Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Parents buying body armor for children, Sen. Durbin wants that outlawed

Sugarmann and his organization, by the way, also lament private citizens' ability to buy guns that can defeat body armor (by the way, the window for commenting on a BATFE proposal to ban more ammo as "armor piercing" closes in less than a week--here is how you can help). In other words, VPC supports the "government monopoly on force" so beloved of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (and Representative Jarrold Nadler), and also a "government monopoly on protection from violence."

Can anything reek more of evil tyranny than laws intended solely to require citizens to be more easily killed by the government? [More]

That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Please give it a look, and tell a friend.


Anonymous said...

Why doesn’t the Oppressive Left care about protecting the Children?

What is it about the Gun-grabbing ghouls and their BSMedia minions with protecting themselves and not our precious offspring? They lost their collective cookies over the mere suggestion that armed police offices keep kids safe.

In part it could be their Dracula like aversion to guns in the hands of individuals not of their security details. But you have to ask yourself why is the oppressive left so adamant about not protecting the Children?

There has to be something else at work here – some other reason than Hoplophobia in the extreme – but what could it be? Why don’t they want someone – either uniformed officer or a CCW person in the schools to stop the next maniac?

Ask yourself – why would they be against a proven security measure they employ for themselves?

Perhaps the simplest explanation is the best – they simply don’t want children protected because that doesn’t further their socialist nation agenda.

We might as well just come right out and say it: They don’t want the children protected because they want more massacres.

They WANT to see wall to wall coverage of dead bodies and screaming parents. The WANT to see days of coverage as the BSMedia milks ever last bit of agony from these Serious Crisis that they see as prime opportunities to further their destruction of the Constitution.

Just look at how they almost can’t hide their giddiness over the news of these massacres.

Look at how they can’t wait to seize upon these “Crisis” with declarations about how other innocent gun owners are somehow guilty of the crime just because they exercise their God-given and Constitutionally affirmed right of self defense

They recently put in place legislation to further restrict our rights – taking the advantage of the deaths of young children to enhance their power grabbing agenda. Problem is, the emotional groundswell from Sandy Hook has subsided so they can’t “Use” it as a means to deprive the innocent of their right of self-defense.

Now, like the death vultures that they are, they are just waiting for their next “opportunity”. They’re patiently waiting for the first reports of a shooting in school or some other ‘Gun-Free’ zone to spring into action.

But now, someone comes along and makes the very practical suggestion of protecting the children and they go Ballistic. They cannot abide this because it would reduce the chances of another death opportunity for them.

Armed officers would take away what they see as ‘collateral’ damage {dead children} in their quest for a disarmed and pacified socialist national utopia.

Armed guards already protect their children, but most of our children aren’t afforded that security.

So why doesn’t everyone ask the gun grabbing ghouls of the Oppressive Left why they don’t want the children protected?