“As a gun owner, I feel a particular responsibility to push back against this growing culture of irresponsibility around guns. Just as I insist that guns at my house are stored responsibly and only used appropriately, I believe I owe it to my family and community to insist that my representatives support sensible gun safety measures over political expediency.” – Cindy Spaet in I’m a gun owner. The extremists don’t speak for most of us [via kansascity.com]
What, exactly, is her definition of “extremist”?
I assume she means the rest of us are extremists??
MouseGun,
Her definition of an “extremist” is anyone who disagrees with her.
Even more than that, she’s an elitist…. She is the only one professional enough to use this gun!!!!…. . oh… and anyone else she deems fit to own a gun…. everyone else is a radical extreemist who want guns so they can steal her magic bag.
She’s a Moms Demand Action Action extremist. Even says so at the bottom of the article.
In line with MouseGun, define “sensible”.
Right?
What are some of these sensible laws she feels we need more of? I’m not hearing any ideas yet that would stop or even hinder a criminal from obtaining a weapon, but I keep hearing proposals to make it harder for poor people, minorities, single mothers, people who live in inner cities to defend themselves – but then maybe that really IS her point: Gun Control is a myth, what they want is Gun Owner Control. The Civilian Disarmament League is the new home of racism and bigotry in America. They feel that no one needs a gun unless they have plenty of money and a few political connections. 🤠
Cindy… open your eyes. How does making me helpless make you or your children safer? And irresponsible gun owners are amazingly few, and fewer all the time. The criminals who use guns to inflict harm are NOT merely “irresponsible” – they are criminals.
Most of the “extremists” are those who want everyone helpless. They have no interest in actual gun “safety,” only in total control of everything . Well over 100 million gun owners did NOT harm any innocent person today, and never will.
She’s not selling sensibility, she’s selling globo-communism for soros and bloomberg. This isn’t her “calling”, it’s not her “purpose” or mission in life that she one day woke up to. It’s her full-time salaried JOB.
SHE’S GETTING P A I D TO SELL THEIR GLOBO-COMMUNIST CR_P.
Whether she is “paid” or not is immaterial to me. I ask these questions of anyone who says they think more “gun control” is the best idea. I tend to ask questions that, hopefully, get people to think. No guarantees in that, of course, but merely writing them off as paid shills accomplishes nothing. You just never know when people might discover the astonishing miracle of critical thinking. 🙂
I’m just pushing back 200%. I don’t look for miracles from that crowd. GOD may Intervene, but it’s too dangerous to try to hep, or for it to wait for it to happen.
I have no opportunity to talk to these people, of course. I’m talking to my neighbors, friends and those who visit such websites as this. Talking to them can produce great results. But if we write off everyone with whom we disagree, we ultimately will reach few of them.
Unfortunately, you seem to be so terribly angry, strident in your rejection of most others, that it is probably just as well that you don’t try to talk to the fence sitters… you’ll just push them off. 🙂
Pay attention. Cindy and her band of shills are vassals for George freaking Soros and his band of anti-western civilization marxist progs. All after that as to any “why” has no relevance. Do think you could discuss alternative ideas with Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin while they walked you to your wall?
Of course they (MDA) are going to promote this ideology because it fits their narrative. If Cindy had a narrative that is counter-intuitive to the MDA agenda, she would be shunned, blocked and vilified. Anyone that tries to debate, honestly, the MDA position they are BANNED. (I got banned from all of their chapter sites, even ones I never visited, for the mere fact of politely engaging in factual debate). Bloomberg and Watts are paid prostitutes to push a nefarious agenda.
Save your breath. She’s a gun control true believer. Even says at the bottom of the article she’s a volunteer for Moms demand Action. SHES THE EXTREMIST
Not my problem. 🙂 Her problem. I’m not holding out any hope she will become sane…
But I always wonder just how many OTHER people read these things… and how many of them might actually consider our comments thoughtfully.
I’d bet on zero… Most folks have their mind made up and are looking for reasons to exclude one point of view or another. For a real world example look at Ford, Chevy, Jeep, MOPAR, and import fans. Thing is people no longer want to think critically most are just looking for something to confirm their prejudice against X,Y, or Z.
For instance I loathe Ford cars (really I like the Mustang, Flex, and their old stuff like the Galaxy) now there are no shortage of articles burying everything Ford builds (remember the early 90s 302’s cam walk issues?) they could make the world’s greatest car and I still wouldn’t buy it and people would still bag on it because it’s a Ford. Now take that same car and slap a different badge on it (Don’t go nuts here don’t slap a Ferrari badge on your base model Focus) and those that hate Fords would sing that car’s praises to the high heavens.
See it’s really not that people have or have not made up their minds it’s that they haven’t found something that reinforces their bias or they don’t care enough to form a bias.
The only anti gun people who appear on this blog are trolls like TrueAmericanPatrioutsAgainstBlaBlaBlah.. I doubt that your argument filled with respect and logic will appeal to any of them, their anti gun dogma is so deeply imbedded in their brains that it is a kind of fanatical, religious zealotry, and thus impervious to a reasoned argument.
“The only anti gun people who appear on this blog are trolls like TrueAmericanPatrioutsAgainstBlaBlaBlah..”
Trolls like that ‘appear’ here, but TTAG has a read-to-comment ratio of something like 10,000-to-1, according to Dan Z when I asked him a number of months back.
Wrap your head around that. Ten *thousand* read more than comment.
TTAG gets read, and *heavily*. Among those lurkers, we have some enemies. But far more of those readers are the ones who have no strong opinions, either way.
It is those we should be appealing to, not the perpetually PMS-afflicted ‘Mad Mommies’.
Exposing their lies is the best way to do that. We are the ones with the facts on our side…
WTF are Cindys kids doing in my house?
I always love when they throw around homicide numbers as if they mean anything. They don’t. A homicide is simply one human killing another. Whether lawful or unlawful doesn’t matter. Oddly enough, the numbers of lawful and unlawful never pop up, probably because they would destroy the narrative.
Same with suicide numbers. Availability of firearms has absolutely no influence on number of suicides. Just look at India or Japan.
And of course “gun violence epidemic”. Damn, I would love to have an epidemic where about 0.2% of people die every year (no, suicides don’t count, and no, lawful homicides also don’t count as “gun violence”.) That’s not even an epidemic. That’s statistically irrelevant.
Now, what exactly is an “extremist” on this? I would like to see that definition. It’s probably the same old “everyone who doesn’t agree with me.” “Sensible”? Same thing. Define sensible first. But if I had to guess “sensible” means her ideas and none other.
Mothers Demand. It seems that this entire “movement” puts emphasis on “mothers” because apparently, so they seem to believe, mothers have devoured wisdom with a silver spoon simply because they got pregnant. Fun fact: that’s not how it works.
No Cindy. You don’t speak for me or anybody else. You were not elected by anyone. You only speak for yourself and you have absolutely no moral high ground in this.
She speaks for soros and bloomberg. EXPLETIVE DELETED IS GETTING PAID TO TRY TO OVERTHROW THE CONSTITUTION,
0.2% is grossly overstating our homicide problem. The homicide rate is under 5/100,000. That’s <0.005%. And of course that rate goes down to a small fraction of that once you step outside of the inner cities.
Remove Suicides and all stats from Chicago and you’ve got a 82% reduction in statistical gun-deaths nationwide…
Wanna talk about just homicides? Remove Chicago and that cuts 51% out of the nation’s murder statistics.
Think about that.
It’s actually more on the order of around 10%. But, for just one city out of hundreds of big cities with a population of a million or more and in a nation of 320 million, that’s still pretty fucking huge.
In addition, shootings initially reported as “homicides” and then adjudicated in court, where the shooter is vindicated and released because the shooting was either justified or he was determined by a jury to be not guilt, stay on the report forever as a “homicide. There is no mechanism to remove such statistics from the reporting system.
“There is no mechanism to remove such statistics from the reporting system.”
That’s because, even though the killer was judged to be not guilty of a crime, one person still killed another. That’s the definition of “homicide.”
A homicide does not, by itself, mean a law was broken by the one committing the homicide.
It’s also just like the fact that because there’s a check box beside “Notify me of follow-up comments by email” doesn’t mean you will be notified if you check the box.
THE ONLY REASON THE HONOR SUSTEM OF GUN CONTROL WORKS, IS THAT THE HONORABLE CHOOSE TO FOLLOW IT, MOMENT TO MOMENT.
WHEN PEOPLE FAIL TO BE HONORABLE ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THE SYSTEM, THE SYSTEM IS ONLY ABLE TO MUSTER A RE-ACTIONARY RESPONSE. AND SUCH REACTIONARY RESPONSE MAY COME LONG AFTER THE FACT, OR NEVER.
The C⭕️Ck-bag communist gun- grabbers don’t speak for ANY decent, worthy US Citizen, and I demand my representatives do more to rid the world of them, and do more to protect our Constitution from their dangerous communist bullsh_t.
THEY ALL GOTTA FING GO
That is what THEY are, in fact, saying too. It’s just that you haven’t heard the last of THEIR message. If THEY fast-forwarded right to the end statement, YOUwouldn’t just be ‘rejecting’ them, you would cut them and let them bleed out.
She claims to ‘support the Second Amendment’ but her beef is ‘This year, legislators proposed a “Guns Everywhere” bill (their name, not mine) that would have allowed people to carry g uns in schools, college and university facilities, and even bars.’ So she believes you have a right to keep AND BEAR arms unless you want to enter a bar or seek higher education, in which case you should have to give up your constitutionally protected rights. Living 180 miles north of KC, I can tell you that in my state gu ns are allowed in bars and drinking is permitted (provided your BAC doesn’t exceed 0.08%) and it’s not been a problem here. I know, because the bar is where you’ll find me most Saturday nights. And I will be armed as well as a couple of other patrons that I know about. No shootings yet.
Then she cites increases in crime in KC and St. Louis. I don’t think she understands the difference between these inner city neighborhoods and Chillicothe or Farmington. The people perpetrating these crimes don’t care about her victim disarmament zones unless it’s to prey on the defenseless. If she wanted to reduce ‘gunviolence’ she’d be heading up an outreach program to get inner city kids out of gangs. Instead she’d rather infringe on the rights of the law abiding. But she still ‘supports the Second Amendment’.
She’s got a Second Amendment Ass (I’d say Second Amendment “But. . ..”, but The ass I’ talking about is either soros or bloomberg, depending on who’s puliing her strings on that particular day).
When her checks come anyway, THERE’S NO USE ARGUING IT WITH HER.
Nonsense, there are probably shootings at the bar every weekend. You’re just too loaded to remember them. 😉
This Cindy gal wants legislators to support sensible gun safety measures…
Please define ‘sensible gun safety measures’. What is it? Spell it out! I think Cindy is a faux gun owner. I don’t think she owns a single firearm.
She’s a female Democrat; therefore a corrupt, dishonest, manipulative piece of dung that cannot be trusted; EVER!!, to be reasonable, nor honest…. FLAME her!…..
“She’s a female Democrat; ”
THAT MEANS: A PARTY PLATFORM SUPPORTER
THEREFORE SHE’S MORE THAN HAPPY TO DEMAND TAX MONEY FOR THE ALSO DEMANDED CONTINUANCE OF ABORTION AND THE USE OF THE FETAL REMAINS AS FOOD.
If that’s not FING satanic, you’re an FING SCOURGE along with her / them. BUT THERE’S NO FING WAY THEY ALL HAVEN’T ABSOLUTELY AND FOREVER WAIVED THEIR RIGHT TO BITCH ABOUT KILLING, MUCH LESS SAFETY.
AND, IF STOPPING MURDER AND PROMOTING SAFETY ISN’T ON THEIR AGENDA, THEN THEY ARE ONLY DOING IT FOR GLOBO-COMMUNISM AND TYRANNY. THE 2ND AMENDMENT WAS ENACTED TO F THOSE TWO VERY THINGS UP, PERMANENTLY.
Well Cindy Spaet, when arsonists use tampons to start 2 million building fires and injure/kill 320,000 people every year, are you going to clamor for the following tampon safety laws:
(1) tampon secure storage requirements
(2) one box of tampons per month purchase limit
(3) must be 21 years of age to purchase tampons
(4) must complete FDA form 4473 for every tampon purchase
(5) universal background checks for tampon purchase/transfers
(6) “good cause” requirement for license to carry tampons in public
(7) tampon “straw purchases” must be a felony
(8) cannot bring tampons on commercial airliners
(9) cannot bring tampons into federal buildings
(10) cannot bring tampons into K-12 schools
(11) cannot bring tampons into universities
We have to be responsible with our firearms _ and we are because if we weren’t, we would be dieing off. All of us have seen people doing crazy things with guns, it is all over the internet. Most of the problems here can be fixed with peer pressure. Of course, having a handgun close, where I can get to it if I am awakened by a bad noise, is my idea of safety. I do not like laws that limit my safety.
Open letter to Cindy, Stay off my lawn.
so she/he/it, locks their guns up? what about rifles and Pistols and or Muzzle loaders, guess there not as dangerous! Its kids will grow up knowing nothing about weapon safety, probably break into her safe just too explore and then instant Mayhem out of curiosity! this very ignorant person wants us to change our behavior just so She/He/It can feel safe, my we have too ban all automotive equipment of all kinds, Bows & Arrows and most knives longer than 2.5 inches, crossbows , slingshots and air rifles, rocks, sticks, no clothes either to prove no concealed sharpened spoon handles, no hammers, saws no nails longer than 2 inches etc.
MEH…once again a far-left fudd presumes to speak for anyone but “her”self. Guns for me but not for thee…😡
So, when a firearm is loaded and ready for self-defense, it is in-use. Otherwise, it’s secured in a quality gun safe.
I prefer loaded, chambered, and on my hip or in my pocket (or both); otherwise, locked in my gun safe. If that is what she means, I don’t think us “gun extremists” disagree much. There may be locations in the country where the gun safe isn’t necessary.
I highly doubt she owns a gun for one and for two who the f*ck died and made this dependa arbiter of all that is sensible and just? Lastly, when did all gun owners get together and elect her as our spokesperson? Was I sick that day or did my invite get lost in the mail? I’d rather have Ted Nugent speak for us all than this wing nut!
“Quote of the Day: Gun Owners’ Responsibility to Support Gun Control”
Zzzz…
What does she mean by this?
“Since 2008 when Missouri repealed its law requiring background checks on all handgun sales”
It seems she’s talking about:
“Missouri’s 2007 repeal of its permit-to-purchase (PTP) handgun law, which required all handgun purchasers to obtain a license verifying that they have passed a background check”
This is one of those “universal background check” laws to close the media created “gun show loophole.”
Interestingly, she makes no mention of how the passage of the law had any effect. She doesn’t say the passage of the law was linked to a corresponding drop in murders and suicides. However, she happily claims the repeal of the law was the sole reason for the rise.
She also fails to mention that last year “a unanimous decision in State of Missouri vs. McCoy, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that the constitutional amendment does not nullify the felon in possession statute to allow convicted felons to possess firearms.”
Last she fails to mention any link between guns recovered at crime scenes and suicides, to their sale to prohibited persons. By her arguement one would expect to find that prohibited people are buying guns and then using those guns in criminal activity.
Washington State, in 2014, passed a “universal background check” law. Recently supporters bragged about “50 prohibited people” that were stopped from buying guns. They didn’t provide any details and when asked about criminal charges being brought were silent.
Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/readers-opinion/guest-commentary/article185320123.html#story“Missouri’s 2007 repeal of its permit-to-purchase (PTP) handgun law, which required all handgun purchasers to obtain a license verifying that they have passed a background check”
http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/state-law/missouri/
https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2014/repeal-of-missouris-background-law-associated-with-increase-in-states-murders.html
Murder statistics are the biggest reason for removing all gun control regulations on law abiding people.
+1 Darkman about murder statistics. I really doubt that this.. “woman”, whatever she is, owns any guns. And if she does it’s probably a .22 with a broken extractor that she inherited from her grandpa. Regardless, her being a”gun owner” or a mom doesn’t give her the authority to tell me what to do.
I went to Wal Mart today and bought Tampax. Ahem:
“As a tampon owner, it is my responsibility to tell you that you are stuffing them in the wrong hole. Now STFU and MMAS!”
Preferably she stuffs about 30 tampons in the hole that is her mouth, so she will stop with the silly babble.
No. Gun owners have a responsibility to support gun control. They need to know how to control their gun under fire and with their own personal safety policies they implement within their own household given their knowledge of the abilities and capabilities of the people within their household.
And when I say “gun owner” i’m talking about an individual person who owns a gun. Not a large collective of people who want to enforce their own personal opinions with the force of the law.
In other words, Cindy has an opinion, and she wants her representatives to force that opinion down the communities throats. If there is a victim of negligence, it is hard for me to argue that. Make the negligence illegal, and punish the negligence only. And proof of negligence – is a victim. However, Cindy can FO about her opinions that she likes to implement in her household that she wants to force on everyone else in the name of safety and warm feelings.
What “growing culture of irresponsibility around guns”? Last I checked, there are 100 million gun owners with more that 300 million guns in the US and around 10,000 homicides with a firearm each year. That works out to one one hundredth of one percent of the gun owners and three one thousandths of one percent of the guns. Frankly, those numbers are so small that measuring their increase, or decrease, as a function of the overall population is a meaningless exercise statistically.
Also, dimwit, crime has been going down for the last 2 or 3 decades – including crime with guns.
I’m sick to death of this narrative that screams “Everything is getting worse and crime is up and guns are the reason”, when all of those things are demonstrably false.
The fact that the anti-gun types continue to outright lie about these things is the number one reason I regard them as troglodytes.
They lie, ignore the truth and then lie some more and then expect people like me to accept their policy recommendations. No, idiot, I don’t take advice from people that have clearly demonstrated that they have no trace of an understanding of what they are talking about.
To those troglodytes the end justifies the means, lies included. They use emotion, not logic.
“…sensible gun safety measures…”
Translation: I’m an idiot.
Comments are closed.