Truth in advertising

Have you noticed the recent trend in arguments from the human/civil rights violators? If not, here are some hints.

“Why is gun control now equal to a restriction of liberties? Gun Control is not Gun erasure, it is not taking away the 2nd Amendment. Gun Control is not saying you do not have a right to own a gun for your protection, safety, and soundness of mind for you and your family.”
Anjeanette LeBoeuf, The Act of Gun Control

Ms. LeBoeuf, bless her heart, also demonstrates why she should have spent more time on history, and less on women’s studies.

“The challenge in bringing change is that the debate over gun rights isn’t really about guns at all. It’s about what they represent: cherished freedoms, a reverence for independence. ”
Philip Elliott, Haley Sweetland Edwards, Charlotte Alter; The Fight Over Gun Control Isn’t Really About Guns

Hold that thought.

“So how can we articulate the gun control message more effectively? What if instead of emphasizing gun control, there was a Movement for the Safety of All Americans? If the problem were framed as a domestic and public safety issue rather than a gun control matter, perhaps we could build greater demand for conquering this national epidemic.”
Bruce Berlin, Let’s Reframe Gun Control To Focus on Our Safety

Ah, safety.

“Take the phrase we often reach toward in the aftermath of a mass shooting: “gun control.” “It feels like there’s an American sense that responds quite well to the idea of ‘rights,’ and not so well to the idea of ‘control,’” Dust says. Dust believes that this small point could the origin of a new type of conversation–around how the right to carry arms is ultimately infringing on our right to peacefully gather.”
Eillie Anzilotti, Can We Redesign The Way We Talk About Gun Control In America?

The trend is to pretend there is no such thing as “gun control,” and the reason is because they finally realized it’s a non-finisher.

LeBoeuf wants people to believe that only total confiscation is “gun control.” Yet proposes… controls. She’s not alone in adopting that position, and it’s not new; there’s a reason Handgun Control, Inc. isn’t using that name anymore.

The rights violators are used to having money and near-exclusive media access, allowing them to push whatever message they wanted. In the Internet age, that access isn’t so exclusive (in the ’90s, merely getting an unedited pro-RKBA letter to the editor in an urban newspaper was a challenge; yet here you are reading this column now). The rights violators are forced to rephrase and hide their goal.

They think this is a winning gambit.

It might be. For us.

“Excuse me, Ms. LeBoeuf. If those laws preventing me from owning this type of firearm, or making me an ex post facto prohibited person without due process, requiring licenses to own, licenses to buy, licenses to carry, mandatory insurance, waiting periods, mental health evaluations, and so forth aren’t gun control, what are they?”

The answer being, as we’ve long known — but which the human rights criminals tried to deny — people control. Now, every time one of those smarmy SOBs plays the “not gun control” card, we can call them on it, and make them admit that the goal is to manipulate every aspect of every life, all the things they can’t do to an armed populace.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

4 thoughts on “Truth in advertising”

  1. “The answer being, as we’ve long known — but which the human rights criminals tried to deny — people control. Now, every time one of those smarmy SOBs plays the “not gun control” card, we can call them on it, and make them admit that the goal is to manipulate every aspect of every life, all the things they can’t do to an armed populace.”

    +1

  2. We need to get the word out today;

    “Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) is warning that House Leadership plans to merge Obama-style gun control with national reciprocity for concealed carry.
    (DUNGISTAN, DC –BREITBART )This news comes just days before Rep. Richard Hudson’s (R-NC) national reciprocity legislation, H.R. 38, is supposed to go the House floor for a vote.
    Massie explains that the Obama-style gun controls are contained in the “fix-NICS” legislation, the very legislation that House Leadership “plans to merge” with H.R. 38. He used a Facebook post to explain the “fix-NICS” legislation would allow “agencies, not just courts, to adjudicate your second amendment rights.”It’s always nice to hear that some loyal Democrat Republicans think there’s some acceptable amount of horseshit to mix in with sirloin to make a good meatloaf.

    Call your representatives, and set their asses on fire.

    Bonus points if one of yours is one of these shitweasels on the Rules Committee, scheduled to consider this merger at 2PM EST today:

    Pete Sessions, (R) Texas’s 32nd, Chairman
    Tom Cole, (R) Oklahoma’s 4th, Vice-Chairman
    Rob Woodall, (R) Georgia’s 7th
    Michael C. Burgess, (R) Texas’s 26th
    Doug Collins, (R) Georgia’s 9th
    Bradley Byrne, (R) Alabama’s 1st
    Dan Newhouse, (R) Washington’s 4th
    Ken Buck, (R) Colorado’s 4th
    Liz Cheney, (R) Wyoming’s at-large
    Louise Slaughter, (D) New York’s 25th, Ranking Member
    James P. McGovern, (D) Massachusetts’s 2nd
    Alcee Hastings, (D) Florida’s 20th
    Jared Polis, (D) Colorado’s 2nd

    U.S. Capitol Switchboard: (202) 224-3121

    Light ’em up.

    http://raconteurreport.blogspot.com/2017/12/shocked-i-say.html

  3. Ah, the public safety argument that somehow my exercise of my Second Amendment rights to infringes on their “right to be safe” or similar BS.

    If I brandish or fire my weapon there will be legal repercussions. So any misuse is already covered. However, they want prior restraint to keep out all CCW carriers from their vicinity.

    Sorry their insecurities and bigotry does not nullify my 2A rights.

    The really sad thing is good people like me (i.e. CCW holders) provide them with free “herd” protection. They are actually ungrateful parasites.

  4. If someone were to ask me how to respond to that I would give the example of the salami. No matter how much we compromise on the issue the anti-gunners are never satisfied by what we give up, they ALWAYS want more and more until there’s nothing left.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *