Wednesday, January 30, 2013


Last week I told you about a National Review opinion piece on guns published under the byline of Celia Bigelow and Aubrey Blankenship, two Koch-ite wingnut-welfare recipients. The piece was an extended plug for the Bushmaster AR-15:
Sorry, President Obama. As young women, we prefer an AR-15 "assault" rifle with a 30-round magazine for self-defense.

In fact, we wouldn't want to be stuck at home without one. In the wake of mass murders like Sandy Hook and the horrific rapes and murders of thousands of women each year, pepper spray, mace, or five-round handheld pistols aren't going to cut it.

So what's a girl to do? When choosing our tool for home defense, we want the best -- in accuracy, handling, and aesthetics. The best choice by all three criteria is -- hands down -- the AR-15.
Well, now (via TBogg) I see that a woman named Gayle Trotter testified today at the Senate Judiciary Committee's gun hearing -- the Huffington Post says she "captivate[d]" the committee with her "vivid testimony" -- and I can't help but notice that she and Senator Chuck Grassley got the Bigelow/Blankenship sponsored-content opinion piece read into the Congressional Record as a tax-funded infomercial:

SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY: Miss Trotter, your testimony discussed the need for women to be able to use firearms to defend themselves and their family. The law currently permits the lawful possession of semiautomatic rifles such as AR-15. Can you tell us why you believe a semiautomatic rifle such as AR-15 has value as a weapon of self-defense, and does banning weapon-- banning guns which feature designs to improve accuracy disproportionately burden women?

GAYLE TROTTER: I believe it does. Young women are speaking out as to why AR-15 weapons are their weapon of choice: the guns are accurate, they have good handling, they're light, they're easy for women to hold, and, most importantly, their appearance.... The peace of mind that [a woman] has knowing that she has a scary-looking gun gives her more courage when she's fighting hardened, violent criminals...
Nice -- multiple mentions of the AR-15 brand, by both Trotter and the senator! And Greassley got in lots of talking points -- about accuracy, about legality. I bet Bushmaster is very pleased. And as for the rest, it's curiously similar to the Bigelow/Blankenship piece, which read in part:
Our goal when defending against a home invader is simple: to hit where we aim....

The AR-15 is lightweight and practical. As light as five pounds, it produces low levels of recoil, and it's easy to shoot. It also looks intimidating, which is what you want when facing an assailant or intruder....
Both mention lightness! And ease of use! And the intimidation factor! And did I mention accuracy?

Why, if I didn't know better, I'd think the opinion piece and the Grassley/Trotter Q&A were written by the same people.


The HuffPo describes Trotter as a humble attorney who's lately developed an interest in gun policy. Well, yes -- but she's an attorney for the wingnut-billionaire-funded Independent Women's Forum, for which she's also become a pundit of sorts, opining on such issues as Obamacare and the Violence Against Women Act (spoiler alert: she's against both). She may have come late to the gun issue, but she's been doing right-wing posts at her blog for a couple of years now (second-earliest post: "AVATAR: 3-D Mythology of the American Left"). She has also blogged at the movement-conservative Catholic site First Things (sample hardball question from her Rick Santorum interview there: "How do you stand up for your principles in the face of the nastiness of your opponents?"), and she's been writing recently for the Daily Caller (sample piece: "The Future Must Not Belong to Those Who Blame America").

So I don't want to hear that she's just some ordinary American woman who spoke truth to power. She's an operative. This was not her first rodeo.

(HuffPo link via Memeorandum.)


aimai said...

I hate these people. They are utterly despicable.

BillyWitchDoctor said...

Yeah, if you're ever attacked, or bumped into on a crowded street, or just hear your dog fart, you want to respond with the AR-15! Non-lethal alternatives are for sissies! Bushmaster: Nothing Else Kills More Better!

nancydrew said...

This stinks to high heaven. Maybe beyond. Another 'lapsed human being', to borrow Carpenter's phrase.

Good to know we can finally retire 'sisterhood is powerful' once and for all.

Anonymous said...

" The peace of mind that [a woman] has knowing that she has a scary-looking gun gives her more courage when she's fighting hardened, violent criminals..."

The bullshite just burns in this. I have been a young woman and I have young women daughters and daughters-in-law who all have young women friends and NONE of them have ever had to fight "hardened, violent criminals", nor ever expect to have to and would laugh at the idea of it happening. But of course that's just "anecdotal evidence" which, no doubt, contradicts the wealth of well reported evidence of "hardened, violent criminals" attacking young women on an almost daily basis. Or, you know, not.

nancydrew said...

Just saw this woman on a split screen Lawrence O'Donnell interview. Lawrence missed the point.

How in the world was she allowed to turn her "testimony" into a gender issue? Flipping awful. Yes, let's see -- a woman needs her 2nd amendment guaranteed right to assault weapons in order to protect herself and her babies from intruders. A father, of course, has an easier way of defending babies in a home intrusion of four or five people breaking in to do harm to all. He's all macho I guess, and unassailable, I gather.

She's appalling.

Spare us from the likes of her and her Independent Women's Forum. Right-to-choose lady. That's right to choose high capacity weaponry as woman.

Ten Bears said...

Day by day my contention it's all a marketing ploy to sell guns to cowards grows ever more obvious. The depravity of these insufficeintly evolved is an obscenity, an obesity.

In this next iteration in our evolution it won't necessarily be the strong, or the well armed, who survive.

No fear...

Victor said...

I have some further questions for you, there, Ramboette.

What you're saying is, that what will make you feel secure for yourself, and/or your family, if you have one, is an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine in the home.

If the AR-15 is so accurate, why do you need 30 rounds?
Wouldn't oh, say, 6 to 10 bullets be enough?
Or are you expecting a Baseball team to break in? Or ALL of the local gang of Crips or Bloods from the nearest urban hellhole.

And what about if you have a significant other, should that person also be carrying an AR-15 with a 30 round magazine?

So, again, what I'm hearing is, that what will make you feel secure for yourself, is to have at least one person spread a hail of lead around your home - preferrably, two people, if you have a significant other. (Now, it appears that on the evening before their Sunday game, just to warm-up, an NFL team might be invading her home)

I'm hoping that you live out in the prairie in case this band of vicious thugs breaks in, Ramboette, and not in a suburban development, apartment, condo, or co-op complex, because if you don't hit every target you aim for, and/or your own significant other and children, what you'll probably hit with strays, is houses, cars, and people in neighboring homes in your vicinity.

And, if they have AR-15's, won't your neighbors be returning fire on your home, since that's where the bullets threatening THEIR families are coming from?

THIS IS SO TEH STOOOOOOOOOOOOOPID, ONLY A CONSERVATIVE COULD THINK THAT THIS MAKES ANY FECKIN' SENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Philo Vaihinger said...

"Sorry, President Obama. As young women, we prefer an AR-15 "assault" rifle with a 30-round magazine for self-defense."

And who does not?

I carry one all the time in my jacket pocket, or tucked into the belt of my jeans.

Perfect for concealed carry at work, on the bus, at school, or in the home!

Examinator said...

I'm sure that Wayne has been in the job too long if you read the Washington Post you'll see him as a poster boy for why presidents only have two terms . He clearly believes his own publicity particularly about his own infallibility (Pope with fire arms! ).

I'm equally sure that his devotee's don't see the circular logic he and his masters are applying i.e. their biggest fear is that of those they let have firearms! (self fulfilling).
As for the young women whell.... 'they feel comfortable (evening up) up with an accurate Rifle with a 30 shot magazine for protection
Strewth! Who are they expecting a hoard of sex starved Mongol warriors, or Drug addled SS storm troopers? Maybe a bunch of drug addled bikies or gangbangers.
In which case I'd advise:
they change century
stop running the Meth lab in the basement
stop using the product of the lab
move. Christ I've lived in some unholy areas but none that warranted 30 rounds from an 'accurate' rifle !
Clearly these hysterical females can't or don't bother to read the stats
e.g. most breaking and entering events the perpetrators are single individual a few have 2 but very very rarely does it get beyond that unless there are millions in gems, gold, bonds, antiques to make it worth while . In this case the crims will be “tooled up” (come with their own firearms), have cased the home and know the home owner's security. Do these hysterically paranoid women think that they'll be able to act calmly enough to pick the villains off? Evidence would suggest they'd shoot widely and get killed.... one cynic might suggest one idiot with a gun is a potential plus for the rest of us.
Given the chances of them needing to 'circle the wagons' for a shoot out for one opportunistic junkie with a habit? one wonders why a point 30 rounds accurate rifle? Are they that bad a shot?
Statistically most home rapes take place with the woman either asleep or unprepared when confronted with an assailant with a knife Or maybe just come home and forced through the door, what are they going to do 'push the rewind button to be prepare on take 2?

Examinator said...

Part 2
Perhaps these paragons of virtue and rectitude need to look at the same fire arm shooting to realize how many self inflicted oops, children or mistaken identity shooting there are . When you get down to the brass tacks you find most shootings are criminal on criminal, Domestic conflict, accidental shootings , suicides, then home invasions (because) the pay off is large enough.
The rest of the break ins assaults are with a knife (one bullet is enough to scare the bejesus out of them). Or simply unarmed.
In short what a load of old unwashed sox.
One is inclined to wonder why the emotional testament to a Senate hearing which is base on facts?
By that reasoning neither Ms Giffords (tragic though her story is) and these well word fail me actually ADDED anything to the discussion but emotion and associated fog.