This is my response to a series of articles in the National Firearms Journal by Cindy Lightheart where she writes about allowing conceal carry permits for women and Cindy's reply to me.
Note how Cindy says politicians resond to women's concerns before a man's. Sad to say, I know she is right as that is how things work in the socialist republic of canukistan.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Fwd: National Firearms Association: A message to Cindy as I
cannot send to her directly. I would dearly like to hear a response as
this will allow me to make a decision to join your organization. I would
find it troubling to join an organization that did not support men\'s
rights alongside of women\'s rights. The right to carry a sidearm for
personal protection is, in my opinion, a civilized and responsible thing
to do. Our government, by denying us this so-called right is, in fact
infantalizing us all. Thanks and I look forward to a reply.]
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 08:26:37 -0700
This is an e-mail via the contact page form at http://www.nfa.ca
xxxxx <[email protected]
Hello Mr xxxxxx,
I very much enjoyed your logic and reasoning behind your articles about carry
Thank you. Your support is very much appreciated!
I agree wholeheartedly that the current legislation puts people at severe risk
of death and maiming from criminals. I live in a rural area of BC and no police
would be able to assist me sooner that 45 minutes if I was very lucky!!
I am however concerned and I hope I have misread your comments. It appears that
you are advocating for the permission to carry only for women? Please say it
Rest assured. We feel it's a lot harder for a politician to say "NO!" to a woman than it is for him to say "NO!" to a man. So the NFA comes in from the flank instead of making a head-op attack into the point of maximum strength. It's a TACTICAL decision. If we win it for women, we win it for everyone!
When it comes to being victims of violent crime, we men are far more likely to
be killed or beaten especially those in the 20-35 age bracket. I in no way
minimize women's real concern but I suggest that we suffer too and should also
enjoy the right to protect ourselves. After all, I think my life is as valuable
and as worthwhile as yours. Also, as a loving father and grandfather, I believe
it is my sacred duty to protect my family.
When it comes to having a gun as an effective tool to equalize imbalances in
physical strength as you noted, I would say the same holds true for most men.
You and I are normal people in that we do not wish violence on anyone. The
criminal on the other hand has made up his or her mind to attack and to attack
suddenly by surprise. Regular folk are at an automatic disadvantage. And, let's
not forget the angry, violent individual who may be stoked up on any number of
substances rendering the person more violent, more impulsive and possibly, more
immune to pain. Man or woman, we are all at risk from that type of person.
By the way, I work in child protection so I see first hand the violence visited
upon women and children AND upon men and children- by sad, violent and sick men
I commend you--and I thank you!
I look forward to your reply. And by the way, nice picture. Is that a Ruger
single action .45 on your hip?
Thank you. I'm guessing. I think you might be referring to an earlier photo. If I'm correct, that particular handgun is a Ruger .22 semi-automatic.