search
top

Is The Brady Campaign Abandoning “Assault Weapons” Issue?

Says Dan Gross of the Brady Campaign:

“There is a very specific type of gun that we want banned – none of them,” said Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign. “All we are trying to do is keep guns out of the hands of people we all agree that shouldn’t have them. Whether you love or hate guns, you agree that a convicted violent criminal, domestic abuser, someone who is dangerously mentally ill, or a would-be terrorist should not be able to get their hands on guns.”

Could have fooled me, Dan. Yep, not for bans at all. I have no idea how anyone could think otherwise. I get that Gross is a serial liar on par with Hillary Clinton, but this really stretches credulity. They are absolutely supportive of banning specific types of guns. If the Brady Campaign wished to change its stripes, it would have removed any reference to these pages. All gun control organizations favor banning any gun they have the political power to ban. Assault Weapons were just convenient targets after the movement to ban handguns went nowhere. It has nothing to do with crime control.

Massachusetts only had two crimes committed with “Assault Weapons” in the past five years, yet their Attorney General still chose by fiat to grossly expand the ban. The only proponent of gun control who’s been willing to be honest about what a farce this issue is has been Professor Adam Winkler. In some ways, this issue has been beneficial to gun rights activists because it motivates our coalition to action. As I’ve said before, I’d hate to be dealing with a gun control movement that was very careful to not overreach.

6 Responses to “Is The Brady Campaign Abandoning “Assault Weapons” Issue?”

  1. TS says:

    I’ll believe they’ve changed when he publicly debates MDA on why we shouldn’t ban “assault weapons”.

  2. P-Dog says:

    Correction: two murders committed with ANY rifle. The rifles might have been lever action or bolt action or single shot rifles for all we know (but realistically yes, they probably were MSRs).

  3. Chas says:

    They will never go away. Are they saying that if they get background checks for transfers that they will close up shop and go out of business? No. So the appropriate response to these con artists, weasels and bullies is, “Fuck off, you stinking liars!”

  4. I’m pretty fed up with that whole “we all agree” argument. I don’t agree at all. Either you believe self defense is a God-Given right or you don’t. There is no “unless” or asterisk on that.

    The kind of government that we need to protect ourselves from is exactly the sort that would declare us all criminals or insane for opposing them. If you aren’t criminal or insane enough to be locked up, the government should not be restricting your right to self defense.

  5. Brad says:

    Gross applies the big-lie technique to politics. And reporters let him (and Hillary) get away with it because they are on the same side.

  6. Chas says:

    These anti-gun non-profits are addicted to the cheap money they make off of their fundraising mailers. That’s their incentive to ALWAYS find some new angle to push for more gun laws. We need to criminalize organized activity against the Second Amendment. The First Amendment was never intended to be used to destroy the Second Amendment. These relentless efforts to rape our constitutional rights as Americans are not acceptable in a supposedly civilized society. Even if that effort doesn’t succeed, it will be amusing to hear their hypcritical howling about the importance of THEIR constitutional rights. If it succeeds, Shannon Watts and Leah Gunn Barrett will have to get real jobs, and stop trying to sell their constitutional rights for cash.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. SayUncle » Of course, he’s lying - […] Gross of the Brady Campaign to Cling to Relevancy says the organization doesn’t want to ban guns. Except for…
top