Profile of Missouri Gun Owner Shows Why Gun Control Orgs Are Doomed to Fail

She’s a widow, a grandmother, and she likes to talk about her flowers. Daisies stand out. Sherry Sherrow also says if anyone tries to break into her bedroom in the middle of the night, “They won’t get far unless they have a gun, too.” Hers is within reach. Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/living/article192624949.html#storylink=cpy

courtesy Kansas City Star

“I may not get them, but with me having a gun — at least I have a chance.” That’s Sherry Sherrow’s philosophy about gun ownership boiled down to its essence. And it jibes well with that of tens of millions of other Americans.

The Kansas City Star’s profile of the Lee’s Summit, Missouri former teacher is an accurate portrait of Americans’ attitudes about firearm freedom and illustrates why the left’s attempts to wring the gun culture out of this country is forever doomed to failure.

She’s a widow and only came to appreciate guns when she inherited her father’s old .38.

She liked that old gun. Liked how it made her feel. So she bought another one. One that fit her hand better — a .380 Sig Sauer semi-automatic pistol. She’s since added a few more — handguns, long guns, assault rifle — making this spry senior citizen, who laughs easily and has 16 grandchildren, pretty much loaded for bear.

Somebody pounding on the front door in the middle of the night spurred this push for security. It scared her. Turned out to be pranksters, but she got to thinking — what if it was something else? What if they’d banged all the way inside?

“It made me wary,” she said.

She’s a regular shooter now and an NRA life member. And she’s not a doctrinaire gun rights advocate.

Like most people, Sherrow knows well the mantras of America’s gun debate and thinks too much of the shouting comes from the edges.

But gun owners like Ms. Sherrow — and their numbers increase every single day — are part of the long-term growth in support for civilian gun ownership. And why no matter how much money they throw at it, gun violence prevention, gun safety, gun reform gun control remains a losing issue.

comments

  1. avatar DrewR says:

    “Why would you carry a gun?” Same reason you have a fire extinguisher, I hope not to need it, but if I do nothing else will work. This lady gets it.

  2. avatar former water walker says:

    And a back of the hand dig at grandma’s “assault”rifle…who the eff is grandma going to ASSault?!?

  3. avatar MyName says:

    Wow, old lady has an STG 44, I’m impressed.

  4. avatar jwm says:

    If it wasn’t for kapo bloomberg and soros there would be no gun control movement in America. People like shannon are not believers. They’re in it for the check.

    1. avatar Dev says:

      I think the opposite; garbage like Bloomberg and Soros are in it for the money and the power while dopes like Watts and Giffords get swept up into the fury, they want to “be a part of something bigger”.

      1. avatar Mister Fleas says:

        No, Watts and Giffords are in it for the money too.

        Watts was a long time P.R. expert for corporations like Monsanto; she is Bloomberg’s hireling. When the paychecks stop she will go away. Giffords is similar.

        1. avatar Taylor W says:

          Damn Straight, Mister.

        2. avatar Mike in OK says:

          Maybe Mark Kelly is in it for the money, but I doubt Gabby remembers what she had for breakfast. Seems very convenient that Gabby turned up right about the time James Brady went out. Thank God they still have a puppet to parade around.

      2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        How do Bloomberg and Soros profit from gun control? I know they’ve dumped millions into the effort, but what revenue stream flows back to those two in return?

        Soros turns 88 this year. His net worth is reportedly $8 billion, ans that’s after having donated $18 billion to his philanthropic organization. (OK, social justice warrior front group. Whatever, it’s still donated money.) What pittance of a payback could gun control possibly provide him that outweighs what he’s given away?

        Same with Bloomberg. He’s 80 this year and worth about $48 billion, making him the world’s 10th richest person. He’s already donated hundreds of millions to his causes, in addition to having joined “Giving Pledge”, whereby billionaires pledge to donate half their wealth. What’s the NPV and IRR of this dinky gun control lemonade stand, if any?

        No, I think these two are just good ol’ fashioned statist know it alls, who throw their weight around for their own sadistic satisfaction.

        1. avatar Curtis in IL says:

          “…who throw their weight around for their own sadistic satisfaction.”

          Bingo. I have met the type, albeit on a much smaller, local level. The ability to control people and governments is what gets them out of bed in the moring.

  5. avatar DaveL says:

    Because Ms. Sherrow knows that when politicians talk about new laws, new fees, new paperwork, new restrictions, new hoops to jump through, that they’re coming after her. They’re not coming after the armed felon down the street. They already have all the laws they need to go after him, were they do inclined.

  6. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    “She’s since added a few more — handguns, long guns, assault rifle…”

    Wow, an assault rifle. Her husband must have left her some big bucks to be able to afford one (plus the transfer tax), Lucky her. /sarc

    1. avatar DesertDave says:

      So, exactly how many guns does she need? Sounds like she is still working on that question!!

  7. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    assault rifle = MSR Modern Sporting Rifle probably…aka AR15 style rifle…semi-auto low/med power rifle

    1. avatar Philthegardner says:

      An assault rifle is NOT the same as an MSR / AR-15 / Semi-auto sporter. Assault rifles are, by definition select-fire. Very few transferable copies are available since the ban of 1986. So unless this grandma set aside some serious coin for her retirement, I doubt that she would be able to afford an assault rifle.
      If however, the media were talking about the dreaded “Assault Weapon” – then the MSR would be included in the definition simply because it looks scary.

      1. avatar HeySpanky says:

        What I think he means is that the old lady more than likely bought an ar style semi auto, and that the article erroneously referred to said rifle as an ‘assault rifle’ as they so often do in today’s media.

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        I would not say assault rifles are by definition select fire. They created the definition out of thin air. Any gun can be used to commit assault but to call the same gun an assault weapon or assault rifle implies and labels it as only for committing assault.

        1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          Then you would be wrong. “Assault rifle”, is a legitimate term, dating back to the original the STG 44 Sturmgewehr produced by the Germans in WWII. That term has a specific definition, which does include select fire capability.

          What you’re thinking of is “assault weapon”, which is an entirely made-up and infinitely elastic political term that can be attached to just about any firearm they want to ban.

  8. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

    Welcome to Missouri, baby! That could be my mom!

  9. avatar paul says:

    I think that Giffords are believers now, she was brain damaged when shot and never got over it. She/he is misguided now, but I have met those that would not get in a vehicle after a bad wreck – that is gun shy. There has definately been a move by the NWO to make all industrialized nations similar, so they can control them. The large multinational corporations are behind this and will soon rule the profitable world. Whether or not China is with them or just being used by them is another story.
    The military industrial complex who Ike warned about, the 60s civil rights and anti draft fights and Nixon being instrumental in opening Red China has worked like clockwork. Sadly, I have children and grandchildren that will stay in the US, and I do believe that they won’t have a good chance that I believed in once.

  10. avatar Southern Cross says:

    I wish I had the option. Some douchebags down the road think I ratted them out to the cops for riding very noisy, not road legal, and unregistered motorbikes on the street. While I didn’t call the police, a week a go I did warn one of them it wasn’t a good idea and it was annoying to everyone else in the street.

    Yesterday while walking the dog I could hear their bikes half a mile away. They were hooning around the suburbs not realizing the number of people they were pissing off now numbered in the thousands. At the dog park other people were complaining about the noise. When I got home there were police bikes parked outside the house and while I was talking to my over the road neighbour some cars of their friends rocked up.

    So now I have a 14″ spanner and a Mauser bayonet within reach of the front door. It’s the best I can do in my circumstances.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Southern Cross,

      You have more options than you realize. Of course none of them are as good as a firearm. At any rate, consider the following:
      (1) Wasp spray can
      (2) Cricket (baseball) bat
      (3) Chemical fire extinguisher
      (4) Walking cane made of hardwood

      A blast of wasp spray or chemical fire extinguisher to the face should provide a significant incentive to leave you alone. Of course a single good whack with a cricket bat or hardwood walking cane also provides an incentive for the hoodlums to exit the area.

      And if you are concerned about hoodlums bursting through your front or back door, have a nice sheet of plywood on the floor to welcome them inside — of course the plywood will have nails that stick up about 1.5 inches (38 mm) above the surface of the plywood, spaced every 2 inches (50 mm).

      Also, think about adding outdoor measures that encourage attackers to leave before ever getting inside. Infrared motion detectors with loud piercing alarms are an option. And surveillance cameras mounted outside could be a deterrent.

      Finally, don’t forget the easy stuff like simple methods to make your doors virtually unbreachable.

      1. avatar MLee says:

        Lots and lots of automatic lights. I have two sensors in the front, one that turns on 1000 watts of lights, another that turns on 600 watts and another light that I keep on low, but can turn up two spots of 100 watts each. Then I have a high res. camera that goes to a flat screen with sound that the dogs watch because the angle and perspective is correct. So they lounge in the bedroom and watch the monitor. With four dogs and the rest of my security including, my Negan bat…(that thing is bad-ass) and the various firearms, including home carry much of the time or at least very close by, I’m pretty comfortable. It’s sure better than sitting around home with NOTHING and HOPING you’re not a victim or relying simply on chance. Chance favors the prepared.
        It’s like Walter Whites comment to his wife, “I’m not in danger, I AM THE DANGER”
        I’d really like to smack a bad guy with that bat though.

      2. avatar Southern Cross says:

        One very large and very loyal dog takes care of the motion sensor and alarm. Front and back doors are security rated. Front perimeter fences are shoulder high, with no rungs, and spiked tops. Side gate is blocked from the inside with filled garbage bins. Alarm system is two steps from the front door with panic mode. I’m a harder target than most.

      3. avatar GS650G says:

        Unfortunately any physical action could result in charges. The bug spray is the best option for backing them off.
        There are a few other options but you would need to involve others and that gets dicey.

      4. avatar RidgeRunner says:

        And a German Shepherd.

      5. avatar rick3 says:

        I have lights and alarms, but I really like this addition (as a last ditch effort):
        “And if you are concerned about hoodlums bursting through your front or back door, have a nice sheet of plywood on the floor to welcome them inside — of course the plywood will have nails that stick up about 1.5 inches (38 mm) above the surface of the plywood, spaced every 2 inches (50 mm).”

        “…well, yeah, officer, we’re doing some remodeling, and they must have stepped on that while they were breaking in…”

      6. avatar Sian says:

        AUGH

        Wasp spray is about as effective as a spray bottle full of water, and opens you up to civil liability. it’s up there with ‘keychain wolverine claws’ in the “really bad self-defense ideas” category.

        1. avatar Geoff PR says:

          Not when you back it up with a Zippo, that stuff is *flammable*…

          *snicker*

        2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Ugh,

          First and foremost, all of my suggestions were sub-optimal and geared toward what someone might be able to possess “legally” in oppressive jurisdictions.

          Second of all, wasp spray is basically charcoal starter fluid which is a nasty petroleum product that will burn your eyes and tastes terrible. While it is nowhere near as effective as other possible items, it is better than nothing and could enable the victim to use a bludgeon much more effectively.

  11. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

    She may think the screaming comes from the edges , but she needs to be shown that NO MORE is the only response to gun control.

  12. avatar Todd says:

    Lee’s Summit the NRA is forfeiting our rights for profit and gain by generating fear. The kind of fear you are manifesting. They have authorized and played a role in all American gun control laws. But they are fine with you an your shotgun.

    You should read the 2nd Amendment. There is No permission to hunt. It’s to fight an invader or a tyrannical government and today that would require more than a shotgun and a duck call.

    If you have to ask for permission from a government its no longer a right. And if you have some time to catch up on history, look at the “Calculus” the Jews were given in Germany and ask any of our Vets that saw combat what they would have liked a shotgun or an AR-15?

    You see its been ruled that we can own only military style weapons in the Miller decision. Your gun does not likely qualify and the ones you do not under stand do qualify.

    Put some knowledge into your thinking.

  13. avatar Don says:

    Gun controllers have already won. Ca, NY, CT, MD, HI, IL, MA, NJ. That is about 100 million people or 1/3 of the population who are tyrannized. Then they move to NC, FL, TX, CO and vote for the same stuff. When those states turn and the first thing the dems do is enact “common sense” gun control you will have 70 million more.

    add to that the pot legalization which means you can’t buy a firearm if you use, the headshrinkers using porn, video games, and distrust of the government as psycho conditions and you can see where this is going.

    No one will have to come for anyone’s guns. The American people will vote, smoke, snort and click there way into tyranny.

  14. avatar DaveR says:

    “She’s a regular shooter now”

    Good for her! We need more people like this.

    Unfortunatly, I believe that most gun owners rarely if ever shoot. That’s a recipie for disaster on many levels.

    While I hate it when the local range is packed, I’m pleased when I see that people are actually SHOOTING!

  15. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    “I may not get them, but with me having a gun — at least I have a chance.”

  16. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    “I may not get them, but with me having a gun — at least I have a chance.”

    After that, the anti’s are left to argue that Ms. Sherrow, like the rest of us is

    – too dumb, reactive & skill-challenged to stand a chance that she’ll “get them”,
    – expendable; an acceptable loss in the grander scheme, not deserving of a chance,
    – doing it wrong; only approved chances, provided by authorized agents are allowed,
    – not worth the cost that chance will cost the rest of us
    – forgetting she’s a sim in clerk-world, organized for their sake. Ant farms aren’t for the ant’s beneift.

    When they do that, Ms. Sherrow might get the idea that they don’t think much of her to begin with. Which is why they’re OK if is left with nothing but her courage to meet any abuse that comes her way.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email