Thanks to Todd Vandermyde for pointing this out, but it would seem our friends at the Brady Campaign have used violent target images themselves:
Remember, this is the same organization who’s President just said, “Sarah Palin used gun “target” metaphors encouraging voters to defeat Rep. Giffords and others.” Pot, meet Kettle.
Hat tip to Carl from Chicago for helping put together this post.
UPDATE: You can find the full Brady mailing here.
hmmm – wonder what Joan Peterson will say about this – something non-emotional I’m sure. Probably ‘nonsense, let’s move along’.
Great find!
Don’t forget this one as well…
http://www.amazon.com/Every-Handgun-Aimed-You-Handguns/dp/1565847059
I think what the Bradys are trying to say in this ad is that “if you vote for Sandy Cole, you are making it more likely that your child will be shot!”.
Quite a disgusting tactic, but not quite the same thing as showing a picture of your opponent with a sniper’s crosshairs on his face. Not that Sarah Palin’s ad did anything of the sort, but this is what they are trying to claim.
shouldn’t the trigger be set further back if the hammer is cocked back?
That is incredibly tasteless. Wow.
So much mis-information about guns and with guns as symbols.
“Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis teum est.”
-Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Markie Marxist sez: “Ha! My commie compadres in the MSM will never let an image like that see the light of day! It would defeat the purpose of criticizing Palin’s crosshair image. Do you really think Diane Sawyer would put up an image like that on the screen? Maybe you’ll view it on “The View”! Ha! Ha! We Marxists own the media! It’s good to own the thought police! Oh, and do remember to be ‘civil’! We like our enemies to be civil – it neuters them! Ha! Ha!”
“shouldn’t the trigger be set further back if the hammer is cocked back?” Shouldn’t the hammer be down on a Beretta 92 that has the safety on?
they must have compensated or ‘shoped the image to make it more menacing.
Or they used a Marui replica. They don’t replicate the decocker.
Mobo is correct. This is clearly different from Palin’s use of crosshairs because this is very specifically about guns whereas the Palin piece was claimed disingenously not to be.
I’m sort of surprised you guys don’t see that?
Ash, I do not believe that Palin’s ad was intended as an incitement to violence. I think you may have misread my post.
The Brady ad is meant to stir up fear among parents in order to scare them into opposing a specific candidate for his opposition to a gun control measure.
The Palin ad was about “targeting” vulnerable seats in the house through the ballot box. It has been interpreted as a thinly veiled threat by those who wish to see it that way.
In any case, the Brady ad is disgusting, but I wouldn’t characterize it as “eliminationist rhetoric”. The analogy just doesn’t hold water.
Chas,
“My commie compadres in the MSM will never let an image like that see the light of day! It would defeat the purpose of criticizing Palin’s crosshair image.”
Probably because you can’t buy a whole lot of airtime for around five grand, which I think is what the BradyPAC spent in a recent election…!
Super catch! I just linked to you.