Skip to main content

Last night, Stephen Colbert talked about how the NRA successfully got the CDC to stop studying the effects of guns, and how they and other gun advocates are spreading FAKE stories when a gun came in handy.

Back in 1993, the jack-booted statisticians at the Centers for Disease Control published a study of gun households.  (In "Better Homes & Ammo")  Now, according to the study, not only were guns ineffective in home protection, but "people who keep guns in their homes appear to be at greater risk of homicide... than people who do not".

Well, sure.  With a gun in the house, my family's less safe.  But isn't that a small price to pay for my family's safety?  (Catch .22 Caliber)  (audience laughter and applause)

....

Folks, we are facing the threat of information.  Thankfully, patriots like conservative historian David Barton are fighting back with positive stories of guns in our schools.

DAVID BARTON (1/15/2013): A great example, in the 1850s, you have a schoolteacher who's teaching.  A guy — he's out in the West — a guy from New England has been searching for him, wants to kill him and find him.  So he comes in the school with his gun to shoot the teacher.  He decides not to shoot the teacher, 'cause all the kids pull their guns out and point it at him, and said, "You kill the teacher, you die."  He says OK.  Teacher lives.  Real simple stuff.
Yeah, real simple stuff.  Remember, kids, remember, guns are like gum.  You have to bring enough for the entire class.  (Safer Than Bringing Peanut Butter)

Now, of course, the blogo-chats out there are saying Barton lifted that story from the Louis L'Amour novel Bendigo Shafter.  But come on, Bendigo Shafter?  Is that even a book?  It sounds like a Native American porn star.  (Star of "Poke-Her-Haunches")

But even if Barton did borrow the story, there's nothing wrong with taking a story from a book and saying it's real.  (Works for Religion)  (shocked audience reaction turns to cheering and applause)

The fact is, the only thing out there that can stop a bad guy with good information is a good guy with bad information.  Like NRA president Wayne LaPierre.

WAYNE LaPIERRE (2/3/2013): If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs, that they're going to be out there alone.  And the only way they're going to protect themselves, in the cold, in the dark, when they're vulnerable is with a firearm.
Yes, if only somebody had threatened Hurricane Sandy with a shotgun, the Northeast wouldn't be in this mess.  (Tip: Aim For The Eye)  So folks, to counter all the negative stories about guns out there, we've got to follow Wayne and David's lead and make up positive stories about guns.  ("Propa-gun-da")
Video and full transcript below the fold.

It's been a month since the tragedy at Sandy Hook, but the media just won't let this story go.  Meanwhile, other news gets completely ignored.  Where's the in-depth report on the salsa dog?

Salsa dog.  Could it happen in your town?

Folks, this morbid obsession with the tens of thousands of people who are killed every year with guns is just all part of the media's anti-gun agenda.  And it is not fooling NRA president Wayne "The Pierre" LaPierre.

WAYNE LaPIERRE (12/24/2012): There's a media machine in this country that wants to blame guns every time something happens.
That's right.  Every time someone takes a bullet to the chest, the media rushes to blame guns.  Hey, maybe the guy tripped and fell on a bullet.  Or hammered it in there.  But no!  To the media, the smoking gun is always a smoking gun.

Some journalists are so prejudiced against guns, they have sunk to journalism.  Because there is no national database of shootings, Slate has started tallying the number of gun deaths since Newtown.  It's been more than 30 a day.  Now I know that sounds high, but remember, there's only 28 days in February.

Sadly, all this anti-gun information has had an effect.  In a recent poll, 93% of Americans now favor background checks.  But we can't trust those 93%.  We don't know their backgrounds.  Luckily, we can fight this negative reporting about guns, and that brings us to tonight's Wørd: Silent But Deadly.

Folks, this isn't the first time our Second Amendment have been threatened by facts.  Back in 1993, the jack-booted statisticians at the Centers for Disease Control published a study of gun households.  (In "Better Homes & Ammo")  Now, according to the study, not only were guns ineffective in home protection, but "people who keep guns in their homes appear to be at greater risk of homicide... than people who do not".

Well, sure.  With a gun in the house, my family's less safe.  But isn't that a small price to pay for my family's safety?  (Catch .22 Caliber)  (audience laughter and applause)

Besides, why on Earth... someone tell me why is the Centers for Disease Control studying guns?  Guns aren't a disease.  I didn't get my semi-automatic from sitting on a toilet seat.  (Different Kind of "Uzi")  (audience groans)

Folks, think about it.  If this kind of information fell into the wrong hands, who knows how much damage it could have done?  But luckily, the NRA stepped up to make sure it would never happen again.

MARK STRASSMANN, CBS NEWS (1/17/2013): In 1996, the NRA successfully lobbied Congress to put this restriction into the CDC's budget.  "None of the funds made available... may be used to advocate or promote gun control."
The NRA made the government stop studying the effect of guns.  And in the 17 years since, we've remained perfectly safe... as far as we know.  (Ignorance is BLAM!)

Now unfortunately, folks, years of hard not-work may soon be undone, because with a stroke of a pen, Obama just directed the CDC to resume scientific studies on gun violence, saying he just wants to protect people from guns.  (Drones on The Other Hand...)

Now once again, we're facing our old enemy from the '90s.  (Newman!)  Folks, we are facing the threat of information.  Thankfully, patriots like conservative historian David Barton are fighting back with positive stories of guns in our schools.

DAVID BARTON (1/15/2013): A great example, in the 1850s, you have a schoolteacher who's teaching.  A guy — he's out in the West — a guy from New England has been searching for him, wants to kill him and find him.  So he comes in the school with his gun to shoot the teacher.  He decides not to shoot the teacher, 'cause all the kids pull their guns out and point it at him, and said, "You kill the teacher, you die."  He says OK.  Teacher lives.  Real simple stuff.
Yeah, real simple stuff.  Remember, kids, remember, guns are like gum.  You have to bring enough for the entire class.  (Safer Than Bringing Peanut Butter)

Now, of course, the blogo-chats out there are saying Barton lifted that story from the Louis L'Amour novel Bendigo Shafter.  But come on, Bendigo Shafter?  Is that even a book?  It sounds like a Native American porn star.  (Star of "Poke-Her-Haunches")

But even if Barton did borrow the story, there's nothing wrong with taking a story from a book and saying it's real.  (Works for Religion)  (shocked audience reaction turns to cheering and applause)

The fact is, the only thing out there that can stop a bad guy with good information is a good guy with bad information.  Like NRA president Wayne LaPierre.

WAYNE LaPIERRE (2/3/2013): If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs, that they're going to be out there alone.  And the only way they're going to protect themselves, in the cold, in the dark, when they're vulnerable is with a firearm.
Yes, if only somebody had threatened Hurricane Sandy with a shotgun, the Northeast wouldn't be in this mess.  (Tip: Aim For The Eye)  So folks, to counter all the negative stories about guns out there, we've got to follow Wayne and David's lead and make up positive stories about guns.  ("Propa-gun-da")

For instance, did you know that four out of five dentists recommend that you own a gun?

Or that Abraham Lincoln actually died from choking on a Raisinette?  (Sic Semper Delicious!)

So, join me in standing up against any actual knowledge about guns.  Let the CDC know, they can take our ignorance, when they pry it from our cold dead minds.  (Silent But Deadly)  And that's the Wørd.  We'll be right back.

Stephen also covered the Academy Awards, and the latest rumors about why the Pope stepped down when he did.
Meanwhile, Jon apologized to former Mississippi Secretary of State Dick Molpus (D) for implying he was racist, when in fact he's actually a civil rights hero in that state.
He then looked at Virginia's version, where a cohabitation law is STILL on the books.
Jon then discussed the sequester with Sam Bee.
Stephen talked with British journalist Simon Garfield about maps, and Jon talked with actor Donnie Wahlberg about his latest project looking at Boston.

Originally posted to BruinKid on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 05:20 AM PST.

Also republished by Shut Down the NRA, Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA), and Electronic America: Progressives Film, music & Arts Group.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  After years of reflection (6+ / 0-)

    the ONLY time I have ever felt a true need for a gun has been in traffic where somebody has decided to become very threatening. That's happened 3-4 times since age 18.

    Can't kung fu people in traffic.

    Just 2 months ago a dumbass was standing in the fucking road during rush hour. A back road but still with heavy traffic and he and this stupid lady  - with kids - decide they are going to stand their ground in the middle of the fucking road.

    I will curse you savagely for this. And I did.

    Dumbass sneaks up to my truck window at a red light. I turn and there he is in my window. I could have shot him dead on the spot and been home for dinner. No gun and no desire ofr hassles = run the red light.

    But that is how stupid people end up getting shot.

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 05:31:09 AM PST

    •  How would the gun have helped you in those traffic (9+ / 0-)

      ... situations?

      How were they resolved, sans gun?

      •  You have a fine Parlour Game, Bob (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Joieau

        The purpose of having a gun would be (A) "deterrence" (To scare somebody off)

        or (B) I could just shoot people who threaten me.

        I MANAGED to evade harm merely by luck in 2 of the situations.

        It is JUST AS LIKELY I could have been assaulted or killed in any of those: we'll never know. I know your game focuses on getting through a criminal assault without lifting  a finger to do anything about it. And that you, further, seriously doubt that assaults actually occur.

        Now, once upon a time you found a need to raise a hockey stick to some warm, decent human beings, and I am unsure why you did, but you seem to have scared them so badly they left your home, where they apparently had not be FORMALLY invited.

        I have had similar experience which I did manage without guns, but in which I was able to use my kung fu.

        We will be viewing the Reality we share differently. You can rest assured in your world that You are supremely right in your orientation as to how to manage things that don't really occur.

        I will continue to realize that crimes do occur and they occur frequently in my community.

        If I have not been victimized recently it;s only luck of the draw, so to speak.

        Probably just a matter of time.

        The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

        by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:17:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Deterrence from what? (8+ / 0-)

          What happened that would have turned out better by pulling a gun?

          •  That's a fair enough questions, given (4+ / 0-)

            the seriousness of using a gun on a person.

            “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

            by jeff in nyc on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:49:50 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What about the seriousness of assaulting a person (0+ / 0-)

              to begin with?

              Kossacks seem to believe that (A) crime doesn't happen and (B) any attempt to defend oneself means you are a violent person who should be monitored.

              I was bullied as a kid and I am not putting up with shit from other people if I don't have to.

              You can.

              I'm not interested in it.

              The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

              by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:59:47 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You bring up in a public forum your gun (6+ / 0-)

                use, and then you get pissed off that someone would like more information about what you are doing with your gun?

                By the way, you may wish to get some professional advice about killing people from one's car....I think it's frowned upon a bit more than killing unwanted visitors to one's house.

                “liberals are the people who think that cruelty is the worst thing that we do” --Richard Rorty Also, I moved from NYC, so my username is inaccurate.

                by jeff in nyc on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 07:11:19 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Interesting you would interpret that response (0+ / 0-)

                  as "getting pissed off"/ It was a question.

                  I could observe you didn't like the question.

                  Killing people from your car is a crime.

                  Shooting people who are actively victimizing you or somebody else is self-defense and allowed.  Please do not confuse the issues.

                  I am not talking about killing people I am talking about self-defense. They are 2 separate issues, whther that is popularly accepted or not.

                  Lots of people get shot because they are fucking with other people. I do not have a problem with that.

                  What is SO WRONG about asking people to NOT FUCK with you?

                  The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

                  by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 07:14:54 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  you fucked with them (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Tfill

                    by your own admission, you fucked with this guy first.

                    •  Yes. I fucked with him by driving on the road (0+ / 0-)

                      he was standing in the middle of.

                      That is called 'criminal trespass' and he is in the wrong.

                      I had a cop tell me once I can just hit those people. I'd rather they just get the FUCK out of the road.

                      its not too much to ask.

                      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

                      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 07:29:44 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  was the cop drunk? (4+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        SilentBrook, trumpeter, jeff in nyc, Tfill
                        I had a cop tell me once I can just hit those people.
                        that's called "vehicular manslaughter", your cop friend is an absolute idiot.

                        So a family was standing in the middle of a busy road and you were forced to swerve off the road to avoid hitting them... while screaming curses at them.  

                        Is it possible these people were crossing the road, perhaps?  And that the father stepped into the road to stop traffic for a couple seconds so that his family could cross the road?  I mean, the nerve!  

                        If he wants to cross the road he should get himself a pickup truck and drive like a lunatic like a good, decent American.  /eyeroll

              •  So nothing would've turned out better with a gun. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                SilentBrook, jeff in nyc, Tfill

                Interesting.

                I voted for the human beings.

                by denig on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 09:04:19 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  That is a 'what if" question that (0+ / 0-)

            can;t be answered with anything but speculation.

            And that's what makes this just a word game.

            Who knows?

            I'd still have felt better with a gun in the vehicle. Go on. Lambaste me for it. I don't give a shit.

            I'll probably stop playing though because I am at work and merely trying to be polite.

            I don;t have time for games.

            The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

            by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:57:36 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Kung fu is not here or there, (10+ / 0-)

      it is inside you. And if you truly have kung fu inside you, you can kung fu anywhere. Traffic be damned. (Though you should watch those damned cars.)  :-)  And yes grasshopper, it is better to run than shoot. People with guns sometimes make poor decisions out of haste and under pressure. There have been plenty of times I was glad I didn't have immediate access to a gun. Not saying I would've shot anyone, but if I had a gun I could've. And there is never enough regret when something like that is done. It can happen to anyone with a gun.

    •  Reminds me of this story from last week (7+ / 0-)
      But that is how stupid people end up getting shot.
      The ying and the yang of stupid people.
      Bizarre shooting after dog runs in front of truck

      ...After the golden retriever ran in front of a truck, the angry driver hit the brakes, then pulled out a gun and shot the dog's owner.

      Peter Harbachuk's leg is sore, but lucky for him, the shooter, who got out of his pickup truck ... had closed his eyes and aimed downward. His bad shot only grazed Harbachuk's leg before he sped off.

      What does seem consistent is that guns can lead to fatalities when angry words would otherwise be the norm.

      I ride my bike often on city streets.  I tried to ride defensively but some people are just angry, aggressive drivers.  Over the years, I've had many near swide-swipes and objects thrown at me  but fortunately have not seen a gun. Yet.

      In a culture where threatening another person with a gun as a first step is increasingly commonplace, I'm more concerned about the randomness of encountering angry motorists toting guns than I am of someone breaking into my home or car and threatening me.

    •  Self-defense is actually "OK" (0+ / 0-)

      Protecting yourself is actually OK.

      It is allowed.

      it is NOT a sin to stand up for yourself or to fight back when you are being victimized.

      Even if you are a Democrat.

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 07:11:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You think a guy standing in the road makes you (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SilentBrook, Tfill

        a victim. You did have to swerve. But boy wish you'd had your gun. Cause you're not gonna take that shit.

        You've gone so far down the rabbit hole, this makes sense to you.

        I voted for the human beings.

        by denig on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 09:15:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  troll? snark? (4+ / 0-)

      or are you a 12-year old making stories up?  Can't kung fu people in traffic? Cursing at people for no reason. Fantasizing about shooting the same people that you antagonized and driving off.

      You do understand that if you had a gun and had shot that man, you would likely be serving prison time right now, right?

      If your story is real, you have a problem controlling your anger and are completely unaware of it (or perversely proud of it).

      •  Your projection onto me is amusing. (0+ / 0-)

        You can deal with dumbasses in the road as you want to.

        That's your right.

        I'll do things my way.

        The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

        by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 07:35:46 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Imminent danger of death or grave bodily harm (0+ / 0-)

          That's the grounds for justifiable lethal force. Being a dumbass in the road is not.

          Anyone who doesn't understand this should not be carrying an operable firearm in public.

          Someone coming up to your window is grounds for raising your alert level, period.

          Get some professional training or at least read In the Gravest Extreme, by Massad Ayoob, or at the absolute least read the chapter entitled "The High Price of Handgun Machismo".

          Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

          by Dogs are fuzzy on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 04:54:58 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks, BK! n/t (6+ / 0-)

    David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

    by PsychoSavannah on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:11:44 AM PST

  •  I grew up with a gun (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SilentBrook, trumpeter, jlms qkw, Tfill

    by the back door.  A 22 rifle. It never occurred to me to use that gun inapporpriately let alone touch it.  My dad liked to hunt and had a 30-30 and a 30-06.  I don't even know where these guns were kept.  We slept with the doors unlocked - no one ever invaded our home or threatened our lives.

    I was born in 1952.  We did not live in a society where violence was matter of fact.  I remember reading "In Cold Blood" and wonderng (as a teenager), what possesses someone to do something like that.

    We need to raise our consciousnes.  We need to rise above violence by making it unacceptable again.  I hope we are on that road.

    being mindful and keepin' it real

    by Raggedy Ann on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 06:54:34 AM PST

    •  Back when you were growing up (6+ / 0-)

      Guns were tools, not fetish objects.

      Seems to me this is a two-pronged approach (or if you'll forgive me, a double-barreled approach).

      There are a lot of fucking guns in this country. A lot of people carrying them around in situations where, historically, many many fewer people would have carried them. And a lot of people carrying them around who haven't been trained, judging by the accidental FAILs that seem to happen every damn day.

      There are a lot of angry fucking people in this country. A lot of people with either the inability to empathize, or the motivation to avoid empathy so much that their very worldview says the ability to threaten or end someone else's life is something that is, if not inevitable, then commonplace.

      Life has become cheap. Cheap enough to shoot as if it were a tin can on a fence, or a brief flash of road rage given permanence by the impulsive application of an at-hand tool of destruction.

      If there are this many angry people out there, there's something wrong with our society as a whole. But maybe, until we're able to fix that long-term dysfunction...maybe we should make it a little harder to reach for that at-hand tool of destruction...and a little easier to think twice about the consequences of using it.

      And for Dog's sake, quit giving guns to crazy people who can't hit the broad side of a barn. The second amendment was written in a time where gun ownership was a skill and not a purchase receipt.

      How does the Republican Congress sit down with all the butthurt over taxing the wealthy?

      by athenap on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 10:18:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well, all I can say is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DefendOurConstitution, jlms qkw

    thank goodness I got next month's Garden & Gun Magazine ['The Soul of the South'] yesterday...

  •  Thanks BruinKid, great that the only "serious" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jlms qkw, Tfill

    journalists (Stewart & Colbert) keep covering the absurd political climate we live in where one person getting shot every 5 minutes is just OK.

    Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up.

    by DefendOurConstitution on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 09:47:47 AM PST

  •  Statistics need careful handling as well (0+ / 0-)

    If people at higher risk of being attacked are more likely to buy guns, a study might find that people who own guns are more likely to be victimized. However carefully the results were collected, their interpretation would require scrupulous critical thinking.

    Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

    by Dogs are fuzzy on Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 04:46:43 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site