Category: self-defense

Rapex 2.0

Instead of addressing the factors driving this violence—such as massive and uncontrolled immigration—the reaction is a grotesque distraction: proposing “trap condoms” with internal spikes designed to injure the attacker’s penis. [More]

It’s been done.

And it didn’t work then, either.

Maybe if they combined it with anti-rape electric underwear…

I guess it doesn’t occur to pro-invader/anti-gun “progressive” women that the very act of inserting one of these obscenities is an act of self-rape performed for the dominating pleasure of their masters.

This is what they would reduce us all to.

[Via Michael G]

Good Guy with a Gun

Security guard kills Michigan church gunman, preventing ‘large-scale mass shooting’: Police [More]

It’s nice the church took proactive steps to protect it’s “flock,” but most of them fit that description, dependent on someone else to save them. Sheepdogs are hardly what the Founders had in mind and I’ve never liked that analogy.

Note that not one “commonsense gun safety law” group would have preferred the congregants to be armed instead of being slaughtered like sheep, which would have given them gallons of fresh blood to dance in.

I wonder how soon it will be until Brian Browning appears over at the “Gun Violence Memorial“?

Related UPDATE

A thwarted blood dancer tries to hide his disappointment while demanding even more vulnerability. Give the guy credit, though: He’s managed to be both a foreign enemy AND a domestic enemy.

[Via WiscoDave]

An Age-Old Question

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging Connecticut’s ban on adults under the age of 21 from purchasing, owning or carrying handguns. [More]

Good– it makes a key undeniable point:

Over 200 colonial and Founding-era militia statutes throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries not only permitted, but affirmatively mandated that persons aged eighteen to twenty acquire and keep arms.

No 2A lawsuit should be without it.

Who Could Have Seen THAT Coming?

Accordingly, we hold that LCMs do not fit the constitutional definition of “arms” before even reaching whether they are “commonly used for self-defense.”However, LCMs also fall outside either protection of the right to bear arms because the provisions protect only those arms that are commonly used for selfdefense, and we have been presented with no credible and persuasive evidence or argument that LCMs are commonly used for such a purpose. [More]

Gee, who would ever think those arguments could be a trap?

The Bear Necessities

A man from Bethlehem said he was caught in a tough situation that involved self defense and breaking the law…he fired a few warning shots before the bear finally took off into the woods. He said it wasn’t until the next day that he realized that he had unintentionally shot the bear. [More]

I’d feel better about this if he’d just admitted that yeah, he shot the damn bear. What the hell else was he supposed to do?

‘Any’

“You, your occupants or guests, or the guests of any occupants, may not engage in the following activities … discharging a firearm in the apartment community… Any violation of this paragraph shall be a material breach of this Lease and will entitle us to exercise all rights and remedies under the lease and law.” [More]

Eddie said it best…

[Via Jess]

Tangentially-Related UPDATE

And in the Not All Landlords are Bad, category, remember this young fool?

He’s being evicted.

[Via William C]

Hold Onto Your Hat

A Washington State University (WSU) student says he was assaulted outside a popular campus bar in February by an instructor and another university employee for wearing a hat supporting President Donald Trump. [More]

Misdemeanor assualt charges are hardly adequate. Since fists can and do kill, their victim would have been justified “buying them each a round.”

Let’s hope this follows cowardly lying communists Patrick Mahoney and Gerald Hoff around for a good long time, and that they both run into men who want to see what they’re capable of one-on-one.

[Via Jess]

They’re Not the ‘Only Ones’

Civilians with permits stopped the attacks more frequently and faced a lower risk of being killed or injured than police. [More]

My guess would be the relevance of mentioning permits is that statistically, there may be more armed citizens with them in the types of areas where “active shootings” are more prevalent, especially since almost half the states don’t “allow” permitless carry. True, there’s no doubt an effect from the extra required training steps an average permit holder undergoes over permitless carriers, but I don’t think the data exists to quantify a difference. Many hardcore 2A activists who are practiced simply don’t believe in permits.

[Via Jess]