The Los Angeles Times has published an Op-Ed, claiming that half of the firearms in the United States, are owned by 3% percent of the adult population. To show that it’s bad news for gun rights. Where there’s no wonder why old style media is dying. Because the claims are outright absurd, and not meant to inform, but to create a narrative in line with being out of touch.
Here’s a quote from Firmin DeBrabander:
The NRA has traditionally succeeded in overcoming the popular will because it knows how to pressure (or threaten) lawmakers into its corner. Even after Sandy Hook, for instance, the NRA rallied enough members of Congress to block background checks. And the gun lobby obviously did well in this last election — though it spent a record amount — getting the president it wanted, as well as several new lawmakers to manipulate.
NRA opponents, however, have discovered a powerful line of attack that promises to make the legislative landscape better reflect the state of gun ownership and gun rights support. Instead of appealing to lawmakers, who are corrupted and corruptible, they’re going directly to the people.
Gun safety advocates sponsored ballot initiatives in four states, and won three, barely losing the fourth. Nevada passed universal background checks, California banned possession of large-capacity ammunition magazines and Washington state allowed judges to “issue orders enabling authorities to temporarily seize guns from people who are deemed a threat to themselves or others.” Maine voters narrowly declined to approve universal background checks.
The above quote is filled with contortions, where the writer means that our Second Amendment is not a beneficial constitutional right like all the rest, and being defenseless and left at the mercy of criminal Democrat constituents is preferred. That it’s somehow the “popular will” to have constitutional rights obliterated. When the National Rifle Association is comprised of American people who have support outside of paying membership.
We’ve come to expect lies, but there’s an important point, and that is the top down astroturf. Michael Bloomberg and wealthy donors. A “powerful line of attack,” for sure, but not an honest description of events. Michael Bloomberg and wealthy Democrat donors, are spending massively and disproportionate, to get their results. Where the public is not asking for restrictive gun control that’s coming from the top down.
According to John R. Lott, “If it wasn’t for Michael Bloomberg’s billions, there wouldn’t be much of a gun-control movement.” And he is exactly right.
Bloomberg’s initiative only eked out the win in Nevada because of the $20 million spent to support it, amounting to an incredible $35.30 per vote. He outspent his opponents by a factor of three – in Maine, by a factor of six. Bloomberg was responsible for more than 90 percent of the money going to support these ballot measures.
This doesn’t include the rest of the tens of millions, that Michael Bloomberg spends every year funding fake studies, and bankrolling anti-gun political candidates. He gives $50 million a year to fund Everytown for Gun Safety alone. He can do this because his net worth is $43 billion.