Bill Gates is still trying to have his fetish-y, psychotic adolescent fantasies come true, worldwide; but this time not at a TED conference in make-believe Ebola camps, but for real, with real quarantine camps and with his own private One Health army. He won’t give up, nor will the WEF and the WHO. We don’t know who the unnamed, dark-clad — police? Mercenaries? — were, who violently beat the Canadian truckers, and we don’t know who the unnamed dark-clad — police? Mercenaries? — were, who violently beat the protesters against ‘lockdowns’ in France. There are mercenary armies available to private individuals or nonprofit entities around the world, with a phone call. The Second Amendment, along with our sovereignty, alone protects us from them.

This is hard to accept. But risks of criminal gun violence, while always tragic, are risks that sadly can’t be done away with altogether, if we are to secure a more fundamental safety for more people and more lives; the right as a nation of 330 million people, to deter massive planned violence, criminal detentions, “lockdowns”, theft of assets, and violent crimes at the state, and now at meta-state, levels, against our lives and freedoms and yes, against our children.

Long, but interesting from a stark raving crazy liberal,
Gun supporter.

https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/rethinking-the-second-amendment?s=r

 
[/quote
......
In a nutshell,  the liberal chick writer had an epiphany.
Kind of like watching a kid opening a cool gift on Christmas morning.
She regurgitates everything that us folks already know.

.

Cliffnotes?

Stark raving lunatic Vegan, feminist, learns why we have a second amendment.
And she defines 2A quite well in our modern English language.
 

She's an excellent writer and as a liberal brings up a lot of pro-2A points that more conservative writers usually too afraid to directly address.

She makes a very good point that I think is important in the discussion. Firearm ownership is a double-edged sword in society. With firearm ownership you get certain problems and without it you have different problems. Any honest conversation must acknowledge that banning firearms brings other problems

No different than the people who die every year from pool accidents, auto crashes, prescription drug overdoses, fast food enabled obesity, medical malpractice, etc, etc.

There are few things in life that are 100% risk-free.  Painting guns as a "double-edged sword" is just a fact, not an issue.  No different than the other things I mentioned, as they all carry a risk.

We know that guns save upwards of 100 times more lives than they are responsible for taking.  Cost/benefit analysis is pretty straight forward.

No different than the people who die every year from pool accidents, auto crashes, prescription drug overdoses, fast food enabled obesity, medical malpractice, etc, etc.

There are few things in life that are 100% risk-free.  Painting guns as a "double-edged sword" is just a fact, not an issue.  No different than the other things I mentioned, as they all carry a risk.

We know that guns save upwards of 100 times more lives than they are responsible for taking.  Cost/benefit analysis is pretty straight forward.

it's important to acknowledge it is that in conversations with people on the other side they can see that we are acknowledging their points. For them to listen to us it is important that we first show we are open and listening to their concerns.

I have serious doubts about the higher estimates of firearm use in self-defense but that is another subject. I think a firearms community is more likely to recognize the double-edged nature of private firearm ownership then those who would wish to greatly restrict firearms. The reason why I said it's important to acknowledge it is that in conversations with people on the other side they can see that we are acknowledging their points. For them to listen to us it is important that we first show we are open and listening to their concerns.

Unpublished CDC Study Confirms More than 2 Million Defensive Handgun Uses Annually

An unpublished Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study confirms Florida State University
criminologist Gary Kleck’s findings of more than two million defensive handgun uses (DGUs) per year.

Since the early 1990s, Kleck has maintained that there is a minimum of 760,000 DGUs annually. However,
that is his low estimate. Kleck and research partner Marc Gertz have contended the actual number is closer
to 2.5 million, reported Breitbart.

Kleck reaffirmed his numbers on February 17, 2015, explaining that while plenty of naysayers have criticized
his findings, none have been able to offer empirical evidence to counter them.

Now, a CDC study conducted on data from 1996, 1997, and 1998 has been uncovered. The study, which was
never released to the public, shows approximately 2.46 million DGUs per year.