Discussion in 'Activism' started by Sky Dog, Mar 26, 2018.
This the best video I've seen for 2A. Dr. Suzanna Hupp's testimony before congress. Please share
Summary? I need a darn good reason to give Youtube clicks these days.
Thank you, have forgotten about that testimony.
Well perhaps your d****good reason is, they don't want to you look at gun vids as is evidenced by their upcoming ban? Perhaps? Anyways here ya go...
Luby's Cafeteria Massacre early 1990s. She was arms length from the shooter & watched helplessly as her family members were murdered, all because the legispotators had 'a law' against carrying her CCW firearm into that establishment. Her summation topic at closing was, the 2A is not for hunting etc but to protect us citizens against the gov't, as she specifically pointed to those legispotators at the hearing.
Including Chjuck Schumer, who at that point had been a said legispotator for , like, 85 years already (see short list on www.job4lifedandbeyond.comm) (humor)
Thanks for the summary, that's exactly my reason for hesitating. We also have this 'drive by' rule here so it's good to at least describe what the video is. I'm familiar with the Luby's shooting & fallout, but not Mrs. Hupp's name, nor are many others.
What a strong, smart and logical woman. So sad she had to experience her story but she is one of our greatest allies in spreading good information on why we need to be allowed to defend ourselves.
Hupp is her married name. Her maiden name at the time of the attack was Gratia. She also testified before the Texas legislature regarding concealed carry. Her testimony there contributed Texas voting to allow concealed carry.
I remember when that happened, remember reading about it and the story she tells is exactly how it was printed back then. I've used her story many times in defending the 2nd Admendment. When she says that the purpose of the 2nd Admendment is to protect citizens against their government, she is dead on the money.
Very touching story and a horrifying event that should be a timeless remdinder of why good people need to be able to defend themselves.
Another way to win such arguments is to take the person shooting. Let them shoot a .22LR or a low recoil pistol. Not only is it good clean fun but it helps to assuage fears and preconceived notions.
Is there a thread to post compelling stories or videos? Quora dot com has at least one dumb question per week with a great answer. Here is one:
Why do some "pro-gun" Americans think "when a criminal strikes I might not have time to wait for the police" is a reasonable argument against gun control and not just another issue that needs addressing drastically?
Haynes Aurelius, Professional Interweb Troll (1995-present)
Well, I don’t want to sound insensitive, but I see you are a teacher… how well has “waiting for the police” worked out? Again, one doesn’t have to be pro or anti gun to look at police response time in active shooter events to see no matter what, precious seconds count and for every minute casualties increase exponentially. Furthermore, the police are NOT required to protect you according to the Supreme Court. Please accept my utmost admiration for what you do everyday and thank you for continuing to educate our youth despite budget cuts and other obstacles. I posted this as an example before on Quora but find it appropriate for your question.
I can give you this anecdote. When I was four years old my mother and I lived just outside of town. There was a serial rapist that had sexually assaulted eight or nine women over the course of nine months or so. Due to news descriptions, she was able to figure out who this person was and informed the police. He was arrested, detained, but Jumped bail which his very rich parents posted for him. The local sheriff called her and said most likely he would be fleeing town, or even out of the country, but may come after her first. He asked if she had a gun, to where she replied “yes sir, I have a Smith and Wesson .357 magnum, and he told her to keep it handy. Where we lived was quite far for police to respond if there was an incident. They did keep a sheriffs deputy in the area yet even still that is not Close enough when somebody is targeting you with bad intentions. That night there was a huge thunderstorm and our power went out as usual back then in a rural area. There was about an acre to the road from our house and my mother noticed a car slowly driving by and stopped. She recognized it to be the same car this guy drove, and hid me in a closet in the back of the house. She quickly locked all of the doors and on her way to lock the very big sliding glass door she heard it start to slide open. I heard two loud gunshots followed by silence except for the rain and thunderclaps from the storm. What seemed like eternity of being scared to death in this closet the door opened and my mother scooped me up in her arms and barricaded us in her bedroom. An hour or so went by and our power was restored at which time She was able to call the police. The deputy in the area made it to our house in nine minutes, which is a very acceptable response time, but not enough even if she was able to Call when she saw that car. There was a heavy blood trail back to the road where the car was parked but this guy was never caught or seen again. Then 30 years later she got a call from the sheriffs deputy (who is now acting sheriff) telling her they got the guy. His very rich parents had helped him flee the country to Mexico where he was eventually Caught for suspected rape and extradited to the US. He told her that the guy had a large scar from a bullet wound under his left collarbone and just above his heart, along with a permanent part in his hair from another large scar that started just above the forehead and ran 6 inches along the top of his skull from a bullet that grazed his head. Her response, “Damn, 2 inches high? I need to get a taller front sight.”
This is how most pro-gun owners defend themselves with a firearm when the police cannot be contacted nor waited on to show up. My mother was ready to die to protect me, by whatever means necessary. The only way she’s going to fight off a 6’2” 225lb man armed with a knife is with a gun. Hell, even without a knife she was no match at 5’1” 105lbs. So put yourself in her shoes and ask yourself what lengths would you go to protect your family? How would you defend your son from a physically superior experienced killer without a firearm? What would happen to your kids if you were overcome or killed trying to fight him? Would you have wished to have had a gun in hindsight?
This is just Food for thought. I’m not trying to attack your stance on gun control or any other political views, merely offering an example of why it is a completely reasonable argument that waiting for the police is not a viable solution. Please also note that the police are not required to intervene or protect you, which leaves no one but you and an attacker. Taking away the ability to defend one's self against any means of threat leaves only victims.. And Criminals love defenseless victims, especially in “gun free zones”
Anyone know how the Canada registration scheme worked? I always wanted to know.
Some answers are a book of personal anecdotes.
Why would gun control have a major backlash one day?
Jerry Myers, High School Biology Teacher
I live in CA, a state that prides itself for leading the nation in gun control. Our leading candidate for our next governor is running on a platform of even more gun control including bans on all semiautomatic rifles. He will very likely win. New laws that will be fully implemented next year will require background checks to buy ammunition. We have more misdemeanors that result in lifetime bans of firearms ownership than most other states. We have universal background checks for all transfers of firearms, even those between family members. There is a limit of purchasing 1 handgun every 30 days. We have a 10 day waiting period between buying and picking up the gun. Soon, there will likely be a limit of buying 1 long gun every 30 days. We have the assault weapons ban. Magazines over 10 rounds are banned. One must pass a safety test and get a firearms safety card to buy or transfer a gun. It is good for 5 years. If someone thinks somebody might be dangerous to self or others and is a gun owner, they can file a report with the local law enforcement agency and a temporary restraining order will be issued that will remove the guns from that person. Then a court hearing will be held to determine if the person is really a danger and to determine if the person should lose his or her gun rights. Legislation is now being considered to extend that to employers and coworkers. Proof is not needed, just a report of a concern. There are a few hundred more laws and every year a few dozen more restrictive laws are passed.
The progressive liberal politicians are falling over themselves congratulating each other for all of these gun control laws that keep people safe. Voters continue to vote them into office because they are doing something about gun violence to make people feel safe.
Nobody has really stopped to evaluate if these laws are really keeping people safe. Let's see. Violent crime is rising in CA. I live in the same city I was born in. I had to use a gun nearly 45 years ago to defend myself and my siblings from a home invasion by 4 thugs with guns. The time between calling the police and the first officer at the door was about 4 minutes. It took about 90 seconds for the thugs to break the door down and fire the first shot. The police were 2 and a half minutes too late but I had a loaded gun available in my bedroom closet that saved the lives of my siblings and myself.
BTW, at that time, what happened was extremely uncommon and was not even called a home invasion. It was called assault with a deadly weapon by 4 perpetrators.
Today, I live very close to the neighborhood I grew up in. There is an average of 5 home invasions a week and on average 3 involve at least one victim being shot and at least one involved a victim being murdered all within a mile radius of where I live. Well over half are gangbangers going after each other. At least one involves a victim with no gang ties. The average police response time from the first call to the first officer arriving is around 4 hours. There are not enough police officers to deal with all the calls.
The criminals doing the home invasions are mostly gun-prohibited people. They cannot legally buy or own guns. They are convicted felons. How do they get their guns? They steal them, they get them from the black market where they can buy them without background checks and for 25% the cost of buying from a legal gun store. They have a non-prohibited friend buy for them.
They have all the greater than 10 round magazines they want. So, a law-abiding homeowner is limited to 10 rounds and is surprised by a home invasion. He is already behind in using a gun for self-defense. He manages to get his gun and then starts shooting. Unlike the movies, it usually takes more than 1 bullet to stop the attacker. Remember, for self-defense, we cannot shoot to kill, we can only shoot to stop the threat. As soon as the person is no longer a threat, we have to stop shooting. If we keep shooting, then we become guilty of manslaughter or murder.
There are no magic bullets that will take out 2 or 3 attackers at once. Yeah, Hollywood gets it wrong again. Under pressure and with BGs trying to avoid your bullets, you will miss. The problem is if you miss and hit an innocent person, you have legal liability for injuring that person. So you can only shoot if it is safe to do so, meaning if you miss the bullet will not hit an innocent person. You have to know what is behind your target. Ten bullets can quickly run out before the BGs run out. Now you have to do a mag change before the BGs, with their 15 or 30 round mags hit you.
The law-abiding gun owners have had it. We have been told for the last 30 or so years that we are the criminals, we are the ones responsible for the deaths of children and old people, we are the ones responsible for all gun violence. Most of us have never been a danger to anything but a paper target or the real criminals that invaded our homes to do us harm in the middle of the night. If we use a gun to defend ourselves we get treated as if we are the criminals.
So many have reached the point of screw it. We are treated like criminals so we are going to act like criminals.
The other major problem CA is having is prison overcrowding. The solution our progressive liberal government came up with was to release all non-violent offenders. That did not solve the problem. Well, there is a solution, reclassify some crimes from violent crimes to non-violent crimes. Good, now we can release those now non-violent offenders. Wait, we now do not have enough parole officers to monitor the few hundred thousand released prisoners. No problem, they are non-violent so they do not need to be monitored.
Then to further deal with the problem lets pass new laws to reclassify previous felonies to now misdemeanors. Let's do sentencing reform so any felony conviction that results with a one year sentence will be served at the county jail so the counties have to deal with the costs. This ignored the fact that the county jails were already overcrowded because the local courts were underfunded and criminals trials took too long and were stacking up. Well, all of a sudden the county jails had to release prisoners without bail so they would not be overcrowded. In my county, get arrested for rape and do not have the money for bail, do not worry, you will be released pending trial within a few days because there is not enough room to hold you pending trial. We have a few that while awaiting trial for rape were arrested two or three more times for rape and released each time because there was no room to hold them.
What does this do to the moral of the average patrol cop? Talk to one privately and they will tell you to drive to NV or AZ to buy the large capacity magazines so you have a chance to defend yourself against the criminals. They tell you to get a gun for home defense because they cannot be there in time to protect you.
California geographical shape works against it. It is long and narrow. Many residents live within a few hours drive of OR, NV, or AZ. We call these free states because they do not have the stupid gun restrictions that CA has. By federal law, we cannot legally buy guns in these states. Now, the criminals still do but that is not what we buy in the free states. We buy the normal size magazines. We are now buying ammunition. While we are at it we are buying all the stuff that the State of CA has outlawed for sale in the state or added extra regulations.
In CA, there are people who buy and sell guns without the background check because they are tired of jumping through the hoops. There are plenty of guns that are not registered with the state because they were purchased from private parties or brought into the state before registration was required. These are sold for a premium. In some of the more rural and more conservative counties, the Sheriff is fully aware of this and will not intervene. He knows the gun control laws are BS and do nothing to stop criminals. Where I spend a lot of time vacationing, I have talked to the Sheriff and these were his words. Also, in the winter, the only gun store in town is closed and the nearest one to do a legal transfer is 200 miles away, too far to force people to drive on snow and ice covered roads to just transfer a gun and then to have the new owner have to repeat the trip 10 days later. He basically has told the CA DOJ to pound sand and stay out of his county. They mostly do and most likely because it is a good 8-hour drive in good weather from Sacramento and there are no airports nearby they can fly into. Since the locals know everybody who lives in the area, outsiders are not trusted so they cannot do any undercover sting operations.
I am also a member of the largest gun rights community in CA. Through that organization, I can keep up on CA gun enforcement efforts. The majority of people caught with illegal magazines end up with no consequences. The same happens if caught with an illegal gun and there is nothing else found. If it was not for a violation of CA possessing a gun that would be legal in most states, and nothing else criminal was going on the DA will not file charges. Why courts are overwhelmed, juries will not convict citizens that are normally upstanding, holding a job, doing everything right and have a clean background and just happened to have a gun that one could easily argue was illegal only because our gun laws are so confusing it is hard to figure out what is legal and what is not. Add to that that a conviction will not result in any jail or prison time because of severe overcrowding, it is just not worth it.
Finally, the CA Department of Justice will never answer a question from a CA citizen as to what is legal and what is not. They complicate matters so much by doing this that a defense attorney can bring this fact up and easily show the DOJ does not even know what is and is not legal because our laws are so confusing. That is also why so many of our gun laws are challenged in court and take years for the courts to figure out what they really mean. They are written by people who have no idea how guns actually operate so even gun experts can read them and come away saying ***, I kind of know what they are trying to get at but as it is written there are so many ways to avoid the ban by just changing this or that on the gun. So the recent ban on the bullet button, which was a solution make a magazine that required a tool to remove from the gun so it became a fixed magazine gun and not an assault rifle resulted in a solution that made changing magazines even faster than with a bullet button and arguably faster than with a traditional mag release button. All of this because gun control laws are written by people who have no idea how guns function.
I remember that shooting like it was last week. It was one of the first high profile shootings that reached nation wide coverage. Note, had just one person been armed, imagine the lives that would have been saved?
Personally I do not think you can actually "win" any argument.
The best you can do is present facts in a non-threatening and polite way and let people decide for themselves.
Separate names with a comma.