“As things started to get a little more violent, I knew that I had no way to defend myself. I couldn’t carry, I didn’t have my gun. My gun was unloaded and locked in my gun cabinet.” – Savannah Lindquist quoted in This rape victim says the #MeToo movement should include gun rights [via circa.com] Video below.
See my earlier comment about commies and guns. The #metoo feminazis are cultural marxists.
Um Robert, you’ve got some unfinished business with your previous post. Hows about we finish that job before moving on.
My 20 year old daughter goes to TCC in Norfolk. She’s been shooting since age 12 and has already taken the CC class at Bobs. Some of her classes are in Portsmouth and next semester she will have night classes. I walked the path she must travel between the Art Center and parking garage with her and we identified the areas of concern. She is forced to leave he gun in her truck, but always carries a Kershaw and knows how to use it. But it is ridiculous that she can’t get a CHP simply because she isn’t 21. She can’t even buy handgun ammo at the range.
Portsmouth after dark is a place she should carry a rifle. I’m not joking.
Personally I’d recommend an M60, 240, or 249 non nuetered (ie in all their open bolt full auto belt fed red blooded American glory) with no less than 1,000 rounds.
I am all too familiar with Portsmouth, but you cannot be serious. A rifle is far less utilitarian at hand to hand combat distance. A pistol is the weapon of choice.
If it’s that bad, she’d be better off spending the money for the rifle on a cheap car, so she can get through it quickly, or better yet, drive around it.
Best defense is no be there.
-Mr. Miyagi
Gman,
You are preaching to the choir.
I am wondering if a North American Arms mini-revolver in .22 Mag or a Derringer in .22 Mag (or an equivalent) would be a suitable option? It is tiny and should be easily concealable — so concealable in fact that no one would ever know if you had one unless someone patted you down as part of an arrest/incarceration. And while it isn’t any good beyond contact range — that is entirely unimportant for rape prevention.
It surprises me that you, and others have as well, would suggest violating the law. Yes I fret that until she is 21 and can carry legally something might happen where her gun might have prevented the tragedy. And yet neither she nor I are willing to place here entire right to carry in jeopardy. We POTG are generally so law abiding that we would rather place ourselves in potential danger than violate the law. Last year, until my Dad passed, I travelled to northern NJ 20+ times. Though I was very angry at not being able to, I never brought a firearm, ever.
Our lives come from God. So does our right to defend them. There is only one gun law in this country, the second amendment. All else is burecratic nonsense that I choose to comply with or not at my discretion.
~S
And you do so with the full understanding of the consequences of those actions. As a parent and husband I have no such luxury to jeopardize my ability to protect those who I love so dear based upon nothing but principle.
The second amendment is more than a principle. My principles are valuable to me, obviously your principles are shallow and of little value. You can’t take care of a family if your DEAD!!
Gman,
There are several ways to view this situation:
(1) The U.S. Constitution, which includes the Second Amendment, is the Supreme Law of the Land and any laws which are contrary to the U.S. Constitution are null-and-void, as if they never existed. Laws which prohibit being safely and responsibly armed for self-defense are therefore null-and-void.
(2) Government laws which assist violent criminals and hinder good people are obscene and repugnant. They deserve no more respect than a law which requires human sacrifice, which is what gun-control laws mandate in a way. (Gun-control laws mandate that people be disarmed and die in pursuit of an ideal rather than observance of reality.)
(3) Our Creator is the ultimate authority on all matters. God established government to uphold the sanctity of human life, not to destroy it. Therefore, any government law which condemns innocent people to great bodily harm or death is in violation of that principle and we have no obligation to observe it.
I realize that numbers (2) and (3) are kind of the same argument. The difference between them is that number (2) is apparent to decent people whose lives are not grounded on faith in our Creator, whereas number (3) is apparent to people whose lives are grounded on faith in our Creator.
Bigger question in my head is if going to art school is worth the risk… And for the question of legality is carrying a knife legal? Knife laws can be as whacky as gun laws if not more so…
uncommon:
You make very valid points. Unfortunately they all come to naught once you’re locked in a cage in a state where the judges don’t care…
You can’t protect your family if you’re dead but you also can’t protect them from your cell in jail or prison.
strych9,
You also make incredibly valid points.
And this is a lesson in the very reason for the Second Amendment: we must have an ability to push back when our very own government turns against us, as is the case with gun-control laws as you so aptly described.
I get your fear and frustration, Gman.
And yes, the POTG are generally the most law abiding folks in the country… so the only thing I can say to this is: she’ll be 21 soon enough. Hopefully she’ll get to that age before there is a problem… stay away from stupid people doing stupid things in stupid places and all that… she’s at that awkward stage where she’s expected to stretch her wings and act like an adult but doesn’t yet have all the freedom of one. We were all there once.
As for a North American revolver? Fantastic collectables and if I owned one I might carry it sometimes myself, but i have to think that one of the numerous flavors of pocket .380s out there might be a better alternative for someone who just needs to have as tiny a gun as possible (although I usually do whatever I can to convince women to NOT choose “the smallest gun possible”).
🤠
if the metoo ledger was unabridged it would be larger than the outlook world address book. and the vast majority of those names would be people denied the right to carry. you gals and looks like a gals really should be prepared.
i try not to think about the fact that the majority of women i know have been abused. but there it is.
The “MeToo” crew wants nothing to do with empowered armed women ready to defend themselves, it goes against the “victim” mentality.
I would like to see victims like Savannah sue both her state and the Fed on this. As well as ending the age 21 requirement. Those who have the ability to fix this should at least try. Talk is cheap.
#metoo as it is is just about more pity, helplessness, attention grabbing and handouts.
It’s a real shame. I was raised to see women as just as strong, capable and intelligent as any man. Modern feminism is killing that perspective.
Nothing stops a rape better than a hot lead injection…better to be judged by 12 than raped by one( or more!).
This^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Fueled by Soros’, Bloomberg’s and Joyce Foundation’s money, women are the tip of the anti-gun spear. I have no argument with them if they insist on being stupid and defenseless. However, when they leverage the power of the almighty state to try and make all of us defenseless, then I have no compassion for them. After all, predators always cull the weakest from the herd.
Ladies, get a gun and know how to use it. If you don’t want a gun, that’s your choice and I respect it as long as you respect the choice of people who want a gun.
No jury would convict a woman who was defending herself from a rapist whether she was legal to carry or not. Even in the slave states. I’d recommend schooling elsewhere and “She followed the law.” would be cold comfort if she’s raped and/or killed. Try explaining that to your wife! And, frankly she would be obeying the law – the 2nd Amendment!
Consider what happened to Berhard Goetz after he shot four muggers in a New York City subway. Most likely Gman’s daughter would be acquitted of murder, attempted murder or assault and that assumes the prosecutor would even try. However, she would almost certainly be convicted of carrying illegally. Anybody’s guess if there would be a civil suit.
Yes. It doesn’t matter what the “crime” is, even if there is zero criminal liability. There will ALWAYS be a civil suit
Carry a gun.
Yeah. We say that a lot here. For many good reasons, we’d all agree it’s a good idea – for men and women alike. There’s just one wrinkle in the “just shoot the rapist” answer: all too often, a woman’s assailant isn’t a perfect stranger who selected her at random – it is very likely to be someone she knows; a coworker, classmate, a friend, a former lover… it is often someone most normal-thinking women would be naturally reluctant to “just shoot”. That isn’t to say the goon doesn’t deserve a bullet, but we need to understand that the victim may not immediately agree with that idea.
It’s much more complicated than we’re thinking.
🤠
A very material point. This comes under training: decide beforehand under what circumstances you will shoot someone you know (all of thos you described plus any college authority figure ie: professor). When that decision is made prior to the event, she can watch for the “trigger” behaviour, hopefully avoid it, and finally have a greater chance of successful self defense if unavoidable. Regardless of the weapon: a knife at raping distance will be equally effective for defensive pueposes, pehaps not so much as a possible deterrent.
@ Bloving. so are most murders between people who know each other. That doesn’t change the fact that between 500,000 (lowest estimate) to three million crimes are prevented by gun owners each and every year.
Also aggravated sexual assault, with serious injury is by a huge majority, mostly perpetrated by a stranger or person known but far outside the victims circle of friends and family. Nowadays copping a feel or pinching a woman’s behind — even on a third date –without explicit consent is “sexual assault.” we all agree that women should not have to put up with that, but that is the source of the bulk of the “known to the victim” numbers, and in fact the source of the “growth” in sexual assault.
My sister-in-law was accosted by a man with a screwdriver 12 years ago in an underground parking lot (which because it had a single government office was technically a “gun free zone). She pulled her firearm and held him until cops arrived. It turned out he had one prior conviction, was the perp in two prior unsolved assaults, one of which left the woman beaten so badly she went blind in one eye.
The gun control groups consider that NOT a crime prevented because she did not kill him and they only count “justified homicides” as legitimate “self defense uses” in their counts. In fact she prevented a crime against herself, solved to previously unsolved crimes — and likely prevented additional crimes against other women future victims of the criminal.
Now is a woman going to pull a gun on a college kid on a date with her who attempts to unbutton the top of her blouse or who puts his hand on her leg during a date (both now sexual assaults)? No. But she is very likely to have enhanced protection for herself for the really nasty rapes that end up with women injured, permanently disabled or even dead that are by and large committed by strangers
Better to be expelled from school and/or judged by twelve than to have an impromptu sidewalk memorial of flowers and stuffed animals erected in one’s honor.
I just wanna go back to 20,000 BC
What’s the best gun for saber tooth?
http://www.hollywoodtake.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/2014/02/26/raquel-welch-one-million-years-bc.jpg?itok=YNgtJvlv
me too.
The 23% sexual assault on campus is totally bogus and essentially nobody believes it.
If a parent actually believed that then they are being a bad parent in letting their daughter go to that school.
The 23% bullsheet number is using the Leftist feminazi definition of sexual assault as including an unwanted glance or being asked out on a date.
The 23% number is primarily used by feminazis to berate all males.
meetoo is a hypocritical leftist movement started by some female actors that got famous by sleeping their way up and then complained about that to get even more attention. It’s just a bunch of encapsulated sjw’s shouting things in their echochamber, complaining about problems that only exist in their little world.
meetoo is not for your normal woman that was raped in a bad neighborhood and that now looks for a way to defend herself should this ever happen again. It is about attention in the attention-business, about actresses, about college girls that had a guy looking at them without filling out a sexual looking consent form #739 before doing so. “Rape culture”, not actual rape.
Comments are closed.