USA Today’s Weak-Kneed Push For Gun Control

americas1stfreedom.org ^ | 10/21/2016 | unknown

[rktman]

It’s just what you would expect from a newspaper whose editorial board just can’t help taking the wrong side on the issue of gun control.

Despite widespread opposition by law enforcement and top state officials, USA Today last week chose to urge the newspaper’s handful of readers in Nevada and Maine to vote “yes” on anti-gun background check initiatives that would only affect the law-abiding, leaving armed criminals to commit whatever violent crimes they choose.

The editorial was titled, “Vote 'yes' on gun safety measures: Our view,” with a subhead stating, “Do what weak-kneed members of Congress have refused to do.” And to say that the editorial is a prime example of why so few Americans trust the so-called “mainstream” media nowadays would be an understatement.

In case you are unfamiliar with the ballot initiatives, Question 1 in Nevada and Question 3 in Maine both deal with greatly expanded background checks for transfer of firearms. Both are being heavily funded by out-of-state billionaires—mainly former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg. And both would do nothing to reduce violent crime—and that’s according to top law-enforcement officials in both state

[rktman]

No doubt all the affiliated usa news papers also take the same position. I know the reno gazette urinal has taken the VOTE YES position. Which is odd since when nannie bloomers and his minions started the petition drive, the paper opposed it. Guess they got a phone call. In any case, we just rec'd our sample ballot and flyer explaining the ballot initiatives for NV and lo and behold, the 'splanation for voting YES on Question1 has some references. Oddly, more than 50% are from......everytown for gun safety support fund. Weird huh?

[Blue Jays]

Newspaper editorial boards have very little vision with regard to how terrible it would be to have a disarmed population.

[Lazamataz]

Newspaper editorial boards have very little vision with regard to how terrible it would be to have a disarmed population.

Incorrect. They know exactly.

They just assume *they* would not be rounded up.

[NorthMountain]

The presstitutes fancy themselves to be part of the 'elite' who would be in charge, and would be ordering the round-ups.

Remember ... when the round-ups and raids begin, the armed agents carrying them out are your secondary enemy. Your primary enemy is the cowardly collection of evil bastards who give them their orders. Plan accordingly.

[faithhopecharity]

My neighbors are off to the big sporting goods chain store because of articles like this. The store has a twenty Percent off sale on the neighbors’ favorite brand of ammo today and they’re stocking up
On it ( Hornadys if this damned text editor will let it get thru, ha! Dicks )

[Blue Jays]

Fair enough.
It is similar to how Libs believe they will be "pals" with hordes of invading "moderate" Muslims, too.

[Ancesthntr]

“Incorrect. They know exactly.

They just assume *they* would not be rounded up.”

---

You got that right. They are willing tools of the upcoming Peoples Republic, and they not only don’t expect blowback, they expect rewards. Leaving us proles defenseless is not merely an accident, it is a goal, a means to an end.

That’s why I hope that everyone in the country has a “Christmas card list” that includes the top leadership of every newpaper and TV station that is shilling for an end to our rights and an end to our Republic.