On Sunday's CBS Evening News, without providing a pro-gun rights view for balance, correspondent Randall Pinkston filed a report which featured the views of two public figures who support an assault weapons ban, including a clip of Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, a New York Democrat and leading supporter of gun control in Congress, as she complained about her efforts being thwarted by the NRA.
RANDALL PINKSTON: She ran for Congress, intent on curbing access to guns, but hasn't had much success.
REP. CAROLYN MCCARTHY (D-NY) CLIP #1: People say, "Yes, we should have better laws. Yes, we shouldn't have assault weapons." But then it goes away.
MCCARTHY CLIP #2: All they hear from is the NRA.
Pinkston then filled in viewers on last year's Supreme Court ruling striking down Washington, D.C.'s ban on handguns. Pinkston: "And the National Rifle Association's support of the Second Amendment right to bear arms received a major boost last June when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a District of Columbia law which limited access to handguns."
After a soundbite of NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly complaining that there is little more that law enforcement can do to prevent mass killings, Pinkston passed on Kelly's support for a new assault weapon ban, but also undermined expectations of its effectiveness by adding that "it's not a magic bullet." Pinkston: "Raymond Kelly, who heads the nation's largest police force, thinks a new ban on assault weapons would help, but warns it's not a magic bullet." Kelly: "You can get a rifle that doesn't have all the elements of assault weapons and cause an awful lot of havoc."
Below is a complete transcript of the story from the Sunday, April 5, CBS Evening News:
RUSS MITCHELL: The Binghamton shootings are unfortunately just the latest in a string of tragic killings in the last 30 days. Randall Pinkston has more on what has happened and tells us why even veteran law enforcement are feeling powerless.
RANDALL PINKSTON: The past month may go down as America's deadliest in gun violence in recent history – seven men, seven shootings, 48 victims, 53 deaths, including five of the gunmen. March 10, Samson, Alabama: Police say Michael McClendon, reportedly angry at co-workers, killed 10 people, then himself. Twelve days later, in Oakland, California, job stress reportedly caused 26-year-old Lovelle Mixon to kill four police officers before he was gunned down. The following week, bicoastal violence. Devan Colifat shot his two children and three other people in Santa Clara, California. The same day, in Carthage, North Carolina, Robert Stewart, reportedly angry at his estranged wife, gunned down eight in a nursing home. Most recently, in just two days, three gunmen killed 21 in New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington state, where police say James Harrison, angry that his wife left him, killed their five children, then himself. Watching the national cascade of violence, New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy had a sense of deja vous
REP. CAROLYN MCCARTHY (D-NY): It brings you back to the place where my son and my husband and the other victims were actually on that train.
PINKSTON: Fifteen years ago, McCarthy's husband was killed, her son paralyzed, by a crazed gunman on a Long Island railroad. She ran for Congress, intent on curbing access to guns, but hasn't had much success.
MCCARTHY CLIP #2: All they hear from is the NRA.
PINKSTON: And the National Rifle Association's support of the Second Amendment right to bear arms received a major boost last June when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a District of Columbia law which limited access to handguns. What can law enforcement do to prevent a mass killing?
RAY KELLY, NYPD COMMISSIONER: Very little. I think it underscores the unpredictability and the inherent danger of police work.
PINKSTON: Raymond Kelly, who heads the nation's largest police force, thinks a new ban on assault weapons would help, but warns it's not a magic bullet.
KELLY: You can get a rifle that doesn't have all the elements of assault weapons and cause an awful lot of havoc.
PINKSTON: While America absorbs the latest shootings, across the country, another trend: Law enforcement agencies report a significant increase in applications for gun permits. Randall Pinkston, CBS News, New York.
—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
RANDALL PINKSTON: She ran
April 5, 2009 - 21:59 ET by MidAmericaRANDALL PINKSTON: She ran for Congress, intent on curbing access to guns, but hasn't had much success.
They've passed laws banning access to certain drugs. I wonder how that's working out.
gun control
April 7, 2009 - 10:24 ET by grumpyoldbThe 2nd amendment says:
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.
explain to me where in this it says, "Unless", or "Except for", or "if congress doesn't want to" or anything along those lines.
Every gun control act since NFA '34 is unconstitutional.
Enforce laws against criminal behavior, not against inanimate objects and the law abiding citizens that own them.
why not ban street gangs?
April 7, 2009 - 17:46 ET by UndercoverConservativestreet gangs using "assault' waepons, "normal" guns, knives and blunt objects kill thousands each year. Why doesn't McCarthy demand a crackdown on gangsta's, bragging, "representing", advertising their 'affiliations" and creating environments of oppression, crime, rape, and just about every other evil condition known to mankind?
Because that's her "people", yo! Gotta let uniformed admitted members of dangerous criminal racist organizations, whose only charter is evil and criminal , go about their business while doing everything in her damned power to only hurt the law abiding.
WTF?!
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is like calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".
"You spend your money anyway you want and respect other's rights to do the same&quo
The gun-grabbing totalitarian Carolyn McCarthy is an idiot
April 5, 2009 - 22:04 ET by R D HelmLast time I checked, the NRA only represented about 3 to 4% of the gun owners in this country.
I left that useless organization back when they caved in to the dems on so-called "assault weapons" and haven't looked back since.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
The Gun Control Mistake
April 6, 2009 - 08:30 ET by allanfGun Control advocates believe that firearms regulation will lower crime and deter spree killers. I don't agree. Criminals will think of other ways to perpetrate their heinous acts if guns are not available.
Criminals will always find
April 6, 2009 - 08:34 ET by motherbeltCriminals will always find a way to get guns.
Drugs are illegal. Look how well that's working.
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
If there is still gun
April 6, 2009 - 09:15 ET by SRPwrdIf there is still gun violence in England(there is) and it has risen since gun control was implemented(it has), then gun control does not work.
"I believe in American Exceptionalism, just like Brits believe in British Exceptionalism and Greeks believe in Greek Exceptionalism." - PreBO, 4/4/09
If there is still gun
April 6, 2009 - 09:23 ET by motherbeltIf there is still gun violence in England(there is) and it has risen
since gun control was implemented(it has), then gun control does not
work.
SSHHHH!! You're not supposed to say that!!
We can make it work here...because the "right" people will be doing it!!
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
allannf
April 6, 2009 - 10:39 ET by larry on LIthe perfect example: England , the weapon of choice is knifes.
NYC Mass Murder: The Weapon, Gasoline
April 6, 2009 - 15:11 ET by allanfOne of the biggest mass murders in New York City history was the Happy Land murders. The killer did not use a gun. He started a fire at the only exit of a disco resulting in the loss of 87 lives.
Deja Vous
April 5, 2009 - 22:13 ET by slickwillie2001I don't recall so-called 'assault weapons' being involved in any of these recent events. And saying "twelve days later, in Oakland, California, job stress reportedly caused
26-year-old LaVelle Mixon to kill four police officers before he was
gunned down", is outrageous garbage.
Just like Rahm Emanuel and Obammy's crisis, this string of shootings by common dirtbag criminals is going to be used to push more liberal programs on us.
Shhhhh, don't tell the
April 5, 2009 - 22:47 ET by kgShhhhh, don't tell the left. They are convinced that people don't kill people, assault weapons and SUV's do. Especially those scary "assault" weapons which are nothing more than a different exterior. Image is everything. It is amazing that stabbings and dismemberments never get publicity like that case in Tenn a few years ago.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
Badowski killings
April 6, 2009 - 07:40 ET by XJ.JonI went to high school with that guy.
Taxed Enough Already
Guns don't kill people
April 6, 2009 - 08:54 ET by ahusserParole boards do. Several points here. The left wishes to ban inanimate objects but don't want to put people behind bars or have them executed for their horrific crimes. Constantly releasing these s-birds into society because, I guess, there is not enough TV's for all the inmates or some other "overcrowding" garbage and even making heroes out of some of them (many cop-killers come to mind).
The 2nd amendment recently re-affirmed by the SC that individuals have the right to bear arms. Just like all those other rights in the first 10 amendments are individual rights. The always hysterical aftermath of these sensational senseless acts of violence is the cry to ban firearms. I submit many of our rights, which (supposedly) sets us free from unreasonable and tyrannical government control, causes the deaths of others but in a less obvious ways as a sensational shooting spree such as proving one committed a crime has to be beyond a reasonable doubt, right to counsel, right not to incriminate oneself, writ of habeus corpus, right not to be tortured or coerced into confessions, right to confront witnesses, right to counsel etc. etc. etc. all allow and make it difficult to apprehend, try and convict criminals many literally get away with murder because of our rights but who would giver their rights away for more security. So in the end our freedoms are not free but paid for in blood everyday and I don't think I would have it any other way. To have total security is to risk total oppression.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
Well...
April 6, 2009 - 10:29 ET by CaligulaIt is either gonna be an "assault weapon", or the new one that they have been using for the past week, the really scary "high-powered rifle". I have never personally seen or had the opportunity to use a "low-powered rifle", although I must assume that they exist as a contrast to the "high-powered" ones.... these people in the MSM are dumber than a box of hair.
I think "high-powered" is a
April 6, 2009 - 11:49 ET by lotrI think "high-powered" is a reasonable qualifier to distinguish something like an M16 from a .22, or even a Daisy air rifle.
However....
I know this has probably already been asked in the past, but, what, technically speaking, is an "assault weapon"? Do they mean "automatic weapon"? Somebody help me here -- right now I scoff whenever I hear the phrase "assualt weapon."
Assault Rifle: noun
April 6, 2009 - 12:06 ET by NL207Assault Rifle:
noun Date: 1972
: any of various automatic or semiautomatic rifles with large capacity magazines designed for military use
Not very specific since it includes both automatics and semi-automatics. I think this is likely a product of the indistinct usage common amongst those who seek to muddy the water and blur the distinctions to further their own agenda.
thanks for def
April 6, 2009 - 12:38 ET by lotrOK, so I see the real qualifiers here are "high capacity magazines" (I thought clip capacity depended on the clip, not the weapon) and "military use." Now I have another question: Does the military, say the Army, use this terminology? Just wondering.
Can't tell you what the
April 6, 2009 - 14:48 ET by NL207Can't tell you what the Army calls this weapon other than M-16.
The Navy/Marine Corps refer to any rifle issued to an individual soldier or sailor as an 'Infantry Rifle', in the case of the M-16, Infantry Automatic Rifle, because these weapons were not automatic in earlier years.
almost..
April 6, 2009 - 13:49 ET by pagg30The definition makes no mention of military use.
Full auto was always illegal for civilian use, It's any semi auto that can be fired more than 10 times without manual reloading. That's where they 'redefined' assault weapons.
This is their in, next it will be 5 rounds, then 3, then 1.
Like you would be any less dead if shot with a black powder revolver.
Attacking and blaming the gun is refusing to address the real problem. Choice. You can choose to be an honest upstanding citizen or you can choose to be a murderous piece of $hit.
"Full auto was always
April 6, 2009 - 14:08 ET by NL207"Full auto was always illegal for civilian use"
Not so until 1934 NFA, since which civilians may still own full auto with a class III federal permit provided their state or local government does not also prohibit it.
Assault Rifle
April 6, 2009 - 13:46 ET by JustAlThe term was coined by Adolf Hitler when he was first shown the MP (for machine pistole) 44, which he described as a "sturmgewehr". Ever since it has been generally agreed that to be an "assault rifle" a weapon must have all of the following characteristics:
1. Be capable of both semi and fully automatic fire.
2. Fire a shouldered cartridge which is intermidiate between that of a pistol and that of a battle rifle.
3. Have a high capacity, detachable magazine.
The left just makes it up as they go along. Like talking about "how powerful" the AK 47 is, when in fact, the 7.62 x 39 round is pretty much tied with the 30/30 as the most anemic center fire rifle cartridge in the world IMHO. It should be noted that it has NEVER been legal for the average American to buy or own an assault rifle, only those with a special federal license who pay a high per weapon tax can own these. It should also be noted that never once, has a legally owned assault rifle been used to commit a crime in the US, not once.
in CA there's a different term
April 7, 2009 - 18:03 ET by UndercoverConservativein CA it's called an "intermediate sniper weapon" if it's optimized for accuracy and has a scope. Which is most bolt actions and hunting rifles.
CA government and government in general has things so backwards. they are afraid (rightly so) of the people, but instead of pulling their heads out and *stopping* the oppressive behavior that angers the public, they try to make themselves completely untouchable and unaccountable for their actions.
The 2nd Amendment is supposed to be the Sword of Damoclese (sp?). Where a ruler needs to be personally, viscerally aware of and responsible for, every choice he or she makes. Replacing the suspending hair with a 3/4 inch chain is what our current leaders want to do, instead of either quitting making too much wind, or getting out of the leadership chair instead of making a lifelong career out of control.
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is like calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".
"You spend your money anyway you want and respect other's rights to do the same"
McCarthy
April 5, 2009 - 22:36 ET by iveseenitallIsn't McCarthy the widow of one of the people killed in the Long Island RR shooting years ago? Her anti-gun stance got her elected to Congress ( a sympathy vote, IMO). But it seemed to me at the time of that tragedy that if just one of the passengers on the train that evening had had a gun, the story would have had a different ending. It's the same old "balance of power" argument that kept the former Soviet Union at bay. Sadly, most "liberals"(including Barry Obama) believe that when someone intent on killing you has a weapon and you don't, you can "talk" him out of using it, or just pass a "law" which he is sure to obey. Naivity is bliss.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
isia... Yep...that's
April 5, 2009 - 23:52 ET by bigtimerisia...
Yep...that's her!
She has made her name/job off of her husbands death...for years now...I suppose I am suppose to be PC here with her, but I won't be, I've watched her since she came into congress...and before that too...listening to her on the House Floor is mind-bending...
I'll leave it at that.
Btw...glad you had this posted, I saw her name here and was going to post some of what you did regarding who this gal is...you saved me the time (I've posted about her before over the years now and then anyway...)
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
Yes, that's her.
April 6, 2009 - 06:25 ET by Red JeepHer actions demonstrate the way alot of Democrat politicians think. Instead of calling for all people boarding trains to go through metal detectors (which were being used in some government buildings at the time) she goes for the more glamorous issue, gun control, symbolism over substance.
Her husband and 19 other people on that train were shot with a handgun, not an assault rifle.
In all the cases cited
April 5, 2009 - 22:58 ET by jdhawkIn all the cases cited where armed assailants gunned down innocent victims, the murderer had the near certainty that he could kill completely unopposed by his victims. I have never belonged to the NRA - I am just no a joiner, but I would support more liberal concealed carry gun laws to give all of us better odds.
If the murderer has the expectation or even the remote possibility that his victims can actually defend themselves, they will think twice. If the murderer decides to go ahead with his or her terrible plans, they will be met with the best defense possible - a good offense.
It is tragic that McCarthy's husband was killed and her son left maimed, but had she or her husband been carrying a firearm, perhaps he would be alive and the son unharmed and the murderer dead or behind bars.
By the way, an overwhelming majority of Americans think like I do. That is why McCarthy can't get her pet legislation through that would further embolden murderers to strike at us.
The facts are that the "best" place to freely murder people is our schools. Murderers have nearly a 100% possibility that their eveil plans can be carried out completely unopposed - and they have repeatedly.
It's not that everyone listens to the NRA, McCarthy...
April 5, 2009 - 23:35 ET by wnaegele..it's just that no one listens to you.
All they hear from is the
April 6, 2009 - 07:02 ET by motherbeltAll they hear from is the NRA?????
Has the Brady Bunch been shut down?????
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
Don't you get sick of all of those..
April 6, 2009 - 07:27 ET by Sergeant ROCK.. NRA commercials day in, day out on CBS, ABC, NBC, etc.?? And the endless editorials on those same networks and newspapers?
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
democrats never want to
April 6, 2009 - 07:24 ET by ConservativeRexdemocrats never want to confront the obvious. I'm getting tired of pointing it out to them. Enforce the 17K guns laws on the books now. BTW, make sure all the criminals have copies of all the guns laws. I am certain they have an interest in what is or is not a legal weapon.
Just when I think democrats can not do anything more stupid, they prove me wrong yet again.
Maybe a little off topic
April 6, 2009 - 08:40 ET by ahusserIt is funny, as a motorcycle rider and a car driver, I really sometimes am in fear for my life in traffic situations. More so than from any random act of gun violence. I firmly believe that my odds of dying or being severely injured and maimed in a vechicle crash is much more than from any human lightning with a handgun. I figure a female with a cellphone is going to get me before a nut with a gun. You know traffic fatalities are not 'accidents' but are caused by oblivious, sometimes aggressive selfish behavior and in NY state there is an average of 4 killed a day on their highways. Where is the outrage and call for the banning of automobiles or the placing governors on cars so they wont go faster than say 35 mph. Just saying.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
Good point.
April 6, 2009 - 08:47 ET by Red JeepGood point.
sshh! they'll hear you!
April 7, 2009 - 18:07 ET by UndercoverConservativedon't give them ideas! There's already talk of banning motorcycles through the refusal to offer insurance and other backdoor plans here. Once universal health care is forced on everyone, risk taking behavior becomes something the Gov must control to keep costs down. Which means, banning "risky" behavior. Smoking, drinking, trans fats, and motorcycles.
If it's a "man's world" why is everything men enjoy banned, regulated, illegal, or hated by the Media?
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is like calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".
"You spend your money anyway you want and respect other's rights to do the same"
This has less to do with
April 6, 2009 - 08:51 ET by moderncommentaries83This has less to do with guns (because studies show gun control laws cause more violence...) and everything to do with hating personally responsible, independent citizens who are capable of doing for themeselves.
Because, in the absence of guns and self-defense (and now, in the UK I believe, you can get more jail time for defending yourself against an attacker than the attacker will get!), you have to rely on the government to protect you.
Which means you have to call the cops and hope the killer doesn't find you before they get there, spend 90 minutes assessing the situation before doing anything, and maybe take out the killer before he takes out more people.
Liberals simply hate people doing for themselves...whether it be raising their children, deciding what to drive, how we heat/cool our homes, what to eat, how we manage our debt and budgets, or how we defend our life and property...if the state doesn't do it for you, it's bad. At least according to liberals.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
More Guns, Less Crime
April 6, 2009 - 08:56 ET by Sergeant ROCKMore Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control
Laws
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason
Carolyn McCarthy, the
April 6, 2009 - 10:33 ET by fitzfongCarolyn McCarthy, the Jersey Girls, Jean Carnahan, Michael J. Fox, John Edwards...nobody exploits personal tragedy for political glorification quite like a liberal.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
the old hack is my rep.
April 6, 2009 - 10:54 ET by larry on LIhere on Long Island . i've voted against her from day one. she was and still is a one issue candidate in a district that had 10 new dems to one new rep register to vote in 2008 and i'am praying for some strong opposition for 2010, to put the hack out to pasture.
Last I heard, she sees
April 6, 2009 - 11:06 ET by fitzfongLast I heard, she sees herself as Senatorial material. Apparently she thinks she's better qualified and more deserving than Gillenbrand and will use the gun thing as her way in. Meanwhile, my Congressman, Peter King seems to think he's found some low-hanging fruit with the new appointee and is considering a run against her. For some reason, nobody with any clout seems to think that Schmuckie's 6-year term is worth going after. That sickens me.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
thanks, now I have a new insult to use! :)
April 7, 2009 - 18:10 ET by UndercoverConservativeIf I really wanna insult somebody, I'll say they're "Senatorial Material"... now them's fightin words lol
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is like calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".
"You spend your money anyway you want and respect other's rights to do the same"
Nazi Repression of Firearms Owners
April 6, 2009 - 11:56 ET by lotrNazi Repression of Firearms Owners
An Armed Society
April 6, 2009 - 12:14 ET by rexdraconimI agree with many posters that the perpetrators of this heinous crimes would have had a much more difficult time of it if their victims were not victims. If, if, if...
The victim mentality is not a matter of armed versus unarmed; it is a matter of leftist programming to make us all "do what the man with the gun tells you." We will then be easier to control and conquer.
Why do so many people die in these things? Did you know that most GSW are NOT fatal, and of the ones that are, a person can still function for a time after the wound? There are a limited number of places you can be shot and have it be instantly fatal. Other wounds can turn fatal, but take time. I have been shot, I have seen combat, I have volunteered in Emergency Services. Firearms are not guaranteed instant death rays; it takes skill and target cooperation to kill someone who doesn't just die on command.
You get an example of the victim mentality in those movies where one guy with a six-shooter holds off a crowd of a dozen. What!?! Do you think he can get all of you before you rush him? Does everyone want to live forever?
When our Nation has made the choices to remove the Warrior Spirit, we have done ourselves no favor. As my oldest son said the other day, for our people there is only one class, the Warrior class. Then there is everyone else. Without the Warrior Spirit an man (or woman) is no more than a sheep set for the slaughter.
Gun, no gun...the key is the victim mentality. You can face the assailant, take your chances (and chances are you will be wounded, not killed; they aren't Jason Bourne) and help yourself and your fellow man. Or you can just lay down and die. The first Warrior principle we teach our children is to Die Hard; make your enemy pay cash for your life.
As to having a gun..."An armed society is a polite society." Removing ourselves from being a dueling society was a mistake. Manners, Manners, Manners...with the removal of manners, so goes the loss of civilization. The leftists are masters of the rudeness (see a certain 1000+ posts lately) and would NEVER be able to survive a Warrior Culture (hence their constant work to disable those who are Free.)Envision a Nation which did not give up dueling...If you had to back up your behavior, instantly, with your life, you would think before you spoke or acted.
Being armed is a right and responsibility conferred upon all of us. The Founders were correct on the well-armed being key to society. Crisis does not wait for the police to arrive. Be it natural or man-made, a crisis is a right-now sort of thing. The people in the middle of it hold in their hearts, hands and minds the first, best, and only responses that will possibly be in time to any good at stopping or ameliorating said crisis.
Furthermore, it is the Free Citizen's duty to keep the government in check, act as the first line of defense in the event of invasion and to provide protection from criminal elements within their home and community. Being armed and mentally ready facilitate our functions as Free Citizens. We do not know what the future holds. If we can live in peace, so much the better. But if the forces of darkness move upon my people or Nation once more, I need to be prepared, or go the way of the Dodo.
I do not, however agree with the call to liberalize CCW. I REFUSE to ask the government for permission to carry, at any time for any reason. I carry openly and will continue to do so. I feel no need to "make people feel more comfortable" by appearing unarmed. I do not feel uncomfortable with armed people around, concealed or open. I instead feel much safer, as I know that my own efforts, when (not if) needed, as a Free Citizen will be backed by other Free Citizens.obviously, I prefer CCW to an outright ban, but how much longer will the pusillanimous compromise on the most basic human right; defense?
These shooting tragedies will continue as long as we fail to embrace the Warrior Spirit, we continue to be compliant victims and we fail in our duties as Free Citizens. each of these tragedies could have seen significant changes through the intelligence and aggressive resistance or intervention of a Free Citizen, armed or unarmed. Being armed increases effectiveness, but as we "gun nuts" always say, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." It is not enough to have the weapon, you must have the training and will to use it effectively.
And that is the really dumb part of cowering or just laying down to die. All of you know how hard it is to actually be effective with a weapon other than point blank. It take practice and discipline. So if nothing else, just making yourself a harder target to hit is an effective self-defense.
Being able to stop the bad guy, however, not only is self-defense, but community defense and national defense as well.
"You can have Peace or you can have Freedom; just don't count on having both at the same time." - R.A.H
"I'll take the harsh reality of liberty over the illusion of security...everytime!"
a coincidence?
April 7, 2009 - 17:57 ET by UndercoverConservativeever notice much of the weapon violence comes from either liberal supported or liberal enabled indivudals and groups, or by individuals pushed over the edge by liberal policy? Street gangs coddled by ACLU-intimidated police refusing to arrest uniform wearing self admitted criminal soldiers, criminals released early and often from jail, the insistence on treating drugs and criminal behavior as a "disability", families supported by welfare and other dole programs raising yet another inbred generation with violent outburst issues, people with lost jobs due to enviro-wacko or democratic financial meddling, families damaged by leftist-pushed indoctrination in schools and disrespectful behavior on all Media types...or dying under the assault of democrat-run administrations (Ruby Ridge, WACO, etc?)
And conveniently, all these recent "incidents" wrapped up along with the BS claims of Mexican rebel weapons coming from American gun shows, coinciding perfectly with the new "don't let a crisis go to waste" Administration and the "renew the" *useless* "assault weapon ban" parade?
"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is like calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".
"You spend your money anyway you want and respect other's rights to do the same"