Appealing to Emotions on Guns Results in Infringements but No Solutions to Violence

Speaking of potential, what effect would the laws being demanded have had on these killings? (Moms Demand Action/ Facebook)

U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- As is often the case, I came across the graphic this article is based on while looking for something else. It’s a promotional poster from March 2018 offered at the Moms Demand Action Facebook page, which provided this description:

“Eleven-year-old Naomi Wadler delivered a passionate speech at yesterday's #MarchForOurLives. Naomi organized a walkout at her school, adding one minute to represent Courtlin Arrington and all the black girls and women whose deaths don't make the news.”

Comments from adoring supporters were gushing. She’s “fabulous” and “amazing.” She’s “SO much more eloquent than the president that it's embarrassing!”

Wadler is, no doubt, a precocious child, with a presence and a purpose that most her age won’t exhibit until much later in life, if ever. We can stipulate that she’s a remarkable young lady. That doesn’t mean she has any answers, or that her adult cultivators and handlers aren’t pros at exploiting sympathy to create exactly the kind of approval-signaling responses we see from her admirers.

What matters here is ginning up emotions. That’s how “progressive” causes work.

We're told this is all about “commonsense gun safety laws.” Let’s take a look at the stories behind the girls being commemorated and see if anything the Moms and the Marchers demand, at least publicly, would have made a bit of difference for the victims.

“I am here today to represent Courtlin Arrington. I am here today to represent Hadiya Pendleton,” Wadler announced to the wildly enthusiastic March for Our Lives crowd. “I am here today to represent Taiyana Thompson, who at just 16 was shot dead in her home here in Washington D.C.”

Arrington was killed when she asked a then-17-year-old classmate to see a gun he had illegally acquired and illegally brought to school. The gun “discharged, striking her in the chest” and he “was putting the gun in the waistband of his pants when the gun went off a second time and struck him in the leg.”

They could have certainly used some “commonsense gun safety” there, notably Cooper’s rules.  But what “law” would have prevented this, especially since both teens had already shown they had no intention of obeying them?

Pendleton was in the wrong place at the wrong time when gangbangers opened fire on what they assumed were members of a rival gang she was standing with. Again, a host of laws were ignored, including the big one against premeditated murder, and the “gunman” was actually out on probation for an earlier “aggravated unlawful use of a weapon” conviction.

Thompson’s killing was at the hands of a boyfriend who had previously been “accidentally released” after he was caught selling drugs.

“[T]he teen was playing with a gun when it ‘accidentally’ went off,” his defense claimed. He did not report the shooting and ran away leaving her to die. But they “loved each other in their own young, teenage way.”

So what do you think? Universal background checks? “Red flag” confiscation laws? Semi-auto bans? Raising the age to legally buy a rifle from an FFL to 21? See anything that would have made a damn bit of difference in any of these stories?

Not that the cud-chewers reveling in Wadler’s “wisdom” would be able to provide a coherent response to such questions — all they know is we have to do something! It doesn't matter that, all this misdirection about “commonsense gun safety laws” notwithstanding, the only thing that could even pretend to have an impact would be a total ban on all guns, which we know is a goal of the power-mad minds behind the useful idiots.

And we all know how nothing says “Stop the violence” like prohibition.


About David Codrea:David Codrea
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

20
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
15 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
17 Comment authors
joefoamMICHAEL JLarryCEMinMOStLPro2A Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
joefoam
Member
joefoam

What a shameful exploitation of a child to further an agenda. How much time was devoted to memorizing her speech rather than to her studies or simply having fun with her friends. Her parents should be publicly shamed for their actions.

MICHAEL J
Member
MICHAEL J

The left’s playbook is to exploit children. If they’re not allowing the killing of unborn or just born children. Then it’s those poor poster children who are worrying what perp will shoot them?
Most people can see through the B.S. but Mom’s demand action should be going after the shooter’s but the left can’t stop them.

Larry
Member
Larry

Why does anyone need an 11-year-old to “represent African-American women victims of gun violence?” If there are a significant number of such victims, one should have no difficult time finding one of those to represent instead.

Of course, an 11-year-old hasn’t had enough time to collect a record of bad life decisions like many of those 30- and 40-year-old victims may have.

CEMinMO
Member
CEMinMO

Excellent summary of facts and events, as usual, Mr. Codrea.

Will
Member
Will

Very strange looking kid ! Check out them eyebrows !

USA
Member
USA

Could be a Disney actor. Wasn’t there just arrests of over a dozen Disney employees about a week ago related to child abduction and pedo stuff rolling hard on social media with a link to the source and there is this guy from Disney who just got rammed.

https://www.cbr.com/disney-vice-president-michael-laney-prison-sex-abuse/

pieslapper
Member
pieslapper

Large groups of liberal women seemingly always victimized, perhaps they should, you know, carry a gun to defend themselves.

KDad
Member
KDad

Even a total ban on all guns wouldn’t make a difference. All gun owners would have to surrender their firearms and we all know that criminals will never do that. So, in the end, the only people with guns will be the scum criminals. Nice try “banners”.

StLPro2A
Member
StLPro2A

ban on guns WILL make a big difference….just not in the way you’re thinking. It won’t make a difference in the killing. But, it will make a huge difference in the Elitists/Progressives/One Worlders ability to control the Little People and/or eterminate them if they don’t “toe the line.” You aren’t wrong…..just considering the wrong agenda.

Tionico
Member
Tionico

I know some eleven year olds who are articulate, intelligent, expressive, self-possessed in a public setting,poised, and can think for themselves. ALL of them are intelligent enough to recognised when they are being played by powers like the Mad Mommas and other bloomie gangs. And NONE of them would allow themselves to be used as a tool, like this young fool is. And ALL of these (my young friends) would be vigously opposing any of the activities that led to the deaths escribed in this piece, because they ALL are familiar with firearms and their dangers/uses. In other words, these… Read more »

Camotim
Member
Camotim

Dumb ass liberals based their politics and public policy on how they feel not on facts or logic.

USA
Member
USA

My rights are not subject to discrimination against based upon another persons (prop) feelings and this applies even if they call me a racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, xenophobe etc. to also include those ism’s and/or that term nationalist. Using kids for props to subvert our country is the lowest form of low life agenda but hey without the cabal creating school shootings there would be none. Creation of violence to strip Americans of their rights while invading across the border is an actually quite obvious plan that doesn’t require a degree in rocket science to comprehend. Isn’t Moms Demand Action funded… Read more »

Bowserb46
Member
Bowserb46

When Mexico essentially banned guns, violent crime increased. When the UK banned guns, violent crime increased. When Australia banned guns, crimes against senior citizens increased dramatically. When you ban guns, you only hurt those who would use a gun for self defense.

Wallace C
Member
Wallace C

At 11, you’re not an advocate. You’re a Chatty Cathy. Someone from the anti-2A canal pulls your string and you repeat a series of canned, preprogrammed sound bites. Sounds good but no thought behind the narrative.

USA
Member
USA

All I see is a picture with words typed onto it which doesn’t prove anybody said anything. Only proves that somebody made a meme. Pictures are not sound bites. Perhaps propaganda is a better term.

Larry
Member
Larry

Are you tryin’a tell me that Judy Garland didn’t WRITE “The Wizard of Oz” all by herself? 🙂

Uncle T
Member
Uncle T

“Cud chewers”, I like that description. I have an uber-liberal cousin who constantly uses the emotional reasons for gun control. He says he’s a gun owner and his opinion is valid because he has a shotgun in the closet that has never been fired. I use logical arguments and get called heartless and cold blooded. Emotionalism and virtue signaling is evidently too cozy a blanket for some to throw off.

RoyD
Member
RoyD

Well, I have read “The Bell Curve” and am therefore not surprised by any of this.

Nanashi
Member
Nanashi

11 year old? Until I saw the caption I thought that was a 30+ year old smoker in the picture.

StreetSweeper
Member
StreetSweeper

Well she started when she was four.