Category: Anti-Gun Folks

The Christian Science Monitor talks to a few gun shop owners, and concludes that it’s largely fear of gun control that drives the spikes in sales after mass shootings, and not people rushing to gun shops with a desire to protect themselves. Clayton Cramer pins this increase in sales on the gun control crowd, and notes:

So gun control advocates, when you keep talking about gun control, remember that when at least some of these reactionary purchasers do something stupid or tragic, it is because you panicked them into it.

What makes us evangelize firearms so much, other than the fact that as people who enjoy a hobby and lifestyle, we want to share it with other people, is that we need more political allies to defeat the likes of Brady, CSGV, MAIG, and VPC. Sometimes I think the gun control groups have done more to create new shooters than the NRA has.

Another thought is, if these post-massacre spikes are being driven by people worried about new gun control, it goes to show that rational political ignorance is alive and well among gun owners too. Even in a hostile political environment, it’s rare that legislation pass so quickly one needs to run out the next day. I wish some of them would get seriously engaged with the political fight, rather than engage in panic buying.

One New Yorker tells the Daily News that he would like to see the National Rifle Association sued for the actions of criminals and for daring to have different policy ideas than he might prefer.

Flushing: The National Rifle Association cannot be defeated in the political arena. But what if the victims’ families sued the NRA for creating laws that allowed this tragedy to happen? What if Mayor Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns sued the NRA as an accessory to gun deaths and injuries in their cities? If even one lawsuit succeeded, it would establish a precedent for holding the gun lobby accountable. Plus, defending against a blizzard of lawsuits would cripple the NRA’s finances. Richard Reif

Mr. Reif considers it perfectly acceptable that the American citizens who support the Second Amendment should see any attempt they make to organize to petition their government silenced by frivolous lawsuits. I am curious to know if Mr. Reif also wonders just why many people believe the political atmosphere is less civil these days.

You can also take your choice of comments from other New Yorkers and readers:

The right to bear arms should be limited to a simple, single-shot handgun for protection in the home or a single-shot rifle to be used during hunting season. No normal citizen needs anything more than that. Irene Goldsmith

I guess Dick Heller and Otis McDonald aren’t considered “normal citizens” to Irene. Perhaps she believes that the only people who should be deemed “normal” are those who think and live exactly like her – so much for tolerance.

To imply that President Obama is responsible for the Colorado tragedy and the proliferation of guns is disingenuous. Place blame on the NRA, where it belongs. James P. Hetzel …

The NRA is a group of unprincipled thugs who threaten any elected official who tries to limit its power; witness the cowardice of both Obama and Romney on gun control. Thanks for giving voice to the obvious and having the will to say what should be said. Suzanne Tenney Sutter Augur

Merely belonging to an organization that supports lawful gun ownership and use is enough for James to convict you of ties to the Colorado murders. Suzanne thinks you’re an unprincipled thug who shouldn’t have a voice with your elected officials anyway.

It’s just another glimpse in the world where anti-gun advocates don’t even believe that you should be allowed to participate in the political sphere because you don’t believe the very same things.

Bloomberg calls on police officers to go on strike until there’s action on gun control. Unfortunately for the Mayor, the vast majority of police are on our side. In the mean time, it looks like MAIG has been pushing editorials around the country that fall along this line. They are appearing everywhere. We’re very lucky that the media is increasingly irrelevant in influencing public opinion.

UPDATE: According to John Richardson, calling for a police strike in New York is illegal. Though, to be fair, because even Mayor Mike has First Amendment rights too, I think there would be serious free speech issues as to this law applying to Bloomberg’s statement.

Of course, if he did get busted for his speech here, all I would say is that Karma is a bitch. We all have to respect each other’s rights. It is the only way we maintain a free society.

UPDATE: Hat tip to Miguel for finding this gem of an open letter to Mike Bloomberg from a police officer:

How dare you, Mayor Bloomberg. How dare you in your arrogance assume that police officers are such lowly scoundrels that they would readily set their duties aside either to serve your interest OR to reduce the risk they face each day in a selfish attempt to force the public to support a given agenda. How dare you suggest that over 700,000 honorable, decent and brave men and women neglect their duty, forget their oath, and risk the public safety in the name of YOUR anti-gun agenda.

Word. Read the whole thing.

Certain segments in the media persist in this ridiculous notion that David Frum is conservative. This article would seem to indicate that notion is nonsense, rattling off nonsensical statistics about the dangers of guns in the home. Tam pretty effectively eviscerates his arguments. I always love the arguments from anti-gunners about how the presence of a gun in my home raises my risk of suicide. My risk of suicide is exactly zero. Would anyone say such a thing about the presence of rope or Tylenol? Would anyone suggest the presence of a railroad in my town, or a tall building, increases my suicide risk? No, most sensible people would say thats patently ridiculous. It’s just as patently ridiculous with guns.

The protest at NRA’s Federal Affairs office in DC looks pretty sad to me. I particularly like that they had to put a person there with a sign pointing out that they were not, in fact, protesting a popular bar. I count 11 people, two of which I know for sure work for gun control groups. According to their Facebook page, they had 31 signed up to go and 12 maybes. That’s dedication! Only about 1/3rd of those motivated to click they’d be there bothered to show up. As one person on Twitter put it, “Did you all fit in one Suburban?”

Looks like the anti-gun groups are planning themselves a little (and I do mean little) protest of NRA. Of course, they are not going to protest NRA’s high-profile headquarters in Fairfax, but instead will protest NRA’s non-descript Federal Affairs office, which sits atop the popular Capitol Hill bar Bullfeathers. I guess the anti gun groups can’t really cover the cost of bus or cab fare out to Fairfax these days, so I suppose I should be understanding here.

It’s a shame I’m in a rush to get back, because Bitter and I could pass through DC and counter protest. Actually, the idea we came up with would be to stop off at a gun shop and pick up one of those jam-o-matic 100 round drum magazines, and offer to destroy it on camera under one condition: that the protesters all sing “I’m A Little Teapot,” of course also acting out the song as they sing it. I figure their dedication to stopping gun violence and ridding our streets of these killing machines is very strong, so of course they would be willing to suffer some minor embarrassment among gun bloggers to accomplish it.

Chris from Alaska finds quite a gem of a quite from one of the Brady Campaign’s board members. One other thing I would ad, is even if any major newspapers weren’t calling for DC v. Heller to be overturned, it should concern them greatly that we have at least one, and probably four Supreme Court justices that want to overturn the decision. For years, I think the elites in the gun control movement really convinced themselves they were up against rubes. Now that it’s becoming abundantly clear their elites are not all dripping with intellectual talent, the tiger is finding it difficult to change its stripes.

On the policy front, a recent tactic you’ve seen from the gun control elite is to pooh pooh the notion of the “law abiding citizen.” You can see a recent example of it here. This is such a thoroughly weak argument that one laughs over the fact that they are even presenting it. Most people, I believe, recognize that Minority Report was a work of fiction, and we do not have a magical ability to look into people’s heads to assess whether or not they might in the future become criminals. All we can do is look at past criminal behavior as an indication for future criminal behavior. That’s what the NICS check is about.

So yes, some people who can pass a background check now will later go on to commit crimes. This is hardly surprising. But the more important question is how you deal with this fact in terms of public policy? You really have to start with the default assumption that everyone is a potential criminal, and either make buying a gun impossible, or so onerously difficult that only the strongly motivated bother. And in the realm of motivated people, where does someone who’s planning on committing a crime with a gun rank?

If the answer is that you have to assume everyone is a criminal, and make it generally difficult or impossible to obtain or buy firearms, how does that jibe with the keeping and bearing of arms to be a fundamental right? Why am I paranoid, as gun control elites suggest, for suggesting their end goal isn’t just a few “common sense” regulations, but a draconian public policy regimes aimed at unconstitutionally disarming most of American society? Their own rhetoric betrays their true intentions. The only reason they joke about our paranoia is because we have them at the end of their rope, and they realize it more than we do. I realize it, but I aim to cut that rope, and help accelerate their movement’s plunge into the dustbin of history. I don’t see any reason to let up now.

So much for that narrative, that our opponents have been crowing about since the incident, suggesting that Stand Your Ground emboldens ordinary people to turn into murderers because the law makes it easier for them to get away with. Makes you wonder when the gun control crowd will realize they can’t win over ordinary people if they only have contempt for them. That must also be why the gun control crowd is bitching at the poll results.