Assuming your question is serious. Comeing out of nowhere is impossible unless you believe in ghosts. You had no situational awareness, period. I'll let you fathom the rest.
The goal of gun control is a total ban and confiscation. Oppose all new gun control. Recall the proponents.
So if I come up with a scenario where a gun would tip the situation in my favor, does that mean that guns are the answer to everything? Your argument is silly. You are using a scenario where a defending yourself could be more dangerous than not as some sort of asinine end card for the self-defensive use of firearms.
How could he have any clue about this "situational awareness"? This is part of the secret knowledge that one gains in the study of the defensive use of firearms. Pretty scary stuff! We who pay attention to our surroundings are constantly scanning so as to determine who/what may and who/what may not constitute a threat. Once one of us who has this "secret knowledge" perceives that there are a pair of hood rats approaching us, the priority changes from + or -, to a matter of which + first. This secret knowledge is a great thing. It also serves to keep you from being run over by cars, flattened by falling objects, and falling into holes. I think everyone should dedicate some attention to attaining this "situational awareness" thing! Oh. I forgot. The *******s have unicorns and fairies to make this unnecessary.
The facts are that a heavily armed community has a far smaller amount of crime and gun related violence than a community that is not so armed. The concept of some how equating Gun Violence to Legal Gun Ownership is beyond flawed. I don't see any problems with back ground checks to prevent people with criminal records from buying a gun but any criminal is NOT going to purchase a gun and use in in a crime as they would purchase an illegal weapon. AboveAlpha
Being aware of your surroundings is not secret knowledge nor does it require firearms or training (can't hurt though) It does require having a clue though. There is some truth to the fact that libs may be more oblivious to certain possible situations. Are they more trusting? Do they require proof of ill intent before even considering the possibility? Don't know the answer but I have witnessed it often in my circles.
Well that's easy. It's only liberals who write articles like that for the Kos. Obviously were all aware that one political faction can have different opinions but oppressive gun control has been a liberal agenda as long as I can remember. So if your party keeps electing this as a platform all people in your voting bloc must bear responsibility. Would you agree?
I used the old OP, but stipulated Left Wingers in my post. According to some of my liberal friends, the only reasons I tend to be considered a moderate democrat instead of a liberal progressive democrat is my stance on gun control, strong defense and abortion. So effectively I agree, liberals do not hate guns, left wing nuts hate guns. I hunt and have several firearms depending on what I am hunting. Most recently my relegation to electric mobility keeps me on the fire lanes or close by so I am limited as to what I can hunt. Here in Southeast Alabama that pretty much leaves out bird hunting so I quietly roll into a position near a large mast providing tree and wait for deer or wild hogs. I use a Browning Auto-5 with a Hastings rifled barrel and 50 cal saboted slugs. - - - Updated - - - Oh? So you do want to take guns away from law abiding citizens then. Is that your answer to criminals with guns?
I like guns. I'm a fair shot, too. In fact, I'm the scariest thing a rightwinger can imagine: I'm an armed leftist.
Actually the scariest thing along those lines for a rightwinger is Dick Cheney with a shotgun. Apparently the man doesn't even bother to aim when he shoots.
Why would you be scary to rightwingers? I also lean left and shoot on a regular basis, when I do bother to go to the range and shoot I am shooting next to fellow Americans that believe in the 2nd A, political leanings rarely come up in the discussions, especially since everyone there believes in the same rights under the Constitution. Gun ownership is not resticted to the left or right and neither are those that are against guns in all their forms.
Some Arms have been banned for those Individuals who are not entitled to the "character of a well regulated Militia", is that a bad thing in our republic?
I think everything needs to take a different turn. Guns are NOT going away, and neither are situations where we NEED them. Just imagine a short commercial piece that goes like this: The family is settled in for the evening, watching TV. The daughter is in her room. Two little kids are in another bedroom. There's a crashing sound in the basement. Mom looks over to Dad, and one of them says "Big Pharma", or whatever key word that the family has agreed upon as their warning to all that there's an emergency. The parents move quickly from the family room, calling out "Big Pharma" as they go through the hallway toward the master bedroom. We see the kids come from their rooms, and join the parents. We see that the door to the master bedroom closes. It's a medium weight security door. The parents go to the gun safe. Mom gets a pump shotgun, and moves with the kids to a position behind the parents dresser, and starts calling 911. Dad gets his AR-15 carbine, with a mounted flash light, and moves to protect the hallway that leads to the bedrooms. The bad guys are moving around in the family room now. Dad knows where they are, but doesn't betray his position. We see big lights come on through the front room windows as the cops arrive. This is the message of responsible family defense. Why aren't we getting that?
A well regulated Militia of Individuals of the People is what is expressly declared as necessary to the security of a free State; not, our federal Wars on Crime, Drugs, Poverty, and Terror.
There is seldom time to follow that scenario. Here is what happened to us. My wife heard the tell tale beep of someone breaching our security system. I quickly turn off the light and TV as I reach down for my twice barrel quail gun (24" barrel) loaded with buck shot. As the flash light beam shows around the corner I click my remote and the hall light comes on. The intruder freezes in spot and looks around the corner down the hall. That was the last look he will ever see. When the cops come to pick up the body they remark how lucky I was he was on the kitchen tile when he bled out. He only had a handgun so there was nothing to fear since my twice barrel shutz gun is far easier to point and shoot.
I'm sorry it had to come to that for you. I've had to make it clear to some people that mine could be the last voice they would ever hear, but didn't have to follow through. But get on board with me here! My position is that there is a demonstrable need for firearms in our society. Rather than being contentious, as it has been between the far left and the rest of the world, we should be teaching responsible use of firearms. This would increase awareness among firearms owners about the correct storage, readiness and deployment of their firearms, if/when the need arises, and it would tell the criminal element that we are all ready to meet them.
My party? What party would that be? I said I am liberal... never did I say that I am a Democrat. Frankly both Republican Party and Democrat Party are a bunch of elitist that are out of touch with the common person and act more like a wedge than a bridge.
Storage? No! I have a double shotgun loaded and ready next to my bed, and I have a single 20 next to my den chair, loaded and ready. I do not store fire arms and the USSC has states that laws requiring them to be locked up or with trigger guards are unconstitutional.
I think Mr. Freud might have something to say about this post. It would certainly explain why liberal Hollywood promotes so much violence.