Right to Opine

A man in Quebec shot and killed an attendee at a political victory celebration.

Apparently he didn’t get the memo—it’s illegal to carry a handgun in Canada, not to mention using it to murder someone.

Hey, I have an idea for our northern neighbors: you just need more gun laws!

The LA Times ran a story headlined ‘Batman’ movie-goer brings guns, knives for ‘protection’.

Gotta love lefty scare quotes. Since charges are being considered I assume that either he doesn’t have a CCW or concealed weapons aren’t allowed in the theater in question.

But other than “protection,” what motive could he possibly have had? Self-defense is an actual right exercised by normal, responsible adults? Not in lefty land.

Just carrying weapons doesn’t justify the scare quotes unless you have an anti-gun bias. Personally, I carry a handgun, at least one reload, and often a tactical flashlight everywhere I legally can. And if my home were searched, police would certainly find a variety of other goodies designed to thwart those of ill intent.

Am I planning mayhem? Of course not. I’m prepared for the “protection” of myself and my loved ones should the fit hit the shan. You can’t rely on “security guards” (scare quotes justified; see Paul Blart) or the police—who either weren’t there or were entirely ineffective at Columbine, VA Tech, and Aurora…where mass murders occurred even though the weapons used to commit them were banned.

Seven people were killed in a “gun-free zone” at a university in California by…you guessed it–a perp with a gun. Didn’t he see the signs?

Count on the Left to exploit every opportunity to push their anti-gun agenda. Not one to miss such a shot, Gail Collins (NY Times – More Guns, Fewer Hoodies) only manages to demonstrate that she is woefully ignorant or deliberately deceptive.

For example, there is not a single state which hands out CCWs with

no more background check than you need to carry a concealed nutcracker.

That is just the beginning of her repeated mischaracterizations of the current state of gun laws and the positions of gun rights advocates. They appear in almost every paragraph. Please at least get the facts straight before giving us your opinion.

More appalling, she mimics her fellow lefties in the media by convicting Zimmerman even though neither she nor they know all of the pertinent facts. She leaps to the unwarranted conclusion that Martin is the victim in this case. That may be, but on the other hand Zimmerman may be innocent, and alive only due to Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Is Zimmerman not granted the presumption of innocence?

The truth is that she doesn’t know which is the case, but that doesn’t slow her down at all in the advancement of her agenda. But she’s not interested in the truth of the case. She just wants to exploit Martin’s death in order to paint a picture of conservative gun owners as hateful, evil, and unreasonable.

I can guarantee you two things:

1. If Zimmerman is found guilty, you will hear the NRA—and CCW holders—applaud the system for having served justice. You won’t see that on the nightly news, though, because it doesn’t fit the narrative. Contrary to media-perpetrated belief, gun owners are not fond of those who abuse the right to carry and commit murder or other crimes. Why would we be? It endangers our own right to self-defense.
2. If he is found not guilty, you will hear nary a peep from Collins, Sharpton, Jackson, et al, apologizing for having wrongly smeared an innocent man–along with the NRA and responsible gun owners everywhere (to whom an apology is due in either case). Anyone remember Tawana Brawley? Duke lacrosse team?The Jena 6?

We must band together and demand that the federal government ban all private ownership of cars! Cars kill!

According to the latest news one person was killed and a few others injured when a BMW going 100mph plowed into a KFC restaurant.

CARS KILL! EVIL CARS!

I mean, really, who needs a car that can go that fast? There simply is no civilian purpose for a car of that caliber horsepower. We must ban private ownership of fast cars! I bet it was even a shiny black sedan with chrome mags and smoked windows like I see the bad guys drive on TV! You know they run over cops, and little kids with puppies, and sweet old ladies, and smelly liberal hippies nice concerned citizens with those monstrous things?

CARS KILL! BIG, FAST, EVIL CARS!

Seriously, who even needs to own a car? When you need to go somewhere you can always take a public train or bus, right? Or you can hire a taxi, eh? They’re always on time and available when you need them. (What? No? Then walk, you buffoon! Serves you right for living in the country instead of with us civilized types in the city.) No one has a right legitimate need to provide their own vehicular self-transportation!

CARS KILL! BIG, FAST, EVIL CARS! LITTLE CARS! ALL CARS!

I bet the driver wasn’t even from the same state! And he probably bought it from some shady guy at one of those car shows sponsored by the NHRA! It’s likely even one of those fast-shifting automatics! Who really needs to change gears that quickly?

NO CARS ACROSS STATE LINES! NO PRIVATE CAR SALES! NO AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSIONS! NOT EVEN PUSH-TO-SHIFT! CARS KILL! BIG, FAST, EVIL CARS! LITTLE CARS! ALL CARS!

We must ban cars, you see? They’re simply not safe. After all, it’s for the children.

[Hey Brady Campaign, Mayor Bloomberg, et al, do you see how moronic you sound?]

A young mom—cornered in her home by two armed intruders—shot and killed one, sending the other fleeing for his life.

This is exactly why every law-abiding American citizen—particularly the most vulnerable—should have a gun and know how to use it. The Left—spearheaded by George Soros, the Brady Campaign, and their ilk—would prefer to have left this young woman and her infant child defenseless.

The NY Times has yet another hit piece on gun owners. It quite naturally begins with an unarguably illegal use of a handgun by a CCW holder. It also contains many of the hallmarks of the typical anti-gun screed, including this gem:

Gun advocates are quick to cite anecdotes of permit holders who stopped crimes with their guns. It is virtually impossible, however, to track these episodes in a systematic way.

This is, of course, followed by the citation of a few specific incidents in which CCW holders committed murder or manslaughter. (Including at least one in which the CCW had no relevance—a husband killed a man he caught with his wife. Hello? What does his CCW have to do with that?) So it isn’t permissible to cite known instances where a CCW holder successfully and legally used his weapon, but you can trot out the stories that support your side?

To further support its slant, the Times pats itself on the back for having “examined the permit program in North Carolina.” Their study uncovered 8 convictions for murder or manslaughter with a handgun by concealed carry permit holders in North Carolina over a five year period (2006-2010). Since 1995 there have been 228,072 CCW permits granted by NC (almost 60K in 2007 alone). The NC permit is good for five years, so not all of those are current, but permits have reportedly been increasing. Suppose there are only 150,000 CCW holders in NC (I’d bet that’s low, but it skews the numbers against me). That works out to 0.005% of CCW holders being convicted for some form of gun-related wrongful death. Now, in 2005-2009 there were 7,515 vehicular fatalities in NC. Now North Carolina has 6,536,601 licensed drivers. So deaths caused by vehicular accidents occur at a rate of 0.115% per licensed driver—twenty-three times the rate of gun-related deaths caused by CCW holders. North Carolina’s entire population is 9.5 million and if every one of its citizens were a driver, the rate of vehicle deaths per driver would still be 0.079%—almost 16 times the “kill rate” of CCW holders.

So using real-world numbers—even when skewed against the “gun lobby”—which is a bigger threat to public safety, CCW holders or drivers? Only when you have a clear anti-gun agenda can you answer the former, but I have yet to see a Times piece clamoring for more stringent vehicle licensing. Now that’s good journalism.

In yet another poorly written attempt to demonize American gun ownership, CNN published this piece about the first homicide to occur in Windsor, Ontario in just over two years. You know the story isn’t really about the homicide just by reading the first three paragraphs:

In his 60 years, Arnold Blaine has known only two people who’ve owned a gun: one a hunter, the other a nightclub owner.

“We don’t even have gun shops,” said the Windsor, Ontario, business owner.

The paucity of guns is one of three factors police in the city across the river from Detroit cite for its low homicide rate.

Those police are, quite simply, near-sighted fools—as are the authors of the hit piece article. Choosing one crime statistic and a single potential factor and tying them together is not only statistically invalid, it is entirely illogical. Let me demonstrate.

Mesa, Arizona, is a city of just under 440,000—close in size to Windsor at roughly 215,000. I pulled the 2010 crime statistics for both Windsor and Mesa for a direct comparison. When you look at these numbers, keep in mind that while it is very difficult to own a handgun in Canada, Arizona has some of America’s most permissive firearm laws. Having until recently been an Arizona gun owner myself (I now reside in North Carolina—with guns—but my kids were in Mesa schools) I can guarantee there are thousands of legally owned firearms of all types throughout the city of Mesa. Handguns, rifles, shotguns, bullpups, “assault weapons”—you name it, there are a whole bunch of ’em in Mesa. If guns were the primary (or even a significant) problem in and of themselves, you would expect Mesa to be a fearful place to live. So let’s see the numbers in residents per crime:

[Note: MV = motor vehicle.]

That paints a little different picture, now, doesn’t it? You are more likely to be the victim of a property crime in Windsor than in Mesa, and far more likely to be the victim of assault or sexual assault. I don’t know how you read those numbers, but I can tell you with certainty that you would be safer in the city that has all those evil guns. I’ll keep my freedom—and safety—thank you very much.

The left in America would have us become more like Europe: a largely secular society with cradle-to-grave “security” provided by the government. After seeing the rioting in England—public depredations that can only be described as evil—I’ll pass.

MOBS have begun stripping people and taking their belongings as police struggle to control riots in London and in other major English cities…

A young man is shown being forced to hand over all of his clothes after appearing to be stripped naked during the third night of lawless riots…

Another picture which emerged shows an unnamed woman completely naked next to a police officer after apparently having her clothes taken from her…

…another shocking video shows a bleeding teenager being robbed in broad daylight by lawless thugs who pretend to help him to his feet.

[Note the stirling security provided by the British government. The Bobbies—yes, that’s one ‘o’ and two ‘b’s, not the other way around—can’t control the mobs, and the people have been entirely disarmed by their own government so that they can’t protect themselves. But that’s a whole ’nother can-o-worms.]

And what are they rioting over? The big-government teat at which they’ve been feeding is drying up. This is swiftly becoming a recurring pattern—riots in Greece, France, and England by a populace weakened and spoiled by decades of government coddling. Once people grow accustomed to being cared for, they lose the ability—and the moral determination—to care for themselves. Think that couldn’t happen here? Yeah, I’d have thought the same thing a few decades ago when I lived in Europe and visited the U.K. with my family. But I was young and naive then.

A school board meeting in Florida became the scene of a potentially deadly shooting spree today when a disgruntled—and rather incoherent—area resident opened fire with a handgun.

The gunman opened fire at [Superintendent] Husfelt and school board members. He missed them all, even though he was at close range, said Lee Stafford, director of student services of Bay District Schools.

Fortunately the man was incompetent with his weapon or this would have turned tragic. Please explain to me again why it’s a good idea to ban law-abiding citizens from carrying concealed weapons in situations like this. It only creates victims out of the innocent.