Rolling Stone can be counted on for two things: revealing pictures of pop stars and a distinctly anti-gun bias. Why a magazine about the music industry would consistently venture into the world of politics is beyond me, and seeing how poorly their articles are researched makes me wonder how they have any credibility left whatsoever. They only succeed in proving my point at the very beginning of their recent article entitled “George Zimmerman and Weaponized Racism” by picturing a Remington 1911 handgun and labeling it as a 9mm, not taking the three seconds to Google the model number prominently etched on the slide. Trust me, it only gets worse from there . . .
The article doesn’t take long to reveal its slant, and within two paragraphs the concept underlying author Tim Dickinson’s “logic” is revealed. The novel theory is that if there hadn’t been a gun present, both Martin and Zimmerman would have walked away from the fight alive.
Trayvon Martin is not dead because George Zimmerman is a fearful little bigot. He’s dead because Zimmerman is a fearful little bigot who holstered a legal, loaded 9mm Kel-Tec PF-9 pistol in public. What, in any other civilized nation, might have been a fistfight between the two – eventually broken up by the cops – turned suddenly and legally deadly in a state that has become so firearm-friendly it’s now known as the “Gunshine State.”
So, in the orange-skied world in which Rolling Stone writers live, the police will always arrive just in time to save the day and no one ever dies from a fistfight. It’s an opinion that ignores the thousands of Americans that are strangled, beaten or bludgeoned to death by “unarmed” attackers [FBI crime data]. Or the thousands more killed by blunt objects. No, according to Dickinson, the only murders that count are the ones involving guns.
This is a common belief among those who are screaming for Zimmerman’s scalp, that “fistfights” are good clean fun in which no one could possibly die. They believe that the only reason someone was killed that night in Sanford, Florida was that Zimmerman brought a gun to a fistfight.
And yet here’s one from San Antonio last week that suffered that exact fate, being beaten to death by an “unarmed” attacker. Here’s another one from New Jersey on the 16th who was beaten to death on a public street. And what about this guy in Dallas from Sunday? I could keep going since it happens every single day in this country, but the reality is that just because someone is unarmed doesn’t mean your life isn’t in danger.
To support their opinion that fewer guns equals less crime, Rolling Stone then points to… Chicago. Really. No, Dickinson doesn’t use the Windy City to bolster a fact-based argument for how well gun control has worked there. He apparently isn’t that ill-informed. Instead, he holds the rampant Chicago gun violence up to support a tired “blood in the streets” prediction of what their newly-passed concealed carry law will do to that city.
Instead [of restricting guns], America is moving in the other direction, thanks to what Diaz [VPC Wonk] dubs “bizarre mutations of the law” generated by the National Rifle Association. Just last week, Illinois fulfilled a decades-long crusade by the gun lobby, becoming the last of 50 states to authorize the concealed carrying of loaded guns in public. The move by the state legislature, overriding a veto by the governor, promises to fuel the epidemic of warlike gun violence in Chicago – where the city’s homicide toll hit 200 this year after a bloody Fourth of July weekend in which more than 70 were shot and a dozen murdered.
One more time, with feeling: the only evidence Dickinson could dredge up to support his “more guns equals more crime” argument is his own personal predictions of what might happen in Chicago. With no facts at hand to make his case, he instead made up his own example out of thin air. An example, by the way, which has never been borne out in the real world. Despite the repeated prognostications of anti-gunners, no jurisdiction that has legalized concealed carry has experienced the Dodge City, blood-in-the-streets scenario. Ever.
Not to mention the good that’s done by armed citizens; the rapes and murders that concealed carry permit holders have prevented.
To even a semi-sentient reader, the Chicago example illustrates exactly what happens when you have a disarmed population for gangs and criminals to prey upon. Yet they choose to ignore the objective evidence and march right on with their progressive utopian view of gun control as the savior of humanity.
[I]n Florida and 20 other states, “stand your ground” remains the law of the land – upending centuries of precedent on the concept of self-defense.
Upended? Since the dawn of time, the idea that an individual is entitled to defend himself from an attacker has been crystal clear. It has only been recently that the “progressive” movement has sought to beatify victims and denounce those who defend their own lives and those of their families, attacking the concept of armed self defense.
“Stand your ground” isn’t a radical new idea — it’s fighting back against the continuous push to force citizens to become victims. That concept — the one Rolling Stone is peddling, that a dead victim is better than a living law-abiding citizen — is the one that upends self defense laws.
“We have to make a decision,” says Diaz, author most recently of The Last Gun. “Is this the new normal? That people go about armed and shoot each other in the street? We seem to have fallen to a level that we’re going to tolerate this kind of violence. And you have to ask yourself: What is this country going to look like 10 years from now?”
Diaz presents a false choice and Dickinson swallows it hook, line and sinker. Diaz wants you to believe that we can stuff the genie back in the bottle, that by banning firearms we can eliminate criminals. By enforcing still more gun bans, we can “fix” Chicago. But after decades of trying, nowhere on the face of the Earth has that proven to be true. Even in those places with the strictest gun control laws, criminals still get their hands on guns and wreak havoc on the law abiding.
Diaz naturally believes that gun owners are inherently evil and violent, that the mere presence of a gun means that you are more likely to commit a crime. But as the New York Times, no less, pointed out, people with a concealed carry permit are actually less likely to commit a crime than the average population.
The real choice is this: do we want to lay down and wait for the cops to ride to the rescue, hoping that they’ll get there in time to save us from becoming another on the long list of murder victims? Or will we recognize that every person has the right to defend themselves, no matter the color of their skin?
Growing up in a martial arts family; no body is ever unarmed or ever not deadly. That being said I still prefer a firearm.
Just from doing jeet kune do for a few months I already know a few ways to kill someone with my hands.
Killing someone with your hands isn’t hard. Beating someone to death is. I think they just consider fistfights and not other ways to kill with your hands, like gougings, stranglings, blood-oxygen asphyxiation, severing/snapping of bones, joints, and vertebrae…
Doesn’t even require an extensive study of martial arts, just a decent knowledge of anatomy and physiology.
LOL Whatever. Read a few Bruce Lee books did ya?
you know what I learned from years of martial arts training?? restraint is real strength. lots of dumbasses out there think they’re badass just cause they know stuff. you’re the real man if you walk away from trouble or stay the heck out of it.
that goes the same for new gun owners who just passed ccw courses and watched too many Magpul videos.
and I also conduct defensive driving seminars. getting INTO a dangerous situation is YOUR FAULT, any action taken because you acted on strong emotion is still YOUR FAULT.
(now play the Law & Order end credits…)
Agree. Restraint is the key. Preparedness is very important. The confidence that gives you, even in retreating, taking cover or just being more observan is more likely to keep you out of trouble. If worst comes to worst…you are prepared to defend yourself, your family, your friends, or some unfortunate that you don’t know, should you choose to do so. No matter, it is still a choice.
They also seem to ignore the inconvenient truth that the murder rate in this country is on a continuous decline while the number of concealed carry permit holders go up.
Pfffff… there you go, letting the facts get in the way of a good story.
Crime has gone down since Roe V. Wade too. More pesky facts to get in the way.
I find the studies on lead reduction being the major driver in crime going down more persuasive than the abortion argument. Look them up. They explain a global trend in ways Roe cannot. But concealed carry sure isn’t making crime go up and is arguably one of many factors that are coming into play in reducing crime.
who to hell cares what rolling stone has to say ! PERIOD
You mean Rolling Stoned?
They see me Rollin. They’re hating.
Because it affects political power. Never underestimate the enemy.
Fist fights are never deadly right?
http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/84998787.html
or
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1996-10-23/news/9610230046_1_18th-hole-richard-stephens-berlin-hills-golf
they said it would have eventually been broken up by cops (if it was a fist fight), ummm… lets say the cops had a better than average response time and showed up in 5 minutes, either GZ or Martin would have been beat to a pulp. and from what happened in the 30 seconds or so we know it would have been GZ. if that fight went on, there very likely still would have been a death. people seem to ignore that you don’t have to be shot to death for your life to be ruined. look at the giants fan that was beat in probably a 1 minute or less fight. his life is almost as badly ruined as being shot to death.
So, if a woman was getting the crap beat out of her by a boyfriend, she should just take it and not defend herself with a gun because, after all, it’s just fists? Fact is, people die from trauma caused by fist fights all the time. Especially, if the back of your skull repetitively comes in hard contact with concrete.
Let all the anti gun people move to Chicago and NY city. They can live in peace and bliss knowing those cities with the strictest gun laws have protected them.
It would be a perverted experiment: isolate 3000 people, 1 active cop, 10 criminals (rapists, murderers, robbers and thugs), half the people live in a gun-free zone, the other half do not…
Im sure Feinstein, Yee, Holder, Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, and our esteemed el presidente Obungles would be the first to volunteer for that gun free paradise in the experiment right? Right?
I got a “free” subscription when i bought some concert tickets online. (i could have sworn that i unchecked the box.) The two issues i got before canceling wound up riding around in the bed of the truck. I wouldn’t wipe my ass with that rag. Only partly because glossy paper just doesn’t do the job.
It’s not nearly as absorbent as The Journal News?
Bear with me. I’m beginning to wonder. I think its a form of condescending arrogance that makes progressives think that all of us mere proletariat types are equal… equal in a way that there is no real guilt or innocence, we merely exist. In their world, there is no real right to self-defense because the individual citizen does not exist. We are all merely members of a community and no individual has any real rights independent of the community. There is no right to self-defense because that would mean an individual has rights outside of the community.
Are there any smarter philosophers fleshing this incredibly arrogant idea out more?
But some are more equal than others…
“individual citizen does not exist” that is exactly what “progressives” believe.
Roe v Wade was based on the right to privacy. What has happened to the individuals right to privacy in the last 5+ years? We elected a progressive president, that’s what happened.
Um, the unPATRIOT Act was passed 12 years ago. This jerkbag just took the baton the last jerkbag gave him and ran with it.
Thanks Nick for this.
The real racism here is in the double standard set by media like this publication. If a raid were conducted on the staff of Roll1ng Stoned I suspect there would be a substantial amount of illegal substances found, enough for more than one felony charge. In this instance, my guess is these elitists wouldn’t trust the public defenders to ensure they dodged the legal bullet. Rather they would have their highly paid attorney get them off. Since the poor cannot afford such a “privilege” gets who goes to jail for 5-10? By using emotion, these scum divert the story away from the truth, and thus protecting their de-facto racism for another turn of the karmic cycle.
Everyone needs to step back and realize these aren’t sincere convictions, fast-held beliefs based on moral foundations!
This is just a show, a play. The name of the play is CON THE RUBES AND CONQUER THE WORLD.
Don’t be a rube. Don’t make the mistake of thinking the play is the real thing; Dickinson is a hired gun, spouting the company line. It could just as well be named GIVE UP YOUR RAISES AND BONUSES AND SAVE THE COMPANY. Or Capitalism, or whatever.
What he’s saying is a distraction, so you’ll pay attention to the words while your wallet is being stolen.
Rolling Stone is a joke of a magazine politics-wise and from what I understand has a limited readership. I would also point out that the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no Constitutionally-protected right to police protection.
Wenner got his first paid writing job at Ramparts, and it’s been downhill ever since, as he has remained typically left-wing and Chadwickian, but focused more on money-making hipness than liberty. So much for Berkeley.
Clearly a last ditch effort from a paper product losing its relevance in the age of dying newsprint.
Beatify?
Word of the day desk calender, Leghorn?
I enjoyed reading this.
I enjoyed sharing this.
KEEP DOING THIS.
lets say that GZ had no gun and it was just a fist fight. lets say GZ won the fight and he was still on the self defense side of the fight. if he beat a minor (especially a black minor) really badly, i bet he would be in even more trouble. what if TM was in coma for life, people would probably be burning GZ at the stake in the court house.
I hate to godwin a thread but grabbers are starting display the reality disconnect of those dreaming/hoping for Vergeltungswaffe. Perhaps they will start doing a grabber version of the Ghost Dance.
Hey, if it looks, walks and quacks like a Fascist…
RS’s political commentary is almost as bad as their musical commentary.
……I have a 9mm 1911…….
To the professional propagandists, all handguns are 9mm Glocks and all rifles are machine guns.
Or, in this case, a Mosin-Nagant is a “Russian-style assault rifle,” which was discovered with “hundreds of rounds of ammunition,” where “some of the boxes of ammo appear to have Russian writing.”
Photo of the rifle is about 18 seconds into the video at that link, complete with a half-dozen copper colored 7.62x54r rounds in a buttstock sleeve. The box with the “Russian writing” is about 5 seconds later. (Sure looks like Hebrew to me.)
I live in NH and we’ve had SYG for two years…to my knowledge not ONCE has someone been killed with that being used as a defense…it has, however, defended a person who presented a firearm to stop a group from beating up a friend…
The entire “old fashion fistfight” argument has always confused me. If I witness somebody I suspect of committing a felony, the very last thing I want is a fair firstfight with them.
I’m not even going to bother to read the article, this one, or rolling stone.
A) we want to smoke a lot of pot and take a lot of drugs and not suffer the consequences of our poor choices and guns make it possible for drug fueled decisions to go horribly wrong. Woo! Rock n’ Roll!
B) Owning guns show that you’ve taken responsibility for yourself. When chances of professional and fiscal success in an industry are akin to winning the lottery there’s no wonder as to why they’re all useless communists.
I’ll say it again. Violence is the problem. Guns, knives, baseball bats, bare hands are the tools. Do we try to fix the problem or do we legislate the tools? Legislate the tools, then we’ll still need to fix the problem (violence, remember?) or we can save time and lives by treating violence first. Nobody has the right to violence except to protect themselves. I keep saying this, nobody is interested, guess I’m crazy.
Yep you’re crazy you old coot!
Anybody know what a “coot” is?
actually yes, yes I do
Coots are medium-sized, crane-like birds that are members of the Rallidae (rail) family. They constitute the genus Fulica.
See also codger; Noun
An elderly man, esp. one who is old-fashioned or eccentric.
You’re welcome. Anytime.
A coot is a waterfowl the size of a duck. It is the
rare occasion when something looks like a duck,
walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck,..but it
isn’t a duck. It’s white bill and distinctive red eyes make it easy to recognize from other waterfowl.
Nope. You’re not crazy. Think about this. If you place two people in a room and convince them that in order to get out one HAS to kill the other. The room is bare, no furniture and nothing that can be turned into a weapon, The two “participants” are stark naked and have no glasses, false teeth or other items that could be used as a weapon. Both are ambulatory, sighted and hear well. Now ask yourself, could one kill the other?
If you arrived at the inevitable “Yes!”, then you have understood the key thing that no progressive socialist seems to be able to grasp. Weapons have nothing to do with it! The violence is in the heart and will of the person. Period.
Until we address the “content of their character” (and that includes every person regardless of race or ethnicity), the violence will continue no matter what objects we “outlaw” because we are putting violence into our minds and hearts daily (and I don’t think I need to “count the ways”).
Those who are saying it’s the difference between free, independent individuals, and a homogenized group identity are exactly right. In the first view The State is an extension of the free, independent individual. In the second view The State is the absolute master of the collective herd of people. There are two factors in every Polity, The People and The State. The crucial difference is which one controls the other. That is the choice we are facing today, and all other discussion is non sequitur, until this key matter is resolved in the US.
I’ve been hearing this argument a lot lately from anti-gunners: that gun owners shouldn’t have guns, because it escalates a situation that would OBVIOUSLY otherwise just ended up as a normal fistfight, where the two parties involved trade a few punches until the other gives up, and at that point the “winner” of the fight casually goes about his business.
Except this isn’t how it happens. How many instances do we have of people just getting the shit kicked out of them for no reason at all, left for dead, or with life-altering injuries, while the attacker “goes on about his business” to victimize more people further down the road?
Did these people not see the recent story where a man just burst into a woman’s home and started beating her senseless, threw her down the stairs, and left her to die?
I guess it’s a shame that she was such a pussy who couldn’t duke it out, old school. That’s exactly the message that they’re trying to put across now: people who carry firearms are pussies and bullies (notice the odd mutual exclusiveness) for taking responsibility for their self defense, rather than just taking a beating like a good ‘ol chum.
…but the first person they know who dies in a royal beatdown with fists, they will ask “what if someone there had a gun?”
I think most of us would acknowledge the wisdom of retreat when it’s reasonable to do so, and if everyone had a similar definition of reasonable, then SYG laws would not be necessary. But when overzealous prosecutors, hungry for reelection, criminalize the inability to retreat (not the unwillingness, the inability), then SYG laws become necessary to protect us from that overzealous prosecution.
Exactly.
I have no idea who threw the first punch or why, and no one can prove anything from the time he got off the phone with 911 and people heard (presumably) his cries for help and ran to find TM on top of him, wailing on his head. But the fact that TM was on top of him wailing on his head is what’s important. If I have a 6′ tall, 17 year old high school football player (whom one could easily presume was in the appropriate shape) straddling me for 30-odd seconds, wailing on my head, my ability to retreat is effectively nullified. I have no choice but to stand my ground.
This is day three of my armed presence in Larimer County. I have yet to draw my weapon in anger. Am I just even tempered or is there something demographically different here than in Chicago?
Welcome! Enjoy Ft. Collins. Go to Cheyenne for Frontier Days if you get a chance.
If you do, enjoy the fact that Wyoming is a constitutional carry state.
Actually Loveland and I am just here through the weekend before I return to gun friendly Virginia.
it was obviously a .9 cal assault pistol made by Gaston Gluck
evil twin of peaceful cobbler Gelston Gluck
A defensive caliber begins in 9.
Political articles in Rolling Stone, Women Magazine, and similar is not about well thought, strong logical arguments. Its barely about deeply felt emotional appeals.
Its about providing cues to low information voters what the “cool” people think. Reaffirming that this is what you need to believe to fit in to the culture leading crowd.
Of course people of the gun find these articles extremely shallow and idiotic. Its not meant for us.
im sure hunter s thompson would have a different view of all this if he was still alive.
Agreed. Rolling Stone is a relic, and this is simply a $hit-stain on the publisher and editors today, not the fine writers of the past.
Visitors to TTAG don’t last long if they are drinking the Progressive Kool-Aid. Just too many reasonable people who point out those un-reasonable things called “facts”, that tend to make Huff-Poser’s heads explode,
and Kos-kiddie-trolls to slink away in confusion.
Here’s a powerful indictment of the State Run Media, reminding us of the facts and truth they refused to report on Trayvon/Zimmerman, and why Obama, Holder, and now Sharpton are now desperate to turn the race-injustice narrative to “Stand Your Ground”, as they see their poll results, and CNNs circle the drain, as more independents and even some liberals with the integrity and ability to think for themselves wake up.
Pass it around.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2013/07/19/obamas-speech-cynical-me-and-cynical-he/
I can’t believe they called Zimmerman a bigot. It sounds like they want to get sued.
On a completely different note, can we stop acting like Travon was an innocent victim. I’m a former marine and I can tell you when you are fully mounted on another, you could easily kill them. It’s a bad position to be in. These idiots in the media neglect that fact, which is easily remedied if they watch a few mma fights and those guys train to avoid getting the crap kicked out of them. I’m not rendering an opinion on the shooting because I don’t know all of the facts but from what I’ve heard, Zimmerman life sounds like it was in jeopardy.
What we can do to “fix” the outcome of the Zimmerman case in the future is 1) lower the standard of proof required to convict a person of murder, 2) lower the standard of proof required to convict someone of a hate crime, and 3) increase the standard of proof required to prove self-defense.
Surely then 1) systematically oppressed peoples will receive more accurate justice in court at the hands of potentially biased juries, 2) systematically oppressed peoples will face less charge inflation based on prejudices and assumptions the majority may have about them and their punishments will be exactly proportional to the crimes they actually committed, and 3) victims won’t have to suffer the injustice of a system which views them as guilty until proven innocent.
Oh, wait a minute…
Yawn. You are just pandering now. Rolling Stone publishes brave journalism and the article you are taking your potshots against is not even about guns, is it? It is about the making of a terrorist. It is real reporting. You have found out yourselves just how hard real journalism can be with your own error-laden reporting of Newton. TTAG is becoming Ranting About Guns, which I guess has become your new business model. Maybe it will even work as plenty of people here seem to agree with you.
You are aware that pictured is the current issue of rolling stone magazine inside of which there are several other articles besides the cover story and the one this blog post is about one of those other ones…
The current issue of RS is providing publicity to a dirtbag who should have been taken out that night and buried next to his brother. This coupled with years of cultural garbage has reduced this once great magazine to the level of toilet paper.
Written by someone who it is obvious has not even read the article but is free with the opinions which are self-evidently worthless. Like so much else posted here by angry people who seem to be foaming at the mouth and who I rather doubt to be safe with a potato peeler never mind a firearm.
You wont last long here, troll, especially if name-calling is all you got.
Yet another troll who could be posting with his fellow Obama worshippers at the democratic underground yet comes here to entertain us. Thanx pal, we appreciate it.
I love that whole ‘freedom of press’ thing even though I may not like what they have to say. Something about ‘freedom of speech’ comes to mind too.
Freedom of press? Of Speech? No one has violated either. Citizens (and a private business) have the right to criticize and or boycott a magazine or other publication.
The pathetic ignorance proudly dispayed here is breathtaking. Jerry knows nothing of my opinions on Obama.
I have no doubt you voted for him twice. And I know that you are an arrogant, self-righteous leftist ass. Don’t you have a justice for Trayvon rally to attend?
oh we must have struck a nerve…
god forbid somebody question your ivory tower comprised primarily of washouts and has-beens with no relevance to the average productive American…
I actually love the Rolling Stones. But… this article is hogwash.
And the most renowned conservative and right wing universitues are……? I’m hearing crickets.
Conservatives graduate and go to WORK. They generally don’t sit in ivory towers and pontificate. When the occasional conservatives are found on campus the leftist ninnies fly into a twitter, call them names they barely understand and make it intolerable to stay around such ignorance.
Scott, what conservative education guarantees work after graduation? Dear pot, kettle called.
what conservative education guarantees work after graduation? Dear pot, kettle called.
Rolling Stone has become the William Shatner of the printed journals.
It is now a parody of itself. It’s relevance long gone, but still lingers on.
Also, cities are dependent in a way that breeds overly dependent people.
Anything that a city has, comes from, or is provided by somebody else.
That they expect a cop to take care of the fist fights and such, is common,
and since they don’t have guns, or an independent will to do it themselves,
they assume the same should exist outside of their civilized city bubble.
Anyone not living as they do, is considered an uncivilized Neanderthal,
and since Neanderthal’s didn’t have access to firearms, neither should we.
If Neanderthal’s had access to firearms human history might have beed a tad different. “God made man, but Sam Colt made all species with an opposable thumb equal”.
I think that in the best possible scenario for freedom was to occur in Illinois there would be “blood in the streets”. Say they got caught by the dead line and constitutional carry was then legal, as well as the FOID card requirements got removed from the books somehow. Then about 100-200 Militia member type well armed upstanding citizens moved to Chicago for jobs.
The resulting slaughter of the criminal type would be massive. I see this form of “blood in the streets” as a positive outcome. It is the progressives that see it as a tragedy.
Even if the cops could time travel to stop the criminals I still wouldn’t want to be disarmed.
Dickinson seems to suggest states are “allowing” us to be armed in public when it’s really been legal from the beginning to do so. Carry laws are merely regulating what is a legal right, with varying degrees of restrictions. This isn’t a NRA dream, it’s really Tom Jefferson’s.
If Dickinson was getting beat up on the ground I bet he’d have a different opinion of what a fistfight really is and he’d be concerned about seeing another day. It’s frighteningly personal to have another person actually pounding on you and there is not way of knowing if they will throw 3 punches or 30.
George Zimmerman did the right thing that night. He saw someone or something suspicious and he stepped up. How many murders, rapes, etc.. Have occurred when someone saw something suspicious and just didn’t want to be bothered and turn the other way. The black community gets so worked up over color, fact is more black people are killed by other black people than anyone else. Why don’t they rally and protest to stop black on black violence.
Given the level of intelligence of the Rolling Stone subscriber base, the magazine doesn’t need any credibility.
The last time I bought an issue of Rolling Stone I noticed it was about 50% ads, leading me to believe what they want most is to be so sensational people will be shocked into buying it and giving the companies they advertise for the impression that their products are being seen by millions of people. Quality is irrelevant.
They had to point out that not only did he holster a Keltec, but also a loaded Keltec. Of course this is from the same numb nuts that refer to Zimmerman as guilty yet refer to the punk Bomber as alleged bomber. The Rolling Stone knows about as much about guns as they do music, nada, zelch, nothing.
I like the joke about in civilized countries everything is settled with fistfights. Yeah, right…in countries where children carry AKs and even RPGs, or the Toyota pickup has a mounted .50 instead of a CD player, you think they put them away and agree to a boxing match? and i doubt even less so with the adults there.
I have only one question for the author of the RS article and other like minded liberals: what are you willing to do to survive? just because you are a pacifist and “empathize” with a man of color doesn’t give you a “get out of danger” card when that random thug wants your wallet or worse.
What did we learn from Zimmerman’s trial?
Carry an extra weapon to plant on the body. yep, you have to be extra dishonest even in a honest to god fight for your own life these days.
The only person who ever wrote for Rolling Stone who was worth reading is P. J. O’Rourke.
and how long does it take before the cops show up… in a dark alley?
Why do I carry a gun? BECAUSE I CAN!!!!
– I CAN defend myself.
– I CAN defend my family.
– I CAN defend my friends.
– I CAN defend complete strangers if I choose.
– I CAN decline to shoot…
– I CAN use speech to calm people down (maybe)
– I CAN retreat (if this is safer and practicable)
– I CAN seek cover (whenever possible)
As a LAST RESORT, I will shoot.
The princesses and princes of the progressive sheeple movement see all of us in FLORIDA to be the RABBIT, the electric rabbit at the Greyhound racetrack to run away. Not all of “us” can run away from thug nation that’s on too much Lean, Meth,PCP AND etc.,etc. Too many young chemical consumers out there with the bomb within them to go off. No to mention the “Knock Out” game and smash mob attacks.