disturbing act of persuasion

I am Australian and I struggle to understand why Americans feel the compulsion to hunt each other with guns.

Today I also feel the need to comment on the NRA ad that is currently airing in the USA commenting on the security arrangements for the President’s daughters.

The ad asks why the President’s daughters have armed guards in their school and other children don’t.


Does your Dad have a job that makes you a target for every crazy, or fanatic in the world?

Oh and Dear NRA, thanks for making two little girls even more of a target now. Remember how Gabby Gifford complained about the ad showing gun sights over her district and not long afterwards she was shot?

Pathetic and selfish individuals.


27 thoughts on “disturbing act of persuasion

  1. Americans’ love of their guns completely slays me. The NRA is a despicable organisation and – just as I thought that my opinion of them couldn’t get any lower – your post has managed to do just that!


  2. As an American I am in complete agreement with you. Pathetic, selfish, despicable. There are many horrible horrible people here with way too much voice. It makes me very sad.


  3. The NRA is getting a lot of flak for that ad, even from their own. Historically, we don’t target the Presidents’ children, especially minor children. It’s just NOT cool.


  4. According to the American media run amuk we are the wild west and we’re all out hunting each other. How sad. In truth we are a complex nation of more than 315 million people, the third largest country in the world. Yes. we have some serious problems, one of which is our apparent inability to have a rational, non-hysterical debate about those serious problems, including what to do about insane people with guns.

    Jared Loughner, Gabby Gifford’s (and others) shooter, was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic who had already targeted Giffords. He is in prison for life. Adam Lanza was (apparently) insane (and maybe his mother who taught him how to use guns), as was James Holmes who killed people in the Aurora, Colorado theater.
As for the NRA ad, the point is, our children deserve as much protection as the President’s children. How we go about that is what’s up for that non-hysterical debate. If some regard the ad as tasteless, no more so than the President posturing and pontificating in front of a bunch of children. That said, the President came up with reasonable proposals. We’ll see what happens here in the wild west.


    • I just don’t understand why anyone needs to use semi automatic weapons in everyday life. They are weapons of war. Those babies at Sandy Hook had 3-11 bullet wounds each. We have guns in Australia, but not semi automatic. I grew up with hunting guns in our home, so I am not totally anti gun, but it is the type of weapon that I question. It seems that American culture can’t get forward for clinging to the past.


    • There has long been an agreement in Washington politics and in the press to leave he president’s children out of the public eye.
      So Bush’s kids, Chelsea, Amy, all of them – with few exceptions – were off-bounds.
      The degree of security the Obama girls receive is completely irrelevant to any discussion of American school safety.
      No one could rationally suggest that every school child in the US should have a personal detail of secret service body guards.
      Which is what these two girls live with since they face a daily, credible threat that someone will target their lives because of their father.
      So, actually, no.
      Everyone’s else’s children do not “deserve” or need or ever, properly, want a constant accompaniment of armed guards.
      This is just static and nastiness from the NRA.
      And that is why people objected to the ad.


      • The President was not posturing, ,nor pontificating. Those children had written him letters pleading for action. And, comparing him up there trying to get something done as tasteless as that NRA ad, I definitely beg to differ.


  5. I saw this commercial and confessed I snorted. ‘Isn’t it nice,’ I thought, ‘that we have the First Amendment to protect the right of the NRA to espouse uncontrolled ownership of every sort of firearm, including assault rifles, which are designed specifically to kill human beings?’

    And yet the NRA’s solution to gun violence is to ban video games that feature shooting and killing people with guns. They apparently want to kill one amendment in order to save another.


  6. “The Conversation” had an article quoting a District of Colombia prosecutor that restricting gun ownership wouldn’t work as DC had tried it and it had failed. Gun ownership has actually increased in Australia to where it was before the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, but our homicide rate remains lower. There are cultural differences perhaps; e.g. if DC was going through territorial wars over drugs, then yes, sections of the population will get guns at any price and by any method to continue that conflict. The ideological conflict hinges around the rights of individuals re the decision point where those rights need to be limited because of the impact on society as a whole. Our history is that we are more accepting of the latter than the former, but this is changing. Like all “Empire” nations, the US has a cultural influence on every other country with access to media. Your culture and social norms impact on us all (as did the Brits previously). Ratty.


    • I rant and rave at Mr FD about it and then I tell myself well at least I don’t have to live there! However, it is my world too and it worries me that there seems to be such a mindset to imagine enemies everywhere, even in the home. It is a little like the smoking debate – one person declares they should have the right to smoke, while another has the right not to be surrounded by cigarette smoke. If one person has the right to have semi automatic guns, does that not deny the right of the person who does not want semi automatic guns in their world? I hope some sanity and common sense can come into the discourse sooner rather than later.


  7. It is beyond belief. I watched a clip on UK tv from a US Gun Show. It didn’t seem like there was anyone really home in a lot of cases – if you get my drift….


  8. The thing to bear in mind is that the NRA membership, when polled, don’t support the views of their leadership, and by a large margin.
    The NRA functions as an industry association, to promote the sale of guns.


  9. That’s another thing that is so frustrating. At least 75% of Americans say they want the proposals put out by President Obama. So, why aren’t our elected officials doing exactly what we say? And if they don’t, why aren’t they getting the boot come election time.
    There’s already some proposal coming up for the 2016 election that the Republicans say will make it impossible for a Democrat to win. What in the world happened to our country?


    • Because elected officials (Republicans AND Democrats alike) don’t give a flying f*ck what the people want. They are in it for what benefits themselves and what will win them the next election.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s