Well, this is how stupid, how dumb, how anti-women, those liberals really are! Seems Colorado believes that women are nothing. Telling women that instead of carrying a gun to protect themselves against rapists, just carry a whistle so something will happen, or go to a rape free zone (something like a gun free zone, but a paradise for rapists), or urinate or vomit. Sure, they just know that all of these things will stop a rape! Or they just want to change the definition of rape to non-rape if a woman just surrenders to the rapist!
Of course the main stream media, to protect their liberals, buck ofama, etal…are damn silent on all of this! Oh, because it is democrats being stupid?
So here are several stories and sites to check out:
1. Colorado Democrat Tells Women That Gun Control is More Important Than their Safety…
What happens when a Democrat is asked about women using guns to protect against rape? Well, Redstate has the video of what one Colorado Democrat said…
2. Colorado Rep: Women’s Feelings Lead to Unnecessary Shootings
A Colorado legislator stated Monday that women in college should not carry guns to protect themselves from sexual assault, because they may prematurely shoot harmless men they “feel” are dangerous.
During a debate on gun control in the Colorado legislature, a bill HB13-1226, was presented to eliminate legal concealed carry on college campuses by permit holders. Rep. Joe Salazar (D-Thornton) decided that women should be denied the right to carry their legal guns because even if they felt they were going to be raped, they had call boxes and safe zones to protect them. Salazar asserted:
There are some gender inequities on college campuses. This is true. And universities have been faced with that situation for a long time. It’s why we have call boxes, that’s why we have safe zones, that’s why we have the whistles because you just don’t know who you’re going to be shootin’ at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re going to be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around, or if you feel like you’re in trouble and when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop around at somebody.
3. Liberals Take The Pro-Rape Position On Gun Control
Being in favor of gun control means being in favor of disarming law abiding citizens and empowering criminals, including murderers, robbers and rapists. But, better women be raped than have guns, because their puny female brains can’t handle the adult decision making required to use a firearm — so says Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar.
4. The University of Colorado at Colorado Springs Department of Public Safety has updated an online statement advising female students to consider a variety of unusual actions if they are attacked, including vomiting, urinating and claiming that they are menstruating.
Ten Democrat Tips For Avoiding Rape Without Needing A Gun
Get the rest at the Looking Spoon.
Drones to Attack Gun Owners and Non-Recyclers.
Guns and Pensions
A nation’s choice between spending on military defense and spending on civilian goods has often been posed as “guns versus butter.” But understanding the choices of many nations’ political leaders might be helped by examining the contrast between their runaway spending on pensions while skimping on military defense.
Huge pensions for retired government workers can be found from small municipalities to national governments on both sides of the Atlantic. There is a reason. For elected officials, pensions are virtually the ideal thing to spend money on, politically speaking. Many kinds of spending of the taxpayers’ money win votes from the recipients. But raising taxes to pay for this spending loses votes from the taxpayers. Pensions offer a way out of this dilemma for politicians.
Creating pensions that offer generous retirement benefits wins votes in the present by promising spending in the future. Promises cost nothing in the short run — and elections are held in the short run, long before the pensions are due.
By contrast, private insurance companies that sell annuities are forced by law to set aside enough assets to cover the cost of the annuities they have promised to pay. But nobody can force the government to do that — and most governments do not.
This means that it is only a matter of time before pensions are due to be paid and there is not enough money set aside to pay for them. This applies to Social Security and other government pensions here, as well as to all sorts of pensions in other countries overseas.
Excellent piece by Thomas Sowell, go to Real Clear Politics to finish reading this.
Just look at it. Something I would do at a grocery store.