View Single Post
  #143  
Old 01-15-2013, 7:39 AM
winslowgirl's Avatar
winslowgirl winslowgirl is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 132
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I thought by far the strongest argument articulated by Mr. LaPierre in that speech was that: "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" .

This statement was roundly condemned by those who live by its dictum, that in response to an existential threat one must meet force with force.

This notion has the great advantage of being intuitively obvious to those who oppose it as well as those who promote it. We know that because its chief critics choose to be protected by good guys with guns.




"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" Matthew 7:20 kjv

The President is knee deep in armed good guys 24/7, as is his stand-in, who even now heads a task force bent on denying that protection to ordinary citizens. If these two men at the top of government really believe their own propaganda, let them stand-down the good guys with guns protecting their precious . . . assets.

If the president believes good guys with guns in schools is not the answer to protecting our children from bad guys with guns, let him remove the protection from his children's school and deny himself the peace of mind he enjoys as a benefit of their deployment.

That School also houses the children of our other masters in the federal government, who advocate and implement the president's policies on this matter. So in addition to the removal of the Secret Service detail protecting the Commander in Chief's kids, let them remove the other eleven armed guards protecting their offspring at that school.

Will they do so? Well of course they wont. They wont because they understand fully that the only effective response to a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun.

And the proselytizer-in-chief and high priestess of the anti-gun zealots, our own beloved Senator Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein, who famously, whilst advocating the prohibition of carry permits for the sheeple, carried in her handbag her own gun permit, let her eschew her current retinue of armed bodyguards.

Our current state Attorney General, the indefatigable protector and promoter of California's anti-gun laws and protector of the People's Peace, let her stand down her 24/7 taxpayer-funded armed escort.

If these officers of state and others responsible for our restrictive gun laws, had to live by them, how long do you think such laws would stay in force?

Why do celebrities who make their living glorifying the gun, advocate ever more restriction of our right to keep and bear arms, our call for the repeal of 2A, continue to enjoy the comfort of legal concealed carry weapons, and/or armed personal body guards, whilst seeking to deny the rest of us the same right of self defense?

Well of course they do so because they are amoral, shameless hypocrites. Hypocrites who well understand that the only effective answer to a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun.

Every minute of every day the same people bent on depriving you of the tools of self defense, are providing us with irrefutable evidence of why it is we need them.
Reply With Quote