From the Second Amendment Foundation . . .
While the legacy media is quick to sensationalize every incident involving misuse of firearms, they just as quickly downplay or completely dismiss reports of lawful self-defense with firearms, and the Second Amendment Foundation is openly challenging the establishment press to explain why.
“Why are the gun prohibition lobby and their bought and paid for politicians and media mouth pieces ignoring stories like this,” wondered SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, after learning of a 12-year-old Louisiana boy’s recent heroic defense of his mother by using a hunting rifle to fatally shoot an armed intruder who was attacking her.
Gottlieb, who co-authored “Good Guys with Guns,” “Right to Carry” and “America Fights Back,” said cases of armed self-defense seem to vanish from the headlines. However, let a tragedy involving a firearm occur, and it becomes the launchpad for on-air interviews with gun control proponents, lengthy newspaper articles about past incidents and editorials demanding additional restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms.
“We’ve seen the media celebrate the heroics of private citizens who pull people out of crashed cars or burning buildings,” Gottlieb observed, “but if an armed citizen stops a restaurant gunman or kills a dangerous home invader, or even saves the life of a law enforcement officer, that story vanishes from the headlines quicker than coherency from a Joe Biden speech.
“We know from experience the gun prohibition lobby suddenly develops lockjaw every time a private citizen successfully uses a gun to save a life,” he continued, “and anti-gun politicians invariably dismiss such cases as ‘isolated incidents.’
“But as municipal police agencies see their budgets cut, their morale sinking and their officers leaving, private citizens will increasingly be taking care of themselves and others. Eventually the media and politicians will no longer be able to downplay, dismiss or simply ignore such cases.
“Armed private citizen heroes, regardless of age, may not fit the media narrative,” Gottlieb concluded, “but they fit the American mold. Instead of sweeping such stories under the nearest rug, we should celebrate that fact that such courage exists, along with the fundamental right to keep and bear arms that allows people to be victors rather than victims.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 700,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.
The more people are kept ignorant and uneducated, the more they can be manipulated. Plain and simple.
I cannot count how many times I’ve explained the Constitution, timeline of the Founding Documents (DOI, AOC, USC, Northwest Ordinance), and 2A to people only to have them blink their eyes and start to wake up as the understanding washed over them.
Here’s one for you, something I’ve said here several times in the past. Our CA State Constitution’s Article 3 Section 1 consists of a single sentence, making it absolutely clear to anyone who reads it that the Lizards in Sacramento are committing treason against both our State and the USC with every gun control law they spit out:
“The State of California is an inseparable part of the United States of America, and the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
https://law.justia.com/constitution/california/article-iii/section-1/
The media hates us, so any stories that show us in a good light — like DGUs — must be suppressed.
Why does a bad guy have to die if he just made one stupid choice? A drunk guy who accidentally breaks into your house cause he thought it was his own or a teenage kid who in a desperate moment, decided to break into your house to take some inanimate objects – do they deserve the death penalty on the spot? That you are judge jury and executioner? No. You shouldn’t have the ability to snuff a life, especially if they’re just trying to get by or in a stupid moment made a bad choice and in no way posed any harm to you.
You’re a damn fool.
Mr Hog doesn’t understand that the home owner does not have the fore knowledge relative to the intruder of which Mr Hog spoke. Also, at the moment of confrontation there certainly isn’t time to discuss the intents and mind set of the intruder especially if the intruder is being aggressive and/or has some sort of weapon. Mr Hog’s sort of thinking is what will get a person hurt or worse. Guess those like Mr Hog live in some form of a perfect world.
So ban punches and kicks then, as well as anything that could be an improvised weapon. Just bend over and let the criminal element have its way with you. Sorry, I know you’re trolling, but I’m using you as a virtual punching bag anyways. 😂😂
Every object can be replaced. A life cannot. California is doing it right by not allowing shop owners to hold thieves at gunpoint. Not worth the risk and the legal repercussions. You have insurance and you will get your money’s worth of your stuff back soon. No need to execute a thief. Sooner or later, he’ll pay the price somewhere.
Like with another shop owner who finally had enough.
“….Every object can be replaced. A life cannot…”
Sure it can, people have baby’s every day..lots of them all over the planet. If it were not so the human species would have died out eons ago.
“You have insurance and you will get your money’s worth of your stuff back soon.”
Oh you’re part of the “you have insurance” crowd. You have no idea how any of this works. Plus, you’re assuming everyone has insurance. You live in a fantasy world.
ROTFL! You do know about insurance premiums or payments? After an event they WILL increase because of the increased RISK to the insurance company having to PAY. Eventually these payments will be too expensive for the shop to pass on to the customers in the form of increased prices. So the shop either relocates or (more commonly) closes.
And Insurance Companies will fight to avoid having to pay.
“ You have insurance…”
So what you are saying is, that insurance oughta be a maintenance agreement between the insurance company and you thieves? And those of us who invest our family livelihoods in our businesses, and provide jobs and a service for local folks, must pay the price for your twisted protection racket? You have some growing up to do, boy.
“Every object can be replaced. A life cannot.”
So what happens when somebody threatens my life over an object I possess?
I’ll tell you how I parse that situation. Whoever has just threatened my life has effectively set up a transaction in which life is worth *less* than the thing he threatened me for. He says my life is worth less than (for instance) the 20 bucks in my wallet. Yet no one life is worth inherently more than any other; therefore, *his* life is worth exactly the same as mine. $20 or less.
Now, I don’t want to give up my $20. Having it forcibly taken away would be both irksome and demeaning. But to kill for it…? No. Material objects, in general, aren’t worth killing for.
Yet keep in mind that the aggressor in this situation — whether in so many words or simply by showing the ability and will to do grievous harm — has put LIFE in the balance as well. And my life is irreplaceable. I’m sure as hell not placing it in the hands of someone who has just told me that he’s ready to kill or maim me for the contents of my wallet. To me, my life is worth literally everything, and therefore I will do everything in my power to keep it. Not only will, but must.
So it’s winner-takes-all — and I do mean all — with $20 (or whatever you’ve threatened me for) as the ante.
I don’t want to play that game, and I’ll do my best to avoid it. But if someone ever does manage to force me into it, I intend to make damn sure that I win. And I’ll be 100% justified in whatever I do to the aggressor to obtain that win.
I have no interest in holding a perp at gunpoint. Once he drops my property I will promptly cease shooting him, that seems fair to me, and my opinion is far more important to me than yours is.
A life not only CAN be replaced, every life is regularly replaced by two more. And the dumb shits who regularly promote such nonsense have NEVER volunteered to replace jack shit, they just plan for ME to do so. Eventually we will learn not to enter into this stupid discussion, just shoot the mofo and walk away. Dunno WTF you’re talking about, of course I agree, really? Poor baby, bet he dindunuffin, right?
“…especially if they’re just trying to get by or in a stupid moment made a bad choice and in no way posed any harm to you.”
Guess you didn’t read the whole article.
Mr. Hogg, tell that to my aunt who spent 7 days in the hospital. Three unarmed intruders quickly became armed with her household items and seriously beat her to near death.(with a chair). Lucky a neighbor heard her screaming for help and rushed to her defense, he was armed. Held them at gunpoint, all 3 were arrested. All for a TV and an Xbox 360, which they had already taken.
Ye! Hogg, breaking into my home poses imminent threat of harm to me, in every way.
And equal or greater harm to you!
Trollin’ trollin’ trollin’…
C’mon, guys…
For sure and making the point that the gun grabbers are irrational fools.
David Hogg.
Most defensive gun uses do not actually involve any gunfire. Most time simply displaying a firearm is sufficient to resolve a situation until the police arrive. If the other person is not a threat then you do not have the right to take their life even if they are inside your home. There will be others who argue about the Castle doctrine. A burglar, or anyone else, inside your home who is unarmed and is not making any type of threat would not meet the lethal force threshold when it comes to self defense, at least in my opinion. Of course it may come down to how a Grand Jury decision on whether the lethal force was deemed justifiable or not.
However if the person is inside your home and is threatening violence then it would be reasonable to use force (up to and including lethal force) to defend your own life or the life of someone else.
Also the laws of the state you reside in may also apply. Some states require you to retreat and only use force if retreat is impossible.
“If the other person is not a threat then you do not have the right to take their life even if they are inside your home.”
Wrong answer. Unless the person is a close family member, there is a presumption that any person who breaks and enters your home presents an imminent risk of serious injury or death, and that therefore self-defense including lethal force is authorized. This presumption imposes upon the district attorney the burden of establishing by proof beyond a reasonable doubt that you were not acting in self-defense. In all fifty states. (But not in England or Canada, which appear to believe that it is better that a violent criminal be free to do his worst than that the criminal be injured while doing so.)
Only a truly delusional person would consider a criminal more important then the victim.
But as we all have seen over the decades, liberal Democrats and people like you never find personal responsibility anything you care about, unless you are using it as a double standard against those you do not like.
Stupid choices yield stupid consequences. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Aka….cleansing of the gene pool. Sadly, too many are playing in a dry pool.
Not only the ability, but the right.
“If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed”
P.S. who said self defense was about property?
How do you know these people are carrying a weapon or not? In a flash you could be dead. Your statement is so stupid. What are you going to do ask them what their intentions are. Get into the real world buttercup.
So where do you live i need so free shit and $$$ because I’m down on my luck. Due to these retards that actually believe in a Covid-19 vaccine. And a party that infected the world to steal an election. You do not own firearms correct?
I have to come back for this one.
David, it’s not the private citizen that decided the inanimate objects were worth the scum’s life. It was the bad guy who decided the inanimate objects were worth his life. There have been many burglaries in which the homeowner suprised the burglar and the homeowner was subsequently attacked. This often resulted in the death of the homeowner, sexual assault of the homeowner or serious injury to the homeowner. Ask me how I know. I’m a 25 year veteran street cop. I used to tell people (when I taught CCW classes to citizens) “My job discription is a historian and a janitor. I write down what happened and cleaned up the mess. You’re responsible for your own safety.”
If you think your safety is guaranteed by volunteering to help a criminal carry your flat screen to his car your not naive. You’re a special kind of stupid.
Gadsden, long time no hear….. good to hear from you, and I couldn’t agree more with your statement !!
+1
Pretty much what I came here to say. I’ll add that, yes, my personal property is more valuable to me than the life of someone trying to take it, much less the sanctity of my home. And more valuable than the Peep’s life is to the perp, too.
Only YOU can decide what your own life is worth.
that’s the first time i ever wondered about putting a perp in the microwave…
IDK, it’s almost like they have an agenda.
Actually, with the MSM such as it is, why would we (POTG) expect anything less from them. Beyond all that, I’d have thought that with so many “shall issue” states we’d have way more DGUs of the capital kind by now. I guess having the permit/ability does not mean one carries all the time, everywhere. In this era/climate of defund the cops and anarchy amongst the woke progressives there must be plenty of “opportunities”. Until “the good guy with a gun” becomes commonplace- to the point where it cannot be ignored, we’ll have this kind of coverage no matter how much money Al Gottlieb wants to spend.
We should just go ahead and celebrate when the good guys win, or things come out like they used to in movies and on TV back before the mid 1960s-forward.
And speaking of heroic action by a young armed citizen- where are things with Kyle Rittenhouse at this time? That’s really WAY out of the news meme.
Recently the DA has asked the court for permission to show that Kyle consorted with known members of the Proud Boys at a bar while out on bail. And that he had said evil things in the past. Don’t know the outcome, but the former is character assassination and should not be allowed., particularly since it is after the fact, and therefore cannot demonstrate intent. To me, it sounds as if the DA has recognized that he has a pretty tough case ahead of him, no matter what he tells the press. he has to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Kyle was not acting in self-defense. If that is what he is thinking, I’d have to say that he is right.
If he cannot find a way to make the videos disappear, he should drop the charges and apologize.
Thanks for an update, Mark.
Pb, thanks. Miss you guys too. As for David Hogg, I doubt he’s the real one. Don’t see enough courage in that boy to confront us here. As for my response to him. Nothing as entertaining as trolling a troll.
….because it takes a lot of ‘courage’ to confront a bunch of pasty LARPERS who hide behind a computer screen. GTFOH.
Like the utter lack of ‘courage’ the troll here demonstrates, hiding behind fake names like the gutless coward he is… 😉
Many people are saying that Geoff the Pervert knows what it is to be a ‘gutless coward’, believe me!!
‘Why Do the Media Downplay Defensive Gun Uses That Save Lives?’
Oh, that’s dead simple. The media doesn’t give a good gorram about truth or even just honest reporting. Even the supposed ‘good guys’ in the media over at Fox News only tell the trough when it’s useful for their own personal agendas I.E. the Neo-Con agenda. At the end of the day most of of the media is collectivist authoritarian. None of them want the ‘little people’ to have the power to look after themselves. As such they’ll go out of their way to down play any reports that contradict their narratives.
If you have to ask…You’ll never understand the answer.
Fag, I have posted my PX #. I don’t hide behind anything. It’s 850-694- 9405. Call Me. I’ll shut down every argument you have, but that’s always fun. Possum is the only one that had the courage to answer the first time I did this. He’s a funny, honest guy. I’d load my truck and head to Kansas in a minute if he called me. I doubt you ever leave your mom’s basement other than meals.
The crickets chirp.
Instead of asking why the media downplays DGU, why don’t we ask why we don’t have a website like the trace or something to advertise the DGUs? Then the stories would become part of the google search engine…
And it shouldn’t be under a org that would get automaticity dismissed by some. Like it can’t be a subpage under nra.com or even this site…
There are plenty of websites that have attempted it, and some of them have even done a good job. None of them have ever attracted a Bloomberg-level patron, and none will ever be indexed as “real” news. The Masters of the Universe keep that gate under lock and key, and none but their own shall pass.
Here: https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/
It’s been there for a long time but since it seems a good portion of posters around here hate NRA, and since NRA itself doesn’t post here, I’m sure those “haters” wouldn’t want to give any credit to NRA.
And to further correct information to those who don’t know, or don’t want to know, NRA ILA is the wing of NRA that deals with legislative and political action. Jason Ouimet is current head.
The media is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Gunms are evil.
They’ve said it so long the lie cannot be denied.
Gunms are an advancement over the bow, the bow was and advancement over the club. The destructive power of weapons advanced, what didnt advance was squelching mans desire to kill.
Take the gun and give me a few IED’s.
The media cannot publicize DGUs, they would outnumber the felony uses and that cannot be allowed because the public would notice.
To protect the rights and lives of criminals.
Where I live on the east coast it is easier to get away with murder than a justified shooting. My dad always taught me to do the right thing, but that just does not work anymore.