With “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day.
Case in point, the very term has been appropriated by those advocating more government restrictions over individual decisions and choices. Instead of leaning forward, to many of us, that seems like several giant steps backward.
Seattle Gun Rights Examiner Dave Workman noticed yet another in a long line of disconnects the other day, when Jennifer Hoppe, the Deputy Director of Michael Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action claimed “The NRA’s leadership has a long history of sexism.” To refute that, all Workman had to do was point to women who have risen to prominent positions in the NRA leadership, including past presidents Marion Hammer and Sandra Froman.
In true “progressive” fashion, the people who support a woman’s right to determine her own self-defense choices are portrayed as anti-woman. And it’s especially rich considering this is coming from an employee of an authoritarian patriarch, and one with some “sexual blind spots” of his own.
Were we to emulate Jennifer’s lord and master, perhaps we could ask her if she ... , or speculate on her being a great ... You know, stuff an opportunistic Proziette would be drooling over the sexual harassment lawsuit potential of, if said to her by a conservative boss.
But wait, as late TV pitchman Billy Mays used to say, there’s more – “progressive” disconnects by MILMs, that is.
Bob Owens at Bearing Arms tells of a Coalition to Stop Gun Violence supporter who responds to grocery chains like Kroger (which simply defer to the law on guns) by advocating “Fill a cart to the brim with perishable food, park it in a remote corner, attach note telling them you will not shop where guns are tolerated and leave the store. Do this every few days.”
In other words, someone who says she wants more laws to protect innocents recommends victimizing innocents and breaking the law. And the pathetic thing is, her enthusiasm for criminal acts is tame compared to two “common sense gun safety advocates” who think that “SWATting” gun owners by calling 911 and reporting armed threats in the store, upping the chances of “gun violence” and potentially getting innocent people killed, is the appropriate way to deal with citizens who are peaceably open carrying.
It did not take much internet searching to locate both individuals, and to identify the respective law enforcement departments that they are likely to call to set things in potentially deadly motion. Perhaps the best way to deal with this would be to contact those departments, report their stated intentions and caution that any reports of a man with a gun from these foolish, spiteful women could result in both extreme dangers for citizens and extreme liability for their departments.
Hey, what is it we've learned about “progressives” and Opposite Day?
If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."
The seat of government is a mighty curious place to set up a Constitution-free zone. “On-Again, Off-Again” is my latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column, noting the bizarre turns taken to date in the Palmer case.
My latest JPFO Alert, “Armed black demonstrators display egalitarian diversity of right to arms,” notes the folks accused of intolerance are actually the ones being inclusive -- and the ones doing the accusing are actually the narrow-minded bigots. Funny how that works.
What good is a right if government can get away with whatever infringements they want? “Court Upholding Ban on Militia-Suitable Firearms Ignores Key Second Amendment Purpose” is my latest offering on The Shooters Log.