Five minutes is not a long time, but man, it would be so nice to have five minutes, to have a face-to-face discussion with Lawrence O’Donnell. I say face-to-face because I would never get a chance to talk if I ever went on his MSNBS show, The Last Word, which should be called Lawrence Rants. On the show, Lawrence, yells at and talks over anyone who dares have a Conservative viewpoint. You can watch the video of O’Donnell screaming at Gayle Trotter for daring to believe in the right to self-defense here. he shows himself to be a bully, a chauvinist who is angry apparently because Trotter does not know her place, and most of all an intellectual coward. The very last thing O’Donnell wants is an honest debate.
This is why a five minute meeting with Larry the Screamer would be fun. First he would not even try to bully me, second he could not be able to control the debate setting, and third, I could call him out to his face for the pompous, over bearing ass hat that he is. And he would do absolutely nothing about it, because he is nothing but a gutless wonder who bullies those that he can.
Much more at Allergic to Bull, where Lawrence and other Leftists pushing for gun control are exposed. O’Donell tried to say that no woman, or anyone period has ever used an assault weapon, a manufactured term that is meaningless, to stop a violent attacker. Aaron Worthing destroys that lie. The spin that O’Donnell used that in many cases the attackers flee when they see a gun, is also addressed.
From the accompanying article:
Early Tuesday morning, Christopher Boise heard a noise coming from the basement. As he walked toward the source of that noise, the RIT student noticed two men standing in the downstairs portion of his apartment.
“They were waiting for me at the bottom of the stairs,” said Boise.
One of them had a handgun trained on Boise.
Within moments, Boise screamed. His cries were heard by his roommate, Raymond.
“It wasn’t like a, ‘I stepped by stepped on a piece of glass’ kind of scream,” Raymond said. “So, I instinctively went to my gun bag.”
Raymond owns an AR-15 which is a military style rifle.
Raymond estimated that just five seconds passed until the door started to open. It was one of the intruders.
“By the time I had it out and ready, one of the men came at my door, slowly opened it, saw that there was a barrel on the other side and from there backed out,” Raymond said.
The two men fled the apartment.
Nothing was taken and no shots were fired.
Now, you might say, “see? He didn’t need any bullets at all, and certainly not a high capacity clip! After all the gun was not even loaded when they ran (as is revealed in the full article and in the video)!” The problem with that is that clearly in this case, it was the fear factor that drove the burglars** off. So what part of their fear was relevant? Would any gun have worked? Would an ordinary hunting rifle have worked? Or did it specifically help that it was a military style rifle? And did the burglars think, albeit erroneously, that this man could fling at them up to thirty rounds without reloading? We might never know the answer to the question and therefore we cannot know whether a lesser weapon would have done the job.
And the irony of it is that allowing this young man to have an AR-15 might have saved lives. If he had nothing, who knows what the burglars might have done. Were they just there to rob, or kidnap? Or maybe the burglars thought that the two young men were gay (rightly or wrong–I don’t want to suggest anything about them) and wanted to beat them up. One of them could have been hospitalized. One of them could have died. Or imagine if Raymond’s weapon was not as intimidating. Imagine the law kept him from having that AR-15, or limited the size of its magazine and the criminals knew it. One of the criminals had a gun, too. Would they have thought that they could take Raymond on? Would a firefight have ensued? One can only guess, and one can only speculate at how such a shootout might have went, but it seems unlikely that all four men would have escaped that situation without someone at least being hurt.
But I saved the best example of the use of Assault Rifles for defense for last. The LA Riots:
This year marked the 20th anniversary of the Los Angeles riots, sparked by the acquittal of four Los Angeles Police Department officers accused of beating the now-deceased Rodney King. During the five days, mobs around Los Angeles looted stores, burnt 3,767 buildings, caused more than $1 billion in property damage, and led to the deaths of more than 50 people and left another 4,000 injured. A story that has been forgotten since then is that of the brave storeowners in Koreatown who fended off mobs with handguns, rifles and assault weapons.
On the second day of the riots, the police had abandoned much of Koreatown. Jay Rhee, a storeowner in the area, stated to The Los Angeles Times, “we have lost faith in the police.”
With the cops nowhere to be found, hundreds of people marauded through the streets towards Koreatown. The neighborhood suffered 45 percent of all the property damage and five fatalities of storeowners during the riots. Having had enough of waiting for police, Korean storeowners assembled into militias to protect themselves, their families, and businesses.
According to the Los Angeles Times, “From the rooftops of their supermarkets, a group of Koreans armed with shotguns and automatic weapons peered onto the smoky streets…Koreans have turned their pastel-colored mini-malls into fortresses against looters tide.”
Rhee claimed that the storeowners shot off 500 rounds into the sky and ground in order to break up the masses of people. The only weapons able to clear that much ammo in a very short time are assault weapons. Single shot pistols or rifles might not have been able to deter the crowd hell-bent on destroying the neighborhood.
By the end of the day storeowners had slain four looters and fended off the mob. It would be 24 more hours until the National Guard arrived and another two days before the riots were completely put down. Had the riots occurred just a couple of years later when the Congress banned assault weapons, many of these storeowners may not have been so lucky. It’s situations like the LA riots, which, while being rare, can occur anywhere from the streets of Los Angeles to far off countries during the Arab Spring.
Assault weapons are legal for this reason: they protect people from extreme cases of assault.
And for bonus points, while the article doesn’t mention if they had so-called high capacity clips or not, with shooting over 500 bullets into the air, it seems reasonable to believe they used a few, doesn’t it?
There are other examples too in the post, go read it all. It is excellent!