In response to these incidents, most normal people would want additional means to protect themselves, especially in regards to the mass stabbing incident. Even more so when one considers previous mass casualty incidents like the one perpetrated by Omar Mateen in Tampa and the Tsnarniev brothers bombing and shooting in Boston. I say normal people for a reason, mainly because citizen control advocates (oops sorry- strike that) gun control advocates are most definitely not normal. Why would I say something like that?
As I have said before- I am glad you asked!
This week Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said during a press conference that the Democrat gun control bill would prevent attacks like the ones that happened this past week.
You read that correctly.
Gun control would prevent bombings and stabbings.
Now I do try to be fair minded and give people the benefit of the doubt, so I spent the entire afternoon pondering how a gun control measure would prevent people from making bombs out of pressure cookers and keep people from stabbing one another. I took literally hours of my time to contemplate Sen Reid’s statements and how they would prevent another bombing or stabbing (especially since the good guy with the gun shot the bad guy with the knife). I looked at it from every possible angle, stretching the boundaries of logic and suspending my disbelief and have come to a conclusion.
That conclusion is based on a principle laid out by Franciscan philosopher John Punch: Non sunt multiplicanda entia sine necessitate. This translates into “Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity” and is commonly referred to as Occam’s Razor. The core of the concept means that the simplest hypothesis is usually the correct one.
My theory is that gun control advocates are bats**t insane and this is how I reached that conclusion:
There is no way curtailing firearms leads to preventing a bombing. There is no way curtailing firearms leads to preventing a bombing. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch. It’s not even an “Apples & Oranges” scenario. It’s an “Apples & Boeing 747” scenario.
Bombs are used in bombings, not guns. Knives are used in stabbings, not guns (unless you count bayonet charges and as far as I know the last bayonetting was during the Viet Nam war).
In spite of this indisputable fact, in spite of common sense, in spite of every single individual with more than a passing knowledge of the English language understanding that bombs are used for bombings and knives are used for stabbing, gun control advocates want you to believe that gun control will stop bombings and stabbings.
To take this a step further the mindless drones of Moms Demand Action, Everytown, and the rest of those who believe whatever Shannon Watts and her ilk are paid to say by Bloomberg, believe this as if it were Holy Writ from the God and/or Goddess of your choice. They think this is truth. They think gun control will stop bombings. They think gun control will stop stabbings. They hold this to be a Truth (capitalized purposely) with the same zealotry as an ISIS fighter believes it is perfectly OK to saw someone’s head off on YouTube with a dull AK bayonet.
Now there is a term in the dictionary that covers this very situation. That term is delude, and its derivative deluded. Delude is defined as taking action to impose a misleading belief upon someone; deceive; fool. The derivative deluded is defined as believing things that are not real or true. Now that is what the dictionary has to say about these people. More accurately, it is what the Oxford English Dictionary has to say about them.
I prefer a more modern, hip, and trendy source.
The Urban Dictionary defines people like Watts, Bloomberg and Ladd Everitt as Bulls**t Artists. A bulls**t artist is someone who lies/boasts incessantly, usually to comedic effect, intentional or accidental. You can’t get any closer to an accurate description of the gun control industry shills and financiers than that.
The Urban Dictionary even goes so far as to define what they say. Their statements are called diarrhetoric, which is sewage, typically disguised as informed discussion that is often used by politicians, lawyers, and big business interests instead of honest dialogue in order to control the weak-minded by convincing them to believe something demonstrably false. (I really REALLY like this term- you’ll see it again for sure).
Now we have definitions for the big whigs of the gun control industry. What about their followers? Well we have all heard the term before as it is used quite frequently. That term is “Sheep” which the Urban Dictionary defines as a group of people who lack the capacity for careful consideration, imagination, or individual thought, who then go with the groupthink and allow god awful trends and events to unfold and make us all miserable. Talk about hitting a nail on the head...
But it is their mental state which concerns me. We all know the money men, 1% elitists, and their paid mouthpieces don’t believe the diarrhetoric (told you that you’d see it again) they spew. They proclaim good guys with guns don’t stop bad guys with guns, from behind a Spartan phalanx of heavily armed goons. Their hypocrisy is legendary. They have elevated it to an art form which can be admired for its artistry, if not for its message… but I digress.
The Urban Dictionary describes their mental state just as accurately as it describes them, and those who tell them what to think, along with the message that those gun control leaders try to get across. It is a grand, eloquent, and most importantly scientifically accurate definition. That definition is bats**t, which is defined as a level of insanity that the word alone cannot justify (used as a prefix). Hence my theory that these people are bats**t insane.
Now, when one considers my theory that gun control advocates are bats**t insane, that the hypothesis I used to develop my theory confirms to the principle of Occam’s Razor, and that the hypothesis and the theory it was developed from is correct based on the scientific method of systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of my hypotheses; one can confidently state that my theory can and will hold up to peer review and outside scrutiny.
- Mr. Decker
As articles, etc popped into my newsfeed this morning, I read a few, and also saw/read some comments on the link. These comments appalled me and got me thinking about something. Why is it when a tragedy occurs, we all automatically jump to a political stance, whether it be firearms, refugees, race, etc?
While I am a staunch supporter of the 2A, I am also a person, a mother, a wife. When did we as a society become so focused on our politics, that in the wake of tragedy we start shouting our beliefs before all details are out or bodies are cold, and families have been notified? Do I feel that gun free zones create victims? Yes. Am I going to start pushing my 2A rights and exclaiming how a gun or a non gun free zone would have prevented this. NO!
This fact, disgusts and appalls me. We can all be advocates for our individual or collective causes, but lets take a moment in the wake of these tragedies and show love, compassion, and solidarity. Bickering, fighting, and pushing our agendas does NOTHING to help the victims and the communities in which these tragedies happen. Start going out to the communities and helping them in whatever way they need. Post support for them, say a prayer, send out good vibes, whatever it is that you believe.
We need to stop the hate and the agenda pushing after any tragedy that occurs. We NEED to remember that there are real people who are affected by them and are in mourning or states of shock and trying to process what happened.
There is a time and a place for pushing our agenda(s). After a tragedy is NOT one of them.
We have detailed numerous instances of the sick and twisted behavior of gun control advocates here. From the Communications Director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence stalking and harassing a pre-pubescent girl on Twitter (to the point of demanding alone time with her), to gun control advocate and CGSV fanboi Johnathan Romans telling people to shoot open carriers on sight, to Shannon Watts bemoaning the arrest of a white man who beat a black senior citizen because he didn’t think the black man should be allowed to carry a firearm, the litany of violent wishes and actions from the “peaceful and tolerant” gun control advocates is long and storied.
Nothing beats the latest s**t show to arise from Bloomberg’s pockets: “Betsy Riot”.
What exactly is a Betsy Riot (other than another Bloomberg astroturf “movement)?
It is a group that advocates acts of mass vandalism. Seriously. I’m not kidding. They openly advocate for the destruction of other’s property. These people have taken it upon themselves to break the law… to get the message across that we need more laws. Gun grabber logic at its finest right there.
Some examples have included destroying magazines they don’t like, vandalizing Starbucks restrooms, vandalizing a Field & Stream store, vandalizing merchandise in WalMart, vandalizing and destroying books and magazines they don’t like… they even vandalized a Veteran’s truck. A visit to their Facebook page shows these and hundreds more examples of criminal acts by this group.
Now as far as I know promoting vandalism is against Facebook’s Terms of Service. Here is what Facebook has to say about the topic:
Theft, Vandalism, or Fraud
We are trying to make the world a more open, connected, and ultimately better place. Organizing acts that harm others through theft, vandalism, or fraud is a violation of our terms.
Now what happens when one tries to report Betsy Riot, which not only organizes acts of vandalism but openly encourages this criminal behavior? Want to guess? If you’re reading this then you probably already know the answer.
Organizing acts of vandalism isn’t a violation of the Terms of Service, despite the Terms of Service saying organizing acts of vandalism is against said Terms of Service.
As you are all aware, Facebook has been killing pro 2A pages right and left. I take that back, they have been killing off kid’s Airsoft pages, Veteran pages… they even killed off a cap gun collector page. None of those pages were doing anything that even remotely violated the Terms of Service. What they did do was rustle the jimmies of people who think that they have the right to decide how you should live your life.
Kids playing with toys? BAN THEM! People who grew up in the 70s who want to discuss 50 year old cap guns? BAN THEM! Combat Veterans who discuss hunting and shooting? BAN THEM! Anything the gun control lobby takes offense to is wiped from the Facebook servers, while groups like Betsy Riot are allowed to continue to promote the destruction of others property with impunity.
Now Facebook is a private business, and is free to remove whatever content they wish. The 1st Amendment doesn’t come into play as it is not a government agency stifling the expression of 2nd Amendment support (or the discussion of 50 year old toys for that matter). I do have one question for Zuckerberg and his radical progressive staff though.
Why even bother taking up server space with a detailed Terms of Service when the TOS means absolutely nothing?
Seriously. I ask the question with zero snark whatsoever.
Why not just come out and write a new TOS that states “Groups who fall in line with our political views can organize and advocate criminal behavior up to and including homicide, while groups who offend our delicate sensibilities will be removed with no explanation given”?
In all honesty it would not only clarify things for Facebook users but be a much more accurate representation of actual Facebook policy rather than be nothing more than meaningless fluff that has absolutely no bearing on whether a post or page will be removed. We know your TOS should be termed BS. You know your TOS should be termed BS. Why not be open and accurate?
In my line of work accuracy counts. Language needs to be very specific and the words used have definitive meaning. If I do not communicate my analysis and thoughts exactly, people’s lives are placed in jeopardy. Now obviously Facebook Terms of Service don’t have that kind of impact, however many people utilize Facebook as a primary means of communication with friends and family. Many people rely on it as a way to expand or maintain their business. In my opinion Facebook should be open and transparent and just let people know that their pages can be removed because someone on Facebook’s staff disagrees with their politics.
Doing so would also save a lot of time. When normal people report things like people advocating things such as vandalism, theft, assault, and homicide, they expect the post to be removed. They then get a response from Facebook that advocating killing people isn’t against the Terms of Service. In the interest of streamlining the Facebook experience, a clarified TOS that omits such advocacy is allowed so long as the actions are being directed against those whose opinions do not follow whatever pablum Salon spewed that week would go a long way to keep people from wasting their time with reporting those kinds of posts.
Heck it would even save ol’ Zuckerberg some money. The staff he has on the payroll whose job it is to review posts that are reported could be cut in half. Write some code so that if a report comes in from someone who has the words “Second Amendment”, “gun”, “Veteran”, “Warfighter”, “Constitution” and other terms which are an anathema to progressives on their page anywhere, it automatically generates a response that no action will be taken. Conversely if a report comes in from someone who has words like “Hillary”, “#gunsense”, “Moms Demand”, "#CocksNotGlocks" or any other progressive causes on their profile, it automatically bans & deletes the person/page reported.
Just trying to help here Zuck…. you should hire me as a cost cutting consultant... this one is free though. Just because I like you.
- Mr. Decker
Hello to all the 1MMAGC supporters out there! I once again apologize for not having written more, but I have been out of the country somewhere and the internet connections we do get are sketchy at best. One of the things I determined to complete when I got back was to get a civilian concealed handgun permit. As a retired law enforcement officer, I can carry nationwide on my badge and ID under the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (often referred to as HR218), but I wanted a civilian permit as well in the event I was unable to make a yearly qualification stateside. Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
My trip back home brought me into Ft. MacDill, so my choice was to get my permit through Florida. In addition to walking off the plane and into the class, Florida has quite a reciprocity list so choosing FL was a total no-brainer. I made arrangements to attend a class taught by an NRA certified instructor at a local gun shop and range.
The next day I show up bright and early, I’m the first person there, and get ushered in the back and take my seat. This is where the surprise comes in.
As additional students come in over the course of the next half hour, I come to realize I am in the minority as a middle aged white guy. The anti-gunners and citizen control crowd all like to paint gun owners as… well… me. Middle aged white guys. That stereotype may have been true 20 years ago, but now the demographics are shifting.
We had 32 people in the class. Seven were white guys and of those seven, only 3 were middle aged. Less than 10% of the class was comprised of what the gun grabbers say are typical gun owners. The rest were made up of young people, senior citizens, minorities and women. There was a young black husband and wife getting their carry permit together. There was an old blue haired grandma. There were people from every possible walk of life sitting in that classroom. Every demographic was present from college kids to senior citizens with about half the class being women.
After the day’s class was over, I approached the instructor and asked him if this was the typical demographic makeup of classes he had been teaching. This led into some rather serious discussion on minority and female empowerment, self reliance and a rejection of the notion that the most basic right we possess, the right to defend ourselves against aggression, should be reserved for those who are rich, powerful or famous. What I would love for everyone to know is that those views were being expressed by demographic groups typically not associated with firearm ownership and carriage.
What he had observed over the past few years was a shift of class participation from white males to minorities and females. Many of these people were first time gun owners (such as the blue haired grandma and her new-to-her Ruger SP-101 in .32 H&R Mag). His general view was that minorities and females are realizing that the gun control apparatus has been lying to them, and that the responsibility for their life, and the lives of their loved ones, rests in their own hands. Having made several new acquaintances during the class, and having exchanged the requisite business cards, and being a quasi-journalist, I decided to do some impromptu interviewing after supper.
As I reached out to classmates and asked them why they decided to take the class and to carry a firearm on a regular basis, the view of the instructor was verified. Almost to a person they hit on the same points that I have made as a 2A advocate. Their answers are familiar to anyone involved in the shooting sports:
It takes the police forever to show up.
The police don’t respond to my neighborhood because it is poor.
I live in a minority community and the police get there when they feel like it.
I don’t want to wait for someone to come help me- I can help myself.
I am a woman living alone- I am a target for an attacker.
I work late nights and walk home in the dark.
I was a victim once and will never allow it to happen again.
All of these are perfectly valid reasons to empower yourself. What I take heart from is that those giving those answers are a demographic the gun control industry has typically thought of as “theirs”. They have sought to ensure vulnerable populations remain defenseless, thereby ensuring new victims to point to in order to advance their elitist agenda. Their desires cannot be accomplished with an empowered population refusing to lay down and become victims. Their answer to aggression and violence is for people to pee on themselves, to hope that their attacker doesn’t kill them in the (average) 11 minutes it takes police to respond, to end the attack by asking their assailant to pet little fluffy bunnies or some other inane concept.
They need fresh bodies… plain and simple… and the people in my class, just like the thousands upon thousands in every CCW/CCH class across the country are telling the gun control industry that the body they need to advance their agenda won’t be theirs.
Seeing people step up and say “It won’t be me” is the beginning of the end for the gun control industry’s message. These are people sick and tired of being told “Good guys with guns don’t stop bad guys with guns” by a multi-millionaire that lives in a gated community speaking from behind a phalanx of heavily armed security. They are tired of “Gun Free Zones” that turn into killing fields because some ivory tower NY billionaire insists a sign on a wall will stop a madman bent on committing the ultimate crime against another human being. They are tired of hearing that an inanimate hunk of metal is to blame for the evil that lies within the hearts of some. More and more people nationwide are seeing, with crystal clarity, that the gun control industry is built on the equivalent of unicorns frolicking on rainbows, that their entire premise is pure 100% USDA Prime bovine scatological products.
I for one am glad.
- Mr. Decker
First a little background on Can Can Concealment:
-They are a company out of Florida and they sold their first holster in July of 2013.
-Their purpose is to help women protect themselves and the ones they love by providing a sophisticated holstering system they will want to wear every day!
-Holsters are proudly hand made for women, by women, in the USA.
They carry 5 different styles of holsters:
-Garter Holster-Perfect for under dresses
They also have extenders and garter belts available for purchase to complement the designated holsters.
Now on to the review.
The holster I received to review was the Classic Hip Hugger holster. I received it in black with gunmetal/gray stitching. This is 5"in width, has hook and eye closures, and has the perfect amount of feminine touch. Upon taking out of the packaging, I unfolded it and then put it on as shown how to by owner, Darlene. It sits around your hips and is very comfortable. Once on, I holstered my gun, finished getting dressed and ready for the day, and went about my day.
As I went about my day, i almost forgot that I had it on. It was comfortable and fit great to my body. I loved that I had no issues when it came to using the bathroom. I didn't have to worry about unholstering my gun, it falling out of the holster, or the holster getting in the way. There was no issues with slipping down from where I initially placed it. While I did have on occasion issues with the top in the front rolling/folding over on me, but that was due to the pants I was wearing and it putting pressure in the middle, causing the top to bend. But, like I said, it was on occasion and not something that was constant and I simply made the decision to not wear those pants. Live and learn...haha.
It did a good job concealing my gun under t-shirts, tank tops, etc. I love that I can wear this holster while wearing a skirt, because it is secure without needing any belt loops, belt, etc. Even under a skirt, no one knew it was there, and I still had great access to my gun. It is a holster that can be worn all day as it is so comfortable and versatile. You can literally go from day to a night out without needing to change your holster! And what woman doesn't love that!
The design of the holster is great in the fact that you can choose where to place your gun, in the front or the back and that IF you choose to carry in the back, the way the "pocket" is done positions your gun perfectly for being able to draw. In reality, this holster allows you to holster up to 4 firearms and 3 magazines. Now that is this style of holster. The garter holster holds 2 firearms and 1 magazine.
I love that this company is geared for women and everything is designed with us women in mind. From the small decorative details, to the fit, to the style. They had everything covered no matter your preference or clothing. The color choices offered allow one to "customize" your own holster to fit your style. The fact that they have extenders available for purchase is also an awesome thing. They understand that we as women vary in size, body type, etc and gives the option to be able to wear a holster regardless of size.
One thing to note: ALLERGY WARNING: If you have a latex allergy, please not that, "holsters are constructed with polyester wrapped natural rubber fibers which contain Latex. Our Non-Slip Tacti-Grip(TM) is Latex Free"
If I'm being honest, which I am when it comes to any reviews I do, I LOVE this holster! It is perfect for wear during the summer when its hot and I wear items that don't allow me to use an IWB/OWB holster. Its perfect year round. Throughout the summer, I have worn it in place of my IWB holster even when I have worn pants that allow for that style of holster. I personally want to order a garter holster as well, so that I have the perfect holster to wear under a dress.
I would highly recommend a Can Can Concealment holster to any woman who has struggled to find the perfect holster to fit all their needs.
Thank you again so much Darlene for allowing me to review one of your holsters and your generosity.
For more info please visit their website at: http://www.cancanconcealment.com
Being a woman gun owner, actively advocating for gun rights, I am constantly aware that I am part of a demographic. I am a fraction of a number in a statistic in an article sitting on someone’s desk. I understand that the cause I am passionate about is bigger than just myself or even my organization. I am representing gun owners, and women, not merely in my home state, or even country, but across the expanse of the world. That is a truly humbling thought.
Of course, I know that to my loved ones I am more than a mere percentage. I am an integral part of their world. I am as vital to their lives as they are to mine.
Whenever headlines scream from the page that an open carry, or conceal carry citizen, is shot by a law enforcement officer in the line of duty, I pause. I pause and think of all the ways something such as this could happen and ways to try to prevent it from happening. I pause and remember how often the media blasts headlines without fact-finding in the hopes to drum up interest in their brand. I pause and pray for those who are directly and indirectly affected by the event itself regardless of perceived faults and attributing causes. I pause just the same any time there is news of a murderer who has taken the lives of innocent people whether they are children at school, politicians at a fundraising event, moviegoers, unarmed military personnel, members of a church congregation, people at a nightclub, police officers protecting citizens right to assemble and keeping the peace at a rally, or any of the person to person violent crime which thrives wherever we take away innocent people’s ability to defend themselves.
There are many reasons I pause before reacting to sensationalized headlines and bursts of emotion driven speculations. One of those reasons is integrity. Not only my personal integrity, which will eventually stand before God giving an account for each word I have uttered, but also for the integrity of those I represent with my voice and platform. Bringing condemnation upon an individual, group, or entire demographic is something which I take very seriously. It is pertinent that I have facts to base my point of view upon. Surmising the situation without facts will not produce anything of substance. Pontificating without knowledge can result in something more damaging than the original event itself.
Unfortunately, there is a severe, and socially accepted, lack of integrity today. There is a movement within our nation which is based on emotion instead of logic. The movement is driven out of fear and ignorance which is being manipulated by those who see a way to pilfer people's basic individual rights, and with it, their collective power. Mass amounts of people are being herded along by headlines, half-truths, and outright lies. Those who prey on the good intentions and vulnerable emotions of well meaning people are not only uninterested and undeterred by facts, but they are deliberately burying them in hopes that the avalanche of public opinion will entomb their blatant disregard for truth, individual rights, and ultimately freedom.
Upon pausing to seek out the truth in situations such as what we have been bombarded with this past week it has become ever clearer that those hastily painted as victims were perhaps not the people they were portrayed to be. I do not have access to all of the evidence in these such cases and must base my ultimate summary on what we can devise from the facts which we are privy to and await the eventual findings from the investigations of those directly involved before sentencing guilt to any party.
The careless way which the mainstream media and social media warriors throw out condemnation through irresponsible headlines and sensationalized stories has fueled the flames of contention and hostility. Creating a domino effect of destruction and death. It has yet to provide anything of import or promote healing and peace. It has, in effect, been detrimental to not only the human race as a whole, but our communities, our families, and our individual contributions to that which is bigger than ourselves. When we look at ourselves as being as vital to the demographic we represent as we are to our loved ones, we begin taking personal responsibility for our actions and reactions. We begin to value the pause.
The following is a response I wrote after hearing a distant family member state that an irrational response to stress is buying a gun. A little more background on the situation, this family member found out that a "mass shooting" suspect lives on their street and they were feeling stressed and unsure about how to protect their family. It is a little lengthy.
The lives of my family are the absolute highest priority in my life. I would sacrifice my own life for theirs without hesitation.
I have a distant cousin who lives in the Seattle area, where there was a "mass shooting" of some sort. After a few days, this cousin found out that the person who is the suspected shooter, lives on her street. Her two young daughters have played on the street in front of his house. She is understandably scared, stressed, unsure, angry, and God knows what else. She asked if stress and the inability to focus are normal responses to stress. ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY!!! Her husband responded by stating, "You know what is not a rational response to stress? Buying a gun!" Here, I go back to my opening statement. The lives of my family are the absolute highest priority in my life. I would sacrifice my own life for theirs without hesitation.
So, cousin's hubby, you're telling me that it is okay with you that the kids in your neighborhood played in this person's yard? He shot up a public place, and you don't think it might be a good idea to have a way to defend your home, your children, yourselves, your neighborhood kids,etc in the event that another neighbor decides those kids shouldn't play in front of his house? Or, what if you had been at the place that he shot up??
Me? I carry a gun, most of the time. Want to know why? So that I don't have to be afraid. I am not afraid for my own life. I am not afraid for the lives of my children. I am not afraid that someone will hurt me. I live in confidence, rather than fear. I am confident that if I was in a "mass shooting" location, or a robbery or somewhere where people intended to do harm, that I would not be a victim. I am confident that those around me would not be victims. The only victim in that location would be the one who initially intended to harm others. That person would be a victim of a mother protecting her children. The victim of the one who does not have to fear for her life.
Am I trying to jab, hurt or chastise those who choose to live without guns? Hell no! I respect your right to choose not to carry. And if it came down to it, and you were in the store or wherever, choosing to fear for your life from behind a shelf of crackers and candy, I would selflessly PROTECT YOUR LIFE. Have I met you? Maybe. Do you deserve to die while eating dinner with your family, or going on a date, or grocery shopping? NO. That is why I choose to live in confidence, not fear. I do not fear for my life. I live in confidence that I can help people stay alive by carrying a gun.
I choose not to go inside many places where I am "not allowed" to carry my gun. Many times, I am angry when this happens. This place of business feels that they can take away my ability to live in confidence. As I, very hesitantly enter places where firearms are forbidden, knowing that I am not going to be able to protect myself and my kids, or that lady behind the candy shelf, IF something went wrong-I fear. I fear. I fear for the lives of the people in this place. I fear that every person who comes in is not abiding by the law and has a gun. I fear that someone with evil in their heart will hurt me, my family, the elderly man waiting for his prescriptions, the child unattended at the drinking fountain, the soldier on his way home, one of my past students and his mom, the 18-year-old cashier, the single mom who had somebody to watch her kids for 15 minutes so she could run to the store for dinner, the father and son in the fishing aisle, the dad with 5 kids in the cart, the deaf lady in the bathroom, the bank teller, or the unarmed security guard. I fear. When I fear, I am only confident about one thing. I am confident that I will be a victim.
Let me tell you a little bit about the town I live in. The major employer in the area is the Department of Corrections. We have both Federal and State operated prison facilities. We have a super max facility, which holds, or has held, people like Timothy McVeigh, Ted Kazinsky, and some of the most vile people who have ever lived. There are no signs up around our community warning people against picking up hitch hikers. There are, instead, signs encouraging you to "Do time with us!" Now, even though there are no signs discouraging picking up hitch hikers, most people in this town know that it is extremely risky to do so. There are regularly scheduled drills at our schools for the event of an escaped inmate. Sirens sound at all hours. Most of us ignore them. They are just "normal." SORT and Search & Rescue teams do regular simulated escape scenario training on my street. But, I am not afraid. I live within walking distance of 13 correctional facilities, containing approximately 20,000 inmates, some of which have done things that do not even need mention. I am not afraid. My house does not have a "no firearms" sign. I do not lock my doors when I leave, or when I go to bed at night. I am not afraid. I live in confidence.
So, when this guy says things like, "Buying a gun is an irrational response to fear," I ask, "Why don't you protect yourself so you don't have to be afraid in the first place???"
Keep all this in mind as you're running the cash register at the gas station and you are all of a sudden looking down the barrel of a gun. Please hope that me, or someone else who is not afraid is in the store right now, because you are now a victim. Hope with all your might that my daughter drove me to the store because she is learning to drive. Hope that I am prepared to sacrifice myself for my child. Hope that I push your head down behind the shelf of cereal as he looked down the barrel at you. You hope. YOU HOPE. You hope with every cell in your body. You hope with every ounce of faith that you have. You hope that I grabbed my gun off my nightstand.
Now, let me tell you about what I hope for. I hope, every time I holster my gun on my body, that it stays there. I hope I don't need to touch it until I get undressed. I hope that I don't need it. I hope other people have their firearms so I don't have to use mine. I hope YOU push MY head down behind the cereal. I hope that barrel isn't pointing at me. I hope that only good people go shopping today. I hope to draw a bear tag this year so I can test the lethality of this little gun against something big. I hope I never shoot this gun at anything alive.I hope I don't have to be a hero. I hope nobody robs the bank today, because I have to go inside. I hope that I don't have to kill somebody in front of my children, or your children. I hope my gun is staying concealed well so it doesn't freak you out. I hope your 3-year-old doesn't see my holster, and announce at the top of her lungs in the middle of the store, "Mommy, that lady has a gun!!" I hope you have let your children see what kind of damage can be done by a gun. I hope you never need to use your gun to kill a person. I hope you kissed your wife before you left the house. I hope nobody was mad when they decided to come here today. I hope I don't get fired today. I hope that creepy dude outside the door doesn't talk to me. I hope 5 bullets is enough. I hope I miss. I hope I don't miss. I hope I didn't break the law. I hope.
I hope you are beginning to understand.
Now, let me tell you some things that I know. I know where my gun is at all times. I know that my gun is loaded at all times. I know that every member of my family is competent with at least 1 firearm in our house. I know that if somebody entered my house, making a threat on someone's life, that my family would know what to do. I know that I have a better chance to make it out of danger if I can defend myself. I know that doing nothing is not an option. I know where I am "not allowed" to carry my firearm. I know I worry about my sister who lives in a metro area and wouldn't know what to do with a gun if her finger was on the trigger. I know I am not a person who will attack another person. I know that I am a caregiver by nature. I know that I am refusing to be a victim. I know there are more felons in my town than there are in most. I know a girl who studied karate from the time she could stand up until she graduated high school, who was beaten within inches of her life by her boyfriend. I know that being a 115 lb., 5 ' 2", blonde female that my chances of being sexually assaulted are very high. I know that more laws are not going to fix problems. I know that my family has skills that will allow them to survive most situations. I know the lives of my family are the absolute highest priority in my life. I know I would sacrifice myself to save the lives of my children.
Again, I ask, "Why don't you protect yourself so you don't have to be afraid in the first place?"
So, family-afar, hear this. I did not run out and purchase a gun due to being scared or stressed by something scary. I did lots of research. I asked friends what they carry. I asked to shoot theirs. I shot everything we already owned. I did more research. I spoke to my gunsmith, a firearms instructor, the guys at the gun counter, and my very knowledgeable husband. I decided what I wanted and for what purpose. I have been through all of the required safety courses and training by my state for me to carry a concealed handgun. I choose confidence over fear.
Make an educated decision for your family. This is my decision. I choose confidence. I choose life.
Amy E. Garner
Step-Mom of 2
Former Preschool Teacher (14 years)
Like many of you, I am reading the latest on the concealed carry decision of Kelly McGillis and I am confused. In one post she proclaims that she is no longer willing to be anyone's victim, and with the next, posts memes which promote the Progressive's gun control agenda.
On the surface it seems as if she is another, guns for me but not for thee, celebrity who has been given a free pass to protect her life while the peasants must bleed and die waiting for the police to arrive.
However, having not spoken to her directly, I have no way of knowing if this is the case. I am hoping that we are simply witnessing the transformation of a woman who did not understand the freedom, empowerment, and protection afforded her under the Second Amendment.
I may be a bit naive, or blinded by hope, time will suerly tell if that is the case. Yet, I've seen this transformation happen before, many times. We all start somewhere.
Should you and I, who are actively pro gun rights, immediately attack her for her left-leaning tendencies with harsh words and ultimatums there is a very good chance she will become one of the, I deserve a gun but I can't trust anyone else to have one, people. We do not want that to happen.
Now is the time to show her empathy and support for taking her first step in the direction of the freedom and personal responsibility that is gun ownership. We must use this opportunity to help her learn that we are a community, a family, who believes that EVERYONE should have the ability and freedom to protect themselves and their loved ones. This is the perfect opportunity to prove that we gun owners are in fact the helpful, knowledgeable, education minded people that we are. Remember, #EducationEqualsEmpowerment.
With Ms. McGillis, as well as all other new to the life individuals, and fence sitters, we have a responsibility to teach. Her local firearms instructors and gun shop owners may be on the front-lines of her experience with this new path she has chosen. However, we are their back-up. Each of us, in our daily lives, represents something much bigger than ourselves individually. We represent gun owners. We represent tradition. We represent empowerment. We represent personal accountability and responsibility. We represent freedom. We represent America.
Together, we have changed the direction of the gun narrative through education and determination. Together we have seen our numbers and demographics explode to include those who had previously not been what many think of as a typical gun owner, Second Amendment supporter. Together, we have reclaimed many of our rights and are diligently working to reclaim even more every day.
Please, take this into consideration as you approach this particular situation as well as all the countless ones you see in your personal daily lives. We all know anti-gunners. We all know someone from the younger generation. We all know someone who is sitting on the fence. Take this opportunity to be the person who empowers them through education. Their lives, and our freedom, may depend on it.
Chances are you’ve heard the argument from both complete anti-gun, as well as some pro-gun so long as it’s not their gun, individuals that nobody needs an AR style rifle. There are many sources which explain that the AR style modern sporting rifles are simply the same rifles we’ve had for years only instead of wood, they are made with plastic. There are also many sources which explain that they are the perfect firearm for the elderly and disabled due to the design features that make them lighter, easier to hold on target for accuracy, and easier to operate (for example, racking a handgun slide is nearly impossible for someone with arthritis or loss of grip strength).
While, yes, all of those things are accurate and worth mentioning, that is not really the point.
The point is, it’s not a need. Nobody needs an AR any more than we need anyone’s opinion on what we choose to own. Defense of one's life is a personal, unalienable, inherent right. Our founders understood that right predates government, all government. It predates our United States Constitution and all of the bills and articles therein. The Second Amendment was simply their way of ensuring that going forward the government recognized the individual's right to keep and bear whatever was going to be the most effective and efficient tool to protect and defend yourself from anyone or anything which would attempt to take your life from you.
Freedom can be a scary concept for people.. It gives you the right to live your life according to your personal will so long as your personal actions do not impede on your neighbor. It scares people who want to be in control. It leaves them trying desperately to impose their own will on their neighbor because they fear their neighbor’s will does not match their own. This is precisely how we get to the point where someone who has little to no knowledge of tools of self defense, and a soapbox, feel it is their place to stand up and demand that, “Nobody should be allowed own this gun because I think they are too scary.” Well, bravo, you just showed your hand. Now, everyone can see you for the freedom-hating, sniveling, coward that you are.
Quite frankly, it is nobody's business what firearms you own, or even if you own firearms at all. I hope that next time you see or hear some dictator wannabe spout off that nobody needs an AR you will join me in the reply, “Nobody needs your opinion either, yet here you are proving that you don’t understand the difference between rights and needs. Thankfully, inherent rights are not subject to fear or opinion, no matter how loud your tantrum is.”
Half the reason that gun owners tell gun control advocates to go get bent like a soggy pretzel is because they literally have no clue what they are talking about. Most famous is Carolyn McCarthy’s crusade to ban guns with barrel shrouds which she defined as "shoulder things that go up". For the record a barrel shroud is a tubular (or semi-circular) piece of sheet metal that provides stand-off from a potentially hot barrel preventing people from being burned. It is literally a “gun safety device”. Carolyn McCarthy wanted to make guns MORE dangerous not less.
When those of us who have carried arms as a profession, either in harm’s way or in competition hear terms like "high powered assault weapon" (PROTIP- actual assault weapons use low to intermediate power cartridges to facilitate effective suppressive fire on full auto) to Kevin de Leon's famous "Thirty 30 caliber bullet clips a second" speech... we assume you're carrying around an extra chromosome.
Yes- terminology does matter, especially if you want people (at least thinking people) to take you seriously.
Modern semi-auto rifles are not “weapons of war”. The last time a semi-auto rifle was a weapon of war was during the Korean War when soliders and Marines were issued the M-1 Garand rifle which fired from a 8 round clip.
On that note, modern semi-auto rifles use a magazine, not a clip. Clips are used to load magazines and the magazines are used to load the rifle.
If one wishes to look at an actual weapon of war available to US civilians, it is the Remington Model 700. It is a manually operated bolt action rifle, typically fed by a 5 round (or 3 round) internal fixed magazine. Grandpappy’s good ol’ deer rifle, with its shiny wood stock is a weapon of war. The AR-15 is not.
Automatic weapons are also weapons of war. Automatic weapons have been subject to a ridiculous amounts of oversight, and sales of new ones have been prohibited to civilians since 1986. Automatic weapons are not semi automatic rifles. The M249 SAW, the M240B GPMG and the M2HB are automatic weapons. As long as the trigger is held, they continue to fire at a cyclic rate of 600-800 rounds per minute. Semi automatic rifles require a separate pull of the trigger to discharge each round, just like a revolver.
While we are on the topic of 600-800 rounds per minute, semi automatic rifles will not fire that fast. Those figures are for the cyclic rate which is the maximum theoretical rate of fire. For the fully automatic M-16 rifle the maximum effective rate of fire is 120-150 rounds per minute. For the M4 carbine it is 90 rounds per minute. For a semi automatic civilian AR-15 it is 45 rounds per minute.
To take this concept one step further, firing any fully automatic rifle at its maximum effective rate, even if they were generally legal to purchase over the counter, would destroy the rifle within a few minutes. A test was done on one which included firing to destruction. The barrel blew out by the 20th magazine.
The shooter in the above described video was not injured. That is because the AR-15 is not a “high powered rifle” or any variation thereof. It is a low powered rifle. It chambers a cartridge based off of the .222 Remington which was designed to hunt varmints like coyotes and woodchucks. Many States ban its use for big game like deer. A high powered rifle would be something like Grandpappy’s Remington 700 in 30-06 which is one of America’s most popular cartridges for big game (since the .223 is typically not suitable for big game hunting).
With that in mind, why should we expect a carefully constructed law that respects our rights that, at the same time, addresses serious concerns about firearms getting into the wrong hands, when you don't even know what the heck you want to ban or why?
When we have Senator Bill Nelson on CNN expounding on how dangerous the “.223 Magnum that has exceptional military velocity” we point at you and laugh. Literally. We point, then laugh. You’re just making things up at that point. You’re not even TRYING to lie effectively.
If the entire discussion was about dogs- this is what most gun control advocates sound like:
“I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.”
So what do you propose?
“I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.”
Wait. What's an attack dog?
“You know what I mean. Like military dogs.”
Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds and the Malinois?
“Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs.”
I have no idea what dogs you're talking about now.
“You're being both picky and obtuse. You know I mean hounds.”
What the hell are you going on about?
“OK, maybe not actually ::air quotes:: hounds ::air quotes::. Maybe I have the terminology wrong. I'm not obsessed with vicious dogs like you. But we can identify kinds of dogs that civilians just don't need to own.”
Well it is plain to see you can’t…. and don’t expect us to listen to what you have to say.
Blog posts are original content written by 1MMAGC moms and dads.