categories

archives

meta


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

ngvac set gun control up the bomb

I have to admit – I really, really love it when our opponents stab themselves in the back. It is no great surprise that the Germans had a word for that concept, but no matter how you cut it, watching anti-rights cultists destroy their own arguments with wanton disregard for the damage they are causing is hilarious indeed.

Speaking of, one of the few advantages of keeping at least half an eye on Twitter is that you occasionally find out about things before they hit the bigtime – for instance, when I read about some new "gun control" extremist organization called the "National Gun Victims Action Council" and how they were planning on boycotting Starbucks (yeah, because that has never failed before), I recalled seeing their Twitter account spouting a few stupid things before. At the time, their tweets were so remarkably inane that I figured they were yet another upstart, astroturf anti-rights organization offshooting from one of the parent organizations and scrabbling to gain traction in their dying community, and, as it turns out, I was not terribly far off-base.

ngvacboardbradyJust take a look at their board of directors, screencaptured to the right so you do not have to give them any traffic (arrows added for clarity). Who are these people? Well, they provide nice, complete bios on each one of them, but here are the important takeaways:

- Elliot Fineman – "Senior member of the Brady Pac-Illinois". (He is also a "behavioral-science-based proactive marketing" professional, which explains why the site reads like one huge propaganda machine.)
- Andrew Goddard – "President of the Richmond Chapter of the Million Mom March". (As a reminder, the Million Mom March is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Brady Campaign.)
- Lori O’Neil – "Served as president of the Cleveland chapter of MMM for two years and as vice president for two years". (Yet another marketing professional, to boot.)
- Kenny Barnes – Has generated press releases with the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. (As a reminder, the CSGV is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Joyce Foundation, which accounts for most of the anti-rights funding in the country.)
- Jeanne Bishop – "Volunteers with the Brady Campaign through its Million Mom March chapters as well as with the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence".
- Griffin Dix – "Chairman of the Brady Campaign’s Million Mom March National State Presidents Council and the chapter-elected member of the Brady Campaign Board of Trustees".
- Bill JenkinsBill and his wife, Jennifer, frequently represent the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence at debates, panels, and other public meetings.
- Thom Mannard – "President of States United to Prevent Gun Violence" and "founding member of the Brady PAC- Illinois". (As a reminder, SUPGV is another wholly-owned subsidiary of the Joyce Foundation.)
- Alice Thomas-Norris – "President of the Million Moms March Chicago Chapter of Survivors".
- Tom Vanden Berk – "One of the founding members of The Bell Campaign, which eventually became known as the Million Mom March" and "board member of the Brady Campaign/Million Mom March".
- Amanda and Nick Wilcox – "Serving as the Legislative Co-Chairs of the California Chapters of the Brady Campaign and interim leaders of the Sacramento Valley Chapter" and "President of the Nevada County Brady Campaign Chapter".
- Willie WilliamsFrequently works with the Brady Campaign to further "gun control" agendas.
- Heidi Yewman – "Washington state president of the Million Mom March/Brady Campaign".

Notice a pattern? Well, apart from not a single one of them being an actual, first-hand victim of "gun violence" (which I find particularly interesting, given Collin Goddard’s willingness to jump on any "gun control" grenade out there), the overwhelming majority of the board has not-insignificant ties to almost every other major and minor anti-rights organization in the country.

In and of itself, this is hardly surprising, given how incestuous anti-rights organizations are these days (and with their decreasing memberships and support, can you hardly blame them?), but this overlap of members is not the backstabbing to which I was referring.

ngvactakeyourgunsawayInstead, I would direct your attention to the screencapture to the left. Verily, that thing could provide me blogfodder for… well… years*, but I want you to ignore the rest of the material (that I only screencaptured as proof that this did, indeed, come from NGVAC’s webpage) and instead focus on the highlighted-in-pinky-purple block.

So far as I can tell (the Board may be comprised of marketers and anthropologists and other high-brow pseudo-"intellectuals", but damned if they can create a webpage that communicates their ideas clearly and efficiently), the format of this section is:

#. Our Buzzword-Laden Name for One of the NRA’s Supposed ‘Main Tactics’
What they are doing.
• Our counterpoint.

While that is just a guess, it is substantiated by the pattern in item number 6. Now, pay attention to item number 7:

7. Simplistic Sound Bite Logic
Law abiding citizens are always going to be law abiding.
Fact: Every criminal was once law abiding citizen.

The government secretly wants to take your guns away:
Any sane gun law will lead to the government being able to take your guns away.

The only… *ahem*… "sane" response to the first italicized sentence is, "Duh." Every adult was once a child, every rapist was once "just a man", and every prostitute was once "just a woman". What was your point again? Oh, right, obviously the solution is to lock everyone up! (Which, given NGVAC’s love affair with once-Great-Britain and the developing police state there, may not be as sarcastic as I might like it to be.)

But the second italicized line… well, that is the money quote, so to speak. "Any sane gun law will lead to the government being able to take your guns away." The NGVAC seems big on "sane gun laws", with the phrase, along with "insane gun laws" (referring, of course, to anything the big, bad NRA proposes), occurring somewhere around once every two sentences on their webpage – can you say, "SEO-whoring"? I knew you could. But Google-bombing or not, that single sentence, right there, is a seven-inch, ivory-handled KA-BAR shoved between the third and fourth ribs of the dorsal side of "gun control".

Why? Simple: one of the favorite talking points of "gun control" extremists – especially when someone accurately observes that registration leads to confiscation – is that no modern "gun control" organization wants to take your guns away.

ORLY?

Well, then, thank you Elliot and thank you Andrew and thank you to the rest of the National Gun Victims Action Council for providing us such an easy counterpoint to that claim – after all, why would people so viciously obsessed with firearms and the demonization of them want the government to have the ability to take our firearms away if they did not actually want the government to do exactly that?

And look at the phrasing of the sentence – note how they simply say "take your guns"; not "take criminals’ guns", not "take convicted persons’ guns", not "take some people’s guns". Nope, take your guns – as in every single firearm-owning person who happened upon their webpage and happened to read that sentence. Nevermind the "why" of the situation (especially because it boils down to nothing more complicated than their deep-seated, pathological, uncontrollable fear of an inanimate object) – these people want to empower the government to whimsically and capriciously confiscate your private property… ironically, at the point of a gun.

We have committed no crimes. We have no convictions levied against us. We might not even know what the inside of a jail or courtroom looks like (I certainly do not). And yet these deluded, frothing-at-the-mouth blood-dancers sound like they are on a mission from God to disarm everyone and anyone, regardless of whether they want to be or not.

Is it any wonder why we fight them on every front? Is it any wonder why we "get angry"? Is it any wonder why I refer to them, and people like them, as ‘cultists’?

And remember, these are not just wierdos off the street or some fringe organization just spouting off nonsense; no, this organization is comprised of honest-to-God movers-and-shakers the lead "gun control" organization in the country (not as though that is saying a lot). Do you really think these bigoted, narrow-minded, and zealous views do not percolate down through their daily dealings in the Brady Campaign, SUPGV, or CSGV as well?

So thank you again, boys and girls of the National Gun Victims Action Council – your words will prove to be invaluable in showing the "gun control" movement for the authoritarian, intolerant, illogical, and irrational disaster it really is. I wonder if you comprehend that yet?

(* – Just look at the last two sentences of the first section. The first is a lie, confuses the causalities of market pressures, and implicitly spreads other lies that simply are not true. The second is a non sequitur; it does not follow logically from the first – simply due to the fact that respecting individual rights, especially that of self defense, is intrinsically sane – so there cannot be any "as a result". And this is without even touching on the fallacy of comparing once-Great-Britain’s crime rates to America’s, or the fallacy of maliciously narrowing the playing field to only the fabricated statistic of "gun murders", or the fallacy of "common sense"… er… "sanity". Oy.)

(Note: As always, family members of those killed by criminals, regardless of the tool employed by the criminal have my condolences. However, being related to someone who was killed in a criminal action, or even being someone a criminal attacked yourself, does not make you above reproach, it does not make you automatically right, and it does not give you the right to go about wantonly attacking other people’s rights. Your grief/outrage/anger/etc. is an insufficient reason to infringe on my right to self-defense, much less my Constitutionally-protected, unanimously-recognized-by-the-Supreme-Court individual right to own firearms.)

15 comments to ngvac set gun control up the bomb

  • You’d think that with so many “marketers” they would be able to find a way to at least obfuscate the message in a way that doesn’t offend anyone with two brain cells to rub together…

  • I find it fascinating that an organization comprised of a million moms has a hard time finding enough qualified women to run things. It seems that the overwhelming majority of MMM leadership is male. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

    Also, if possible, would you mind terribly adding me to your blogroll? I’d be grateful.

  • Not to mention their wilful mischaracterization of their opponent’s statements to provide a strawman:

    Law abiding citizens are always going to be law abiding.

    Has the NRA ever made that claim? All we’ve ever claimed as private firearms rights advocates is that CCW holders are statistically much more law-abiding than the population in general, and thus much less likely to commit the crimes of violence they fear.

  • Tam

    It took me a second to parse the “Any sane gun law…” thing, and I believe what they’re trying (clumsily) to say is that a sane gun law will allow the government to take guns away. Not from you, you understand, but from people who shouldn’t have them, like wife beaters, and people convicted of DUI, and people under the care of a mental health specialist, and people convicted of serious misdemeanors, and people who’ve made violent threats on the internet, and…

    …well, eventually, everybody, although they’re often not honest enough with themselves to admit it.

  • SGB

    Stalin would be so proud of these propaganda clowns.

  • MAJ Mike

    The Lib-Cong are only pro-choice regarding abortion. Our motto could be, “My gun, my choice.”

  • @ bluesun: Seriously. Given the number of apparently big-time exucutives, sociologists, anthropologists, and Grand-Poo-Bah Degrees floating around in that board, you would think one of them would be smart enough to realize that telegraphing their moves that obviously was just damned stupid.

    Guess not, though. All the better for us :).

    @ Oliver Perry: Had not really stopped to think about it myself, but you rather hit an interesting point with that observation… I wonder what MMM’s distribution of the genders is, not that they would ever release that kind of data into the wild.

    One might start thinking their name was a lie… ;)

    Oh, and done.

    @ John Hardin: Like I said, that single screencap could keep me in posts for the forseeable future, but it probably just is not worth it – these guys are so far out in left field, I would honestly be surprised if anyone but the already-lost took them seriously.

    @ Tam: Oh, I know they were not (necessarily) referring to us (right now), but, as you said, that is the inevitable conclusion of their mentality. I would prefer not to go down that path at all, especially given that particular organization’s love affair with the “terrorist watch list” that you never know you are on, have no way of removing yourself from, and requires no due process.

    And, Christ, I am far from being a particularly outstanding author, but whichever moron was in charge of that particular page could not write his way out of a gorramed paper bag!

    @ SGB: To take your snark literally for a moment, I seriously doubt he would – their propaganda was obvious, clumsy, and crappily written, and he was not a man known for his tolerance of failure.

    @ MAJ Mike: An internally inconsistent point I just love to point out to those people who suffer from it :).

  • And another points is the implicit assertion that if you’re a part of the “right crowd” you’ll get to keep your guns. Heck you might even be allowed to carry a handgun, just like in New Jersey, New York City, Boston, or San Francisco.

    Again and again we see that these people are not against guns, free speech, or wealth in general, they’re just against the “wrong” people having said things.

  • Tam – Especially when you add in the wonderful “three felonies a day” theory.

  • The most obvious response to “Fact: Every criminal was once law abiding citizen.” is “Fact: Every totalitarian state was once a state with a ‘sane’ weapon-control law.”

  • [...] commentsBobG on #32Rob Crawford on find a nicheJoseph Hertzlinger on ngvac set gun control up the bombOddball on find a nicheDJMoore on find a nicheMr_Rich on one-line review: contagionMr_Rich on so it [...]

  • @ The Jack: Hm. I wonder what the staff of the NGVAC thinks of Joan Peterson owning firearms with her husband, given her particularly deranged “gun control” support… Is that “acceptable” to them, or will they cast her under the bus eventually? I wonder if any such casting would be sufficient to break through that woman’s insanity, or if she would just comfort herself – as she sells off those firearms – that it was “for the greater good”?

    I swear, what I would give for a logically consistent opponent…

    @ Lokidude: Rather surprised they did not mention that themselves…

    @ Joseph Hertzlinger: … And still is, for that matter. Governments have killed at least one order of magnitude, and probably multiple orders, more than any summation of crime, accident, or suicide, and yet these half-baked morons want to hand yet another government all the power in the world.

    No. Our forefathers fought and died to prevent that from happening, and damned if I will dishonor their memories.

  • [...] course there’s the fact that NGAC is mostly made up of Active Brady Campaign and Million Mom March active members, or Lori O’Neil being such an anti-rights activists…but activly using the blank twitter [...]

  • [...] there’s a group (mostly Brady Campaign Members posing as a sister group) who are planning on boycotting [...]



web analytics

View My Stats