Tag Archives: Armed Citizen

Advice for someone involved in a defensive shooting…

Posted on by
1

Emily Yoffe, aka Dear Prudence, offers up advice to a reader who had an in-law dig up old bones and has turned it into a bit of a family joke.  Unfortunately, the sharing of this information has lead to other issues with his family.

Dear Prudence: I killed an armed intruder in self-defense. Is it OK if I don’t want to talk about it? – Slate Magazine.

“Q. A History of Violence:” Some three decades ago, I killed a man. He had broken into my home, armed; we struggled, he died. It was clearly self-defense and, frankly, I have no regrets or remorse…

“A. Apparently these friends and family would prefer that you had been killed by the intruder, so they could then honor your memory as a tragic victim…

Personally, I think she knocked it out of the park.  Your thoughts?

-Gary

Kelly Dwyer’s liberal bias shines through in what should be a simple report of a crime

Posted on by
2

A shooter kills a would-be robber in self-defense while waiting in line to buy LeBron James’ signature shoes…

The headline almost says it all.  Unfortunately; the author, Kelly Dwyer, couldn’t leave it at that and exemplifies everything that is wrong with the mainstream media and a clear push to drive an agenda other than simply relaying the facts.  Dwyer opens his article with the following statement, “Greedy shoe companies making select sneakers needlessly exclusive paired together with consumer exuberance, desperation, and American gun culture on Saturday long enough to cost one would-be alleged robber his life.”

According to witnesses, the decedent was more than just a pick-pocket.  He was actually trying to rob several store patrons as they waited in line.  It is not mentioned in any of the articles I’ve found relating to this story but, it appears the shooter in this case was among those the decedent tried to rob. The shooter in turn, shot the decedent.  How that turns into an indictment of guns and corporate greed as the primary factors leading to the decedent being shot is beyond me and should be beyond the realm of logic of any reasonable person…Unless you’re Kelly Dwyer or some other “journalist” with a bone to pick against any company earning an honest profit on the goods they sell or of course, the current great evil of the world, guns.

-Gary

Britain wants its guns back!

Posted on by
2

Britain wants its guns back – The Commentator.

How interesting. With over 11,000 respondents to a poll on the The Telegraph’s website, over 80% have said they want to REPEAL the ban on handguns enacted after the Dunblane Massacre of 1996. I don’t suppose that should be much of a shock.  With people being hacked to death in the street with meat cleavers, I’d want a gun too. Glad I already live in a country that still recognizes my right to go armed in spite of the current administration’s proclivity to deny that right to anyone other than it’s own political allies.

– Gary

Videos like this are just the latest illustration of bias and lies in the media

Posted on by
1

I just watch the following piece from KTRK’s Ted Oberg and I honestly want to vomit. I have to give Governor Perry credit for taking the interview and handling it like a champ.  That said, struggled to hold my tongue as I listened to Oberg spew lie, after lie, after lie.

Oberg claimes a “majority” of American want to ban modern rifles.  But, it is been repeatedly demonstrated that this is not true and is based on flawed studies in which participants think they are being asked about fully-automatic firearms. And even then, few of those people realize that legal access to and ownership of those items has been tightly controlled since the National Firearms Act of 1934. Even fewer know that after McClure-Volkmer (1986), the supply of fully-automatic firearms available to civilians has been largely fixed and that fewer than a dozen NFA registered firearms have EVER been used in a crime.

Oberg goes on to claim that there are 30,000 annual “gun deaths.” We kill more people in automotive accidents, criminal recklessness, and drunk-driving annually yet, no one is talking about banning cars.  But something I find more bothersome about this number people like Oberg like to throw around is the fact that in any given year, according to both the CDC and the FBI, more than half of all deaths attributed to firearms are suicides.  There is no scientific evidence to prove that banning guns will prevent suicide.  In fact, the idea of banning guns to prevent suicide fails miserably if yo look at a country such as Japan where there is virtually no access to firearms and yet, the country has had a suicide rate that had been  almost double that of the US since the at least the 1960s. To be fair, that still means we have a little less than 15,000 deaths annually that are attributable to violent criminal acts.

When it comes to violent criminal action in this country, there is no bigger motivator than conflict over the illicit drug trade.  The biggest gangs in this country are organized for the purpose of, and funded by, the manufacture, distribution, and sale of illicit drugs.  While hundreds of millions of dollars are spent enforcing laws and incarcerating people who use, distribute, or sell drugs, almost no money is collected through taxation of the people who benefit from it. How it is that we have not applied the lessons of Prohibition to things like marijuana is beyond me but, I for one, am tired of the resulting gang wars being used, in part, as justification for limiting the rights of law abiding people.

-Gary

Commentary on registration and confiscation by John Farnam

Posted on by
2

Defacto results:

In NY yesterday the NYSP seized privately-owned guns and the state pistol
permit, all legally owned, of a law-abiding state resident. He was not
charged with anything.

The NYSP, shortly afterward, sheepishly admitted it was all a “mistake!”
They had foolishly acted on little more that an unsubstantiated rumor.

Now, at great personal expense, the owner is trying to get his property and
rights reinstated.

The poorly-written state law (“SAFE Act,” hurriedly passed in the middle
of the night) states that anyone “… likely to engage in conduct that would
result in serious harm to self or others” loses his rights. “Likely,”
according to whom? What does that mean? Of course, no one read any of it
before they voted!

In our Country, “due diligence” is supposed to be applied before one loses
his rights, liberty, or property to the state. Some are apparently
interpreting this new law to mean that no species of due diligence need be
applied at all!

Lessons:

1) Registration of privately-owned guns, always touted as “harmless,”
never helps the law-abiding citizen, in any way.

2) Once your legally-owned guns are unlawfully impounded, they will never
be voluntarily returned to you, even when it is pointed out that the “mistake
” was entirely the state’s. No bureaucrat will ever be charged, nor even
disciplined, for the error. You’ll have to get a court order, at your
expense. Even then, the process may take months, even years, and you’ll be
defenseless in the interim.

3) Leftist/liberal politicians are looking for any excuse to forcibly
confiscate privately-owned guns, while simultaneously making the process of
legally obtaining guns so onerous that most will be discouraged from even
trying. Their goal is to make gun-owners such a minuscule minority, that the
rest of our rights can then be trampled with scant political risk.

4) The goal of leftists is universal confiscation of privately-owned guns.
It always has been! “Registration” is just a necessary intermediate
step. “Enforced-helplessness” is difficult to impose on armed citizens!

“When you disarm the people, you commence to offend them and show that you
distrust them, either through cowardice or lack of confidence, and both of
these opinions generate hatred.”

Niccolo Machiavelli, From “The Art of War,” 1520