categories

archives

meta


"walls of the city" logo conceptualized by Oleg Volk and executed by Linoge. Logo is © "walls of the city".

quote of the day – joan peterson

This is me, being about as speechless as I get:

Who needs guns then? Well, hunters need guns for the sport. Some peo­ple need guns for their pro­fes­sion– law enforce­ment, secu­rity guards, peo­ple who trans­port cash from busi­nesses to banks, etc., gang mem­bers, drug car­tels, felons, rob­bers and those who, with­out a gun, could not do their jobs.

Follow the link for the full explanation (be not afraid – it does not go to her site), but the short explanation is that not only does Joan Peterson, Brady Campaign Board Member and blood dancer extraordinaire, believe that criminals "need" firearms, she also seems to believe that crime (i.e. the "jobs" of the "gang members, drug cartels, felons, and robbers") is completely impossible without the presence of firearms.

… *headdesk*

How do you even begin to have a rational conversation with a person like that?

18 comments to quote of the day – joan peterson

  • There’s more to it than that. She is also saying that those are the ONLY people who need guns. Hunters can have “appropriate” hunting arms, say a bolt action rifle or a fowling piece. Cops, security guards, and armored car drivers cannhave anti-personnel weapons like handguns and in some rare cases, ARs. But since you (and I) are demonstrably not cops, security guards, or armored car drivers, the only reason we want anti-personnel weapons is because we want to commit crimes. She believes with all of her heart that we are criminals that just haven’t been caught yet.

  • Since when is being a gang member, member of a drug cartel, felon and robber a legitimate form of employment?

  • Archer

    @ Rauðbjorn: Since it contributes to “gun crime” and “gun death,” and thus, advances her agenda.

    Of course, with this new class of “legitimate” professions, we not only need to expand the ATF and DoJ to regulate, we also need to dramatically expand the IRS so they can make sure these “professionals” pay their “fair share.”

  • “How do you even begin to have a rational conversation with a person like that?”

    That’s why I don’t even bother to try; she is beyond help, and anyone who can’t see through her hysterical fears isn’t bright enough to reason with.

  • the dude

    Meh, sounds like most Commiefornians I’ve talked to. “Why do you NEED a gun???” “Certain guns shouldn’t be available to the public (but I have no idea which ones and why)” “If I needed a gun, I’d be more worried about where I’m living that I’d need a gun (because crime NEVER strays beyond city limits!)”

    In short, plain and simple straight up idiocy that, in my opinion, doesn’t deserve an ounce of reaction more than a raised eyebrow.

  • @ Sean D Sorrentino: Too true – I must confess that my brain pretty much shut down after the exposure to the excess quantities of “stupid” flowing forth from the merely superficial exacmination of her words… If we were to plumb deeper, the further failure of her deficient thought processes become clear… and all-too disturbing.

    @ Rauðbjorn: when your nearly exclusive purpose in life is to prance in the blood of violent crime victims and arbitrarily abridge law-abiding citizens’ rights, one’s definitions of words becomes… fluid.

    @ Archer: Given the mass quantities of corruption and illegal activities that are coming to light in the BATFE these days, what makes you think these “professionals” are not already paying to continue to ply their trades?

    @ BobG: Pretty much exactly why I gave up on her as well.

    @ the dude: That may very well be true, but it is important to highlight these instances all the same – the anti-rights cultists have become quite skilled at presenting a demure, obsequious, deferential attitude to the general public, such that when we speak out at them, they can claim to be the “bullied victim”, no matter how fallacious that claim is. Things like this speak to their baser motivations, especially since this woman is a board member for the only “gun control” organization with any actual pull.

  • Oakenheart

    I wonder if a practicing psychiatrist could develop a diagnosis of her malfunction by reading that blog. Clearly the woman has problems.

  • Apparently the 6 guys who robbed me at knife-point didn’t get her memo. If only they’d known!

  • @ Oakenheart: Arguably, such a diagnosis would be intrinsically flawed, but I have often wondered the same thing myself… Even we, as unskilled neanderthals, can tell the woman has some serious psychological issues.

    @ Nick – New Shooter Podcast: Damn, that sucks… But, yeah, in Joan’s world, that obviously never happened!

  • In a word, yes. The woman’s position inherently defends and supports criminals, she has specifically defended her murderous brother-in-law, and now she defends their “livelihood”.

    *sigh*

    And to think she thinks she is doing good…

  • Guns are a good start, but we must also outlaw spatulas, microwave ovens, jump ropes, and toilets, which have all been used to kill people.

    Who needs spatulas then? Well, home cooks need spatulas for the pancakes. Some peo­ple need spatulas for their pro­fes­sion– chefs, cake decorators, the prop master for Weird Al’s 1989 classic, “UHF”, etc., gang mem­bers, drug car­tels, felons, rob­bers and those who, with­out spatulas, could not do their jobs.

  • Yup, been there, written that.

    But, for some reason, for anti-rights cultists, guns are different. Despite the fact that murders and other crimes were committed before the development of firearms, and despite that other tools and weapons are still being used by thugs to perpetrate their violence on others, their fetishistic beliefs dictate that guns are simply different.

    That is one mental process I will simply never understand – a hunk of metal is a hunk of metal, whether it is forged into a firearm or a knife.

  • Ah, so you have!

    Despite the fact that murders and other crimes were committed before the development of firearms, and despite that other tools and weapons are still being used by thugs to perpetrate their violence on others, their fetishistic beliefs dictate that guns are simply different.

    I recorded a podcast segment on this point last night in reference to calling murderers who use firearms “gunmen”. Other than “bomber”, I can’t think of another case where the choice of weapon supplants the act in the language we use to describe the perpetrator. There may be others I’m not thinking of right now, but I’ve never heard knifeman, spatula-man, sharpened-toothbrush-or-spoon-man (which are used frequently in prisons), hammerman, carman, bare-hand-man, etc. The salient point is that there was an attack.

  • Well, not to be contrary, but you narrowed your field to modern times… looking further temporally abroad, you had “archers” and “swordsmen” and “pikemen” and so forth.

    Cannot say as though many murders were perpetrated with the use of a pike, I would imagine, but that is besides the point ;).

    Regardless, yeah, society has done a lot to create the myth that firearms are somehow intrinsically different from everything else, and anti-rights cultists have done their best to perpetuate that myth, but it is still a myth.

  • That’s true, I did. I guess I see the archaic terms as having a connotation of one being an expert in the weapon’s use, whereas we currently use “gunman” to describe any murderous a-hole who picks up a firearm and starts blasting. But yes, fair point!

  • Yeah, that is true, they are used in different fashions, but the words were still out there.

    Though, “gunman” did used to mean someone proficient with firearms… Then it got redefined towards more nefarious purposes, and we have pretty much lost the word ever since.

  • [...] (37)quotes of the day – national defense authorization act (24)we do not claim; we prove (18)quote of the day – joan peterson (17)paul helinski of gunsamerica fails at the internet (17)how social are you? (16)a spotter for the [...]