So, not too long ago, I was prompted to rant (something I almost never do ;<)) when listening to Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz talking about "sensible" gun laws. Let me be honest - I have listened to these two talkers for years and have often been simpatico with some of their views. But I became so repelled by their misinformed and misinforming rhetoric on firearms, that it made me realize how much they hype all things liberal just as Hannity and others hype all things conservative. I suggest to everyone to find an issue on which you fervently disagree with the pundits you cling to; it will open your eyes to how all of them are manipulating us.
So, anyway, in reaction to this rant, my wife became upset, thinking that I might be turning into a conservative Nazi or something (shit, she's only known me for 25 years - what's left to learn?). God forbid I not toe the line on all issues liberal. One of the questions she asked me in relation to "sensible" gun laws was "What if it was me that was killed? What would you think then?" Well, that would suck. I'd be pissed and would ask why didn't you have your pistol with you on the tragic day you needed it? After all, since she has a license to carry, I can only assume that if she were killed that easily, she must have been in a gun-free zone. So when I tearfully testify in front of Congress with her picture next to me, my major question for them will be why couldn't she be legally armed in that place? Just as with Newtown, tell me how the rule against being armed protected anyone? How did the laws in CT protect anyone?
I told her long ago that if I am ever killed in an active shooter situation on campus where I work (we have had a few campus alerts in recent years), that she needs to sue the pants off of the state and university and whoever else did not allow me to carry the firearm I am legally licensed to carry and defend myself. I do not expect police to protect me - I know they can't and they know it, too. I am not paranoid; I am prepared. Their answer is to disarm me; my answer is to let me take care of myself. If I am killed by an assailant on a day I am disarmed by our government, who will be responsible? When I lose my right to protect myself at the door, who is responsible for me?
This is what liberals like Maddow and Schultz do not get; their answer to violence is capitulation, their fantasy is that taking guns away from law-abiding citizens will magically reduce violent crime. Quite frankly, I am not a criminal.
No comments:
Post a Comment