Why it pays to ALWAYS be High Road - Brady blogger threatens to shoot heckler...

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Green Lantern

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,665
http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3270

If You Can’t Beat ‘Em…Shoot ‘Em!?

Friday, October 26, 2007


Leave it to the wordsmiths at the Brady Center to get too cute by half.

In a series of exchanges today between some gun bloggers and the Brady Center’s mouthpiece, Peter Hamm, Hamm threatened to shoot one of the bloggers.

It all started when the blogosphere criticized Hamm’s suggestion that students who “…don't like the fact that you can’t have a gun on your college campus” should “Drop out of school.” (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,304806,00.html). One would think that quote would be the most ridiculous one of the entire exchange. Not so.

After some light-hearted tongue-in-cheek back and forth banter, Hamm took offense to a blogger who called him “Petey.” Hamm replied, “Don’t call me Petey. Or I’ll have to shoot you.”

Of course, we’ll give Hamm the benefit of the doubt that he wasn’t being literal in his threat, and hold off on referring him to anger management classes. In the future, however, we’d advise a mouthpiece for the nation’s gun ban lobby to choose his words more carefully. But then again, based on the Brady’s track record of outlandish statements, that may be asking for too much.
Click to expand...

To clarify - calling Hamm "Petey" wasn't really "low road" imo. I bet a lot of people plan on doing it themselves, now! But rather, this shows why one should NEVER say anything that could be taken as a threat to do harm to another person, especially during a debate on gun control! ;)

Now, can you IMAGINE the circus that would be going on if it were the other way around - if a pro-gunner made a comment (even in JEST, as surely Hamm's was) about shooting someone that called him a nickname that annoyed him???

I "GA-RON-TEE" there would be NO 'benefit of the doubt' as the NRA mentions that THEY are giving HAMM. No, countless media folks would be calling for the arrest of the blogger for 'terroristic threats' or some such nonsense.

While thinking "what would Brady do" is useful, I wonder HOW useful it would be to pursue this and make a big to-do about it.

I fear for the 'backlash' effect. IE, for every person that is turned off by the actions of the mouthpiece of an "anti-gun violence" group, how many more will be turned "on" and SUPPORT the Brady Campaign because of it? Either because they think we're taking it to far, or they're hard anti-gun extremists that wouldn't mind if Hamm WAS being serious???
 
But... but... you'd have to have one of those evil guns to be able to shoot someone with it... now why would a Brady blogger have a gun? Wouldn't be a hypocrite or anything, eh?
 
A very old legal trick.
You use the diminutive to convey that the other person is not important.
It worked very well this time by getting a rise and making someone look foolish.
 
I believe

in politely baiting liberals and gun grabbers until they snap and say or do something stupid.

Makes getting my point across to the bystanders & evesdroppers much easier. :D

Its easier than it appears and quite entertaining to watch them self destruct. :evil:
 
A couple of things caught my attention about this exchange.

Petey quite possibly owns a gun and is a hypocrite of the highest order.

OR

Petey's anti-gun neurosis stems from psychological projection. I'd wager money that he lacks the self-control to own a handgun without threatening people (like he just did in his statement), he projects this onto others and believes that all other people are just like him. Petey knows his own limitations, but incorrectly assumes they apply to all people.

He's likely an emotionally driven sissy too, fact and logic mean little compared to his "feelings".

-T
 
Very interesting story. I'm sure Petey thought he was being clever by suggesting that he had a gun and would use it on someone for calling him a name he didn't like. He may have thought that he was playfully reversing roles. But in fact he exposed the problem at the root of the Brady's and those that follow them. They project their own feelings, emotions, intentions, thoughts, on to law abiding gun owners. Petey may truly believe that a gun owner would react in just the way he portrayed, because he may feel deep down that he might react that way if he really was carrying a gun.
 
Petey's anti-gun neurosis stems from psychological projection. I'd wager money that he lacks the self-control to own a handgun without threatening people (like he just did in his statement), he projects this onto others and believes that all other people are just like him. Petey knows his own limitations, but incorrectly assumes they apply to all people.
Click to expand...

In my experience (which is very little, i admit), people become gun grabbers for one of two reasons:

1) Ignorance. Fear of the unknown makes these people afraid of the weapons, not those who use them to harm.

2) Projectionists. Passive aggressives who cannot control their emotions and thus do not trust themselves to behave maturely. They project this mistrust onto everyone similar to them (the average citizen.)
 
Not to defend the Brady knucklehead, but this seems clearly to have been an attempt at humor. He wasn't seriously suggesting that he would shoot anyone or commit any act of violence.

Sort of like when someone jokes "I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you."

I wouldn't make anything of this comment because you could wind up looking foolish for trying to imply meaning to his statement that simply isn't there.
 
Not to defend the Brady knucklehead, but this seems clearly to have been an attempt at humor. He wasn't seriously suggesting that he would shoot anyone or commit any act of violence.

Sort of like when someone jokes "I could tell you but then I'd have to kill you."

I wouldn't make anything of this comment because you could wind up looking foolish for trying to imply meaning to his statement that simply isn't there.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Unfortunately, we're much more foregiving than our gun grabbing liberal adversaries. If one of "us" had said something like that (or in this case, "typed"), the mainstream media would be broadcasting it multiple times per hour.
 
Jkimbal, jqbagley and El Tejon you guys are spot on. Petey and those like him are so arrogant they project their worst stereotypes on the common man and woman.
 
+1 saxonpig

much as I despise the idiots like petey, it's the NRAILA who is embarrassing themselves here. Writing a serious article about such an obvious joke is just offensive on so many levels:
1. they've wasted a solid 5 minutes of my time
2. they are guilty of the same zero-tolerance non-sense that they blame schools for when they suspend 2nd graders for drawing pictures of a gun.
3. not only do they lack a sense of humor, they're insulting the intelligence of us all

seriously, whoever wrote that article is a grade A shmuck.
 
I Wonder What Siggy Would Say...

Looks like our friend "Petey" suffered a Freudian slip - if it was the real Peter Hamm, if it wasn't a joke, if, if, if...

Naa, it couldn't have been a slip. Freudian slips fall off your tongue before you can "delete" them. Not so on the keyboard! There is always the "delete" option. Lack of use of the delete feature before you publish means you meant to post what you said. All that remains is the question whether he meant what he said.

In any case, it was a stupid thing to say.

Maybe he said it to see how far it would go. Maybe someone other than the real Peter Hamm said it just to cause trouble - an instigator, as it were.

Who can say for sure without a denial or confession by Peter Hamm of the Brady Bunch himself?

Woody
 
I wouldn't make anything of this comment because you could wind up looking foolish for trying to imply meaning to his statement that simply isn't there.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.

Mike
 
You use the diminutive to convey that the other person is not important.
Click to expand...

But if you do well, you go on to 7th grade, and name calling no longer has the power it once did.

Mike
 
I wouldn't say it's a terroristic threat... but it's certainly not professional or acceptable by any standards. But then, when did the Brady Bunch hold what THR members like to call ethics?
 
A lady of my acquaintance (No, honey, I won’t tell them who you are) when she was a hoplophobe used to sprinkle her conversations with “Execute him/them!” whenever a person or group met with her disapproval. Now that she has become a pistol packing gun nut – I mean aficionado – she carefully avoids saying any such thing.
 
Petey made a tongue-in-cheek comment, any reasonable person would agree.

Just imagine the uproar, however, if a CCW holder or LEO were to make the same tongue-in-cheek comment. It's not difficult for me to imagine charges of terroristic threats and calls for permanent revocation of any firearm privileges, and calls for tighter restrictions for the rest of us.

After reading about Petey's Freudian slip, how comfortable would YOU be with a decision to issue him a weapon?
 
"Hold your fire" on the NRA, they TOO don't think he meant it....

Of course, we’ll give Hamm the benefit of the doubt that he wasn’t being literal in his threat,
Click to expand...

Would you prefer they NOT point out this incredibly poor (but telling) choice of words by the most prominent 2A-restricting group in the nation? :confused:
 
Well said MrTwigg! Baiting liberals is indeed a wonderful passtime. And yes they will blow up and say something stupid at least 90% of the time. Their intolerance to any other belief or viewpoint is easily exposed.

I think it's time to send Petey another 5 gallon pail of Xanax!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
More Brady scare tactics
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Lil38
L
Z
  • Locked
Example of Brady Campain deception
Replies
14
Views
1K
progunner1957
P
T
  • Locked
The Brady Bill bunch, & the NRA were in bed together for this one!!
Replies
7
Views
840
Henry Bowman
H
A
  • Locked
Deputy's previous shooting defended
Replies
6
Views
392
NG VI
N
W.E.G.
  • Locked
VA-ALERT: MSNBC Article on National Park Ban!
Replies
0
Views
283
W.E.G.
W.E.G.
Back
Top