Just when I think the Coalition to Stop Gun Rights Violence have reached hypersonic levels of shrill , they come along with something even higher.

What awful event has brought the verbal ire of our chap Ladd?

On Oct. 20, the man saw Evanovich pistol-whip a woman and take her purse. The witness, who had a permit to carry a handgun, drove up to Evanovich and asked for the purse back. Evanovich pointed his gun at the man and told him to mind his own business, and the man, still sitting in his car, aimed his own weapon and fired, according to a criminal complaint.

So, a citizen sees an assault with a deadly weapon against a woman, legally intervenes and when threatened by the criminal, produces his weapon and defends himself. But apparently there is a code of location/position according to CSGV which makes shooting from a vehicle somehow morally wrong.

And to Laddite Beth Ritchie, I am sure you would have a different opinion about “vigilantism” if you were to have your face re-arranged by a gun held by a criminal. Are you sure you rather walk the high moral ground and wait for the criminal to finish you up rather than have somebody help you ?

Go this building in New York and confront the One Percenters coming in an out.

They are easy to recognize. They all wear a leather vest with a patch like this:

Take your Alternative Lifestyle Partner who works for PETA and let him confront them about their inhumane use of leather products while you accuse them of raping and pillaging our country.

Call me when you get out of the hospital…if.

Every time I say “light blogging” I end up posting 5 times before supper.

I am doing some interesting reading and all from the Small Arms Review, the UN Gun Grabbers. I downloaded and printed the following: Estimating Civilian Owned Firearms, Small Arms Survey 2011 and Global Burden of Armed Violence. A grand total of 271 pages very well written in sentimental “bureaucratise.” An easy to impress mind would end up crying at the introduction alone and joining the flock or Rebecca Peters or Occupy Smith & Wesson.

I am just gonna leave you this bon-mot from Small Arms Survey 201:

The 2006 report prepared by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights discusses the principle of self-defence under human rights law; it appraises claims that the principle provides legal support for a ‘right’ to possess small arms, which, in turn, would negate or substantially minimize the duty of states to regulate possession. Yet the report concludes that, though the principle has an important place in international human rights law, ‘it does not provide an independent, legal supervening right to small arms possession, nor does it ameliorate the duty of States to use due diligence in regulating civilian
possession’ (UNHRC, 2006, para. 19).
(Underline mine, quotation marks in the original)

Basically, Self-Defense is a right when We (The UN) say it is and it is convenient and that makes it a privilege. Remember that they do not have the same concept of Rights as we do. For us are God Given and inalienable, for them are just grants given by the State.

I’ll be making a full report later in the week.