Moms Demand Action posted this on their Facebook page.

It links to this article ISIS Appreciates the NRA’s Work.

In the United States, you can buy semi-automatic weapon without submitting yourself to a background check, so long as you make your purchase at a gun show. Roughly 90 percent of Americans object to this policy. But the National Rifle Association (NRA) — and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) — like it a lot.

Um… No.

The NRA likes the “gun-show loophole” because the organization is funded by firearms manufacturers who would like to continue making money selling weapons to criminals. (A large majority of the NRA’s members support universal background checks, even as the organization does everything in its power to prevent their enactment.)

This is the most lying bullshit ever told in the history of lying bullshit.

First of all, that 91% of people including the NRA want background checks is right up there with 97% of scientists believe global warming will kill us all bullshit statistics.

I can tell you, as someone who works in the industry, we don’t get up in the morning and say “I really hope some criminal buys one of our guns and shoots up a school so more people go out an buy guns for self defense.”

That is EXACTLY what these fuckers believe.

So, besides criminals and the insane, who could possibly oppose universal background checks?  Gun manufacturers.
They are the ones who call the shots at the NRA, and they are the most important people in the opposition. The manufacturers don’t want anything that interferes with total gun sales and profits.
Background checks would impose a minor burden on gun transactions, but more importantly, limit the size of the market (and therefore, profits) in two ways.
The direct loss of profit comes because closing the current gaping loophole in the background check system will shut off sales to criminals and the mentally ill who are effectively free to buy all the guns they want at gun shows and through private transactions.
But there is also an indirect loss of profit: Cutting off sales to the mentally ill and criminals will reduce crime and thereby reduce the public’s demand for guns for self-protection.
That is some pure cynical evil right there.
The cost of the lawsuit against Remington for Sandy Hook was a whole hell of a lot more than the profit made on that one Bushmaster rifle.
But I digress.  Back to ISIS.

 It isn’t too hard to guess why ISIS also approves of America’s lax gun regulations. But there’s no need for guessing.  “They say the Americans are dumb — they have open gun policies,” an ISIS recruit told the New York Times last year.

Yes, there are some dumb Americans, and they work for NY Magazine.

ISIS doesn’t understand American gun laws, they only know the bullshit that gets printed in the media.  ISIS repeats that bullshit to their followers.  The media then picks up on that and treats ISIS like it is the legal authority on American gun laws.

This is the informational equivalent of the human centipede.

Really, what this comes down to is a new through terminating argument.

“ISIS likes…” is the new “Hitler did…” to make dismiss something.

I just love the idea, though, of Moms Demand Action turning to ISIS for knowledge about Americas gun laws.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

4 thoughts on “Moms Demand Jihad”
  1. Not ‘new’, just under a different name. They played the same card a while back with an ‘Al Queda Training Manual’ that in reality turned out to be some photocopied newsletter from some loser in the UK. Pretty much word for word “buy machineguns in the US” etc.

    The funny thing is the ‘manuals’ rely more on anti-gun bullcrap meme’s than actual laws.

  2. Why would gun manufacturers want to make it easier for people to buy used guns? If profit was the sole motive they would want it to be more difficult to buy used guns from individuals so we would buy more new guns.

  3. Yes, I read that article too, and i was appalled at the lack of cogent thought that went into it.

    Unfortunately, so many people live in densely populated urban areas where firearms are strictly regulated but all the ‘bad guys’ have them to shoot up their neighbors and innocent passers-by, they have begun to believe that is the natural order of things.

    And for certain values of “natural”, and “neighborhood”, they may be correct.

    Most of American firearms ownership is judged (by ‘almost everybody’) in relation to about 20 counties in America, according to the latest statistics gathered by John Lott.A few counties in Chicago, Baltimore … etc. They make America look like Dodge City to the world.

    In my small part of the world, the worst case of “assault” happened last September when a strolling couple was assaulted by a college kid who threw a rock and hit one of them in the temple. This, in a Western State which is a “Shall Issue state”!. (Note: the victims were not armed.)

    Many people in my state are armed; CHL in a “Shall Issue State” is a matter of passing a thorough background check, demonstrating training (I teach firearms defense at my local gun club; not a problem) and paying a few dollars to the local sheriff because it costs them to do the fingerprinting for the background check. OH, and the folks in the Sheriff Office are experienced in taking the most unflattering photographs since the invention of the Drivers License.

    Buying a firearm in private use to be unregulated; now all transactions require a background check, which is in convenient and more expensive. I suppose there are people who will sell a gun to someone they don’t know, but I don’t know them. And the idea that someone who doesn’t qualify for firearm ownership could willy-nilly start shooting up the town is even more preposterous. The local stores don’t even bother to post (NO GUNS) signs on the door, because they would lose all their business.

    As a consequence, folks who think having a gun makes it ‘eash’ to rob a store, terrify a neighborhood, or go on a shooting spree would find themselves in the center of attention by a bunch of armed citizens who go to the range every month to practice their shooting skills.

    I can promise you that … I teach the folks who are new in town.

    Support your local sheriff.

  4. “Buying a firearm in private use to be unregulated; now all transactions require a background check, which is in convenient and more expensive. ”

    Not true, depends on the state. If you are just a private person who wants to sell his gun, you can without an FFL.

    Here in Indiana, you can do Face to Face transaction anywhere among Private Parties. (Neither can be an FFL)…Both parties must be Indiana citizens and must testify to each other that they are not Prohibited Persons.

    No Paperwork, nothing.

    We like it that way.

    FFL holders are, however, required to do 4473 and NICS.

Comments are closed.