A Case For Guns

The following article was printed in the New York Sun. It is refreshing to find a well written article supporting the right to keep and bear arms published in a paper that is located in the heart of anti-gun darkness, New York City.

A Case For Guns

Four decades ago, a gunman accosted my mother, who was on her way home after attending the 6 a.m. Mass at St. Lucy's in Spanish Harlem. When he demanded all her money, she looked him in the eye and said, "What would your mother think of you doing this?" The gunman turned around and fled, saying nothing.

These days, she likely would have been shot dead. Even as the latest school shootings fade from the public's consciousness, the battle against guns wages forth on all cylinders. But while guns have always been a part of the American landscape, it's the criminal element that has absolutely no respect for innocent life that is a relatively recent phenomenon.

Read that last sentence again. "But while guns have always been a part of the American landscape, it's the criminal element that has absolutely no respect for innocent life that is a relatively recent phenomenon." Guns, and law abiding firearm owners have not changed, the criminals have.

It seems that the more we try to "understand" goblins and make excuses for their behaviour, the more violent they become. We do not need more gun control laws, we need to remove violent criminals from society, period.

Back to the article:

After the Amish school slayings in Lancaster, Pa., numerous posters to Internet forums recalled their childhood days in rural parts of the country when they would go hunting before school and leave their rifles in the principal's office for the day. It wasn't long ago that there were no school shootings. I once wrote a column defending the NRA, noting that the 1963 film "Flipper" had a scene showing the young star reaching for his rifle that was hung on the wall in his living room as he went to investigate strange noises. I don't recall any outcry over what was then a natural American response to danger.

Like many native New Yorkers, I have an aversion to lethal weapons. At one time, I too wondered why there wasn't some kind of national gun control law in place. Living in a dangerous neighborhood where criminals plied their trade using handmade zip guns was largely responsible for this paranoia. The Second Amendment somehow was not applicable to my life in New York City. Getting guns out of the hands of criminals seemed the logical thing, and anyone who could not recognize this need must be an extremist, I thought.

That perspective changed once I moved to Miami, where my husband grew up. I learned that guns seemed to prevent more crimes, because law-abiding citizens could protect their homes, property, and lives from the criminal element. My mother-in-law bought her shotgun at Kmart. She and her family lived near the Everglades, where snakes and alligators are unfriendly neighbors. My uncle-in-law owned a gas station in a rough neighborhood, and had been beaten severely by robbers. He started carrying a .45 wherever he went, and was never beaten or robbed again.

There were quite a few times when my friends and I would head out to the desert on dirt bikes for some target shooting. Each of us would have at least two long guns, and those that had them would bring along hand guns. We never had the urge to rob anyone, no one ever got shot by "accident". Firearms were a part of growing up. This was not all that long ago.

In a society where the goblins are becoming more evil and less afraid of law enforcement by the day, it becomes even more important for the law abiding citizens to be allowed the means for self protection. I have said it before, and I will say it again. To deny a father the right to defend his family, or deny a woman the right to defend herself or her children, is not just against the Constitution of the United States, it is immoral.

Go read the rest of this article, it is a shining light from the land of Bloomberg.