They just don't seem to get it. Bad guys will always have guns regardless of the laws against them, Bad guys will always victimize others for what ever reason. Sometimes those who are paid to protect us are Bad Guys . Bad guys want us to be unarmed and powerless, making it quick and easy to prey upon us at will. Bad guys don't like the idea of entering a house that may have a gun owner who may fight back. Bad guys don't like thinking about raping a woman who may pull a gun and shoot them. Bad guys don't like facing anyone prepared to fight back. No they have to slow down and check out their prey alittle more cautiously before acting. Does that sweet old grandma pack a 44 magnum, she looks confident in her walk and demeanor. Hmmm, I better go look for someone else easier to mug.
As for self protection, this is their view!: If someone else does not get there in time to save you or you can't talk your way out of it or you can't run or run fast enough, then you deserve to be a victim... YOU SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHT TO STOP THE ATTACK USING A GUN.
Yet, when the L A riots took place, they found that Police protection failed and they and their businesses were being threatened. And the Police were not saving them. They ran to buy guns to protect themselves and their property only to find a waiting period to purchase the needed weapon. They howled like banshees at such a stupid law. I guess forgetting, they passed the stupid law! What? Was it that everyone else has to submit to this law, but not them? Luckily, Civilians who had Guns did play a HUGE role in STOPPING the carnage of that riot!
So are they really trying to protect anyone or are they just wanting to control others even if their views are a minority? It's really all about controlling others...... And controllers are Dangerous People because their goal is to remove control from others, to strip them down, make them submissive and dependent, wait one second here, isn't that the same thing the criminal does?
And the scary thing is:
These are the same people who are tying the hands of Judges in dealing with misbehaving adults ......
They are the same people who are tying the hands of Parents in dealing with misbehaving children.
They are the ones that worry more about the criminals rights than the victims rights.
They are the same minority that want to dictate to the majority through litigation when they loose in a vote.
I see anti-gun advocates as criminals, attempting to steal from us the means to defend ones self from other criminals. Anti-gun advocates like all criminals lie and use deceptive means to get what they want, and right now that is the repeal of the 2nd amendment and finding that difficult, have resorted to pushing for unnecessary laws and red tape in all aspects of gun manufacture, distribution, sales, ownership and use. Hopefully to make gun ownership so regulated that they can still control others through litigation. Think about it, the "Mandatory Trigger Lock" laws now in force in many areas have effectively stopped a gun from being used in a self defense situation. The lie used to push this through is, "Children dying at alarming rate from playing with guns in the home".. Yes children have died because of playing with a gun, and that's tragic! It HAS NOT been happening at an alarming rate as they profess. Actually it is one of the least causes of child deaths. They don't tell you, far, far more children died playing football at school or choking on food. Is there a move to abolish football or puree all food given to children? They don't tell you the projected amount of adults and kids that will die because a gun could not be used to protect a family because of a trigger lock .. They don't want you to know how many times adults and children have survived attacks because a gun was used to stop an attack in the home.. The liberal media refuses to report the (MANY THOUSANDS) of times a civilian used a gun legally to stop attacks each year. Liberal media does not honor anyone in using a gun to save themselves or someone else by televising their brave effort. Liberal media does not want the public to know that civilians with guns have stopped far more crimes from being carried out than criminals have used guns in the commission of a crime.. In short guns are used more to stop crime than used to commit crime. Don't believe that? Well get off your duff and check it out for yourself, don't be lazy get educated. You will not find the facts on the liberal media! So much for fair and balanced reporting....
FACTS TO PONDER
The award-winning criminologist Prof. Gary Kleck states that firearms are used defensively 2.5 million times a year. 48 percent of those incidents involve women defending themselves; most of the time a shot is not fired. The conclusion: women benefit from gun ownership.
The number of physicians
in the U.S. 700,000
Accidental deaths
caused by physicians per year. 120,000
Accidental
deaths per physician is. 0.171
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Department of Health Human
Services
Now think about this:
GUNS:
The number of gun owners in the U.S. is. 80,000,000
The number of accidental gun
deaths per year,
all age groups
is. 1,500
The number of accidental deaths
per gun owner is. .000188
Statistics courtesy of FBI
Note: The FBI does not count minors killed in drug related crimes and gang wars as accidental deaths from what I can tell... The deaths counted are totally Accidental...
Observation:
So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Here is another thought, as a Policeman responds to a gun related call, he rolls into the scene not knowing who is victim and who is the perpetrator. So he has to, for his own protection, treat all involved the same. Is it possible in this situation to mistakenly shoot the wrong person who moved in what could be a threatening way?
Now let us look at a victim who is armed and absolutely knows who is presenting the threat to them, how likely is it that this victim if forced to shoot will shoot at the wrong person...
Is it possible that Police are more likely to shoot the wrong person than an Armed Victim who knows their attacker?
Check it out, it may surprise you...
When the topic of Citizen retaining guns for the preservation of Freedom from a repressive Government:
Anti Gun Advocates finally ask their
BIG ONE, Gleefully, "What can civilians do with pistols and hunting
rifles against a repressive well armed government ?"
Good
point, sense liberals have been the leaders in disarming citizens starting
in the 1920s and 30s and have been stripping civilians of their gun
ownership rights ever sense.. But the good news is not all the Generals
and service people will align with a repressive government, they will join
any just uprising against a repressive government that has stepped out side
its authority in the Constitution and Bill of Rights... And they will
bring their equipment with them. A repressive governments first job
will be to totally disarm the population. Not many soldiers will want to
kill their own families in supporting the disarming. And I believe
the real fight for freedom will start when a move is made to totally disarm the
population. See, the 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting and
skeet shooting, it is about keeping the Power in the hands of the People who
grant permission for a Government to govern them. It is the ultimate
balance of power that our forefathers built into our government. An Armed
repressed citizenry has a chance to restore a representative
Government.
"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."
The interpretations of the 2nd amendment is argued. To me it says:
( A Governments [states] need to have an Army to protect its people does not take away the right of the people themselves to be armed.)
My true feeling is that this is what the forefathers were saying. I can not see our forefathers NOT wanting to establish the right of gun ownership for self protection and for the ability of the population to restore a representative government if need be.
Some more FACTS to ponder...
In 1929, the
Soviet
Union established gun control.
From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves,
were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
In 1911,
Turkey established
gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Germany established
gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others
who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up
and
exterminated
------------------------------
China established gun
control in 1935. >From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable
to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Guatemala established
gun control in 1964. >From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to
defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Uganda established
gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend
themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------
Cambodia established
gun control in 1956. >From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people,
unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------
Defenseless people rounded
up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56
million.
------------------------------
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in
Australia were forced
by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own
government, a program costing Australia taxpayers
more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now
in:
Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent
Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not, and criminals still possess their guns!
While figures over the previous 25 years showed a
steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically
upward in the past 12 months, since criminals now are guaranteed that their prey
is unarmed.
There has also been a dramatic
increase in break-ins and assaults of the ELDERLY. Australian politicians are at
a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in
successfully ridding Australian society of guns. The Australian experience and
the other historical facts above prove it. Honest Citizens are the
ONLY ones hurt by gun
control......
You won't
see this data on the US evening news,
or hear politicians disseminating this information.
Guns in the
hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws
adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.
Take note my fellow Americans,
before it's too late!
The
next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this
history lesson.
With guns, we are
'citizens'. Without them, we are
'subjects'.
When will we learn that outlawing things does not prevent there use for illegal purposes, Only the law abiding citizens will follow such laws and ends up getting hurt by having rights restricted by such laws. The only sane laws should be increased consequences for those who use a "Thing", barstool, bat, hammer, club, toilet plunger, knife or gun as a weapon in the commission of a crime.. Period....
( A rich history of court
decisions that found the police to have no constitutional obligation to protect
individuals from private individuals.
In 1856, the U.S. Supreme Court found
that officers had no affirmative duty
to provide such protection.
In 1982 (Bowers v. DeVito),
the Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit held, "...there is no Constitutional right
to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen."
)
Anyway, I for one will protect myself, family, property and country by being ARMED, I refuse to put the responsibility for my safety on the Police alone. I know that they cannot be at my side to protect me, my family or my property and knowing by multiple court decisions, they have no mandate or responsibility to do so. I accept the responsibility of self protection and therefor retain my 2nd amendment rights to do so...
It is apparent that the more a population is disarmed and regulated, the more deaf and aloof the government becomes to the governed....
God Bless the USA and its forefathers who had the wisdom to set up a Government that is threatened enough by its Armed Population that it stays honest to the dictates of the governed. Knowing full well that a Government not threatened by its population WILL soon become Tyrannical and Suppressive!