gun store sales
(AP Photo/Dan Sewell)
Previous Post
Next Post

 

Picture a gunslinger and Annette Evans probably does not spring to mind. She is Chinese-American, lives in the suburbs of Philadelphia and identifies herself as socially liberal—not the archetypal conservative, rural white man. Yet she owns over a dozen rifles, pistols and shotguns (“one for every occasion, like purses or shoes”) and teaches self-defence courses to women. Her race and gender put her at risk, she says. “It may be a low chance that I’ll run into someone who will kill me, but without a gun, I’ll die.”

More gun-owners, especially new ones, look like Ms Evans. Of the 7.5m Americans who bought firearms for the first time between January 2019 and April 2021—as gun-buying surged nationwide—half were female, a fifth black and a fifth Hispanic, according to a recent study by Matthew Miller of Northeastern University and his co-authors. The share of black adults who joined the gun-owning ranks, 5.3%, was more than twice that of white adults. That is new: in a previous survey, in 2015, new buyers skewed white and male, though they were more politically liberal than long-standing ones. Overall, today’s gun-owners are still largely white (73%) and male (63%). But they are diversifying.

Gun culture has broadened its appeal. Decades ago most people bought guns for hunting and recreational shooting. Now they mostly do so for self-defence, which is a universal concern. People who feel vulnerable to crime or hold less faith in the police are more likely to arm themselves.

The Economist in Gun-ownership in America is diversifying, because of safety fears

Previous Post
Next Post

82 COMMENTS

  1. I don’t think that it is so much a lack of faith in their police that has people arming up, but, rather, a lack of faith in their Attorney’s General and local / State Prosecutors who are delinquent in their sworn duties….after all, why should mere codified Law impede a Prosecutor who has an Agenda to implement.

    • Perhaps, but police-vs-prosecutor is a distinction that might not matter in the end, if people lose faith in the system as a whole.

      • I agree with your final clause. However, speaking for the present, I have noticed how many POC in traditionally Blue cities and areas are requesting additional police support…in spite of their local Prosecutor’s Offices endorsing “Catch and Release” programs. Individual police officers serve under a police chief who is politically appointed (in most cases). That same chief implements policies that he / she personally believes in or has been directed to implement. My experience supports that most individual officers still believe and support the values / Law that they swore to uphold.*

        *subject to change as increasingly insane “Woke” policies are implemented which drive honest officers out to be replaced with Kool-Aid guzzling younger converts.

        • I’m making 150 D0IIars an hour w0rking from h0me. I was sh0cked when my friend told me that she was maklng D0Ilars 17386/m just from her h0me 0nLlne. Then this completely changed my Llfe. F0r Details… http://Todayz50.cf

    • The odds of a cop being there in time to prevent you from being the victim of a felonious attack are about one in a million. As they say, when seconds count the police are only minutes away. The police, prosecutors and courts can make being a victim of an attack less likely by incarcerating as many as possible of the small percentage of people who would perpetrate such crimes, but they can never incarcerate them all.

      • Friends, any violent criminal deterred is a good beginning…One scumbag behind bars is an oddity…three scumbags locked up reflects an organization…fifty people incarcerated is a movement.

        (apologies to Arlo Guthrie)

        • Whew… I thought you were going to go on and on about the 27 8×10 color glossy photographs with the circles and the arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining how each one was to be used against you in a court of law, etc. That would have been excessive.

        • @Sam and Pb

          Gents, thank you for joining in the chorus…there were a number of us on that Group W bench, waiting for the Shrink, way back then…

          G’nite

        • … and the biggest, baddest father stabber of them all sat down beside me and said, “Kid, whadja get?” I said, “I didn’t get nuthin’. I had to pay $50 and pick up the garbage.”

      • Well the “fear” isn’t reaching the Gun Control media because over the weekend they were all out using the death of a NY Policeman and the Glock with the drum photo to blame everyone but the guilty parties. Even though the Glock was stolen years before and in the possession of a prohibited possessor the narrative shifted to the need to reel-in surrounding states for supplying firearms to sugar and spice and everything nice Gun Control NYC. And reports shifted to if the USSC rules for carry problems are going to be made so much worse. The media understands time is running out for little nancy and the Rat Party so more knee jerk insanity is on the way.

        Why exactly is it that the media can without fear stick their behinds in the face of The Second Amendment? Simple answer is the media has defined Gun Control as the go to answer to violence and they know empty headed fools are quick to climb onboard. Unfortunately the vast majority of airheads unknowingly climb aboard with what is clearly an agenda rooted in racism and genocide.

        And who exactly is it that keeps America’s gullible airheads so ignorant? That would be zipped lipped Gun Owners who for one reason or another cannot set the pace and define Gun Control by its diabolical history of rot. In other words…The problem is really not the media.

    • OGIM,

      As a Los Angelino, I can definitely agree with your statement that nobody trusts our D.A. to properly prosecute crimes.

      • 45’ish years ago (honeymoon) we swung through California (I-8 to San Diego up to L.A. and up Hwy 101 to Oregon) visiting Balboa Park, friends in Oceanside, Disney, Knott’s Berry Farm, San Fran, Yosemite, Redwoods, etc. We had a great time, ate well and loved the weather. Work forced me back to CA in the late 90’s and early 2000’s…couldn’t believe the changes…haven’t been back. Many parts of California are truly beautiful. Sadly, the batshit crazy, greedy, entitled Libbies have ruined a great place….moreover, they are proud of their destructiveness and are successfully exporting it to other States much akin to a virus infecting new hosts.

        • The changes only really began to ramp up in 2011 when Jerry Brown was re-elected as Governor. That completed the transformation from a Red state (under Deukmejian and Wilson in the ’80s and ’90s) thru Purple (Davis – who was recalled – and Schwarzneggar) to Blue (Brown) and finally to “Clown World” (Newsom).

          Mrs. Haz and I were both born and raised here. Lived our entire lives here. Raised our children to adulthood here (though they left for greener pastures). We’re finally having the serious conversations about moving ourselves as well.

          Sad. SoCal was a fantastic place to grow up in the ’80s. The Dems have completely destroyed this place.

        • Old Guy, my experience is similar, but my adjectives would be different. In the 70’s, California was ‘tolerable’. In more recent years, they have become intolerable. Yeah, as far as nature goes, Cali has some of the most beautiful land in the US. But California Fever was a problem before either of us was born, being mentioned as early as 1840 by Richard Dana, ‘Two Years Before the Mast’.

        • There are still small pockets of sanity left, but they are dwindling. OC, although probably purple now, is still much more sane than North or South of here. I’m a lifer, but the wife and I are looking to move within 5 years. The left thinks its a privilege to live in their insanity.

  2. “Socially liberal” … ???

    I wouldn’t be surprised if this doesn’t translate to firm belief in gun control and gun registry. Becoming armed is one thing but it isn’t enough by itself unless you change the tyrannical and paranoid mindset also.

    Excellent stats though. Thanks for sharing. Can always use them later.

    • “Socially liberal” to me means that people should be free to do what they want if they are adults and are hurting no one. As a Christian, I impose limits on my behavior, but we live in the world, people may not have my values, but do no harm to others. I look at the 2nd and see another right we shouldn’t have to fight for.
      Limiting my right to self defense is NOT socially liberal, it is controlling. Many people are “socially liberal” and “fiscally conservative(in different degrees)”. This is the definition of a Libertarian. Yes, many Libertarians are single issue voters(legalize drugs!!!), This is like a family that has been Democrat for 6 generations, suddenly start voting a Republican ticket only because of the Dems now wanting to limit guns.
      I agree that that is a power move, but what had the Republicans been doing before that? They don’t wants firearms in the hands of the unwashed masses, either.

      • avatar Geoff "A day without an apparently brain-damaged mentally-ill demented troll is like a day of warm sunshine" PR

        “…but what had the Republicans been doing before that? They don’t wants firearms in the hands of the unwashed masses, either.”

        You’re not speaking for me. I have *zero* problem with anyone lawfully owning and carrying firearms.

        The dirty little secret about Asians being attacked, rarely is it Trump supporters doing the violence…

        • The NYPD has a hate crime watch Twitter account. It’s glorious to behold and I guarantee does not convey the messaging its creators thought it would.

          Frankly, I’m shocked it’s still up.

        • You’re right, it’s ALWAYS Trump supporters perpetrating that (and most other racially motivated) violence. What a bunch of suckers and losers Trump supporters are lol…

        • Look at you laughable knuckledraggers You are full of shi(* like Christmas turkey. You Leftist-Socialist ANTIFA and BLM thugs are the perpetrators of the violence, racial and otherwise.

          Just wait for the midterms in November. We will so who the “losers” really are.

        • Nameless, brainless troll,

          Are you in a contest with dacian the stupid to see who can be the biggest idiot?? If you, you are edging him out (barely) – but no one on this forum is impressed. Now, if one of you two mouth-breathing morons could actually articulate a logical point, utilizing simple declarative English sentences, I would me mildly impressed (although my kids could do that in prmary school, so I’d ONLY be “mildly” impressed.

          There is a cable somewhere with your name on it.

      • I don’t agree with you and your definition. Socially liberal IMHO means to dominate and control society and with tyranny if necessary but I really need her to clarify this. My suspicion is she’s another early version of Gabby Giffords who came out of the closet. I don’t know if she won’t turn on gun owners otherwise.

        Libertarians are deceivers and they are NOT single issue voters; clearly they want to legalize weed AND advocate open borders (open borders being a policy of sedition and nothing more). I’ve seen them talk a conservative line while running interference for the Democrat / US Communist party. They’re two-faced at minimum and are fooling nobody that really watches them. After all the Libertarians, USA and elsewhere, were started by socialists in France. To date they haven’t changed. Socialism is communism.

      • “They don’t wants firearms in the hands of the unwashed masses, either.”

        This is a sincere question because I’m still learning about the history of gun control. I know people talk about the Mulford Act. That was 55 years ago. It’s a good sign when people have to go back that far to give an example. What are some other, newer examples? I’m going to be busy at work, but I’ll check back this evening.

        • Take any gun law at all, and dissect it. While dissecting, bear in mind the population of the county/city/county/state where the law is being enacted.

          Red states are tending toward consitutional carry, and eliminating licensing and registration. Red states are pretty Caucasian. Blue states twist themselves into knots in their attempts to regulate firearms. Blue states have a higher percentage of non-Caucasian populations.

          To summarize, there is near zero effort to control white people’s access to guns. The control is aimed at people of color, and primarily at the darkest colored skins.

          That my be a coincidence, but I don’t think so. I think Democrats are afraid of black people.

        • Mississippi Missouri Tennessee and Texas say hi. But honestly I think it is less of a race thing now than what it would have been 20-30 years ago and more of a power seeking control behavior form what is currently typical of democrats

        • I thought rt66paul might weigh in since he’s the one that brought it up. I don’t know what he’s referring to.

          Paul, I take it you’ve never been to the south. That’s where the highest concentration of black people live.
          https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/black-population-by-state

          Those are also generally considered to be red states. “Blue states have a higher percentage of non-Caucasian populations.” That isn’t true for the most part. See the above link.

          “To summarize, there is near zero effort to control white people’s access to guns.”
          Do white people in California have better access to guns than black people in Mississippi? Black people only make up about 5-6% of the population in California and about 37% of the population in Mississippi.

          Paul, you may have misunderstood my question. We all know Democrats are for strict gun control. I was wondering how Republicans “don’t wants firearms in the hands of the unwashed masses, either.” I’m not doubting it. I just want to know when and where this took place. Thanks

        • Dude, We Republicans don’t give a rat’s behind about a gun owners pigmentation. We do care about letting criminals get away with crime in general. And we don’t give a damn about whether they are White, Black or Purple.

      • You: “As a Christian I impose limits on myself…”. Wow. Once again, as always, the condescending arrogance and assumption of moral superiority just shines right thru with ‘you people’. Me: “as a confirmed atheist I have zero morals, no conscience whatsoever and certainly impose no limits on my behaviour”. That, by your own inference, is your world view. How very, very Christian of you. Every. Goddamn. Time.

        • What a funny subject. I woke up this morning thinking, ” What did the dinosaurs do to piss God off? “

        • Wow, that’s some first rate projection there, troll. Paul said literally none of that. Sounds like you got some heavy guilt, there, Chief. What is it you’ve done that you’re so ashamed of????

    • In her context “socially liberal” likely means that she supports abortion on demand and a social safety net, rather than the current Communist propaganda spewed forth from Sanders and the Squad.

      • I’m pro choice but not for abortion being publicly funded. The “safety net” part is something we already have which is the greatest Ponzi scheme of all time (next to the organized crime insurance industry); the US Social Security.

    • I had similar experiences over 45 years ago in visits to San Francisco and LA. The liberal mindset was already present in Portland and the rest of the Willamette Valley to some extent even back then.
      Then the onslaught of Californians began and brought the ideas that they were fleeing with them to Oregon and gradually took over.
      The rural areas of Oregon are still decent places to live but our government is controlled by the majority of the population that lives in the Willamette Valley rendering most of the state voiceless.
      Twice our Republiclican Senators have had to flee the state to deny the Democratic controlled Senate a quorum to prevent outrageous bills becoming law.
      In short, we’ve been Californicated.

  3. “People who feel vulnerable to crime or hold less faith in the police are more likely to arm themselves.“

    LOL imagine that. Can’t understand why the people in this country wouldn’t trust the police? O yeah, the propaganda campaign of the last decade (from old Jim Crow joes party) about police shooting colored people. Love to see that campaign sell more guns 🙂

  4. If this trend keeps up the gun control commies will be smearing gun owners as 61.6% white, which just happens to be the percentage of Americans who are white.

    • And you’re wrong again. Lawful Permanent Residents (LPR) are authorized to own firearms in the USA as long as they remain in lawful status. There are many LPR(s) that are gun owners and also have carry permits for handguns too.

      • Yes, he is wrong, again. As a many times over visitor from the Great White North to the Home of the Free, Land of the Brave, it seems to me that even allowing only Citizens/lawful residents to exercise their Naturally Inherent Fundamental Human Right of Effective Self Defense is, in and of itself, yet another infringement on people’s right. I seem to recall the quote as reading: “No free man shall be disbarred the use of arms”, not: “only those with the approval of state authority may be allowed the use of arms”. I’ve ridden throughout the Pacific Northwest/Midwest from BC to Mexico many times over, for years, but no gat for me, at least legally. That ain’t right, so to speak, and you can imagine my frustration, at least legally, up here in the Queen’s Colonies.

        • I have no idea why the colonies you’re in still answer to and honor the Queen but there’s nothing we in the USA can do about it. If we’re driving to Alaska we can’t carry our handgun through Canada to Alaska. We can’t do anything about that neither. I don’t think that would change even if y’all dumped the Queen which you should at least to the extent she has input on your firearms laws. Your national mindset, especially the RCMP, doesn’t think handguns nor a lot of other firearms are in your culture to begin with. That will have to change also in addition to getting rid of the Royal shadow over your nation.

      • Yes, it’s all a big, expedient, pandering lie from The Proper Authorities™ of course, north and south of the border. My point was more that a visitor/guest to your/any country with a proper Constitution such as yours should well be able to exercise any inherent right while within your borders. Otherwise it just ain’t really a right, is it? I would gladly undergo a background check or some other type of security theater, even a temporary license/insurance etc while spending a month or two tooling around the USA on my big, black, scary, non- military style, non-fully semi automatic, high capacity Harley with the shoulder stand that goes up. Hell, the life I save could be my own.

        • Yes I firmly agree. With Federal laws it mostly depends on your type of VISA and/or admission you have. This will also depend on the laws of the state you’re in also. For example here in Texas we often see foreign tourists fly in to Houston and Dallas with extended layovers and visas that allow them to go outside the airport for extended layovers and the purpose of this is they go to a local gun range for a few hours and shoot or train. This goes on to the extent a lot of Chinese tourists will go to the outdoor ranges and rent their AR15(s) and even their full autos for a day at the range. They’ll shoot for hours on end while in total disbelief they can do that here. Folks from the communist states like NY, NJ, CA, CT, RI, IL, etc., will fly in for a weekend to TX, FL, and other states to take LTC courses and get their permits. Truck drivers are also known for this. I’m all for Canadians being able to do this especially if the permissions would reciprocate but as long as they’re part of the Commonwealth that won’t happen. Seems they’re all wanting to be more like tyrannical New Zealand and the Aussies nowadays.

      • Well, the idiot manchild in Ottawa, the cities of Toronto and Montreal and the CBC ain’t Canada, per say. No one east of Ontario wants to put up with their crap anymore, much less listen to it. But alas… they seem to get to make the rules, somehow. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is the natural condition of our species; without that first pointy stick we would all still be running, naked and screaming, for the nearest tree, desperately hoping the predator behind us can’t climb. This transcends artificial boundaries and should not be determined by reciprocation either; they either respect our rights or are tyrants, simple as that. I forget the lawyers name but he is quoted as saying: “The right to keep and bear arms shall be subject neither to the Democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility”. Always liked that one, good words. Both our countries have failed us tremendously, yours far less so than mine. Keep fighting the good fight down there and I hope it soon rubs off up here, as things usually do. Cheers.

  5. Her race and gender put her at risk, she says.”It may be a low chance that I’ll run into someone who will kill me, but without a gun, I’ll die.”

    She has a very valid point, for a few different reasons. Yes yes I know, anti-gun people are go0ing to claim studies show this and that and other – but those focus on narrow and contextual definitions employed for the study and do not take into account the aggregate of all data available. But if its looked at in the overall aggregate that represents the real world;

    1. Gender: Although men are more likely to be the victim of a violent crime, in the context of the amount of crime that does come of women they are more likely to have been targeted for that violence primarily due to their gender and more likely to be seriously injured or killed if they can not defend against the crime in a stopping and definitive manner.

    2: Gender: Of the amount of violent crime that comes to women those women who employ defensive gun use are almost 73% more likely to avoid serious injury or death than women without defensive gun use.

    3: Ethnic background: Women from mixed ethnic backgrounds (e.g. Chinese-American and others) are 24% more likely to be victims of violent crime than white women. (as a note: Men from mixed ethnic backgrounds are 23% more likely to be victims of violent crime than men from any other ethnic group…and…White full-time students. either male or female, are 19% more likely to be victims of crime than Asian full-time students either male or female.)

    • “Her race and gender put her at risk, she says.”

      Yes/perhaps – from BLACKS. As she continues to lives in one of the biggest national cesspools of the BLM BS. Philly has had DECADES of militant black racebaiting and lawlessness. The potential danger to Orientals is NOT from gun owners, conservatives, or whites.

      • avatar Geoff "A day without an apparently brain-damaged mentally-ill demented troll is like a day of warm sunshine" PR

        ““Her race and gender put her at risk, she says.”

        Yes/perhaps – from BLACKS.”

        And that’s the pesky detail the Leftist Scum media fails to publicly acknowledge…

  6. The Economist used to be a reliable center-right voice in politics and economics, as well as funny. I remember an issue about Saudi Arabia in the nineties had a cover with a picture of two camels humping. I cancelled my subscription when they dove into the tank for Obama. Since that time it has been infected with Leftist scum. It is no different than the NY Times now.

    I’m happy they’re feeling nervous.

    • Well good for her…will she continue to vote for her oppressors? Like all those black folks in Cook county?? Forever???

  7. avatar Geoff "A day without an apparently brain-damaged mentally-ill demented troll is like a day of warm sunshine" PR

    “…Yet she owns over a dozen rifles, pistols and shotguns (“one for every occasion, like purses or shoes”)”

    And the AR-15 platform is one of the easiest firearms to accessorize…

  8. Anyone who is still playing footsie with the authoritarians because they see themselves as “socially liberal,” isn’t paying attention to what’s happening. The libs aren’t fighting for anyone’s rights. They’re making up rights to fight for. They’re making up the right for men to use women’s restrooms. They’re making up the right for parents not to have control over their children. They’re pretending like they’re going to give blacks the right to vote because they have such little respect for the citizens of this country, they think people are too dumb to see through the charade. They’re fighting for the “right” of unlimited illegal immigration so they can give them the “right” to alter our representation in government through increased population or by giving non-citizens the right to vote. “Attacks on democracy” anyone? What a joke.

    Meanwhile, the authoritarians the “socially liberal” people put into office, are terrifying people so much with their insane Progressive ideology, that everyone and their brother are busy arming themselves.

  9. It is well that this woman carries again to defend herself. However; if she really wants to be safe she should grow up, grow a brain, grow a pair of testicles or ovaries, whichever is gender appreciate, and stop voting for fecal brained liberals who aid and abet the violent criminals.

  10. People who have called themselves socially liberal have in the past supported gun control. They have supported the creation of the welfare state. They have supported the building of public housing projects that were made “gun-free zones”. And they disagreed when the Christians when they said a fathers Love and discipline is necessary in the home.

    Law abiding socially liberal people have a right to Arms. Historically they have not been a supporter of that right. Perhaps this will finally change for the better.

  11. What should be scaring everyone on the entire political spectrum? Our nation’s accelerating trajectory: the more hysterical you are, the more you get your way.

    The way it used to be:
    A toddler wanted to eat an entire box of cookies before dinner and threw a temper tantrum when mom or dad said, “no.” Then mom or dad promptly chastised their toddler, potentially giving a soft spank on the fanny or putting the toddler into a timeout in a corner and requiring an apology for the toddler’s outburst after the toddler settled down. And the toddler did not get any cookies.

    The way we are heading:
    A toddler wants to eat an entire box of cookies before dinner and throws a temper tantrum when mom or dad do not act fast enough. Mom or dad quickly gives the box of cookies to the toddler and then mom or dad flagellates her/himself for being “privileged” and failing to talk to their toddler about his/her feelings of inadequacy which the parents incorrectly assume must be the real cause of the outburst. (Why else would the toddler throw a temper tantrum?)

    Many parents are raising children to be spoiled and entitled brats, failing to teach self-regulation, and rewarding angry/hysterical outbursts. And then we have many parents who are totally failing to raise their children at all. I am not sure which is worse.

    • “Many parents are raising children to be spoiled and entitled brats, failing to teach self-regulation, and rewarding angry/hysterical outbursts“

      Yes.

  12. In my life, women have ALWAYS had guns, or at least access to guns. Dad and grandfathers had guns, and generally used them recreationally. Mom and grandmothers had guns, and almost never used them, but when they picked a weapon up, they meant business. When I was a wee tyke, it was mother, not dad, who poked a shotgun out the door, blazing away at noises in the night. Grandpa never fired at a prowler in the late evening, but Grandma certainly did. Sis is the one who went into law enforcement, not any of us boys. For that matter, many of my girlfriends were comfortable around guns, including the girl who became my wife. I have no daughters, but we don’t distinguish between boys and girls among the grandchildren. The girls show less interest, but again, when they deign to handle the weapons, they seem to master them quickly, then move on to other interests.

    I simply cannot understand any mindset that says women shouldn’t have guns. No intelligent man will ever put a woman to the test!

    • I hope that’s some kind of lame joke. All Native Americans should have weapons, just like everyone else in ‘Murica. I was pretty close to an old Apache, who I trusted with my own life. I’m almost as close to several Choctaw, that I trust equally. I don’t know any Sioux or Cheyenne, but I can’t see how they might be any different.

  13. What a load of self serving ball socks. NOBODY needs that many guns NOBODY. Here’s a fact. If the bad guys hold a pistol on you and demand your wallet [purse’] GIVE IT TOO THEM> Why? Because by going for the wallet the bad guys first intent is NOT to kill you. If that was the first intent you would already be dead and there is NOTHING that you could to prevent it ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
    One thing is for ABSOLUTE sure- If you go for your piece you will also be dead. You cannot out draw the guy with a gun in the hand. YOU may well think you are some kind of Rambo but Rambo would not have lasted a minute in real combat.
    Rambo is one of them guys who has a gun that never misses and his opponents all have guns that never hit anything. The average American Gun Freak would not stand a chance in real combat especially not one as stupid as this young lady Why doyou think that it takes anything [at least in the UK] up to nine months of really really hard training before you get to be, by our standards, a truly compentent Infantryman.
    I know because for the best part of two decades part of my job description was a a Small Arms Trainer in the RAF and ther UK Reserve In fantry First as a Sergeant Armourer in the. RAF and then in the Reserves

    • Gawd, you’re pathetic, Albert. If a mugger holds a gun on me and wants to rape my daughter, just let him do it? Tell her to “lay back and enjoy it”? Please absent yourself from this forum, troll, you embarrass youself in a very cringe-worthy way.

      • Yes, he is pathetic. Generations of brainwashing by scared little men and women. Lamp; to reply to you further up in the comments, my comment was addressed to ‘rt66paul’, not ‘paul’ further down. I’ve done nothing to “be ashamed of” as you put it nor do I have an ounce of guilt over anything in my life (well, maybe not calling Ma often enough) and he (rt66paul) absolutely inferred exactly what I said, as do so very many more. Just exceedingly tired of hearing that crap from the all the good ‘God fearing’ people amongst us. Hopefully He will straighten them out a bit if they ever do meet up.

    • Albert Hall, I don’t know where you reside now, but herein the US you are free to own whatever your heart desires when it comes to firearms, except sawed off shotguns and “machine guns”.

      If you want to allow a robber to get away with your hard earned property more power to you. I’m not going to let that happen if I can prevent it.

      For your edification, statistics show you to be absolutely wrong if you resist. According to stats, a woman who does NOT resist, is 2.5X’s more apt to be injured and a man is 1.4 times more apt to be injured if he adopts a “passive” role.

      I don’t give a rant’s behind about your background in the RAF. You Brits have a different mind set than we Americans. We believe in self defense. Here’s some food for thought. You don’t have to be infantry trained to be able to defend yourself? That you trained soldiers in small arms does not make you an “expert” in self defense matters. Being an armourer means that you know the inner workings of a firearm. It does not make you an “expert” on mattes of self defense.

    • Let’s see….

      “NOBODY needs that many guns NOBODY. ”

      Simply put, old bean, “rights” are for citizens; “needs” are for subjects.

      However…. you are correct about the ability to successfully outdraw a drawn weapon.

  14. @Mr. Lucky
    … and the biggest, baddest father stabber of them all sat down beside me and said, “Kid, whadja get?” I said, “I didn’t get nuthin’. I had to pay $50 and pick up the garbage.”

    “You can get anything you want, at Alices’ Restaurant (excepting Alice).”

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here