She has a good one up!
The theme for most of my blog posts is seeking change to the conversation- change to the gun culture- change to gun laws. It is not for the sake of change though. It is for the sake of saving lives. That is why I write this blog.
And by “Change the Conversation” its by having no conversation at all. Joan doesn’t want to play with us, she will delete most comments on her blog, and only comments (and rarely at that) on the blogs of other anti-gun groups. Also she’s lying about her reasons because when it comes to saving lives, we’re doing a pretty good job of it.
This is one of the big issues I don’t think gets talked about much in the debate between the 2nd Amendment and the gun-banners. BOTH sides are wanting the same end result. Its not like the NRA never talks about “Gun Death”, or isn’t the leading provider in gun safety training! One side says if we have less guns, we’ll have less crime. The other side says if good people can defend themselves against violence, there will be less violence.
Oh and look at that link I just posted, what do the antis have to counter that?
In the years I have been writing there is a definite change to the landscape. There are more groups working to make this change happen. Twitter and Facebook, for example, are now very effective tools for sharing messaging, points of view, articles and campaigns. It’s about time that gun violence prevention groups are organized and organizing for change. After the shooting at Sandy Hook elementary school, even more groups have emerged to put pressure on lawmakers to pass stronger gun laws. And with more people writing, blogging and posting on Internet sites, the truth is more often exposed about what the corporate gun lobby is doing to keep us in the dark about their true agenda
Interesting how she talks about a “Hidden Agenda”…given that she ignores how guns save lives, and crime has been dropping as more people keep and bear arms. And how she ignores the utter failures of previous gun control efforts, and their rank unpopularity, and simply spouts about banning more guns and restricting more rights. Who has an agenda?
And what’s the story with “More Voices” on the gun control side. I did a post wayy back when I first started this blog where I went down Jason “Baldr” Kilgore’s blogroll to show not only how infrequently anti-gun bloggers write compared to pro-gun bloggers, but also how many of those “separate” blogs are really all written by a handful of people working for the same organization (and I mean “Working for” as in paid to do it, rather than “Working For” as in compatriots for a common goal). Go have a look, and go and swing by Jason’s or Joan’s site to see how they’ve changed.
There are a few new faces on Jason’s roll, Joan doesn’t link as much as he does, but there are a TON of dead links, and links that have been removed. Hell there was one new blogger who I was reading who posted about 10 posts in about two months, then for reasons unknown locked all of his blogs, both the gun control one, as well as a few I found out about after the lock from reading his twitter backlog that sounded interesting.
More on that:
There’s much more in this article that informs us about how the gun lobby is reacting to the changes happening in the gun violence prevention movement. One thing is clear. This group hates former Mayor Michael Bloomberg who founded Mayors Against Illegal Guns. Why? Because finally there is someone on the side of gun violence prevention with money and influence to make change. Thanks to Bloomberg and the many other groups involved in the movement to change the conversation about guns and gun violence, change is beginning to happen. The Brady Campaign, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, Moms Demand Action, Violence Policy Center, Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, Newtown Action, States United to Prevent Gun Violence, and many other groups, including those working in states all over the country are contributing to the new landscape that makes the gun lobby so nervous.
Well about Bloomberg. He’s no longer a mayor, neither is his co-founder, Boston’s Tom Menino (who is apparently dying of cancer…I won’t comment on that), and MAIG has pulled the listing of their members after so many quit, or had their names signed to MAIG pressers without ever being members, or after withdrawing their membership. Bloomberg is now spending his money on his own, or dumping money into Moms Demand Action, of which he is the primary money source.
The rest of those groups Joan lists are really just all subsidiaries of the same groups. Gun control groups are either funded by the Joyce Foundation, the Brady Campaign, or Michael Bloomberg.
Joan herself is a member of all three groups in one way or another, and makes her living being one of the leaders of Protect Minnesota, which funds its paid staffers through a Joyce Foundation grant.
Now of course multiple memberships isn’t a bad thing, I’m a member of multiple 2nd Amendment groups myself, but when the active membership of these groups is so very small one wonders how much work they’re doing to simply inflate their apparent numbers.
Change will only happen when the truth is exposed. The truth is that only some gun sales require background checks and others not. They are all selling the same products. Guns are all potentially dangerous. They should all be treated the same as say cigarettes where store clerks ask for IDs for anyone who looks too young to legally buy them. In addition, cigarettes are now behind counters where someone has to ask for them. Why? Because we have decided that they are bad for your health and not good especially for kids and teens. Alcohol sales are regulated as well. IDs are required for purchases if the buyer looks too young to be legal. Why? Alcohol can be bad for people as well. But all alcohol sales are treated the same. All cigarette sales are treated the same. Sales of some decongestants have been moved behind the counter where buyers must ask for them. Why? They can lead to illegal drug production and use. These restrictions just make common sense and we don’t seem to object to these changes because we have learned the truth about the risks and dangers involved. It is for the common good in the interest of public health and safety. Guns and their owners should be treated the same. But they aren’t. And that is a problem.
BIG lie! Joan is of course playing out the talking point for her “universal background check agenda” and comparing apples to masonry bricks. Yep, store clerks check ID for tobacco sales, alcohol sales, and Pseudoephedrine, but only Pseudoephedrine has mandated rules for its sale. I can’t remember the last time I had to show an ID to buy a beer in a store (Restaurants are a little more picky), or a cigar.
Still after that its no different than guns. I’ve given all of the above controlled substances to friends. No ID needed, and honestly no fear of prosecution either. Now try to go to a gun show and buy a firearm from a stranger without at LEAST pulling out your license. That’s an inconvenient truth for Joan.
Further what good has it done? Is there no longer a Meth problem in the United States? That should be enough to refute it ALL, as that’s the most restricted sale out there. Still most smokers start smoking in their teens, well before their 18th Birthday, and most people have their first drink of alcohol in High School!
But Joan somehow thinks it’ll work THIS time. Yeah, “Common Sense”.
Guns are dangerous and pose a risk to those who own them and carry them in public places. We should think about that when we allow people to buy them without background checks. But more than that, there should be more attention paid to these risks. So why are we not doing more about those risks and studying the risks like we do for other products and services? Because the corporate gun lobby doesn’t want us to.
Umm look at the above link from “Corporate Gun Lobby” National Shooting Sports. Again, guns are dangerous and have risks, but lawful citizens carrying guns and owning guns have made America SAFER! We’re pretty open about this, why are the antis spending all their time ignoring this and using twisted statistics to make it seem like it isn’t true?
We all know that talking about guns and gun violence comes with a lot of controversy. It shouldn’t. There is pretty much wide spread agreement that we should be requiring background checks on all gun sales. There is also agreement on some of the other controversial gun measures that have been proposed and have failed over the years. Why? The corporate gun lobby doesn’t want us to agree on solutions. Instead of joining us in efforts to stem the tide of gun violence, many in the gun rights community go in the opposite direction and actually flaunt their guns in public to make some kind of point.
No, because the entirety of people who support Joan’s agenda can fit into a small Hotel Banquet hall! We have more guns, we have less crime and violence, and the people know it, so your laws go down in flames! You have no support, so you have no success!
Lives are forever changed by gun violence. Faith communities can speak out and make a difference for change in our communities. I will be participating in one of these sabbath events on Sunday. I hope you will all find a faith community near you and find out what you can do to effect change. Check out the Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence for more information. Participants will be singing, reflecting and hoping for non violence to become more prevalent than the violence that is so pervasive in America. They may even pray for truth and justice. Based on the few incidents I wrote about in this post, I would say that prayer will not be enough. Action is what is needed to enact the changes we deserve. We know we can do better so let’s get to work.
More like Joan’s agenda doesn’t have a prayer!
