Crime Current Affairs Politics

Dana Loesch Illustrates The Duplicity Of The NRA And The US Gun Lobby

Speaking of ideological lunacy, Dana Loesch, the hard-right commentator and disingenuous spokesperson for the National Rifle Association (NRA) in the United States, squares off against the CNN presenter Alisyn Camerota, defending her claim that many journalists in the US media “love mass shootings”. Of note is Loesch’s focus on the discussion of these events, including the identification of the perpetrators. The NRA and its allies are campaigning to have the reports of gun-related atrocities omit the names and photos of the shooters, to deny them the “publicity” and “celebrity” they supposedly seek. In fact, this is nothing more than a cynical exercise by the gun-lobby to limit the media’s airing and investigation of mass homicides in the US. All in all, the CNN anchor is far more tolerant of Dana Loesch’s fatuous and discursive arguments than I could be.

26 comments on “Dana Loesch Illustrates The Duplicity Of The NRA And The US Gun Lobby

  1. Roy Hurley

    The left is upset because Planned Parenthood doesn’t get to sell body parts.

    • While the millionaires of the American Right are filling up the graveyards with the adults and children who die prematurely because of their self-serving policies, from guns to healthcare, the environment to employment laws. Luckily for them there is no end of people willing to excuse away their own socio-economic oppression.

      • Roy Hurley

        How,then, do you explain Hillary Clinton? Where was the anti-war movement during the eight years of Obama? Stop with the hypocrisy already. There is a Deep State in the U.S. and conservatives aren’t privy to it.

        • Clinton was a terrible candidate, another Wall Street patsy. For sure. However Trump and company have jumped head first into the same swamp. Arguably raising its levels to bursting point.

          • Roy Hurley

            All the actors bowed out for Clinton, including the liberal darling Bernie. Yet, that answer doesn’t come close to addressing the 8 years of Obama. If Trump wasn’t President there would most likely be no protests and the neo-cons and neo-liberals would have carte blanche, judging from the last Democrat liberal poseur in chief. So, I guess that just makes you “useful idiots”.

        • Roy Hurley

          Your silence says all that needs to be said.

  2. You’d think those of whom are making politics out of these incidents would question the causes rather than attack the gun lobbyists? I.e mental health of folk in the US? Btw, the same folk that wail about gun laws are not as roused to take the gun out of US foreign policy? Tyrants, hypocrites and liars….

    • A semi-automatic rifle with a twenty-five-round magazine is not a hunting weapon, not a home defence weapon and usually not a very good target-shooting weapon. It is, however, an excellent weapon for shooting unarmed and surprised people in quick succession. Hence the popularity of semi-automatic rifles in mass shootings. Would a bolt action rifle with a five-round detachable box magazine cause the same damage in the same period of time? There are simple practical steps which would limit the capacity of would-be mass murderers to carry out their dastardly deeds.

      • Semi automatic is a red herring. A gunman will do just as much damage with a couple of revolvers if the intent is there. Making a big issue of this suggests there is indeed a underlying motive behind this. Again one must question the motives and integrity of some within this campaign due to their lack of upset at the US foreign policy of unleashing all sorts of weapons upon foreign lands. Some victims are more equal than others it seems.

        • Roy Hurley

          You right about that. It should be called “narcissistic outrage” in regards to the gun issue. How many liberals give a damn about Syria, Yemen, and Libya, to name only a few. How about the weapons sent to the Ukraine? Deathly silence from the mainstream liberal talking heads when it comes to “resistance” and actual endorsement when Trump launches some missiles or gives in to the neo-cons. Oddly enough, if you want to see anti-war Democrats being interviewed you’ll have to watch FOX news ( Tulsi Gabbard, Dennis Kucinich,etc.). Anyway, the hypocrisy of the “left” disgusts me. The best thing about Trump is that they , the so-called liberal left ,so blindly hate him that they don’t hesitate to show their true totalitarian colors.

          • Yip, like him or loathe him he has shone a big shiny light upon the hypocrites. Anybody with a half a brain can’t not miss the extraordinary double standards coming from the so called ‘left’. This hypocrisy should make people truly question everything they’ve been told rather than reach for the all too easy and false narrative that it was ‘the Russians that done it’. I.e the Russians didn’t put Trump into power; it was the arrogance and willingness of liberals to turn a blind eye to the Clintons lies and corruption. The US people decided to put one in the eye of their rulers and Trump was a perfect candidate to demonstrate their contempt for their rulers. Btw, it seems the liberals are still in denial and are preparing the ground for more shock results in the mid term elections by claiming the ruskies are planning to hack them elections too! Jesus wept.

          • Yeah, the bad bad Americans should not send weapons to Ukraine. But if Putin does it then it’s totally OK. (And if his henchmen shoot down a passenger plane or two – no big deal – who cares about some Dutch civilians anyway)

            • Roy Hurley

              You have swallowed the neo-con propaganda,hook ,line,and sinker.

            • Lol, you’d need to provide proof of your allegations and that doesn’t mean fake news or speculative reports read through neo Nazis Latvian glasses.

        • Indeed.

          • Two high-capacity mags which should be illegal, in a semi-automatic military-grade handgun which should also be illegal, fired by an experienced shooter on a range, at close quarters and under optimal conditions. But given the choice, I’d rather be fired at with a 9mm at close range than a typical AR-15 round, which can punch a large exit hole in your body while scrambling your insides along the way.

            Not to mention the fact, taking the scenario above, that some jittery kid with two Glocks is going to do a lot less damage trying to shoot people cowboy-style than someone sweeping a room or yard with a semi-auto rifle, with the added lethality of rounds going through everything but thick concrete walls.

            What no one can answer me is: why have an assault-style or tactical rifle for home defence or hunting? A Ruger revolver or similar would be more practical for the former while a bolt-action rifle is entirely good enough for the latter.

            • Answer: because people believe, rightly, that once legislation is put in place to ban these guns after a mass shooting, that it is only a matter of time before a mass shooting happens with smaller more limited arms, and that the outrage over the death toll will be enough to go further. Secondly, in order to stop the guns coming through you would have to put a massive effort into constructing far far tougher border security, perhaps even *gasp* building a wall or something.

              The truth is most Americans don’t need these guns, and they don’t have a use in anything but war. But those who are advocating far beyond their limitation are doing more to damage to their limitation than anything. There is mass hypocrisy on the anti-gun side. Groups of liberals who hate the police and think they are all racist are saying they are a fine force to protect unarmed civilians. What others have said about this issue being held far above the American war machine which continued and was put in motion well before Trump is correct. When a truck of driven by an Islamist plows into a crowd, or a nail bomb explodes at a concert all liberals say is, “well you have to expect this, its really rare in relative terms” etc. This is the hypocrisy being highlighted. Not to mention that those Dems campaigning have no problem funding billions to the industrial war complex.

              • Sure – American right-wingers always scream that “libruls” want to ban all guns. But what actually happens in countries with sane gun laws is that gun owners need a permit from the government and it’s not very hard to get if you’re a sane and law abiding citizen.

                There’s a gun store 15 min away from my house and no school shootings.

                But as the Americans don’t speak foreign languages they have no idea about anything that happens outside of the Anglosphere.

            • There are many variables in how much damage various weaponry can inflict but there is no doubt that certain individuals should not be allowed anywhere near a firearm.

            • kerdasi amaq

              The obvious answer is that it gives Americans the means to hunt any British soldier who would dare to invade their country. That is the essential purpose of the 2A.

  3. If the Americans cared about those shootings then the 2nd amendment would have been repealed already.

  4. ar an sliabh

    Owning a gun is a “god-given” right according to the American constitution. Until they change that, there is nothing that will change anything. Now, we all in Ireland know damn well it was the gun that got us our freedom, just as it gained the freedom of the Americans in the time of their revolution. Like the britz ever acquiesced to protests – Bloody Sunday ring a bell?. It also was the gun that guaranteed the freedom of the “emancipated” black slaves post-american civil war. No one was going to respect their freedom unless that respect was reinforced by a gun. In any society, no matter how liberal, someone will have a gun. Those without one will always be subject to the whims of those who have one (our pensioners being beat and robbed at gun point come to mind?). Mass shootings are all events that really highlight that concept. Bottom line, a person without a gun is subject to state or occupational power, or the delusions of any criminal illegally in the possession of a gun, while a sane person with a gun is a truly empowered citizen. No true free speech without something to back it up, no freedom without the threat of the citizen having the ability to guarantee it (that is why all of those in favour of totalitarian governance [right or left] oppose it and will do anything to undermine it as a right). It is important for citizens to have similar capabilities than those in governance, including fully automatic weapons and large capacity magazines. Our volunteers sure have them and might have to put them to use if more Irish are burned out of their homes in the six counties during the upcoming Brexit purge. We sure as hell would not be anywhere but under thumb of the empire without all of the “illegal” weaponry that at least gave us the free Republic. That does not mean, of course, that every nut wanting to shoot up some kids should have a gun. The Americans have to figure it out. Perhaps they should enforce some the laws they have on the books. If they would, many of the mass shootings they had would have never happened. They also have to do something about their mentally ill and their incredible drug use and their constant advertising of murder being the only form of conflict resolution. Boy, do they have some issues.

  5. In this American town, guns are required by law – CNN

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: