I don’t know which one – the NRA or Dana Loesch – has hit an all-time low for the dumbest, most pandering and colossally stupid statement about gun ownership that has ever been made, but since Dana made the statement on behalf of the NRA, let’s lump them together and call it a draw. The video message went out over Twitter and all the usual red-meat digital venues and it’s the standard entertainment format for all such NRA-promoted public service announcements, namely, one of their mouthpieces looks straight into a camera and barks out a few sentences about something or other having to do with guns.
If you’re a die-hard, red-meat internet trawler of course you’ve heard of Dana Loesch. She’s been a helpmate of Glenn Beck, hosts her own radio show and tweets away to a responsive and raucous crew. Of course she has all the right credentials to promote guns: makes sure you see that little Christian icon that she wears around her neck (stole the idea I suspect from Laura Ingraham), never lets you forget that she’s a good ol’ Southern gal and, in case you thought there was any chance she would let the slightest, liberal influence into her home life, she home-schooled her kids. It’s a masterful image, made expressly for red-meat consumption, and it figures that sooner or later she’d wind up pimping for the NRA.
In this ad Dana is dressed up in the gun-girl style which used to be pink but has now shifted to leather and black. I have a good friend who loves to spend time with women who dress from head to toe in black leather – he supplies the whip. And this new ‘tough’ image for the gun-carrying female brigade wasn’t developed by accident; it’s all part of a continued attempt by the NRA and the gun industry to figure out how to get the majority of Americans who happen to be women into guns. Pushing the soft, feminine angle didn’t work so now they’ll try the tough, disciplined look. It’s so obvious and so phony that I’m astonished Dana could pull it off with a straight face.
But what’s even phonier than the clothes is the message itself: “I’m a Mom and that’s why I own guns.” Then Dana goes on to say that because she’s a Mom she has to protect her family and the best way to protect her family is with a gun. Dana may have quit the Tea Party but she then launches into the usual spiel about how the “media” constantly underreports women using guns to protect themselves and their homes. Dana better be careful about how much time and energy she spends going after the ‘mainstream’ press. The last woman who built her career around that gambit was a part-time Governor from Alaska who still hasn’t told us which newspapers she reads.
As for Dana’s comments that she needs a gun to protect her family and her home, a bit of research reveals some facts that negate everything she says. A survey of 14,000 crime victims reveals that in less than 1% of the criminal attacks did the victim protect themselves with a gun. And when they did defend themselves, the number of victims who were injured was the same whether or not they had a gun. Want to know the real reason the ‘media’ doesn’t report all those home invasions where a woman defends her life and sacred honor with a gun? Because they account for less than 2% of all home invasions, that’s why.
Twitter was abuzz after Ms. Watts tweeted what I thought were some rather polite criticisms of Dana’s remarks, and the nasty attacks on Shannon indicate that, once again, the NRA is opting to create the most extreme arguments for carrying a gun. Which is a good thing, when all is said and done, because it means they’ve given up trying to bring reasonable people over to their side. And in case you didn’t know it, the reasonable argument always wins out.