Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Media Silence On Armed Anti-Police Protestors And Private Guards Is Deafening

Media Silence On Armed Anti-Police Protestors And Private Guards Is Deafening

Suddenly confiscating guns isn’t a Democrat priority when Democrats like the people carrying the guns.

https://youtu.be/ovtLTPrB2M

I’m so old I remember when the media would flop onto the nearest fainting couch at the sight of a protester exercising his or her Second Amendment rights.  Remember the wails of horror, fear, and outrage we were treated to when Tea Party activists and, more recently, anti-lockdown protesters were shown lawfully openly carrying perfectly lawful firearms at protests?

The headlines were intended to shock the general public, to scare people, to incite anti-gun fervor.

  • Reuters (2011):  Gun-toting Tea Party activists rally in Montana
  • Think Progress (2010): Gun Rights and Tea Party Activists Encourage People To Bring Guns To New Mexico Protest
  • Time (2009):  When Protesters Bear Arms Against Health-Care Reform
  • CNN (2009):  Man carries assault rifle to Obama protest — and it’s legal

With regard to the last story, it was taken, you may recall, to brazen heights when MSNBC edited out the race of a gun-toting, anti-Obama racist (he was black).

This ended up being a disaster for the race-baiting, anti-Second Amendment mainstream media.  Remember how they only showed the man with his big scary gun from the neck down?

Politico reported at the time:

Several conservative bloggers, including Hot Air, RedState, and NewsBusters, have taken MSNBC to task for not identifying a man with a gun at an Obama event as an African-American in a segment that discussed the “racial overtones” of those packing heat at presidential town halls.

Following the shot of the African-American man focusing specifically on the gun, MSNBC host Contessa Brewer said that “you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists or to their legs.”

All while cropping out the man’s head, so you couldn’t see that their example of “white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists” was black.  They wanted to obscure the fact that he was a black anti-Obama protester exercising his Constitutional right to keep and bear arms in an open carry state.  Who was stoking what?  (Ace of Spades also offered up one of his seriously awesome takes on the matter at the time.)

The frenzied anti-Second Amendment fear-mongering and (we now know) phony horror at seeing armed protestors reached an even more fevered pitch earlier this year when protestors showed up in various states to protest draconian and often illogical lockdown measures.

Remember the headlines?

  • NBC News:  Hundreds of protesters, some carrying guns in the state Capitol, demonstrate against Michigan’s emergency measures
  • The Guardian:  Armed protesters demonstrate against Covid-19 lockdown at Michigan capitol
  • Forbes:  Armed Protesters Storm Michigan State House Over COVID-19 Lockdown
  • WaPo: The tea party is back — and endangering lives
  • San Francisco Chronicle:  Reopen California coronavirus protests ‘identical’ to early Tea Party rallies, leader says
  • The Atlantic: The Great Irony of America’s Armed Anti-Lockdown Protesters: they say they are demonstrating against tyranny, but they are in fact enjoying an extreme—and dangerous—sort of liberty.

Funny how we don’t hear any of that “great irony” talk amid the George Floyd protests/riots of 2020 and the CHAZ zone in Seattle.

This seems a moment ripe  for “gee, what exactly are tyranny and fascism?” introspection, particularly when there are hundreds of images all over social media of armed anti-police “protestors,” including those guarding CHAZ borders and now “patrolling” CHAZ streets.

And especially given that people of color have been forced to take up arms to protect their communities from these “peaceful” and “festive” arsonists, looters, and murderers.  But we hear crickets from Democrats and their media stenographers who once thought the mere sight of any long gun (commonly mistaken for an AK-57billion “weapon of war”) was cause to further restrict or even revoke one of, if not the, most prized rights of every American.

Some local media wrote glowing reports about armed protesters “protecting” the Seattle East Precinct after it was abandoned by police, but mostly these stories about guns at protests or used to protect businesses against rioters are simply ignored, or glossed over in passing, because they don’t fit the narrative.

https://twitter.com/AuburnGirl36849/status/1271231335391268865

https://twitter.com/AuburnGirl36849/status/1271231283277058049

The Washington Post, usually among the most stringent antigun outlets, posted a great video about armed citizens in Minneapolis protecting their neighborhoods.

What you won’t hear is any talk about gun control or about how awful it is that citizens are protecting themselves and their neighborhood from violent rioters, looters, and arsonists with big, scary-looking “weapons of war.”

Suddenly, in fact, gun control is the one subject we hear nothing about.  This is pretty surprising given that the 2020 Democrat presidential nominee hasn’t been officially named yet, and one of their very favorite candidates, Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke, openly admitted, “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.”

It’s almost like Democrats and their media cohorts have another reason for trying to disarm the law abiding citizens of this country.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

TY Fuzzy…

I immediately tried to look up WA open carry laws.. and found this

As a general rule, a person may legally open-carry in Washington state in any place it is legal to possess a loaded handgun, as long as it does not manifest “an intent to intimidate another or [warrant] alarm for the safety of other persons.”

How is striking a pose in front of some kind of fence or barrier not actually trying to intimidate people?

Silly me.. we don’t have laws any more.

    stl in reply to amwick. | June 16, 2020 at 9:49 am

    In a sane constitutional world, that law would be, unconstitutional. It depends on someone/anyone being offended or feeling threatened and suddenly, your gun is now illegal. This seattle situation has ruined the gun control argument, even though they will still try to re-enforce gun control on everyone else once this particular episode dies down.

      Mac45 in reply to stl. | June 16, 2020 at 10:55 am

      The wording of the statute is ” to INTENTIONALLY threaten”. So, the state would first have ti prove, not that a person merely FELT threatened, but that a reasonable man in similar circumstances would have felt threatened AND that the possessor of the weapon INTENDED to use the weapon to threaten that person, before a conviction could be secured. The second part of the statute covers reckless or careless display of the weapon. Again, the state would have to prove that the weapon was being displayed in a manner which was placed others in danger of injury, before a conviction could be obtained. In neither case, would mere possession generate enough probable cause for an arrest.

An actual grocery store conversation several years ago:

Woman: “He’s got a gun.”
Me: “Who?”
Woman: “That man over there.”
Me: “So?”
Woman: “Doesn’t that scare you?”
Me: “No.”
Woman: “Why not?”
Me: “He’s open carrying where it’s legal and the gun is in a holster with a leather strap across it so it doesn’t fall out.”
Woman: “It scares me.”
Me: “It’s not scary unless he pulls it out for no obvious reason. Decaf from now on.”
Woman huffs and walks away.
.

    GWB in reply to DSHornet. | June 16, 2020 at 9:15 am

    Me: “He’s got car keys.”
    Woman: “Who?”
    Me: “That man over there. He’s got car keys in his hand.”
    Woman: “So?”
    Me: “Doesn’t that scare you”
    Woman: “Why should it?”
    Me: “Well, cars kill people. Lots of people. And pedestrians like us are particularly vulnerable.”
    And on, and on, and on…

It’s deafening only if you think they have standards or that they can be shamed or perhaps there’s just one conservative that doesn’t know they’re conservative yet. Otherwise it’s business as usual. Only to the left, all the time.

    Halcyon Daze in reply to forksdad. | June 16, 2020 at 9:51 am

    Leftists believe the end justifies the means. With that belief in hand, everything a leftist does or says is justified in their mind. Therefore nothing can be hypocritical enough, or illegal enough, or embarrassing enough to create a cause for self-reflection. There can be nothing to ever stop a leftist from working to achieve his/her end. Our ideological opponents never sleep, and the battle never ends. Do not forget this.

    henrybowman in reply to forksdad. | June 16, 2020 at 2:18 pm

    It it weren’t for hypocrisy, Democrats would have no principles to run on at all.

The (liberal) Media has their hands on the gasoline hoses fueling the fires. The is all on their shoulders, the blood is on their hands.

General rule number one for leftists: EVERYTHING must serve the agenda.

General rule number two for leftists: The agenda is based on how we feel today NOT on reality, standards or thoughtful consideration.

Four days ago:
Pelosi calls for gun control measures to mark four years since Pulse nightclub shooting
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/502442-pelosi-calls-for-gun-control-measures-to-mark-4-years-since-pulse-nightclub

Media silence is street violence.

End the left.

Copperjockey | June 16, 2020 at 10:05 am

The Dems are sort of like a saying my dad used to use. “Do as I say not as I do”

Democrats, Progressives and other liberals believe that everything that they are against is permissible, if the RIGHT people are doing it.

TheOldZombie | June 16, 2020 at 12:32 pm

The riots and the hypocrisy over the thugs in Seattle with their guns is good for the country. It’s pretty much ended any talk of gun control for a few years. Maybe a few decades as people will remember this year.

People who’ve never thought of buying a gun are out there buying them.

Personally I don’t care that they’re carrying weapons. First of all because I have no plans or desire to visit CHAZ / CHOP. They can exercise their second amendment rights. That said, I do get a nice chuckle recalling that the protesters in MI who walked / stood with weapons were called “domestic terrorist” by not only my govorner but by every CNN and MSNBC talking head. Its fun to see their lack of consistency.

    henrybowman in reply to WillS68. | June 16, 2020 at 2:20 pm

    Don’t forget when the Bundys peacefully “occupied” a government building in the middle of desolation, the media screamed that it was “terrorism” that called for an immediate federal armed response. NEVER forget.

    To be clear, I don’t have a problem with lawful open carry at all. In fact, I have long been a huge advocate of it. This post is not intended to be negative about lawful open carry (there is some question about the CHAZ warlord handing out weapons from the trunk of his Prius and the legalities of that regarding transfer, background checks, etc.), but lawful open carry? I’m a fan. That’s why I loved the Latin gangs protecting their neighborhoods and the WaPo piece on the locals protecting their businesses and neighborhoods.

    Someone posted a great vid of bikers and other residents protecting their town in my post about the Latin Kings; I watched that vid and thought how safe I would feel in that town. Wouldn’t it be fun if the media gave the same coverage to lawful carry by all Americans, including those not swilling the Marxist goop they are busy ladling over America? Exposing their hypocrisy is important.

      In the case of the Latin Kings “protecting” their neighborhoods, they were actually restricting other citizen’s lawful use of common roadways. They had no authority granted them by the greater community to regulate the use of these roadways, paid for by common tax funds. I have no problem with residents bearing arms and visibly monitoring the public activities in their neighborhoods. I have a big problem when someone illegally interfering in my lawful activities. If they are armed when they do it, I may have to use MY carried firearm to protect MY rights.

        JimWoo in reply to Mac45. | June 16, 2020 at 10:03 pm

        They did good here in south side of Chicago. They knew who to watch. They knew who burned their own neighborhood (2 Walgreens and grocery store) and were looking for more loot in fresh pickings.

I’m surprised that snopes.com still exists. It uses former porn stars and hookers as “fact checkers” and its founder has been accused of embezzlement.

texansamurai | June 16, 2020 at 9:46 pm

if the header photo of this article is at all indicative of the ” protesters ” who’ve appointed themselves the police force/guard for this nonsense then they’re obviously outright street thugs–look at how they are holding their weapons–lord, could take their weapons(or waste them) before they could get off a shot–a child could probably do it

and the police are afraid of inciting these idiots?

come on

Grrr8 American | June 17, 2020 at 5:33 pm

This post becomes even more significant when read in conjunction with an email I received from a friend a couple of days ago:

“There is a guy Efrain, in my Men’s group at church who emigrated from Venezuela. We heard his story tonight. The activities that the country underwent prior to instituting the dictatorship is what is attempting to be followed here, now. They turned the population against the police, replacing it with vigilantes that the government could control. They released prisoners, then armed them, and they became a new type of policing force called enforcer squads, in local neighborhoods. What he is seeing now is what is being attempted now.”

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend