Case Against Self Defense

What liberals call the “gun controversy” is actually something else. It is the “self defense controversy.” Anti-gun fools want to “get rid of all guns” as a means to destroy self defense as a human right—for everybody--except themselves, of course. They will retain their “right” to hire armed thugs to defend them while denying the rest of us the same right—if they can. They can afford it, because WE are paying for it, for the most part. Their armed thugs are paid for with taxpayer money. Some even go so far as to carry their own guns. But it is becoming increasingly obvious that liberals want to make the very concept of self defense illegal. They want to punish people who defend themselves against an attack. Every time we come up with something that helps us defend ourselves that is not a gun, they want to ban it, too. Currently on their list to be banned is the stun gun. It is a very effective instrument to stop an attacker in his tracks without killing him. But liberals don’t like them because they DO “stop an attacker in his tracks.” I was once accosted by a cop who saw a metal 2-cell flashlight in my pocket, who said, “That could be used as a weapon, you know.” To which I replied, “If and when I ever do use it for a weapon, we can discuss it, then.” He just laughed, but it was very instructive because liberals are serious about destroying ALL tools for self defense. (Just common sense)