Quote of the day—Gaia’s Dancing Indigo Children

#GunOwners cry about their #SecondAmendment rights but they don’t give a shit about the fact that thousands of innocent people are killed each year by their sinister death machines. It is time for us to do away with private gun ownership entirely. The only people who feel the need to own guns are paranoid, mentally ill people. If you own a gun, you are a terrible human being and if you own a firearm and you have children you should be absolutely ashamed of yourself. A child who is raised in homes with firearms is 43% more likely to die of a gun shot wound. It should be considered abuse to keep firearms in a home with children and the state really should step in and take them into custody. Every gun owner in America is a potential #MassShooter, it’s only a matter of time before the snap and start spraying innocent children.

Repeal2A

Gaia’s Dancing Indigo Children
Posted on Facebook June 11, 2015
[Via a Facebook post from Sean Sorrentino.

This is what they think of you.

There is speculation this is the work of a troll. But it’s consistent with other anti-gun people.—Joe]

15 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Gaia’s Dancing Indigo Children

  1. The sooner that more people recognize that we (Traditionalists) cannot co-exist with the Progressives and their lunatic fringe operatives, the better. This once country has already split, all we’re waiting for is the physical manifestation of that division.

  2. A certain adjunct professor of sociology openly called for firearm owners w/ children to be prosecuted for child abuse. He was completely serious. He was also for a time a board member of a ceasefire group until his open views were making them look bad.

  3. sirs:

    along w/ george washington, thomas jefferson, john jay, james madison and alexander hamilton, not to mention chief justice joseph storey, i am one of the mentally ill persons who intends to keep his firearms.

    the delusional twat who wrote this can have my guns when she can wrest them from my cold dead hands. i betcha i get her first.

    signed a mentally ill,

    john joseph jay
    whitman college, 1970, b.a. degree in political science
    university of oregon school of law, 1977, doctor of jurisprudence

  4. ” A child who is raised in homes with firearms is 43% more likely to die of a gun shot wound.”
    Someone has confused themselves with the notorious number “43”.

    According to a study published by Arthur Kellerman, ‘a person with a gun in the home is 43 times as likely to shoot someone in the family as to shoot a criminal.’. That 43 times number is MUCH more impressive than “43%”.

    However, both statistics are wrong, and kellerman has been debunked so many times since his 1986 study that the details seem to have been lost in mythology.

    Which is where they belong.

    • He he. Once again we see that leftists not only don’t understand economics, they don’t understand psychology, and this one is revealed to not understand the difference between multiplication and division. Thanks for pointing that out, Jerry.

    • If you’re going to quote the nonsense work of Kellerman, please quote it correctly. He did NOT say “43 times more likely… than to shoot a criminal”. He said “kill a criminal”.
      The difference is crucial. As Gary Kleck first showed, only a tiny fraction (2% or so) of defensive gun use results in the death of the attacker. So the actual answer is that a gun is more likely to prevent a crime than to cause a death. But in any case, that “study” deserves the name “nonsense ratio” that Kleck attached to it, for the reason he states very clearly:
      “The basic problem that makes these ratios nonsensical is that they are presented as risk-benefit ratios, but in fact do not reflect any benefits of keeping guns for self-protection. If one sets out to assess only the costs of a behavior, but none of its benefits, the results of such an “analysis” are a foregone conclusion. What is so deceptive about the ratio is the hint that killing burglars or intruders is somehow a “benefit” to the householder. This is both morally offensive and factually inaccurate. Being forced to kill another human being, criminal or not, is a nightmare to be suffered through for years. Even police officers who take a life in the course of their duties commonly suffer the symptoms of post-traumatic stress syndrome.”

  5. So if you don’t own a firearm that makes you a willing slave, target, dedicated socialist?

    • That seems like an overly harsh labeling. I would say that such a person needs to be educated — for example about the fact that police have no duty to protect. And about the fact that bad things can happen to good people anywhere. And about the principle that the person most responsible for your continued life and health is you, not someone else.
      Once past that point, you get to Heinlein’s observation that “the difference between ignorance and stupidity is that ignorance is curable”.

  6. That was made by a satirical Facebook page and you all fell for it. Great job.

  7. No, this Gaia idiot is for real. Her initial reply to my confrontational message was telling me to stay away from churches frequented by colored people, even though I keep a duty weapon for my job at home and it never once complained about its lack of killing someone. She then sent some fake automated message about agreeing to pay $20 if I replied to her message. Yeah, good luck enforcing that, nutbag!

  8. To all the fucking morons like the jerk here,when all the guns are finally confiscated the REAL killing will have only just begun. look to history, it happens EVERY time.

Comments are closed.