These folks could have just sat back and shut up.
Joan Peterson
Board member of the Brady Campaign
January 9, 2011
Blog post in response to this video.
[Have the people on her side “just sat back and shut up” when people advocating for the Second Amendment have their public events? Nope. That is when they call the press and lay down on the sidewalk.
This is the attitude of those that demand infringement of your specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms—they would like for you to voluntarily surrender your First Amendment rights as well.—Joe]
Anti-Freedom, not just Anti-gun!
I thought they were calling it ‘compromise’
To paraphrase Michael Savage;
The mark of a good American is a silent American. The mark of a better American is a stupid American, and the best American is a silent, stupid American.
Of course that only applies to those who favor liberty. If you’re a good communist you never sit down, you never shut up and you never get the fuck out of the way. Or as Dan Rather put it when speaking to his fellow communists after he was forced into retirement for (being caught) fabricating documents; “Courage”. Never give up The Struggle (for “Social Justice“).
Remember our philosophical starting points and ultimate goals and that makes a big difference in how vocal both sides should be:
1) Gun rights activists are seeking to protect, maintain and restore our rights improperly taken from us. It’s the “What part of ‘…shall not be infringed…’ is too difficult to understand?” type of argument. Obviously, we must speak out in defense of a civil right when it is attacked or undermined.
2) Gun control activists are seeking to restrict and deny this civil right. They have no moral authority to do so and they should mind their own damn business! They can “practice” their Second Amendment right by NOT owning or using firearms, however, they cannot dictate this restriction to me. Perhaps they should sit back and shut up.
Quite a bold statement for ol’ Joan to be making, considering that us uneducated hillbillies are known to have violent tendencies and hair-trigger tempers. Logic would dictate that telling armed, open-carriers to “sit back and shut up” seems sort of stupid. But then stupid is as stupid does.
Of course, if they really were “honoring” the fallen victims of crime, without an anti-gun agenda, they would welcome the pro-gun folks to their little Kum-bah-ya event. After all, they are always after us to compromise and be sensible – wouldn’t the sensible thing in this situation to invite us in and see if some common ground might be found? Nah…..
Well of course. The 1st Amendment is a danger to their cause.
Not to pick on Joan, but using her as an example regarding the ‘We care:You don’t’ silliness. If this were true, imagine a firearm owner on the scene where her sister was killed. Would they have defended the sister, or joined in on the shooting?