A Time to Squelch an “Opposing View”

By Kellene Bishop

stop-asking-questionsToday I briefly endured a ridiculous article talking about how some people were un-American for rattling off their opposing views about the proposed health care changes, and other critical issues. (Click here for the article) Pelosi and others have whined that they aren’t even given a chance to share their views on these topics, as they have repeatedly been shut down by folks who don’t want to listen to what they have to say. Why is that, one may ask?

Well, I believe it falls in line with the same reasons why I don’t rationalize and have a conversation with a criminal. There are times when it’s plainly obvious that your life and livelihood are in danger, at which point you don’t offer tea and crumpets to the perpetrator. You take action to defend yourself and your values immediately, lest you act too late. In my opinion, this is a serious problem occuring in America both politically and physically. In the name of “decency” we are trying to rationalize with imminent threats all around us. Lives have literally been lost in this process. And certainly freedoms have been sacrificed.

Let’s put it this way. A would-be rapist definitely has an opposing view from mine. This would definitely be a view that I should have no hesitation in squelching. No, I shouldn’t converse with him. No, I shouldn’t let him get his point across. I should indeed stand up for everything good, free, and virtuous within me and stop the threat, period. I believe that fighting for one’s freedom is the most American thing one can do, even if it means not permitting the would-be perpetrator to have their say. When it comes to this kind of danger, both physically and politically, I’d say political correctness has lost its purpose.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.  
Advertisements

My Wish – 100,000 Women Strong

By Kellene Bishop

Owning a handgun does not offer women any benefit for self-defense.  KNOWLEDGE, on the other hand, of how to use a firearm for self-defense is the ultimate equalizer.  And to me it’s the ultimate sign of freedom and liberty. 

There are a great many female gun owners in the U.S. at present.  Unfortunately the fact that these same women don’t actually use their firearm for self-defense merely gives fodder for the anti-gun crowd who claim, “See?  Firearms don’t help women prevent rape.”  Now that’s a shame. 

My Wish - 100,000 Women Strong! Photo c/o nytimes.com/

My Wish - 100,000 Women Strong! Photo c/o nytimes.com/

If I had my wish come true, it would be that an additional 100,000 women not only possess firearms in the U.S. this year, but also get expertly trained in handling them and carrying them on their person.  While my wish may sound a little far fetched, I firmly believe it’s a worthwhile one.  Imagine the hesitation in a violent criminal’s mind: “Geesh.  (Censored, of course)  Is THIS one of those 100,000 armed women who know how to use it against me?” or “Am I really ready to go up against a skillfully armed woman?”  I believe that the number 100,000 is sufficient to thwart millions of crimes all over the U.S. and make criminals think twice before assuming a woman is a vulnerable target.  I believe that that impact of 100,000 confidently armed women will alter the wrongfully perpetuated societal stigmas that many have about armed citizens.  And I believe that 100,000 armed women will make children more safe, not only against firearm accidents, but against perpetrators who target them.  Oh, what I wouldn’t give to have my wish granted and see 100,000 women competently quick-draw their weapon, shoot accurately, and reholster it.  It nearly gives me goose bumps just thinking about it!

Photo care of

Photo c/o northshorejournal.org

Can’t you just hear the beautiful symphony made by the sound of the action after the slide is released all over the nation?  Ch-chang!  (I LOVE that sound!)  The patriotic sight and sound of “the rockets red glare; the bombs bursting in air” would be akin to the sound of double-taps all over the practice ranges in the U.S.  Can’t you just imagine the new level of confidence as women walk and talk strong and powerful knowing that they no longer will play the role of a helpless victim?  While my wish of 100,000 women is barely a dent in the number of the population of adult women in our nation, I believe that it’s sufficient to suitably rally against the crimes against women and their children and to accomplish what our law enforcement and government officials simply can’t or won’t do.

Independence isn’t just a benign word to be associated with our nation.  It should be a state of being that we women embrace every day.  We can be independent in our own effective protection and security and in doing so, literally impact the protection of women all over the nation.  This is my wish. 

Will you be one of the 100,000?

Will you be one of the 100,000?  

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Self-Defense—A Human Right

By Kellene Bishop

Last night I was asked a question by one of my readers on my Emergency Preparedness blog, Preparedness Pro.  Although this question was asked by a citizen of England, in which possession of a firearm and essentially any weapon of any kind is forbidden, I still believe his question has merit for our Women of Caliber readers also.  The question posed to me in the most basic of terms is what would I do if I lived in such a state?

mother-childrenI wonder what a mother would tell me if I told her that she does not have the right to protect her children.  What would your reaction be if there were a “law” passed telling parents that they are required to allow their children to immerse themselves in whatever is on television or their computer or in their video games without ever being permitted to give any parental input to “defend” them from anything negative they are exposed to.

Now, let’s take a citizen of England, for example.  They are forbidden from possessing a firearm, pepper spray, knives that would be obviously used for self-defense, billy clubs, etc.  The penalty is 5 years in prison.  Recently in Australia, a farmer was imprisoned for shooting a burglar—IN HIS HOME—as the result of the views of self-defense there. 

What would you do if for some reason you were forbidden from using valuable tools to protect you and your loved ones and were left solely to the use of your physical abilities for self-defense?

For me, it’s a relatively simple response with two parts.

Human Rights c/o osocio.org

Human Rights c/o osocio.org

First of all, let’s be perfectly clear that there is a huge difference between a RIGHT and a CIVIL LIBERTY.  Inherent human rights can NOT be given and taken away by man regardless of what title or position the world may give him.   Human rights are only to be protected and preserved by man.  A person can write something down, have “men” vote on it, and then CALL it a “law,” but if it is in opposition to human rights, then it cannot be considered a law.  Just because a man (or group thereof) establishes a procedure and labels it a law, does not make it such.  And it certainly does not make the law right.  No law can undo any of your inherent rights as a human being.  Just because individuals are willing to accept such a “law,” and just because men or women may forcibly be put into prison for breaking such a “law,” does not make it a law.  It just makes it a persuasive argument–even though a seriously flawed one.  It is merely an attempt to squelch a human right and hope that all will submit to such a position. 

In my opinion, no man can take away a right that God has given.  We have a right to breathe.  We have a right to benefit from all that God has given us.  And we “sure as shooting” have a right to defend ourselves, our family, and our property from harm.  No man can take that right away from you.  Any attempt to take away from a person the right for them to appropriately defend themselves is unacceptable.  Only YOU can ignore an inherent human right or refuse to acknowledge it, but that does not surrender it.  Human rights are not even our own to surrender.  They are infinitely a part of us.  To attempt to surrender them only states that one is willing to be a subject or a slave.  In other words, they willfully acquiesce to such a state.  Unfortunately, when too many people surrender their unalienable human rights in this manner, it gives the impression that a governmental opinion is “law” regardless of reality. 

waterFor example, there is a state in our nation (Colorado) that has claimed all rain water for itself.  Citizens (not subjects) are literally BANNED from collecting any rain water.  This is a “law.”  And yet it is unacceptable.  A state government cannot claim that which falls from the sky to the ground to be its property.  Rain is for the benefit of all and is the owner of Him who provides it and none else.  I would definitely defy such a preposterous law were I a citizen there.

To summarize the first part of my response, if a human right is infringed upon, then it is the responsibility of the citizens to correct that wrong.  It may require a heavy price.  But in my opinion, no price is too heavy to pay in order to recognize and embrace all of our human rights.  The ability for every person to defend themselves, regardless of their level of physical fitness, bank account balance, or occupation is indeed a right.

Second part.

self-defense-kitchen-knifeIf a person elects to subject themselves to such a preposterous position—that they aren’t allowed to possess effective self-defense tools in order to even the playing field against themselves and a criminal—then additional knowledge is required.  You want to be sure to become familiar with how to expertly use alternative items which are not defined as “weapons” such as a kitchen knife, a golf club, etc.  A can of air deodorizer or hair spray and a cigarette lighter can go a long way to defend yourself.  

The success of self-defense doesn’t begin in the moment of an attack.  Successful self-defense has everything to do with the preparation.  Protecting and preserving such a right against unlawful infringement is one of your best defenses.  I come from a long line of revolutionaries.  This particular nation exists with a shred of freedom because of them.  Personally, I’m a wholehearted believer in paying a price for FREEDOM of all mankind and I firmly believe that such can only be ensured if all mankind is openly “permitted” to defend themselves, anywhere, anytime, and in any way most appropriate for the situation. 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Independence

By Kellene Bishop

Independence Day Flags photo c/o giftideasdirect.com

Field of Flags in Lubbock, TX photo c/o giftideasdirect.com

Independence Day.  Yet another holiday whose true meaning has been drowned out with meaningless commercialization, furniture and auto sales, and oblivious talking heads.  Even the very name of this momentous holiday has been marginalized, watered down, and forgotten.  And yet this day, unlike all others, serves as an all too infrequent reminder that all of the joys and values in our life that we hold dear exist because of this one day in history. 

Grant it, this day was not possible without all of the battles that were fought before and after its day of significance.  But what is critically important in my mind is that this day would have no longevity and substance had it not been for the millions of Americans who have fought to preserve its intent ever since.  To assure its invaluable presence in our lives today, the same proactive measures taken by those who went before us must be reenacted every day of our lives.  We can’t afford to allow the luxuries and conveniences of our generation to blind us to that which made possible such blessings.  Just as we can not profit by killing the goose that lays the golden eggs, we cannot exist without the freedoms that guarantee joy and happiness in our life.  In fact, try as we might, we cannot even willingly give away such freedoms.  They are unalienable indeed.  But sadly, we can ignore them to the point that they are foreign and unthinkable.

Picture this: You’re watching the evening entertainment on television.  A Special Report interrupts your show with this statement.

independence-the-world-is-flat“A renowned author and scientist, Dr. Geek, has just announced to the world that in spite of all of our previous research, the world is actually flat. In fact, Dr. Geek has evidence to support that the outer edges of the world have still not been completely explored, and that we’re simply sitting on a much larger flat surface that we have previously believed.” 

Ridiculous, right?  But would a mass amount of media reporting for an entire month begin to cause us to doubt the truths we already know?  Would an act of Congress passing a multi-billion dollar budget to explore such “scientific evidence” make us believe that it must be true?  Would we then develop a divisive belief in our nation comprising of the Flats and the Rounds?

Our freedom of independence cannot be altered just because a story is consistently in front of us on the evening news.  Independence cannot be sold, voted against, legislated into oblivion, mortgaged, traded, bought or given away in a treaty.  But we can surrender it in our hearts and thus ignore it.  We can stop believing.  We can stop behaving like independent souls.

Family photo c/o ora.ucr.edu

Family photo c/o ora.ucr.edu

Our family, our faith, our liberties, and the efforts of ALL of our life’s pursuits are all meaningless in a nation without true independence.  This independence does not restrict itself to one day a year.  Rather this singular event in history has the power to provide us with independent freedoms for as long as this nation shall stand.

In the name of the freedoms we enjoy every day, and even those that we have surrendered already in our hearts, may we all remember this Independence Day for what it is truly about.  May we renew our hearts this weekend in appreciation and passion for how the Declaration of Independence permeates our lives and assures us lasting joy.  May we hold our Independence close to our hearts and never surrender it to any man.

declaration-of-independence

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

What It Really Means to be “Anti-Gun”

By Kellene Bishop

Photo c/o katrinabrownelondon.com

Photo c/o katrinabrownelondon.com

A few days ago I sent an e-mail to a list of my family and friends who subscribe to my emergency preparedness blog, Preparedness Pro.  The most recent blog posted was on the necessity of firearms and ammo (along with necessary skill and practice) for a properly prepared state.  Unfortunately, my message was not well received by one of my friends.  He sent me back a message that simply stated “I’m anti-gun.  Please take me off of your list.”  While I can perfectly understand why a person is not comfortable with the subject of firearms for self-defense, I was certain that my friend was not fully aware of the ramifications that invoking such a vow as being “anti-gun” truly entailed.  In my work I find that the majority of individuals who are “anti-gun” are women.  And thus I felt that addressing this topic was appropriate for our Women of Caliber audience today.

What does it really mean to be “Anti-Gun?” I’m convinced that a person who makes such claims does so based on the following misinformed or incomplete reasons.

1-     Fear of the power behind the tool.  Yes, a firearm is deadly.  Thank goodness.  Because I do not know of any other tool I can reasonably employ to defend myself against a alcohol and drug-crazed, 6’4”, 280 pound man who’s intent on harming me.  I can’t run fast enough.  The police can’t respond fast enough.  I can’t talk my way out of an encounter.  And I can’t rely on my physical strength and skill to properly combat them.   Self-defense is an equal opportunity freedom.  We all should be entitled to defending ourselves regardless of our medical history, weight, physical fitness, etc.  That’s why I often refer to my firearm as the ultimate equalizer.  What I do know is that I can have easy access to my firearm, pull, point, and shoot to effectively stop a would-be attacker. 

Photo c/o bebo.com

Photo c/o bebo.com

There are plenty of other valuable tools in our world that are dangerous if used incorrectly.  Medicine, exercise, transportation, food and farming equipment to name a few.  All are very powerful for good.  Yet all of these can be misused to even cause death to ourselves and others.  Fortunately for us though, the media, Hollywood, and our government don’t typically have agendas to vilify these types of tools.  And yet there are many others who occasionally promote misinformation on these tools as well.  Nothing is without some controversy or a difference of opinion.  But differences of opinion never alter the truth.  Only statisticians do that.  

2-    Belief that only criminals (thugs, drug dealers, bad guys, etc.) have guns.  Just because criminals have guns does not mean that those who have guns are criminals, anymore than the fact that a plane has crashed means that all planes will crash, or that 500 high school students killed per year playing football means that football should be banned.  For every thug out there who carries a firearm, there are hundreds of thousands of guns owned by law-abiding citizens.  Out of over 4.7 million crimes committed in the U.S. in 2005, less than 10% of them involved the use of a firearm.  Even among homicides, where one would assume a firearm was always used, less than 67% of them involve the use of a gun.  (http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/guns.htm)  Consider the opposite side of things.  Over 2.5 million crimes per year are STOPPED by the use of a firearm in the hands of citizen.  (John Lott, More Guns, Less Crime)  You’ve got less than 6% of 4.7 million crimes involved a gun, and yet you have over 50% more of those same kinds of crimes being prevented BY a gun.  Sounds like there’s a skewed perception there, folks.  Don’t you think?

Photo c/o zimbio.com

Photo c/o zimbio.com

3-    Fear of the safety for our children.  This is a very strategic propaganda put out by the anti-gun supporters, knowing full well that no parent in their right mind would put their children in danger.  And then of course, on those rare circumstances when a child is tragically killed by a gun, the media runs the story over and over again as if it was an announcement of Armageddon.  It’s a highly emotional, and unfortunately successful angle used by our national manipulators.  But the real facts don’t lie.  Children are less likely to be killed by one of over 300,000,000 million guns held by 94 million gun owners than they are to be killed by an automobile, drowned (in a bathtub or a pool), burned in a fire, or suffocate on plastic!  In fact they are at least 6 times more likely to die from any of these causes, and in some cases as much as 40 times more likely.  (Kids and Guns, 2000, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention)  Now think about this.  Out of all of the crimes that were stopped as the result of a firearm, how many children’s lives were saved as a result, or better yet, allowed to remain normal with a loving parent still alive as the result of the use of a firearm.  If someone is “anti-gun” do they really realize that they may just as well be stating that they are against protecting their children, loved ones, friends or communities at all costs?  Do they realize that they might as well be saying that they are “Pro-Crime?”  While you may think this is an audacious leap of logic, the statistics are there to support such a claim.  Unfortunately, those who truly are “anti-gun and to heck with the consequences” really don’t care about the truth.

For more on children and guns, click here

4-    The absence of a passion and understanding of freedom.  During the monumental Revolutionary War, there were plenty of individuals who took up arms who were unskilled and uncomfortable in their use.  After the war, they recovered thousands of rifles in which multiple wads were found stuffed down the barrel, but never fired.  Why?  Because although these men believed in fighting for their freedom, they found it very difficult to actually aim and fire upon another human being.  They would go through the motions of loading the firearm, lifting it to point, but never pull the trigger. And then in their confused and panicked state they would go through the motions again and again until their lack of firing caused their death.  Harming another human being purposefully goes against our peaceful grain, of course.  And I thank God for that “sensitivity chip.”  It’s a mental fight that has been prevalent through the ages.  But going through the motions is also what gets people killed and no longer able to live their fulfilling life and provide for their family.  Even police officers struggle with firing on a human being.  They practice with silhouettes, not live targets, of course.  So the mental preparation to completely defend themselves is oft times missing.  (As a result, many police departments have begun using more realistic looking targets in order to help law enforcement with this vital mental preparation.) 

Photo c/o conservapedia.com

Photo c/o conservapedia.com

What does this have to do with freedom?  When I hear someone is “anti-gun” I cringe to think that they are the very persons who would have permitted the British, the Romans, the Japanese, the Germans, and any other enemy Freedom has experienced through the ages, to take everything—and I do mean everything—that they hold dear.  It nearly brings me to tears to hear that “anti-gunners” would hold the defenders of our freedom in the same light as criminals in our day.  Freedom is not fought just on a battle field.  It is fought every single day, even in the sanctity of our homes, restaurants, our parks, our streets.  The only reason why our Freedom has not been utterly destroyed is thanks to the 94 million gun owners who are still willing to lay claim to its merits.  Somehow it just doesn’t seem fair that those same 94 million gun owners are the very reason why anti-gunners have the freedom to attempt to lay neutral on this issue and still have some semblance of safety.  To put it plainly, “anti-gun” is clearly a member of the “anti-freedom” camp.  

5-    Naïveté.  I agree that life would be a whole lot better if I didn’t even have to consider the horrific “what-if’s” that exist out there.  I would much rather live in a community where I could leave my door unlocked, trust that my children and family members would never be violently harmed, and that the world was one solely of peace and happiness.  Unfortunately, the stark reality of the presence of sheer evil interrupts that fantasy.  It’s also naïve of me to believe that my husband will always be there to protect me.  Or that simply by owning a firearm, I will instinctively know what to do with it under threat of violence or death without any concerted practice.  It’s naïve of me to believe that in an earthquake all of the criminals will stay securely in their jail cells, or that the most well organized and violent gang in the U.S., MS-13, will never invade my peaceful neighborhood.  It’s naïve of me to believe that a 9-1-1 call will result in my immediate safety.  I could go on and on with the naïve thoughts I have entertained in my younger years.  Instead I choose to face reality.  And the reality isn’t so much the horrors that are out there as it is that I’m STRONG, CAPABLE, AND COMPETENT.  As such I can ensure my own safety and the safety of those who are important to me.  I need not be fearful.  I need not be paranoid.  I simply need to be armed with the proper tools and skills necessary.  I don’t walk around with a gun because I’m paranoid.  I walk around accompanied by real peace and practical awareness because I carry a firearm.  I’m friendly to those around me because I do not fear their violence.  I’m happy because I do not fear becoming a victim with no justice to balance.  I’m more confident because I know I am an active and beneficial participant in the safety of my community.   

To all you self-proclaimed anti-gunners, I implore you to forsake your fear, rekindle your patriotism, get knowledgeable in the facts, and eliminate naïveté from your life.  There are countless benefits in doing so that will last a lifetime.  In the meantime, you only make yourself more vulnerable to the harmful realities that inevitably await you as you leisurely bask in your ignorance.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.  

Proof Positive that Ninety-Percent of the Guns in Mexico Did NOT Come From the U.S.

By Kellene Bishop

While this site is dedicated primarily to the firearm self-defense education of future or current gun-owners—particularly women—I cannot avoid the genuine need to educate my readers on important matters of gun ownership.  Indeed, your very ability to carry a firearm by which to defend yourself is intrinsically tied to our 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  This Amendment which reinforces your inalienable right to defend your life, your property and your liberty is consistently under fire from those who are threatened by it.  While this may not make sense to a trusting citizen of this nation—that a government would attempt to take away such a security, especially in light of the fact that this same government has ruled time and time again that law enforcement, military, and even your own community members are under no obligation to protect you otherwise in any manner—it is still a matter of verifiable fact.  The threat of the elimination of such rights has been thrust upon us ever since our leaders have been bedazzled with obtaining powers to which they are not entitled. 

second-amendment-rifleWith great foresight based on a history of learning, the Founding Fathers specifically tied the right of the citizens to defend their liberty to their right to defend against a tyrannical government.  Is it a coincidence that such a right to “keep and bear arms” was only the Second Amendment?  I think not.  As such it certainly cannot be accused of being a mere afterthought of our forefathers.  Indeed, these wise servants of our nation desired that if the power of the spoken or written word was ineffective in ensuring the freedom and sovereignty our nation, then by all means they were willing to ensure such freedom by the “flint and lock.”

Since the sanctity of this right is consistently under fire, it’s impossible for any citizen to consider a firearm for personal self-defense and not be affected by the political landscape involved in such rights as well.  As such, I feel it appropriate to enlighten my readers on matters which would circumvent or violate the Laws of the Land in this matter.

For a long time now, I’ve heard time and time again the misquote that “90 percent of the guns which are confiscated by criminals in Mexico come from the U.S.” 

First of all, IF that was actually true, can I just say “SO WHAT?!”  If the U.S. had provided guns to Mexico, did we do so with the intent that they be used for nefarious acts?  I don’t think so.  And if you believe that they were provided to Mexico with an ulterior motive, the U.S. doesn’t pull the trigger on such acts.  The criminals do.

obama-calderonSecondly, I have written previous pieces regarding the fictitious state of such claims.  However, while it may be common place for so-called journalists and gossipers to restate this mythical statistic, I believe it an act of ignorance and perhaps even treasonous for our Commander-in-Chief to do so.  Recently, on his trip to Mexico, Obama “admitted” to President Calderon that “90% of the guns which are found in the use of crimes in Mexico have come from the U.S.”   The problem is there was no such fact to “admit” anymore than it was a “fact” when he claimed that America was no longer a “Christian nation” at a recent international summit.  This claim of the 90% weapon stuff is indeed NOT fact.  And if Obama made such a statement knowing that it was in error, then he did so with the intent to put the American culture at odds with the rest of the world once again.  In fact, a knowing mis-statement of this nature clearly shows his anti-gun agenda to the world, most importantly to those who elected him to office believing (however naively that may be) that he had a more favorable stance on the right of American citizens to defend themselves.

Here are the Make-No-Mistake-About-it-Facts on the guns in Mexico.

 

29,000 guns were recovered in Mexico in 2007 and 2008.  18,000 of those guns were clearly NOT from the U.S.  They were instead from Israel, Turkey, Asia and other nations.  So the remaining 11,000 guns were actually given to the ATF in hopes that they could be traced to somewhere, even if it was the U.S.  Of those 11,000 guns which ATF received, only 6,000 were traceable, meaning that they had enough information such as serial numbers, brands, etc. to provide any tracing information.  And finally, out of those 6,000 guns which were traceable, a whopping 5,114 were found to be from U.S. sources.  U.S. sources means that they were purchased at a pawn shop, stolen from a U.S. owner, or obtained some other way within this nation and then delivered to Mexico. 

 

5,114 guns out of 29,000 is nowhere near 90%.  Yes, I realize that the people spouting this fictitious percentage of 90% are the very same people who don’t know how to calculate their taxes, read a bill prior to passing it, counting votes, and properly evaluate assets which they require the tax payers to foot the bill for…but come on!  How in the world could they be so far off the mark?!  It’s NOT 90%.  It’s 17.6 percent.  Gee.  Just a LITTLE bit off there, eh?  (If you must, you can read the ATF report here)

So what’s the motivation to spout such a number then?  Hmm.  Perhaps it gives the Powers That Be the ammunition they need (excuse the pun) to convince legislatures and gun-fearing ignoramus’s that there must be a ban on guns.  After all, if there is a ban on guns then so many guns will not go to Mexico, right?  We all know that the Brady Bill brought crime rates lower—NOT.  And we all know that D. C., New York City, and the State of California which are notoriously anti-gun have very little crime as a result of their anti-gun laws, right?  Yes, of course I’m being sarcastic.  You see, here’s a rule of marketing… when you’re intending to support of falsehoods in your campaign, the only way you can do so is by dispensing more falsehoods!  Statistics don’t lie.  But plenty of folks lie about the statistics.

Folks, if you are really trying to get genuine information on the use of guns and their value to your life AND your freedom, please don’t get your information from the press.  As I’ve said before, I perfectly accept someone’s right NOT to use or own a firearm so long as that person has come to such a conclusion via genuine education.  Not to do so is about as wise as the Spaniards were in believing that the earth was flat… after all, wasn’t that published repeatedly as well? 

(Clarification from the author: Let it be known that I am not a Republican, Democrat, or any other type of “it.”  I do not attack anyone based on their political affiliation.  (What kind of caliber they use for self-defense…yes, admittedly I may become quite riled when someone is stupid in this matter.)  But otherwise I am merely an AMERICAN.  As such I will defend American freedoms by taking to task anyone who would destroy such freedoms.)

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.  

20/20 Shoots Blanks

2020-if-i-only-had-a-gunSerious flaws were present with the 20/20 show aired last Friday, April 10, 2009.  This episode was focused on showing the error of private citizens owning guns.  It made a case for the fact that individuals don’t shoot effectively when they are under stress, that children and even teenagers aren’t properly trained to avoid guns, and that gun shows are ideal locations for criminals to buy guns.  Let’s go over their fallacies bit by bit. 

1)     “Individuals don’t shoot effectively when they are under stress”: In actuality this is 100% true.  This is why Women of Caliber emphasizes individuals to not only get training, but to get a specialized form of training that enables a person to automatically defend themselves in a moment of emotional climax.  However, the gross error that 20/20 commits is the insinuation that only if you are expertly trained, should you have the right to defend yourself.  This is 100% false!  Even the police and military require special training in order to overcome their body’s natural reactions in the event of a criminal attack.  The fact that 20/20 was able to contrive shooting errors in the scenario they aired does not negate the fact that citizens have the right to protect themselves from criminals (and even defend themselves from a tyrannical government).  Many monumental wars have been fought to defend this nation by every day citizens who were not trained in matters of sharp-shooting, overcoming tunnel vision, and muscle memory.  Yet the wars were won because so many stood up for their rights to freedom, with an effective tool of influence.  Speaking of influence, over 2.5 million criminal acts are prevented EVERY YEAR as a result of the presence of a firearm in the hands of every day citizens, not Rambo-trained individuals (John Lott, Sr., Research Scholar, School of Law at Yale University and former chief economist for the United States Sentencing Commission).  Having the ability to protect yourself is not only your human right, but it is the law.  And no television show can tell you otherwise.

 

classroom-shooterIn this scenario, 20/20 had a “shooter” enter a classroom full of undercover participants and one “Exhibit A,” an individual “armed” with a derivative of a paintball gun in a holster on their person.  All of the “Exhibit A(s)” had just gone through a gun safety and target training with professional instructors prior to being put in this contrived situation.  While each “Exhibit A” was attending a training class, the appointed shooter enters the room and starts shooting.  The undercover participants start screaming and running in all directions.  In every instance shown by 20/20, the Exhibit A person was unable to draw their firearm effectively, protect themselves from being shot, and/or accurately hit the offending target.  Can I just say, DUH!  For one thing, just how often does such a scenario as the one 20/20 illustrated actually occur?  Sure the news is full of shootings in public places over the last 6 months, but they are far from being commonplace.  In my opinion, using such a scenario was callused and sensationalizing a horrific occurrence.  Very rarely do mass shootings get stopped by regular citizens.  It is difficult to be sure of your shot and thus difficult to avoid collateral damage due to the ensuing chaos of fleeing and frantic persons all around.  The cessation of such a scenario with a firearm would very likely require either a whole lot of armed private citizens focused on the same outcome, or one very well trained shooting expert.

Secondly, the flaw in this scenario is that shooter knows who “Exhibit A” is, so of course they are going to be aiming for “Exhibit A.”  And sure enough, in each instance, the skillfully trained shooter goes into the room, takes out the instructor and then immediately goes for the “Exhibit A” person.  That does not happen in a real scenario.  Criminals do not expect anyone to fight back.  They intend to intimidate and get their prey to cower and comply.  In mass instances, the shooters do not know who’s armed or who isn’t.  In such mass shootings, the shooters are just as susceptible to tunnel vision due to the heightened emotions as any who would defend against them.  Ultimately the only point that this portion of 20/20’s episode conveyed accurately was the need for legally armed citizens to be trained properly and practice regularly if they want to save their own lives or the lives of others.

 

 

gun-safety-children2)    “Children and even teenagers do not handle situations with firearms properly”: Again, another DUH!  This point is 100% accurate thanks to the education that most children receive all of their life at the hands of the media and film industry about guns—not for the reasons that 20/20 attempted to demonstrate.  Most parents do not train their children appropriately about guns nor frequently enough.  20/20 would have viewers believe that gun safety training was ineffective in preventing accidents.  Bottom line is the safety your children employ around firearms is up to you.  Obviously it takes more than a simple 20 minute safety class to train them properly—it has to be a lifetime effort.  Just as you attempt to train them all their life to choose right over wrong, you must train them all of their life to handle a firearm appropriately.  That way they don’t turn into stupid teenagers who mishandle firearms.  By the way, you may want to take a look at the real statistics of children dying at the hands of firearm accidents by seeing my previous expose on children and guns:   https://womenofcaliber.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/children-and-guns%e2%80%94part-ii/

 

 

american-flag-freedom3)     “Because of all of the shootings we’ve had, we must make it harder for people to get guns”: See this is where folks really don’t understand what it means to be a nation of Freedom.  Freedom is in place so that ALL citizens can have the unfettered ability to make decisions for themselves.  And in the event that some citizens use their freedom to take away the freedoms of others, then they need to suffer the consequences.  But taking the freedom away from law abiding citizens because there are many who won’t use their freedom wisely is wrong, plain and simple.  This is like the age-old question that people ask, “Why does God let these bad things happen?”  Because He allows us to make choices and to suffer the consequences that come thereafter.  If He took away the freedoms of one to punish another then He would not be a God of Free Agency, would He?  And if our nation takes away the Freedoms of some in order to MAYBE thwart the evilly used freedoms of others, then we are no longer a nation of Freedom.  Our government does not exist to legislate and squelch freedoms.  It exists to support and protect our freedoms and then to dish out appropriate punishments to those who abuse that freedom, and ONLY to those who abuse that freedom.  Yes, it’s easy for criminals to get guns.  And no matter what laws get put into place, it will always be simple for criminals to get whatever it is that they want.  But we cannot punish the criminals in what may be their evil intent (i.e. prevent them from getting guns through standard processes) without surely punishing a free, law-abiding people from carrying out their rights.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.