Posted on 11/01/2011 3:27:53 PM PDT by Kaslin
As I always say, you can be a victim, or not, the choice is yours.
Yesterday, Spartanburg County Sheriff Chuck Wright of South Carolina told women during a news conference to obtain their concealed weapons permit in order to better protect themselves from rapists and criminals in the area.
The sheriff of Spartanburg County, S.C., turned a news conference about an attempted rape in his community into an extended rant Monday in which he slammed a criminal justice system preferred by "liberals" for failing to keep the repeat-offender suspect behind bars -- and implored the women in his community to pack heat for self-protection.
"I want you to get a concealed weapons permit," Sheriff Chuck Wright said at the Monday news conference, as reported by TV station WYFF. "Don't get Mace. Get a firearm."
The sheriff alleged that a 46-year-old man named Walter Lance abducted a woman while she was walking her dog Sunday afternoon and attempted to rape her.
Lance was arrested and charged with kidnapping, first-degree criminal sexual conduct and grand larceny, the Spartanburg Herald-Journal reported.
In the news conference, Wright said Lance had been convicted of 20 crimes dating back to 1983, including disorderly conduct, domestic violence, assault and battery with intent to kill, and resisting arrest, among others.
"Now if anybody sitting in this room had been charged with any of that stuff, they'd probably be finding a tall oak tree and a short rope for us," Wright said.
"I can tell you that our form of justice is not making it," he stated. "This fellow that has been charged numerous times for crimes against women and crime in society ... he's been in jail more times than I have, and I'm the dad-blame [guy] over the jail over there. And he seems to get out quicker than I can get out. And I am aggravated.
"I've had liberals call me and tell me, 'The chain gang is not going to work.' Well, let me inform you that your form of justice isn't working either."
Wright suggested that the women of Spartanburg carry their weapons in fanny packs. "You can conceal a small pistol in them," he said. "They got one called The Judge that shoots a .45 or a .410 shell. You ain't got to be accurate. You just have to get close."
This Sheriff should be applauded and is absolutely correct in his suggestions. Yes, law enforcement is an important piece of society however, ultimately it is up to the individual to protect themselves, in particular women because they are biologically weaker than men and easy targets for assault.
However, unsurprisingly MSNBC fill-in host Craig Melvin seems to be more worried about the fate of potential rapists, rather than the safety of women. During an interview with Sheriff Wright today, Melvin suggested law enforcement should be the only necessary protection for women and society against criminals. At the beginning of the interview, Melvin asked:
Sheriff, if law enforcement is charged with protecting the public, then, then, then why should that not be sufficient? Why should folks have to go out and get guns and arm themselves if we've got cops?
To which Wright responded:
We can't be everywhere, and we are a fool if we tell everybody that we can take care of all of our problems.
Later in the interview Melvin has the audacity to suggest a woman defending herself against rape is "implying guilt rather than innocence."
Melvin: If women are shooting potential attackers, aren't they presuming guilt before innocence? What if a woman kills an attacker? Isn't that opening another whole legal can of worms?
Sheriff Wright: Well, it's easy to fix that. Just don't attack a woman.... I know that this is controversial, but I do believe that people who believe in the Second Amendment and believe that they should arm themselves have a right to do so, as long as they're trained properly.
Melvin was also shocked to learn the Sheriff suggested women use a .45 calibur handgun to get the job done. What did he think the Sheriff was going to suggest? Spitballs? A rubber band gun?
Here is a reality check for Craig Melvin: The most violent cities in the country, Chicago, Detroit, New York City, all have extremely strict gun laws. Being armed is a deterrent to criminals, plain and simple. If criminals know there is potential to get shot, they think twice about attacking you. Women have every right to protect themselves against rape, murder or other violent crimes by carrying a concealed weapon and yes, if they are attacked, have the right (in most states anyway) to shoot their attacker in self-defense. It is obvious Melvin has never done a single ounce of research about concealed carry. Women can't wait around to find out the intentions of an attacker; women who do that end up dead in a ditch somewhere. His implied sympathy for rapists and his idea that women shouldn't defend themselves because they might "kill their attacker," is pathetic.
As the saying goes: When seconds count, the cops are minutes away.
So you can protect your dog
Melvin: If women are shooting potential attackers, aren’t they presuming guilt before innocence? What if a woman kills an attacker? Isn’t that opening another whole legal can of worms?
..............
What does he mean by “potential attackers”? You are either being attacked or not.
What if a woman fights off an attacker with her bare hands and he falls backwards and he hits his head on a rock and dies? It’s self defense. if the attacker dies, it’s his own fault. This guy seems bewildered by the fact that a person can’t rightfully defend themselves, gun or otherwise. it’s like this is the first time he’s ever heard of it.
I would be really mad if I were a rape victim and I heard this guy say these things on MSNBC. He makes it sound like women being attacked by rapists are in the wrong for defending themselves by any means necessary!
Cops don’t protect people from crime in 99% of circumstances. They investigate crimes after the fact.
> Liberals aren’t very smart, are they?
They think that cunning and intelligence are the same thing.
They are not.
Criminals can be very clever.
But they are not intelligent, or they would not be criminals.
Same goes for leftists.
What about the Second Amendment don’t those people understand?
Why? Because they are fun. My officer friends, not so much. :-)
Because my gun has mastered the urge to shoot at all my pets every time it enters my house?
I’d just settle for a nice machete and to hell with the cops.
Because my civil rights aren't up for review due to other peoples' definition of my "need". I don't think they "need" any free speech; does that mean they can't have it now?
I like your graphic. Mind if I steal it?
(1) To protect themselves from cops and criminals.
Why should people have home kitchens when there are restaurants to go to? Why should they have medicine cabinets when there are emergency rooms? Why should people have riding lawn mowers when there are landscape services? Why should they have privately owned cars when there are planes, trains, buses, etc.? Why should homeowners own hammers and saws when there are professional carpenters?
“Liberals aren’t very smart, are they?”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Rather like saying dwarfs are not very tall, if they were they wouldn’t be.
Cops will get there AFTER the crime is done.
Courts have already ruled that cops are not liable for not stopping a crime.
While NYC does have strict gun laws it is a bad example since it is actually a very safe city.
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.