LA Time columnist Sandy Banks titles her video “Should I Get A Gun?” Of course what she’s really saying is “I Want a Damn Gun.” Well good for her! The more Americans who tool-up, the better. That said, did you catch this? “We also knew we were safe ’cause Daddy has a gun. I realize now that it wasn’t the gun but the confidence it inspired.” No, Sandy, it was the gun. And making a distinction between vulnerability and helplessness and fear is like discussing the difference between being really thirsty and dehydrated (i.e. there isn’t one). You can click here to read Ms. Banks’ column. Suffice it to say an LAPD officer intervenes at the crucial moment and tells the writer not to buy a gun or a baseball bat for self-defense. Provided Banks isn’t lying through her teeth. What are the odds?
“Suffice it to say an LAPD officer intervenes at the crucial moment and tells the writer not to buy a gun or a baseball bat for self-defense. ”
She certainly better not tool up with any newspapers; if they see her the LAPD might unload all their magazines in her direction.
Sorry, couldn’t help it. 🙂
I’m going to agree with the possibly imaginary cop – anyone with her be-a-victim mindset should not own a gun. She is unlikely to learn how to use it effectively, and she seems to see it as some kind of magic talisman you can wave at a criminal. I would barely be willing to trust her with pepper spray.
They don’t need and armed citizens stopping them from wildly shooting random pickup trucks out of fear. regular people having guns would create an unsafe situation for our officers.
Especially if they are overstepping their authority, e.g., seizing peoples’ property for their own purposes, in violation of the Bill of Rights.
And especially since they patrol in nearly as much body armor as our troops in SWA. And don’t forget the Bearcats, courtesy of DHS. An RPG wouldn’t stop them.
“Gee officer, I’ve been having some naughty feelings lately, can’t you help disabuse me of them?” is all I can imagine going on here 🙂
I could see, after the Zimmerman trial verdict, why somebody would talk about “confidence” being an issue, but that’s no reason to buy or not buy a gun. Train those impulses out of you. But heck, I know that in LA people not enough people do that for their cars – http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Los-Angeles-Road-Rage-Video-Goes-Viral-212863781.html
what are the chances that this is just propaganda trying to convince a few of the MILLIONS of potential new gun owners that they should rethink their decision like she did?
Banks is not lying–in her mind. Her hoped for end, convincing prospective gun owners from following through, justifies her fictional narrative. At least that’s the way it comes off. Especially the way her closing line neatly hands us the lesson that we’re “supposed” to take away from the Zimmerman case.
If anyone that reads this sees anything but thinly veiled anti-gun propaganda they aren’t reading critically.
1) It presupposes guns are there to inspire confidence. I’m a 6’1″, 220 lb man who trains boxing and BJJ. I don’t need a gun to wreck another human being. I keep guns because I can’t rule out the possibility that someone will use a gun or another deadly weapon against me or those I love. I’d hazard to guess that’s the majority of the defense-inclined gun owner population.
2) It manufactures an expert – an unidentified police officer saying “no – you shouldn’t bother to try to defend yourself AT ALL, you’re only going to hurt yourself”. Few cops I know believe this. You should do everything you can to defend yourself and your loved ones during the several minutes it can take for police to respond to a call.
3) It paints a nice picture that John Q Public thinks about gun purchases primarily because of night terrors. In my case, my life wasn’t that sheltered. I’ve been threatened at gun point twice. I’ve been assaulted by multiple attackers once. I own a gun because those horrible stories you hear about on the news aren’t fiction – well, not all of them, anyway. And I don’t believe in allowing someone with bad mental wiring to just have their way without a fight.
Y’all did of course see the sponsor stamp at the end of the video:
Los Angeles Times”
I got to agree, in the middle of the night sitting in your room as someone breaks in your house and waiting for them to rob/maim/kill you and purposely being unarmed for fear of hurting yourself is ludicrous. Regardless of size, being unarmed potentially puts you at a serious disadvantage, and hiding under the covers doesn’t do a damn thing to even the odds.
Senator Feinstein had a gun too. Mark Kelley is a gun owner also. When they start sounding like Ted Nugent I will pay attention.
They also know they’re not mere earthly mortals like the rest of us slobs. They can be trusted. They have better judgement & will exercise a level of restraint that eludes regular Ah-mer-i-kuns.
“The sound alone is enough to scare a burglar off.”
Until it isn’t.
RF is rubbing off on a few of us, I see.
Unless he isn’t.
But he probably is. Maybe.
Aye, there’s the rub.
From the article… That would-be thief in the middle of the night wants an easy in-and-out. Get a bigger dog. Install an alarm. Don’t go down and pick a fight.
Um, if someone breaks into your home isn’t it safe to say a fight has already been picked? Dumb…
Indeed. And once the door has been kicked in and the dog shot, you’ve got how many minutes until the police arrive (if they arrive) while you get raped, stabbed, shot?
She thinks a home invader “wants an easy in-and-out”–and that gives her comfort?!
No John Ringo, no.
… Guns, construction, and beer? Hell yeah!
Strange how if you change one word in the sentence: “That would-be thief in the middle of the night wants an easy in-and-out.”
Thief to Rapist, how different the context is. She might have gone back in and got the gun….
“That would-be rapist in the middle of the night wants an easy in-and-out.”
Don’t worry. Ladies have been advised to give their rapists the R. Kelly treatment.
Piss and shit themselves and puke on their attacker?
The old ‘In-Out’ from Clockwork Orange.
Her article is a bunch of nonsense, and I recommend that she, and anyone else who feels like her, spend an afternoon on the internet before doing any of the stuff she did. Research guns, other weapons, tips for home security in general, and what you should actually do if you hear someone in your home (hint: it isn’t confront them unnecessarily with a baseball bat, or an unloaded shotgun, which are effectively the same thing). And the cop was only half right.
TO: Silly Woman
RE: Baseball Bats?
I probably know less about baseball bats than I do about guns. But for $34.99 I could get a Louisville Slugger, and I liked the way it felt. I imagined marching down the stairs, holding it over my head. — Silly Woman
You obviously missed that incident some years ago where some professional athelete encountered a home invader with such a ‘weapon’ and was promptly dispaced by a bullet from the invaders hand gun.
[.45 cal, because it’s just silly to have to shoot someone twice.]
Question – Why spend $35 or more on a baseball bat no matter the material?
When one can get a really nice and strong hickory pick and Mattock handle at the local hardware place for $15-20. It swings just as well, and impact has dang near the same end result severe pain, broken bones, or death.
Crowbar or tire iron in that same price range is even better, no flexing and much more directed impact.
Picked up a 24 ” crowbar from a mil-surp store in Idaho (off of I-15) for about $8 a few months ago.
It’s hefty to say the least.
I love how these people always say something like oh I don’t think I could pull the trigger knowing it would take a life. When we all know these are the same people that would act like the holy roller’s from the mist and sacrifice everyone else if they though it might save their own asses. After reading a rediculous amount of posts from fellow gun owners I get the feeling most of us imagine ourselves saving someone else wether it be our families or a stranger rather than numero uno.
This is what Sandy and others of her ilk are really saying, “I’m too immature and irresponsible to own that powerful and dangerous gun; it might go off all by itself and hurt someone, so since I am so helpless and powerless, and claim it proudly to anyone reading my fearful writings ; I want all of you to just as helpless and powerless as I am”.
On some level the cop did the right thing based on her attitude, but what she really needs if she is genuinely concerned is training. My father taught me how to shoot when I was a little kid, with a Mini-14 and a Makarov in .380. I wasn’t even 10 when I first started shooting those in his lap. Once you learn how to shoot you just stop thinking like a slave, you know that if it comes down to it you can bring the pain as long as you are prepared.
I’ve never sought professional training, but it is available for adults who don’t know anyone that can teach them the fundamentals. If I could afford it I would have expanded upon my own skills already. Something tells me an LA Times columnist could easily afford training, but she just doesn’t want to do it…
This is something my girlfriend and I have talked a lot about recently, we call it the “veil of professionalism.” People think they can’t learn certain things because they have been conditioned to think only professionals can do those things and conversely some professionals like the general public to think only they can provide certain services when that is not really the case.
This kind of ignorance works out to big profits and prestige for people who don’t necessarily deserve it. People today are more interested in cultivating their “personal brand” than their own practical skill set. We have become a society of childish poseurs.
I like your theory.. I’v found it to be true.
Once, I offered to do a full tune-up service on my wife’s friend’s car. She had little money, was a single mom, and had no husband/boyfriend to help her with things like car maintenance.
My wife extended my offer to her, and she turned it down, because “well that’s nice, but he’s not a professional mechanic.”
Mind you, this friend had been to our house numerous times and seen my motorcycle rebuilds in the garage, knew that I had rebuilt the engine in my wife’s car.
Because I wasn’t a “professional,” she didn’t trust me to do very basic work on her car. She preferred instead to take it to Jiffy Lube and trust it to a high school dropout – no offense to any JL guys that may be here. I know a true gearhead that has worked there when nothing else could be found.
This same friend once brought up the idea of prepping and asked what the whole “SHTF” thing was, after one of her daughter’s friend’s fathers made passing mention of it. When I explained what SHTF meant, and what prepping was, she asked “if something happened, couldn’t you just go to the store?”
“You don’t need a gun, because the police will always be there to save you.”
It’s obvious the officer she was referring to had read her past work and knows something about her, that’s why he said “you should definitely not get a gun”. Some people would just shoot randomly if they heard a bump in the night and it’s a safe bet she’s one of those people. He wasn’t saying “no one should have a gun for self defense” just “you (the author) are too dumb to have one”. That’s made quite obvious by her article. The officer was just being nice so she wouldn’t write about him for the rest of her “career”.
She felt safe when her father had a gun because she felt he would know what do to and be able to do it if he ever had to use it. She would not feel safe with a gun because she would be more scared of it than the burglar.
I read through her article and I did not get the sense that she really wants a gun.
I think she wanted to dispel the common line of thinking that a gun makes you safe, a line of thinking even she grew up with. A gun making you safe is a myth, owning a gun makes you safe just as owning a samurai sword makes you a samurai. You must have the mindset and training to make proper use of the tool, something she would never want to do. Having a gun is part of the overall safety equation, but it isn’t everything.
RF you are correct, it was the gun. She can have all the confidence in the world knowing she has a gun in the house but that does’t mean squat if she doesn’t have the confidence to use it. Guns do not stop crime the person holding the gun does.
Damn, what kind of Glock was she looking at that the pump shotgun was “less intense”?
Now we know it’s propaganda because that’s the Joe Biden meme…
The rarely seen Glock 666. I hear its chambered in 88 magnum…
Spot-on about the father. I read, “We also knew we were safe ’cause Daddy has a gun. I realize now that it wasn’t the gun but the confidence it inspired.” and I think, no, it was your Dad. Of course I know nothing about him, but if he’d been a bad guy or just a damn fool, you would not have felt better that he had a gun.
And I’ve got no problem with someone of her attitude deciding not to have a gun. If she’s not sure she’s willing to use it in extremis, then if it ever comes to it, she’d probably become part of the statistic used to try to convince me that I am more likely to have my gun used against me, than I am to use it to protect me or mine.
Exactly. Her father inspired confidence. If it had been the gun alone that inspired that confidence, she wouldn’t damn near pee herself over the mere prospect of owning one.
“LA Times Columnist: I Want a Gun”
Sorry, dear. California inmates need not apply.
Didn’t even bother reading her article, knew it was anti gun as soon as I saw Bloomberg in the credits of the video.
Didn’t bother reading as soon as I saw it was the LA Slimes.
She just provided evidence that restrictive gun laws scare people away from exercising a civil right.
Sounds like he’s using fear to shape some more bad choices. He’s presenting a false choice between prevention and power. You want both. The majority of burglars might just want a quick smash and grab for whatever is easiest to sell for a quick buck, but a rapist has other ideas. If the prevention plan fails, then what?
Just because you’re arming yourself doesn’t mean you’re going down to pick a fight. It just means that if the fight comes to you, you can do something more than just hope for the best.
She’ll be an easy ‘in and out’ if he’s there for HER!
She should start by examining why she thought it made sense to move from anywhere to LA (or NY). Mecca for immature brainless 20 something females (and shemales). The acting, the theater, the culture, the nightlife, blah blah blah.
Get a clue, control your environment as possible, then firepower.
Why does every store owner recommend a glock to a first time gun buyer. A fine weapon they are, but for sheer simplicity, less intimidation, safety, and ease of operation when used as a bedside gun, wouldn’t a smaller caliber revolver be a better choice!? I think that is what the women intended when she said less intense. I think it is where i would have had her start.
Or are you ignorant of the incident where a woman emptied a .38 spl revolver into the chest, neck and head of a man coming into the attic to get at her and her daughter.
The man left the house with five bullet wounds. Including a head shot.
He was captured blocks away after he drove his car into a tree.
[.45 cal, because it’s just silly to have to shoot someone twice.]
Dear mr. Macho .45,
None of the shots the lady with the .38 fired were center of mass. Detroiter was just stating that the complexity of a semi auto could be intimidating to a first time buyer.
No. They were not center of mass.
THEY WERE UPPER CHEST, NECK AND HEAD.
Please learn to read.
And if there had been more than one invader, she and her daughter would have been hors de combat as she had used up all her six rounds from the revolver.
P.S. The incident I’m referring to can be read HERE!
Upper chest, neck, and head… But it’s not like they were between the eyes and through the spinal chord. The head and neck shots were probably skim shots and I’m sure upper chest means shoulder. Do you seriously think that four .38s to the chest and two good ones to the head would not have stopped the intruder but a .45 would have?
If I was the store owner I would recommend a ruger sp 101 .357 and use the hornady .38 loads geared towards women. The slide of semis are to difficult for the women in my family. Does anyone know of a good 9mm with a easy slide for a woman with Carpal tunnel?
.357s are just faster .38.
They punch holes in things and people real good. But they don’t put people down as well as the .45 cal, which has a proven track record of dealing with drugged up fanatics since the Moro insurrection in the PIs.
It’s latest success was in Operation ANACONDA where the Rangers testify that their Personally Owned Weapons, they packed in saved their asses against the drugged up Talibani.
For serious social work there is only the .45 ACP which is why I like my WWI Colt 1917.
That is a cute looking S&W model 61 in .22lr even if it is just a modernized Browning 1900.
The video is raw MAIG propaganda. They try, oh how they try.
I wasn’t recommending .357s I was recommending the .38. Ease of use is superior to stopping power when it is the tool of an untrained woman.
TO: S. CROCK
I wasn’t recommending .357s I was recommending the .38. — S. CROCK
You’ve got a good handle for making that kind of stupid statement…..’CROCK’. As in What a CROCK.
Read the article I linked to.
[The Truth will out….a .38 is next to worthless for stopping a dedicated and determined attacker.]
re: .38 next to useless
fwi the Crock in my name refers to Davy Crockett.
you said a .38 is next to useless against a determined attacker. i agree that a 9mm with 16+1 capacity is better, but a .38 is still a good option. saying that their might be better self defense options than a .38 is fine but saying its next to useless is just silly.
im replying to this comment because your last comment didn’t have the reply button. and thank you for getting rid of that dumb “[.45 cal, because it’s just silly to have to shoot someone twice.]” quote.
No. A revolver is a horrible choice for someone with little finger strength. 10-12lb triggers on 2lb guns make for very questionable accuracy. A Glock has about a 5-6lb trigger, and a decent sight radius, and good capacity… though probably not so much in California.
Not all revovlers have heavy triggers. My cousin’s .357 is a bone stock S&W and the trigger is smooth as glass and easier to pull than a Sig P238.
Actually, I kind of agree with the “cop” on this one. If she’s that mentally weak, she doesn’t need a gun, because she, personally, is more likely to hurt herself than shoot someone else. Most people, however, aren’t so infantile, and for them I encourage gun ownership.
I totaly disagree with the cop. He should have recommended a butt load of firearms training classes and told her when she is comfortable around guns to go ahead and buy the most effective self defense tool available to citizens.
What is this, the sequel to “Emily gets her gun”?
Interesting article’ ma’am. The study stating that gun ownership increases the likelihood of suicide or homicide in the home is a misnomer. It would be akin to saying that owning a car increases the chances of being involved in a car accident.
Regardless, if you wanted a concealed carry permit, and met the legal qualifications to do so, you would probably still be denied. In Los Angeles, applicants must show “good and just cause” to be granted a concealed carry permit by Sheriff Baca. Historically, the sheriff has been disinclined to acquiesce to such requests unless they are made by those who throw him parties, give him expensive gifts, contribute to his causes, or are otherwise politically connected.
If you were to do the research, you would find that concealed carry permits holders have a 2% error rate (shooting the wrong person), compared to police officers who have an 11% error rate. For example, the widely known incident were LAPD opened fire on two unarmed ladies delivering papers during the Doerner manhunt. Additionally, concealed carry permit holders have arrest rates 6-7 times lower than the general populace. You are welcome to research whatever statistics you please, the number of lawful uses of firearms vastly outnumbers the unlawful, and burdensome laws such as gun free zones provide the law breaker with a tactical advantage.
I am glad that you have protective dogs in your home, and that you were not injured in the incident you described which appeared to be a false alarm. I have dogs in my home as well, and they are wonderful protectors that I cherish. Should their bark or bite prove insufficient, I’d rather face an intruder(s) with a Glock 23 or AR-15 than a pair of slippers. If you choose otherwise, I will make no attempts to infringe upon your freedom. All I ask is that you respect my responsible firearm ownership. That right was secured by men and women greater than myself, and it is relevant today as it ever was. I know because I’ve used a firearm to defend my own life.
Sent from my iPhone
All the more impressive for being typed on an iPhone. That’s dedication, A81!
i am sick and tired of ‘journalists’ using dubious unsupported personal anecdotes as news. i was scared, so i tried to buy a gun, but guns are even scarier and will probably murder me in my sleep because a cop told me so. well here in tx every chl class and renewal has been taught by a policeman, and everytime a robber is shot the news quotes a police official saying ‘no charges were filed/ good thing they were armed.’ finally, her assertion about killing yourself or others. i have heard it often, but if we are going by anecdotes every member of my family, extended family, in laws, and most of my friends own guns and there has been zero incidents of accidental discharge. i think her post has less truth in it than the ‘true’ stories in hustler forum.
No, she does not need a gun! The simple solution would be to live in a gated community and have an armed security detail like all the other gun control folks out there. Duh!
After watching that video my brain hurts…
I can scarcely see how she can have the confidence without the gun. Oh, I can also recommend learning some Judo because you may not always be able to easily get to your gun.
This is just a new strategy by old BloomingIdiotBerg. He donate $1 M to Gabby and Mark’s “soft” Gun Ban Pac. He is also sponsoring a fund raiser at his house for Manchin from WV. What to Gabby/Mark and Manchin have in common? They own guns and shoot. Its a trick to try to slip up on us with compromise. I am willing to compromise with Bloomer. We can cut one of his testicles off. After all, he has 2.
Regarding the LAPD officer telling the lady not to purchase a firearm or baseball bat for self defense……”your a dirty little piggy, and I don’t like you”.
LA TIMES = nanny state socialism mouth piece