Joan Doubles Down

She Tweeted it Yesterday, and then doubled-down with a blog post. Lately Joan’s blog posts have been nothing short of an embarrassment. They’re disjointed, mostly quotes from other anti-rights shills, and really don’t follow any one train of thought. This one is a little more coherent, so I’ll reward her with a post!

Raise your hand if you think it’s a great idea for these Michigan militia members to get their arsenal of weapons back after serving time in jail. Really, where is common sense? I submit to my readers that when something like this can happen, there is something seriously wrong with our system. Yes, these 3 folks were acquitted while other members of their group were not. But really, what were they planning with all of these guns? Did they really have what was claimed to be a gun collection? Does one also collect ammunition just for fun if one is not planning to use it someday?

What an idiot! But it gets better with this!

Remember now, these are the very same people that the NRA and its’ minions want to become a “protected class” ( see my last post). We should worry about protecting these folks?

Well given that you want to take rights away from innocent people JUST because you don’t like them, YES! YES WE DO! Because Evil bitches like you exist, and you are so consumed with hate, that yeah, we do!

I had a really interesting conversation last night with a man who drives a security truck for pick-up of cash at businesses in town. He is armed every day because of his job. He leaves that gun at home when he goes out and about in the community because he, like many other gun owners, does not buy into the NRA’s version of America. The idea that gun owners could become some sort of “protected class” of people seemed ridiculous to him. Like so many other gun owners, he believes in background checks for all guns sales. I know this because I asked him. He does not believe in the loose conceal and carry laws and is very opposed to Stand Your Ground Laws. He supports the restrictions on ammunition magazines so that “only” ten or twelve bullets can be shot in one round. He finds it ridiculous that anyone thinks they need more than that. He is a hunter. He is reasonable and told me he would never join the NRA. And he finds the organization to be irrelevant in today’s world and understands that we should be trying to stop some people from owning and carrying guns.

First, who knows if this is true or not. Still one must question this security driver. He carries every day at work. How many ND’s has he had? How many people has he shot in error? So what’s the big deal carrying off duty?

Also gotta love Joan applying this gun owner to “many gun owners”…first no Gun Culture 2.0 gun owners would tolerate Joan, and certainly Joan doesn’t associate with anybody but “Progressives”, so maybe she THINKS this is common, but she’s self-selecting.

Again no rational is given for any of this shit, just that its “Common Sense”….well just because. Sounds like common sense to me!

But, as it turns out, all kinds of people who shouldn’t be carrying guns in public do so anyway. In Florida, according to one gun permit “instructor”, it’s “pretty freaking easy” to get a permit. Great. How reassuring. Raise your hand if you think the following is O.K. with you

Shouldn’t be carrying in YOUR eyes (again with taking rights away from people you hate!), I’m all for Vermont Style carry. Why should I ask permission to exercise a right. Oh you can tell Vermont, Wyoming, Alaska, and Arizona, because THE STREETS ARE RED WITH BLOOD!!!! (or not)

So good job at an *almost* coherent blog post. She’s already done another one, so her coherent streak was broken at one.

This is the VERY BEST the anti-rights side has. No wonder we’re winning!

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Safety, Self Defense. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Joan Doubles Down

  1. Lissa says:

    Re *they* were acquitted but others in the group were not — Aren’t civilized, educated people supposed to be AGAINST guilt-by-association?

  2. Thirdpower says:

    Joan isn’t their ‘best’ but she is part of the leadership. There are a few intelligent individuals present in the groups but they’re all blinded by being ‘True Believers’ (ie Ladd and both of the Josh’s.

    Their effective and intelligent leadership were mostly hired guns (ie Hamm) that have since mostly dropped the cause or at least those groups seeing the way the wind was blowing.

    • Thirdpower says:

      On another angle, note she’s another one that is now an opponent of the 6th amendment. They’ve had their trial/due process, been found not-guilty, but are still guilty and should be punished in her world.

      • Robert says:

        Don’t forget the Fifth Amendment. So that makes at least three amendments that Joan is perfectly fine trampling on.

  3. Jack says:

    Yeah, I’d say Bloomberg and MAIG have a leg up on her, but still Joan is a “big wheel” herself.

    So… she finds a great Only One/”I’m a gun owner but”/Fudd. Amazing how her buddy supports every one of Joan’s talking points, including such laughable errors as “ten or twelve bullets can be shot in one round” (so he/she is against shot shells?) and ” trying to stop some people from owning and carrying guns”.

    Isn’t that like saying “We should be trying to stop some people from owning and writing books.”? Or owning and drivng cars?

    Also it’s funny and creepy that she feels that due process, return of property seized when no crime has been commited, and the very idea of rights is a “protected class”.

    They really are against liberty and rights and see such things as a special entitlement.

    Here’s the delicious bit. We’re for Shall issue / Constitutional Carry. Which means at the (most restricive* if you’re not a Prohibited person, you take the training, pay the fees, and you get the permet.

    Where Joan and the others support “sensible” restrictions such as Boston, NYC, or San Fran carry where only the cronies and buddies of the Mayor and Police can carry.

    Now which side wants to make a protected class of people who can carry?

  4. Chad says:

    yup, the streets are running red with blood here…….not

  5. Bleddyn says:

    “it’s “pretty freaking easy” to get a permit.” Maybe someone should tell Joan that this means the process of application is not much harder than getting a driver’s liscence and has nothing to do with the qualifications for approval (not that it’s very hard to not be a felon, like you say, I do it every day!). What makes me feel like she would just refuse to understand anyway though.

    And, as it turns out, all kinds of people ARE carrying in public who shouldn’t be; even in those bastions of civil liberties known as New York and Los Angeles: they’re called criminals.

  6. You know, now that I think about it, I was a pretty bad anti gun advocate. I never came close to saying any of the idiotic things this chic says. Of course, I didn’t even know who she was until I started carrying a gun. I am guessing had I followed closer attention to the Brady Campaign, I would have switched sides long ago.

  7. Ken O says:

    Her disjointed message and general manner of writing makes me assume she has been toking the peace pipe and paranoia has set in.

  8. While Joan might be a board member, I think her influence is fairly minor on a national stage – perhaps a little more in the middle on a state level here in Minnesota.

    I’d love to debate her – she doesn’t post half of my comments over there because I post facts that refute the crap that she cooks up. It would be a lot more fun to debate her in person… but I suspect that will never *ever* happen in my lifetime.

    • Weerd Beard says:

      “debate”? More like “BLOODBATH!” These dorks NEVER open and freely engage an equal in debate. At best you’ll see Full-time Paid Lobbyist and politician Paul Helmke or a similar, vs. say, the local chair of Conceal Carry Campus, or MAYBE Larry Pratt of GOA…and they still need to spin it to make it LOOK like a win.

      Hell, not only will they not DEBATE, but they won’t even DEFEND their own cause under any circumstances. They’ll drop talking points, but they won’t actually discuss them for any reason. That says a LOT.

      Remember, we comment at THEIR blogs and cites, NEVER the other way around. The best I got was Jason Kilgore (I think we can both agree a total lightweight), would occasionally come by and drop a talking point…and never come back to the discussion he created.

      That’s as close as they’ll ever come to a “Debate”.

  9. Greg Camp says:

    Jadegold once did a carpet bombing run on an article that I’d written, but never came back to see my replies.

    I’d call for a show of hands from all of us who keep raising ours while reading her post, but my right arm’s worn out. Let’s see:

    Returning property to someone who is found to be not guilty? Aye.

    Finds it normal to have a gun collection and ammunition? Aye.

    Believes that the right to bear arms shouldn’t be infringed? Aye.

    She didn’t ask this, but I also think that magazines holding the designed number of rounds is also acceptable.

Leave a Reply

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