Posted on 09/25/2008 8:11:40 AM PDT by chicagolady
For all you Sarah Palin types.........
Armed Females of America -- They tell you in the anti-gun women's magazines to be aware of your surroundings and to take precautions so you are not caught in high-risk situations. (Don't go out by yourself at night; don't go into high-crime neighborhoods; don't talk to strangers; etc.) They tell you to always check the back seat of your car before you get in; to walk on the street-side of the sidewalk (rather than the building-side); and to get inside a well-lit store if you suspect someone is following you.
These are all good suggestions that I practice all the time.
What the anti-gunners don't tell you is that no matter how prepared you are, and no matter how careful you are, you are still at risk of being attacked. And if attacked, your chances of being maimed, raped or dead are much higher if you have no adequate means to defend yourself. (Screaming, running, and passivity, contrary to what they would have you believe, are NOT adequate!)
I was originally from Long Island, New York, and before I met my husband, I didn't even know that regular citizens like myself could legally own a gun for self-defense. Then my husband taught me about the Constitution, how to shoot a pistol, and how to use a gun for self-defense.
Now I know that as long as I am prepared, I have a vastly better chance of surviving an attack by a predatory criminal. It is exciting to know I have control over my own body and life, and I don't have to live in fear.
Some say I am selfish -- that I am putting my life above that of the criminal. I say: When it comes to criminals, they are putting their lives above mine. Someone who would rape, maim, or kill me is an animal without morals or conscience. The strongest and most well-prepared will survive. Thanks to my handgun and the lessons my husband gave me, I am more likely to be stronger and more well-prepared than my attacker.
Some say I am stupid -- that my gun can be taken away from me and used against me. I say: That is why I take self-defense lessons, and practice my draw, my stance, and my grip.
Some say I am naive -- what if the criminal has a gun too? I say: May the best aim win. If my attacker has a gun, I certainly wouldn't have a chance without one, would I?
Some say I am lazy -- that if I "really" cared about self-defense, I'd go learn Karate. I say: I am disabled, and I have a RIGHT to be able to defend myself ADEQUATELY against an attack!
What do you say?
My Mayor Richard Daley thinks only crimminals should have guns!!
Not in my world. A robber who initiates the action is on the offensive. Just because they hadn’t fired their weapon at that second, doesn’t give you a crystal ball to look into the future.
Your post also has nothing to do with this article. The lady already said she was disabled and based on your history, you would see this lady at the mercy of anyone who would take advantage of her.
You haven’t learned anything from this article or the post. I’m through.
> Not in my world. A robber who initiates the action is on the offensive. Just because they hadn’t fired their weapon at that second, doesn’t give you a crystal ball to look into the future.
Interesting — you see, that was a quotation from “Kill or Get Killed”, written by your friend Col. Rex Applegate. You clearly disagree with Col. Applegate (a real expert), so what chance have I of persuading you?
> Your post also has nothing to do with this article.
I never promised you that it would. I only promised that I’d be happy to learn what you had to teach — which, so far, is that Col. Applegate and you live in different worlds.
I have to live with the practical application of the theory, so which of the two of you am I to believe?
> The lady already said she was disabled and based on your history, you would see this lady at the mercy of anyone who would take advantage of her.
That is emotive nonsense and doesn’t follow — in fact, it is clear to me that you didn’t read her article in its entirety. Because she also says:
> Some say I am stupid — that my gun can be taken away from me and used against me. I say: That is why I take self-defense lessons, and practice my draw, my stance, and my grip.
...which is, of course, a sensible thing to do, and in line with what both Col. Applegate and my humble self advocate.
(For the record, I don’t advocate Karate or any of the Asian martial arts, for all of the same reasons the Col didn’t advocate Judo or Jiu Jitsu. I prefer the more pragmatic systems — such as was taught by Col. Applegate and W E Fairbairn. KM is also excellent, if you have the time.)
I bought my first gun last week: a Mossberg Persuader (12 gauge shotgun). I went to a range Thursday to get some instruction on it because I’d never used a shotgun before.
I plan to buy a handgun next. I’ve only shot a .357 revolver, a 9mm Glock, and my ex-BF’s Glock which I believe was a .40 caliber and was pretty powerful. Any recommendations? :-)
In honor of the idiots who actually say this - they are out there - I propose National Helpless Victim Day. Anyone who believes this nonsense can wear a t shirt that proclaims his adherence to the right of the criminal to rob, rape, torture, and murder without encountering any mean - spirited, right - wing, violent resistance. As a further commitment to their cause, they can sign a pledge that they will not prosecute the crimes, since that might also interfere with the criminal's rights.
I will support them enthusiastically in this endeavor. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.