JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
In preparation, check out some interviews of Jordan Peterson by liberal commentators. He's very good at correcting them about putting words in his mouth and making assumptions about his positions.

Be sure to bring up the one common factor in nearly all mass shootings, the fact that most shooters SHOULD have been under in-patient treatment for their demonstrated mental illness, but that we don't have such facilities since they were closed in the 1970's. And coincidentally that's the time that mass shootings started happening.

This is a great point. I forget which one of our presidents this "progress" took place under.
 
O'Conner v. Donaldson in 1975 is where the SCOTUS held that someone could not be held against their will unless they were a threat to others. There have been cases since then that expanded this policy.

It is irrelevant who was President at that time, since it was not something that the President could change. However, since Gerald Ford was under the cloud of Nixon's resignation and pardon, it was unlikely that any legislation would have been passed to address this development.

O'Connor v. Donaldson - Wikipedia
 
I thought Dominic did a great job and stayed on target (so to speak) the entire time.

There was an important moment toward the end when the panel discussed the absence of research into the causes of gun violence. Everyone admitted - even the other two panelists - that we really don't know why there has been an increase (if there has been) in mass shootings, and we don't have any idea if any of the gun control measures would actually curtail either mass shootings specifically or gun deaths more generally.

It seems to me, then, that all of these gun control measures fall under the rubric of "we have to do something, even if we're not sure it will help." That's a pretty poor basis for undercutting 2A rights.

Two points: If Dominic or anyone ends up doing something like this again, it might be useful to try to get those urging some form of gun control to explain how, based on actual evidence, what they propose might reduce mass shootings (the most emotional argument for doing something) and be prepared with all of the examples where what they propose would have been ineffective. Second, I'd also ask if they (those proposing any form of gun control) are willing to include a sunset provision so after two or three years of their proposed new gun control regime it automatically ends and we can actually look and see if the gun control has resulted in reduced gun violence. If they say "yes," then ask why there's no sunset provision in their proposal; if they say "no" ask them why we should, in the absence of any rational basis for thinking what they propose might work, infringe on the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners.

I thought the moderator was trying really hard to keep it a fair fight, and I liked it when she slapped down the negative audience reaction to something Dominic said. The audience seemed surprised that she actually wanted it to be fair.
 
Most of the Antis statistics are based on old or flawed polling: 40% of gun sales are without a background check, 98% of the people are in favor of background checks, the assault weapon ban was super effective, defensive gun uses are a myth, etc..

We need to supply the next panel member we counter statements and good statistics. Also stories of where gun control cost lives, New Jersey, California, etc.
 
Queation to ask IP43 petitioners; "Am I a bad person for owning a gun?" If no, "then why are you setting up a law that could put me in jail next to drug dealers and rapists? Do I offend you that much?"
 
I finally listened to the whole thing. Dominic did a great job staying on message and not letting Klownutson get under his skin. I am very proud of Dominic. I think the moderator was fair too.

I've been to enough churches in my life to know when a Pastor is spinning yarns, and this Klownutson guy is totally full of kaka. He's just another self-righteous attention craving windbag who loves to hear himself talk. He shamelessly tried to suck up to the moderator in the beginning a few times, but she saw right through it ("I really admire journalists"). I didn't hear anything in the way of facts from his mouth, just the same emotional rub and tug ("the children are begging us to do something!!!") and corny apocryphal stories only little old ladies believe.

Among many offensive and ignorant statements made by Pastor Klownutson that stood out to me:
  • He has graciously allowed us to have 10-round magazines, even though he wanted it knocked down to 5
  • He pals around with members of the 82nd airborne and the Police Dept who agree with him (see kids, only the authorities can be trusted with guns!)
  • He knows how life in small town Oregon is (Really? Do tell us how it is, Klownutson).
  • Most hunters are "transitioning to bow hunting".
  • If hunters see another hunter with an AR15, they "leave that part of the forest".
  • He played football and ran track, but never felt the need to carry a gun (see kids, tough guys don't need guns!)
  • He goes around to different churches "teaching" people about guns (i.e., lobbying for gun control)
  • He knows everyone, knows everything, and has been everywhere.
 
I finally listened to the whole thing. Dominic did a great job staying on message and not letting Klownutson get under his skin. I am very proud of Dominic. I think the moderator was fair too.

I've been to enough churches in my life to know when a Pastor is spinning yarns, and this Klownutson guy is totally full of kaka. He's just another self-righteous attention craving windbag who loves to hear himself talk. He shamelessly tried to suck up to the moderator in the beginning a few times, but she saw right through it ("I really admire journalists"). I didn't hear anything in the way of facts from his mouth, just the same emotional rub and tug ("the children are begging us to do something!!!") and corny apocryphal stories only little old ladies believe.

Among many offensive and ignorant statements made by Pastor Klownutson that stood out to me:
  • He has graciously allowed us to have 10-round magazines, even though he wanted it knocked down to 5
  • He pals around with members of the 82nd airborne and the Police Dept who agree with him (see kids, only the authorities can be trusted with guns!)
  • He knows how life in small town Oregon is (Really? Do tell us how it is, Klownutson).
  • Most hunters are "transitioning to bow hunting".
  • If hunters see another hunter with an AR15, they "leave that part of the forest".
  • He played football and ran track, but never felt the need to carry a gun (see kids, tough guys don't need guns!)
  • He goes around to different churches "teaching" people about guns (i.e., lobbying for gun control)
  • He knows everyone, knows everything, and has been everywhere.
I came in late trying to get setup on my wife's Facebook account and missed the "pals around with" comment. I would like to meet some of these police and airborne people. I think that they might have a different take on what pals around means, just like the take he has on guns.
 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top