It's refreshing to read stories like these even if they don't happen in Ohio, and its great to hear that nobody, especially Sandra, was hurt in the ordeal.
Dispatch: “Ma'am, are you holding him at gunpoint?”
Sandra: “Yes, I am. And if he moves towards me, I'm afraid I'm going to have to kill. I don't want to have to kill him.”
The last sentence of that 911 transcript is so telling of the self-defense mindset. In the past ten years that I've been involved in grassroots activism I've never once met anyone in my life who has wanted to use deadly force.
With the likes of the Brady Campaign calling reform bills "Make my day" and "shoot first" legislation the average person would probably be surprised to hear "I don't want to have to kill him" on a 911 transcript.
Perhaps Sandra's neighbor summed up the situation better than anyone else when it comes to violence against the elderly.
"Don't mess with the gray haired people! We still got a lot of fight in us."
|
|
A microcosm of the debate over the Department of the Interior's rule change regarding firearms in national parks can be seen in two dueling articles on the Knox News website.
On Dec. 10, Dan Thomasson wrote an article (Firearms should not be allowed in national parks) in which he stated:
So much for finding a moment’s break from the threat someone might decide to shoot you over a triviality, a daily possibility in today’s urban battlegrounds. The only hope one might have under the circumstance is that before the assailant could pull the trigger, he or she would be attacked and eaten by a bear.
I might take that irrational statement and turn it on its ear by pointing out that a criminal intent on breaking the law by assaulting you is not going to change his mind because there is another law he'd have to break first (if guns were banned), and that if the good guys aren't prohibited from being able to counter that attack with a firearm of their own then maybe they wouldn't have to rely on a bear coming to their aid. Or, I might just let the article in response (Park visitors have nothing to fear from new gun law) do it for me. |
|
Read more...
|
|
Professor Don B. Kates, Jr., a civil rights lawyer and criminologist, once wrote:
"Even if all 500,000 American police officers were assigned to patrol, they could not protect 240 million citizens from upwards of 10 million criminals who enjoy the luxury of deciding when and where to strike. But we have nothing like 500,000 patrol officers; to determine how many police are actually available for any one shift, we must divide the 500,000 by four (three shifts per day, plus officers who have days off, are on sick leave, etc.). The resulting number must be cut in half to account for officers assigned to investigations, juvenile, records, laboratory, traffic, etc., rather than patrol."
In the 2005 Castle Rock v. Gonzales case, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Jessica Gonzales did not have a constitutional right to police protection, even in the presence of a restraining order.
Visit the Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner for the rest of this article. |
|
Hearings are starting on president-elect Barack Obama's cabinet selections. Of particular interest to gun owners:
U.S. Attorney General to-be Eric Holder will be before the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 15th.
"To-be..."
That's a heck of an assumption from the "authorized journalists" at MSNBC. It's like it's a done deal--all that's needed is the rubber stamp.
Some of us are demanding Holder not be confirmed, and leading that charge is Jeff Knox of The Firearms Coalition:
Visit the National Gun Rights Examiner for the rest of this article. |
|
You hear a lot about anti-gun pundits wanting "common sense" gun control. But what exactly is common sense about some of the laws they want?
Ohio is known for having some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country, but what are they accomplishing? Are they really making us safer?
Take, for instance, one of my pet peeves, the restrictions placed on concealed handgun license holders when it comes to patronizing a place serving alcohol.
Visit the Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner for the rest of this article. |
|
|
