categories

archives

meta


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

the eugenical dreams of joan peterson

I do not read Joan Peterson‘s (aka "Japete") misnamed weblog "Common Gunsense", simply because the level of derangement that woman exhibits frankly frightens me, but the cost of that restraint on my part is that I miss out on a great deal of blogfodder, which, if this post is any indication, might be just as well for my blood pressure and opinion of humanity.

To cut straight to the chase, it would appear as though, in an unsurprising falling-in-line with her anti-rights cultist predecessors, Joan Peterson has concluded that firearm owners should not be parents. Do not worry, that link does not go to her site, but this is the key quote in question, as originally penned by "Japete":

Why on earth does a 17 year old girl want a purse with a gun design on it that looks so real that airport security detained her?

[…]

Does it seem appropriate to you? 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."

Ignoring, for a moment, the complete and utter idiocy of the TSA harassing a female teenager due to a stylized pistol bas relief on her purse, and then likewise ignoring Joan’s apparent belief that the Thousands of Sexual Assaulters agents are completely and totally infallible in all situations and circumstances, pay attention to the third question in the above blockquote.

In Joan Peterson’s intolerant and narrow-minded opinion, a person who ornaments their purse with a stylized, artistic, completely-non-operational rendition of a firearm is a deficient role model for whatever children that person may or may not have in the future. Given that baseline position, can you imagine what Joan must think about actual firearm owners, much less people who carry firearms, potentially even in their purses?

"But why should we care what an obviously mentally unbalanced hoplophobe thinks about our style or ownership of private property?" I can already hear you asking. You forget one thing – this is not just another "gun control" extremist wailing in the wilderness like Michael Bonomo and his thuggish, bullying co-authors; no, Joan is, in truth and fact, "President of the Northland Chapter and the Million Mom March Chapters’ national representative to the Board of Directors of the Brady Campaign". As such, and by her very own "logic" (though I very much hate to use that word in reference to anything she does), Joan Peterson’s positions and statements reflect – quite poorly, in this case – on the organizations she has agreed to represent and manage.

Organizations that have not, so far as I can tell, even attempted to muzzle an obvious loose canon who is doing them and their causes a world of harm.

Based on nothing more than her own bigoted perspective on the world, an official representative of the largest anti-rights organization in the country (which is not saying much), the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence Ownership, has apparently concluded that firearm owners are incapable of being good parents, and I can only guess it is a matter of time before she starts proselytizing about how to ‘save’ those children from their parents, much less other topics even farther down that particular rabbit hole. That is not "gun control"; that is eugenics, and I find the only safe course of action for me, to refrain from devolving into language I generally refrain from using here, is to quote what I have said in the past:

These are the kind of people who would despicably strip you of your Constitutionally-protected rights to self-defense and self-preservation. These are the kind of people who would rely on such reprehensible techniques as calling the Child Protective Services on someone who dares to disagree with them. These are the kind of people who knowingly aid and abet criminals through their “activism” and the legislation they support. These are the kinds of people who would uncaringly leave you and yours defenseless in the face of crime that does happen to anyone, anywhere, any time.

Do. Not. Let. Them. Win.

There is just too much at stake. 

6 comments to the eugenical dreams of joan peterson

  • Good catch on connecting it with Tango’s incident. For some reason I didn’t make that connection. I see a pattern repeating.

  • They’re all like that, liberals that is. I used to subscribe to an organic gardening magazine Mother Earth News (maybe I’m a closet hippie). They slowly devolved into more political leftism over the years, finally cumulating in an article that advocated “population control” to help save the environment.

    I never renewed my subscription afterwards. Population control can have only one connotation, and if Hitler (et al) wasn’t enough to prove that fallacy, I didn’t want anything to do with them.

    Gun controllers, by definition, fall into this same category. If you’ve seen one liberal, you’ve seen ‘em all.

  • Archer

    “Organizations that have not, so far as I can tell, even attempted to muzzle an obvious loose canon [sic] who is doing them and their causes a world of harm.”

    Personally, I think she’s doing a wonderful job*. Let her continue her fine work*. If this* is how she wants to spend her time and energy, who am I to stop her?

    Far be it from me to deny her her First Amendment rights.

    (*: showing the world the true colors of the gun-control crowd.)

  • lucusloc

    “Far be it from me to deny her her First Amendment rights.

    (*: Winning over people for our side.)”

    FTFY

    also

    “*: proving our points for us.”

    “*: being the best pro-freedom spokesperson around.”

    “*: helping to defund the anti-freedom croud”

    etc, etc.

  • @ Barron Barnett: If I had to guess, the anti-rights cultists have realized that attacking people through their families is a remarkably effective and demoralizing tactic… The real question, now, is whether these assaults are coordinated or just the flailing strikes of a dying organization.

    @ alcade: I am not sure I would agree that all liberals are automatically as bad as Joan here is, but I could concede that it is possible for them to be. But, yeah, it disturbs and saddens me that people would still even consider such gos-se as “population control”, or telling other people that they cannot be parents simply because they hold to different opinions.

    @ Archer: Looking back, I probably should have phrased that better – I was not trying to suggest that those organizations forcibly silence her, only that, were I in charge of any of those organizations, I would be going out of my way to ensure that Joan was only speaking as Joan, and not as an official representative of those organizations.

    … For exactly the reason you mention.

    @ lucusloc: And that is why I hold her positions to be representative of the organizations she represents – it is simply unquestionable that her lunacy is doing all that and more, and yet the Brady Campaign, CSGV, etc. continue to fervently support her. Fine. If you support her, you support her positions, and you are welcome to them!

  • […] Campaign Board Member, blood-dancer extraordinaire, arguable face of “gun control”, and eugenicist Joan Peterson (writing under the moniker “japete”) at the conclusion of a post abusively […]