Barbarism is defined as:

1a: a barbarian or barbarous social or intellectual condition : BACKWARDNESS
b: the practice or display of barbarian acts, attitudes, or ideas

2: an idea, act, or expression that in form or use offends against contemporary standards of good taste or acceptability

I would consider barbarism what we’ve seen in places like New York City and California, where criminals prey on disarmed citizens freely without meaningful ramifications.

I covered a recent incident where a man beat a woman in the head with a hammer to steal her purse.

Miguel covered an attack on a woman who was punched 125 times by a single assailant.

That is barbarism.

States giving law abiding citizens the right to possess the weapons best to repel barbarians is not barbarism.  It’s literally anti-barbarism.

Clearly the Editorial Board believes that civilization is law abiding citizens having to beg and jump through hoops to be allowed to carry the tools to defend themselves.

Of course, all other things being equal, locales that have more burdensome and onerous obstacles to concealed carry have higher rates of crime and victimhood of law abiding citizens.

Barbarians take advantage of unarmed victims, preying on the weak and helpless.

The barbarian in Texas or Florida has no idea if his victim is capable of fighting back.

The barbarian in NYC, LA, or San Francisco is almost guaranteed that their victim is unable to defend themselves adequately.

The quoted article bemoans that now 23 states allow permitless concealed carry.

This is not backwardness but progress in expanding civil rights.

I hope for a day when all 50 states and DC have permitless concealed carry without preemption.

Which is more barbarous: a mugger with dozens of prior convictions bludgeoning a woman with a hammer for her purse or a mugger having his recidivism terminated by a law abiding citizens in self-defence?

As a man who believes that a decent civilization prioritizes the safety of the law abiding above the safety of criminals, I prefer the latter.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

9 thoughts on “No, this is us winning”
  1. Interesting. The link w/ the woman beaten shows the youtube video has been removed for violations. Guess YT doesn’t care about ‘asian hate’.

  2. The next mountain to concour will be asshole d.a. who instantly prosecute obvious self defense…. THAT will be a win. As for the “article “, samo samo whining from elite liberal MORONS

    1. Liberal DAs….which is why it is important to be involved locally as much as possible. Everyone has to vote. We need a movement like parents did for all of the fanatical leftist school boards.

  3. Generally speaking, liberal bedwetters like this guy can be effectively tongue tied when you point out that Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont don’t require permits to purchase handguns.

  4. Good news. Unfortunately for me, my wife and I are still paying $115 each every 5 years here in MI – we need the current governor to go. The Republican led legislature here is hopefully paying attention to Ohio. If we can elect a Republican governor, we might be able to make this happen.

  5. I hate to pick nits (no, not really), but the State doesn’t _give_ any Rights. We posses them as citizens.

    The State may, or, sadly, may not _allow_ us to exercise them, but that’s different.

    I recently received an email from a friend that mentioned that the Constitution gives us Rights. Gasp! I thought that he was more knowledgeable than that.

    Just sayin’.

Login or register to comment.