|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
SAF To Dominant Media: It’s Not ‘Gun Violence,’ It’s ‘Gang Violence!’
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The Second Amendment Foundation today criticized the dominant media for its continued subliminal campaign to blame firearms for the carnage in Chicago, repeatedly using the term “gun violence” to describe the slaughter that local authorities appear unable to curb.
“It’s not ‘gun violence’,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “it’s gang violence, and the sad thing is that reporters and editors know it. But they simply refuse to acknowledge that if you don’t call the problem by its right name, you can’t solve it. |
| Comment by:
kangpc
(2/17/2017)
|
“He who controls the language controls the masses.” – Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals
We must stop accepting, or even using, the misleading terminology of our opponents.
Stop using the meaningless term "gun violence." It's just as absurd as using phrases like "fist violence," "boot violence," "stick violence" or "brick violence."
As we learned when we, and the politicians, accepted the meaningless term "assault weapon," Saul Alinsky, at least in this instance, is correct. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
