Skip to comments.Gun Control Laws Only Control the Law Abiding
Posted on 07/28/2012 5:55:57 PM PDT by tselatysr
Just like the majority of police officers who never have to fire their gun during the course of a career, most civilians will never be shot at while watching a movie, browsing in a shopping mall or attending school. But for those few that do have the misfortune to be an unwilling participant in an ambush here are a few rules of thumb you may find useful.
The police can't protect you. The Aurora, CO police force is a fine, highly motivated department - I know because the police association was formerly my client. There were officers already at the theatre for the midnight showing of Batman to deal with the anticipated crowd. Only 90 seconds elapsed between the first 911 call and officer's arrival on scene. This is a spectacular response time. Yet 12 people were already dead and 58 wounded. Which is why they are called "first responders" and not "first preventers."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Disarmed) won't protect you. Feinstein wants Congress to renew her "assault weapons" ban. "Assault weapons" or "assault rifles" are no different from regular rifles, they only look scary. For example: the bayonet lug on the muzzle. (Yet, when is the last time you read of bayonet wounds during one of these attacks?)
"Assault weapon" is simply a propaganda term designed to alarm the public. Federal law already bans machine guns, which are authentic military assault weapons. The Washington Times points out FBI figures "show just 358 of the 8,775 murders by firearm in 2010 involved rifles of any type. By comparison, 745 people were beaten to death...but no one has called for outlawing fists."
Cinemark won't protect you. Colorado citizens with a permit are allowed to carry a concealed weapon. Cinemark corporate minions know themselves to be much wiser than a mere legislator, so they banned weapons inside the theatre. Sure enough not one of the law-abiding citizens had a gun, but the law-breaker had plenty. Cinemark is already being sued, but it's the wrong lawsuit. What we need is for Cinemark know-it-alls to be sued by a permit holder left defenseless by their asinine policy.
Gun-Free Zones = Sitting-Duck Zones. When is it going to dawn on liberal gun-grabbers that gun-free zones only notify the shooter he won't be subject to return fire? One gun owner in the audience could have made all the difference. At Columbine the police officer assigned to the school engaged those two shooters before they went inside.
During the brief gunfight, the shooters were so rattled they couldn't even hit the cruiser the officer was crouched behind! These cowards don't want to die, they want you to die. If the Aurora gunman had heard a round whizz past his ear it could have changed the entire complexion of the evening.
Unless you've been shot and can't get away, avoid talking to the media. "Father of the Year" nominee Jamie Rohrs is a perfect example. During an interview with CNN, Rohrs described his reaction when the shooting started. "My son's on the floor, as I turned to, like, find Ethan in the dark of the theater, with the gas, like, I'm so disoriented and I lose him, I just lose him. Then he opens fire again. So I jump, and I run."
During the time three other men are dying while they shield their girlfriends from the bullets - and are consequently unavailable for interview- Jamie thinks, like, "feets, don't fail me now" and leaves his 4-month-old rolling around on the floor, like, during a stampede. Safely outside he generously hopes his son and his girlfriend get out alive. Fortunately, his girlfriend only had a "small bullet wound" so Rohrs subsequently proposed to her in the hospital. I'm sure the ceremony will be fine unless when Jamie says, "until fear of death do us part" brings back bad memories for his girlfriend.
Only you can save you. I urge conservatives reading this to apply for a concealed carry permit and take the training necessary to use a gun to defend yourself and your family. Liberals, who believe merely being in the same room with a gun - let alone owning one - is sign of serious mental illness, are more difficult to advise. Progressives might try shopping at pawn brokers. Employees are usually armed, which deters shooters. Or stay at home and use Amazon. Always sit near the exit in theatres. Wear a bullet-proof vest. Avoid hip-hop concerts or events that attract hip-hop performers. Marry a police officer. Stay hydrated. (Whoops, wrong column.)
Article shared using the Free Republish tool on Tea Party Tribune.
Who knows what that law was called? (Hint: this is San Francisco we're talking about, LOL!)
Well duh! The gun laws are aimed at controlling the citizenry, to make them more and more dependent upon the ‘Nanny’, but then everything on the agenda of the DNC/Demoncrats is aimed at building that dependency don’tchaknow. It is at the heart of all that is globalism from the banking emperors/ Even the action to make us dependent upon borrowing is a tool for that ultimate world-wide dependency upon an uber powerful elite who operate from the power they instituted on Jekyl Island, in 1912.
By definition the lawless will have little issue getting guns and high cap mags.
The lawful will be defenseless.
That anime is not for pacifists (or children; but I repeat myself.) With either girl present in the theater Mr. Holmes would be quickly neutralized.
No more. Period.
Thanks for the info. I don’t know much about anime myself but I have a friend who attends the Anime Expo every year. I’ll have to get his opinion.
The political cretans are not at all interested in YOU and your family being protected and safe they are interested in protecting thier own a##es against us. There are reasons why they are slow and methodical in implementing thier utopian agenda for us they would much rather bring it down fast but it’s these pesky guns we all own that are forcing them to sneak around and slowly move us down the road.
What makes people think more laws are needed to keep people from breaking laws?
How is keeping me from defending myself going to keep someone else from mass murdering?
Why do liberals always answer any issue with more control over me, and less liberty for all.
Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.