Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ARE YOU A CITIZEN OR A SUBJECT?
FOR FREEDOM & JUSTICE GROUP ^ | October 20, 2002 | Tammy Bruce

Posted on 10/20/2002 1:14:26 PM PDT by CHACHI

Snuffy and Me By Tammy Bruce

FrontPageMagazine.com | October 16, 2002

I'm a gun owner. "Snuffy" is my .38 snubnose Smith & Wesson. As a woman a firearm is the only thing that truly equalizes me if faced with someone determined to do me harm. Yes, physical defense courses are good, but in my opinion if a man who wishes me harm is close enough to touch me, he's already too close. Anyone who enters my home with malevolent intentions will not leave standing up. It's that simple.

As a defender of the Second Amendment, I knew it was only a matter of time before opponents of our right to bear arms couldn't stand it anymore and started to exploit the tragedy brought to us by the cowardly freak dubbed the Beltway Sniper. Anti-gun political candidates are using it make hay with their self-defense supporting opponents; professional haters of firearms are, as usual, shouting from hill and dale that the sky is falling.

Ginni Wolf, executive director of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse declared that the Beltway Sniper has proven her group's argument that there are "too many guns out there, and it's very easy for these types of people to obtain guns."

What planet is she on? What the sniper has proven is that there aren't enough firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens! Here's a newsflash for Ms. Wolf — the Beltway is essentially a gun-free zone. There, law abiding citizens do not carry weapons leaving them unarmed and defenseless to face a maniac killer who does not care about rules.

The sniper isn't cowed by gun laws, or the rhetoric of Kathleen Kennedy Townsend about the evils of firearms. Gun laws wouldn't have saved her father like they aren't saving the innocent good people who have also been murdered by a deranged man. The deranged and the criminal will always get their guns, just like those who wanted a drink during prohibition got their booze. The reality is gun laws only serve to keep firearms out of the hands of the law-abiding and cost those good people their lives by giving the murderous clear, risk-free targets.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, the author of the Tyranny of Good Intentions, wrote about author and professor Joyce Lee Malcolm and her book Guns and Violence. Malcolm provides evidence that firearms actually reduce violence: National polls of defensive gun use by private citizens indicate that as many as 3.6 million crimes annually are prevented by armed individuals.As many as 400,000 people each year believe they saved a life by being armed. Contrary to Handgun Control's propaganda, in fewer than 1 percent of confrontations do criminals succeed in taking the gun from the intended victim. Thirty-four percent of felons said they were scared off, wounded or captured by victims who turned out to be armed. Even more telling, in the 17 states and the District of Columbia without concealed-carry permits (the suburbs in which the sniper is thriving) enjoy an 81 percent higher rate of violent crime. Dr. Roberts reports their restrictive gun laws produced 1,400 more murders, 4,200 more rapes, 12,000 more robberies and 60,000 more aggravated assaults.

There was recently a slew of attacks on gay men in Southern California recently. Two thugs from south Los Angeles ventured up into West Hollywood, armed with bats, and brutally attacked several gay men. It's safe to say those bent on committing violence for whatever reason would think twice if they knew their potential targets could defend themselves in the most definitive of ways.

The Beltway Sniper proves that gun control laws actually put people at risk. The sniper is already in violation of numerous laws, gun related and otherwise. If the sniper is part of a foreign terrorist cell it also reminds us that the average citizen, here in the Homeland, is in fact our first line of defense. Those who argue, during this time of war on our own soil, that Americans should be disarmed, are naïve, irresponsible and promoting arguments which are ultimately fatally dangerous, not only for human life but for liberty itself.

It is law-abiding citizens like myself and so many others who own firearms who not only are personally safer, but keep this country free. If the anti-gun zealots insist on politicizing the situation with the sniper, those of us who support the Second Amendment have a duty to stand up and remind people this is an issue of civil rights and of self-defense. Those who argue to disarm us simply do not trust Americans, and perhaps even despise what has made this country great — like the individualism fostered in part by rights like the Second Amendment.

As of this writing, the last victim of the sniper was a woman who, with her husband, was putting merchandise into her car at a Home Depot. Her husband witnessed the shooting and could not respond. Several other bystanders witnessed the shooting and could not respond. If one of them, just one, had been armed, odds are the sniper's murderous rampage would have ended right there.

It is time to reject the vacuous arguments of the Left that we Americans need to be protected from ourselves and cannot be trusted to implement self-defense. Europe's history has shown us that a defenseless citizenry invites nothing less than criminal anarchy and tyrannical dictatorships.

While the Left wants you to believe you need to be protected from yourself, it took terrorism and a serial killer to show us who the real enemies are, and to expose the absurdity of gun control fanatics. Let evildoers — ranging from bin Laden to the Beltway Sniper, know this — American individuals will defend this nation, our neighbors, and our selves. Snuffy and I, and our compatriots throughout this great country, guarantee it. -------------------------------------------------------- Tammy Bruce is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW and author of The New Thought Police (Prima, 2001).


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: constitution; corruption; rights; socialists; threats
The Left is out to do away with our civil rights. It is simple: If you have the right to bear arms, you are a citizen. If you do not have that right, you are a subject. VOTE THEM OUT OF THE SENATE & CONGRESS THIS NOV. 5
1 posted on 10/20/2002 1:14:26 PM PDT by CHACHI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
I'm a verb.
2 posted on 10/20/2002 1:16:40 PM PDT by Thebaddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
The home defense weapon should be a nice little shotgun,the .38 is the conceal and carry weapon. This is all mote. Gun control is and never has been about guns,its PEOPLE CONTROL that these laws are targeted at
3 posted on 10/20/2002 1:41:37 PM PDT by South Dakota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Thebaddog
Really?

I am a noun
4 posted on 10/20/2002 1:42:25 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
Ginni Wolf, executive director of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse declared that the Beltway Sniper
Odd that a gun grabbing organization with "handgun" abuse is railing against a person with a rifle. They should have a more accurate name of "Marylanders Against the 2nd Amendment"

I was with the article till this line:
If one of them, just one, had been armed, odds are the sniper's murderous rampage would have ended right there.
Armed citizenery is good for multiple killings at one place, ie someone with a machine gun or knife trying to kill dozens and is standing there doing so. With a suddent shot and taking off a typical CCW person isn't going to be able to do much. I think this was in the book "More Guns, Less Crime"
5 posted on 10/20/2002 1:43:01 PM PDT by lelio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
"Those who argue, during this time of war on our own soil, that Americans should be disarmed, are naïve, irresponsible and promoting arguments which are ultimately fatally dangerous, not only for human life but for liberty itself. "

Agree absolutely. If bearing arms ultimately makes the people an enemy of the statists (not of legitimate government), by default, the statists force the people to view them as enemies of the people.

The only thing I could add is the fact that even if the Second Amendment was not written into the Constitution, the right to self-defense and bearing arms is still the choice of the invididual -- not government. It's simple logic.

6 posted on 10/20/2002 1:44:06 PM PDT by Eastbound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
You really look like an adjective to me. At least an adverb in that red dress.
7 posted on 10/20/2002 1:46:09 PM PDT by Thebaddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Thebaddog
I'm a lawn ornament.
I am a pink flamingo in
your neighbors
yard.
I flap my wings
but I cannot fly.
I am bound by the fact
that I'm 15,
and therefore can't vote.
Darn.

Sandra Cisneros couldn't have done better. =)
8 posted on 10/20/2002 1:50:34 PM PDT by hapsgroupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Thebaddog
Yikes! You are peeking! :-)
9 posted on 10/20/2002 1:52:55 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hapsgroupie
Nice one to lift a Sunday when the Bears lost.
10 posted on 10/20/2002 1:57:32 PM PDT by Thebaddog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
It's not just simple logic, it is a basic fact of nature.

One usually doesn't see a cornered animal merely lay down and take it from the aggressor.

11 posted on 10/20/2002 2:11:50 PM PDT by Tench_Coxe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lelio; CHACHI
I have to agree with lelio that the average person carrying a handgun would not have been able to do anything about any of the cases to date. The effective range of a handgun is maybe 25 yards. If anyone had been within 25 yards of the sniper in any of these shootings, we'd have a much better description of the sniper(s) and vehicle. At this point, no one has seen enough to venture any kind of return shot.

On the other hand, there might come a day when it could matter. Some guy who snuck behind a tree to take a smoke or walked out of a rarely used door might suddenly come across the sniper setting up for a shot. In that case, his having a handgun readily available could be the difference between ending the attacks and adding another victim.

WFTR
Bill

12 posted on 10/20/2002 2:28:16 PM PDT by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Really? I am a noun.

Call me Ishmael...

13 posted on 10/20/2002 2:34:45 PM PDT by BradyLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
Tammy Bruce is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW

I can see why.

I guess being pro-abort, lesbian, and pro-2nd Amendment doesn't cut it with the fem-nazi crowd.

14 posted on 10/20/2002 3:26:36 PM PDT by dread78645
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradyLS
Call me Ishmael...

You are Ishmael. I am A Noun? LOL!

15 posted on 10/20/2002 3:29:06 PM PDT by ladyinred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI; Ramius
I love to side on the side of self-defense, but what this woman is proposing is not a reasonable argument for concealed carry.

The rapist victimizing a community is an argument for concealed carry. The home invader is a situation for concealed carry. The mugger/slasher in the dark parking lot is a situation for concealed carry... our sniper is not.

The victims don't even know they are in the sights until they are down. I can't defend myself against something I can't see.

And the witnesses? - Well, unless the witness is real close to the sniper (and the sniper has not been that careless so far) when he aims and fires, a witness is not likely to be able to take out the now-fleeing sniper in a vehicle from a long ways away with a handgun. And if they try, who knows what is downrange.

I can sell home defense to the populace easily, and concealed carry for situations where I find myself relatively alone with an attacker away from home... but not situations where I am trying to use a handgun to be a hero in a busy populated street against an escaping sniper.

It is the wrong tool for that job. Carry anyway, we could get lucky, but so far this sniper has not been the kind of target a handgun in the purse would have stopped, and I think this idea is too open to criticism by the Brady Bunch.
16 posted on 10/20/2002 3:42:52 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lelio; WFTR
I agree, good intentions, wrong application.
17 posted on 10/20/2002 3:44:03 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
Are you the author of this? I didn't realize this was just a message on a Yahoo board. I thought it to be a published article.
18 posted on 10/20/2002 3:58:26 PM PDT by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CHACHI
This free American citizen is voting ALL liberals out! The Second Amendment stands - and don't forget, it was meant to keep liberal government officials who might want to take over America, at bay. Criminals can always be shot dead if they enter your home. And they won't, if they think you may be armed.
19 posted on 10/20/2002 7:04:19 PM PDT by maxwellp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
Quite so. There are plenty of reasons why the good citizens of the greater DC area should be able to carry weapons of their choosing, but sniper hunting is not among them. Sure, it wouldn't hurt, and maybe somebody would get lucky. They don't have that opportunity though.

There is a fair point in there that the people of DC are by and large wandering around completely defenseless from all forms of crime-- snipers included. It is true that a handgun is small comfort when the criminal is hidden and at long range. I would think though that there are any number of circumstances where it just plain wouldn't hurt for more regular citizens to have the option available to them.
20 posted on 10/21/2002 10:36:48 AM PDT by Ramius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson