Eric Holder (1995): "We must brainwash people against guns..."

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Yeah, but when the Supreme Court makes rulings we don't like, we invoke "activist judges" and act like their rulings don't matter. What are you, new?

No, I'm just not Newt Gingrich

 

[NightHawkeye]

Breitbart is dead, why is his site still running?

ROTFL ... bummer that ...

It's called building a lasting legacy. Some do it through writings; some do it through businesses; some do it by setting an example. It seems that Breitbart did all three.

 

[SOAD]

ROTFL ... bummer that ...

It's called building a lasting legacy. Some do it through writings; some do it through businesses; some do it by setting an example. It seems that Breitbart did all three.

So we should expect more edited until 'out of context' attack videos against the left? SOP as usual

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

ROTFL ... bummer that ...

It's called building a lasting legacy. Some do it through writings; some do it through businesses; some do it by setting an example. It seems that Breitbart did all three.

Sure he did, if by "setting an example" you mean "in psychopathic lunacy".

 

[JoyJuice]

Holder 1995: We Must 'Brainwash' People Against Guns

He lays out the leftist strategy, in this case against guns, that's worked so well in so many other areas - brainwashing people - in particular our young people by indoctrinating them with a large variety of "repetitive" messages from as many sources as they can muster which will communicate the values of the left.

He actually admits it.

Well no. I don't know how you can be so wrong. What he is talking about in specific is kids in Washington DC in 1995, and not an overall strategy. DC was commonly called the Murder Capital in DC....mainly from kids killing kids.

Here's a suggestion, slow down in your desperation.

 

[Rion]

I find it interesting less in the "oh ho, he works for Obama" and more in light of the Fast and Furious fiasco. Especially since the ATF was making plans to use it to justify more gun regulations.

 

[Blackwater Babe]

Since when does the ATF make gun regulations?

 

[JoyJuice]

I find it interesting less in the "oh ho, he works for Obama" and more in light of the Fast and Furious fiasco. Especially since the ATF was making plans to use it to justify more gun regulations.

I don't agree with that plan, even though it was essentially the same plan that was under Bush but with a different name. So it really has not one thing to do with the idea who works for Obama.

Here's the thing when it comes to Obama and guns. Despite the right wing rubbish of Obama taking your guns that actually spurred a run on guns and ammo (fear is profitable to the NRA) Obama actually increased gun rights with the lapsing of the Brady ban and legislation to carry in national parks.

I just roll my eyes when I read OPs like this in light of the reality.

 

[Rion]

Since when does the ATF make gun regulations?

They don't, but they can ask Congress to do so.

 

[Blackwater Babe]

They don't, but they can ask Congress to do so.

Even so, I think

Especially since the ATF was making plans to use it to justify more gun regulations.

sounds misleading

 

[Rion]

"Bill - can you see if these guns were all purchased from the same (licensed gun dealer) and at one time. We are looking at anecdotal cases to support a demand letter on long gun multiple sales. Thanks."[bless and do not curse]

Yep, totally misleading.

 

[Schneiderman]

A comment from 17 years ago outlines the modern "leftist" agenda?

A comment from 17 years ago indicates the bias of a someone currently in an extremely powerful position, placed there by someone who consistently places people with an anti-gun agenda in extremely powerful positions.

That said, see the context. They don't want to brainwash people against guns to enforce gun control. They want to brainwash people against guns to include CRIMINALS who may use guns - a step toward removing guns as a resource for criminals, therefore removing the need for them in self defense situations.

The easiest way to remove guns as a resource for criminals is to lock up dangerous criminals and keep them there for as long as possible so they can't go out in public and get more guns.

Most of the recent NYC shootings, all of which Bloomberg blames solely on guns, were carried out by people with substantial criminal records who were let out of prison, probably so they could throw in more non-violent potheads.

Guns themselves brainwash people - they provide a sense of security in a weapon which when used can be incredibly dangerous.

Can you provide an example of something that actually happened in real life to substantiate your claim?

Then, can you provide evidence that such incidences occur at a rate which would negate the positive effect on self defense that guns have? Remember, even the lowest estimates put lawful uses of guns for self defense at over a half million cases per year.

And people sure have been brainwashed to believe guns are this eternal good with illogical phrases like "guns don't kill people, people kill people". Of course people kill people. But people are much more likely to kill people, and much more able to kill people, with a gun, as opposed to a different weapon.

Yes, which means that the weak and disabled are much better able to defend themselves against an aggressor with a gun than without.

All guns were designed to kill,

No, they were not. This is either a willful lie or an expression of gross ignorance.

most guns were designed to kill people -

Also not true. More importantly, irrelevant. Hammers were designed to whack nails but you can kill someone with a hammer, can't you? Cars were designed to transport people and cargo speedily over relatively long distances, yet more people die as a result of the use of automobiles than by the use of guns.

So even IF all guns were designed to kill- even IF all guns were designed to "kill people"- what relevance does this have when:

Guns almost never kill people: there are somewhere around 300 million guns in private hands in the US and only around 30,000 are ever used to kill people- including cases of suicide where a person used a gun to kill themselves. So, guns almost never kill people.

And,

people who lawfully own guns almost never kill people, and in fact are far less likely to be criminal than the average person: there are somewhere around 80 million lawful gun owners in the US and only 11,000 homicides. I have not seen data on how many murderers owned their firearm lawfully, but most murderers do have a criminal record that would prevent them from lawfully possessing a firearm. Furthermore, all data available on the criminality of gun owners vs. general members of the public shows that gun owners are far less likely to commit any criminal act than the average person.

you don't go hunting with a handgun.

Yes you do. Again, either a willful lie or an expression of gross ignorance. Why would you participate in a discussion on a subject that you know so utterly little about?

Are you honestly trying to argue that humanity is much better for the innovation of guns?

Yes, absolutely. Are you unaware that for the vast majority of people over the vast majority of human history, life was short, violent and miserable? Most people lived at the mercy of a person or group of people that accumulated a resource of physical power and used that power to oppress. Most people were not able to enjoy peaceful lives until after the firearm equalized mankind and freed the masses from the selfish ambition of stronger men.

That's what sets the 2nd Amendment apart from the others, and makes it more controversial. All of the other original amendments are philosophical - saying you have a right to something you are born with - speech, being treated respectfully, being aware of your powers, to believe how you wish.

The 2nd amendment guarantees that we have the natural right to whatever means available and necessary to defend all of our natural rights. Those other rights become meaningless when you are defenseless- that's why they were meaningless for most of human history.

None of the originals

The 2nd amendment IS an original. STOP BEING DISHONEST.

give you a right to own a modern, man-made invention.

Like a printing press, or a house?

And that the Bill of Rights would state that you have a right to bear arms - before your right to food, shelter, clothes, water, health and medication, education, relationships, family, or anything which is much more necessary to human survival - you have the right to own a gun. How do you not see this as wrong and controversial?

Because all those things you mention are meaningless if someone more powerful than you takes them away by force, which was the case for most of human history and in some places is still the case today.

I think some people set the Founding Fathers on too high a pedestal - yes, they founded the country. This doesn't put them above making bad decisions. The 2nd Amendment was written at a time directly following the Revolutionary War, and a time when people weren't allowed to have guns to avoid rebellion. It was written specifically to pander to that.

And history shows that this is an extremely important issue and still is. Governments murdered hundreds of millions of their own people in the 20th century alone- after the government disarmed them.

"But that can't happen here!"

I bet the victims of those atrocities thought the same thing before their doors got knocked down in the middle of the night.

Nowadays, that isn't the issue, with the invention of weapons far more dangerous than guns. Now this "right" - granted with no religious influence, purely cultural - is used just as a means to own guns for "self defense" in the handful of cases where it's used for that purpose (or in the case of some guns, hunting, something which I have no issue with). You can argue all day about how much the 2nd Amendment grants, but the real question should be, is the 2nd Amendment still necessary? Should it really be considered a "right" when so many others things, far more necessary to people, AREN'T included as "rights"?

The answer is undeniably YES.

As long as there are human beings in positions of power over others, it will always be necessary for those ruled to have a means of self defense against those who rule them. Governments are the deadliest inventions in history. If you're so concerned about murder you should be more interested in the dangers of government than of guns in private hands.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Since when does the ATF make gun regulations?

umm...since they make changes to the CFR.

Here's the thing when it comes to Obama and guns. Despite the right wing rubbish of Obama taking your guns that actually spurred a run on guns and ammo (fear is profitable to the NRA) Obama actually increased gun rights with the lapsing of the Brady ban and legislation to carry in national parks.

Are you referring to the assault weapons ban? (Because banning the shoulder thing that goes up is a perfect way to regulate guns).

 

[pennmark]

Holder 1995: We Must 'Brainwash' People Against Guns

He lays out the leftist strategy, in this case against guns, that's worked so well in so many other areas - brainwashing people - in particular our young people by indoctrinating them with a large variety of "repetitive" messages from as many sources as they can muster which will communicate the values of the left.

He actually admits it.

Just think: This man is actually the Attorney-General of the United States of America. A person who wants to "brainwash" people into hating liberty.

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Just think: This man is actually the Attorney-General of the United States of America. A person who wants to "brainwash" people into hating liberty.

Not liking guns and trying to reduce people's desire to have them =/= hating liberty.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Not liking guns and trying to reduce people's desire to have them =/= hating liberty.

Why not?

He's saying that he doesn't trust people to act like adults.

 

[SmellsLikeCurlyFries]

Why not?

He's saying that he doesn't trust people to act like adults.

*shrug* To be fair, few adults these days act like adults, in any capacity.

 

[JoyJuice]

Why not?

He's saying that he doesn't trust people to act like adults.

Problem is he wasn't talking about adults. He was talking about kids who are killing each other.

 

[katautumn]

Problem is he wasn't talking about adults. He was talking about kids who are killing each other.

And why is that? It couldn't possibly have anything to do with lack of parental involvement and very little to do with actual firearm ownership in, and of, itself now would it? Perhaps if we had stronger parental involvement and most kids weren't being raised in broken homes and most inner city kids had dads in the picture and if most kids weren't latchkey kids, coming home from school to an empty house every day, maybe we wouldn't have this immense problem with violence between kids.

Kids who are angry, have no one to look up to but celebrities, their parents are more interested in pursuing monetary gain or leaving for the next exciting person who comes along so they're never around, and kids who have no strong parental support are going to become violent. Kids don't need access to guns to kill each other. We have seen lately all it really takes is a Facebook page and a mean streak to get someone to commit suicide.

 

[EdwinWillers]

"Look, an opinion we disagree with. i know, lets call it brainwashing. nobody likes bein brainwashed, after all."

Uhh... notwithstanding the entire thrust of this video clip, which is prefaced with the comment that he wants to change the hearts and minds of the people [of DC (in this particular context)], that he lays out first his viewpoint that the problem [with guns] is people are "saturated with violence" into thinking guns are cool and hip - and that he then proceeds to outline his plan - counter-saturation - involving ad agencies ("to ply their skills in a more creative way than selling products no one wants to buy"), newspapers, TV, radio ("to devote to us [prime] time and space..."), entertainers, athletes, "community leaders w/credibility" (Jesse Jackson, Mayor Barry - LOL), and schools (making it "a part of every day, in every school, at every level").

Notwithstanding all that, he says this (~3:05 into the video, for those interested in knowing about what we're discussing before they comment):

“We have to be repetitive about this,” he said. “We need to do this every day of the week, and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.” - Eric Holder