Women's March Puts Dana Loesch in Its Crosshairs

The so-called Women's March, which should be called the March of Liberal Women Only, has called out radio host and NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch for doing promo ads depicting the importance of firearms in protecting our liberties against criminals and anarchists while chiding the hypocrisy of the left on this issue.

The Women's March supports abortion as part of the right of women to control their own bodies.  Well, if women are in control of their own bodies, why can't they protect those bodies with a firearm?  A gun in the hand of a trained and truly empowered woman is the best rape whistle ever invented.  The marchers accuse conservatives of being sexist oppressors who want to keep women barefoot and pregnant; at the same time, they claim that women are defenseless waifs who should be disarmed.

Spokespeople for the Women's March have called Loesch a pretty face exploited by the NRA to sell guns to men:

The "feminist organization" Women's March that protested the NRA because they were butthurt that Dana Loesch's video called for everyone to tell the truth, says she's nothing but "a pretty face to sell guns to men".

In front of the NRA HQ building, an unidentified man with the March stepped up to the microphone to address the NRA Spokeswoman, saying, "Dana Loesch: it's not too late to join these women up here! You're a woman, too. Don't let the NRA use you, Dana – as a pretty face to sell guns to men!"

Okay, so she's a pretty face, but the NRA  doesn't sell guns, and the NRA and Dana Loesch are merely advising people of both genders, even transgenders, of their constitutional right to self-defense.  The Second Amendment was put in the Bill of Rights to protect the other nine.

Loesch has shot back with a withering critique of the marchers' hypocrisy in claiming to be empowering women while trying to disarm them.  As reported on the pro-gun website BearingArms.Com:

It's a good question – why are members of the women's march, who claim to be about empowering and championing women, trying to disarm them and render them defenseless?

Dana Loesch, NRA spokeswoman and host of The Dana Show, called out the Women's March agenda when she asked:

"Why are they trying to make statistics and victims out of people like me? It's ridiculous," Dana said. "Don't claim to be the champion of someone that you want to keep under your boot, and that's what this ideology is doing."

Loesch has rewritten the old feminist song with new lyrics that say, I am woman, hear me lock and load.  Her idea of a women's magazine has 30 rounds.  That has liberal heads exploding.  They think women should march, but only in lockstep with their agenda.

Loesch thinks otherwise:

On Monday, NRA Spokeswoman Dana Loesch joined NRA TV's Grant Stinchfield to discuss the hypocrisy of the Women's March protest of the NRA.

"I didn't particularly take to being Progressively mansplained by this Women's March speaker," Dana told Grant. "Newsflash to this sexist, you know – women can vote, too – we had the right to bear arms before we had the right to vote and you can come and take that out of my cold, dead hands."

"This guy speaking at this protest embodies everything that anyone ever needs to know about the gun control movement, it is the ultimate war on women, it is the ultimate in class warfare and sexism."

Perhaps the feminists who believe that women should be armed only with pathetic "rape whistles" should listen to the testimony Amanda Collins gave before the Colorado legislature when it was considering the issue of students, particularly female students, carrying guns on campus.  As Investor's Business Daily editorialized:

Collins was raped at gunpoint in a University of Nevada-Reno parking garage in October 2007. Nevada law prohibited her from carrying a gun on the campus, but her attacker had one. She was raped 50 feet away from the campus police department office. Her attacker was James Biela, a serial rapist who raped two other women and murdered another.

He attacked her at gunpoint in a gun-free zone. At the time of the attack, Collins had a concealed weapons permit but not her firearm due to university policies prohibiting carrying concealed weapons on campus. Just such a gun-free zone policy is why the Aurora, Colo., shooter chose the theater he did.

As she ended her compelling testimony, she asked the committee, "How does rendering me defenseless protect you against a violent crime?" ...

"Had I been carrying that night, two other rapes would have been prevented and a young life would have been saved," Collins told NRA News host Cam Edwards, defending students' right to carry weapons on campus. "A call box above my head while I was straddled on the parking garage floor being brutally raped wouldn't have helped me one bit," she said.

So-called feminists want women to be as defenseless as Carol Bowne.  The 39-year-old New Jersey woman with a restraining order against an ex-boyfriend was murdered by that boyfriend while she waited for her application for a gun permit to wind its way through a process that takes at least two months to complete.  It wasn't completed soon enough:

The Berlin Township woman got a restraining order against a former boyfriend, installed security cameras and an alarm system to her home and began the months-long process of obtaining a handgun, friends said.

But it wasn't enough.

Bowne, 39, was stabbed to death in the driveway of her Patton Avenue home on Wednesday night.

Bowne was a victim of domestic violence.  She didn't have a gun in her home.  Gun control zealots tell us a gun in the home is dangerous, but then so too is an ex-boyfriend, one Michael Eitel, with a knife.  That is why gun rights advocates say women should own guns – because a restraining order is just a piece of paper.  So Bowne sought permission from the government to exercise her Second Amendment rights:

According to news reports, Eitel had previously went to the salon in Somerdale where she worked and broke the windows on Bowne's vehicle[.] ...

Bowne then went to Berlin Township police in mid-April to apply for a gun license. According to reports, she went to check on the process – which takes about two months to complete – as recently as this week.

Why don't women's rights  include a right to self defense against rapists, gang-bangers, and vengeful ex-boyfriends?  If Carol Bowne had gotten her gun, she would likely be alive today.  Keeping people like Carol Bowne disarmed does not make us or our daughters, mothers, sisters, wives, and girlfriends safer.

If you experience technical problems, please write to helpdesk@americanthinker.com