Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part completely with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.

Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.

But she is still in that fog, trying to hang on to it because that’s where her belief system on guns feels more less-challenged still. For example, she says this > “As a white, middle-aged female, the only significantly elevated risk I’d encounter from keeping a safely stored firearm would be su* icide.”

1. A person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Being “a white, middle-aged female” has nothing to do with it and neither does the gun, because no matter the race or age a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Basically the difference between ‘risk of su* icide’ and ‘elevated risk of su* icide’ is only in the timing – to ‘do it later’ or ‘do it now or very soon’ – this is why a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide also, its just a matter of timing.

2. She got this line from left wing studies prompted by and paid for by anti-gun sources and cited by left wing media and left wing sources with their ‘trust the science’ BS, and their data was bogus. They purposely cherry picked data from homes where “a white, middle-aged female” had already attempted su* icide but failed because they did not apply their method correctly to cause the desired outcome, and had done more planning and selected another more assuredly fatal method and was going to carry it out BEFORE A GUN WAS INTRODUCED TO THE HOME. Then the gun got introduced and they used that instead and voila! STUDY REACHES PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION THAT A GUN IN THE HOME CREATES AN ELEVATED RISK OF SUI* CIDE FOR “white, middle-aged females” – in reality, the gun made no difference, the “white, middle-aged females” were already at an elevated risk of su* icide before the gun and would have committed su* icide anyway and had planned and was going to carry it out by another method even if there was no gun.

3. Look at her excuse for it too, this > “…from keeping a safely stored firearm…” > think about that for a second then look at #1 above…how the firearm is ‘safely’ stored makes no difference to a person at risk or ‘elevated risk’ of su* icide, when they get ready to do it they will do it with anything they can use, a gun ‘safely’ stored away does not keep them from using something else. But then she turns around and says she is not at risk of Anyway … I’ve encountered these types of left wingers before. She is in, what we call around here, ‘belief system twilight zone shock’. She has discovered that the anti-gun and left wing media have not been truthful with her, her belief system on guns was based upon the deceptive obscuring fog they kept her in. In short she has discovered that reality on guns was not what she was led to believe but she is not ready yet to part with that deceptive fog that has fed her belief system on guns.

But she is still in that fog, trying to hang on to it because that’s where her belief system on guns feels more less-challenged still. For example, she says this > “As a white, middle-aged female, the only significantly elevated risk I’d encounter from keeping a safely stored firearm would be su* icide.”

1. A person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Being “a white, middle-aged female” has nothing to do with it and neither does the gun, because no matter the race or age a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide even if there is no gun around. Basically the difference between ‘risk of su* icide’ and ‘elevated risk of su* icide’ is only in the timing – to ‘do it later’ or ‘do it now or very soon’ – this is why a person at risk of su* icide is always at an elevated risk of su* icide also, its just a matter of timing.

2. She got this line from left wing studies prompted by and paid for by anti-gun sources and cited by left wing media and left wing sources with their ‘trust the science’ BS, and their data was bogus. They purposely cherry picked data from homes where “a white, middle-aged female” had already attempted su* icide but failed because they did not apply their method correctly to cause the desired outcome, and had done more planning and selected another more assuredly fatal method and was going to carry it out BEFORE A GUN WAS INTRODUCED TO THE HOME. Then the gun got introduced and they used that instead and voila! STUDY REACHES PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION THAT A GUN IN THE HOME CREATES AN ELEVATED RISK OF SUI* CIDE FOR “white, middle-aged females” – in reality, the gun made no difference, the “white, middle-aged females” were already at an elevated risk of su* icide before the gun and would have committed su* icide anyway and had planned and was going to carry it out by another method even if there was no gun.

3. Look at her excuse for it too, this > “…from keeping a safely stored firearm…” > think about that for a second then look at #1 above…how the firearm is ‘safely’ stored makes no difference to a person at risk or ‘elevated risk’ of su* icide, when they get ready to do it they will do it with anything they can use, a gun ‘safely’ stored away does not keep them from using something else. But then she turns around and says she is not at risk of suicide but still uses the risk of suicide as her excuse for safely storing the gun because she is a “white, middle-aged female” – its anti-gun brain washing, not that a gun should not be safely stored but rather its the scare tactic brain washing – she is not confident in her own abilities.

She is still clinging to that deceptive fog.

And this good guy has the resources to train more than most people. I look forward to reading the investigation report. So I can adjust my training accordingly.

Successfully distracting a bad guy is definitely a really big win.

Sheepdog!!!

“Why does she feel less safe when her husband is out of town?”

because she lacks the self-confidence and self-esteem to be her own first responder.

Also.
No optic. No “TV set” box on the top of his sidearm. He is just using the old fashion iron sites.

Now let the calibers wars begin. Again. I remember when the “experts” said it’s 45acp and nothing else.

And here is a thing about practicing at 20 yards or more – if you are accurate at 20 or 25 yards, you will be even more accurate at 10 yards or 7 yards. 😁

As a Navy helicopter pilot who flew combat missions in Vietnam, the Tanker Wars of the 180s and Desert Shield/Storm, it’s a lot different when the bullets are going both ways.