Gun grabbers’ bible released into the wild. Oops.
By Dennis E. Florian
Gun Owners’ Resource
More than a few of us have, for years now, had a nagging suspicion that just wouldn’t go away. We couldn’t prove anything, but it seemed awfully funny that disparate gun grabbers all managed to be able to cough up the same BS at the same time, almost like it had been rehearsed or something. Were they running off of some kind of playbook or something?
Silly paranoia, right? Well, it turns out it may have not been so far off target after all.
As TTAG, WR2A, The Examiner, and bunches of others have been reporting for the last few days, it turns out there actually is a gun grabber’s playbook: they call it “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging” (you can download it below) and it’s every bit as slimy as you’d expect it to be, offering tips on everything from using effective rhetoric to driving a wedge between NRA members and leadership.
One of the people who prepared the guide was Al Quinlan, a principle of the Washington, D.C.-based firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (GQR), which also has offices in London and Buenos Aires.
A PDC report filed by the Seattle-based Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR) shows a May expense of $43,700 paid to GQR for opinion research.
According to the guide, Quinlan was part of “a team of communicators” with “decades of experience advising organizations on message development and strategic communications.” Other members of this team were Frank O’Brien, creative director and founder of OMP, another Washington, D.C.-based firm, and Jeff Neffinger and Matthew Kohut at KNP Communications, also headquartered in Washington, D.C. [more]
Holy crap, the dog really did eat my homework! Some of the lovelier highlights from this gun grabbing grimoire include:
- “An emotionally-driven conversation about what can be done to prevent incidents…is engaging.” [“Wave the bloody shirt hard and don’t waste time with facts”]
- Stand Your Ground laws should be discussed the use of provocative substitute phrases including “Shoot First” and “Kill at Will” [Slander and slurs should be used whenever possible]
- It also lists terms that should be avoided in public debate, like “duty to retreat,” noting that the term may be an established legal principle, but it coveys weakness to the public and is “hard to defend.” Gee whiz, I wonder why.
- “The core frame should be personal and emotional—centered on ‘people’ and not on facts, laws, or legislation.” [“Whatever the hell you do, don’t let them think!“]
- “Use a few facts—but only in a way that reinforces the personal frame” [“Twist the truth whenever possible”]
- “Cite law enforcement’s support at every opportunity.” [Google is not their friend. Then again, neither is Wikipedia.]
- Use “stronger laws” instead of “stricter laws,” and “preventing gun violence” instead of “gun control.” [Change the name and hope they don’t figure out it’s the same thing with a new label]