Sebastian sent me a link to Joan Peterson’s latest ramblings, and I truly could not believe what was on the screen before me. I don’t mean the standard non-sensical ramblings with her own set of facts that change depending on what argument she wants to make. She’s actually questioning whether people who even own gun-themed clothing are reasonable enough to have children. She asserts that people who make such decisions may not be acceptable role models. This is what she has to say about the 17-year-old who was stopped by TSA for having a gun design on her purse:
The teen is pregnant so one has to wonder what role model this will be for her young child? There’s a message here and it’s not one of “peace on earth, good will towards men.”
This is not some sort of fantasy of a random gun banner in a thoughtless Facebook comment or careless tweet. This is “thoughtful discussion” from a board member of a group that some members of Congress actually take serious when it comes to policy on our fundamental rights. She considers it reasonable to question whether a home with a women who merely owns a purse with a gun design on it makes her a fit parent.
It almost makes me wonder what Joan would really have to say about the NRA tricycle and NRA jeep. Or, even better, what would she really say about the fact that there was a bidding war for the tricycle at our Friends of NRA dinner in September?
25 thoughts on “Should Pro-Gun People Be Allowed to Have Children?”
I have to admit Bitter, I find this woman’s suggestion even more irritating than you, given my experiences with abused children. Oddly enough, I rarely see anything promoting “gun culture”, but have seen a number of instances of the opposite…
So she’s wants Eugenics! Stop the people that you disagree with from reproducing, and if they do; take the kids away and indoctrinate them into the collective.
Remember…when a pro-2nd Amendment person writes something, it reflects ALL the collective opinion of the NRA and gunny-dom.
When she, a board member of a “national” organization, writes something…she’s only one person expressing her opinion.
She is becoming more and more strident, nonsensical, and desperate. Her comments have dropped by 90%.
Dang, Right Wing Wacko beat me to the punch posting his eugenics comment. Joan Peterson does not realize how despotic she sounds. She cloaks herself in her “victim hood” and wants all of us to be like dumb defenseless sheep ready for the slaughter.
Thus, I now question those innocent, sweet statements like hers about “peace on earth” and such. While I agree that is the goal all sane people would want, we realize that only the very insane believe that it is possible without Divine Intervention.
That is the fantasy world that they live in; where “the trigger pulls the finger”, where all gun owners are a provocation away from snapping and killing everyone, and that if we add enough gun control laws we can end private firearm ownership and end all gun violence and achieve world peace. Yeah, right.
Brady Board Member, and she’s also one of the directors for “Protect Minnesota” which is the Joyce Foundation AstroTurf in the area.
She’s actually such a prolific anti-rights activist she’s got multiple letterheads she can lobby under.
And the people all the way up, and down endorse her disturbed world-view.
We are NOT dealing with sane people.
Weer’d Beard has it correct; she is not sane. She has a delusional view of things, and gets absurdly hysterical at anything that challenges her fantasy view of the world. The woman needs serious therapy before she slips any deeper into her bizarre personal world.
Yeah, boring and typical.
To wit, roughly: “You had a picture of a gun on something, therefore you’re a murderous deathbeast who hates all goodness and peace.”
Not even worth responding to, really.
(Though the idea that “having an outline of a single-action revolver on your purse” means anything other than an old-west motif is boggling. Or would be, if not for long exposure to Japete-style reasoning.
Nothing in any of the interviews suggests the woman in question has any idea about firearms or gun rights at all, beyond “this was not a gun, what the hell?”.
Which is fair.
Someone should tell the TSA apparatchiks that “replica gun” means “something you could fool someone with, into thinking it was a real gun”.
Not “a one-sided piece of pot metal bolted to a piece of leather sewn to a purse and also much smaller than a real revolver”.)
After reading several of her posts over the past many months … why one should even give a damn what Joan Peterson thinks is beyond me.
Educate me if I am wrong, and if we should give a damn what she thinks. But once I read enough nonsense out of a person, I just ignore them.
Why? Because like Bitter said, she’s not just some run of the mill Anti, she’s on the national board of the Brady Campaign and heads up Protect Minnesota.
I think more people should read her page, this way they’ll realize how utterly high and doped up anti-gunnies are. They should also read Brady’s support for drug dealers who were gunned down when drug deals went wrong.
There are times I think Neil Smith’s characterization of them as the “Jack Booted Thugs Lady’s Auxiliary” is somewhat overblown.
This isn’t one of those times.
Always the professional victim. She keeps beating everyone with her dead sisters corpse to the point we don’t listen anymore. I just read her stuff for the comic effect.
For those who wonder why we read her at all, it’s useful to know when they say these outlandish things. As others have noted, she’s a leader with supposedly mainstream gun control group. If someone is trying to talk to a gun owner who just doesn’t think they are that much of a threat and then they point out that the board member of the Brady Campaign has argued that we need to question the suitability of any parent who even shows a passing interest in firearms, it could make a difference in inspiring a little passion.
As a parent and a gun owner, I can assure Joan that the quickest way to not have peace on earth is to come for my children because you don’t like my politics.
She is just continuing her trend. On “A Law Abiding Citizen” she states her belief that legal adults shouldn’t be able to buy certain firearms
The point is that 18 yr. olds should not be legally allowed to buy AK 47s anywhere. Yes, they can buy bomb making materials as well but until those are combined to actually make the bomb, they are not inherently dangerous or designed to kill.
What if I buy all the separate components to build my own AK? Individually, they’re not inherently dangerous and designed to kill, so I should be good to go, right?
I know this is a waste of time, but…
Does she think lots of 18-year-olds are buying $2000 rifles with federal background checks and $200 tax stamps and local CLEO sign-off… to commit crimes?
The question for Joan is why any adult who is not willing to bear arms to defend his or her family should be allowed to have any children?
Growing up with a brother, I have a natural tendency to enjoy baiting other people when they are so easily baited, and give such satisfactory reactions.
Such is the case of the anti-gunners regarding children in the presence of guns. It’s the gift that keeps on giving, and someday I look forward to introducing my own toddlers to guns – with pics! :)
Eric is correct. Any parent who lacks the maternal instinct to fight tooth and nail in the defense of their children is not fit to be one. So, firearm ownership is actually the right thing.
I bought my first gun when I became a father. I had an innate urge that I needed to do everything in the world to protect my princess. God entrusted her to me and I try not to let him down.
Now that she is going into her teens and is stunningly beautiful, I have an urge to buy a backhoe to make burying the bodies easier.
I love it! I have a teen too. Maybe we can pool our free cash and get a group backhoe for dad use only. = )
Not only do I read her posts, I send people who are “on the fence” over there. They all come down on the 2nd Amendment side of the fence, telling me “She’s crazy. Are they all like that?” And I just smile and nod.
Also, the counter arguments by the gunnies are great. I’ve learned alot about guns, arguments, etc.
I notice that she’s realized that and is now “limiting” comments so that they don’t dominate any one thread…as if she’s got limited space and sooooo many commenters.
Comments are closed.