Ammo For Sale

« « SHUSH Act | Home | LA gun permits » »

Why are anti-gun activists so violent?

Anti-gun shill Ladd Everitt:

Oh, and dont worry, I am not writing this to ask you to commit to nonviolence. If you believe violence can be conquered with violence, so be it.

Well, OK.

9 Responses to “Why are anti-gun activists so violent?”

  1. LucusLoC Says:

    Same lies he has been using for years. All of it debunked many times over. a lot of the comments are the same, from the “rifles cannot beat a modern military” to equating suicide with criminal homicide. Their lies have become their reality.

  2. Lyle Says:

    Interesting choice, the word “conquered”.

    It’s a Straw Man of course. I don’t know of anyone ever claiming that violence can be “conquered” with violence. Violence can certainly be stopped in the act though, by violence (which is why cops carry guns), and that is the only claim I’ve ever heard.

    Guns are for stopping violence in the act, not for “conquering” violence as a phenomenon. Big difference. Ladd Everitt knows the difference, which is why he chose the word “conquer” to change the subject.

  3. Lyle Says:

    LucasloC; If civilian citizens with their rifles couldn’t beat (or at least seriously degrade and demoralize) a modern military, then leftists wouldn’t be trying to restrict or ban said rifles. QED.

  4. Fred Says:

    So, pointed sticks then?

  5. Ravenwood Says:

    @Fred, or a board with a nail in it.

  6. Weer'd Beard Says:

    Ladd’s MO for YEARS is to paint targets on people and groups he doesn’t like and hope that some of the creeps thathe travels with (see the Bernie Bro who shot up the baseball practice) act on his advice.

    Meanwhile he’ll occasionally say “But I don’t ADVOCATE violence” so he can step away when violence does happen.

  7. Ron W Says:

    Ladd Everitt writes,”For starters, contrary to popular myth, owning a gun does not make you safer. Instead, it puts you and those around you at significantly higher risk of violent death. Research has shown that firearms are dangerous and ineffective as a method of self-defense”

    Well then, is he calling for government officials and agents to give up their guns and the wealthy elites who hire armed security to follow this admonition? If being unarmed is good for the common folk, isn’t it good for their supposed ruling elites? Why don’t they disarm and LEAD BY EXAMPLE? Hello? Mr. Everitt?

  8. JTC Says:

    It’s a homophone problem.

    You can’t conquer violence as a social phenomenon, but you can damn sure conquer violents visiting violence on you.

    So be it. Yep, it be so.

  9. Donny Anonny Says:

    At this point I’m convinced he’s got some deep seated mental illness.

    It’s not even worth discussing his crazy pants rants.