"Is freedom anything else than the right to live as we wish?
Nothing else."~Epictetus
God bless this site, this Free Republic.
Please click the pic
Again?
Time to flood the enemedia with the daily stories of lawful, defensive firearm use stories.
Easybakegunclub updates these stories every day.
http://www.easybakegunclub.com
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.
The gun is the equalizer in domestic violence. Remove guns, and the man is almost always the dominant force.
>> 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.
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.
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.
"Is freedom anything else than the right to live as we wish?
Nothing else."~Epictetus
God bless this site, this Free Republic.
Please click the pic
