Top Idiotic Anti-Gun Memes from Last Month

Flopping Aces ^ | 03-14-18 | Wordsmith

[Starman417]

So a month ago on February 14th was the Parkland shooting. Today, students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida and students from all across the States are participating in a walkout as an act of protest against gun violence, for "nothing being done"; and as an act of "support" for the 17 killed.

In wake of the shootings, social media was like an ant hill that had been kicked over, with the anti-gun nuts going ballistic (as they always do), lamenting about AR-15s, gun violence, politicians "bought" off by the NRA, ridiculing "thoughts and prayers", and bringing out their keyboard pitchfork and torches.

Along with my newsfeed blowing up on Facebook, came a slew of stupid memes. Below is a collection of some of the dumbest for your painful viewing "pleasure". I had intended to post this at the end of the weekend of the shooting; but was a lazy blogger.

It did not take long for the race hustlers to push this one:

 

Here's a counter-meme to reveal the glaring idiocy:

 

Of course, it must be either/or (nevermind the veracity of the claim "29"):

 

The apples to bacon comparison:

 

Because Nikolas Cruz qualifies as a "well-regulated militia"; and let's paste it atop a portrait of George Washington just because:

 

Cruz is not a member of a white supremacist group.  Initial claim seemed to be made by an attention seeker.

 

A walnut to oranges comparison:

 

What is bizarre, is that it is the pc police who see fit to ban Harper Lee's book- not conservatives; and they are also the ones who wish to ban the AR-15 and guns in general.

Here's what the right means when we say quit politicizing the deaths:

So the claim is that these politicians are "bought off" by the NRA.  Here's the reality:

So, does the NRA buy politicians?

There are two real questions to be answered in answering that one: first, does the NRA really spend an outsized amount of money on politics? Second, as a general matter, do outside organizations “buy” the support of politicians, or do they simply support politicians with whom they agree?

On the first question, between 1998 and 2016, the NRA spent approximately $13 million on all candidates, parties, and leadership political action committees, according to the Left’s favorite fact-checker, Politifact. The NRA also spends money on “outside expenditures,” meaning ads they cut themselves, for example, in the amount of $144.3 million, plus another $45.9 million on lobbying. That’s a grand total of $203.2 million on political activities over 18 years, or approximately $22.6 million per 2-year election cycle. The NRA spends far more in presidential years than non-presidential years — according to OpenSecrets, the NRA spent some $54.4 million in 2016 on politics.

Let’s look at some other political actors, by way of contrast.

According to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research, labor unions spent $1.713 billion on political activities and lobbying for the 2016 election cycle alone. That’s not unusual: they also spent $2.2 billion on political activities in 2008 and 2010, and $1.69 billion in 2012.

Planned Parenthood, the nation’s leading abortion mill, spent $33.9 million on outside spending from the 2012 through 2016 election cycles, according to OpenSecrets. EMILY’s List, another abortion group, spent $33.2 million on politics in 2016. NextGen Climate Action, a leftist group pushing climate change legislation, spent $22.9 million.

In other words, lots of groups spend lots of money — but the notion that the NRA is disproportionately “buying” politicians is asinine.

Which brings us to the second question: is the NRA actually even “buying” anyone? The answer here is obviously no. The NRA isn’t paying politicians off to change their positions anymore than Planned Parenthood is doing so. There’s a reason the NRA supports pro-gun candidates and Planned Parenthood supports pro-abortion candidates. They pick the candidates who support their agenda and support them. They don’t go around offering cash in briefcases in order to convince those who disagree to go along with their agenda.

The NRA, in reality, is a powerful lobbying organization because a huge number of Americans agree with their agenda. Most gun-owners, even if they aren’t members, see the NRA as a vital organization in defending their Second Amendment rights. Congress isn’t beholden to the NRA — it’s beholden to its own constituents, many of whom support the NRA’s belief system as a general matter.

 

Naw.  Activists are pissed at guns.

 

 

Our Founding Fathers used the state of the art weapon at the time.

Semi-automatics shoot bullets as fast as you can pull the trigger and as many bullets as can fit into a clip.  I'm not against all forms of gun legislation.  I agree that guns have changed and the technology makes it scarier.  I don't even mind entertaining the possibility of banning all guns so long as you can guarantee for me that it won't just be law-abiding citizens who won't have access to guns.  You can't.  There are around 300 million firearms in the U.S.  Confiscation is unlikely and unrealistic.

And if they wish to modify the 2nd Amendment, there is a process to amend the Constitution.  Good luck with that.

 

Yes.  Because gun ownership is the moral equivalent to all those nasties. [/sarcasm]

[rktman]

Well, I’m not laminating mine by golly.

[Moe-Patrick]

Idiotic

[Chode]

[Tzimisce]

The liberal Antifa is threatening to kill me and my family for being conservative.

And now liberal politicians who back Antifa want to disarm me.

And my fellow conservatives want to “compromise” with all of this.....

[alancarp]

Regarding the ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ meme, the creator of that is wrong - both are banned since schools are gun-free zones.

How’s that working for you?