I don’t understand men who physically abuse their partners. I can probably rationalize a lot of things, but striking someone you claim to love, that you chose to spend your life with, even if only for the right now? I can’t wrap my head around how anyone, even if they were raised in an abusive family, could think that’s acceptable.
I’m not perfect, and I’m not a perfect husband, but damn, son.
Luckily, we live in a country where women who are abused can not just find resources to escape from that, but also have the means to defend themselves from people like that. That’s a fantastic thing, and I’m glad to see it.
But it seems that two lawmakers in Minnesota–and these probably aren’t alone–think women should have to undergo training before having the means to defend themselves from abusive partners and ex-partners.
During Wednesday’s Gun Violence Prevention Working Group hearing, Minnesota state Sen. Ron Latz (DFL) argued against women being armed for self-defense unless and until they receive training on using guns.
Latz’s comments came amid a discussion about training requirements for gun owners and a 30-day waiting period for gun purchasers.
State Sen. Keri Heintzeman (R) asked, “So, if a woman fears for her safety, in a domestic violence situation or stalking or harassment, will she have to wait 30 days to purchase a firearm?”
State Sen. Liz Boldon (DFL) responded by saying, “…Very open to conservations about the specific language [of the proposed gun control], with the bottom line being a woman in a domestic violence situation who wants to own a gun — anyone who owns a deadly weapon should have training on how to safely use that deadly weapon…”
Well…that’s a take.
Look, I understand the arguments for training requirements. On the surface, it might sound just fine if you ignore that this is a constitutionally protected right we’re talking about here.
However, we’re also looking at a delay in a woman in a dangerous situation being able to get the best means of defending herself there is. Restraining orders are just a piece of paper, and a red flag order doesn’t prevent the dangerous man from coming with a knife or even his bare hands. The average woman can’t stop the average man in a situation like that.
So a gun is the best method possible.
And these turdnuggets want to make that practically impossible.
Let’s not forget some of the issues Colorado is running into with their training requirement. Only a fool would assume these can’t crop up anywhere else. Sure, they can be mitigated, but training requirements are always a potentially slippery slope to just that sort of thing, and you can’t tell me these lawmakers would be heartbroken to see this happening in Minnesota.
Then there’s the fact that these people seem to think violent predators who seek to torment and murder the woman in question will kindly wait until she’s undergone the required training and other hurdles before attacking her. If anyone actually believes that, they’re so stupid someone has to remind them to breathe.
What we’re seeing is nothing short of disgusting. They’re trying to leverage a horrible tragedy to push for laws that had nothing to do with what happened, that don’t actually prevent crime, and have no bearing on criminal behavior in the slightest. They’re acting like they were giddy when the shooting happened because it was the excuse they’d been waiting for.
And that’s the attitude of a sociopath.
I hope that’s not the case, but it’s kind of hard to tell from here, you know?
Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
Read the full article here
