I’ve been away from the blog for a while, been travelling and teaching some common sense to law abiding gun owners.
I found this video today made by my dear friend Colleen Lawson. She lives in Chicago and she was one of the plaintiffs in the McDonald case brought before the Supreme Court. Just watch and listen to her, how can leaving people like her and her family unprotected be called common sense?
I agree with most of what she says, but wow, what an annoying voice and manner to say it in. If she does another one with some speech therapy and some confidence, I think it could have an impact.
Wow, what a powerful message, and from the heart!
I sure hope that common sense starts to take hold in that state which would mean passing Shall Issue as well as revamping the myriad of pro-criminal gun laws they have on the books.
Thanks Colleen !
Hey Gail, I periodically read japete’s blog and decided to comment on a statement she made that wasn’t factual. It’s got nothing to do with colleen lawson, but I thought I’d post it here in case japete decides not to approve.
“Jared Loughner was not stopped in Tucson by the gun permit holder who had his gun out ready to shoot”
Wrong. He clicked the safety off, but did not pull it out from where it was hidden.
“Instead he was stopped by people tackling him while he was reloading his Glock.”
Well, his high capacity magazine caused a jam while he was reloading, which gave people the opportunity to tackle him and get the gun away from him.
“Once they seized his gun, the permit holder didn’t know who the actual shooter was and almost shot the man who had taken the gun from Loughner.”
No. Zamudio saw first saw a guy holding a gun, saw the slide locked back, meaning the gun was incapable of firing. He then decided the man with the gun was not an immediate threat. He then noticed the pile of people on Loughner and understood that he was the real threat and had been restrained. Then he saw that the man holding the glock was really agitated, yelling things at loughner like “I’ll kill you” so Zamudio convinced the man to give him the glock. Zamudio then set the gun down away from the scene and helped hold down loughner until the police arrived. At no point did Zamudio’s gun leave it’s place of concealment. I have not heard that anyone else at the scene had a gun or pointed one at the bad guy so when you say things like this-
“This is the way it works when several people have their guns out at a chaotic scene.”
It kind of leads me to believe that you are willing to disregard fact in order to persuade others to your point of view, or that you are willing to twist facts in order to make a tragedy work in your favor. And, based on the comments in this article, this isn’t the first time that you have been corrected about this particular situation. So why have you reposted this un-factual statement again?
Can you explain that? I know you read the comments in earlier posts, I saw your responses to them. Are you going to lump yourself in with the group of people that insist that Barack Obama isn’t American or that 9/11 was an inside job, who persist in spreading their beliefs even after being shown the facts of the situation? Because it seems that you are persisting in spreading your beliefs about Joe Zamudio, in spite of having the facts explained to you.
Did she ever publish your comment, if so I didn’t see it.
Hi, I’m a young conservative and if you really want to take stand for gun rights, please help me win a wasr-10 by clicking this link:
http://bit.ly/v7GDm6
thanks from me and my family!
Hi, you post interesting posts on your site, you can get much more visitors,
just search in google for – augo’s tube traffic