NFL Bans Daniel Defense Super Bowl Ad — This Man Has EPIC Response



  2. “This man” is on the NRA payroll. Surprise!

    • So what? So he’s not allowed to have an opinion? Get a clue.

      • I didn’t say he’s not allowed to have an opinion. (Did I?) I think this man should have an opinion. He’s being paid good money to have an opinion. Perhaps, though, the website should disclose his employment. And instead of calling him “This Man”, they should call him “Colion Noir, NRA Commentator”.

        • And your point is…..?

          • I don’t get it either. Oh, oh wait… yeah… the big evil NRA that is in the pocket of the arms industry. Forget about the 5 million average Americans who take a stand against other people telling them what’s right for them, it’s the sinister gun lobby right there haha!

        • and maybe they should also disclose that he has ran a youtube channel long BEFORE being an NRA commentator and has always been a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment without getting paid to do so.

    • So should Bob Costas have to disclose his political beliefs or what political organizations he belongs to before lecturing us on national TV at halftime?

      • If Bob Costas is being paid by an interest group to advance their agenda, he should disclose that if he is going to comment on that particular subject. Come on folks, full disclosure is nothing new or controversial. It’s only fair.

        • you want it both ways. Not surprising.

          • I don’t know what you mean. I just said that Costas and Noir should be held to the same standard. How is that “having it both ways?”

          • You want information to be provided to skew the opinion of the audience only when you disagree with it. Costas gives his addressunder guise of politicalambiguity whenin fact his goal is to take advantage of emotions following an horrific event to gain support for more gun control. Applying your rule of full disclosure, Costas should have disclosed his politicalmotive prior to wastingmy time and ruining a football game.

          • You figured Costas out by the words he used. What other disclosure did he need to make? I really don’t understand what kind of disclosure you would want from him that he didn’t make clear in his comments? Are you saying that Costas was being paid by a gun control group? If not, how is this anything like the above?

          • No, they shouldn’t. One is a journalist. One is not.

        • Mr. Colion Noir has been voicing his opinion on the 2nd Amendment before the NRA ever took notice.

        • That interest group is called NBC. Much as I’m sure you consider Fox News to be a conservative special interest group.

        • Here is some full disclosure for you. US Constitution, Bill of Rights Article 2 States; A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
          What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED do you not understand?

    • This man was doing videos just like this long before he started contributing to NBA. It was because of his personal videos that the NRA brought him on.. Not the other way around. So, that he contributes to the NRA,and receives a paycheck doesn’t change anything, certainly not the validity of what he says in this video.. Thanks for trolling by..

    • Colion Noir has been making YouTube videos like this for over two years before his association with the NRA. He’s opinions and style of expressing them is why the NRA came to him.

    • An you are an anti-gun trolling treasonous dickhead.

    • That’s called a genetic fallacy. Your argument is invalid.

  3. Robert Provenzano

    Love this guy!

  4. It doesn’t matter who’s paying this guy.. Listen to the points that are being made and then argue against how hypocritical the situation is.

    • But fairness dictates that his relationship with the NRA should be disclosed.

      • Ok, now what?

      • Does the fact that some of the videos he does are specifically for the NRA, in any way, negate or detract from what was said? Other than to a liberal looking for some reason to dismiss it..?

        • So, you don’t think paid spokesmen should have to disclose their relationships when commenting on the industry they’re paid to support? Because this is pretty much an established rule of journalistic ethics.

          • What makes ColionNoir a journalist? He worksfor a special interest group.. Why wouldjournalistic ethicsapply?

          • Now that I answered your question, it’s your turn..

          • Exactly. And given what we see above, how do we tell whether he is a journalist or an employee of a special interest group?

          • I suppose you could tell by the fact that it was truthful and undoctored to know he isn’t ajournalist for MSNBC.. How many non-journalist youtubers do see givingtheir affiliations for videos not paid for by their employers? This is likely one of the many videos he does on his own, without the aid or input from the NRA.

          • I’m sure there are a lot of people on You Tube posing as regular guys– but who are really part of a slick PR campaign.

          • Please continue your witch hunt on them… As you said, there are journalistic ethics.. none of those apply here, so you’re arguing a point that need not be applied here.

          • The NRA is a citizen activist group and Colion Noir is a citizen who was making pro-gun videos long before he even became associated with them. None of which makes anything he says untrue.

          • Dope, the NRA is a gun manufacturer lobbying group. OMG you’re dumb as a stump. (not surprising, most gun fans are) Just because you can, STUPIDLY, pay dues to become a “member” doesn’t mean they’re not what they are. They’re a group specifically tasked with lobbying Congress to put forth their interests, which is to SELL MORE GUNS to idiots like you. Please, tell me you don’t vote with your lack of brains

          • They are a pro-2nd Amendment activist group and don’t own any gun manufacturers, get your facts straight. kthnx.

          • hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Tell us, BENNY, where do you get your “facts” ? Fox News? Your church??? hahahahahahahahahaa. Buy a brain, moron

          • Yeah, you are a moron robot not worth spending another minute talking to. Good day.

          • hahahahahaa. BRILLIANT cumback, Putsie. You think of that all yourself??? See what happens when you quit school in the 7th grade??? what a moron. And to think, jerkoffs like you have the right to vote. Take a look at who the biggest contributors are to the NRA, putz. But first, grab both ears, and pull your head out of your ignorant uneducated ass

          • Yes, clearly you are a MENSA candidate…..

          • That comment would be a helluva lot cooler if you knew what it meant. Hint: Has nothing to do with your menstrual cycle

          • The day you wake up and pull your blind head out of your ass
            Is the day you are gonna be pissed off for being such a FOOL for most of your life
            You are an Idiot with no real reason for living

          • another great cumback, putsie. A. Get a brain, B. Get a dick, THEN call me, we’ll do lunch, loser. hahahahahahaahahhahaahhahaahaha What an ignorant jerkoff. Seriously, Tom, you ever suck a dick you didn’t like?

          • So does he need to mention, at the beginning or end of every video he makes, every organization he is a member of in an effort to make sure that you know his affiliations? Do you call or check CNN/MSNBC/FOX/HLN online on a regular basis to check which organizations your favorite newscaster is a member of? Do you know every organization that even one politician is a member of? Every bit of mainstream media you see in the U.S. is a ‘slick PR campaign.’ Whether this is a slick PR video is up in the air as far as you seem to be concerned but even if it is why question it if you believe what is being said, unless of course you disagree with him, which would beg the question, why? Don’t just call the guy out as to try and discredit him or what he says, make a legitimate argument as to why you don’t agree with him.

          • Stephen A. Leaman

            So now you throw accusations at the guy without an ounce of proof? Typical Liberal tactic. Say something whether it is truth or a bold faced lie and it doesn’t matter because you can not unmilk that cow and the uninformed will believe it and claim any attempt to deny the accusation is simply an effort to cover stuff up.

          • and….and…damn that’s a long sentence.

          • Ad Hominem…You still haven’t refuted a single word the guy said.

          • I won’t refute a single word. It makes sense to me. But good form would be to disclose his connection with the NRA.

          • Not all of his videos are for the NRA. Only a select few are produced for them. Most of the time they are his own videos. Should he post a disclaimer every time he makes a video as to who it is for?

          • Your still not answering his question. This is just his opinion. The person saying the opinion shouldn’t affect the words coming from their mouth. Even if this was the NRA directly saying these words…they would still be the same. The reason your looking to this is so that you can dismiss their logic without having to listen to it.

          • I didn’t disparage his opinion. He makes a good point. But think about this: What if a man posted a viral video about the health benefits of tobacco. Wouldn’t you want to know whether he was being paid by the tobacco industry? Wouldn’t that information be helpful to you in putting that into context? Wouldn’t that doctor appear to be “sneaky” if he didn’t make that disclosure? It may be his opinion. It may even be true for all I know. But disclosure is really the right way to go. Let’s turn this on it’s head.
            Why do you think this opinion was presented as the objective opinion of some average guy rather than an NRA PR video? If his connection with the NRA is benign, why not disclose it?

          • There is no claim to be an expert here. This guy makes an argument in logic. In your example one expects a Doctor to have knowledge or information we do not.

          • lol…, protecting your family is akin to the benefits of tobacco? Wow…..liberals will sink to any depth…and then start digging.

          • I’m not sure what being liberal has to do with anything. I’m liberal on a good deal of topics but found johnlal used a terrible analogy in attempting to make a logical argument against this ad, where this ad humorously makes good points. So based off your post, I’ll just assume you’re a Republican and say Republicans are willing to disparage liberals at any opportunity they get? WTF dude.

          • Jay Ohh…Thanks for proving my point …you’re a liberal douche…lol. PS…your name suits you! lol

          • Your comment really doesn’t require an intelligent response. In actuality, you just proved my point but I’m not even going to waste anymore time with you as you read my comment and that was the sole goal.

          • Not even relatable…I’m astounded that you tried to do this. One of these is something that can be scientifically studied, with specific evidence that can be presented either for or against. This guy isn’t using facts to argue his point nor is he positioning himself as an expert on the subject. He is simply using logic and common sense. This logic he displays has absolutely nothing to do with who he is or what he represents. He could have been Charleston Heston holding a rifle in his hand and his logic would still be true.

          • Stephen A. Leaman

            Except your analogy is just plain stupid. There are no benefits to tobacco, it would be a bold faced lie. Everything this man stated was his opinion and the truth. You are wrong johnlal.

          • The difference is a person who is being paid for something based on an industry or purely profitable reasons is completely different than a person who believes in their rights. Many of Americans do not belong to the interest group known as the NRA but still believe in the right to bare arms. Our rights given to us by the constitution should not be a question in this regard. A completely different scenario than simply an industry trying to gain momentum for sales. I do not recall a law in our constitution specifying the “right” to smoke cigs… that I believe is a luxury. Our right to protect ourselves and those around us if need be should never be questioned in terms of the nature at which a person chooses to protect his family as long as he is following the laws attached to said amendment.
            I posted again down here.. Also, “benign”… as if malicious or deceitful agendas are to be assumed? That is a very liberal comment and to me a very bold statement as such “expressions” of delusions have supposedly filled the conservative party for years. I am not conservative, liberal, demo, rep… I am libertarian. I believe all parties should be abolished including my own but at least look at what a libertarian stands for. We need a great person to stand up for us and stop all these dealings under the table. Let us be less corrupt and a better nation… how about that?

          • Look at his YouTube Channel. I have followed it for years and he has been publishing these political videos for a very long time. The NRA hired him only about a year ago. He’s doing the exact same thing he did before they ever found that his message matched theirs.

          • Not sure why you said this to me. Are you agreeing with me… Cause I am not against him.

          • His video’s are to his subscribers. There’s no sneak to it and he doesn’t get payed for any of the videos that aren’t also officially released through NRA channels.

            This video is not.

            He is only payed for the videos that are double posted on his channel that start with the NRA disclaimer: those are NRA produced videos with NRA cameras and NRA post-production people. And even then it isn’t exactly big NRA bucks. He is one of multiple NRA commentators hired around the same time for the occasional guest appearance.

            This video was him and his camcorder in his room.

          • Hey stupid, what difference does it make if it’s true. And you have a lot of gall talking about journalistic ethics with the dog and pony show the media made of the families of Sandy Hook to push an anti-gun agenda they had rolling all along.

          • Colion Noir has been making youTube videos like this for over two year before his association with the NRA

          • Speaking of hypocritical.. Journalistic ethics seem to be nonexistent today, especially when considering the fact that every news channel/website is supporting a particular party or agenda. We don’t hear, or read, the news, we receive biased opinions that favor a particular journalist’s perspective. Stop listening to those “paid spokespersons” and start considering the evidence at hand.

          • I know I am wasting this on ears that will not hear what I am saying but did you really just bring up “journalistic ethics” as many before me have pointed out….Journalists no longer report facts….they spin their opinions into every story, qualified to do so or not. What he said sounds pretty factual to me and dead on. Progressive/liberal media only report on what pushes their agenda. Someone called this what it is hypocracy and it sounds like you dont like it but cant argue the points in the ad because it is very well done and follows the rules….something the progressive/liberal media knows little about. They dont follow the rules they follow the agenda and report what they are told to. And even if he was the president of the NRA does that change the point he is making, NO, but immediately we start the discrediting process, by trying to imply that his points are not valid if he is paid for them. If that is the case all of our elected officials should be discredited as well….EVERYONE OF THEM CHANGES THEIR OPINIONS/POINTS/ACTIONS BASED ON WHO IS PAYING THEM.

          • WorldPh_ingChamps

            In all fairness, where was the transparency involving Benghazi, this fiasco, there is not even a system in place for the gov. to pay the insurance companies’ subsidies to actually ENROLL the people in the Obamacare system!!! WHY?!?!?! Because this gov’t that is in place is nothing but propaganda, with NO transparency like Obama claimed he was about before he became POTUS. So, again, another hypocritical liberal argument….

          • The difference is a person who is being paid for something based on an industry or purely profitable reasons is completely different than a person who believes in their rights. Many of Americans do not belong to the interest group known as the NRA but still believe in the right to bare arms. Our rights given to us by the constitution should not be a question in this regard. A completely different scenario than simply an industry trying to gain momentum for sales. I do not recall a law in our constitution specifying the “right” to smoke cigs… that I believe is a luxury. Our right to protect ourselves and those around us if need be should never be questioned in terms of the nature at which a person chooses to protect his family as long as he is following the laws attached to said amendment.

        • Yes, it does, 0nly you’re not bright enough to understand why

          • f only I mix numbers with letters, I might as brightas you.. This page is a blog, and Colionposted the video to his personal youtube channel, what part requires disclosure of anything? O brightone..

          • Good cumback, Putsie. Thanks for proving my point. Please, feel free to use the gun on yourself. It’d be the best use of one this century

          • My adolescent nieces and nephews play the “if you don’t know, that’s your problem” game too… They don’t have any idea what they’re talking about either… but I love that your first comment resorted to insult, and then followed with name calling, rather than actual conversation/debate. Typical liberal windbag.

          • douche, you lost. Again, you should be used to it by now, now run along and blow yourself.

          • I want to stop commenting, but you’re so hilarious I just can’t help myself. Every time you comment, you look like more and more of a moron. Please continue. It’s great theater…

          • lol, Jerkoff, kill yourself, you serve not purpose

          • I try to take you seriously, but I just see that kid with his finger up his nose every time I read a comment from you…

          • lol, jerkoff, kill yourself. You serve no purpose in life

          • Just for you:

          • But, I suppose, in your fashion, I should comment on your use of SPACING. Right? seeing as that’s the way morons justify themselves, but commenting on typos. lol. What a jerkoff

      • Why. He is speaking as a private citizen, not an NRA employee. Do you really think they paid him for this? I don’t. What he said was spot on. I think the NFL is being totally hypocritical here. Lets ban some beer commercials, just to hear the uproar from the big brewing company’s.

      • Proverbs 26:4 “When arguing with fools, don’t answer their foolish arguments, or you will become as foolish as they are.” Sorry johnlal, can’t answer you.

      • I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with those who are unarmed,

      • Edward D Hutchinson

        johnlal, who are you to dictate what good form is and what is not? I think it’s good form to be able to state freely, without fear of repercussion or question, anything I want in the free society, protected by free speech country that I live in. I have the right to say that Martin Bashir is a ‘dunce’ and that ‘someone should crap in his mouth’ for what he said about Sarah Palin, without someone like you wanting to know if my affiliation is with Fox News or not. In plain terms. it’s not really any of your business. Secondly, if what you say about it being ‘the right thing to do’ then there needs to be a change made to the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights… which you of course you don’t have the ability to make. Lastly, no, I don’t think a paid spokesman should have to disclose anything. I’m not paid at my job to disclose whether I am straight or not in order to work around other men. When this country starts demanding that we share personal information with the public, without having committed a crime that forces you to do so, that’s when I’ll know that our free society is dead. And change WILL happen in America. I guarantee it .

      • He’s been doing these kinds of videos years before he was asked to be a spokesman. I would know, I’ve been subscribed to his Youtube Channel for some time.

        He’s not some black guy they asked to pretend to be pro-gun: this is genuine Colion Noir.

    • Spot on

    • I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with those who are unarmed.

      • An ignorant assumption coming from someone who can’t even post as himself, or herself. Well I would enjoy reading your “battle” response, because that’s obviously what I was looking for.

  5. NeedsACocktailASAP

    There is a difference between Miley twerking and the physical violence in football. Which, by the way, I don’t really care for either of those things either.

    In my opinion, this ad romanticizes gun violence. As this straight, white man comes home to his perfect family, he tells us it’s his right to defend his family how he sees fit. Which, I agree with to a point. But encouraging civilians (and by civilians, I mean non-law enforcement in this example) to arm themselves in the event of villains is something I can’t support.

    How many people have been shot dead by white men “protecting their homes”? Trayvon, Jordan Davis, Renisha McBride and Robert Franklin to name a few. (I’m not even going to talk about how all of these people are black) These people are dead over misunderstandings and underlying racism. It’s actually scary out there. So yeah, after all the shootings and violence we’ve had this year, I find this ad, not offensive, but misleading and uninformed.

  6. God damn I want to shake that man’s hand and buy him an IPA. In fact, I’d buy him a gun.

  7. Daniel Defense sells a perfectly legal product. If they came on and said, “Daniel Defense guns are good guns, you should buy them!” that would be cool. But this whole childish fantasy of vigilante crimefighting is not only pathetic, it’s dangerous as we learn from the body counts all too often. First, the message of the ad way beyond one gun company’s private interest, and second, it continues with this idiotic Batman-wanabe syndrome that makes us intelligent, responsible gun owners look bad.

    • Right, because the former Marine in the video was totally talking about how he carried his gun to enforce law in his neighborhood.

      Oh wait. He wasn’t.

  8. Most liberals dont know the NRA was started to teach blacks how to defend themselves. Or that the kkk was known as the terror wing of the left.

  9. Linda Hackett-Hutchinson

    Good for him he nailed it right on the head they hypocrisy is astounding

  10. Does it matter here that the NFL neither bans nor allows the ads to be played during any of their games (except for the ones played on NFL network of course). So, if any entity banned the ad, it would have been…. Fox. Yes, that Fox, the goofy brother of the fair and balanced Fox. I’d be willing to bet that the real issue is that Daniel Defense couldn’t afford to pay Fox the $8m to air that 1 minute of boredom live across the nation.

    If they were so determined they could still go to major markets and buy the local advertisement slots. (You know, the same way that the local car dealerships/attorneys get their ads in the super bowl). But they didn’t. They poked out their lips and threw a bitch fit like good conservative crybabies.

  11. So what if he is being paid by the NRA?, does that make his message wrong? What about all the anti-gun celebrities, think they aren’t getting paid, duh? Yah, right? Doubled standard, again!!!!!

  12. At first at first government disarms inhabitants and then enslaves them. At first government brain washed citizens and then manupulate them

  13. I want this young man as my next commander n chief! Well said sir, well said!

    • He’s strong on the 2nd amendment, how strong is he on the rest of the Constitution?

      • Knowledge and support of at least one ammendment to the Constitution would be an improvement over the current administration.

    • Haha I like him but I don’t know if I’d go that far. Have to see a resume first. There’s a lot more to running the country than the 2nd Amendment. Hopefully people have learned that lesson over the last 8 years. A few years in the Senate and some community organizing didn’t quite cut it.

  14. This guy just became one of my favorite people.

  15. Freedom of speech you Nazi-zombies…..period.

  16. Justice for Trolls

    NFL can ban what they want. If you dont like it, boycott the super bowl *shrugs*

    • So them letting “Lucky Charms” Bloomberg espouse the opposing view is ok though? What’s that smell? Oh ya it’s your hypocracy…

    • If they can ban it then I can let them know what I think of it.

      • Justice for Trolls

        Let them know by not patronizing them. That’s the language folks understand. Think they care about niche message boards? LOL

        • Think I didn’t already drop them an email directly? Think I don’t know in the end they don’t give a damn? Am I patronizing or are you?

          • Justice for Trolls

            All I’m saying, if it means that much to you. Don’t watch the NFL. Or you could start your own league. Then you can show whatever commercials you like. I’m pro2a…. but I’m not seeing anything worth fighting over here.

          • Justice for Trolls

            Start your own league, run the commercials you want…
            Watch the game and the league if you want…if not you are welcome to boycott it….. the super bowl and the league. But something tells me you wont… so what are you whining about..

            Its really a bunch of fluster about nothing….

          • ?!?! Nonsense, I don’t need to start my own league in order to voice my displeasure so cut the bull. And I still decide whether I get flustered or not over stuff. Civil rights may mean nothing to you but they do to me.

          • Justice for Trolls

            Well pardon me Mr. Medgar Evers…You are pro ALL civil rights or just ones in regards to gun commercials?

            If you are still watching the Super Bowl, and the NFL.. Your civil rights must not mean that much to you.

            You don’t even care that much about the commercial, you just want to be mad… which is cool… but don’t act like it’s some matter of real principle lol. Calm down..

            Unless you don’t realize it’s all a marketing ploy lol. Got all the media play they could want…for free. Just by saying they were banned by the NFL (which they new the deal ahead of time, all that space gets sold many moons in advance at top dollar). And everyone getting all foamy at the gums about it… I love my Pro2a bredren but, sometimes I wonder lol

            Well played on company’s part though.

          • I’m pro all civil rights, esp. the ones in regards to self determination. Trying to paint me into some weird corner because I’m firmly pro 2A won’t work. Not a football guy so no I actually don’t give a fuck about the super bowl, haven’t watched one in years. Don’t care much about the commercial, but I do care about the principle that protecting my family is somehow offensive while Bloomberg and his MAIG get another chance to spew their rhetoric on civilian disarmament. Also don’t care if it’s a marketing ploy, but I do care about double standards. People get “foamy at the gums” over all types of shit from same sex marriage to animal abuse, who are you to tell me I can’t be passionate about things that matter to me.

  17. Damn, did he ever get it right. And I was just wondering about all the comments about the NRA, and him being a shill for the NRA. Where did that come from? I didn’t hear one mention of the NRA in his little tirade, did I miss something.

  18. no one NEEDS an AR-15. it’s more firepower than anyone needs. if you can’t hit your intruder(s) with 9 rounds in a standard available semi-automatic handgun, you need to hit the firing range more often. HOWEVER, it is your right by the US constitution to bear arms, and the type undefined. therefore, I support your right to own an AR-15, M4A1, AK-47, or whatever other assault rifle YOU feel is NEEDED or is your RIGHT.

    • While I share the majority of your sentiment, I can’t get behind it all. For arguments sake I would venture to say the vast majority of competent firearms instructors would tell you that the best weapon for defense is the one you’re comfortable with. With the amount of time I’ve spent with AR platform rifles it would be hard to find enough hours to get to the range with my sidearm. That being said, though my safe includes more than one AR, it would not be the weapon I grab in a home invasion. That’s not because it’s more “firepower” than I need. It’s because I feel my HK USP or 18″ 870 serve that particular purpose better and though I’m more familiar with an AR than some of my own anatomy, I’m quite comfortable with both. If you want to get into a “firepower” discussion, there is nothing inherently powerful about the 5.56 cartridge and capacity is not exclusive to the AR platform. My hunting/bolt action precision rifles are substantially more powerful weapons and you can fit high capacity magazines to a .22. So what makes it more firepower than anyone needs? The fact that its shot up so many movie sets?

    • No one needs an AR-15? Then why do police carry them? And if police carry them for self defense why shouldn’t I? My wife would be able to handle an AR-15 much more so than a shotgun – despite Biden’s uninformed and deceitful babble.

  19. I really like this. I used to like the NFL.

  20. I’m sure this guy believes what he’s saying, and he makes good points. And responsible gun owners of course have the right to defend themselves.

    Here’s the issue.

    The NRA does not actually fight for gun owners. The NRA fights for gun manufacturers. You can see this in cases where they have actually fought against responsible gun owners who were injured or even killed by faulty guns and ammo. (source:

    So they pay people like this (again, I know this guy believes in what he’s saying) to make gun owners angry about “liberals” or some other group of people that supposedly don’t think people should be able to defend themselves.

    Guess what people? Very few people actually think you shouldn’t be able to defend yourself or own a gun. Everyone is afraid right now because while overall gun violence has gone down, mass shootings have gone up (source in the link at the end of this post), and everyone wants to stop that.

    But we can’t seem to get sensible legislation passed because the NRA very effectively makes it seem like we are enemies when we have a common goal. Just know, when the NRA says “Only a good guy with a gun, stops a bad one,” they are lying through their teeth. They represent big gun makers. Gun manufacturing corporations want to sell more guns. They do not care who they sell them to. That’s why they fight against even modest background checks under the guise that it’s a “slippery slope to tyranny.” They value their dollar over your life.

    Last thing: Here’s a link to the best article on guns in America (written by one gun owner, and one non-gun owner):

  21. Good Grief!

    If you guys actually did your research instead of listening to politicians within your country argue back in forth, you would see that GUNS DON’T EQUAL SAFETY.
    I challenge you to compare the USA to ANY OTHER developed country. See how your gun & violent crime & gun death compare… then look at the gun laws & licensing in each country. When you do, you will see that the USA has one of the highest violent/gun crimes & gun deaths in the world.. comparable only to third world countries with NO reasonable gov’t & law…
    I think before you start talking “fact” you should probably do some research that isn’t filled with political propaganda.

    Granted, I don’t have a problem with strict gun laws & licensing – hunting & (IF ABSOLUTELY necessary home protection) but the USA is so gun crazy & so unaccountable that it’s really no wonder there are so many guns on the streets..

  22. Michael J. Simmons

    He does make very good points in this and I do agree with him. I am not the most rabid of Gun Rights supporters, in fact I will go so far to say that some policies do have a point. However, banning an ad where not even one gun is shown anywhere in the whole ad! Is plan stupid and Yes, it is hypocritical of the NFL to just not show the ad at all.

  23. Smartest move the NFL has made in a decade. Nice NRA ad, though. LOVE how they use the image of the kid in the crib to fool the sheep. Too bad he’s more likely to accidentally shoot the kid than protect him, as many of his brethren already have.

    • Yea right… more likely to shoot the kid…. How many people died of Alcohol related diseases and accidents this year…. Typical anti gun village idiot spouting off not even listening to the parallels that were drawn.

  24. The Truth is what it is, despite the argument, We as men have the sovereign Right and Obligation to protect our families. Neither the Govt or Police (Citizens On Patrol) have that responsibility.

  25. Fundamentally, the NFL is a business and a true conservative would say they can pick and choose whatever commercials they like. Surely backlash is always possible (like the wardrobe malfunction and the subsequent watering down of the halftime show with bland entertainment by geriatrics until recent shows have become a bit more relevant) but fundamentally, it’s their show, they get to make their own decisions. Don’t like it, don’t watch it. I find general offense to most commercials as they appeal to only the basest of instincts in humans, so I ignore them during the game, so I wouldn’t care if this ‘banned’ commercial was included or not, it simply wouldn’t matter.

  26. So now the NFL is anti-American. the players need to boycott the super bowl… seriously. I am.

  27. This was a publicity stunt by the NRA and nothing more. Regardless of the purpose or message behind the Daniel Defense commercial, I am totally offended by how crappy it is, not its content. Let’s be blunt, it’s a poorly produced piece o’ crap ad not worthy of the highly sought and ultra primetime slot for which is was “supposedly” created. It has the production value of a late night TV spot for collectible gold coins…Especially the end where they splash the company name and logo. Really? TOTAL amateur hour! Which begs the question, why would any company hire an agency and pay to produce a mediocre commercial knowing full well it was going to be rejected based on its category? Answer: To be able to SAY it was rejected, hit the pro-gun hornets nest and create viral buzz. So, either all of the upper management at Daniel Defense and researchers at the ad agency are COMPLETELY inept and need to be fired for failing to spend five frickin’ minutes researching whether or not such an ad would be permissible during the Super Bowl before flushing its share holders money down the toilet OR it was all a publicity stunt. The fact that it was Guns and Ammo that “broke” the story and the NRA who funded Mr. Noir’s rebuttal video, pretty much ties it all up with a neat little bow!

  28. This guy is awesome and so is this response. Well done sire. Well done.

  29. Your chain’s being yanked, fellas.

    Daniel Defense had no intent to ever see this ad hit
    SuperBowl airtime. Run the numbers. Their total yearly revenues were 28
    million, but they made a ONE MINUTE long ad and they’re going to buy
    airtime that costs 3.5 million per 30 SECONDS? As if they’re going to
    spend one-fourth of their total revenues (not profit, mind you –
    revenues!) on this ad. Not a chance.

    These guys just know how to sucker a gullible audience into running a
    viral video campaign for them. Works every time with this gang.

  30. The original controversy’s a scam, fellas..

    Daniel Defense had no intent to ever see this ad hit
    SuperBowl airtime. Run the numbers. Their total yearly revenues were 28
    million, but they made a ONE MINUTE long ad and they’re going to buy
    airtime that costs 3.5 million per 30 SECONDS? As if they’re going to
    spend one-fourth of their total revenues (not profit, mind you –
    revenues!) on this ad. Not a chance.

    These guys just know how to sucker a gullible audience into running a
    viral video campaign for them. Works every time with this gang.

  31. America doesn’t own the NFL. It’s their business, their brand, their ad inventory. This ain’t a liberty argument. Don’t like it? run your shit on different inventory.

  32. It must really suck to be a conservative these days, pretty much being wrong all the time…I think yet again the truth and facts have completely disarmed your ire over this supposed slight against the second amendment…you all should go back to prayer in schools, railing against gay marriage and how trickle down/supply side economics are so great…wait, even the Pope is not on your side on those….well, I’m sure you MUST have some good ideas of how to make America better, I mean you’ve had nearly 8 years to think about it…

  33. “Call Danny Defense within the next 5 minutes and we’ll even throw in a rocket launcher – FOR FREE!”

  34. All good. All correct. Stay vigilant folks. The left are non-stop liberty nibblers. That’s how they’ve done it. And they never give up. They need to be set back in a major way. Get your brains in gear.

  35. great put up, very informative. I wonder why the opposite experts of this sector don’t understand this. You must continue your writing. I am confident, you have a huge readers’ base already!

  36. It’s in point of fact a great and useful piece of information. I’m glad that you shared this useful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>