A good use of their money

It’s extremely rare that I am pleased with anything Washington Ceasefire does. But I find this moderately pleasing:

New ads asking you to think twice about gun ownership are showing up on Metro buses…

Ceasefire spent $50,000 on the bus signs…

The ads are trying to change the minds of people about exercising their specific enumerated right to keep keep and bear arms. That’s going to be a really tough sell. And to what end? The only way that can have a detrimental effect is if they can get a critical mass in the legislature through the shift of public opinion. They are advertising in districts they already “own” legislatively. The best they can hope for is to keep from losing some of that support.

It is going to be a especially difficult sell since they are using bogus statistics. Only one researcher has come up with their claimed conclusion, “When you have a gun in the home, you are 22 times more likely to kill a family member or a friend than you are an intruder”. Other researchers disputed it. And the wording of the conclusion is such that it is very misleading. It assumes the only valid use of a firearm is if it is used to kill an intruder. Brandishing or a wounding that results in the protection of innocent life or property doesn’t count with this metric.

So… keep pouring that money down the toilet Washington Ceasefire. Your end is near and I am pleased you are hastening that day.

6 thoughts on “A good use of their money

  1. I’d like to put up a sign that says “If you belong to Washington cease fire, you’re 22 times more likely to be against the Constitution”

  2. “They are advertising in districts they already “own” legislatively. The best they can hope for is to keep from losing some of that support.”

    More like districts they USED to own, and are rapidly losing their hold. Just look at the political shift. It used to be that gun ownership and the 2nd Amendment was a litmus for the super-far right Republicans, and surprisingly akin to the people looking to slap the Ten Commandments onto every public building, and pushing “Sin Taxes” for stalwart religious reasons.

    Meanwhile Handgun Control Inc. Was the leading gun control group in America and was helmed by the Bradies, and Paul Helmke, all Republicans.

    Now we have lots of Democrats, and Moderate Republicans penning liberal gun bills, and signing them into law, and ALL the forces of gun control are self-described “Progressives”, who fault President Obama for not being Marxist enough!

    I’m sure Ubu and all her Neighbors prattle on about banning guns, and mandating social programs on the backs of people who actually work…but I suspect she crosses paths with dozens of gun owners every day, and those people might be self-described Democrats and Liberals, and many of them are frustrated that their government doesn’t trust them to carry their guns if they feel the need.

    The Gun Control laws are really a simulacrum for the Sodomy laws of yesterday. The people who support them are as radical as they are fossils.

  3. Remember they aren’t using any money they had to earn themselves, they are spending someone else’s money.

    That usually means less responsible spending, in both the government and public advocacy realms. I they had $1,000,000 to spend getting this message out, do you think they would have only spent 1/20 of it?

    I suspect they spent all they had on what they wanted, without worrying about the reality of their actions.

  4. “When you have a gun in the home, you are 22 times more likely to kill a family member or a friend than you are an intruder”.
    Or is it 47 times, or 14 times more likely? Whatever number it is, it is like Senator Iselin’s number of communists in the State Department in the Manchurian Candidate. Made up, so one is as good as another. 57 times more likely?.

    And Weer’d Beard, these people prattle on about all these good ideas because they have all the ideas because they are smarter and more compassionate than the people who merely have stumbled across all that money; They are cruel, greedy, unimaginative and, what’s worse, UNCOOL!

  5. Since a woman is more likely to be raped by someone they know, maybe those “friends” mentioned in the statistic needed killing? Even Ceasefire enjoys hearing about another justifiable homicide… they all can fit into their misleading statistics.

  6. Ahhhh! That’s right, Fishorman, more sleight of hand there. The statistic starts with “someone known to the victim” and magically morphs it into “family and friends.” I know not every one I know is my friend, and I’m sure the same goes for the person who wrote that perniciously false statistic.

Comments are closed.