Join the World’s Largest Ad Agency

Ever since the Newtown massacre, gun controllists have been relentless in using children to further their agenda. Their goal, of course, is to persuade Americans that you must choose between your love of children and your love of the Constitution.

That is obviously a lie, but these people have put some big money behind ad campaigns in an attempt to make their case. This print ad, for example, was designed by the ad agency Grey, Canada.

Smaller agencies have also gotten into the act, crating ads that, as in the case of the one below, use the image of a dead child to push a political agenda. (Guts and Glory, Brooklyn).

Now it’s our turn.

We think this audience is smarter and more creative than any ad firm. So let’s harness that power and come up with some ad concepts that promote gun rights and the Second Amendment. It’s time to fight back and show Americans why protecting our freedoms is the single most important thing we can do for the health and happiness of our children.

So now it’s your turn to play ad executive. If you were going to design a print ad in support of gun rights, what would it be? What images and text would you use to capture the publics’ attention and convey your message? Fill out the form below describing your concept. If we like it, we may just have the Mercury designers and artists create a real version of your ad and then post it on some of our digital properties, like the Glenn Beck Facebook page, which has over 2.2 million fans.

Describe your idea in the form below. Please be as brief and specific as possible and read the “Questions & Answers” below before you submit.

Before completing the form, please read the CONTROL Print Ad Submission Agreement.

Question & Answers

How many ideas can I submit?
As many as you’d like, but please submit a new form for each new concept you are pitching.

What do I win?
Nothing—it’s not a contest, it’s an opportunity to help spread the gun rights message.

Can I submit an idea for a movie/book/TV show/story idea/TV commercial, etc?
No. We are only looking to create print ads, similar to the ones included in this post.

What if I have questions/comments/concerns?
This form is only being monitored for this specific program. Please use our other means of contact to reach us regarding any other questions or issues.

I really love the book CONTROL.
Thanks, but that’s not a question.

  • http://youtu.be/0iRCvDwF26Q Sam Fisher

    You know the gun racist already have a bill to pass just waiting for people to die.

  • Anonymous

    Gun deaths are down because more people are exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Just read the news on the Blaze!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1541124102 Gail Fletcher

    Just remember this when it comes to protecting liberty. There are too many in the world who will try to twist the fact to meet their agenda. It is so important to protect the truth. It is so important to protect liberty.

    You can’t change the worldBut you can change the factsAnd when you change the factsYou change points of viewIf you change points of viewYou may change a voteAnd when you change a voteYou may change the world

    ~Lyrics from Depeche Mode song entitled New Dress

  • Anonymous

    If people can’t see this was a false flag, I feel sorry for them. This was planned from the start. Yet Benghazi happened too long ago? We have guns walking in to Mexico which was a failed attempt to pin that on gun owners and gun shops, so they had to come up something else that would tug at the heart strings of America. Of course, it had to be little kids. One of the children that supposedly died, they stole a picture of someone’s daughter and said she died. Horrible. The whole story doesn’t make any sense other than GUN CONTROL. They haven’t looked at any other solution to helping secure the schools or help people with mental illness. Maybe if they had done that I would buy it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/shvndave David Andrews

    So, imagine Glen Beck sitting on the floor of a library with an AK-47, grenades, 2 sidearms and bandoliers.  Next to him is a Senator holding Senate Bill S.649.

    Now, caption it “which of these two is really protecting your life and liberty?”

  • Staceycarverd

     Gail, I have quoted these lyrics many times; they are so true in this day and age, and just what we are experiencing everyday in the liberal lapdog media (a.k.a. propaganda wing of the WH).

  • Staceycarverd

    Note how the left does everything with the emotional appeal of it “being for the children.”   We cannot dare to logically discuss facts, the actual statistics are forbidden as they only confuse the masses and steer people away from backing the agenda — supporting their own oppression.

  • Staceycarverd

     Politicians never do anything to treat the cause of the problem, only the effects.  For example, if they actually wanted to reduce poverty, they’d not reward and encourage boys and girls to be promiscuous and have illegitimate children.   They’d not allow welfare for life unless there was a real reason they couldn’t work.  
     One of the first thing we learned in economics regarding government, is that which they wish to encourage, they subsidize; that which they wish to reduce, they tax.  Yet, we subsidize slothfulness but tax personal income.

     We already know all about gun control — it simply doesn’t work, those intent on committing harm will always find them, or a suitable substitute.  This is all about securing their seat of power from the masses.

  • Anonymous

    What about a mother at home alone with small children,  with a burgular breaking in and trying to molest them when she shoots him or them as the case may be, or just holds them until the local law arrives later, when without a gun, she or they would have been harmed before the arrival of the local law.. 

  • Pete

    Ask the average American if there is a country wide background check for buying a gun, and they will say NO, it just got voted down.  That is not the truth.  The FBI has a system right now that is called NICS to do an instant background check on anyone in any state.  Why doesn’t the average American know this?  Why?  Because we are not protecting our rights and not getting the message out that’s why.  We as a group are terrible communicators and we are afraid or something.  Just this one bit of information would change many votes.  Check it out at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics

  • Pete

    Oh, and don’t be surprised if they use the “marginalize them” tactic.  The sheeple love that tactic as they swallow it so easy and then they use “public outcry” tactic, like the false flag at the Newtown school.  Oh, maybe we can capitolize on the fact that they want first responders to have magazines greater than 10 rounds.  We ARE the FIRST RESPONDERS.  So, yes, we agree..!

  • Pete

    Have you noticed that the same people that want control of their body to kill a fetus want gun control “for the children”.  

  • Anonymous

    You are right in everything you have said. The thing is they are trying to take our guns because a civil war is about to happen. It is not to keep kids safe. There are many things they could do to prevent violence to our children and they will not do it. The bottom line is they need gun control so the masses cannot fight back when the collapse happens. They did the same thing in Nazi Germany. Frankly, I don’t trust either side. For all we know they are playing good cop, bad cop. The important thing is to keep our constitutional rights as the founders intended. They saw this as a potential problem. Our fore fathers died for our rights. We cannot let any of those rights be taken from us for any reason.

  • Anonymous

    If they were for the children, they wouldn’t let the murders of late term abortions. This doctor that actually killed the babies after being born is outrageous. I don’t see them coming to their rescue.

  • Tim Kopp

    1,000,020 children killed last year. 1,000,000 by abortion. 20 by firearms.
    So liberals want to outlaw firearms.

  • 2War Abn Vet

    That lower ad would have been more accurate had it shown Auschwitz inmates instead of a little girl and the caption read, “Senator Barrasso doesn’t want you to end up here.”

  • Anonymous

    Excellent! Now, just add pictures for the progressive slime who can’t/won’t read the truth!!!

  • Guest

    Since the Revolutionary War was fought with Muskets, Flintlocks Pistols, and Swords, dosent that mean that when the 2nd Amendment was written, all guns were Military Style?

  • Anonymous

    Pete, your comment triggered a thought process in me that combined abortion and gun “control” and I just submitted my picture and thoughts for the program. 

    This comment should have been linked to your first posted comment — but okay, I agree with all your comments.

    I’ll publicly describe my submission here, in hopes that it will trigger someone else’s submission.

    Picture: A “fetus” holding an AR-15.

    Text: Gotta get rid of those “Assault Weapons!”

    Alt. texts: Add your own thoughts.

  • Guest

    I say we retort Moms Demand Action by pointing out that AR-15s are rarely used in mass shootings, but over 95% of shootings take place in Gun Free Zones. So if we really want to ban something that will our kids safer, we need to ban Gun Free Zones not AR-15s.

  • Anonymous

    Gun control advocates often like to point out that when the 2nd Amendment
    was written the only guns available were Flintlocks Muskets
    and Pistols they use this fact to make the case that 2nd Amendment therefore does not apply to the possession of Military Style weapons.

    This is a ludicrous argument because the Revolutionary War was fought with Flintlocks Muskets
    and Pistols meaning that when the 2nd Amendment
    was written in 1791 all guns were Military Style.

  • Anonymous

    Where did that statistic come from?

  • Anonymous

    On the Blaze?  A little bias, don’t you think?

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.wakeland.9 Jim Wakeland

    police are there to respond to the crime after it’s commited,you and your firearm is the first line of defence

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1460198902 Brian Doose

    Obama sitting at a gun stand in the US with a sign reading “Backround checks enforced!”, and then Obama in Syria sitting at a stand that says “Free guns for Liberty, no backround checks!” 

  • Brad

    “Why does he hate Lybians so much?”

  • Anonymous

    Obama said, Gun control will save children’s lives when they approve of murder in the womb and post abortion..56 million babies have been sacrificed to their god of evil.. May God have mercy . Wake up America ! Gun control is people control and abortion is murder !Abortion is government sanctioned “MURDER” We all must stand before our father in heaven when that day comes.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t think these ads threaten current gun policy.  The NRA is doing just fine.  Even legislation for background checks, which most Americans and senators favor, has been filibustered.

  • http://www.facebook.com/fitz256 Bill Fitzgerald

    How about taking current gun stories like the kid in Texas who saved himself and his 12 year old sister and put it next to a banner that says “Real gun control is putting guns in the hands of the right people”. Or” With gun control the invaders would have won”. or ” Two lives lost if not for guns”

  • http://www.facebook.com/fitz256 Bill Fitzgerald

    Or how about “With Gun control the Zombies win”?

  • Nikefan

    I have been thinking that at some point in the making of America, people stopped with the thought to protect their self and started depending on the police to be the enforcers of law but I would like to know “when” Americans stop with self preservation and let someone else carry the gun. I believe that not only is it your God given right but your DUTY as an American to arm yourself. I also believe thats what Jefferson meant when he said well trained militia, he was thinking of people like you and me that lived in their homes in towns, not some army barracks. Its our responsibility as  Americans to know how to defend our homelands, not just up to the military.

  • Anonymous

    Newtown, CT is a WELL known Satanic hub.  Yes, the Church of Satan.  Dont belive me, look it up. There is one in Cali and the other in Newtown.  Do a little Sandy Hook research and your life will not be the same.  You don’t have to believe in the Satan, but you need to understand that they DO.  And isn’t that such a nice little picture of that devil child at the end to wrap this article up.  

  • Jason Fox

    You realize not all ad shops are run by hippies, yes? 

  • Jason Fox

    If you’re interested in using a real agency staffed with plenty of conservatives, give me a shout. Not everyone in our industry toes the leftist line. - @jason_fox:disqus 

  • Anonymous

    Apples and oranges.   First, Syria is at war.  Obama doesn’t want to get involved, but might be forced to as Assad massacres Syrians and risks WMDs getting into the hands of  Al Qaeda.  Second, background checks are hardly the last stand between government control and freedom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1247109053 Laura Ann Fogle

    I don’t think it’s going to matter what picture or catchy phrase we use.  You can’t reason with people like liberals/democrats.   Everything they believe is illogical and backward.  If we spoke to them in their language, they would think we were stupid.  Try to show them that they are doing the same thing, and they call you an unenlightened bigot.  

  • Anonymous

    Apples and oranges.   First, Syria is at war.  Obama doesn’t want to get involved, but might be forced to as Assad massacres Syrians and risks WMDs getting into the hands of  Al Qaeda.  Second, background checks are hardly the last stand between government control and freedom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/JeanHD Jean Gray

    The administration says, “Protect the children” while aborting them dead or alive!  Hypocrisy at the highest level.

  • Anonymous

    You’re suggesting the children massacred by that deranged kid with assault riffles were killed because they’re Satin worshipers?  You’re not mentally well, sir.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Timothy-Roesch/100000685428335 Timothy Roesch

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f8VmJRuBFY
    superimpose this video with a desperate 911 call.
    “What will you train your daughter to do? Be a victim or defend herself?”

    Again, you probably need permission to use this video.

  • Anonymous

    Yes, those liberal are insane for wanting to check if a person is a criminal, mentally ill, a terrorist or in a drug gang before selling them assault rifles with large clips.  That’s just crazy.

  • http://www.facebook.com/dawn.vanvleet Dawn VanVleet

    Yes and they ignore people like Kermit Gosnell, murdering innocent precious living babies with scissors, or letting them drown in a toilet. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1247109053 Laura Ann Fogle

     When was the last time a criminal, mentally ill, terrorist, or drug gang member actually went through legal channels to get a gun?  To think that those checks will stop murderers from getting guns is foolish.

  • Richard Townley

    This is my submission for the 2nd Amendment print ad. 

  • Anonymous

    I just created an inexpensive deterrent to home invasions.
    See   http://www.nbihomesecurity.com.  It really works

  • Anonymous

    The term “Democratic” Party is obsolete and incorrect.
    It’s the Democrat Party.
    The Democrat Party

  • Anonymous

    Your right. It won’t stop them. It will just make it a little harder and when they’re caught with an illegal firearm instead of a legal one, there will be one more charge against the criminal.

  • Anonymous

    One of the largest sources of guns used in illegal activity are ones purchase with Federal Firearms Licensees. Frontline quoted an ATF agent as saying “illegal activity by those licensed to sell guns, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), is a huge source of crime guns and greatly surpasses the sale of guns stolen from John Q. Citizen”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1247109053 Laura Ann Fogle

    How does it make it harder if they aren’t getting the background checks done to begin with?  Using liberal logic here:  When abortion was illegal, women were still getting them done illegally.  When women started dying frequently in back alley abortions, we (the US Gov’t) legalized it.  Not only did they legalize it, they really don’t have any regulations on it at all.  It is much more informal than other ‘medical’ practices with less checking and without mandatory reporting.  So, less women died.  Even being pro-life, I’ll admit that it’s now safer for the baby murdering mothers than it used to be.  However, why, when innocent people are dying in places that don’t allow guns, we try to make it harder for them to get them?  Why not just legalize them, and allow people to get them freely?  Gun control makes as much sense as telling pro-life mothers that they can’t get an abortion.  

  • Anonymous

    The bill proposed GETTING background checks. Most guns used in crimes are legally obtained. It’s a fact.

  • Robyn Raley

     This was my idea also!  A very liberal “friend” on facebook put up a picture of a child on a mother’s lap with a gun barrel in their mouth, using and holding it like a toy. How kids put everything in their mouth. Her caption was and “We want to allow people to have guns”?  My thought immediately was how Pro-Abortion she is, and NOW she wants to protect the kids?  No, her agenda is taking away our rights, using the children.   It amazes me that she could see this totally separate from abortion. 

  • Anonymous

    This legislation does not propose preventing law abiding citizens from buying guns.

  • Anonymous

     Good idea wrong premise, this submission is for print ads not video clips. Like your idea, but you need to find a way communicate that message with a static image + text.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1247109053 Laura Ann Fogle

      I had to reply up here because there was no reply button on your last
    two comments, so if this isn’t in the right place, that’s why.  Hopefully you still see
    it.  Sorry.  Anyway, I don’t know where you’re getting your statistics
    that gun crimes are committed mostly with legally obtained guns.  That’s
    false.  Those committing the crimes almost always get them illegally
    either through theft, black market, etc.  Also, limiting gun ownership
    based on mental capacity is dangerous, too.  It wasn’t long ago that
    homosexuality was considered a mental disease.  I don’t have a problem
    with gay people being responsible gun owners.  When the gov’t can
    determine what constitutes a mental disease, they can rule out anyone
    they want from gun ownership.  It’s a slippery slope scenario.  There
    are already those in our gov’t that want to make Christianity a mental
    disease.  That would rule out a lot of law abiding citizens from gun
    ownership.

  • Anonymous

    Let me drop a little info for you http://youtu.be/U_kzjgBIVrM?t=10s Those kids were not killed with assault riffles, they were sacrificed.  They always use children in these sick twisted rituals.  Like I said you need to learn to do your own research these days.  The media cannot be trusted.   

  • Anonymous

    You’re joking, right?

  • Anonymous

    In your mind, how does the ritual work? Where do you get your information from? The guy how posted that weird youtube video?

  • Anonymous

    No, after I watched his video I was a little spooked but clearly you cant get to much from that one video.  It sparked my curiosity and I kept digging, b/c of ALL of the other inconsistencies that have been pointed out by numerous people.  And let me tell you, when digging for more information, it didn’t get better.  It got worse and more creepy.   Unfortunately, I cant give you all the answers b/c I don’t know them. I dont pretend to. I’ll give you one more video that should open your eyes up some.  If it doesn’t get you to dig yourself to find your own answers, then nothing will.  At least not coming from me.  Watch the video in it’s entirety.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usILpsOKODM

  • Anonymous

    If Bloomberg & the Democrats are so concerned about our own public & personal safety & the God given rights of civilians protecting themselves with firearms, then why do they continue to receive “taxpayer protection” of armed security everywhere they go?  Don’t they owe it to the citizens of this Country who put them in power the same kind of freedoms they enjoy everyday of their own lives?  Call your senators & congressman today & demand they protect your rights & liberties that they are privileged to have! 
     
    This ad was brought to you by the majority of Americans who stand up for everyone’s right to protect themselves.

  • PitBoss711

     There are plenty of other sources that show the same facts about the decrease in gun violence.  Do some research and pick one.

  • PitBoss711

    Certainly not your favorite Obama ad agency MSNBC.  Kool-aid, Kool-aid…tastes GREAT!  Why is it that liberals, who care nothing about facts, want someone to hand them sources.  Have someone show you how to research and find them yourself.

  • http://twitter.com/irishamrep1 Joan Reynolds

    Someone must get information and make a commercial using a real occurance like happened in NEW ORLEANS during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina where on orders from only God knows who busted into people’s homes, knocked old ladies in the floor and took their guns. THEN only the BAD guys and cops had guns. And we all know what the bad guys and in one instant the cops did with those guns.
    The good people were left with no way to protect themselves! Bobby Jindal did go to congress and get a Law passed in hopes that it wont happen again. But it WILL! If we do NOTHING!

  • Anonymous

    Democratic states have the most deaths from guns, did you ever ask yourself why? Democratic states have civil unrest because of progressive liberalism that leads to violence. Democratic policies cause loss of jobs, more people on welfare, drinking and drug escalates, families struggle to make ends meet raising stree levels in overpopulated communities, all of this equals gun violence. Republican states have fewer gun related deathes for all the opposit reasons!

  • Anonymous

    Despite its apparent popularity I’m going to have argue that
    using any kind of abortion argument to promote gun rights is a bad idea as we
    would be no better than Moms Demand Action (MDA) if we do. Specifically all the
    MDA adds and others like them rely strictly on emotional appeal to convince
    people we should ban guns, they have absolutely no critical thinking element to
    them.

    If we are to permanently change peoples mind in favor of gun
    rights our Print Ads need to be the opposite of MDA and force people to think critically
    about the issue. If we fail to use critical thinking Print Ads, such as
    abortion ones, we will lose anyone who might have changed their view on gun
    rights just as soon as MDA comes out with a new and even more emotionally
    appealing add.

  • http://www.facebook.com/stephen.engle.988 Stephen Engle

    You have a good point, however most people who are in favor of gun control and those who support them do not think critically or logically. If they did we would not be in this position.  You can not sway some one who thinks emotionally with a logical argument, let alone force them to think that way.
    I think, to sway an emotional thinker is to out emotionally advertise the opposition. But this must be done while you appeal to the Logical thinkers as well. There must be a bilateral approach in order for the Pro Gun movement to move forward.

  • Anonymous

     Most people are tooooooo lazy to think. they live by emotion and are controlled by fear or at least the perception of fear.
    That’s why calling someone a racist works well, to a point anyhow. At least until  people get tired of hearing “WOLF” .
    Personally I Like the idea of having the photo of a dozen or so Lab Coat wearing  Dr. types superimposed over a pile of a few hundred thousand aborted fetuses. Kind-a makes the comparison of those greedy low-life abortionists to terrorists appropriately pungent.

  • Anonymous

    Obama & all of the other anti-freedom zealots can take their 1.4 million signatures & SHOVE-IT!!! :-)

  • Anonymous

    The reason some people get lost in thought is that it is unfamiliar territory. That, however, does not prevent them from voting.

  • Allen Simms

    I disagree. The left claims that they support gun control in order to protect “the children”.. the abortion stats demonstrate their blatant hypocrisy. We need to start pointing out the fact that liberals LIE LIE LIE to push their agenda

  • Anonymous

    The only thing worse than no security at all is a false sense of security. If being stripped of the ability to defend yourself and your family when seconds count and the police are, at best, minutes away makes you more safe according to the current government, you might be living in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Chris-Braun/1662038676 Chris Braun

    Show a picture of Olivia Engel and caption it:
    “Olivia wishes there had been an armed guard at her school.”

  • Anonymous

    I haven’t read any studies coordinating gun crimes with legal availability of guns. Probably since Americans have continuously had a constitutional right to have guns. I have read a correlations between legalized abortion and steep reduction in crime rates. Eg: http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/DonohueLevittTheImpactOfLegalized2001.pdf

  • Don Lovell

    How many children are lost to; auto accidents, drowning in tubs, pools, fire, etc. An argument can be made on the basis of the cost to society. As an example if we were to reduce the speed limit to 35 mph from 70 mph (pick a number) the number of children lost would be reduced. The out cry of that would be too damaging to the society. We don’t have time to go slow and make sure the children arrive safely.

    Take the frame work of this concept and expand it. As an example remove all radios, cell phones etc. Stop talking to the driver etc. We can save just one child

  • http://www.facebook.com/jory.d.smith Jory Dennis Smith

    That is the thing. If we try to fight fair we will lose. Watch Allen West’s latest video. He talks about this. Its time we stop fighting “fair.” That is why we are losing.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jory.d.smith Jory Dennis Smith

    do like a game show end where they get to choose the prize. Have a gun, doctor, pools, lightning. One by one they choose the thing that seems least deadly. The stats show that each of them are more dangerous and the lady finally ends up choosing a gun. She hears the stats on that and she goes, wow a gun is more safer than all of these. The host says, yes they are. 

  • Anonymous

    Appreciate the constructivist criticism, your idea of a bilateral approach to print ads that have an emotional hook but then make readers think critically about the issue just might be the right way to go. Though I still say that abortion is the wrong emotional appeal to use because there is no critical thinking link between abortions and gun rights.

    Therefore here are a few ideas I threw together using the issue of Rape and other crimes that are emotional in nature, but link directly to critical thinking points of the gun rights debate. NOTE: Crime numbers in the last one are just rough estimates and I’m fairly sure I lowballed them.

  • Anonymous

    I severally disagree! Fighting fair is what make us who we are. You have the philosophy that the ends justify the means; which is mistaken because quite simply the means are how an end is achieved, therefore whatever the means, so will be the end.

    Its like saying that someone can loose weight and get healthy by only eating Crispy Cream Donuts! Therefore if we stop fighting fair we will become no better than our lying opponents.

  • http://www.facebook.com/michael.bowen.7731 Michael Bowen

    The 2nd Amendment is what We The People have so we can keep our rights ,We teach are kids gun safety so that some day they can keep theirs , we don’t use them as props for an issue they are to young to understand . they just don’t understand what a Gov unchecked can and WILL do .stand up for YOUR 2nd amendment .its YOUR RIGHT

  • http://www.facebook.com/cheetah2129 Teresa Ann Ramsey

    How about we start with using people who have defended themselves with guns. Tell their stories, main stream media won’t so we should. You want an idea for a commercial. Show a mother with 2 small children in the kitchen as a scumbag watches outside across the street. Show him breaking down the front door as the mother grabs her kids and runs to the attic. Finish it off with him not robbing the home but following the family upstairs forcing the mother to defend them. It’s time to take off the gloves and point out the real predators. There are many stories like these that most people haven’t heard, i think it’s way beyond time they were told.

  • http://twitter.com/Kristin08377405 Kristine Martin

    If yοս thiոκ Stеvе`s stοry is imрοssiblе,, 5 wееκs agο mοthеr iո-law basically brοսght hοmе  $8136 sittiոg thеrе a twеոty hοսr  wееκ iո thеir aрartmеոt aոd  thеir ոеighbοr’s mοm`s ոеighbοսr has  dοոе this fοr 10-mοոths aոd gοt рaid οvеr  $8136 рarttimе at thеrе рc. thе  stерs οո this wеb-sitе, http://WWW.Lux14.com

  • Jonathan

    I like them and hope to see them in use sometime soon. Fix the typo – should be “officers”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1423148123 Brenda Ieriko

    Slogan: “An oxymoron: – “Removing your gun, will keep you safe.” ”(Have two photos side by side. 1st picture in a rural setting, a woman on her deck relaxed, reading a book, leaning against a wall is the gun beside her chair or inside her doorway. It’s sunny.
    2nd picture, same woman without her gun, but she’s now just inside her front door, peering out through a locked screen door, looks nervous/ cautious. Now the tone is grey and dull.)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1423148123 Brenda Ieriko

    Slogan: “Without guns = without defense = you can’t fight back = VULNERABLE.”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1423148123 Brenda Ieriko

    Slogan: “So – we CAN’T be trusted to protect ourselves, but SHOULD trust the government who decides this…?”

    (Maybe two illustrations side by side.
    1. A rounded-out stick figure man who is an ‘official’, taking a gun with both hands from a lady.
    2. A Press Conference, with several replica men, smiling, like respectable figures in back of the podium. In front a main power-person, with arms slightly open as if welcoming,  with a big laugh or smile. Either the smile looks fake; or some other element shows deceit or malice, like he has an earpiece, and a black shadow is behind a nearby curtain with walkytalky or something…)

  • Anonymous

    I already did my research and you are wrong, which is why I questioned where you saw your statistics in the first place. About 11,000 to 12,000 homicides are committed per year by guns, NOT 20. Not only are you wrong about your information, but you’re wrong that liberals want to ban guns. Maybe some extreme ones do, but the vast majority want background checks. Background checks are NOT the last protection between freedom and total government control. You’re paranoid if you think so.

  • Anonymous
  • Anonymous

    If we can get our names on a list to impeach Obama would that help to send a meesage to Obama!

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    We already do background checks, it’s the Federal data base that’s objectionable. Just look at what one liberal in NY did with a gun database. 

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/26/gun-database-draws-criticism/1791507/

    They drew “Targets” on law abiding citizens.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Department of Justice report on guns. 

    Firearm-related homicides declined 39%, from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011. 

    Nonfatal firearm crimes declined 69%, from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 victimizations in 2011. 

    It seems that you’re the last one to know.

  • Anonymous

     Wow it looks like even spam bots want to weigh in on gun rights.

  • Anonymous

    Well, the publishing of the data does seem to portray the gun owners negatively, BUT, people know the vast majority of gun owners are law abiding. I agree this journal published the information to capitalized on the feelings of traumatized parents of the victims. That’s wrong, but I don’t think the story will have any prohibitive effect on gun ownership whatsoever. What I can’t understand is objecting to checking the background of prospective assault rifle buyers. The majority of guns used in illegal activity are purchased legally.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Mikalauskas/540958186 John Mikalauskas

    Awesome! Use them all!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Mikalauskas/540958186 John Mikalauskas

    Kenny, you seem to have some valid points here and I do not disagree – in my heart. But we are losing ground here…specifically what do you propose to counter the lies from the left?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Mikalauskas/540958186 John Mikalauskas

    We are not supposed to be denied our rights to a gun no matter what? Read the Second Amendment -  “…shall not be infringed…” You are buying into that somehow all crazies just go buy guns and then kill kids with them. At some point, the slippery slope begins with an agreeable “yeah, this crazy guy on 5 meds should not have a gun” – okay so far, he is clearly crazy, but then how about that Xanax you take to lower the stress…well, you must be stressed – you COULD “do something bad” and obviously would use your gun to kill kids so no, give us your gun….and on and on. This is about the start of the end. Do not buy into any “infringement of our rights”!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Mikalauskas/540958186 John Mikalauskas

    Great stuff! You all rock on here.

  • Anonymous

     So we’re supposed to join the worlds largest ad agency and help them out with making ads featuring children and guns, well here’s one they might want to try.

    Now Showing in theaters near you (not) I just thought that might add to the excitement of my upcoming commercial segment featuring – second amendment rights and the rights of the unborn. 

    The camera zooms in and we are suddenly brought close to the living quarters of the entity housed in the protective body armor of its mothers womb, we notice something unfamiliar to us, but peculiar to our senses and as the camera pans in even closer, we suddenly are aware that accompanied with each unborn perfectly healthy baby, is an automatic firearm locked and loaded – maybe this might stop the eager abortionist from murdering his next innocent victim. On the bottom of the screen it reads..”Don’t tread on my ground, I have rights too”

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Obama can attest to that, he had quite an illegal gun sales program going with the Drug Cartels in Mexico.

  • Tom E

    “Which threat should you have the right to meet with deadly force?”
    Perhaps someone has a more succinct way of stating this.

  • Tom E

    Not sure if my photo loaded but it would be a photo of an armed criminal next to a fetus.
    “Which threat should you have the right to meet with deadly force?”
    Perhaps someone has a more succinct way of stating this.

  • Sandie

    God imagination – creative. What a combination of issues.

  • Sandie

    Screw the free Obamaphones – where’s my free gun?

  • Anonymous

    The gun-walking program started was started by Arizona ATF in 2006 under Bush through 2011.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Nice try, but it just a dodge.

    The program was discontinued by Bush because it wasn’t effective. It was restarted by the Obama administration. You should have known this but you’re just a Liberal with leftist talking points.

    Under Bush there were tracking devices and none of the guns were lost. Under Obama most of the guns were lost and then turned up at murder scenes. It’s all Bush’s fault isn’t working anymore. Bush left office in 2008.
    FAIL.

  • Anonymous

    If you think that’s great then check these out.

  • Guest

    “So let’s harness that power and come up with some ad concepts that promote gun rights and the Second Amendment.”

    OK, how about this?  When the reactionary Tea Party attempts their coup d’etat against the government, to quote Glenn Beck, “you’re going to have to shoot them in the head.”

    Support the 2nd Amendment today!

  • Anonymous

    Ultimately I believe we must score a big dramatic win for gun rights that unquestionably shows more guns do in fact equals less crime.

    Not another scientific study, not another gun rights convention, but an all out effort to try and get every would be crime victim who can pass a background check a gun and large box of bullets. For this win I propose we support the Armed Citizen Project’s effort to lower crime in Chicago which has become the poster child for how progressive economic and gun control policies lead to high crime rates.

    http://armedcitizenproject.org/articles/video-the-armed-citizen-project-sets-sights-on-chicago-next

    If we can support the Armed Citizen Project-Chicago Edition and take it from a neighbor hood level venture to a city wide one; we can turn one of Americas most crime ridden cities into one of its safest. Thus scoring a win for gun rights that no one can deny or ignore.  
     
    So I challange you that if you truely beilive in gun rights, then donate to the Armed Citizen Project’s and tell your friends to do the same, and together we can gain ground in the gun debate while making Chicago a safe place to live once again.  

  • Guest

    Less crime, maybe. More suicides? Definitely. More domestic murders? Definitely. More deaths by accident? Certainly. More guns for criminals to steal?  Yep. 

    Better idea: mandate gun safes and gun safety courses for all gun owners.

  • Anonymous

    First gun crimes are down 40%-70% since 1933 as an arguably direct result of right to carry laws ensuring that more bullets end up in bad guys then good guys. So its not less crime maybe, it less crime defiantly.
    http://www.drudge.com/news/168138/hush-hush-gun-murders-down-40-gun-crime

    Second, since when do those who are trying to kill themselves deserve more rights than those trying to prevent themselves from being killed by violent criminals? Japan has practically no guns and still has a high suicide rate, proving that accces to guns is not why people kill themselves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Japan

    While it is true that criminals do mainly use illegally obtained guns including stolen ones, are you equally prepared to ban jewelry because criminals could steal some gold necklaces and then use them in the crime of bribing a judge to sentence an innocent man to death row? Again that’s a faulty argument because it places the potential misuse use of guns over the very real very definite use of guns to stop crime. Also I remind you that Bonnie and Clyde stole their rather deadly weapons from a government armory, not private citizens.

    As for your accident argument, stupid people will always find a way to hurt themselves, its just a sad truth of life. Whether they do it with a gun or a ladder is of little consequence as in either case stupidity, such as standing on the top step, or looking down the barrel while pulling the trigger, is the cause of the accident not the inanimate chunk of metal they were using. Though if you want to see less gun accidents I suggest you tell everyone you know who owns a gun to join the NRA and take one of their industry standard firearms safety classes.

  • Anonymous

    Not according to Wikipedia: “Under the Bush administration Department of Justice (DOJ), no arrests or indictments were made. After President Barack Obama took office in 2009, the DOJ reviewed Wide Receiver and found that guns had been allowed into the hands of suspected gun traffickers. Indictments began in 2010, over three years after Wide Receiver concluded.”

  • Anonymous

    In both administrations, ATF had risky gun-walking strategies to catch Mexican drug criminals. But you seem to think the ATF was doing something illegal from 2009 through 2011, as opposed to 2006-2008. What do you believe was illegal in Fast and Furious that was not in Wide Receiver.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    During the Bush program the weapons were tracked and recovered. During the Obama program the weapons were not tracked and showed up in the hands of Drug Dealers and at murder scenes. Do you see a difference in the two programs?

    My guess is that you don’t and will continued to worship “The One” like a good cult member. The fact that you don’t know the difference between the two programs is proof.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Nonsense. Nice try quoting Wikipedia but you selected a few words out of the article and omitted the fact that the 9 people who were charged were charged for “making false statements” not for trafficking.

    There was also no proof that any guns reached the hands of Drug Traffickers, only allegations that they had.

    I understand that a half truth is as good as the complete truth to you leftists but it’s not for me.

  • Anonymous

    I’ve not seen any data on how many guns were recovered during Wide Receiver. Where did you find the information?

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    I’m sure you can find everything you want so you can pick and choose your next post and give it a really good liberal spin.

  • Anonymous

    Gun-walking was a bad idea, period. Holder ended it. Clement, Keisler or Mukasey did not end it. I don’t support gun-walking under any administration. Apparently, you do, as long it’s republican.

  • Anonymous

    So you don’t know where you read about all guns being retrieved during wide receiver? I’m getting the feeling you’re making it up.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Holder continued it after Bush decided to discontinue it.

    No spin Landree. I don’t buy into your leftist garbage.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    I’m getting the feeling that you have no idea what took place or why Bush discontinued the program and why Holder decided to start it up again.

  • Anonymous

    Been doing research. Of the 450 guns sold during Wide Receiver, most were lost in Mexico. Documents went public disclosing the failings of Wide Receiver during the Holder hearings. There’s plenty of news on that. I can’t find any information supporting your claim…again, where do you get your information that all guns sold during Wide Receiver were retrieved?

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Good for you. Did your get the report where the Mexican government recovered guns under the Bush program because it was a joint operation between both governments? You won’t find it at Wiki.

  • Anonymous

    I read that that there was an agreement between Mexican and American authorities. I also read that the Mexicans wanted to terminate the program. Nowhere did I read that all the guns were recovered. That’s what I’m asking you. Where did you read that?

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    Keep digging.

  • http://TheConservativePush.webs.com/ SoThere

    I have to apologize because the article is not on line anymore or at least I couldn’t find it. It was a CBS report on Mexican seizure of weapons tracked from the United States.

  • Chris Jacobs

    Posted with typo earlier, sorry.
    Hi Res available on request
    chris@chrisjacobsphoto.com

  • Chris Jacobs

    Need to change the narrative.  It’s not about abortion. The argument shouldn’t even be “tyrannical Gov’t”. Libs always do a good job of changing the argument, ie: “balanced approach” instead of raise taxes. We need to change the argument to protecting your children. Not “the” children, YOUR children. How you decide to protect them is your right, be it concealed carry, AR-15, or a bow and arrow.

  • http://www.facebook.com/WordTickler Kerry Rogers

    We have enough gun control. What we need is idiot control.

  • Anonymous

     Two words “Simply Awesome”

  • Sandie

    Project Gun Runner was started under the Bush administration. It’s tactic was interdiction of straw purchasers and unlicensed dealers to prevent legal guns from entering the black market, and it was successful.  Between 2005 and 2008, 650 such cases involving 1,400 offenders and 12,000 firearms were referred for prosecution.

    Fast & Furious was started under the Obama administration. The ATF purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers, hoping to track the guns to Mexican drug cartel leaders  with the expectation that this would lead to their arrests and the dismantling of the cartels.  Problem is, they never tracked them!   As everyone knows, it was a colossal flop.

  • Anonymous

    We know Fast & Furious was a failure. Nobody, including the administrations disputes that, which is why Holder ended it. We’re talking specifically about Wide Receiver. SoThere claims all weapons walked in Wide Receiver were recovered. I’d only read that there was limited recovery of weapons (one such source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71127.html ). Obama administration follow-up in 2009 by filing charges against targets.

  • Sandie

    I didn’t see you bring up Wide Receiver particularly until after SoThere’s comment : “During the Bush program the weapons were tracked and recovered. During the Obama program the weapons were not tracked and showed up in the hands of Drug Dealers and at murder scenes” which was comparing Project Gunrunner, not Wide Receiver  with Fast & Furious. I was only providing those statistics.
     
    Wide Receiver, though flawed, was more of a a gun-tracing operation not a gun-walking program that was shut down in 2007. The Obama tarted F & F almost 2 years later against counsel. 
     
    Gun-tracing involves putting specific safeguards in place to track firearms, such as RFID chips perhaps with video or
    aerial surveillance. That is what was done under Bush, with Mexico’s knowledge of the project. Gun-walking is what happened in F & F, where ATF agents sold thousands of guns without a reliable way to track or recover them, apparently just hoping for the best, and without Mexico’s knowledge. Holder said that “three hundred guns” were allowed to “walk” (walk vs be tracked) in Wide Receiver, which can’t be substantiated. Other reports claim half that number. That figure is
    dwarfed by the approximately 2,000 firearms that walked in Fast and Furious. Roughly 1,400 guns were lost and about
    700 have been recovered in Mexico and at crime scenes like the sites of Terry and Zapata’s murders.

  • Sandie

     Operation “Wide Receiver” was a program that took place under the Bush administration, but that program ceased in 2007, almost two years before Eric Holder was sworn in as Attorney General. Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious were entirely seperate programs that used different tactics.
     

    Differences: Wide Receiver - small number of guns involved: between 200 and 300 total
    Fast and Furious – large number of guns involved: over 2,000 guns total Wide Receiver – used RFID systems to track the guns
    Fast and Furious –  there is no record of RFID being used to trace these guns Wide Receiver – used “controlled delivery,” tracking the guns all the way into the hands of the buyers, then apprehending the purchasers.
    Fast and Furious – did not use “controlled delivery” Instead, agents agents were ordered to not to track the weapons.   Wide Receiver – program ended in 2007 when the RFID systems in 30-40 guns malfunctioned and agents were no longer able to trace the weapons
    Fast and Furious – Program began in 2009 and allowed all 2020 guns to disappear without tracking them in the first place. Wide Receiver - only 12 guns were not recovered
    Fast and Furious –  over 1,400 guns from the program have not been recovered Wide Receiver – program took place with the full knowledge and consent of the Mexican government
    Fast and Furious – Mexican government was kept completely in the dark about the program  Wide Receiver – program resulted in over 1,400 arrests made of gun smugglers
    Fast and Furious – only 20 suspects were indicted as a result of Fast and Furious    Wide Receiver – Zero casualties resulted from this program
    Fast and Furious – At least 200 Mexican civilians, possibly as many as 300, including Mexican Attorney Mario Radriguez, were murdered with guns from this program at over 170 different crime scenes.  2 US Federal Agents died as a result of this program. U.S. Marine and Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata were both murdered; guns from the Fast and Furious programs were found at their murder scenes.  
    The differences between these two programs are stark and
    alarming.  The truth is that under Attorney General Eric Holder, the
    Justice Department began a program that was far more dangerous than the
    one that ended during the Previous Administration.
     
    http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/25735100377/the-differences-between-wide-receiver-and-fast-and
     
    I don’t know if this will help you, but here is another comparison:
    http://reasonedpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/02/wide-receiver-vs-fast-and-furious.html

  • Guest

     That Guest is Victor Tiffany. His posts are illogical and his only purpose here is to troll and annoy. He spouts nonsense and has no critical thinking skills. He is what is known as a reactionary liberal. Notice he couldn’t respond with anything cogent – he spared you his usual psycho rant.

  • http://www.facebook.com/craig.crockett.71 Craig Crockett

    i just heard an intelligent young mom tell me (as we played with water guns) “dont do that, shes gonna end up shooting up some school”.   i believe that showing an ad of some liberal promoting gun bans,,, being interupted by a shot in the face from a water gun held by a laughing perfectly innocent young girl,,, would be funny, and would show america that all that crap they are talking,,, is just restricting us from what is truly important to us.   just a thought
     

  • lee howard

    what is the name of the flower that you drop water on and flower opens up it is one of glenns advvetisers

  • Watch it

    It was about children, not all ages. I think he was just trying to make a point, not be dead on with the numbers.

  • Watch it

    Background checks have been in practice for some time. Not many people object to them, it is the national database.