Skip to comments.Domestic violence: Next in gun-control fight
Posted on 08/03/2014 5:16:09 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
Washington (CNN) - The scene is intense: A man is ferociously knocking on a door while a woman inside the house calls 911, saying that her ex is trying to break in. A child sits on the couch.
The man bursts in and grabs the child, and the woman yells not to take the toddler. The man pulls out a gun. A shot rings out, and the screen goes black. A child cries out.
The violent domestic scenario is only a television ad from a gun control group, but it attempts to portray what some women face. It also depicts the next front in the gun control debate.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Time to flood the enemedia with the daily stories of lawful, defensive firearm use stories.
Easybakegunclub updates these stories every day.
If she had been armed, the perceived outcome would have been different.
In the scenario given, the man not having a gun would not prevent him from taking the child. However, the woman having a gun probably would.
A women with a gun she knows how to use is every bit as dangerous as a man. Without the gun she will lose at least 95% of any physical fights.
They have the scene all wrong, the woman is holding a double barrel shot gun and when her ex breaks in she fires both barrels at his groin.
The pro-Bill of Rights people need to quickly respond with the same ad except that the woman is armed and when the maggot breaks into her house, she busts a cap on his ass and then waits 20 minutes for the police to show up.
Read reply #5, LOL.
Better yet respond with two scenarios -
1. the woman is armed and protects herself and her child.
2. Neither the woman or the man have firearms.
(In this scenario the woman winds up just as dead as in the original commercial.)
I sense growing desperation on the part of the Progressive Left to get on with disarming America’s patriots. I think they expected to be a lot farther along with that particular project by now.
The gun is the equalizer in domestic violence. Remove guns, and the man is almost always the dominant force.
Dial 911 and Die
LOL! I think we’re on to something here.
>> The violent domestic scenario is only a television ad from a gun control group
So make an pro-2A ad that portrays the woman using her own firearm to drive away the intruder and protect her child. I mean, isn’t that the solution this contrived scene is crying out for?
This “scenario” has already been addressed in federal law. The Lautenberg rule exists and covers protective orders, not just convictions.
The claim in the article that it does not cover a$$hats who are not married is patently false. A DV protective order can be issued for unmarried people and even people who are not living together.
It is in practice one of the most restrictive and abused gun control laws on the books. While it may need review... I don’t believe it needs strengthening, tightening, or expansion.
The NRA should run the exact same ad except the woman pulls her gun and kills the s.o.b.
Divorce lawyers are far too often demanding restraining orders without regard to violence. Here in CA, you lose your guns with a TRO and play hell getting them back even when a judge doesn’t convert a TRO to permanent RO.
Already been done. Go to the easybakegunclub.com link up-thread. It's one of the vids further down the page.
The NRA needs to run an ad with the exact same scenario except that the woman is armed. It would be a 2 second commercial.
When will the NRA put their commercial of the woman defending herself air?
Same scene. Man pulls his gun, you hear the Bang and the scene goes dark. The light comes on and you see the man on the floor. The woman says, “My two friends, Smith and Wesson saved my life.”
Then watch the left’s heads explode.
Here’s the link to the actual video posted on easybakegunclub.com:
Once it is found that a guy owns guns, those guns are up for grabs in a divorce custody battle.
Here it is framed as only a threat against women. That isn't true at all. Men can be just as threatened here.
Then there's the issue of the stereotypical male/female stigma, where the guy is subject to all the pressure if the woman decides to cry wolf in order to get custody of the children.
So it's not quite the issue of poor women always being under the gun. Men can be the victim here just as easily as the women, and I would submit it's a lot easier to frame the man and toss out charges that will be taken seriously whether justified or not.
This can have ramifications far beyond the divorce as well.
The only way that 95% of women will ever have equal lethality to a man who has picked to attack her at the time and place of his choosing, is when she when she is armed with a firearm.
Leftists love victims and hate women.
Your video link was the first thing I thought of, while reading this story.
This one is a pretty close second, however ;) Thanks.
Biden even said it. Fire a shotgun.
And of course, not being able to get a gun legally hardly means he wouldn’t be able to get one.
Or a less lethal version where she points her laser dot equipped pistol at his groin and Daddy doesn’t have to die, or whatever might happen if a bullet went there.
If the shells were loadws with rock salt, he wouldn’t die but wish he did.
"Is freedom anything else than the right to live as we wish?
There is a rebuttal/parody ad which is the same ad except the woman is armed (with a shotgun) and when the maggot breaks into her house, she points it at him, he screams and drops his. Worth finding.
Double YEOW,....because Doc will tell him to draw a hot bath, put hand on the opposing sides of the tub and make like a doughnut. Dunk OW OW OW! Du nk OW OW OW! Dunk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.