quote of the day – kendra st. clair

By now, you all are probably aware of the story of the 12-year-old girl perforating the home-intruder through the bathroom closet door, but have you heard her response to the incident?

"When I had the gun, I didn’t think I was actually going to have to shoot somebody," the 6th grader recalled. "I think it’s going to change me a whole lot, knowing that I can hold my head up high and nothing can hurt me anymore."

About the only way this situation could have been better was if this was not Kendra’s first time behind the trigger of a firearm. Thankfully, though, such tools are designed to be easily used by anyone from 12-year-old girls to 92-year-old war veterans, and that ease of use arguably saved this girl’s life.

And let us not mince words here – that young woman either saved her own life, saved herself from being raped, or saved herself from being abducted (and then probably murdered and/or raped). The various authorities and back-seat commentators are hypothesizing that her attacker was "homeless" and was "only looking for food", to which I say "bulldren"; you do not go looking for food in the bathroom closet. According to Kendra, she opened the blinds/shades on one of the windows to get a look at this person beating on her home’s front door, so we know the jackass was already aware of her presence in the house; couple that with the fact that he probably heard her on the phone with her mother and/or 911, and he knew more-or-less where she was hiding. He could have chosen to avoid that area and grab whatever food/valuables he was after if that was really his intent.

Apparently it was not, and when Kendra literally had nowhere else to run, she did what she had to in order to protect herself, as she had every right to do.

And let us take a look at that instance of self-defense. If Kendra’s mother, Debra, had followed the advice of "gun control" extremists, the Glock would have been locked up in a safe somewhere, with its ammunition and magazines locked in a separate safe. Debra was not home; what if she had the keys to the respective safes with her? What if she could not remember the combinations when her daughter’s life was on the line and she was not home? What if Kendra did not know how to operate a combination lock (I did not until high school), or fumbled it in the stress of the situation?

Or, worse still, what if Debra had taken the council of the true anti-rights cultists and simply not had a firearm in her house? What recourse would Kendra have had against an aggressor who was significantly larger, stronger, and more vicious than she could hope to be at 12 years of age?

So long as people like Kendra’s home invader exist and continue to try to prey on the weaker, the infirm, the older, the younger, the smaller, the slower, and anyone else they can get their despicable hands upon, "gun control" only serves to aid and abet violent criminals by disarming those potential victims and turning them into defenseless prey. I do not hold to that. Thugs who unlawfully break into other people’s home with any form of ill intent should be so lucky as to only receive what Kendra provided to her aggressor, and that particular dreg of humanity should be counting his lucky stars that she was unable to aim properly at his center of mass; something tells me she would not have hesitated to do so, and rightfully so.

guns are bad news for women, the cartoon

I swear, people, you are just impossible to reach… I have shown the "extremist" behavior that can result from women taking responsibility for their security, I have brought your attention to the fabrications employed by those looking to arm women, I have documented made-up women who were supposedly enjoying firearms, I have even illustrated the dangers of recreational firearm use, and yet you still will not listen to the simple fact that guns are "bad news" for women!

What do I need to do to reach you? Because, really, I am getting quite tired of nonsense like this cartoon:


I mean, what the hell was that? Was the artist somehow trying to imply that any crime statistic other than gun death matters? I mean, who cares if a woman gets beaten up by an abusive husband/boyfriend – at least no gun was used, because guns are "bad news" for women! Was the artist trying to indicate that the woman would be defenseless without the firearm? Well, that gun sure as hell is not going to help, because guns are "bad news" for women! Was the artist misguidedly trying to get his audience to think that the firearm would have somehow equalized the situation between the stronger, abusive male and the weaker, wounded female? Of course that could never be the case, because – all together now! – guns are "bad news" for women!

How many times do I need to repeat that simple fact before you people start listening?!?

(As with my previous posts in this category, it saddens me that I have to specify this, but I know I do: the entire above post was written very sarcastically, and with good reason. The entire notion that guns are "bad news" for women is absurd on its face, and both it and those who promulgate it should be treated with the utmost contempt.)

(Cartoon artist unknown (though if you do know his/her identity, please let me know); originally found at Gun Free Zone.)

quote of the day – breda

I like to ramble on about how open carry is not such a big deal to most people, and how it is becoming surprisingly mundane for such an out-of-the-ordinary activity, but, as is often the case, other folks do a much better job illustrating the point than I manage to:

Special thanks to NancyR for loaning me her Sweet Daughter for an afternoon during the 2011 NRA Annual Meeting. We ate brownies, got free tactical hats, giggled at kitty videos on the internet, rode up and down (& up and down) the escalators, carried a stuffed bunny around the exhibit hall…all while I carried a gun on my hip – and it was fun! The new normal, one girl at a time.

I confess to not regularly reading NancyR’s weblog, and thus I do not know Sweet Daughter’s actual age, but it is probably no more than about six or seven; however, the young lady has already learned that "firearms" are far from mutually exclusive with "safe", "fun", or "female", and is further learning – literally at the knee of some very impressive people – that an adult human being is not only responsible for her safety, she should also take responsibility for her safety. And, being the precocious young lady she probably is, Sweet Daughter will probably be enthusiastically sharing her experiences with her compatriots in very short order.

The problems anti-rights cultists are facing are that firearms are fun, firearms are empowering, firearms are equalizers (both in terms of gender and size), and the ownership of firearms is a Constitutionally-protected, individual, human right. On the other hand, "gun control" is none of those things, and actually fails miserably at its stated goal. With a disparity like that, how can the hoplophobes ever hope to succeed?