[rface]

I didn't publish her name here.

So much to say - so little time to say it. Going to work.

[DumpsterDiver]

I didn't publish her name here.

Well, you should have. What a load of hyperbole.

Old joke:

Writers who abuse hyperbole should be taken out and shot!

[samtheman]

Carjackings are way down in areas where citizens are allowed to carry concealed weapons.

[BenLurkin]

For starters - this nervous Nellie hasn't figured out yet that officers are in danger from criminals, who themselves care not a whit about whether their carry is legal or not.

There is, of course, no additional risk to LEOs.

They are at risk now from the criminal element, and will never be at risk from ordinary citizens who are carrying legally.

[longtermmemmory]

newsflash to this idiot. Police have ALWAYS assumed everyone is potentially dangerous.

This is nothing more than democrat hypoerbole. Same as tax cuts starve children.

[Henrietta]

"I would like to make the public aware of the possible "side effects" of this new bully law."

Yeah, I guess one of the side effects would be that if you are a bully, you'd better watch your @$$, because the person whom you are threatening now can carry the means to kill you.

[GrandEagle]

After all, he must assume you’re armed.
LOL! (Trying to stay in my chair from the laughter...)
This individual obviously doesn't know any police officers very well. All of the officers I know always assume everyone is armed.
This foolish person must think that without the law recognizing a citizens right to carry a firearm, the criminals wouldn't carry one!
I live in a state that has has a CCP for years. I have been stopped a few times for various traffic offenses (usually speeding) and have NEVER been drawn on by an officer.
Even after letting the officer know that I am carrying a concealed weapon (Although not required, I always do if I have it on my person), I have never had an officer even act nervous. They all ask if I have a permit, most ask to see it, then some even discuss firearms with me, exchanging opinions on what the best self defense weapon might be.

[MarkL]

I know, because for 22 years, I was held hostage in my own home as my ex-husband practiced killing me day in and day out with his beloved guns. It's a disease of dependence with fear and control its drug.

It seems like this woman is speaking more of herself than anything else... She stayed with an abusive husband who "practiced killing me" for 22 years? She needed a) to get her head examined b) a protective court order, and c) a handgun to protect herself.

This woman is a nut. "There was nothing that I could do to protect myself, so nobody else should be able to protect themselves either!"

Mark

[10mm]

...for 22 years, I was held hostage in my own home as my ex-husband practiced killing me day in and day out with his beloved guns.

So she voluntarily stayed married to this lunatic for 22 years. We should care what this irrational kook thinks?

Bring back literacy tests for voters!

[NonValueAdded]

Perhaps she doesn't realize that the rest of us don't want to feel defenseless for 22 years.

[marktwain]

I know, because for 22 years, I was held hostage in my own home as my ex-husband practiced killing me day in and day out with his beloved guns.

Hmm... He must have been grossly incompetent. 22 years of practice, yet he never succeeded.

In 22 years, she never had a chance to escape this "hostage situation". I just read some statistics that shocked me, but given the other research that I have read, made sense.

Of spouses that murder each other, 75% of the victims are men. Have we been lied to, or what? This was in a relatively politically correct book titled "100 ways to live to be 100", and claimed FBI statistics as the source.

Anyone out there who can shed light on this?

[DE50AE]

Her name is at the linked site - so, apparently, is her address. Not a smart move on her part. She bases her whole premise on her experience with one nutcase, and now she's effectively posted a sign in her front yard saying there are no guns in this house. What a dim bulb.

[DakotaGator]

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

The author of that article is a nitwit. And, when you get to her bottom line, you find she was too cowardly to either flee a bad situation or defend herself.

The Constitution protects her against government excesses. It can't protect her from herself.

[CarryaBigStick]

My brother, who is a sheriffs deputy, believes strongly in the citizens right to concealed carry. Because he knows that honest law-abiding citizens with CCW permits such as myself will be there to back him up if the going gets rough. He considers us an asset, not a threat.

[Sender]

This woman has "issues" best dealt with by a shrink IMHO.

[supercat]

I know, because for 22 years, I was held hostage in my own home as my ex-husband practiced killing me day in and day out with his beloved guns. It’s a disease of dependence with fear and control its drug.

Which seems more likely:

1. The husband was making bona fide plans to kill his wife, and practicing them carrying it out, or
2. The husband was simply going to the range, and the wife believed that anyone married to a nag such as herself must want to do her in, and thus projected her hostilities onto her husband.

Anyone at all think #1?

[Condor51]

I didn't publish her name here.

---

Well, since she did, I will. It's Brenda.

And all I can say is I'm sorry Brenda - you married a NUT. And if he didn't 'practice killing you' with guns, he would have used something else. Like knives.

And BTW, nobody says YOU have to carry a gun. feel free not to. But I'd then suggest you stay of MLK Drive after sundown (assuming you're white), or any part of 'the bad neighborhoods' where you live, as I wouldn't want your car to breakdown.

As something would likly go wrong with the inadequate crack-addict mind that needs to use a gun to rob, rape and proably kill you. Then feel free to

Forget the above -- insert this;
Brenda you're a moron. Call 911 and have a nice after-life.

[Mulder]

I would like to make the public aware of the possible "side effects" of this new bully law

Thanks. I'm obviously too stupid to think for myself.

As for the "side effects" from a personal standpoint, the state now recognizes my Right to carry a tool that I paid for with my own money.

From a societal standpoint, I would expect to see a decline in the violent crime rate, since this has been the experience of most states that have passed CCW laws.

First off, don’t be surprised that if and when you get pulled over by a police officer, he or she comes in full assault fashion with gun drawn and ready to defend his or her life. You’ll have a gun pointed right at you, cocked and ready to fire.

And don't be surprised if I file a lawsuit against the jackboot for excessive force. And don't be surprised if his boss takes him off the street for numerous complaints of acting like a moron.

Don’t panic and do something stupid, because you might get shot

Yeah, and then I might own half the freakin' town if I survive. Or I might just die, then I won't have to listen to the bulls**t from you and your fellow sheep anymore.

After all, he must assume you’re armed

Didn't they assume this before this law was passed?

Or are the officers dumb enough so they just assumed that Mr. Gang Banger would obey the laws against CCW becasue "it's against the law".

Statistics in Texas have shown that citizens with CCW 'permits' are 70% less likely to commit crimes than those without CCW 'permits'.

So tell me again why your average cop would fear a CCW holder? Are they stupid, or do they simply have a superiority complex?

I’m sure many officers have pondered this situation in their daily duties.

If an officer can't handle a peaceably armed citizen, then he or she needs to find a new line of work.

Cops in 35 other states with CCW laws don't seen to have this problem.

Nor do officers in the dozen or more states where open carry is totally legal, or in Alaska or Vermont where anyone can carry open or concealed without a permit.

Do you think Missouri police officers are dumber than those in Vermont?

I will always be against putting more potentially dangerous weapons in the hands of our general public

How do you feel about putting other "potentially dangerous weapons" in the hands of the general public, like ballots or books or cars?

Less lethal avenues should be sought if you feel you need to defend your life 24 hours a day

In other words, you should just hand over your wife and daughters to a burglar/rapist?

There’s something wrong with the inadequate mind that needs to use a gun to feel protected

You mean like all those cops that not only carry guns, but "drawn and in full assault fashion" for a routine traffic stop?

I know, because for 22 years, I was held hostage in my own home as my ex-husband practiced killing me day in and day out with his beloved guns

So let me see if I understand this:

Your husband, which I assume you voluntarily married, held you hostage for 22 years and conspired to murder you every day for 22 years, and you didn't call the cops. You didn't call a lawyer. You didn't leave. (Did he duct tape you to the chair, and only untie you when it was time for you to write your "contribution" to the paper?).

So now you want to take away everyone else's gun for something you accused your ex-husband of doing, and which easily could have been prevented if you had only taken the responsibility of either arming yourself (in most states it is lawful to use deadly force to defend your life or prevent a forcible felony), or utilizing those very resources (the police) which you desire that the rest of us use for our sole source of protection.

Well, here's what I think:

First, the Constitution enumerates my Right to keep and bear arms. In other words, I have a Right to own and carry a gun, regardless of what you think, or your friends think, or your masters in gov't think.

Secondly, I really don't care about your "plight". You're an adult. If you were too stupid to marry a bad guy, then stick with him for 22 years, then that is your problem, not mine. It doesn't give you the Right to tell me what to buy with my money, or what I can carry on my person. Nor does it give you the Right to conspire to overthrow the Bill of Rights.

Finally, I doubt very seriously that your husband was as bad as you claim. You've accused him publicly of multiple forcible felonies, and many men in that position would sue you and your paper for slander in civil court. Such false public accusations may also be grounds for criminal charges.

[BykrBayb]

Oh give me a break! I was pulled over a few years ago in Columbus, GA. When I reached in the glove box to get the insurance card, my husband's hand gun came tumbling out. The cop rolled her eyes at me, like anyone would when confronted with a clumsy bimbo, and waited for me to put the gun back and get the insurance card. She did not panic.

[humblegunner]

There’s something wrong with the inadequate mind that needs to use a gun to feel protected.

Your mind is faulty Ping!
Why is there an assault rifle under my desk???

[Objective Reality]

What an idiot.

All cops have always assumed that all stops are potentially going to be met with gunfire, and that every person they deal with is armed. The flat, outright ban on all firearms would do NOTHING to change this.