Joan Peterson is currently in hysterics over the fact that a man running for Congress in the 8th Congressional District of Arizona, which also happens to be Gabby Gifford’s district, is featuring a picture of his service where he is carrying a rifle:
Says Ms. Peterson:
Why does he need to run an ad with a poster showing himself with an assault weapon and calling himself a “Warrior”? Is this some sort of code to the extreme conservatives and gun rights activists?
I’ve largely grown bored with our favorite Brady Board member, but every once in a while I run across something so completely nuts I just have no choice but to share. I will admit to not getting an updated secret decoder ring from the NRA in some time, but going out on a limb here I am fairly certain there is no code.
What we have before us is a politician who is a United States Marine who served in Iraq. He would like potential voters to know about his service, so he puts pictures up of him soldiering on his campaign material. I know this is a shocking revelation, but soldiering generally involves carrying a rifle. Not only rifles, but real, honest to goodness select-fire full-auto capable assault rifles. Soldiers also, fairly commonly, refer to themselves as “warriors.” I know that’s hard to believe, but trust me, it’s true.
Surely the Brady Campaign is not now embracing the position that we ought to disarm our military? Surely they do not take the position that there is something wrong with Marines being proud of their service, or having to hide their service, because one of the tools they use to protect freedom is a firearm?
I show this only to point out how far outside the mainstream the leadership of the anti-gun movement truly is. Soldiers carrying guns… well, that’s just icky.
The woman really is barking mad.
Exactly right – weapons are icky. When they use the language of bodily rejection (nausea, revulsion, sickness), they’re not using metaphor…
I am sorry that you did not get your secret decoder ring. Apparently you are not in the inner circle. I will let you know if there are any coded messages that you should be made aware of.
So if I ran for office and showed a photo of myself in-front of a 2000lb bomb would they cry about that also? I was a jet mechanic in the USMC.
If you zoom in, you can see the frame is actually broken up into dashes and dots. Looks like it says
–.- . …- .- -..- –.. -… . .-. -… .. -. -.– –. …- .- .-.
QEVAXZBERBINYGVAR ??? I can’t find that in the code book. Contact me in the usual way. out…
Ever since the shooting the antis think they “own” Gifford. They leave out the fact they never endorsed her for Congress.
Gifford is the one who took the military to task for not fighting the war in an environmentally safe way.
She doesn’t want to ban guns, she just doesn’t want anybody to own or use guns EVER for any reason.
She supports self defense so long as no guns are used, and she supports hunting…at least until she can get away with not supporting it.
She’s stuck on “Guns are bad M’kay?” and can’t get past it. Bat shit insane.
“Surely the Brady Campaign is not now embracing the position that we ought to disarm our military?”
If they are, it’s about time! I will only consider supporting a ban on civilian ownership and use of weapons if we also ban the police and the military from ownership and use of weapons as well. The police, because they technically are civilians, and whatever power they have, citizens have as well; soldiers, because I do not trust an armed military, especially when the civilian population is disarmed.
Conversely, any weapon that should be legal for the police and military, should be legal for civilians to own–with the possible exception of hollow-point bullets, since those are mistakenly banned by Geneva Conventions, but are crucial in self-defense and police situations, where a full-metal jacket round could go through a bad guy, or a wall, and kill an innocent bystander.
I, for one, welcome the Brady Bunch attacking the United States Marine Corps.
I will also welcome the USMC’s counter-attack…
Correction Joan “assault rifle”. An assault weapon is a weapon that looks like an assault rifle. An assault rifle is a weapon engineered for armed assaults.
An assault weapon only fires a single bullet when you pull the trigger. An assault rifle will fire as many bullets as you an feed it before over heating.
;-)
For whatever reason I can’t post on Blogger with my google account now.
Anyway, as is typical with her grade of “research” she just quoted the Verhoeven movie plot summary off IMDB in response to a question about her knowledge of Heinlein’s novel (the issue was his statement about military or public service as a requirement for voting).
One should not send traffic to someone who is batshit crazy anti-gun. There’s simply no point in engaging with someone that far gone. She’s looking to argue, but should simply be ignored. That’s my view.
You’re allowed to have your view. This is Sebastian’s blog, and he believes that when the leadership of a gun control group is making a public statement that essentially says our vets should not be allowed to talk about their service to our country or show themselves in photographs or video serving our country simply because there’s an image of a gun, it’s worthwhile to have a discussion about the issue.
I assume the ‘code’ is that he’ll fight for us in congress; like he fought for us in the army.
What’s the matter, can’t Bitter find am NRA decoder-ring on Etsy?? :-) Maybe in the Steampunk section?
I suppose that Peterson can’t be ignored because she’s not a lone wacko, but is on the board of the Brady Campaign. Her crazy isn’t just her own, but is representative of the anti’s because they’re chosen her to represent them, so it is a good idea to put a spotlight on her, so that she can be seen for what she is.
I do find her over-the-top level of leftist paranoia to be disturbing – it’s like fingernails on a chalkboard. Hopefully others will benefit from being made aware of that too.
I have a reply to Mrs (Ms?) Peterson, but it’s not fit for public consumption.
I’ve been quite reasonable and polite about and to her before, but… Jesus Christ What The Hell Is Wrong With Her?
(That’s the clean version.)
Waily waily, ach Crivens! A Marine has a gun and calls himself a warrior! Cats and dogs, living together! Mass hysteria!
Hah! Peterson better watch out. Giffords went from an F rating in 2004 to a C rating in 2010. If this trend continues Giffords will eventually go full pro-gun and Peterson will then be compelled to renounce her!