(My personal political message is below the first two videos)
Truth VS. Fiction
Dana Loesch, NRA Spokesperson with honest facts
Copyright © AR.Life, Gun.Vote, Pro-Gun.Democrat
All Rights Reserved
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
Mark Glaze, senior adviser to Guns Down with fake "facts".
A Pro-Gun Centrist Democrat
If you want to have and keep the right to own and carry a gun, and also the gun you want, then you better think carefully before you vote.
You often hear anti-gun politicians say they just want "sensible gun laws", but it's clear what they really want, through the laws they propose, is to get rid of as many guns as they can, for some this means all guns if they could. They say it's all in the name of reducing "gun violence". The term "gun violence" is meant to deceive you, we don't say club violence, stabbing violence, choking violence or name any other violence by the tool used, because it's ridiculous and it's just as ridiculous to say "gun violence". It's clear that it's just a political tactic to make you afraid of guns when it's violence, not the tool used, that you should be concerned with. With violence, you can't expect to get a reduction in it by changing the tools used. If the root of violence isn't what is changed then the violence remains.
They count all homicides by gun as if they were all murder and only occurred because a gun was used. Some even outright call total gun deaths, gun murders. When a gun is used for lawful self-defense of anyone, they count that against the gun. When someone commits
suicide with a gun, it's the guns fault. It's the gun, not the responsible person, who's to blame when an accident occurs with one. For some, even with police shooting deaths, it's the gun that's to blame.
They want to make you afraid that without their laws criminals are getting or will get guns and harm you. Consider this; criminals don't obey laws by definition, so if guns, their use, magazines, accessories, and types of ammunition are heavily restricted, who do you think is at a disadvantage, the criminals who will get guns to commit crimes anyway or the honest citizens who obey the law? How many people who have had crimes committed against them, are severely injured or even die at the hands of criminals, would not have if they had a gun to defend themselves. Those that can defend themselves are the ones who are less likely to be victims.
The guns they target most are "assault rifles" (semi-auto rifles similar to, mistaken for or implied to be machine guns), yet for homicides, any rifle, never mind "assault rifles" are among the least used. So why is it the number one gun they target to reduce "gun violence"? They claim an AR15 is "weapon of war", though it was sold as a sporting rifle in the 50s, long before the M16 was used by the army. It should make you wonder if they're really trying to reduce violence or just trying to scare you, so they'll have something they can claim to protect you from to get your vote.
When these politicians lie, misrepresent facts, or don't even care what the real facts are, they show that they are willing to deceive you to get your vote. So if your candidate says they just want "sensible gun laws" you should find out for yourself before you vote what they really want, because after you vote it's too late.