Disarming America

Does Obama really think the "way to peace" is through disarming America? That's pretty much what ALL liberals think. They think the "bullies" of the world will go away if we just prove to them we aren't a threat. Life doesn't work that way. The only reason for a bully to "go away" in real life is if you beat them within an inch of their lives with a baseball bat. If you disarm yourself, they'll think you're weak and beat you up some more. Or if the bully is a dictator, he'll just kill you. "Anti-gun freaks" are constantly braying that we need to "get rid of guns" and they hope that'll solve the problem. But it won't, because gun-wielding criminals don't obey laws. To take guns away from their intended victims is to give them an unlimited supply of "easy targets." It doesn't work. It amazes me that people who THINK they're smart enough to "run things" and tell us all what to do and how to do it just can't understand this simple thing. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. There are many "simple things" they don't understand, although they'll never admit it. They probably aren't even smart enough to know it. (Rush Limbaugh/Barack Obama)

What Criminals Don't Want You to Know

Criminals don't want you to know that they're afraid, too. Afraid you won't be completely disarmed by your government so they can rob or assault you at will. They're afraid you have a gun, with which to shoot them. They're afraid you have tear gas or pepper spray, with which to blind them for the few seconds necessary for you to get away from them. Or that you might have a stun gun you can use to completely flummox them for the same amount of time and for the same purpose. That's all it takes. Just a few seconds, if you don't "stand around and admire your work." In 2004, there were 401,326 robberies. Only a small percentage of them were attempted with a gun, and if they don't have a gun, you can have "the difference" if you have any of the above mentioned items and aren't afraid to use it. There are about 38,000 carjackings each year, and only 74% of them are done with a weapon. How many of those weapons are guns, I don't know. Not many, I'd guess, because most violent crimes are committed without a gun. There were about 854,911 aggravated assaults. Firearms were used in only 19.3% of the cases. Most were done using knives or other cutting instruments, clubs, and fists or feet. Many are family assaults: husbands and boyfriends beating on or killing their wives or girlfriends. But most of them can be overcome if you have the means to disorient or blind your attacker for those few seconds required for you to get away. You can get these items from Personal Defense Consultants or other vendors.

Empty Holsters "Frighten" Students

What a bunch of weenies they are! To be "frightened" by an inanimate object. Schools are well known to be a "gun-free zone," telling criminals, "come on in and shoot us. We don't have guns with which to protect ourselves here." "During the week of April 21-25, 2008, thousands of college students throughout the United States, organized under the banner of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), will attend classes wearing empty holsters, in protest of state laws and school policies that stack the odds in favor of dangerous criminals and armed killers by disarming law abiding citizens licensed to carry concealed handguns virtually everywhere else." Notice, one of the things they're demonstrating against is not even allowing those who are LICENSED to carry concealed on campus with their guns. That this policy does not even slow down those bent on killing people on campus was proven at several schools, one of the recent ones Virginia Tech, where more than 20 people were killed because none of the students OR faculty--or even security could carry a gun to use in defense. School "authorities" say they're opposed to this demonstration because it "frightens" students. I'd say they'd be even more "frightened" if someone bent on killing them brings a REAL gun into their classroom. Do they really think a student or a faculty member would "go crazy" if guns were allowed in classrooms? Do they think a ban on guns in schools will actually keep "crazies" out? Come on! (SCCC)

For Want of a Gun . . .

If Steven Daniel Furtado had been allowed to carry a gun for his own protection he and his sweetheart might still be alive. But NO. Not in California, where a "weapon" is still described as something "that can be directed at a person in such a way as to cause him discomfort or injury." It was that way in the sixties when I first took up the sales of less-than-lethal self-defense items and it remains so to this day. This is so "vague" and wide it even covers my hands and feet, which I can CERTAINLY "aim at someone and cause him discomfort or injury." Did the ex-boyfriend "project something at Steven" that could injure him? Was what he used LEGAL? No. But if Steven had been armed, maybe he and his girls would still be alive. A typical result of liberal anti-gun laws. (Sacramento Bee)