President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have been advocating for much stricter gun control. If they had their way, no American citizen, except law enforcement and military, would be allowed to own a firearm of any kind.
Hillary Clinton has already signed two United Nations treaties that would restrict the sale of weapons and the ownership of any firearm – handgun, rifle and shotgun. Fortunately, these treaties need a two-thirds Senate vote to ratify them and that has not yet happened.
Then you also have people like New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg who is so anti-gun that it’s a wonder he even allows the New York police to carry guns. A number of other mayors share the same anti-gun feelings.
So I wonder what they would say if confronted by people who have successfully defended themselves in their own homes by using a firearm?
Last Christmas, 18 year old Sarah McKinley of Oklahoma City used a shotgun to defend herself and her baby from two knife wielding intruders. One of the intruders knew that Sarah had recently buried her husband and that she was home alone with her three month old son. There is no telling what would have happened to her and her baby if she did not have the shotgun which she used to shot one of the intruders who kicked in her door.
Now we have the case of 12 year old Kendra St. Clair, also from Oklahoma. She was home alone when someone broke into her house. Frightened, she called her mom who told her to grab mom’s handgun, a .40 caliber Glock, hide in mom’s closet and call 911. The intruder made his way to mom’s bedroom and was trying to open the closet when Kendra fired one shot through the closet door. She hit the intruder in the shoulder causing him to flee the house. A short time later, police apprehended him and he is facing charges.
Again, we don’t know what would have happened to Kendra if there was no gun in the house. She quite possibly could have been raped and or murdered. Instead, she had a weapon with which she was able to defend herself from the intruder and escape any harm.
Mr. President, Secretary of State Clinton, Mayor Bloomberg and all of you other anti-gun liberals, what do you say to Kendra St. Clair or Sarah McKinley?
Do you tell them that you would rather there was no gun in the house and that they just had to take their chances with the intruders?
Do you realize that your anti-Second Amendment policies would have made a victim of this 12 year old girl instead of making her a hero?
How many other victims do you want on your hands and consciences?
Ask yourself what you would do if someone broke into your house and threatened your children?
Would you rather stand by and watch what might happen or have a gun to prevent it from happening?
Mr. President, could you honestly look one of your daughters in the eye and tell her that she was raped because you don’t believe in owning a gun for protection?
I wish all of the bleeding heart liberals could put themselves in Sarah’s or Kendra’s position and feel what it would be like without having a gun to protect themselves. Or better yet, I wish they could look into the face of a 12 year old girl who had just been raped and/or beaten and explain to her that she is better off being a victim instead of being armed and preventing it from happening to her. Maybe then, they will have a change of heart.
In the meantime, all of us who value our families and want to do whatever we can to protect them from harm, need to make a concerted effort to vote out every anti-gun politician there is and make sure we only vote for those that will uphold our Second Amendment right to bear arms and protect ourselves.
Posts
9 comments:
If they had their way, no American citizen, except law enforcement and military, would be allowed to own a firearm of any kind.
Wrong. Fail. Next!
Had there been gun control, Kendra still would have had access to a gun and still would have shot the intruder.
What don't you understand about gun control? Soon Kendra will receive training and licensing to drive a car, which must be registered.
By gun-nut logic, you should be screeching about the tyranny of it all.
I think I'll watch 'Idiocracy' again.
One day I was home alone and two robbers kicked the door down. I scared them off. They broke down the door, saw me standing there holding something, and ran away in fear, never to be seen again.
Guess what I was holding. A telephone. Yes, I was calling 911.
So I thwarted a crime and didn't have to kill a human being to do it.
"They're coming to take out gurns!!!" I'm a gun owner and this is total bullshit...not that there was ever any doubt. These stupid fucks believe whatever Fox and Rush tell them with no regard for actually reading and comprehending what the treaty actually says, whether you agree with it or not. It only has to do with exports not trade within each sovereign nation.
I personally have no problem with legal ownership of guns, however there's always a chance it will end up in the wrong hands but those risks can be mitigated by the owner if they so choose. It's the stupid owners who are the problem. I also respect the views of those who choose not to own guns and that's their right just as it's my right to own them if I so choose. I or any other owner however should be held accountable for any actions of my own or by those who I allow willingly or unwillingly to access to my weapons. By that I mean if I am lacking in the security of my guns and a child ends up with them and kills/injures themselves or others then I should be accountable. I don't have small children anymore so my risk is mitigated already. I don't have those risks so therefore I'm not concerned about it. My weapons are not left loaded, are not easily accessible and the ammo is not kept within proximity of the weapon itself save for my semi-auto pistol. However only I and my wife know where the weapon and full mag is for it and if necessary we have developed a proficiency with locating and loading it in less than 10 seconds in the dark and I have done so on one occasion (nothing like clearing your house at 4am in your underwear). It turned out to be a false alarm luckily. That underwear bit was wayyyyy TMI I'm sure.
One wonders, did your underwear already have skid marks on them or only after that big "scare"? ;-)
Boxers or briefs, my man? Inquiring minds want to know. Yee-haw!!!
Boxers, no skid marks, was the first day so I hadn't turned them inside out yet.
Cheers,
It's interesting that I've lived in a lot of places, both within the USA and overseas, have traveled extensively on my own (sometimes in some places that were dubious), and I'm no spring chicken.
Yet I've NEVER been in a position where I ever felt like I needed a weapon to defend myself. I do know people who have been mugged or robbed, but they never felt a weapon would have made a difference in their particular situations.
So this endless hype about needing guns is bogus, imo. All I've witnessed is this incredible increase in gun violence over the course of my lifetime, which never existed for the first several decades of my life. All I see is the NRA and similar doing their damndest to ensure that my life is now endangered by their money-grubbing tactics of scaring witless rubes into believing that gun ownership is "necessary." It's not.
Quite often, I also read news stories about how owning guns really doesn't make someone safer in the case of home invasions and the like. Some citizens may truly be prepared to be able to protect themselves with a gun, but more often than not, the gun is used against them.
For the past decade or more, actual crimes - violent or otherwise - have greatly diminished in the USA. At the same time, gun violence has increased.
So sick of the propaganda and lies resulting in artificially creating the situation where our lives end up being LESS safe due to craven greedy gun and ammo industry owners.
Wake up sheeples.
This "gun in the home" toon came across my mind...
http://s2.hubimg.com/u/7476935_f520.jpg
It's my understanding that most gun control supporters and legislation seek to limit access to things like assault weapons, NOT rifles and pistols which are the guns that the two girls defended themselves with. So even if this emailed tirade, the usual straw man of "gun control = no gunz" is still just that: a straw man.
Post a Comment