Heidi is a board member for the Brady Campaign. A few years ago, she decided to manufacture a controversy out of Starbucks’ non-policy gun policy. Starbucks refused to bow to the pressure, and they continue to allow patrons to carry in their restaurants.
A normal adult would look at that loss and say, “you win some, you lose some.” A normal adult would get on with her life. Not Heidi. There is something very troubling about her logic.
In an article for Ms. magazine, she outlines a plan to buy a gun and pursue absolutely no training. She admits with no real remorse that she doesn’t know how to tell whether it’s loaded or not. Even worse, she’s going to carry it on her person for the next month. The denouement of her article describes her sitting in a Starbucks location (note the clumsy attempt at irony) in this manner:
Today, they have a woman with absolutely no firearms training and a Glock on her hip sitting within arm’s reach of small children, her hands shaking and adrenaline surging.
I’m really failing to grasp her point. All I see is someone who presumes to advocate for gun safety by being as unsafe as possible.
6 thoughts on “Heidi Yewman”
Her point is, “Because I am an idiot with a gun, every other person with a gun is also an idiot.”
That article is so full of holes, I don’t know where to start. Her point is, “Because I am an idiot with a gun, every other person with a gun is also an idiot.”
That’s what happens when flogging your agenda becomes more important than actually doing good journalism.
I’ll take the gun off her hands when she’s done with it, since it’s so yucky and everything. Surely she’ll be so anxious to get rid of the people killer (that not coincidentally will not kill any people, how’s that for irony?) that she’ll just give it away, right? I’ll gladly take the background check, the same one that certified her as suitable for firearm ownership (though that means nothing, except in her case, where it indicates what a good person she is).
Yewman, and many others in the comments, assert repeatedly that the vast majority of all gun owners carry in the same ignorant manner that Yewman did. She’s got absolutely nothing to support that assertion. This is not surprising, but it’s still annoying.
Meanwhile, we’ve overwhelmed their comment moderation: http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/the-gun-report-june-21-2013/?_r=1
And they’ll be publishing the rest on the Huffington Post: http://msmagazine.com/blog/2013/06/12/my-month-with-a-gun-week-one/comment-page-1/#comment-134790
There are claims that she’s been deluged with invective from “trolls and hate mongers within the gun community.”
So, where are those comments? I’m sure folks like Yewman would love to play the bullied martyr card, and those comments would be easy fodder for mocking us.
The answer? There aren’t any. The article wasn’t meant to inspire (or tolerate) debate; it’s a propaganda piece.
Not mentioned on the Ms blog as they were censored were the sincere offers to train her so she could be safe.