I'd like to say that I'm surprise at how anyone taking such a public stand can be so monumentally ignorant of the item that they're opposing.
But....she is but the tip of the iceberg of asininity:
"The state should have a monopoly on legitimate violence" [Nadler, D-NY]
Violence Policy Centers' Josh Sugarmann in 1989: "Assault weapons... are a new topic. The weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons - anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun - can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons."
In the PR handbook by OMB, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, and KNP Communications, "Gun Control Handbook - Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging"....under the section titled "Overall Messaging Guidance," the guide states the Key Messaging Principle, is to always focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence, not the political food fight in Washington or wonky statistics. And it's critical that you ground your messaging around gun violence in prevention by making that emotional connection. And Tell stories with images and feelings. Our first task is to draw a vivid portrait and make an emotional connection. We should rely on emotionally powerful language, feelings and images to bring home the terrible impact of gun violence.
"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of handguns in the United States - is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal." - Pete Shields, Chairman,Brady Campaign [when it was Handgun Control, Inc], 1976
"I'm convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily - given the political realities - going to be very modest. Of course, it's true that politicians will then go home and say, 'This is a great law. The problem is solved.' And it's also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time. So then we'll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal - total control of handguns in the United States - is going to take time. My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition - except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totally illegal." - Pete Shields, Chairman,Brady Campaign [when it was Handgun Control, Inc], 1976
Remember, they keep telling us that they don't want to take away anyone's firearms.......
CI,
ReplyDeleteHave you seen this? Damn.
Sure did see that. The good thing is that the defense against that tactic [if it would come to pass] is either lying, or more importantly, telling the doctor that it's none of their business.
Delete