Brady Campaign Board Member Gets CCW

Status
Not open for further replies.
So she buys a gun and doesn't even read the manual?

I mean, let's just think of any power tool that you have never used before. You take it home touch it and start writing about how scared you are without even learning a thing about it? So her point is that she is an idiot. So we listen to idiots and take advice from idiots for exactly what reason?
 
Last edited:
What I find especially rich in this story - true or not - is while Ms.Magazine purports itself to be all about women's empowerment, it runs an article where a woman glorifies living in fear and ignorance while at the same time shamelessly refuses to accept any personal responsibility for herself and her decisions.
 
The entire exercise was flawed from the beginning. She laid out HER four rules for the exercise...the last of which was; "and finally be prepared to use it for protecting myself at home or in public".
She thus FAILS from the start because she DID NOT follow her own four rules. She was in no way "prepared" for anything. She was carrying an empty gun, did not even know how to drop an empty magazine, had to ask a cop if it was loaded or not, and was deathly afraid of the thing. Where was the; "be prepared to use it for protecting myself at home or in public" ???? The only thing she was 'prepared' for was to have her unloaded and useless Glock ripped from her shaking hand just before being raped and mugged.
But then, this is the type of person who firmly believes that 'simply' being raped and mugged is not sufficient justification for self-defense.

BTW: I understand what she was attempting to show. But, by not following her own parameters, the entire exercise was invalidated.
.
 
I've never lobbied against mandatory training for a CCW and I never will. I think its essential,...
Click to expand...

That's certainly the conclusion that common sense reasoning gives you, but I would offer as a counterpoint: WA state has had shall issue CCW since the early 1960's, with no training requirement whatsoever, and not even a written test. If you can legally own a gun and your check for the permit fee doesn't bounce, you get the permit.

I've lived here twenty some years, and have yet to hear of an example where a permit holder did something wrong where it seemed like training would have helped. We've had people with permits do bad things - one that comes to mind is a 21 year old fraternity president that engaged in a drunken drive by of a rival frat house days after getting a permit - but I don't think that was a lack-of-training issue, in the sense he wouldn't have done it if only an instructor had pointed out the permit didn't authorize driveby shootings.

Can anyone from Vermont comment on whether they have observed issues from not having a training requirement (since they don't have a permit requirement)?

n.b. I'm a big training fan - Lord knows I've spent enough at our local version of GuCan anyone from Vermont comment on whether they have observed issues from not having a training requirement (since they don't have a permit requirement)?

Anyway, the logic that training helps is impeccable - I'm just not sure that the data shows that the lack of a training requirement leads to bad outcomes. Have people in other states seen different results?
 
Kinda like someone protesting the fact that pornography is protected by the first amendment by going out, buying, and reading/watching a lot of pornography.
 
Now, writing this, I realize that rolling up on an on-duty cop with a handgun in tow might not have been fully thought through.
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who read that passage and thought of this picture?

hqdefault.jpg
 
Ridiculous. Oh well, we just need to keep up bringing new shooters into the fold and gently educating the ignorant. Gun ownership is on the rise and we can keep it that way.
 
New shooters who support gun control and it's advocates do our cause no good at all. In fact they only do harm. People like this woman can honestly say " I own guns and I support this gun control law".
 
What's going to happen if she gets mugged and, without thinking, pulls the gun and uses it to defend herself? Do you think Brady will let her keep her membership? THAT'S the headline I'm waiting for.
 
My comment, should it be posted:
Whether we like it or not, a right to do something is a right to do something without interference. For anyone suggesting someone be required to take a test or training before buying a gun, let's extend that to other rights. Let's require that someone take a U.S. history class and pass a test before voting. Let's require that someone be government-certified before being allowed to be called a journalist (Ms. Yewman might not care about that one, but her friends at Ms. probably do). Let's require that you show a good reason for wanting to attend your church or associate with other people. Let's require that you purchase an annual license to post on a blog (after all, the internet isn't mentioned in the Constitution, so you have no right to it, do you?). We can criticize Ms. Yewman for her poor choice, but she has the right to make that choice (we can say the same about other "choices" as well, can't we? Do you want government permission for that as well?). It is up to the individual to exercise his rights with intelligence and thoughtfulness, not the government. Let Ms. Yewman carry her gun, and let her be thankful that when she needs it, there is someone else there willing to use his gun to protect her since she probably won't be able to protect herself, gun or not.
 
Wait wait wait wait.... She's carrying a gun she's not even able to properly clear? These people are dangerous in more ways than one...
 
cuervo said:
My comment, should it be posted:
Whether we like it or not, a right to do something is a right to do something without interference. For anyone suggesting someone be required to take a test or training before buying a gun, let's extend that to other rights. Let's require that someone take a U.S. history class and pass a test before voting. Let's require that someone be government-certified before being allowed to be called a journalist (Ms. Yewman might not care about that one, but her friends at Ms. probably do). Let's require that you show a good reason for wanting to attend your church or associate with other people. Let's require that you purchase an annual license to post on a blog (after all, the internet isn't mentioned in the Constitution, so you have no right to it, do you?). We can criticize Ms. Yewman for her poor choice, but she has the right to make that choice (we can say the same about other "choices" as well, can't we? Do you want government permission for that as well?). It is up to the individual to exercise his rights with intelligence and thoughtfulness, not the government. Let Ms. Yewman carry her gun, and let her be thankful that when she needs it, there is someone else there willing to use his gun to protect her since she probably won't be able to protect herself, gun or not.
Click to expand...

Beautifully said Sir.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
 
Comrade Mike said:
Wait wait wait wait.... She's carrying a gun she's not even able to properly clear? These people are dangerous in more ways than one...
Click to expand...
Yes, and by all appearances she is doing so intentionally. She appears to be attempting to carry a gun on her person while having learned as little as possible about how to use it, hence my trollface post above.
 
Best part of the article. I think the cop is spot on...

The cop thought I was an idiot and suggested I take a class. But up to that point I’d done nothing wrong, nothing illegal.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree that she has "done nothing wrong". Maybe nothing illegal, but wrong and illegal are sometimes very different. I'd say that being a willfully ignorant about the handgun that you have in your home with a child present is definitely wrong.

And like others have said, read the freaking manual. Do we need a law for that now too?
 
I posted a comment.

Dear Mrs. Yewman,

Can I have the pistol when you are done with it? I would be more than happy to reimburst you for it at the going rate for a lightly used Glock. You have inspired me to do a similar project in my home state.
Click to expand...
 
I think she could be doing this not to make a point in favor of gun control, but rather to make gun owners say that she needs training, that way she can point and say "see? Even they agree we need mandatory training!"

I will not fall for it. No one who is serious enough to buy a gun for protection wouldn't read the manual that would explain to her how the gun works, and how to check if it's loaded. It would explain the safety rules. There are also many YouTube videos that can show these things, and there are ranges where she could actually use that gun and get advice, which a serious buyer would do.

She is treating it as a game, not a responsibility. That's the distinction.
 
How much training should you be REQUIRED to have? None, it's our Constitutional Right.

How much training should you CHOOSE to have? As much as you can.
 
The fact that she starts her article citing her "gun dealer" tells me I don't need to read anymore of her nonsensical drivel. As if a gun store is equal to a drug dealer, or she purchased it out of Tony's trunk in a dimly-lit alley. Ugh, I despise ignorant people.
 
Last edited:
BullfrogKen: "What I find especially rich in this story - true or not - is while Ms.Magazine purports itself to be all about women's empowerment, it runs an article where a woman glorifies living in fear and ignorance while at the same time shamelessly refuses to accept any personal responsibility for herself and her decisions."

Nailed it.
 
Last edited:
BullfrogKen said:
What I find especially rich in this story - true or not - is while Ms.Magazine purports itself to be all about women's empowerment, it runs an article where a woman glorifies living in fear and ignorance while at the same time shamelessly refuses to accept any personal responsibility for herself and her decisions.
Click to expand...

Something I think we need more of are the voices of pro-gun women. I know lots of women who would take this author to task for being an ignoramus, just none who post online like THR folks.
 
I only know about AZ for sure. She obtained a CCW permit? And doesn't know if her weapon is loaded?
In AZ I had to show proficiency at the range before I passed.
This woman has never fired the weapon, and carries it around empty???:confused:
I suppose if she's watched enough TV she knows how to just throw it at an attacker.
This kinda reminds me of the Blair witch project.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Brady Campaign attacking Starbucks
2 3 4
Replies
83
Views
7K
w_houle
W
D
  • Locked
My Challenge to Facebook Brady Campaign
Replies
13
Views
1K
DCoats
D
X
  • Locked
Words I never thought would come out of my GF's mouth
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
xenophon
X
Seminole
  • Locked
Mas Ayoob: Sipping on Starbucks and Listening to the Radio
Replies
3
Views
794
captainmarko
C
J
  • Locked
Woo Hoo! New Mexico downgraded by Brady Campaign!
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Dannyboy
D
Back
Top