search
top

The Silence of the Anti-Gunners

Many journalists have taken the attitude that they should try to shame people out of gun ownership, so Project Veritas decided to challenge them about how proud they are of their non-gun owner status. Would they be willing to actually tell the world that they don’t own guns in a way that’s personal? The same kind of personal they made it for gun owners in New York whose houses were put on a map…

I suspect you already know the answer – not a single one of them accepted the sign to declare themselves non-gun owners.

One of the most interesting parts of the video is the section with the husband of the publisher of the Journal News who admits that he’s so anti-gun, he fled the country to avoid them; yet, they gladly hire armed security that he brags are armed. He also continues on how we need gun control that allows nothing more than a single shot – which is less than what his armed security detail is likely carrying.

One of the editors of the Journal News had her armed security detail try to threaten the “anti-gun group” with calling the police for trespass – while they stood on public property. I guess that reflects their views on any so-called “rights” of these “little people” to assemble and even walk down a sidewalk.

7 Responses to “The Silence of the Anti-Gunners”

  1. Matt says:

    So what does recent events do to their armed security? Is this guy going to demand they drop their magazines to count the rounds within to ensure only 7 are present, per the new law? Or is that law only for the rest of the state, not important people like him?

    • Rob Crawford says:

      There are two classes of people who aren’t going to be hassled by this “law” — the elite (and their immediate servants) and the career criminals.

  2. New York Stagehand says:

    In addition, we need to get the “Gun Free” meme working FOR us! Encourage those who are anti-gun to put prominent “No-guns” stickers on their front doors. That way they can see how well it actually works.

  3. New York Stagehand says:

    Continued from above (due to wifi error…)

    They should also put them on their cars and wear buttons! If they really believe it, they should stand for it!

    WE need to be prouder and LOUDER about our support. Wear pro gun Agitprop as much as possible and keep educating those around us.

  4. Wolfman says:

    Besides the irony of ‘I support you, just not in public’ two people struck me in this. First, the guy who comments that ‘it might encourage someone with a gun to barge in here.’ So he admits that flaunting your inability tobdefend yourself makes you vulnerable. Also, he’s either admitting that criminals carry guns and he’s an easy target, or he really believes that otherwise lawful gun owners are due to snap any second now. Either way, he’s not showing much confidence in disarmament. Second, the columnist whose friend hailed him out for being anti-gun because then THEY couldn’t revolt against the evil Right Wing. I am opposed to government overreach when ANYONE does it. That guy, apparently, only worries if its ‘the wrong sort’ thats in power. Look buddy, the rules don’t care about ideology. The RULERS do- so if you want ultimate control with no political or legal backlash, you better stay in power, no? Who is he willing to sacrifice for ‘the Revolution’?

  5. If the media truly want to wage an all-out propaganda war as Sen Manchin alleges, then we should not play defense.

    We must play offense and counterattack, in a responsible, legal, non-violent manner.

    These people — for the most part — have little personal moral courage, apparently little commitment to their beliefs, and will be vulnerable to highly personalized incentives/motivation. The mapping of Journal News employees demonstrated a vulnerability.

    Invading their personal privacy like a personal paparazzi team is one obvious way to influence them. I’m sure there’s more legal and non-violent options that people will come up with that fall a bit short of tar and feathers.

top