Images of the Antis: Twofer

So I’ve been spending the better part of the day baby-wrangling, and I realized I’ve fallen a bit behind looking at the images of the antis from the various (you know who) anti-freedom lobbyist pintrest pages.

First up is chock-full of anti-freedom foolishness:

OK Right off the bat, there is no citation of the “1 in 30 Would Be gun buyers on Armslist”, and I couldn’t find what they were talking about with a very quick Google search. If you’ve seen this citation please post it in the comments. I don’t see what they’re talking about, or even what this really means. I’m guessing its pure made-up nonsense, or “Criminal History” is defined as “Whatever we say it is”. Still the kicker is the comparison to the “Terror Watch List”. I talk about the fallacy of the watch list here extensivly, but the take away is that the past terror attacks in America after the inception of the “Watch List” were done by active terrorists NOT on the list, and the people who ARE on the list are NOT terrorists, or even a danger to anybody. So yeah, you could FILL that 747 with “Terrorists” as defined by the arbitrary and erroneous “Watch List”, and that jet would take off from the airport, and arrive on its destination without even a foolish “Drunken Disturbance” while en route.

Its just a foolish fear-mongering tactic that actually amounts to nothing but the loss of freedom to people who have done NOTHING and will do NOTHING. Hey but cling to that stupidity antis!

Next up is some prime psychological projection:

Yeah, the NRA is editing the constitution to push their agenda. So says the people who talk about “Collective” despite all 9 Supreme Court Justices, even the anti-rights “Progressive” ones citing that there is no such thing.

Further reading the dissent argument for Heller vs. DC you see the “Progressives” agreeing that the 2nd Amendment protects the right of the individual people of the United States to keep and bear arms…just they want to decide on arbitrary and illogical terms what arms can be kept, and where they can be carried.

Pure projection, as the “Progressives” are the ones who claim the Constitution is a “Living Document” subject to whatever arbitrary whim that strikes them at that moment, even when such whims are by nature unconstitutional per the drafting of the Bill of Rights.

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

5 Responses to Images of the Antis: Twofer

  1. Eck! says:

    For all those antigun fools that spout TLDR (too long and didn’t read) here is the law that makes your idiotic posters invalid and just another of or their “feeelings” of how it should be.

    (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are – (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

    Part two is referencing the general population that are NOT currently in the military
    or the National Guard. If they are part of the state level Guard units they are in the organized militia.

    Those that are not part of the well regulated and unorganized militia are the mindless
    antigunners, though officially they still are.. However by request of the government they can be forced to participate (drafted).


  2. skinnedknuckles says:

    I believe this is the source of the 1 in 30 metric – I’m sure you aren’t surprised.

  3. McThag says:

    Define “criminal background”.

    Convicted felon? Misdemeanant?

    Numerous arrests without indictments or convictions?

  4. Archer says:

    “So says the people who talk about “Collective Right” despite all 9 Supreme Court Justices, even the anti-rights “Progressive” ones citing that there is no such thing.”

    FTFY. The Supremes decided unanimously that 2A protects an individual right, and the “Collective Right” argument is hogwash.

    Other than that, an excellent fisking! (not that they make it hard, but still….)

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Thanks so much for pointing out that EGREGIOUS typo! I’m hardly a polished writer, and if Weer’d World was a subscriber site or magazine I’d be hiring Christina LMT as my full-time editor (she’s got MAD skillz), but there’s the difference between a wrong word choice, or a messed up contraction, and a completely wrong word that totally changes the post.

      So I fixed it. Thanks!

Leave a Reply

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