After the horrific school shooting in Parkland, Florida, I explained that the gun-control policies being pushed by left-leaning students such as David Hogg would be utterly ineffective at deterring evil people.
But give the kid credit. He’s fully exploiting his 15 minutes of fame (in a way that makes Sandra Fluke look like an amateur).
His latest idea is to somehow boycott financial firms that do business with gun manufacturers.
Dana Loesch asked me to appear on her show to discuss the economics of this issue. It’s a Skype interview, so the quality on my end leaves something to be desired, but I hopefully got across my main point that boycotts only work if consumers change their buying patterns. And, to be blunt, David Hogg is not going to change the minds of people who appreciate the 2nd Amendment.
I also explained that Hogg’s proposed boycott is a private version of Obama’s reprehensible Operation Chokepoint.
Except it won’t work because Hogg’s hyperbole isn’t nearly as effective as the coercive power of government.
Indeed, Hogg is far more likely to increase gun sales, which is the point of this bit of satire.
Though I don’t want to imply that the leftist students from Parkland, Florida, have been completely ineffective.
They demanded change. And the school gave it to them in the form of a preposterous requirement for see-through backpacks. Here are some details from a CNN story.
Survivors of a school shooting in Parkland, Florida, returned from spring break Monday to new security measures that some students
said made them feel like they were in prison. Marjory Stoneman Douglas students encountered security barriers and bag check lines as they entered campus Monday morning. Inside the school, administrators handed out the students’ newest mandatory accessories: a see-through backpack much like the ones required at some stadiums and arenas… Now, with the bags, they’re sacrificing their privacy for what he and others consider an ineffective security measure.
Of course these clear backpacks are a joke.
But, as illustrated by this bit of satire, it’s rather naive to expect good results when you ask for more government.
And since students such as Hogg make a big deal about “assault rifles” that are functionally the same as other rifles, it’s poetic justice that he’s now being deprived of an “assault backpack.”
But why stop there?
Surely we don’t want to run the risk of a student hiding a gun under their clothes. We need to ban “assault clothing”!
But David Hogg isn’t meekly acquiescing to see-through backpacks. At least according to this final bit of satire.
Ouch. I thought some of the anti-Fluke humor was hard hitting, but both “hold my sippy cup” and “from my damp soft hands” are rather brutal.
[…] next bit of satire is amusing, though I wish its creator just used a random collection of David Hogg-types for the lower frame. As explained by the Pink Pistols, gun rights are especially important for […]
[…] politicians in Illinois must have noticed because they now want (another “hold my beer” moment?) to accelerate the already-happening collapse of their […]
little hitler aka david hogg hail hitler. NOT
[…] examples of gun control satire can be found here, here, here, and here. Along with a bonus David Hogg edition.671 × […]
[…] Other examples of gun control satire can be found here, here, here, and here. Along with a bonus David Hogg edition. […]
“David Hogg Announces June 5th Release Date for Gun Control Book”
by AWR HAWKINS
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/04/23/david-hogg-announces-june-5th-release-date-for-gun-control-book/
When you’re taught WHAT to think, rather than HOW to think by the strongly socialist education system, then having such perverted ideas may be inevitable.
Has anyone asked this kid if he believes that his grand-mother/mother/sister/girl-friend has the right to defend herself from being attacked? Does he understand that he’s denying them the right to defend themselves from being raped?
This suggests a major improvement – instead use the term “right to defend yourself from attack” rather than “obey the 2nd Amendment”. In the wonderful TED explanation of the most effective method to persuade someone to a different point of view:
1 – tell them WHY it would benefit them, next
2 – explain HOW it would do so, and last
3 – tell them WHAT you’re suggesting would give them these benefits
The order is crucial, and the ongoing battle about WHAT – protecting the 2nd Amendment, the unfortunate focus on WHAT rather than WHY – explains why so many people don’t understand the value of guns, although many if not most presumably believe in the right to defend themselves. Or even if they are willing to be assaulted, they don’t deny their loved ones the right to defend themselves…
Hogg and the other crisis actors are in Soros’ pay. And I’m sure old Sorehead thinks he is getting his money’s worth, or he wouldn’t go on paying them.
As far as denying gun stores access to financial services, this has been tried once already, in Operation Choke Point, and will probably be repeated every time a Democratic president is elected. I suggest that NRA’s management solve the problem by opening a members’ credit union. That would also persuade a lot of lapsed members, including myself, to rejoin.
the stage managed activities of young mr. hogg are not intended to have much impact on present day real world activities… it is a strategic undertaking… not a the idea is to exploit tragedy as an instrument of youth indoctrination…it is designed to have an impact on HS age kids… coax them into being activists… just imagine being a kid…. influential adults are paying lots of attention to you and your peer group… soros is paying all of your expenses… you get to hang out with cute guys and girls…[you might even get lucky…] you are promoting the cause of social justice… the legacy media is praising you… you are famous… it has a lot of appeal… you could get a book deal! heady stuff… and addicting to an impressionable kid… most of them have no experience with firearms… so this series of events will shape their attitudes for years to come…
now if we want a boycott that has the potential to change future behavior… I suggest we boycott politicians… specifically the democrats… engage in a campaign to deny ANY democrat a vote… at either the local… state… or national level… if the boycott was national… and supported by independents… libertarians… and people of color…it would have a pronounced effect on electoral outcomes in most states… we would certainly get the attention of the political class… and they might work harder for the benefit of rank and file Americans… rather than their fellow swamp creatures…
The only reason this idiot has gotten exposure is that people keep writing about him and his stupid ideas.