I Demand An End To Cancer!

King Canute is spinning in his grave:

Jamie Foxx Joins Other Celebrities To Demand End To Gun Violence

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s gun-control campaign Mayors Against Illegal Guns released a video Friday featuring Jamie Foxx the star of Quentin Tarantino’s controversial and highly violent movie ‘Django Unchained’ and other celebrities demanding an end to gun violence in America.

Why stop at gun violence? Why not cancer and heart disease? Let’s demand a change to human nature while we’re at it.

I’m sure all those celebrities feel good about themselves now. They made an ad that saved the country from gun violence. Now they can go back to making violent movies and television shows.


About Myiq2xu

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Gun Control and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to I Demand An End To Cancer!

  1. myiq2xu (D) says:

    Maybe those celebrities who have armed bodyguards would be willing to pay higher taxes so the rest of us can have them too.

  2. I seem to remember a Simpsons episode where the Reverend’s wife screams “what about the children?” at a town hall meeting. Yeah, this video from Hollywood hypocrites feels something like that!

  3. yttik says:

    I demand an end to icy roads! And cheap wine. Life is too short to drink cheap wine.

    But what about other kinds of violence? We’re saying no to gun violence, but not stabbings, strangulation, hit and run? Statistically more than twice as many people are killed with somebody’s bare hands than with rifles.

    I am 100% in support of a ban on violence. Actually, I thought we already had one, backed up by hundreds of laws and a whole prison system. Maybe all these celebs would like to pitch in by refusing to make movies that glorify violence? Maybe the media would like to start focusing on some positive news rather than glorifying the acts of infamous killers?

  4. HELENK says:

    I know you all will be thrilled and overwhelmed to know that the obamass started their $4million vacation today

  5. fif says:

    Baaaaa, the Sheeple are charging. Do they ever have an original thought? We only have to tolerate it until they are whipped into a frenzy by the next fad cause. Narcissists abound.

  6. DandyTiger says:

    As WCMB likes to say to hollywood types: “dance monkey, dance”. We don’t want to hear your politics, we want to see you dance.

  7. myiq2xu (D) says:

    I just received a package from my uncle in Arizona (the one that had the stroke this time last year).

    Big Styrofoam box delivered by FedX. Inside was a 2 lb block of dry ice and six small steaks.

    I’m trying the bourbon soaked pair tonight. Both of them together should make a nice meal.

    • myiq2xu (D) says:

      Ever see what happens to dry ice in a glass of tequila? It looks like something Fester Addams would drink.

      • lyn5 says:

        Dry ice makes the best root beer. In college, I worked in a chemistry lab, and they would make sure the dry ice wasn’t radioactive before they made the brew with root beer syrup.

    • yttik says:

      LOL! We used to ship crab. You’d put one crab in a box the size of a refrigerator with a half ton of styrofoam and dry ice.

      • myiq2xu (D) says:

        This box is big enough to hold a case of beer and a bag of ice, with room to spare. All for 36 ounces of steak.

        I’m keeping the box. I put the dry ice in a bucket of water out front to freak out the neighbor kids.

  8. westcoaster says:

    I’m sick of these moronic patronizing ads voiced by some of the worst actors in Hollywood. OK, a few can act, but if I have to be talked down to by the same people that try to entertain me, it doesn’t endear me to them.

  9. myiq2xu (D) says:

  10. swanspirit says:

    Laura Ingraham can kiss my ass un fucking believable , bringing Mitt Romney into a discussion of this fiscal cliff debacle and saying “it would have been nice to have heard this during the election ; not to put it all on Romney ”
    Guess what Laura , your tepid support was part of the fucking problem .

    • swanspirit says:

      Sorry , a bit OT there

    • lyn5 says:

      WTF? Romney was addressing the economy during the election, and he had his plan. No one listened.

    • angienc (D) says:


      She was too busy nit-picking Romney, helping to drag out the primaries to get rid of the unelectables, etc. to discuss the fiscal cliff she didn’t pay a bit of attention to what Romney was ACTUALLY SAYING.

      She may as well become a Dem because she & her ilk are just as responsible for Obama’s election & re-election as anyone who actually voted for him.

  11. myiq2xu (D) says:

    RD, on December 21, 2012 at 8:18 pm said:

    As I said, if you haven’t had a kid in school in the past decade, you have no idea how locked down school is and how terrified everyone is of every little thing.
    You don’t say anything about my proposal but you bring up domestic terrorism completely ignoring the domestic terror generated by macho gun addicts with assault weapons feeling their cheerios as they strut around the country because they think no one can touch them.
    THAT is trampling on our rights. We shouldn’t have to walk around in fear.
    Think back to when you were a kid. What was wrong with those days when we didn’t have the NRA shoving guns down everyone’s throats?? You don’t need an assault rifle in your home. You don’t need an arsenal. If you want to play survivor, go do it where there aren’t any people who don’t want want to participate. Otherwise, there is no reason for you to have more than a simple revolver OR rifle.
    It’s time to ratchet it down.

    No, don’t even tell me about it. I’m sick of the gun lobby’s arguments. If you don’t have a kid who’s missed out on their childhoods in the last decade, you have no idea what the fear and gun industry have done. Enough is enough.

    RD is so full of shit she squishes when she moves. Fully automatic weapons (like the BAR and Tommy gun) were legal until 1933. Lee Harvey Oswald bought the rifle he killed JFK with via mail order. Saturday Night Specials weren’t outlawed until 1968.

    We have more gun control now than ever.

    BTW – The NRA is funded by gun owners, not gun manufacturers.

    • DandyTiger says:

      It’s so much easier to bypass logic and ignore facts. And when we have an issue with no easy answers, it’s amazing how black and white the issue can be to some. Thinking is hard.

    • DandyTiger says:

      Also, the whole if you don’t have kids bullshit is equivalent to “think of the children.” You know, I’ve seen some language, images, and videos on that website that’s not suitable for kids, so she should be in jail. For the love of god, think of the children.

    • angienc (D) says:

      Hey, RD — the government doesn’t *care* about you or your brat.
      Anyone who trusts GOVERNMENT to protect their children really is too stupid to be a parent — but hey, idiots having kids is how we ended up with Obama.

    • HELENK says:

      shall I tell her that when I was a kid we played war and were shooting at all the japs and the germans.
      or we were playing cowboys and indians
      or cops and robbers??

      take a look at the movies from the 40s and 50s that were played on at Saturday afternoon kids matinees

      radio shows

      the shadow
      the whistler
      the green hornet
      crime stories

      caps guns, red ryder beebee guns were toys of choice for most little boys

      the difference was that the good guys won

  12. HELENK says:

    Is this the time to say that my youngest grand daughter is learning to shoot a rifle???
    she is studying criminal justice in college and wants to go into the Coast Guard when she gets out.
    one of her classmates is a discharged marine and he is teaching her how to handle the weapon.
    Only thing I said to her was learn how to handle it good and carefully.

  13. angienc (D) says:

    What’s the over/under that these morons have no problem with all those hip hop songs that glorify gun violence?

    No, I’m not calling for censorship, just pointing out the hypocrisy.

  14. HELENK says:


    she who wants me to pay so she does not have kids, want to tell parents what they are doing wrong in raising boys.


  15. swanspirit says:

    Why is it that people who know what they are talking about are not heard ? Don’t our children deserve the same expertise on security our president gets? Dan Bongino is ex secret service

    Ending Targeted School Violence
    What We Can Do Now
    December 20, 2012
    by Dan Bongino

    As a father to an eight-year-old elementary school student, I have asked myself repeatedly, what could have been done to prevent the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary? Despite the inauthentic political rhetoric and the genuine outpouring of grief and sorrow after each of these tragic occurrences, they continue to occur and grow in their degree of depravity. Listening to commentators and politicians talk about the issue has only served to infuriate me further. It appears that they are using the murder of innocent children to further an ideological agenda that may cause the environment which produced these horrific events to become more conducive to repeated tragedies, not less.

    I spent over a decade of my life as a special agent with the United States Secret Service and never experienced a violent incident at any location visited by a protectee in my custody, despite some of them having threat profiles which virtually guaranteed an attack if these individuals were left unprotected. It is this set of experiences which makes me ask the very basic and no longer avoidable question, “Why can’t we keep our children safe?” Acknowledging that these events are exceedingly rare, it is the nature of these acts and their devastating consequences on the most innocent among us, which do irreparable damage to our collective national psyche and makes even extremely rare occurrences too much to bear.

    Given the severe consequences of any failure to properly secure the life of a protectee in my custody, I was accustomed to ignoring variables which would play no role in the enhancement of a security plan. This approach appears to have escaped the political-class as there is a growing group of political opportunists clamoring to jump in front of the television cameras to propose politically expedient “solutions” which will do next-to-nothing to ensure this never happens again. In my home state of Maryland, State Senator Brian Frosh, who is exploring a run for Attorney General, has stated that he is planning on introducing legislation to ban “assault weapons”. He claims that banning assault weapons would, “reduce the slaughter” and continues with, “Would it stop the gun violence? No. But would it save some lives? Absolutely.” I use these quotes to clearly illustrate this point; the State Senator, with zero experience in risk assessment, threat mitigation or structural security is proposing a sweeping ban on a category of weapons which he struggles to categorically define, yet he is “absolutely” sure it will save lives?

    He claims it will save lives despite nearly a decade of data showing this claim to be inconclusive at best and misleading at worst. Psychologically unstable and sociopathic individuals, throughout recorded history, have always found a means to implement their deadly plans despite societal norms and regulatory and legal structures designed to thwart them. It is time to take a different approach to school security and stop focusing on chasing lightening.

    If we want to stop these acts from occurring on school grounds we must begin to examine methods by which we can ensure that they are “hard targets” and stop focusing on political talking points. In addition to the gun-control politicians, there are groups expressing concern regarding targeted school violence yet, when asked about security, they frequently state that they don’t want our schools to look like “war-zones”.

    Two points on this topic. First, we don’t determine where unthinkable acts of violence are going to take place, the attackers do. Second, while in the Secret Service, we traveled with our protectees to schools, churches, foreign embassies and most every other category of structure in existence, and I ask you, do you ever recall the President appearing on television as if he were walking into a figurative “war-zone”? I conducted President Obama’s security advance to an actual war-zone in Afghanistan in December of 2010 and managed to make it appear on television as a troop rally. Modern security techniques place a premium on discretion and implementing a robust security plan in a school environment is no different.

    Here are some steps we can take immediately to create a safer school. First, we should adjust the current focus from strict access control to threat mitigation. Most of the schools I have visited assume they are secure because you must be “buzzed in”. This approach conflates an “access control only” approach (something that is valuable at a football game or ticketed event) with security. The problem with this approach in a school is that any historical look at targeted incidents of school violence shows that these acts were largely committed by people familiar to the school. In these cases the assailant would have likely been granted access, regardless of the security level of the open door he was walking through. Assuming now that access is not an issue for the assailant we should be asking ourselves, “what next?” The answer here may be uncomfortable for some but we must consider placing discreet, armed individuals within schools to ensure that any armed assailant, once inside a school and bent on destruction, is confronted by potentially deadly force. It may not stop every attack but it will buy the one commodity which, in the security field is irreplaceable, time. Time allows law enforcement the opportunity to respond and an emergency plan to be implemented.


  16. swanspirit says:

    THIS is too good

    This is how the media works to silence and vilify the opposition and to ensure that only their ideas control The Narrative. The media doesn’t care about securing our schools; they only care about coming after our guns and handing Obama another political win.

    The media also doesn’t care how wildly hypocritical they look.

    In their zeal to rampage this left-wing agenda, the media has apparently forgotten that back in 2000, on the one-year anniversary of the Columbine shooting (which occurred with an assault weapons ban in place), President Clinton requested $60 million in federal money to fund a fifth round of funding for a program called “COPS in School,” a program that does exactly what the NRA is proposing and the media is currently in overdrive mocking:

    Clinton also unveiled the $60-million fifth round of funding for “COPS in School,” a Justice Department program that helps pay the costs of placing police officers in schools to help make them safer for students and teachers. The money will be used to provide 452 officers in schools in more than 220 communities.

    “Already, it has placed 2,200 officers in more than 1,000 communities across our nation, where they are heightening school safety as well as coaching sports and acting as mentors and mediators for kids in need,” Clinton said.

    The media is not only so driven to ensure Sandy Hook is used to win this round on gun control that they’ve become morally blinded to what really needs to be done to immediately secure our schools; they’ve lost their grip historically and politically.

    Think about it: The media is entering a new year attempting to convince parents that their children will be less safe with a policeman in their school.

    Off the rails doesn’t even begin to describe it.


Comments are closed.