Same end, different means

…we can do better than this. We can do better to make sure that fewer parents have to endure the pain of losing a child to an act of violence.

– President Barack Obama

full transcript

I agree.

I don’t agree with the reasoning that disarming the citizenry is the way to achieve said safety.

And yes folks, that’s ultimately what he (and his ilk) are after. They tried to slice off a huge chunk, but since that won’t succeed instead they will slowly chip away at the stone. If you start to let the chips fall, eventually there won’t be a rock left and you’ll wonder what happened.

We teach and strongly advocate for things like women’s self-defense clinics where we teach women to fight back against rapists. Rape is an atrocious act of violence. I don’t care who you are or what you think, but the Truth is the vast majority of women can be overpowered by any man — even a teenage male. Are you advocating for my daughter to be a victim? It was not her choice to be weaker, to be smaller, and thus potential prey. If she is at a disadvantage through no fault and choice of her own, what do you suggest she do to overcome potential disparity? What can you honestly suggest she do that could prevent a 250# 25-year old male from raping, beating, and leaving her for dead? Yell “NO!”, blow a whistle, and palm-strike him to the nose? or as some legislators recently suggested, she just pee/poop her pants or tell the attacker she has a disease? I tell you what… come try that on me and see how far you get (pure training environment, just to demonstrate the reality of how much that technique fails).

Like all tools, we use tools to overcome disparity. Most of us aren’t strong enough to pound a nail or turn a screw without a tool. And a gun? That’s something that enables the weak to overcome the disparity against a strong attack. Palm strike or pepper spray or taser? Think about how close you have to be to the attacker to make those things work — too close. A gun? it’s designed to overcome distance. It’s designed to overcome disparity.

I don’t want to lose my children to an act of violence. I don’t want you to lose your children to an act of violence. I used to believe that there was never a reason to hit, that violence was never the answer. I’m glad I overcame those notions, because I left my bubble and learned that yes sometimes there are reasons to hit, and yes sometimes violence is the (only) answer. The idealist in me wishes it wasn’t so, but the realist in me knows it to be true and has finally accepted it. I don’t know anyone that would sit idly by while their children were beaten, raped, kidnapped, etc.. What would they do? They would fight. They would be willing to sacrifice their own lives for the life of their child. If you’re going to fight, if you’re going to be fighting for the life of you and your child, don’t you want ever advantage possible that would enable you to prevail?

We all want the same thing, but we vastly disagree with the road to achieve it.

6 thoughts on “Same end, different means

  1. Sadly, there is a blind spot in the perception of all anti-gun people I know . . . in that spot rests the belief that there is always an alternative to using a gun.

    The few I know who have had a change of mind, are people who had an experience that realigned their perception of the world around them. But before that, even explaining the same circumstance to them did not make any headway.

    I hold little hope for the arguments above, no matter how well written, to take hold.

      • Not really; I can’t very well hope people experience a threat, get mugged, get robbed, etc.

        I’m not someone who sees the end of the world as we know it because of a new regulation, but, I am someone who abhors dishonesty as much as stupidity.

        The “we must do something” mentality is both, and therefore dangerous. I don’t have friends on the left because of it, and I don’t have friends on the right because of similar attitudes on different issues . . . and while I don’t particularly miss having friends, it does make me rather pessimistic about the future.

        • Well, ok, I see what you’re saying about hope. I didn’t mean that. I meant that if some people saw the light (eventually), perhaps others will too. Yes I’d rather it come because they just are willing to see it, not because of a bad experience. It has been known to happen… but yes, I do understand your pessimism.

  2. I can’t really add anything to what has been said above except that I question the motives of anyone who says “i believe in the 2A” when it is followed by “but we need ‘reasonable restrictions’ on it” or “nobody needs a _________ type of gun.” I suggest everyone be just a skeptical.

    • It’s like most any argument about any topic. When you say “yes, but…” then it says that you really believe in the “but” part, not the “yes” part.

Join the discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.