info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie?
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Michael Ejercito
Jan 17, 2013, 10:55:42 PM1/17/13
to
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
January 16, 2013
Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie?
By William A. Levinson
Human beings are almost universally receptive to impartial facts, and
people will therefore support any course of action that is inherently
right and effective. If the truth were on the side of the enemies of
the Second Amendment, they would not need to lie to the public along
with fellow members of Congress.
The Brady Campaign Speaks with Forked Tongue
The Brady Campaign has a long track record of using distorted
statistics to deceive the American people, including well-meaning
donors of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money. Consider, for example, the
Brady Campaign's statement that a firearm in the home is 43 times as
likely to kill a family member as a violent criminal. The Brady
Campaign, therefore, wants us to believe that gun owners shoot family
members in fits of rage, when the truth is very different.
Of the gun deaths in the home, the vast majority are suicides. In
the 43-to-1 figure, suicides account for nearly all the 43
unjustifiable deaths.
... Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show
2.39 accidental or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every
justifiable fatal shooting.
Some of the "accidents" may, in fact, be suicides, because police and
newspapers sometimes preserve the decedent's reputation by saying that
he shot himself while cleaning his gun. This is a physical
impossibility, because you have to disassemble a gun to clean it.
Even if we accept the 2.39-to-1 ratio, however, note the phrase "every
justifiable fatal shooting." From police instructor Massad Ayoob's
The Truth About Self Protection:
For every one shooting thirteen to fifteen criminals are deterred
or driven off just by the sight of the gun, and this fully
accomplishes what the homeowner bought the gun for in the first place.
When you also consider the fact that only about one out of four people
who are shot actually dies, you realize that for every home intruder
shot dead by the resident, there are ninety-nine others who don't get
killed, but who give up their assaults.
The Brady Campaign must therefore admit that, for every 43 misuses of
a firearm in the home (including suicide), 100 violent felonies are
prevented. For every genuinely accidental or criminal firearm-related
death in the home, more than 40 violent felonies are prevented.
Property theft, by the way, is not a violent felony; we are talking
about rapes, aggravated assaults, and murders.
The Brady Campaign adds:
What's more, a more sobering study conducted by the Violence
Prevention Research Program at the University of California-Davis
found that suicide is the leading cause of death among gun buyers,
especially women, in the first year after the weapon was purchased. In
fact, the study -- which was published in the New England Journal of
Medicine -- found that a person who purchases a handgun is 57 times
more likely to commit suicide within a week of buying the weapon than
the general population as a whole.
This statement confuses cause and effect and is an insult to the
intelligence of anybody who has studied basic statistics. If somebody
kills himself with a handgun within a week of buying it, he almost
certainly bought it for the express purpose of suicide. Similar
"facts" could doubtless be quoted for first-time purchases of sleeping
pills (especially with alcoholic beverages) and ropes.
The Brady Campaign has also played fast and loose with campaign
finance laws, as shown by the fine that the Federal Election
Commission levied against it for misconduct.
In 2003, the Brady Campaign's PAC was fined $26,000 by the Federal
Election Commission for failing to properly disclose $200,000 it spent
on mailings in 2000 opposing two Republican House candidates, Reps.
Ernest Fletcher (R-Ky.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
This brings us to the Million Mom March, a true poster child for the
ethics, character, and integrity of the entire anti-Second Amendment
movement.
The Million Mom March
The Million Mom March, with which Senators Feinstein (CA), Levin (MI),
and Mikulski (MD); Hillary Clinton; Tipper Gore; and numerous members
of Congress were closely associated, underscored the anti-gun
movement's total lack of character and integrity as follows.
(1) Misuse of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money to influence an election
(2) Solicitation of money, volunteer time, and corporate
contributions under the fraudulent premise that firearm misuse kills
12 or 13 children a day. Dianne Feinstein, Jerrold Nadler, and many
of their associates signed their names to this falsehood.
(3) A Form 990 tax return that told the IRS that the group had not
tried to influence legislation even though its express purpose was to
demand so-called commonsense gun laws
A group that tells its own donors and volunteers that its mission is
to promote public safety, turns around and uses the donations for
lobbying and electioneering, and then tells the IRS that it spent no
money on the latter activities is simply not credible. The Violence
Policy Center also is on record as planning openly to lie to the
public.
Assault weapons, just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns,
and plastic firearms, are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks,
coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns
versus semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a
machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the
chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.
The VPC therefore seems to admit that that it is using money that is
501(c)(3) tax-exempt for educational purposes to confuse the public
over the relationship between a semiautomatic rifle and a machine
gun. "Plastic firearms" is yet another deliberately deceptive
phrase. Many firearms have polymer frames, but their steel barrels
cannot possibly get past an airport metal detector.
Dishonest Lawsuits Against the Gun Industry
The dishonesty of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo and his predecessor, Eliot
Spitzer, is well-known. As argued by Spitzer before he was caught with
expensive prostitutes:
It is now clear that most manufacturers and wholesalers are
unwilling to give up the profits they reap from selling guns into the
criminal market.
...[HUD] Secretary Cuomo said, "The gun industry should follow the
lead of Smith & Wesson and accept common sense-safety [sic] standards
to keep guns out of the hands of children and criminals.
Gun manufacturers already followed these standards meticulously by
selling firearms to the public only through federally licensed gun
dealers, who, of course, do not sell to criminals or minors. The
ethics of Cuomo and Spitzer, therefore, differ little from those of
common criminals -- a line that their fellow travelers Governor Rod
Blagojevich (IL), Rep. Mario Biaggi (NY), and Rep. Bobby Rush (IL)
crossed to become convicted felons. Rush was a member of the Black
Panthers, who, at the time, called for the murder of police officers:
"The Revolution has come, it's time to pick up the gun. Off the
pigs!" Cop-killers and their supporters have nothing to say about gun
control in which anybody should take the slightest interest.
This leaves the anti-Second Amendment camp with serious questions that
are simply not going to go away. If they are right, why do they need
to lie?
William A. Levinson, P.E. is the author of several books on business
management including content on organizational psychology as well as
manufacturing productivity and quality.
January 16, 2013
Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie?
By William A. Levinson
Human beings are almost universally receptive to impartial facts, and
people will therefore support any course of action that is inherently
right and effective. If the truth were on the side of the enemies of
the Second Amendment, they would not need to lie to the public along
with fellow members of Congress.
The Brady Campaign Speaks with Forked Tongue
The Brady Campaign has a long track record of using distorted
statistics to deceive the American people, including well-meaning
donors of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money. Consider, for example, the
Brady Campaign's statement that a firearm in the home is 43 times as
likely to kill a family member as a violent criminal. The Brady
Campaign, therefore, wants us to believe that gun owners shoot family
members in fits of rage, when the truth is very different.
Of the gun deaths in the home, the vast majority are suicides. In
the 43-to-1 figure, suicides account for nearly all the 43
unjustifiable deaths.
... Putting aside the suicides, the Kellermann/Reay figures show
2.39 accidental or criminal deaths by firearm (in the home) for every
justifiable fatal shooting.
Some of the "accidents" may, in fact, be suicides, because police and
newspapers sometimes preserve the decedent's reputation by saying that
he shot himself while cleaning his gun. This is a physical
impossibility, because you have to disassemble a gun to clean it.
Even if we accept the 2.39-to-1 ratio, however, note the phrase "every
justifiable fatal shooting." From police instructor Massad Ayoob's
The Truth About Self Protection:
For every one shooting thirteen to fifteen criminals are deterred
or driven off just by the sight of the gun, and this fully
accomplishes what the homeowner bought the gun for in the first place.
When you also consider the fact that only about one out of four people
who are shot actually dies, you realize that for every home intruder
shot dead by the resident, there are ninety-nine others who don't get
killed, but who give up their assaults.
The Brady Campaign must therefore admit that, for every 43 misuses of
a firearm in the home (including suicide), 100 violent felonies are
prevented. For every genuinely accidental or criminal firearm-related
death in the home, more than 40 violent felonies are prevented.
Property theft, by the way, is not a violent felony; we are talking
about rapes, aggravated assaults, and murders.
The Brady Campaign adds:
What's more, a more sobering study conducted by the Violence
Prevention Research Program at the University of California-Davis
found that suicide is the leading cause of death among gun buyers,
especially women, in the first year after the weapon was purchased. In
fact, the study -- which was published in the New England Journal of
Medicine -- found that a person who purchases a handgun is 57 times
more likely to commit suicide within a week of buying the weapon than
the general population as a whole.
This statement confuses cause and effect and is an insult to the
intelligence of anybody who has studied basic statistics. If somebody
kills himself with a handgun within a week of buying it, he almost
certainly bought it for the express purpose of suicide. Similar
"facts" could doubtless be quoted for first-time purchases of sleeping
pills (especially with alcoholic beverages) and ropes.
The Brady Campaign has also played fast and loose with campaign
finance laws, as shown by the fine that the Federal Election
Commission levied against it for misconduct.
In 2003, the Brady Campaign's PAC was fined $26,000 by the Federal
Election Commission for failing to properly disclose $200,000 it spent
on mailings in 2000 opposing two Republican House candidates, Reps.
Ernest Fletcher (R-Ky.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)
This brings us to the Million Mom March, a true poster child for the
ethics, character, and integrity of the entire anti-Second Amendment
movement.
The Million Mom March
The Million Mom March, with which Senators Feinstein (CA), Levin (MI),
and Mikulski (MD); Hillary Clinton; Tipper Gore; and numerous members
of Congress were closely associated, underscored the anti-gun
movement's total lack of character and integrity as follows.
(1) Misuse of 501(c)(3) tax-exempt money to influence an election
(2) Solicitation of money, volunteer time, and corporate
contributions under the fraudulent premise that firearm misuse kills
12 or 13 children a day. Dianne Feinstein, Jerrold Nadler, and many
of their associates signed their names to this falsehood.
(3) A Form 990 tax return that told the IRS that the group had not
tried to influence legislation even though its express purpose was to
demand so-called commonsense gun laws
A group that tells its own donors and volunteers that its mission is
to promote public safety, turns around and uses the donations for
lobbying and electioneering, and then tells the IRS that it spent no
money on the latter activities is simply not credible. The Violence
Policy Center also is on record as planning openly to lie to the
public.
Assault weapons, just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns,
and plastic firearms, are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks,
coupled with the public's confusion over fully automatic machine guns
versus semi-automatic assault weapons -- anything that looks like a
machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun -- can only increase the
chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons.
The VPC therefore seems to admit that that it is using money that is
501(c)(3) tax-exempt for educational purposes to confuse the public
over the relationship between a semiautomatic rifle and a machine
gun. "Plastic firearms" is yet another deliberately deceptive
phrase. Many firearms have polymer frames, but their steel barrels
cannot possibly get past an airport metal detector.
Dishonest Lawsuits Against the Gun Industry
The dishonesty of NY Governor Andrew Cuomo and his predecessor, Eliot
Spitzer, is well-known. As argued by Spitzer before he was caught with
expensive prostitutes:
It is now clear that most manufacturers and wholesalers are
unwilling to give up the profits they reap from selling guns into the
criminal market.
...[HUD] Secretary Cuomo said, "The gun industry should follow the
lead of Smith & Wesson and accept common sense-safety [sic] standards
to keep guns out of the hands of children and criminals.
Gun manufacturers already followed these standards meticulously by
selling firearms to the public only through federally licensed gun
dealers, who, of course, do not sell to criminals or minors. The
ethics of Cuomo and Spitzer, therefore, differ little from those of
common criminals -- a line that their fellow travelers Governor Rod
Blagojevich (IL), Rep. Mario Biaggi (NY), and Rep. Bobby Rush (IL)
crossed to become convicted felons. Rush was a member of the Black
Panthers, who, at the time, called for the murder of police officers:
"The Revolution has come, it's time to pick up the gun. Off the
pigs!" Cop-killers and their supporters have nothing to say about gun
control in which anybody should take the slightest interest.
This leaves the anti-Second Amendment camp with serious questions that
are simply not going to go away. If they are right, why do they need
to lie?
William A. Levinson, P.E. is the author of several books on business
management including content on organizational psychology as well as
manufacturing productivity and quality.
Mr.B1ack
Jan 19, 2013, 2:09:59 AM1/19/13
to
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800, Michael Ejercito wrote:
> http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-
> http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-
gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
>
> January 16, 2013
> Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie? By William A. Levinson
Because logic won't build them a case ...
>
> January 16, 2013
> Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie? By William A. Levinson
Michael Ejercito
Jan 19, 2013, 1:08:04 PM1/19/13
to
Michaekl
Mr.B1ack
Jan 20, 2013, 9:17:40 PM1/20/13
to
no steenkin' logic a lot of the time. Our 'leaders'
are experts at whipping up and then exploiting the
crowd mentality ... the Collective Human ... the
mindless and dangerous beast.
Michael Ejercito
Jan 21, 2013, 12:33:00 PM1/21/13
to
campaign for the involuntary euthanasia of the mentally ill? The
mentally ill would make perfect scapegoats, what with being a
politically powerless minority and all...
Michael
Mr.B1ack
Jan 21, 2013, 4:57:54 PM1/21/13
to
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:33:00 -0800, Michael Ejercito wrote:
> On Jan 20, 6:17 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:08:04 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>> > On Jan 18, 11:09 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>> >> >http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-
>>
>> >> gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
>>
>> >> > January 16, 2013
>> >> > Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie? By William A. Levinson
>>
>> >> Because logic won't build them a case ...
>> > That is so right.
>>
>> Minor little problem ... "The People" don't NEED no steenkin'
>> logic a lot of the time. Our 'leaders' are experts at whipping up
>> and then exploiting the crowd mentality ... the Collective Human
>> ... the mindless and dangerous beast.
> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part of a
> campaign for the involuntary euthanasia of the mentally ill?
Theoretically ... but given current cultural norms
> On Jan 20, 6:17 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:08:04 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>> > On Jan 18, 11:09 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>> >> >http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-
>>
>> >> gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
>>
>> >> > January 16, 2013
>> >> > Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie? By William A. Levinson
>>
>> >> Because logic won't build them a case ...
>> > That is so right.
>>
>> Minor little problem ... "The People" don't NEED no steenkin'
>> logic a lot of the time. Our 'leaders' are experts at whipping up
>> and then exploiting the crowd mentality ... the Collective Human
>> ... the mindless and dangerous beast.
> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part of a
> campaign for the involuntary euthanasia of the mentally ill?
it'd have to be done in stages, using subsequent
incidents to build towards a new and hostile
mentality towards the nutters. This is all much
complicated by the fact that almost all nutters
are harmless or mostly harmless ... but, in the
end, prejudice and bigotry would always triumph
over those inconvenient little facts. We've seen
that over and over again all through written
history.
Adept 'leaders' can use 'incidents' - real or
imagined - to incite prejudice, bigotry and
even genocidal rage against pretty much any
identifiable group. Obama is gonna try to do
it relative to 'gun owners' ... but he may
have difficulties since such a LARGE percentage
of the population owns guns or has people near
and dear who do - maybe even their sainted
Granny. This campaign may backfire (it's already
sold a million guns after all ...).
> The
> mentally ill would make perfect scapegoats, what with being a
> politically powerless minority and all...
thing better is if they have some kind of
clearly "different" appearance or mannerisms.
Secret agendas, 'reds under the beds' kinda
semi-believable accusations - are recommended
if there's no clear 'difference'. Paranoia
is easy to build and build and build ...
The 'Collective Human' is a stupid and gullible
beast - prone to paranoid fantansies and violence,
mostly immune to reason and evidence. Competent
leaders and/or their propagandists know how to
herd the beast anywhere they desire and prod it
to rip out the throats of their rivals.
Now, really, the "mentally ill" are responsible
for very few deaths. Most killings are done by
drunks and nasty little gang-bangers - it's just
that they happen a few at a time, under the
medias radar for the most part. Thug on thug,
like *who cares*, right ?
Michael Ejercito
Jan 21, 2013, 5:53:51 PM1/21/13
to
up of the mentally ill for forcible internment or even euthanasia,
instead of going after gun owners? He could convince the American
public to march lockstep with such a plan, especially if he distorts
facts. As an added bonus, he could make it easier for Democrats to win
elections in 2014- something which would be much harder if he went
after gun owners.
The mentally ill are the low-hanging fruit, and a much easier
target for politicians willing to trample over people's rights.
Michael
Mr.B1ack
Jan 21, 2013, 10:03:06 PM1/21/13
to
Going after them is going after The Enemy.
> He could convince the American public
> to march lockstep with such a plan, especially if he distorts facts. As
> an added bonus, he could make it easier for Democrats to win elections
> in 2014- something which would be much harder if he went after gun
> owners.
>
> The mentally ill are the low-hanging fruit, and a much easier
> target for politicians willing to trample over people's rights.
nutters are one of their 'protected minorities'. Not
so much as their big favored ethnic groups, but still
someone to protect. They'd rather let a thousand
dangerous nutters loose on the streets than risk
persecuting/stigmatizing even one. Probably dates
back to Ken Kesey and 'Culkoos Nest'.
Michael Ejercito
Jan 22, 2013, 12:05:09 PM1/22/13
to
On Jan 21, 7:03 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:53:51 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
I am sure many of them will feel that Obama is the enemy.
>
> > He could convince the American public
> > to march lockstep with such a plan, especially if he distorts facts. As
> > an added bonus, he could make it easier for Democrats to win elections
> > in 2014- something which would be much harder if he went after gun
> > owners.
>
> > The mentally ill are the low-hanging fruit, and a much easier
> > target for politicians willing to trample over people's rights.
>
> Ah ... but 'liberals' are bleeding-hearts - and the
> nutters are one of their 'protected minorities'. Not
> so much as their big favored ethnic groups, but still
> someone to protect. They'd rather let a thousand
> dangerous nutters loose on the streets than risk
> persecuting/stigmatizing even one. Probably dates
> back to Ken Kesey and 'Culkoos Nest'.
Clearly, they are not right in the head.
Michael
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:53:51 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
> > On Jan 21, 1:57 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:33:00 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
> >> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:33:00 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>
> > He could convince the American public
> > to march lockstep with such a plan, especially if he distorts facts. As
> > an added bonus, he could make it easier for Democrats to win elections
> > in 2014- something which would be much harder if he went after gun
> > owners.
>
> > The mentally ill are the low-hanging fruit, and a much easier
> > target for politicians willing to trample over people's rights.
>
> Ah ... but 'liberals' are bleeding-hearts - and the
> nutters are one of their 'protected minorities'. Not
> so much as their big favored ethnic groups, but still
> someone to protect. They'd rather let a thousand
> dangerous nutters loose on the streets than risk
> persecuting/stigmatizing even one. Probably dates
> back to Ken Kesey and 'Culkoos Nest'.
Michael
Mr.B1ack
Jan 22, 2013, 4:07:21 PM1/22/13
to
of coup to get rid of the ultralibs with power.
The slow, creeping nature of the leftification
of America has meant there are no clear lines
in the sand beyond which a large percentage of
both citizenry and military will revolt. Ergo
I don't see a coup coming anytime soon, if ever.
Instead it would be necessary to deliberately
engineer a series of *political* disasters for
the lefties. This is difficult.
>> > He could convince the American public to march lockstep with such a
>> > plan, especially if he distorts facts. As an added bonus, he could
>> > make it easier for Democrats to win elections in 2014- something
>> > which would be much harder if he went after gun owners.
>>
>> > The mentally ill are the low-hanging fruit, and a much easier
>> > target for politicians willing to trample over people's rights.
>>
>> Ah ... but 'liberals' are bleeding-hearts - and the nutters are
>> one of their 'protected minorities'. Not so much as their big
>> favored ethnic groups, but still someone to protect. They'd rather
>> let a thousand dangerous nutters loose on the streets than risk
>> persecuting/stigmatizing even one. Probably dates back to Ken
>> Kesey and 'Culkoos Nest'.
> Clearly, they are not right in the head.
or entertaining eccentrics ... maybe they need a
pill or something at most. 98% of the time that's
an acceptable perspective (whether it's true or
not).
It's the other two percent of the time however ...
nutters the old world would have said have 'demons'
in them. The guy that shot the congresswoman, the
guy who shot-up the movie theatre - those mug
shots ... you can see the worms squirming in their
brains, the pure malice in their eyes. Joe Liberal
doesn't wanna see that - WON'T see that.
The worst thing though is that a cultural 'meme'
has been started - the "massacre meme". It's what
you're *supposed* to do if you're angry or frustrated.
That punk who shot his parents and small siblings
over the weekend ... he said he was about to move
to phase-2 - go out on the town and kill as many
other people as he could before dying in a hail
of police bullets. It's like he, and these others,
have a script in their heads from some 'B' movie
and they wouldn't feel right unless the show
goes on like it's supposed to.
This is weird stuff - and *extremely* dangerous.
It's not just chronic nutters anymore - it can
be *anyone* who gets super-angry and snaps. This
'script', this 'meme', this 'mind virus', seems
to be deeply embedded in the populations
subconscious.
It didn't really come from anywhere in particular,
it's just grown stronger over the last several
decades. When oppressed-feeling Joe has had enough
and ain't gonna take it anymore, the script kicks
in - go out in a blaze of bloody glory ! You'll
FINALLY be important ! People will be SORRY they
didn't kiss your ass all along !!!
Liberal Here
Jan 24, 2013, 4:52:01 PM1/24/13
to
The first argument you wackos make is the need to be armed to protect
yer family.....Odd though, such fear of eminent danger and oppression
is symptomatic of paranoia. And mental illness is a disqualifier to
own firearms.
JohnJohnsn
Jan 24, 2013, 5:29:46 PM1/24/13
to
On Jan 21, 11:33 am, Michael Ejercito <mejer...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 20, 6:17 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:08:04 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>> On Jan 18, 11:09 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>>>>http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
>
>>>>> January 16, 2013
>>>>> Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie?
>>>>> By William A. Levinson
>
>>>> Because logic won't build them a case ...
>>>
>>> That is so right.
>
>> Minor little problem ... "The People" don't NEED
>> no steenkin' logic a lot of the time. Our 'leaders'
>> are experts at whipping up and then exploiting the
>> crowd mentality ... the Collective Human ... the
>> mindless and dangerous beast.
>
> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part
> of a campaign for the involuntary euthanasia of the mentally ill?
>
Hey! It worked for Obama's philosophical idol, Herr Hitler; didn't it?
>
>
> On Jan 20, 6:17 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:08:04 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>> On Jan 18, 11:09 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>>>>http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/01/why_does_the_anti-gun_camp_need_to_lie.html
>
>>>>> January 16, 2013
>>>>> Why Does the Anti-Gun Camp Need to Lie?
>>>>> By William A. Levinson
>
>>>> Because logic won't build them a case ...
>>>
>>> That is so right.
>
>> Minor little problem ... "The People" don't NEED
>> no steenkin' logic a lot of the time. Our 'leaders'
>> are experts at whipping up and then exploiting the
>> crowd mentality ... the Collective Human ... the
>> mindless and dangerous beast.
>
> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part
> of a campaign for the involuntary euthanasia of the mentally ill?
>
>
> The mentally ill would make perfect scapegoats, what with being
> a politically powerless minority and all...
>
> Michael
>
----
> The mentally ill would make perfect scapegoats, what with being
> a politically powerless minority and all...
>
> Michael
>
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by
that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do
before.”
— Rahm Emanuel, then-Obama White House Chief of Staff, Nov. 2008
“The good thing about Newtown is, it was so horrific that I think it
galvanized Americans to a point where the intensity on our side is
going to match the intensity on their side.”
--Ed Rendell, former Pennsylvania Governor, 13 Jan. 2013
“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.“
--Joseph Heller, `Catch 22'
JohnJohnsn
Jan 24, 2013, 5:42:50 PM1/24/13
to
On Jan 24, 3:52 pm, Liberal Here <liberalh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Jan 22, 4:07 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:05:09 -0800, Michael Ejercito wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 7:03 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:53:51 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>>>> On Jan 21, 1:57 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:33:00 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>
>>>>>>> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part
>
>
> On Jan 22, 4:07 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:05:09 -0800, Michael Ejercito wrote:
>>> On Jan 21, 7:03 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:53:51 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>>>>> On Jan 21, 1:57 pm, "Mr.B1ack" <nowh...@nada.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:33:00 -0800,Michael Ejercitowrote:
>
>>>>>>> So it would be possible to use the Sandy Hook shooting as part
>
> The first argument you wackos make is the need to be armed to protect
> yer family.....Odd though, such fear of eminent danger and oppression
> is symptomatic of paranoia.
>
> The first argument you wackos make is the need to be armed to protect
> yer family.....Odd though, such fear of eminent danger and oppression
> is symptomatic of paranoia.
>
“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you.“
--Joseph Heller, `Catch 22'
>
--Joseph Heller, `Catch 22'
>
> And mental illness is a disqualifier to own firearms.
>
Only adjudicated mental illness, Uberliberal.
>
The "rub" here is that you Looney Liberal Gun-hating/Gun-banning
Democrats are trying to institute "laws" that will assign the term
"mentally ill" to everyone you don't want to have guns: with
yourselves as being exempt, of course.
Your text in this Thread is prima facie evidence of that.
----
“All warfare is based on deception.”
— Sun Tzu, `The Art of War', 6th century B.C.
“Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and
plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled
with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus
semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun
is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public
support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can
envision a practical use for these weapons.“
-Josh Sugarmann, `Assault Weapons and Accessories in America', 1988
“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by
that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do
before.”
— Rahm Emanuel, then-Obama White House Chief of Staff, Nov. 2008
“The good thing about Newtown is, it was so horrific that I think it
galvanized Americans to a point where the intensity on our side is
going to match the intensity on their side.”
--Ed Rendell, former Pennsylvania Governor, 13 Jan. 2013
advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience’ that would
take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown
in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that
forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm
those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.”
--Cesare Bonesana, Marchese Beccaria, `Of Crimes and Punishments'
“Why is it that every time a lunatic uses a firearm to commit an
atrocity the gun-control fanatics want to punish the millions of gun
owners that DIDN'T do it?!?!?”
--Me, Dec. 18, 2012...
“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is
in session.”
--Mark Twain
Scout
Jan 24, 2013, 7:08:54 PM1/24/13
to
"Liberal Here" <liber...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:01867f0f-42c4-40e7...@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
An alarm system?
Do you use them when you are home?
Why?
Are families always safe from violent criminals?
If not, then how can you say protection isn't needed?
Do you have fire alarms?
Is that a sign of paranoia?
Spartan613
Jan 25, 2013, 12:26:03 AM1/25/13
to
"Liberal Here" <liber...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:01867f0f-42c4-40e7...@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
news:01867f0f-42c4-40e7...@u7g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
Does mental illness mean you can't be the President?
After all, Obama has squads of armed bodyguards protecting him and his
family, and from what?
No one has tried to kill him even once. He must be paranoid.
--
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not
want merely because you think it would be good for him".
Robert A. Heinlein.
Michael Ejercito
Jan 27, 2013, 4:13:21 PM1/27/13
to
Michael
0 new messages