North Slaps it out of the park today. First here:
You and I wear guns to protect ourselves and our loved ones against criminals. The criminals would rather we not have guns, so they can take what they want from us. Property/rape – taking what is NOT theirs.
Along comes the anti. They want us unarmed because it is “better” for them, not for us. They want to take our God-given right to protect ourselves away – taking what is NOT theirs.
I want to keep what is mine. The ugly criminal can’t have it. The rapist can’t have it. The foolish gray-haired MN liar can’t have it.
Criminals and antis are no different.
Then on the Black List
No number of laws can guarantee my safety as much as clicking off my safety can.
Well said, buddy!
Speaking of the foolish gray-haired MN liar, it appears that Minnesota’s Governor has vetoed the Castle Doctrine.
Say what he will, he caved into the shills and liars. Still I wouldn’t worry much, as I can say “Just get the law up again in the next session, and maybe replace the governor with one who understands freedom, and doesn’t cater to criminals.” And that’s all POSSIBLE! You see all the antis can do is manipulate sympathetic people, such as Police Chiefs willing to lie to secure the big paycheck and nice office at the Police Station, and Governors who feel REALLY BAD when a junkie gets gut-shot for attempting to rape a woman who HAPPENS to have a 9mm in her belt.
But we are the majority, and we are NOT the shills and liars. We do what we do because its right. We do it because we want a better society and safer streets, and we don’t get paid to do it.
All it takes is a little hard work…and given that we aren’t “Progressives” we aren’t afraid of that either!
She might cheer for their win, but they’re on defense big time, it’s not like this died in committee somewhere. We’re at the castle gates so to speak, it’s only a matter of time before we get in.
Thanks, WB!
( I did get in trouble for all the slapping at the water park, though… )
Ah, but Joan better not put on her “Blood Dancing” slippers just yet. I think that Judge Legg’s Ruling down in Maryland on the Federal Level may have Castle Doctrine built into it as part of the “Bigger Picture” of the RKBA. After all, the Judge ruled that the 2A implicitly had Self-Defense in Mind. And since this was a ruling against a State by a Federal Judge, down the road when this hits the Supremes, we may hear the “Lamentations of their Women” when the Antis lose.
After all, if one has the RKBA for Self-Defense, does this not mean that one has the Right to Defend one’s self inside one’s own “Castle?”
Stay Tuned.