Many years ago, a young woman lived in Washington DC. Economic circumstances forced her to live in a high crime area & commute to work via metro, as as she couldn’t afford a car. As she walked home one evening she was followed by 2 dirt-bags who attacked her as she unlocked her front door. Over the next few hours she was repeatedly raped, her home ransacked & was beaten so badly her skull was fractured. She spent weeks in the hospital & Many months in rehab. Years later she’s not fully recovered. & never will be. But she’s fit enough to handle a gun which I gave her & now carries it when ever she leaves home. But isn’t this “illegal” in DC you ask? Ask her if she gives a $H1T.
Besides training her to use a gun, I’ve taught her the following:
- The 2nd Amd is the only CCW “permit” required. “Permission” NOT required to exercise a RIGHT.
- When SECONDS count, police are only MINUTES away.
- Better tried by 12 than carried by 6.
- My sister will NEVER AGAIN be a victim.
fr8dog
November 21, 2011
Comment to More women are using guns for fun and protection
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
YES! The world needs millions of fr8dog in our communities! Better yet, the nation needs about 40 or 50 of him in government.
Amen, Brother, Amen.
Leave it to gun owners to applaud people breaking the law.
Part of the reason DC has so many metal detectors. Most of the museums, all of the government buildings, lots of the private businesses. They don’t mind somebody getting robbed in the Smithsonian, as long as the thugs are gone before the police get there. “They threatened you and beat you? You seem ok. Case closed.” Get robbed/beaten outside the Smithsonian and the police don’t even need to respond.
I won’t be surprised if public transit installs metal detectors in the next few years (with the usual caveat that a bus driver working by his fat self will refuse service to a small woman setting off the detector, but will have no choice but to ignore the detector when a gang of scary and muscled youths set it off).
@ub52, What if the law mandated the return of slaves to their masters in Alabama even though the 13th Amendment clear said there should be no slaves? Or perhaps the law mandated a clitoridectomy for all females?
Not all laws should be obeyed. And the disobedience of some laws should be applauded. This is not to be taken lightly and I’m not necessarily saying the case in point is such a case. But I have given the more general topic considerable thought. Have you?
I don’t think Martin Luther King Jr, or any one else in the African American Civil Rights movement would be happy with you, ubu…
Rosa Parks was breaking the law, as were the Black people sitting at the Woolworth’s Lunch Counter.
Of course the people pouring garbage on them, arresting them, and sending dogs and fire hoses on them were all Democrats, just like Ubu.
Some things never change.
@ubu52: actually it is the government that is “breaking the law” by infringing on our God-given right of self-defense with the more appropriate tools as noted in the Second Amendment that recognizes this inherent right and it is there to protect us from government over-reach.
Please don’t tell me that there are not hideous laws, past and present, that are an affront to free and decent people. The main point is that this woman has to break the law (and be in jeopardy of the law) to protect herself because the government does not have to do so, and often cannot do so. Then the laws further hinder her ability to provide for her own protection. A simple cost/benefit analysis: risk of another traumatic life-altering violent rape versus the risk of the “illegal” firearms possession and its legal woes. Hmm…let me think.
The gun control laws take an innocent victim and further abuse them by leaving them vulnerable. That’s idiotic.