This Is What “90% Support” Looks Like

The gun control measures that “have 90% support” failed in conference committee yesterday, after having to be buried in the House Public Safety omnibus finance bill because the DFL didn’t have the votes to pass them as standalone bills, even in the Metrocrat-dominated House.

And I hope, hope, hope that the DFL keeps running with that “90% support line” in the Senate elections next year.

18 thoughts on “This Is What “90% Support” Looks Like

  1. This is purely political grandstanding by the Dems, so that during the election cycle, they can tout; “We tried to do something, but the evil Republicans blocked it. We need control of the senate to push through our tax and spending increases and to take their guns away!”

  2. This is why it’s important that urban districts be compact and extend their “tentacles” into the suburbs and countryside as little as possible. Let them have their Ilhan Omars; let the rest of us have peace from them unless we read their antics in the papers.

  3. The story in the Star & Sickle said there was “growing support from local gun safety groups”. If I was involved in this fight, I might contact the reporter and ask if “growing support” meant there are new local gun grabber groups, or that the one local gun grabber group that exists didn’t support any aspect of any gun grabbing legislation ever presented at the MN legislature at any time before this?

    In fact, it was just a bold faced piece of propaganda the “reporter” tossed in to support the cause.

  4. ^ I guess we know Strib’s going to Strib on guns. But I was newly struck by the Strib’s coverage there yesterday… In a story where the news peg is gun store burglaries, stolen gun caches, and the truly illicit gun trade, reporters Jany & Hargarten want to describe this as say ‘gun control laws being skirted’. The notion of laws being skirted is in the paragraph directly below the bold paragraph header ‘Burden on Police’.

    http://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-police-recovered-700-guns-citywide-in-2018/509863452/

    Burglary isn’t a ‘skirting’ of firearms law.

    So this is yes propaganda such that I guess you have an instinct to guess that the reporters are actually capable of writing a new story correctly.

    This article also contains the very ambiguous ‘some say’ assertion, in the that same paragraph.

  5. This article also contains the very ambiguous ‘some say’ assertion, in the that same paragraph.

    Right. Another question to pose to these propagandists. Who’s “some”.

    Mitch’s group should reach out and ask those questions, IMO. Call the bastards out.

  6. Here’s another piece of pure propaganda.

    Yesterday, Mogadishu Barbie had a little soiree for her fellow terrorists Somali mongrels…and here we pick up this gem from Jennifer Brooks in the Star Tribune:

    “Ramadan is a time to avoid conflict and quarrels, but anyone who follows Omar on Twitter knows conflict avoidance is not her style.

    So when she rose to speak, she took the opportunity to drop a few words of her own that can be pulled out of context and rearranged into something scary.

    Ramadan, she said, can be a struggle. A struggle to talk when your mouth is too dry to swallow, a struggle to move when your limbs feel impossibly weak from hunger.

    “That word, ‘struggle,’ for a lot of Muslims has a heavier meaning,” she said. “You will hear extremists, terrorists, Islamophobes talk about the word ‘jihad.’ For many of us, the word jihad simply means to struggle … The struggle to better ourselves, the struggle to better our communities, the struggle to be righteous.

    “This month of Ramadan provides sort of a boot camp to the betterment of our community,” Omar continued”

    It’s obvious to anyone, even Brooks, that Mog Barbie is blowing a dog whistle. So, being the faithful mutt she is, Brooks goes to the defense:

    “This was either a straightforward Arabic language lesson, or our congresswoman is trolling Islamophobes for fun and fundraising.”

    Yeah, and when she spat on the US soldiers her filthy relatives killed, mutilated and dragged through the fetid streets of her hometown she was just having a little fun. So when this ignorant twaat yells “JIHAD!!” and ululates on the floor of the US House (I can see it happening, y’all), don’t go all white man hatey…she’s just joshing again.

  7. “Some say the growing number of gun recoveries underscores the ease with which criminals can obtain firearms, skirting state laws that make it illegal for someone with a felony record to possess a gun.”

    A good editor would have yanked that sentence. It stands out as an unfounded assertion between a statement of fact and a ver batim quote from an LE source.

  8. criminals can obtain firearms [by] skirting state laws

    My god, those people are stupid. They’re criminals. Already.

  9. Either those reporters and their editors are very stupid or its a very dishonest article…

    In terms of artifacts of our national gun discussion, ‘skirting state laws’ is an obvious reference to background checks. The article’s news peg is the interdiction of stolen guns on the street. There’s no relevance whatsoever between buying a handgun from a fence and background checks.

    The whole article is a category deception. And by the way, the article also quotes that they city coppers take in about 1/4 of the guns they used to. Which should mean whatever the problem is, its dissipating. But the article exists to further the notion that there’s a gun problem.

  10. bikebubba: This is why it’s important that urban districts be compact and extend their “tentacles” into the suburbs and countryside as little as possible. Let them have their Ilhan Omars; let the rest of us have peace from them unless we read their antics in the papers.

    This is one of the fundamental differences between us and them:

    Us: I don’t like what you’re doing, but as long as it doesn’t hurt me or mine, whatever.

    Then: I don’t like what you’re doing, and I will force you to change, at gunpoint if necessary, until I feel you are no longer hurting anyone’s feelings, let alone hurting anyone.

    jdm & John: I have long ago stopped giving the left the “out” of their actions being a result of stupidity. It’s all intentional. They’re not stupid, they’re evil. Also, just remember: There’s a difference between the conditions of “being smart” and “being educated”. They can exist independently of each other.

  11. Bill C
    ” I have long ago stopped giving the left the “out””…
    well said
    and more to the point don’t give Glen Taylor an out. If its in the StarTribune then Glen Taylor approves it!. Does anyone actually believe the WaPo can publish information that substantially damages Jeff Bezos and his political interests? The same is true of the Strib and Glen Taylor!

  12. I accept your perspective, Bill C, and I will incorporate, heck, assimilate it: evil *and* stupid, it is.

    Which, when I think about actually fits better (thanks) because the left is never ever prepared for the Law of Unintended Consequences.

  13. jdm on May 15, 2019 at 4:41 pm said:
    . . . because the left is never ever prepared for the Law of Unintended Consequences.

    See Trump, Donald J.

  14. It’s hardly surprising that the people who rabidly exploit ordinary citizens’ fear of government overreach in regulating the second amendment, also exploit them financially to line their own pockets.

  15. John: The answer is not either stupid or dishonest, it is both. They tout support for UBC, but don’t tell people being asked the question that a check would be required to lend a gun at the range so someone could fire a mag through your gun and ANOTHER check for them to give it back.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.