Connect with us

News

CNN Gun Town Hall Shaken Up as Woman Asks: ‘Do You Believe a Woman Has a Right To Choose?’

Published

on

Wednesday night’s CNN show trial was just as hideously horrible as one could have predicted when it came to promoting gun control and confiscation in the wake of the El Paso and Dayton shootings (so just like the first one). At around 10:00 p.m. Eastern, Antifa supporter, judge, and jury Chris Cuomo’s dismissal (along with his panelists) of a female gun owner showed an invective toward those who don’t share their worldview.

And at another point, Cuomo offered a truly insane falsehood about the 1990s assault weapons ban.

So, an hour after Cuomo opened the show by ghoulishly maligning the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment supporters, Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners member Theresa Inacker told the audience:

I’m Theresa and I’m a volunteer with the Coalition of New Jersey Firearm Owners, so I’m a proud, female firearm owner and I just want to say I’m a firearm owner and I care too. So, I think there’s a little bit of a misunderstanding that we don’t care. But we do and, actually, we’re against violence. All violence. Not just gun violence, so my question is do you believe a woman has a right to choose whether or not to defend her own body? And in the manner she chooses? And the government should not interfere with that decision?

Perfectly normal. She pushed back on CNN’s near-universal smearing of millions of people and wondered if women should be allowed to protect themselves. But the fix was long in, including the fact that one of the snarky chyrons merely identified her as “AR-15 owner.”

But CNN law enforcement analyst and former Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey dismissed Inacker, telling her that her comments were “a little off-topic here, but I do believe in a woman’s right to choose” and “when you get into the area about any means she chooses, I don’t know what you mean by that.”

Ramsey continued by talking down to her as if she was some trigger-happy person, stating that “there are laws if you’re talking about deadly force” versus just owning a firearm, and that she should be fully read up on state gun laws “so they don’t wind up doing something that could actually cause them some problems down the road.”

Cuomo then interjected with some mental gymnastics, talking about abortion and making a pretzel-twisted argument about how owning a firearm (i.e. the Second Amendment) infringes on someone’s liberty:

It’s interesting. There’s a transitive property involved, right? You’re playing on what we see with reproductive rights. And in each case, though, people who are making these impassionist — impassioned argument what’s the concern? The concern is the well being of the person who winds up being the recipient of the act, right? When you’re talking about reproductive rights which obviously isn’t what we’re talking about tonight, but still important. It’s well, what about the fetus? Or what about the baby? When is it a person, right? You’re thinking about, well, who is going to be impacted by the decision that’s made. Well, that’s the same thing here is that I have a right to own a gun. I do. I do own a gun. But my right has restrictions on it, Chief, right? And we start talking about what is the impact of my right on the rest of society that’s where you get into what Scalia — and you have to say it that way — may he rest in peace. He was a genius jurist. Before that case, we didn’t have an individual right read into the Second Amendment and the difference is huge. The Second Amendment used to be about what the state could make you do. That’s where it came from. You have to have the arm. It has to be able to be used and you have to know how to use it, so when you come to work in the Washington’s army, you know what the hell you’re doing[.]

A few minutes later, Cuomo falsely stated that the decade-long assault weapons ban that came about with the 1994 crime bill was unfortunate because “you cannot figure out if it made a difference in crime because we don’t track it”, and that “the manufacturers went right around the restrictions and there were all these weapons that existed already that were willing for transfer.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
20 Comments
  • Stephen Russell says:

    Hey CNN it cuts both ways: right to choose body & defense,. makes sense Good call.

  • Louise says:

    Only one single reason to bring about the diminishment of the second amendment. To create a total unified unencumbered rule of control over all Americans and the Ability to remove us from society.

  • CharlieSeattle says:

    Typical for………..☭NN!

  • MO says:

    The left is powerless as long as we can protect our rights as individuals once they disarm Americans they will be able to control us anyway the choose to do so. That is scary and it is also unconstitutional.

  • John R. Bloxson Jr. says:

    These Talking Heads must be smoking the heavy stuff to be so dense.

  • RONALD MCCORMACK says:

    Mario Cuomo and his two idiot sons helped turn NY into a slime hole. Big mouth fools and they are intellectual light weights.

  • Daddy K. says:

    Somebody should have asked queeromo if he owns a gun and if he ever goes out without 1 or more body guard who also has guns on him

  • Ron says:

    Hey Ass I’s as in AI, or Crackers or dumb ass Google leave my screen name alone!
    You think you are cute, but I will win in the end, hell awaits you.

  • Mona says:

    Cuomo is such a liar and one of the worst examples of human beings that ever existed.

  • Diana says:

    The government needs to give ever household an AK so we can protect ourselves from the crazies that have emerged with the illegal obama administration best believe it the democratics socialist communist muslums atheist had a lot to do with this and all the other attacks, all where democratic leaning people, soros is behind antifa, and him obama are most likely behind this dig you will find out, but we are prosecuted by our Constitution s Written do not Infringe on our rights we need to make this plain no license needed no registration needed keep you corrupt asses out of our rights it’s our faults kept our mouth shut to long Now we must make sure this government, democratics socialist, one world order well Not INFRINGE on our GUNS all states better get out of this NOW all persons need to carry loaded guns ready to stop these crazies democratics, leftist, if one or two people would have been armed it would have been stopped much faster

  • William John meegan says:

    Democrats can commit cold blooded murder with abortions; but, they don’t want anybody owning a gun to protect themselves.

  • Cecelia Henderson says:

    It has always amazed me to watch and hear a man say so much and make absolutely no sense.

  • Richard says:

    When the First Amendment comes under jeopardy, as it is, the Second Amendment is necessary for its defense. The Second Amendment is the foundation for all of our liberties. Only a tyrannical government must fear an armed people.

  • Tim says:

    Funny thing is Bill Clinton recently stated that the bill you just talked did in fact reduce the numbers in gun violence and mass shootings. So once again you democrats can’t even get your own story straight.

  • FRED says:

    MAIN DIFFERECE BETWREN CITY SLICKERS ANTRY AND THE DEPOLORABLE FARM COUNTRY PEOPLE.. WE KMOW HOW WHEN AND WHERE ,AND THEY HAVE NO IDEA..DEPLORABLES WIN AGAIN

  • REWA says:

    WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS?

    When a shooting occurs we tend to have a knee-jerk reaction as to how to fix it. Too many times it becomes a blame game and usually ends up being highly politicized. After weeks of empty rhetoric everything quiets down until the next shooting.

    As with any big decision there are three criteria which must be met. 1. Is it realistic? 2. Is it attainable? 3. Is it measurable? “ALL” three must be met.

    Some call for eliminating all guns. Is it realistic, is it attainable, is it measurable?

    Limit the size of the magazine. Is it realistic, is it attainable, is it measurable?

    Better background checks. Is it realistic, is it attainable, is it measurable?

    Terrorism is difficult to protect against since we are dealing with evil people who will use any means to accomplish their horrific plan.

    Right now, thoughts and prayers is all we have to offer.

  • RWF
    >