Brandon at Liberty and Such finds twelve recent stories of folks who defended themselves and their families with guns. As he says, the media isn’t covering these stories of the good guns do, so it’s up to us to spread them around, you know, in the interests of this “national discussion” we’re supposed to be having.
Speaking of the “national discussion”, the Washington Post reports on the discussion below this picture;
I don’t see anyone at that table representing me in this discussion we’re supposed to be having. The Post writes;
To sell such changes, the White House is developing strategies to work around the National Rifle Association that one source said could include rallying support from Wal-Mart and other gun retailers for measures that would benefit their businesses. White House aides have also been in regular contact with advisers to New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), an outspoken gun-control advocate who could emerge as a powerful surrogate for the Obama administration’s agenda.
“Work around the NRA”? Really? Then how is it a discussion? And regularly talking to Nanny Bloomberg? Is he going to recommend that gun owners be forced to breast feed? And Wal-Mart is so easily influenced in this “discussion”, like they’ve always been because their business doesn’t depend completely on firearms sales. Yeah, I have a lot of confidence in this discussion.
I also see seated at the table former police chief of DC Charles Ramsey who presided over one of the highest murder rates in that city in it’s gunless history. His excuse was that too many criminals were serving their sentences in jail and then going back to their lives of crime afterward. His solution was making gun laws tighter in the surrounding counties of Maryland and Virginia.
So, I guess because the administration is looking for ways to “work around” the NRA, the millions of gun owners that organization represents are being left out of the conversation. So how is that a conversation? It sounds to me like we’re being dictated to instead.