Tricia Bishop – passively aggressively doubling down on the stupid

bal-tricia-bishopA few weeks ago, a Baltimore Sun editor named Tricia Bishop penned an inflammatory column in which she equated gun owners with sex offenders and demanded a registry of those who chose to exercise their Second Amendment rights, so she could decide whether or not to allow her crotchfruit to grace those homes with her presence.

The backlash was quick and intense, as numerous gun rights supporters and even those in favor of gun control (just check the comments in the original and the Twitter feed response) widely panned the idea as stupid, offensive, and unconstitutional.

Well, Tricia apparently hasn’t learned the first law of holes, because she’s doubled down on the stupid in yet another column – this one a passive aggressive composition about the mean gun owners who insulted and berated her for wanting to treat them like sex offenders, as well as impugned her intelligence and parenting skills.

Her bottom line, however, is that the gun bullies, as mean and intimidating as they are, should be countered by an equally powerful anti-gun force, because see… polls are on her side. And in this battle of good versus evil, gun grabbers are sure to win, because POLLS or something.

So time for some whining fascist to English translation. Just a reminder that her text will be in italic blockquote, but will not show up on mobile devices for some reason. However, I’m sure you’ll be able to figure out which is text is her stupid, and which is my reply.

Here’s what happens when the NRA tweets your gun-control column, which is then picked up by several conservative media outlets: It makes your piece one of The Sun’s best read opinions of the new year, and it unleashes the hounds.

Translation: I love the attention. Even the evil NRA and conservative media outlets link to me! Look how important I am! They consider me significant enough to unleash their attack dogs on me! Look at me! I have the best read column of the new year (which was something like six days old at the time).

“Batten down the hatches,” was the advice my editor gave after signing off on the admittedly provocative essay, which explored the idea of a searchable, public database of registered gun owners. He wasn’t kidding.

They came at me via email, Twitter, Facebook, telephone and the U.S. Postal Service, attacking my looks, intelligence and parenting skills. They suggested multiple ways my child could be killed other than by guns and liberally used the f-word, b-word and c-word (at least once misspelled with a k) for emphasis. “Special kind of stupid” was a favorite put down (though I kind of liked “trollop” — you just don’t hear that much anymore), as was questioning whether I was on my period (Hey Trump fans!).

Some were local, but many weren’t. And a handful were thoughtful, respectful and earnest, with fair points to make. I tried to respond to those folks, though I may have missed some; I stopped reading the messages after a while. You can only take so much cyberbullying before it gets old.

Translation: Gun owners attacked me. They were mean to me. They bullied me until I hid under my bed away from my Inbox. They called me names. Why? Because I wanted to treat them like the worst life form on this planet (sub-human detritus that even convicted felons despise) for the awful crime of taking responsibility for their safety and the safety of their loved ones and daring to exercise their Second Amendment rights! They called me bad words for that!

In short, the response was largely ruthless, relentless and meant to intimidate. It was also impressive. Seriously. Tens of thousands of people read the column online (and at least another 23,000 read the web summary), and hundreds took time out of their days to give me a piece of their minds. If these same gun owners lobby their legislators with half the passion they directed my way, it’s not hard to see why they have been so successful in fighting gun control efforts.

Translation: They’re mean! They’re bullies. (But look at how awesome I am that they took the time to abuse me – I must be significant!) But I have a case of passion penis envy, because they’re intensely dedicated to their rights, and people like me can only use the First Amendment to attack the Second by proposing cretinous ideas rejected by the vast majority of Americans with an IQ above room temperature and then hide when the backlash inevitably hits.

And there’s the takeaway: Those of us who claim to support gun reform efforts — the majority of the country, according to recent polls — have to be as loud or louder to be heard (though perhaps more civil). It’s not enough to shed tears over the latest mass shooting or bemoan gun buying loopholes with like-minded friends. We’ve got to act. The gun owners, roughly a third of the population, sure do. Many are single issue voters who turn out for every election, proudly contribute to the NRA and wholly believe in their cause. Can we say the same?

Translation: We need to lie more and louder. We know we’re in the minority. We know recent polls show us losing, but we need to be louder anyway, because if you screech a lie loudly enough, “GUN SHOW LOOPHOLES! POLLS!” politicians will not notice that the gun show “loophole” claim has been debunked numerous times, and polls show a decline in gun control support. Just lie more. Lie louder.

In an op-ed earlier this month in the New York Times, discussing his new executive actions on gun control laws, which are supported by 67 percent of Americans, President Barack Obama pledged to also take every action he could as a citizen. “I will not campaign for, vote for or support any candidate, even in my own party, who does not support common-sense gun reform,” he wrote. “And if the 90 percent of Americans who do support common-sense gun reforms join me, we will elect the leadership we deserve.”

I can get on board with that, though I don’t think we should wait around for the next election. We need to speak up immediately to let our politicians know how they can best represent us — or find a new career. There are many gun control advocates who already do this, but nowhere near enough given the numbers of people who say they support reforms.

Translation: If the President can lie and obfuscate, so can we! There’s just not enough of us who lie loudly enough. So we need to start. The quicker, the better. Just watch how I do it below!

The time for action from that silent group is now. As Alec MacGillis, a former Sun reporter now with ProPublica, noted in a recent opinion piece, the gun lobby’s power is waning: Gun ownership is concentrated in a smaller portion of the population, universal background legislation nearly passed in 2013, and more politicians are willing to take on the National Rifle Association.

Translation: Only in my twisted world can I claim that the gun lobby’s power is waning by using an opinion piece that cites a CNN story from 2012. Only in my twisted world can I claim gun ownership is on the decline, despite NICS background check data showing a clear increase, and despite other, more current polls, contradicting that claim. I also don’t care that I’m relying on data based on what people will admit, which leaves a rather vast and unknown delta between those who acknowledge gun ownership and how many actually do. And only in my own delusions can I claim a 54-46 Senate vote rejecting the background check bill in 2013 “nearly passed.”

New polling and study data are also making it clear that Americans not only want tighter controls on gun ownership but also more controllable guns. A study published yesterday in the American Journal of Public Health found that roughly 60 percent of Americans overall (including 40 percent of gun owners and 56 percent of political conservatives) would be willing to buy a “smart gun” with safety technology that limits who can fire it. That suggests there’s a market for such firearms — which could reduce gun suicides and accidental shootings, and render a weapon useless if stolen — despite claims to the contrary by gun manufacturer trade associations.

Translation: I will use only specifically-worded surveys to bolster my disingenuous claims. Scientific studies and public statements about lack of reliability and the risks of hacking from law enforcement officers don’t matter, because they don’t support my agenda. I also don’t understand what a “market” actually is. Oh, you mean a free market? Yeah… I have no idea.

While a public database of gun owners may push too far, easy access to guns is nevertheless a problem in this country. So is our acceptance of it.

Translation: I got my ass handed to me by both gun owners and non-gun owners alike. My leadership at the Baltimore Sun likely told me I should soften my approach.

Let me add this. The majority of Americans oppose drunk driving. Vehemently so.

bishopSo if this is the same Tricia Bishop who is now demanding that gun owners be treated like criminals for the safety of the children, I would submit that maybe this hypocritical imbecile be registered as a danger to society after her drunken driving incident.

(h/t to Misha for finding this particular piece of interesting information.)

Perhaps Tricia needs to stop digging and find another cause celebre. She just isn’t all that good at it.

 

23 responses

  1. They’re basing reduced gun ownership on polls. How many sensible folks are going to answer honestly when a voice on the phone starts asking them if they own any firearms?
    Now NICS numbers, you can at least postulate that each check represented a likely sale, and those statistics are very much counter to supposedly reduced gun sales.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. NICS numbers still don’t catch all new gun sales. In many states a concealed firearm permit serves as a proif of passing background check since that check is more in depth than a NICS check. A call to the state issuing agency to verify that the permit is valid is all that’s required, no NICS check made. That means two things: on, that there are still more guns sold than NICS checks indicate, and two, that the NICS checks numbers are going to be a lttle biased towards new rather than repeat gun buyers.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Absolutely right. But NICS stats are at least a tiny bit more accurate than surveys. Like I’m going to tell some halfwit over the phone how many guns I own, if any at all!

        Like

  2. Brillant, make sure you spread this far and wide!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Thanks for your input, Tricia Bishop. (NOT)

    I’ve honestly not had anyone in my family killed by a gun. But a drunken asshole driving an automobile managed to kill my brother when he’d just turned 18.
    Maybe assholes who engage in harmful behavior should just STFU about tools they consider harmful. Since you can’t control yourself, don’t assume others are also not able. That’s known as “projection.”

    Liked by 1 person

    1. So sorry about your brother, Ned. In all seriousness, I doubt Tricia will ever read or comprehend this column – nor will she understand how dangerous she is, especially compared to every gun owner I know. And I know quite a few!

      Like

  4. Has someone pointed out to her that if we truly were “gun bullies” she would not have survived to write the second oped?

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Hey, I support gun reform efforts as well. I think everyone not currently incarcerated or on parole/probation for a felony should be allowed to have a gun. I think fully automatic firearms should be as easy to get as semi-auto. The only thing limiting if someone can get a particular firearm should be financial. If you can afford it, you should be able to buy it.

    This dishonest meme kinda pissed me off last week. http://www.memepile.com/photo?id=7076

    We live in a society that has more access to a wider range of books in more formats for less money than at any time in history. You’re not limited to just bookstores. Anyone can walk into pretty much any department store like Walmart or Target and buy a book. You can buy books at gas stations for heaven’s sake. And if you just can’t wait to get to the store to buy something, you can grab your computer or even your phone and buy an eBook and have access to it immediately, many times for free.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. […] THEY ALWAYS DO: Tricia Bishop – passively aggressively doubling down on the stupid. […]

    Like

  7. The rise of extreme data storage capabilities even for individuals and the incessant hacking of supposedly private records at all levels of government and commercial enterprises mean that widely available lists of everyone on the planet are inevitable. This is a two-edged sword. Sure, the anti-gunners will get their lists of gun owners one way or the other, but pro-liberty activists can also make lists of the arrogant filth who adore the idea of helpless citizens with no defenses at all against corrupt governments and other kinds of violent criminals. In combination with increasingly effective face-recognition, gait-analysis and other identification technologies, such desktop or cloud-based databases can be used to viciously strike back at anti-liberty vermin by publicly declaring that known goblins will be arrested on sight for trespassing should they step one nanometer onto private property owned by decent people, fired from their jobs at businesses owned by gun-liberty supporters and evicted from their apartments similarly owned by pro-liberty citizens. One might even contemplate criminal elements gaining access to information such as the home addresses of such goblins and doing what they wish with that information, which would be a great … pity.

    Even as the subhuman goblins screech their hatred at the very idea of decent people being able to defend their homes, their children and their own lives against ordinary goblins like muggers, burglars, rapists and Islamic terrorists, the most evil kind of goblins might find their lives growing ugly, dark and short.

    Truth to tell, I really should write a series of … fictional … stories or an entire novel along those lines. It would be great fun to have the goblins get their just desserts for their slobbering hatred of gun owners and other people who insist on resisting the thuggery of the same kind of statists who made a cemetery out of China and Cambodia and Russia and North Korea. I’m put in mind of the 1996 novel “Unintended Consequences” by John Ross. Technology has marched a long way over the past twenty years.

    Like

  8. Interesting…..two charges,two citations,one :Guilty…two: Noll Pros. Not sure what the ramifications are….

    Like

  9. It’s funny. She writes something that goes even further than most “pro-gun reform” folks would be willing to talk about. There are almost zero posts or tweets supporting her asinine position, and the pro-gun rights folks blast her out of the water, and she has the temerity to write a column about how they’re winning?

    She must still be drunk.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Sarcasm on:
    I counter her idea of a Gun owners data base with a simple OK, If you also create a list of those people with say more than $2500 in gold silver or valuables in their house. After all we don’t want the criminals only robbing gun owners, they should have bling too.

    Maybe there is a list of DUI/DWI that she should be on. After all we do not want our children riding in cars with known drunks caught driving.
    Sarcasm off:

    This is why lists like that are dangerous. Its bad enough the criminals scan obits
    to see if there are empty houses that might contain valuables. A list of gun owners is an advertisement to the criminals, get your guns there. And the whole point is keeping guns out of criminal hands where they are most often misused.

    If there is one constant the gun grabbers are generally selfish to the extreme as its all about them and incapable of critical thinking. We should create a list
    and update it with the names these people. We know who they are.

    Eck!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The problem is that she doesn’t care about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. She pretty much said as much in her original column. No, she ONLY cares about hitting people who have done nothing illegal.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. “They came at me…attacking my looks, intelligence and parenting skills.”

    Her looks are immaterial.

    Her intelligence has now been confirmed by her doubling-down, and it’s not impressive.

    Her parenting skills were demonstrated in the first article. Her children will turn out to be unable to survive without “safe spaces”.

    Like

    1. You mean her lack of intelligence, right?😉

      Like

    2. “They came at me…attacking my looks….”
      I’d do her.

      (What? You weren’t thinking the same thing? Right!)

      OC

      Like

      1. Shriveled, sniffly, and irrational is not my type. Sorry.

        Like

  12. Those tolerant liberals – accepting all differences except the difference of ideas

    Liked by 1 person

  13. […] last, but not least, The Liberty Zone notes an anti-gun nutter doubling down on […]

    Liked by 1 person

  14. In one of the states there is a proposal to compel all journalists to register, just like the sex offenders. This is a very smart move.

    Like

  15. “While a public database of gun owners may push too far, …”

    She still won’t admit it’s a bad idea. She’ll only go so far as to say “may”. If she heard from so many thousands of people then I’m sure she heard more than one argument about why it’s a bad idea. And I’m sure she heard more than a handful of civil ones. You can bet the farm she doesn’t care. If a database was built and in force tomorrow she’d be just fine with it.

    Unfortunately, I think she’d be shocked to find how many of her prospective “play dates” for her kids would never happen.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. French is such a lovely language, full of mordant little aphorisms for any situation. “Cet animal est si féroce qu’il se défend quand il est attaqué.” (“What a fierce animal! It even defends itself when attacked!”)

    As for Tricia Bishop, I agree with Ned and Misha. My children are in vastly more danger from drunk drivers like Tricia Bishop than from guns. In fact I think the state would be fully justified in taking away the children of people who drink and drive, as they’re obviously not capable of managing their own affairs, nor of raising children.

    Perhaps Tricia Bishop should have to have a “convicted drunk driver” sign in her front yard, and on her front door, and be required to register with the police and the local probation board wherever she may go for the rest of her life.

    I would ask why a respectable family newspaper like the Baltimore Sun would hire such a moral leper for their editorial board, but the alert reader has already, I’m sure, formed a hypothesis.

    Liked by 1 person

%d bloggers like this: