What might have happened if a few of the 1,500 concert attendees in Paris’ Bataclan theater had guns?
After every tragic shooting, liberals and progressives call for more gun laws. They exploit American ignorance as to why the Framers gave us Second Amendment protections.
A disarmed population makes crime a safer occupation and street violence a safer sport.
Gun control zealots are almost always people who are lenient toward criminals, while they are determined to crack down on law-abiding citizens who want to be able to defend themselves and their loved ones.
I can’t convince my friends in New York City, but it’s just a fact: More guns — less crime.
Millions of American civilians have also been forbidden to have guns, and are also sitting ducks — for criminals, terrorists or psychos.
The following are some statements by the Founding Fathers. You tell me which one of them suggests that they gave us the Second Amendment for deer and duck hunting and protection against criminals.
The vast majority of people who own guns for their own self-protection are in no way responsible for a criminal, terrorizing person’s choice to harm others.
The great bulk of the studies show that gun control laws do not in fact control guns. On net balance, they do not save lives but cost lives.
Why — at a time in our history when guns were readily available, when a person could just walk into a store or order a gun through the mail, when there were no FBI background checks, no waiting periods, no licensing requirements — was there not the frequency and kind of gun violence that we sometimes see today, when access to guns is more restricted?