NY Times: Stop calling "gun control" Gun Control

[wired]

Gun Safety is that thing on the side of the slide I never use.

 

[BigDog67]

I had to look up the definition of obfuscate.

Man I learn a lot from NWF....

We must try to eschew obfuscation and espouse elucidation!

 

[Member 5605]

They need to ban everything flat out.

Once the states correct themselves we won't have issues anymore.

 

[USMC1911]

Have any of you read the COMMENTS to that article? Scary!

The comments are scary, the idealogury is staggering.

Scary anti freedom comments in a anti gun NY Times article? Hard to believe.

 

[titsonritz]

How about a-hole control? Let's start there.

 

[Boboclown]

Writer can write whatever he wants. Not paying for a subscription.

 

[titsonritz]

Writer can write whatever he wants. Not paying for a subscription.

Same here, especially that rag.

 

[BigDog67]

You don't need a subscription. Right click on the link, when the box drops down select "Open link in inPrivate window" that USUALLY circumvents that bullsnot.

 

[titsonritz]

Yo don't need a subscription. Right click on the link, when the box drops down select "Open link in inPrivate window" that USUALLY circumvents that bullsnot.

Honestly, it just not worth the effort. I'd rather do something useful like jerk-off or a pile of cocaine.

 

[BigDog67]

Doesn't necessarily have to be THAT article. It works with most newspapers that try that subscription garbage.

 

[wired]

Doesn't necessarily have to be THAT article. It works with most newspapers that try that subscription garbage.

Its either that or they go out of business. Hard running a newspaper these days.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

The Pendleton Round-Up is signaling Nation in Distress.

 

[Boboclown]

Its either that or they go out of business. Hard running a newspaper these days.

I don't mind supporting a newspaper. Just not that one.

 

[Flopsweat]

"New York Times"

Can't get it without subscribing. They want MY email?!

Wut?

The paywall is one reason I didn't click, also not going to give them the clicks. This time TLDR is Too Loony, Didn't Read.

How about a-hole control? Let's start there.

I needed that last week when I got a bad burrito.

 

[ma96782]

Gun Control.....TEXAS style.

Aloha, Mark

 

[ma96782]

Scary anti freedom comments in a anti gun NY Times article? Hard to believe.

Because.....Freedom is Dangerous and Anti Freedom is good for America.

Aloha, Mark

 

[titsonritz]

Gun Control.....TEXAS style.

Aloha, Mark

Another thing they both have common is they were both presented with a SOLGW AR after smoking their respective scumbags.

 

[bbbass]

1. NYT
2. Bruni... that guy is an azzhat, and always has been an azzhat

 

[Soli]

lol anyone with interest has recognized the propaganda/Orwellian bent of changing names, phrases and topics (do young people know what a "Saturday Night Special" is, and more importantly its central place in the early gun control efforts?), used by anti 2A forces over the past decades.

Bruni is a well entrenched anti, it's his schtick. But... reading this article... and donning my tin-foil head covering, I'm shocked that he so explicitly lays out the strategy.

"There's an argument for "gun control," absolutely. It's accurate: The legislation in question entails more government control over who can purchase guns and when and how.

....

But it's off key. It's unhelpful. And it's an example of the loaded language that often shapes our discourse on important matters."

We want control but shouldn't use the word?!? Accurate language is unhelpful?!? "Shap[ing] the discourse" is more important than accurate communication?!?

Oh yeah, of course it is.

Or... maybe Bruni is actually a deep, deep, DEEP, mole, fighting for the 2A from inside the belly of the rancid beast that is the gun control movement. How else to explain a blatant admission of a strategy ("I know, we'll bullbubblegum them into thinking we're not coming after their guns by changing how we talk!!!") that depends on secrecy to be effective?











Nahhhh... he's just another woke idiot with a megaphone. Thanks for the quotable quotes Bruni!!

 

[wired]

lol anyone with interest has recognized the propaganda/Orwellian bent of changing names, phrases and topics (do young people know what a "Saturday Night Special" is, and more importantly its central place in the early gun control efforts?), used by anti 2A forces over the past decades.

Bruni is a well entrenched anti, it's his schtick. But... reading this article... and donning my tin-foil head covering, I'm shocked that he so explicitly lays out the strategy.

"There's an argument for "gun control," absolutely. It's accurate: The legislation in question entails more government control over who can purchase guns and when and how.

....

But it's off key. It's unhelpful. And it's an example of the loaded language that often shapes our discourse on important matters."

We want control but shouldn't use the word?!? Accurate language is unhelpful?!? "Shap[ing] the discourse" is more important than accurate communication?!?

Oh yeah, of course it is.

Or... maybe Bruni is actually a deep, deep, DEEP, mole, fighting for the 2A from inside the belly of the rancid beast that is the gun control movement. How else to explain a blatant admission of a strategy ("I know, we'll bullbubblegum them into thinking we're not coming after their guns by changing how we talk!!!") that depends on secrecy to be effective?











Nahhhh... he's just another woke idiot with a megaphone. Thanks for the quotable quotes Bruni!!

Shaping the conversation . I noticed how fast the narrative was changed when the Asian Hate shooter went on his rampage. At first it was reported as a guy with permawood shooting prostitutes in massage parlors , essentially brothels. Now he was an Asian Hater shooting workers in Spas.