Girl Scouts at Gun Show

Gun Watch ^ | 3 March, 2014 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Girl Scouts at Gun Show

It was nice to see these enterprising girl scouts at the local gun show in Yuma, Arizona.   They were quite busy, and sold a lot of product.  Their table was next the the AZCDL table where I was busy giving away free .22 ammunition.  A good time was had by all.

People at gun shows tend to be a standard deviation more responsible than the average American, who tends to outclass the world population in responsibility by a good bit.   Those who attend gun shows are very responsible and polite people, more educated than average, more informed about the world, more politically savvy, and with higher ethical standards.

It is hard to separate out the cause from the effect in the gun culture.  Are more responsible people attracted to guns, or do guns tend to make people more responsible?  It may be a complex feedback loop.   Certainly, populations in the United States that have higher levels of gun ownership tend to be better educated, more prosperous, and have much lower crime rates.

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch

[Arthur McGowan]

A pro-abortion organization does not belong at a gun show.

[Donnafrflorida]

correction. i just posted this on GS FB page.

[Figment]

No girl scout cookies here, planned parenthood, lesbian agenda and all. The same cookies are available at Wal Mart or just about any dollar store for a fraction of the cost and proceeds don’t go for above mentioned lefties

[bmwcyle]

I don’t care where they are. They can keep their abortion support cookies.

[Figment]

“I’d rather NOT be “ruled” at all.”

We are not “ subjects “ we are citizens of a free country , if we are willing to defend it

[EandH Dad]

If you were represented by the first 100 people in the door at the Yuma Gun Show you’d likely be better off and not ruled over at all.

[JimRed]

I would rather be ruled by the first 100 people in the door at the Yuma Gun Show than by the U.S. Senate.

WADR, rethink that statement. Their job is to SERVE us, not to RULE us! TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!

[CodeToad]

You've been lied to, which doesn't surprise me since we're talking liberals and homosexuals running the GSA.

[EandH Dad]

Everything has a price. While the .22 ammo might be free there may a cost attached to it I wouldn’t want to pay. I’ve seen no solid proof that the box of Thin Mints is paying for abortions but I could offset that contribution somewhere else. That’s the hidden cost of Thin Mints and while barely worth it, I must have Thin Mints. Don’t judge me, you have your problems too.

[Paine in the Neck]

I did not say that it was.

I didn't mean to imply that you did. That was a rhetorical question intended for discussion.

You didn't buy cookies and mentioned to the leader the nature of your objection and otherwise left it for the girls to enjoy themselves. I think that is the best approach given the circumstances and basically the approach I have followed when approached with cookie solicitations.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I’m sure the RINO leadership would say it is not “prudent” to have a more honest congress with core values, because they are neither beholden to multinational corporations nor would they be internationalist enough.

They might do “radical” things, like trying to restore the government to constitutionality and balanced budgets, significantly downgrading the US intelligence-police complex, block the importation of semi-illegal laborers, and even erect tariffs to bring industry back to the US.

The Republican leadership would be horrified.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I’d rather NOT be “ruled” at all.

Good catch. I'd go one further and say that I refuse to be 'ruled'.

[chrisinoc]

“Those who attend gun shows are very responsible and polite people...”

Not only that but those who attend gun shows have disposable income and are generous. Our German shepherd rescue had a booth at the Crossroads of the West show at OC Fairgrounds in January and did more in donations and merchandise than any other show.

We will be back on March 15-16.

http://www.gsroc.org/2013/events.gsr

[miele man]

Don’t these Girl Scouts have to wear a uniform or have they gotten rid of it because it is, well, uniform?

[logi_cal869]

Here's one from the horse's mouth, so-to-speak (Girl Scouts of Northern California):

Frankly it doesn't matter to me how the $$ breaks down; it's the philosophy of the leadership victimizing its membership...children...little girls...

[gusty]

I say Bully for these girls. Slamming the door in the face of little girls is always a loser, no matter the issue. If I was there, I would have bought a few boxes. The reason that Second Amendment supporters are on the path to winning is that they present a positive attitude. We look like we are having fun. If someone out of the ordinary supports us, we welcome their support. I will be honest, gun rights ranks at the top of my list of issues, so I say good for these Girl Scouts.

[CodeToad]

When homosexuals hide behind little girls and boys I call them out on it, not support it because there are children involved.

[tennmountainman]

Were the scouts on their way to a planned parenthood meeting?

[Balding_Eagle]

An armed society is a polite society.-Robert Heinlein

When it comes down to actually enacting that phrase into action it's surprising how many Freepers are opposed.

[dagogo redux]

It's a slow news Sunday: Let me fill the void with some controversial thoughts about Ms. Sanger and Planned Parenthood. I'm not going to let on where, exactly, I come down on this debate, nor will I join in any discussion this generates (prior obligations pull me away), but I thought these might provide some food for thought here.

First, Ms. Sanger is correct. Even the most cursory objective review of the evidence supports a link between genetics - individual and racial - and what are generally considered serious social ills - crime, dependency, drug use, low intelligence, destructive voting patterns and family breakdown.

Second, there is clear evidence as well that the family and community milieu in which a child is raised will also affect these measures, and that the combination of “nature” and “nurture” are strongly additive, and that BOTH are passed down generationally.

People from both sides of the abortion debate and related debates may rage against the validity and significance of the evidence I refer to above, but I'd suggest they are not thinking impartially, and need to go back and review it again.

Ms. Sanger has proposed and put into place a mechanism for selectively “culling the herd,” and has done so with the stated purpose of improving the herd's vital qualities over succeeding generations. An understanding of animal breeding, coupled with a broad societal view of the problem, suggests that the wisdom of her method has probably gone some distance towards its goal: although things have gone markedly downhill anyway, one might hate to imagine the society that we would now live in if THESE specific millions of offspring had been allowed to join the herd since Roe v Wade.

It is not to be overlooked, in a society that says it values freedom, that Ms. Sanger's mechanism employs a form of selective breeding that is engaged in voluntarily, not compulsorily, by the mother. From the standpoint of Ms. Sanger's detractors, it is also not to be overlooked that the developing child is not a voluntary participant - and there's the rub.