Saw this story here today and it caught my eye and interest for a variety of reasons. In broad daylight, according to news reports, a man forced a woman and her son into their home as they were bringing groceries in. He tied them up, but the woman was able to loosen herself enough to be able to free her son, who then got his father’s gun out of a locked storage box. When the intruder, who was robbing the house, was not satisfied with just taking their things threatened to kill them both and began to force open the door to the room they were in, the boy shot him, killing him with a bullet to the head.

Well, if the intruder had used his brains for something other than assaulting and robbing women and children, then I guess they wouldn’t have ended up on the floor. 

However, that’s just the most obvious point of the story.

You don’t often see stories in the media that provide an example of gun use and ownership in a positive manner, despite the fact that frequently that is all that stands between an individual and serious harm or death. After all, how long does it take for the cops to arrive? Assuming, of course, one can get to a telephone to call for help. That is not always the case.

Those who worship at the altar of restrictive — as well as unconstitutional – gun control prefer not to discuss certain facts, such as lower violent crime rates in areas of high gun ownership and recognized right to carry.

And, that holds true historically, as well. As Fred Reed, among many others, points out, guns were common among youth in prior generations. But, tell me, were school shootings? Not to my knowledge. In earlier generations, in many families, guns were not locked up, bullets carefully locked up in another place. They were, instead, readily available, in case they were needed. Did you have kids shooting each other? Not too often, as they were raised with respect for what the gun was. Oh, yes, and they were raised with respect for other people, as well. Sounds like a problem that strict gun control can’t begin to touch.

The philosophy behind the back and forth struggle about using a gun to protect yourself in your own home is disturbing. There are many who seek to criminalize protecting yourself and your property, insisting that you should rely on the State to protect you, that you should submit or hide and hope that you or a family member are not hurt too badly before law enforcement officials are able to come to your aid, if they even do. Criminals actually have the nerve to sue if they are shot while robbing your house. 

Fortunately for myself and my family, I do not feel any particular obligation to abide by such nonsense, particularly when it clearly violates the rights and protections granted to me by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Each of my girls, when they get old enough, will be taking gun safety and use classes. An intruder fortunate enough to get past my Great Dane should expect that his luck is about to run out.



Be Sociable, Share!