Brady Campaign's Peter Hamm talks smack on Facebook!

[redsaber75]

Peter Hamm (Washington, DC) wrote
at 9:24am yesterday
Hey Lindsey, did your parents raise you to be a rude, mean spirited bully, or did you get that way on your own?

I cannot, for the life of me, fathom how you folks sleep at night after viciously sniping all day at people who have been victims of crime.

You should be ashamed of yourself, and you should find something constructive to do with your time, such as get a job, or actually study for your classes, if you are actually enrolled.

I never cease to be amazed at the brutal, aggressive, dictatorial behavior of the activists on your side. And let me make this clear - it energizes us. So give up this foolish notion that you have that you're going to scare us away. We aren't ever going anywhere.

Go play with your guns.

Peter Hamm

I love it when people talk smack online. Because they would never say it to your face in person.

Keep in mind this guy is the Communication Director for the Brady Campaign.

 

[Eightball]

let me make this clear - it energizes us. So give up this foolish notion that you have that you're going to scare us away. We aren't ever going anywhere.

He wouldn't need to say such things if his side was "winning." Sounds like he's getting scared, and needs to get more popularity, fast.

 

[Rachen]

He wouldn't need to say such things if his side was "winning." Sounds like he's getting scared, and needs to get more popularity, fast.

Apparently, he thinks that he was not going to get caught wacking off on Facebook. Surely, there won't be any NRA people there to fight him or rebuff him, right? Think again Mr. Hamm, because right now, your imbecile little comment has been copied and pasted to many other webpages, and before long, your reputation as a mean spirited and hurtful individual will be spread so far and so much on the Web, by countless Americans who cherish their freedoms and cultural roots, that telemarketers all over the country will wish that they have the same skills as THR members to spread information over such a long distance to so many people.

 

[CBS220]

A link would be nice.

 

[Rachen]

A link would be nice.

Yes, that will be great. Lets have solid evidence of his little masturbatory activity on Facebook. Somewhere down the road, we can use it against him.
In this day and age, you just have to be really careful of what you say. Evidently, this little fool has completely undressed and showed everybody his TRUE self.

 

[misANTHrope]

I dug around trying to find his, and this is as close as I got- another secondhand discussion. No luck yet finding the original discussion.

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2243394202&topic=3891

One thing I have noticed, whilst browsing the various anti groups, is how their membership compares to an organization like SCCC. SCCC is closing in on 30,000 members, while the biggest anti group I've come across so far was the ProtestEasyGuns folk, with 1900 members. I find this quite encouraging.

 

[mike101]

I just sent it to the Brady Campaign.

 

[Dksimon]

I added him as a friend on facebook so we will have to wait and see if he accepts.

If he does accept I have a few questions to ask him so maybe we will get some more interesting things out of him!

 

[TwitchALot]

I will try to obtain the link.

 

[Eightball]

If he does accept I have a few questions to ask him so maybe we will get some more interesting things out of him!

Keep us posted.

 

[redsaber75]

A link would be nice.

It was posted here:

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=2243394202&topic=3891

 

[redsaber75]

One thing I have noticed, whilst browsing the various anti groups, is how their membership compares to an organization like SCCC. SCCC is closing in on 30,000 members, while the biggest anti group I've come across so far was the ProtestEasyGuns folk, with 1900 members. I find this quite encouraging.

The other thing about a lot of the prohibitionist groups is that they often shut off any sort of discussion or debate.

 

[Dksimon]

!!!!!!! HE ACTUALLY ACCEPTED MY REQUEST!!!!!!!

Now I have to think of something to say to hime while still maintaining the characteristics of a decent human being.

Any imput?

 

[Deanimator]

Apparently, he thinks that he was not going to get caught wacking off on Facebook. Surely, there won't be any NRA people there to fight him or rebuff him, right? Think again Mr. Hamm, because right now, your imbecile little comment has been copied and pasted to many other webpages, and before long, your reputation as a mean spirited and hurtful individual will be spread so far and so much on the Web, by countless Americans who cherish their freedoms and cultural roots, that telemarketers all over the country will wish that they have the same skills as THR members to spread information over such a long distance to so many people.

I've fought anti-gunners first in FidoNet, then in usenet since 1986. Absolutely one of my most powerful weapons has been "File, Save As" and copy and paste.

It's simply astonishing, the number of sheer imbeciles who think that once they say something in a discussion forum or in usenet, that it just disappears forever. I've kept user specific quote files, both in FidoNet and usenet. Nothing slaps a liar down quicker than a VERBATIM quote, WITH all of the header information. Even better is an embarrassing quote from a supposed "liberal", full of racism, anti-Semitism or misogyny, and believe me, I've got TONS of all three and more. It's hilarious to have some jackass get blindsided by some David Duke-like comment he made five years ago. Almost as funny is to do linguistic analysis of posts from five "different" posters to show that they're really just one. Then just use the poster's real name (if you know it) when talking or referring to his multiplicity of aliases.

I've literally run several hateful anti-gunners out of usenet, one to the Daily Kos where they don't allow contradiction of their views.

I had one of them threaten to sue me once. I just told him to go ahead... but that in discovery I'd be acquiring EVERY word he EVER said in ANY newgroup, echo or discussion forum where he'd EVER posted. I told him it'd be worth it to lose the case, JUST to get every racist thing he'd EVER said in the internet, DOCUMENTED as a public record. Strangely, he forgot that idea...

 

[rocinante]

Canada has a kangaroo court on human rights. My understanding is they heavily censor and punish anything inflammatory, racist or culturally insensitive. i.e. the p.c. nanny crowd is driving the bus up there. Anyhow one activist dragged the owner of a board that is white supremacist oriented before the court. Part of the evidence was online chat. Problem was the vilest and most degrading comments were by the activist baiting his target posing as like minded poster. Not only did the activist fail to reveal this fact but lied when busted about it.

I know that synopsis is vague but if anyone asks I will dig up a reference.

I am sure the Brady Bunch and their ilk are feeling defensive now a days. Lets home the SCOTUS really makes them the underdogs.

 

[Conqueror]

Mr. Hamm has a remarkable love of ad hominem attacks like this one, and uses them frequently. One would imagine this to be highly undesirable in a Communications Director.

 

[armoredman]

Maybe his title is actually Miscommunications Director?
Sounds like a real winner, a prince of a guy. Reminds me of some inmates I know...

 

[SaxonPig]

DK- Without disclosing which side you are on, simply tell him you are interested in the debate over sensible gun control (they love that word "sensible") and politely ask him to provide you with facts to bolster your arguments. Like statistics proving that gun control reduces crime and violence.

I wonder what he'll come up with?

 

[BlazingAngel01]

Fascist much......Hamm

 

[Rugerlvr]

Daily Kos where they don't allow contradiction of their views

I'm not trying to promote Daily Kos or anything, but I used to post pro-gun stuff over there all the time, and never got banned or anything. It was a pitiful attempt on my part to educate, but it just got so tiresome. It was like spitting in the wind. I think the key is to be respectful, and not didactic, or come across as a "gun nut." (i.e. don't tie name-calling, divisive politics into your arguments, use common sense.) I did discover that there are pro-gun Democrats out there. I wish they had the cojones to educate some of their fellows in that party.

 

[misANTHrope]

DK- Without disclosing which side you are on, simply tell him you are interested in the debate over sensible gun control (they love that word "sensible") and politely ask him to provide you with facts to bolster your arguments. Like statistics proving that gun control reduces crime and violence.

I wonder what he'll come up with?

Ooohhh, I like this tact. If you're not averse to bending the truth some, play it like you've got these rabid pro-gun people arguing with you, and you need some good factual sources to show them. Act like you're getting your [butt] handed to you in debates, and you need help.

 

[Soybomb]

No doubt responses like that get some hard core anti's cheering just as much as some of the dumb responses from the pro crowd do. The important thing to me is the fence sitters. I never plan to win over the person I'm debating with, thats just a pleasant surprise if it happens. I want the audience, who generally largely doesn't know much about guns or even really care much to be won over. These are the votes I want on our side. Let Mr. Hamm tell people to go play with their guns while you pound him with unbiased statistics and facts. The fence sitter who has much less of an emotional investment than Mr. Hamm does can make the decision on who presented the better case.

 

[Deanimator]

I'm not trying to promote Daily Kos or anything, but I used to post pro-gun stuff over there all the time, and never got banned or anything.

I just read the other day that they and some others are currently engaged in a "purge" to eliminate contrary views on gun control, regardless of how they're presented.

 

[Superlite27]

and you need some good factual sources to show them. Act like you're getting your [butt] handed to you in debates, and you need help.

And if he actually provides some crap like "Studies show that people who have a gun at home are 46 times more likely to have it used on themselves", just say something like:

"But I can't use that because it counts suicides and premeditated spousal murder. Can you help me prove these gun nuts wrong using something else?"

And if he does........knock the crap out of it...politely. This way, you can kind of argue "by proxy". You can bash the hell out of his logic under the guise of trying to provide FACTUAL information in favor of gun control.

I wonder where it will lead?

 

[Dksimon]

Hamm for dinner

I have written a message to Mr. Hamm.
Please look over it and let me know what you think. I will update you when he replies.