The latest Bloomberg anti-gun advertisement was meant to show why firearms need to be outlawed. The ad actually proves the need for owning a firearm for self protection!
The advertisement proves:
1. Despite the fact the perpetrator was banned from owning a firearm or ammunition due to a restraining order against him, he illegally possessed a firearm. Outlawing firearms would not have stopped this.
2. The criminal was illegally carrying a concealed weapon. Again laws against this behavior would not have stopped him.
3. The restraining order did not protect the woman. It even appears to have acted as a catalyst for violence.
4. The police could not possibly arrive in time and thus were powerless to protect the woman.
5. The woman was shot to death because she had no form of self defense.
6. The only possible way for the woman to have survived was to protect herself with a firearm.
- Anti-gun Democrat Congressional Candidate Arrested for Murder Using Gun!
- DC Police Chief Says Best Option for Saving Lives: Take the Gunman Out
- Anti-gun Ad Proves Need for Self Defense
- Would You Believe Obama Voted for Stand Your Ground Legislation?
- Obama Supporter Strongly Believes in the Second Amendment