topic for a gun blog, I’ll only mention this once:

          2000 years ago? This time-frame is incorrect, and the use of it *could* construe a lack of knowledge about what you consider looney toons stuff. (If you wish to really convince the loons of their insanity, perhaps you should study their sacred text in depth.) The book of the Bible and Torah that contains the references to that event was written 1450-1410 BCE.

          One also must remember this: “Absence of Evidence is Not Evidence of Absence.”

          Now, back to the topic at hand… the fallacy of Mr Jackson’s claim of how “simple” semi-auto rifles that look scary are a danger to national security….

    • Actually, Jackson attended a first-rate divinity school. And promptly dropped out. Just like he attended a first-rate undergraduate school — and promptly dropped out.

    • Banning Little Caesars chains that don’t open on time and make me waste half my lunch hour is a matter of national security.

  8. Oh, they’re banning semis, are they? That’ll clear the traffic, but I think quite a few people will be out of jobs…

    Anyhoo, I’d like to mee the man that can put a semi .308, or otherwise through a 747 at the speed it is going, at the angle you would have to shoot, and with the wind, Mythbusters 90 degree shot with a bullet anyone? Have you seen how much they miss with FULL AUTO ANTI AIR cannons that are already calibrated in WWII Pacific footage? Those planes are way closer. There’s a reason they used Flak on Bombers, and they still missed with those. I am using WWII references, because even with all of our weapons tech, that is basically what we would be doing, considering we don’t even have targeting computers on our FALs and PTR91s. You would have to have to have a data feed right from the cockpit of the craft to make those calculations, and if you can get that data feed the problem is bigger than your EVIL semi or bolt rifle. Oh, an I’d like to show him the rabbit fur liners on my boots that the rabbit donated to me, and I DIDN’T shoot with my AR-15 cause I DON’T hunt with my EVIL rifle appearantly.

  9. You ever have that nightmare where you keep running from something but can never seem to get any further away? That’s why way it is with trying to educate idiots. It seems like every morning, there’s some new fresh brand of stupidity for intelligent people to contend with. It never ends. Fortunately, this pile of walking dog shit has established himself such that only fellow morons would even listen to him.

    Further, there’s not a doubt in my mind that aforementioned pile of dog shit knows damn well about the racist roots of gun control, and how gun control does indeed continue to keep “his people” victims. He relies on it. After all, without the helpless masses stuck in never-ending loops of victim mentality, where would his revenue source come from? Straight from the “progressive” playbook. He wants to truly help “his people” about as much as Sotomayor and Kagen truly care about Constitutional integrity.

  10. Is the good reverend trying to break into stand-up comedy? I actually threw my head back and laughed when I read his comment.

  11. In today’s news. Acknowledged hack and media whore Jessie Jackson, realizing that his face hadn’t been in the news for quite some time, staged a yellow journalism interview.

  12. Where are the Reverend’s comments on the carnage that takes place in Chicago every weekend?

    (insert sound of crickets chirping here)

    Oh, that’s right. Deaths by the dozens in a Democratic, black enclave… those don’t count.

  13. Rifles overall were used to murder fewer people in 2011 than knives, blunt objects, and even fists and feet. Unchallenged lies become the truth.

    • It would be mighty interesting if they did, as not only does Chicago still have a gun ban, Illinois does not allow concealed carry for anyone. Except cops. Of course.

  14. I’m glad Jesse told me this. I’ll have my semi 20mm at his house by tomorrow. I know he’ll know exactly what to do with it.

  15. Banning something doesn’t mean that those so inclined won’t be able to get their hands on it. Adultery is banned but it didn’t stop Jesse from, uh, getting his hands on it. So to speak.

  16. This thing of guns shooting down aircraft is always “amusing.” Off the top of my head, I don’t know of a single occassion in the US where a jet aircraft has been downed by gun fire. Second, as several have noted, it is nearly impossible to hit an aircraft traveling 500 mph; the only time you could hit one would be a while landing or takeoff, when the speeds drop to a more reasonable 100 mph or so, but hitting one is a long way from downing one. And this is to say nothing of the fact that commercial aircraft fly five or six miles up. Nonetheless, this same lame excuse was used by Governor Schwarzenegger to ban .50 cal rifles in California (home of the Barret). So where do these bizarre claims come from?

    • This thing of guns shooting down aircraft is always “amusing.” Off the top of my head, I don’t know of a single occassion in the US where a jet aircraft has been downed by gun fire.

      Small arms fire was the #1 cause of US aircraft losses in Vietnam. A fighter might be traveling 500+ mph, but a helicopter sure as hell isnt. I know Hueys (and most modern helicopters) are jet turbine powered.

      • in vietnam, small arms fire could mean anything up to and including belt fed heavy machine guns. and very few choppers were brought down by a single shooter regardless of weapons type. with a rifle against modern jet aircraft such as airliners you could only hope to hitthem when they’re low and slow,such as take off and landing. most air port perimeter security is far enough away from the flight path to put them out of range of most man portable firearms.

        • in vietnam, small arms fire could mean anything up to and including belt fed heavy machine guns.

          No, belt fed heavy machine guns are not small arms. From wikipedia
          “Small arms is a term of art used by armed forces to denote infantry weapons an individual soldier may carry. The description is usually limited to revolvers, pistols, submachine guns, carbines, assault rifles, battle rifles, multiple barrel firearms, sniper rifles, squad automatic weapons, light machine guns (i.e. M60), and sometimes hand grenades”

          and very few choppers were brought down by a single shooter regardless of weapons type
          What a pointless comment. You could say very few Americans were brought down by a single shooter regardless of weapons type.

          most air port perimeter security is far enough away from the flight path to put them out of range of most man portable firearms.
          I know the US’s busiest airport, Ohare in Chicago isnt out side the range of .308 let alone something bigger. And the only thing which serves as a permiter is a chain link fence, which is easily defeated.

        • Did I miss something? No one ever told me that Nam was part of the United States. And although I will concede that Hueys had gas turbine engines, I don’t think that qualifies them as “jet aircraft.” Commercial airliners travel at 500+ mph (up to about 560); military jet aircraft, even the slow ones, can do 650, the rest doing 1000 mph or better.

        • Well Matt, when passenger jets in the US start hovering at tree-top heights on a regular basis, your statistics might have some applicability to the topic.

  17. The same weapons that was used to kill people in Aurora, Colorado could be used to bring down airplanes.

    If I recall my infantry anti-aircraft drill from way back when, it involved coordinated bursts of automatic fire from a squad-sized group – and that was generally regarded as an optimistic alternative to tucking your head between your legs and kissing your a$$ goodbye.

    • kind of interesting that matt knows that ohare’s perimeter defenses are easy to defeat and he knows that the aircraft are within range of a specific cartridge, the 308.

      • Not really. The highway and several major roads go right by the perimeter. And who really thinks a chain link fence secures anything? Who hasnt climbed over one as a kid? If your a OFWG who cant climb one, just buy a pair of bolt cutters.

        Take a look at google maps, it is really close to plenty of roads. Its not like you need a super long range rifle.

  18. The dangerous part is that the majority of the populous is uninformed and/or misinformed about guns is buying this hook,line and sinker. The antis will continue to distort, lie, and fabricate “facts” with full hysteria until they win. TPTB allow lower income areas of fall into lawlessness and play on the emotions of the entire community in which it happens. It is interesting that statistically of the top 10 States on the murder list are governed by Mayors with a (D). The other is an “independent”. This is just like in society, it’s the guy that hits back (defends himself, et all) that gets the harsher punishment. I saw Rahm Emanuel’s throw down to the thugs that shot that little girl in Chicago. Quote: “How dare you!?”
    There’s nothing I can write about J Jackson that isn’t common knowledge. His prejudices are well documented. But like I said, people for some reason give him credibility.

    • Well…

      Those who listen to Mr. Jackson anyway. Those who have low opinions on what he has to say are fairly immune to the words coming out of his mouth. But yes, those who do listen to his words as having truth in them will fall for the lies.

  19. Why hasn’t anyone commended RF on the URL of this TTAG page? It’s the funniest part of the post.

    “Anti-aircraft Glock 23”

  20. Ill say it once,ill say it a thousand times.A few more high profile incidents,it’s a done deal.Esp after cheap,stack em deep.

  21. Jesse – why don’t you spend some quality time with your first born son. He is a mentally ill nut and frankly, when he “recovers”, the grand jury will indict him for soliciting bribes for Blago. He is going to jail Jesse. It is not racism so don’t even bother trying to taint the jury pool. Just enjoy seeing him face to face and being able to be within 6 inches because within the year, Junior is gonna be IN PRISON for 20 yrs!!!!

  22. You know what does bring down jets? Geese. Maybe we could ban Geese. Or maybe we should let people have guns, and they could use their guns to shoot the geese so fewer airplanes would crash.

  23. Hey Jessie!
    Why doan you go smear some victim’s blood on yourself? Hey Jessie! Would it inner up your schedule to go protest the demise of De-Troyt’s Nay Bore Hoods? Hey Jessie! ain’t you a Disney channel show?

  24. Well, tell Jesse that we will remove the second amendment, when we remove the 13th and the 15th amendments, see how happy his pathetic ass is then.

  25. Folks, just to give a statistic, since a poster mentions US gun deaths being 10 times as much as India. Speaking from India, we have gun deaths only 2-4% of total homicides. Do the maths.

  26. it BLOWS ME AWAY that ignorance like this babbling fool can get onto national news and just spew BS that he has no information or knowledge on.

    freaking blows. me. away. (pun intended lol)

    limiting or restricting guns isnt going to keep criminals from getting guns. they get them illegally……. not like everyone else who LEGALLY wants to have one.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here