Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) - Screenshot courtesy of KWQC

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) - Screenshot courtesy of KWQC

New Colorado GOP Representative sends message to America, tweets out ‘Speak Loudly and Carry a Glock’

Posted by: | |Categories Around The World, Featured
Share:

WASHINGTON, DC – A newly elected Republican Representative from Colorado has already made waves because she allegedly asked for permission to carry her firearm on federal property. 

Now, in another move that will be sure to infuriate liberals, she has tweeted out, “Speak Loudly and Carry a Glock.”

 

Representative Lauren Boebert, a well-known firearms advocate, sent the tweet on December 8:

“I’ve always heard to ‘speak softly and carry a big stick.’  I prefer to speak loudly and carry a Glock.”

Boebert was elected after upsetting five-term Republican Scott Tipton during the June primaries.  It is widely believed that she won the election because of her strong support of the Second Amendment, and because she bashed Tipton for not supporting President Donald Trump enough.

Boebert initially made national news when it was reported by two unnamed congressional officials, a Republican and a Democrat, that she had sought out permission from the Capitol Police to carry her firearm while at an orientation for newly-elected lawmakers. 

While Boebert’s team never acknowledged whether or not this was the case, Laura Carno, one of her aides, said:

“This was a private conversation and inquiry about what the rules are, and as a result, the Congresswoman-Elect won’t be going on the record.”

The Capitol Police also did not acknowledge whether or not the conversation that Boebert had with them had anything to do with her asking permission to carry her firearm on federal grounds.  They have also refused to acknowledge in the past when other lawmakers have asked for permission and had it granted.

A regulation on Capitol Hill from 1967 allows lawmakers to have and maintain firearms in their office or while transporting them within the Capitol grounds.  The regulation states:

“[No law] shall prohibit any Member of Congress from maintaining firearms within the confines of his office [or] from transporting within Capitol grounds firearms unloaded and securely wrapped.”

Of course, Democratic leaders are ‘up in arms’ over the idea that anyone is allowed to have a firearm on federal property, regardless of what the laws or regulations state.  Democratic lawmaker Jared Huffman is one of those who do not believe that firearms should be allowed on the grounds.  He said:

“Members could have a loaded AK-47 sitting on their desk and no one would do anything about it.”

After this was reported, Boebert sent out a tweet that seemed to acknowledge the request:

“The violent crime rate in Washington DC is 158% higher than the national average.  Look at how they treated Rand Paul on the streets & now won’t even investigate who assaulted him.  As a five-foot-tall woman, yes, I want to carry and it’s my right.”

Another member of Congress, Republican Thomas Massie, believes that having legally owned firearms on federal grounds is acceptable.  He pointed to the active shooter situation in Alexandria, Virginia as an example.  In that example, a Democrat-minded madman decided that he was going to kill Republican lawmakers and tried to do so in 2017.  Massie said:

“As soon as you leave the Capitol property, you are a target.”

Another Republican lawmaker, Marjorie Taylor Greene, not only thinks that it is a good idea for elected officials to carry guns on federal property, she believes everyone should that is legally allowed to do so.  She said:

“Not only do I support members of Congress carrying a firearm, I believe every American has the right.  I will work every day to end ALL gun-free zones.”

Regardless of whether or not she will carry her legally owned firearm while on federal property, Boebert seems to be taking a liking to poking the bear.  On December 3, she tweeted:

“Democrats should think of concealed carry as masks for our guns.  Maybe then they’d support it.”

 

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

CBS headline blames murder of children on firearms, framing article to vilify guns instead of criminals

December 5, 2020

 

Having now worked in the realm of journalism and reporting on newsworthy events for well over a year now – you begin to see certain trends when observing how other entities report on matters. 

Some may call it “spin”, others might call it selective editing or intentional omissions…but no matter how you paraphrase the act itself, it’s hard not to pick up on the patterns.

Take for instance when a firearm is used in a crime or series of crimes, such as this one article by a Philadelphia-based CBS station which is titled: 

“More Than 20 Children Killed By Firearms In Philadelphia In 2020, Almost Double Compared To Last Year”

Now of course, one could speculate that it’s merely a clickbait title and then just jumps right into the facts of the cases/investigations.

But within the article itself, it seems to carry a theme of the true-to-form evil all present within these children being harmed is the guns involved in the cases. 

One need only look at the carefully crafted manner of phrasing when the articles mentions the children hurt or killed within the city: 

“20 juveniles lost their lives to firearms in Philadelphia this year alone”

“14-year-old boy is gunned down”

“Another deadly shooting involving a child”

“23 victims ages 17 and under were killed by gunfire”

“That’s up from 12 children killed by guns during the same time last year”

“Neighbors in Olney are fed up with the gun violence”

Now, technically, all of the aforementioned are true statements. But look at the subliminal narrative attempting to be crafted here – with using terms like “killed by guns” and “killed by gunfire”. 

If one were to afford an honest assessment on the likely carefully chosen words throughout the article, one begins to see that the reader is being inundated with terms likening firearms to be the de facto perpetrators of these actual homicides. 

Folks, guns by themselves to do not shoot or kill people – people shoot or kill people. Now uttering things to the effect of ‘being tired of gun violence’ isn’t inherently bad, and many people innocuously saying things akin to that aren’t always decrying the tool used in a murder itself. 

A gun is nothing more than a tool…an instrument that can be weilded in many of fashions. Firearms can be used for sport like skeet shooting, perhaps hunting, and of course self defense. 

Like many other things, guns can also be used in the commission of a crime. But so can hammers, knives, commercial-grade explosives and incendiary devices. 

Yet when violent crimes are committed with knives or hammers, one doesn’t really see much vilification of the instruments involved.

For example, we’ll use the same exact CBS outlet referenced earlier to see how they reported an armed robbery with a knife-wielding suspect from back in May of 2020. 

Guess how many times “knife” (or references to) was used in the article?

Twice. 

Ready to see the context it was used in? 

“A suspect who pulled a knife”

“Police say the suspect pulled out a knife”

And nowhere in the article was there quotes of people saying they’re ‘fed up with the knife violence’, nor were there any snappy statistics of how many people were the victims of knife-related crimes nor how many people have been stabbed this year in the city. 

Obviously, crimes involving any kind of violence – especially lethal violence – are bad. But becoming hyper-focused on the instrument used to commit a crime can eventually result in displaced anger at a tool used rather than the root issue (which is the criminal behind the act itself). 

Someone intent on doing something criminally violent will find or develop a means to carry out said crime.

And while it is true a firearm can be dangerous in the hands of someone intent on maliciously harming people – it still boils down to the flawed individual and not so much the tool they so adopt. 

 

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Share:
Submit a Correction
About The Author

I am a proud husband to a wife who works in education and the father to two wonderful children. My first focus is on my family and spending time with them, my second is on my career. I am a current law enforcement lieutenant and have been an officer for over twenty years. Chris Elliot is a pen name for safety reasons.

Related Posts