We know who promotes gun control laws and why. know the enemy.
On Thursday, August 22, 2013 3:16:24 PM UTC-5, Travis wrote: > > > > > > > > > August 22, 2013 **** > The Democrats' Anti-Gun Manual Exposed**** > > *By* *Janice Shaw Crouse*<http://www.americanthinker.com/janice_shaw_crouse/> > **** > > A shocking new > report<http://washingtonexaminer.com/democratic-anti-gun-guide-urged-using-trayvon-martins-death-to-hit-nra-guns/article/2533972>reveals > a deliberate plan by Democrats to exploit incidents of gun violence > to their advantage. As Rahm Emanuel said, "You never let a serious crisis > go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you > think you could not do before." In other words, forget the facts of cases, > the circumstances surrounding them, or even the victims themselves; just > take advantage of circumstances and current events to push your agenda. Or, > as the manual puts it: "The most powerful time to communicate is when > concern and emotions are running at their peak."**** > > Regarding the issue of gun control, the Democrats are prepared; they > published an 80-page > manual<http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/748675/gun-violencemessaging-guide-pdf-1.pdf>titled > "Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging" that instructs > users on how to exploit the emotions resulting from horrific incidents to > attack the National Rifle Association (NRA), supporters of the Second > Amendment, and gun owners -- ways to take advantage of events to get around > the constitutional right to bear arms.**** > > Who doesn't want to prevent "gun violence"? Who is promoting "gun > violence"? What about gun crime? The manual addresses those questions when > guiding readers in how to address certain audiences: "For example, when > talking to men, it is important to know that they are much more motivated > by protecting people from 'gun crime' than preventing 'gun violence.' Women > are motivated by both."**** > > This is because the phrase "gun crime" aptly describes an incident > committed by a criminal, not by a law-abiding citizen who may or may not be > a gun owner. Most registered gun owners do not commit crimes, whereas every > single person who commits a criminal act with an unregistered gun is a > criminal. When people think about criminals with guns, they are less likely > to support "gun control" legislation because they realize that legal guns > could protect them.**** > > The "gun violence" manual's writers also urge caution when going after the > NRA: "How to discuss the NRA is another example. It's critical to know that > our base supporters are very critical of the NRA's role in enabling gun > violence. But, most general audiences view the NRA as a mainstream > organization."**** > > The NRA enables gun violence? See the not-so-subtle bias here?**** > > The NRA website <http://home.nra.org/home/document/about> gives a > straightforward message. "In civilian training, the NRA continues to be the > leader in firearms education. Over 55,000 certified instructors now train > about 750,000 gun owners a year. Courses are available in basic rifle, > pistol, shotgun, muzzle loading firearms, personal protection, even > ammunition reloading."**** > > The "gun violence" manual turns the NRA's message on its head: "It is far > better to discuss the NRA in terms of the role its officials play in > *preventing > people and communities from protecting themselves *from the terrible > personal toll that gun violence takes on people's lives." (Emphasis theirs.) > **** > > If the manual writers had perused the NRA website, they would have seen > the "Refuse to Be a Victim <http://refuse.nra.org/>" training course, > where "you can learn the personal safety tips and techniques you need to > avoid dangerous situations and avoid becoming a victim." The fact is, the > "gun violence" manual writers do not wish to deal with or acknowledge > anything that would interfere with their messaging to promote gun control > (just not in those words).**** > > The "gun violence" manual tells readers, "Do talk about 'preventing gun > violence.'" "Don't talk about 'gun control.'" "Do advocate for 'stronger' > gun laws." Don't use the term 'stricter' gun laws." Yes, if they were > truthful about their desire to take the guns away from law-abiding owners, > people might just disagree with them.**** > > According to the manual, the best time to sway people to the gun control > side is after a high-profile shooting incident such as "Columbine, Virginia > Tech, Tucson, the Trayvon Martin killing, Aurora and Oak Creek." When > people's emotions are running high, the gun control crowd is urged to > become more vocal.**** > > "A high-profile gun violence incident temporarily draws more people into > the conversation about gun violence. It opens the eyes and ears of folks > who, in more 'normal' circumstances, don't pay much attention to the issue > of gun violence prevention." The writers think it is the perfect time to > emphasize "emotion over policy prescriptions." Or as James > Taranto<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323477604579000731721030424.html>of > the > *Wall Street Journal* framed it, it is a lesson in "how to incite a moral > panic."**** > > The manual writers fervently believe that gun control will lead to fewer > incidents of gun crimes. If that were true Washington, D.C. would not have > been the murder capital of the United States for so many years, when it had > the strictest gun control laws in the nation. Neighboring > Virginia<http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/04/virginia-gun-crime-drops-as-firearms-sales-soar/>is > seeing a decline in gun crimes as the number of gun owners increases. > **** > > The writers also included a section in the "gun violence" manual to > address contentious issues. For example, the Obama administration's Justice > Department got involved in a gun-running scheme known as Fast and > Furious<http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57598487/more-fast-and-furious-guns-surface-at-crimes-in-mexico/>, > > where guns were sold in the U.S. to questionable purchasers and ended up in > Mexico, where they killed many people, and in the U.S., where one was used > to murder U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. The manual guides the > reader on how to handle this:**** > > ACKNOWLEDGE FAST AND FURIOUS AS A BOTCHED OPERATION AND THEN PIVOT TO WEAK > GUN LAWS. There is no need to get drawn into a detailed defense or > re-litigation of Fast and Furious. We are better off acknowledging that it > was a botched operation and then quickly moving on to a broader > conversation about weak gun laws and guns flowing into the hands of drug > cartels.**** > > It's odd: the first messaging principle the manual suggests is "Always > focus on emotional and value-driven arguments about gun violence, not the > political food fight in Washington or wonky statistics." The death of a > United States citizen and law enforcement officer by means of a > government-endorsed gun-running operation is pretty emotional and > value-driven, but not to those who want to push for "gun control" for > law-abiding citizens. In that case, it's just a box checked in the > messaging and a pivot to avoid the unpleasant facts.**** > > And that is how demagogues throughout history have won supporters, > influenced debates, and destroyed governments. There was a time when > American students were taught to spot such specious arguments in others, > never to use such rhetoric themselves, and to disdain mob tactics of all > varieties. Today, on the other hand, demagoguery is just another form of > political spin. Worse, such false rhetoric is enshrined in a political > party's instructional manuals.**** > > ***Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D. wrote her doctoral dissertation on > political rhetoric and is a former presidential speech writer.***** > > > *Page Printed from: > http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/08/anti-gun_demagoguery_enshrined_in_political_manuals.html > * at August 22, 2013 - 02:22:25 PM CDT**** > > > __._,_.___ > > > > > > > __,_._,___ > > > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
