Women Disarming Women

The gun control movement has become the new feminist battleground. Courtesy of millions of dollars flowing from Michael Bloomberg to women-fronted groups, the face of "gun control" is now decidedly female. Feminization of the issue is not by happenstance. It is a deliberate strategy designed to appeal to gender voters, to beta males, to those who make decisions based on emotion rather than fact, and to those who are ill-informed but know what is best for all. If this movement is successful, the consequences will be tragic and deadly -- especially for women. Women who choose to arm for self-protection in an increasingly dangerous society will be denied that right and instead, will be forced to become easy prey and crime statistics. Make no mistake: gun control is the real war on women and civilian disarmament is the goal. Michael Bloomberg has endorsed gun confiscation and Hillary Clinton is onboard. That women are the vanguard of an effort to make all women weak, dependent submissives is a stunning repudiation of feminism's supposed foundational principle: a woman has the right to make her own life choices.

Female-centric groups, such as Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Everytown for Gun Safety, are portrayed by sympathetic mainstream media and promotional websites as grassroots organizations comprised of safety-focused "caring, concerned moms." Led by a former Democrat operative, these wise nurturers march, boycott, and demand "common sense solutions" to the ubiquitous "epidemic of gun violence" and "mass shootings." This sisterhood predictably has expanded to include liberal celebrities and politicians. Julianne Moore, she of the "#not one more" tweets, is recruiting other Hollywood actresses of great intellect to the cause. Gabby Giffords and, of course, Hillary, who has just embraced the cause out of political desperation, are also vying to become the preeminent anti-gun Valkyrie.

What are these "common sense solutions?" The amorphous mantra encompasses any and all impediments to legal carry and gun ownership. The Moms boycott and bully businesses into imposing, through store policy, greater restrictions than those enacted by citizen vote or otherwise imposed by the laws of the jurisdictions in which those stores operate.They want to ban any kind of carry on college campuses, ban open carry where open carry is legal and seek to lengthen the waiting time imposed by federal law before a customer can take possession of a legally purchased firearm. The fact is, not one of these "solutions" would have prevented any of the criminal shootings the Moms ghoulishly propagandize. These incremental restrictions, however, do advance the ultimate goal of civilian disarmament.

In the midst of our increasingly dangerous, combustible world, how is it that women can agitate to strip other women of their right to arm for self-protection? Well, they do so by denial, en masse, of certain inconvenient yet incontrovertible truths.

The first undeniable truth is that women, generally, are smaller in stature and have less muscle mass than men. The size and strength differentials make women easier, less physically resistant targets for criminals. Depending on the circumstances, if a female is attacked she might be able to yell for help, dial 911 and hope police respond in time, blow that rape whistle, fight off her attacker, beg for mercy, or just submit. Or she can equalize the fighting field and compensate for her lesser physical power by having a firearm. As Samuel Colt, the father of the modern personal firearm industry realized in the 1800s, the gun is "the great equalizer." Like no other weapon, a firearm affords a woman a fighting chance to thwart and to survive a criminal attack.

The second truth is that "reasonable" gun restrictions actually put women at more risk. Tragically, we can't ask Carol Bowne of New Jersey her opinion of stringent gun control because she was murdered while waiting for a government permit to buy a firearm for self-protection. Ms. Bowne was a victim of domestic violence and was being actively stalked.  She did everything the gun control crowd says will keep women safe: she obtained a judicial restraining order, installed a home security system and an exterior surveillance system. She also applied for a permit to buy a handgun. By law, the permit process is to take 30 days. In practice, the government sits on the applications with impunity while a 14-point investigation is conducted. On day 41, Ms. Bowne inquired about her permit and was told it was not yet processed. Two days later, she was viciously stabbed to death in her driveway by her stalker; a man who was not stopped by a piece of paper or surveillance systems. Ms. Bowne had not a fighting chance to stave off the attack thanks to the wisdom of the gun control crowd. And what consequences for the police department that failed to timely grant her permit?  None at all. Berlin Township Police Chief Leonard Check issued no statement of remorse or sorrow for the murder or the inexcusable permit delay. This man, who should be stripped of his office and vilified by women everywhere, shamefully, still holds his position.  

What did the Moms say about this tragic murder? Crickets. Julianne Moore must have taken a day off from tweeting, since she was silent as well. A supporter of Everytown, Executive Director Jean Shivas of New Jersey's Coalition for Battered Women said: "We will never know whether a gun would have saved Carol's life." What a bloodless, dismissive statement from one woman about the brutal murder of another! Ms. Bowne, apparently, is acceptable collateral damage to the new feminists braying for civilian disarmament. She will not be the only casualty if this deadly agenda progresses.

The third inconvenient truth is that guns in the hands of women do save lives. While the Moms flatly deny that a good person with a gun has ever saved someone from a bad guy with a gun and the mainstream media rarely report such stories, "Ms. Dee" of Detroit  is a hard person to ignore. This woman, a cancer survivor, obtained a gun license several years ago when her home was broken into. In June of this year, the same month Carol Bowne was brutally murdered, Ms. Dee awoke in her bed to a man shoving a gun in her face and four more men crawling through her bedroom window. She was able to reach her own gun, fired at the men and they ran away. Caught in a life or death situation, Ms. Dee saved her own life thanks to self-reliance and a police chief who encourages firearm ownership because the police cannot be everywhere. 

Nor do the Moms ever acknowledge that firearms save the lives of children. Eighteen-year-old Sarah McKinley and her 3-month-old baby were home alone in Oklahoma City less than a week after her husband died of cancer. Two men, one armed with a 12-inch hunting knife, were breaking into Sarah's home. She grabbed a shotgun, locked herself and her baby in the bedroom, where she grabbed a pistol as well and called 911. One of the men broke down her bedroom door and charged her with the knife. Sarah shot and killed the criminal. She was on the telephone with the 911 operator for 21 minutes, and the police still had not arrived. But for her self-defense with a gun, there would have been two more tragic victims to mourn. http://abcnews.go.com/US/okla-woman-shoots-kills-intruder911-operators-shoot/story?

The right to protect self and family is the most precious of our constitutional and God-given rights. To all of the Moms who choose to outsource this right to police or a random Good Samaritan, I say, that is your choice. If you as a woman choose to respond to a home invader by cowering in a closet with your children and hoping help arrives in time,,that is your choice. If you prefer to plead for mercy from a criminal who does not value your life, instead of defending your life with a gun, that is your choice. You are free to choose to be a helpless victim. I, and millions of other women, however, choose to be self-reliant and armed so that we have a fighting chance to protect ourselves and our families. We refuse to be defenseless prey for criminals. The Second Amendment gives us that choice and you will not take it from us.

The gun control movement has become the new feminist battleground. Courtesy of millions of dollars flowing from Michael Bloomberg to women-fronted groups, the face of "gun control" is now decidedly female. Feminization of the issue is not by happenstance. It is a deliberate strategy designed to appeal to gender voters, to beta males, to those who make decisions based on emotion rather than fact, and to those who are ill-informed but know what is best for all. If this movement is successful, the consequences will be tragic and deadly -- especially for women. Women who choose to arm for self-protection in an increasingly dangerous society will be denied that right and instead, will be forced to become easy prey and crime statistics. Make no mistake: gun control is the real war on women and civilian disarmament is the goal. Michael Bloomberg has endorsed gun confiscation and Hillary Clinton is onboard. That women are the vanguard of an effort to make all women weak, dependent submissives is a stunning repudiation of feminism's supposed foundational principle: a woman has the right to make her own life choices.

Female-centric groups, such as Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America and Everytown for Gun Safety, are portrayed by sympathetic mainstream media and promotional websites as grassroots organizations comprised of safety-focused "caring, concerned moms." Led by a former Democrat operative, these wise nurturers march, boycott, and demand "common sense solutions" to the ubiquitous "epidemic of gun violence" and "mass shootings." This sisterhood predictably has expanded to include liberal celebrities and politicians. Julianne Moore, she of the "#not one more" tweets, is recruiting other Hollywood actresses of great intellect to the cause. Gabby Giffords and, of course, Hillary, who has just embraced the cause out of political desperation, are also vying to become the preeminent anti-gun Valkyrie.

What are these "common sense solutions?" The amorphous mantra encompasses any and all impediments to legal carry and gun ownership. The Moms boycott and bully businesses into imposing, through store policy, greater restrictions than those enacted by citizen vote or otherwise imposed by the laws of the jurisdictions in which those stores operate.They want to ban any kind of carry on college campuses, ban open carry where open carry is legal and seek to lengthen the waiting time imposed by federal law before a customer can take possession of a legally purchased firearm. The fact is, not one of these "solutions" would have prevented any of the criminal shootings the Moms ghoulishly propagandize. These incremental restrictions, however, do advance the ultimate goal of civilian disarmament.

In the midst of our increasingly dangerous, combustible world, how is it that women can agitate to strip other women of their right to arm for self-protection? Well, they do so by denial, en masse, of certain inconvenient yet incontrovertible truths.

The first undeniable truth is that women, generally, are smaller in stature and have less muscle mass than men. The size and strength differentials make women easier, less physically resistant targets for criminals. Depending on the circumstances, if a female is attacked she might be able to yell for help, dial 911 and hope police respond in time, blow that rape whistle, fight off her attacker, beg for mercy, or just submit. Or she can equalize the fighting field and compensate for her lesser physical power by having a firearm. As Samuel Colt, the father of the modern personal firearm industry realized in the 1800s, the gun is "the great equalizer." Like no other weapon, a firearm affords a woman a fighting chance to thwart and to survive a criminal attack.

The second truth is that "reasonable" gun restrictions actually put women at more risk. Tragically, we can't ask Carol Bowne of New Jersey her opinion of stringent gun control because she was murdered while waiting for a government permit to buy a firearm for self-protection. Ms. Bowne was a victim of domestic violence and was being actively stalked.  She did everything the gun control crowd says will keep women safe: she obtained a judicial restraining order, installed a home security system and an exterior surveillance system. She also applied for a permit to buy a handgun. By law, the permit process is to take 30 days. In practice, the government sits on the applications with impunity while a 14-point investigation is conducted. On day 41, Ms. Bowne inquired about her permit and was told it was not yet processed. Two days later, she was viciously stabbed to death in her driveway by her stalker; a man who was not stopped by a piece of paper or surveillance systems. Ms. Bowne had not a fighting chance to stave off the attack thanks to the wisdom of the gun control crowd. And what consequences for the police department that failed to timely grant her permit?  None at all. Berlin Township Police Chief Leonard Check issued no statement of remorse or sorrow for the murder or the inexcusable permit delay. This man, who should be stripped of his office and vilified by women everywhere, shamefully, still holds his position.  

What did the Moms say about this tragic murder? Crickets. Julianne Moore must have taken a day off from tweeting, since she was silent as well. A supporter of Everytown, Executive Director Jean Shivas of New Jersey's Coalition for Battered Women said: "We will never know whether a gun would have saved Carol's life." What a bloodless, dismissive statement from one woman about the brutal murder of another! Ms. Bowne, apparently, is acceptable collateral damage to the new feminists braying for civilian disarmament. She will not be the only casualty if this deadly agenda progresses.

The third inconvenient truth is that guns in the hands of women do save lives. While the Moms flatly deny that a good person with a gun has ever saved someone from a bad guy with a gun and the mainstream media rarely report such stories, "Ms. Dee" of Detroit  is a hard person to ignore. This woman, a cancer survivor, obtained a gun license several years ago when her home was broken into. In June of this year, the same month Carol Bowne was brutally murdered, Ms. Dee awoke in her bed to a man shoving a gun in her face and four more men crawling through her bedroom window. She was able to reach her own gun, fired at the men and they ran away. Caught in a life or death situation, Ms. Dee saved her own life thanks to self-reliance and a police chief who encourages firearm ownership because the police cannot be everywhere. 

Nor do the Moms ever acknowledge that firearms save the lives of children. Eighteen-year-old Sarah McKinley and her 3-month-old baby were home alone in Oklahoma City less than a week after her husband died of cancer. Two men, one armed with a 12-inch hunting knife, were breaking into Sarah's home. She grabbed a shotgun, locked herself and her baby in the bedroom, where she grabbed a pistol as well and called 911. One of the men broke down her bedroom door and charged her with the knife. Sarah shot and killed the criminal. She was on the telephone with the 911 operator for 21 minutes, and the police still had not arrived. But for her self-defense with a gun, there would have been two more tragic victims to mourn. http://abcnews.go.com/US/okla-woman-shoots-kills-intruder911-operators-shoot/story?

The right to protect self and family is the most precious of our constitutional and God-given rights. To all of the Moms who choose to outsource this right to police or a random Good Samaritan, I say, that is your choice. If you as a woman choose to respond to a home invader by cowering in a closet with your children and hoping help arrives in time,,that is your choice. If you prefer to plead for mercy from a criminal who does not value your life, instead of defending your life with a gun, that is your choice. You are free to choose to be a helpless victim. I, and millions of other women, however, choose to be self-reliant and armed so that we have a fighting chance to protect ourselves and our families. We refuse to be defenseless prey for criminals. The Second Amendment gives us that choice and you will not take it from us.