Second Amendment Sisters are living in the past

O

Oatka

New member
In the Letter to the Editor section, 3/4 of the way down.

Letters address is: editpage@seattle-pi.com
http://www.seattle-pi.com/opinion/ltrs1613.shtml

Second Amendment Sisters are living in the past

I am writing about the opposition march, held concurrently to the Million Mom March by the Second Amendment Sisters.

I am appalled at the thought that in the 21st century there are still women, much less mothers, who are less concerned with their children's safety than they are with their right to a long forgotten way of life.

Don't they know that every two hours another mother loses her child to gun violence? Maybe it takes being that mother to wise up. Is that the only difference between the two groups, those who have lost and those who might still lose?

I wish the Second Amendment Sisters could tell the women on the other side what, if anything, they really think they will accomplish. Their claims are not correct.

They claim that if you do not ever want to feel powerless and if you want to protect your family, you should join them, but how powerful and protected will they feel if a loved one accidentally shoots someone?

Watching the eruption of publicity following the Million Mom March, I couldn't help but notice a sign from the opposition rally. It read, "I wasn't raped because I was carrying a gun." Her point was obviously that she wanted to protect the basic right that allowed her to carry a gun and protect herself, but how many other women are raped because, under the same "basic right," their assailants were also allowed to carry a gun?

In fact, an estimated 79,000 people are sexually assaulted every year (216 per day) at gunpoint.

The only thing the Second Amendment can do now is hurt us. The Second Amendment Sisters need to wake up and join the sisterhood that is trying to save lives instead of helping to destroy them.

Amanda Hopkins
Tacoma
 
:mad: :mad:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I am appalled at the thought that in the 21st century there are still women, much less mothers, who are less concerned with their children's safety than they are with their right to a long forgotten way of life.[/quote]

Well I am APPALLED at knowing that there are women, much less crack head moms that are NOT concerned for the safety of their families. Ya a long forgotten way of life, when crimes were rare.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Don't they know that every two hours another mother loses her child to gun violence? Maybe it takes being that mother to wise up.[/quote]

Ok now where did THIS stat come from? Sarah Bradys makeup remover bottle?? It does take a good Mother to wise up and fall back down to reality.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I wish the Second Amendment Sisters could tell the women on the other side what, if anything, they really think they will accomplish. Their claims are not correct.[/quote]

I will accomplish not being a freakin victim and protecting my child. HAHAHHAHAHAA now lets be real WHOSE claims aren't correct? Justice Dept stats or Sarah Bradys false stats that were PROVEN to be wrong???

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>They claim that if you do not ever want to feel powerless and if you want to protect your family, you should join them, but how powerful and protected will they feel if a loved one accidentally shoots someone?[/quote]

Yes join us, we are cult. :rolleyes: If a loved one shoots an intruder I will feel proud I taught her good.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>their assailants were also allowed to carry a gun?[/quote]

Oh gee Darwin at its best.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR> In fact, an estimated 79,000 people are sexually assaulted every year (216 per day) at gunpoint.[/quote]

And how many lives are saved and how many rapes are prevented BECAUSE of a gun???? Gee only 79,000 people are sexually assaulted? Boy I sure feel safe now :rolleyes:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>The only thing the Second Amendment can do now is hurt us. The Second Amendment Sisters need to wake up and join the sisterhood that is trying to save lives instead of helping to destroy them.[/quote]

Hurt you???????? How is protecting myself and my family going to hurt anyone? Sisterhood? More like Rosiehood to me. It seems Amanda would rather save the lives of criminals rather than good people.


I have been called a 'bad mother' before for the mere fact I am not for gun control. Now this lady is calling all pro-gun Moms bad Moms? So I guess she is a good Mom if she allows her child to be raped or teaches her child to play victim? :rolleyes:

This lady along with the other MMM's need to find theirselves a little island of paradise and live there.

:mad:






------------------
Sandys' Homepage
RKBA forums
We are as one as we all are the same fighting for one cause -Metallica

[This message has been edited by Miss Demeanors (edited June 16, 2000).]
 
Sticks and stone (would be met with force) but words we can let slide

:rolleyes", too.

Best way to fight this nonesense...teach another newbie to use gun.

[This message has been edited by Oleg Volk (edited June 16, 2000).]
 
Oatka:

My response to, and a "copy and paste" of the letter to the editor follow, should anyone be interested.


comment on a letter you published, Where Have I heard This Before?
Date:
Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:55:09 -0400
From:
alan schultz <mrmidnite@earthlink.net>
To:
editpage@seattle-pi.com


Editor:

The following is a cut and paste of a Letter To The Editor that appeared
on your paper. I came upon this letter whilst "surfing the net", and was
struck by the above mentioned. I refer to comment in the second
paragraph.

Letters to the Editor

Friday, June 16, 2000

Guns
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Second Amendment Sisters are living in the past
I am writing about the opposition march, held concurrently to the
Million Mom March by the Second Amendment Sisters.

I am appalled at the thought that in the 21st century there are still
women, much less mothers, who are less concerned with their children's
safety than they are with their right to a long forgotten way of life.
Don't they know that every two hours another mother loses her child to
gun violence? Maybe it takes being that mother to wise up. Is that the
only difference between the two groups, those who have lost and those
who might still lose?

I wish the Second Amendment Sisters could tell the women on the other
side what, if anything, they really think they will accomplish. Their
claims are not correct. They claim that if you do not ever want to feel
powerless and if you want to protect your family, you should join them,
but how powerful and protected will they feel if a loved one
accidentally shoots someone?

Watching the eruption of publicity following the Million Mom March, I
couldn't help but notice a sign from the opposition rally. It read, "I
wasn't raped because I was carrying a gun." Her point was obviously that
she wanted to protect the basic right that allowed her to carry a gun
and protect herself, but how many other women are raped because, under
the same "basic right," their assailants were also allowed to carry a
gun? In fact, an estimated 79,000 people are sexually assaulted every
year (216 per day) at gunpoint.

The only thing the Second Amendment can do now is hurt us. The Second
Amendment Sisters need to wake up and join the sisterhood that is trying
to save lives instead of helping to destroy them.

Amanda Hopkins
Tacoma


"Don't they know that every two hours another mother looses her child to
gun violence"?

Anyone, no matter how old they might be is still, "their mothers child",
and the total of those shot to death ranges, depending on who is
tossing numbers, from 11.5 to 13 per day, including "children" 18 and
older. The the characterization of such persons as "children" strikes
the writer as truly questionable.

Some of these "children" might be innocents, who just happened to be in
the wrong place, at the wrong time, just as could happen to anyone else.
It happens however, that a lot of these "children" turn out to be
criminals, shot during the commission of serious crimes, drug dealing,
"defending" their turf, the place where they sell drugs, and or in other
forms of altercations with "children".

These people are not innocents, who while minding their own business,
were blown away. They knowingly undertook to participate in illegal and
dangerous activities. There are risks involved in such activities.

So while they certainly are "some mothers children", let's not waste a
whole lot of tears on them or their passing. Let us also refrain from
chastising others, or from criticizing those who seek to defend what are
our most basic CIVIL RIGHTS. By the way, where does Amanda Hopkins get
her figures? Anyone thought to ask about that?

Alan Schultz
 
"but how many other women are raped because, under the same "basic right," their assailants were also allowed to carry a gun?"

Nobody has ever said there is a "basic right" to carry a gun for the purpose of committing a crime.
 
This is Mrs. Mickthenailer (I need to get my own handle!)
The one unfathomable issue is that these "good moms" really, really think that if total gun control comes to pass, that the intruders who invade their homes (and there will be many) will, of course, be unarmed because, naturally, guns will be against the law. Or, perhaps evildoers will suddenly stop committing crimes. Will their righteousness save them and their children?
Do they give ANY thought to this whatsoever? :confused:
 
Baaaaaaaaa. Baaaaaaaaaaaa. Baaaaaaa-Ba-Baaaaaaa-Baa-Ba-Baaaaaaaa.

She should go rollerblading in Central park on a hot Saturday afternoon.

Idiot.
M2
 
"Ms" Hopkins whole spiel can be paraphrased as follows:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"Baaaa. Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! Baaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!! bAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! bAaAaAaAaA!!! Ba-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a!!!! Baaaaaaaa!!!! Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!! Baaaaaaaaa!!!!!"[/quote]

[This message has been edited by Jedi Oomodo (edited June 16, 2000).]
 
Hey you guys, all this talk or BAAAAAAAA BA, makes me think of a character from an old (back when he was funny) Woodie Allen movie. Anybody remember "Daisy"? When I think of Amanda I think of Daisy!!!!!!! If you don't know the scene and the movie I'm talking about e-mail me for a good laugh. Sandy, you go girl!
 
Sandy,

AMEN sister! You said it better (well almost ;)) than I could have! As a very colorful friend of mine used to exclaim:"Two snaps in a figure eight!" :D

------------------
---------------------------
"Pray as if your life depends on God, Prepare as if it all depends on you..." -Texas Preacher
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>I am appalled at the thought that in the 21st century there are still women, much less mothers, who are less concerned with their children's safety than they are with their right to a long forgotten way of life. [/quote]

When will these people wake up to the fact that an unarmed populace is subject to being tyranized(sp?) What about their childerns safety then?
 
As you all may know, I live in Tacoma.

Let's take a quick look in the phone book...here we go.

Amanda Hopkins

(253) 752-9194

Make sure she's the Amanda Hopkins who wrote it before you engage in debate.
 
Amanda is an emotional basket case. Forget her. Keep up those cogent, concise, well-documented letters to the editor. Those make a difference, as do our conversations with friends, relatives and co-workers.

The 'Amandas' of the world will be taken care of by Darwin, Inc. ;)

But ... it is somewhat amusing to read their drivel, isn't it?

Regards from AZ
 
Yes, let's imagine a world where guns have been banned. That's pretty easy because guns were once banned throughout the world due to the fact that they were not invented yet. The era immediately before the invention was called the Middle Ages. Those of us who slept through history class all remember that time as the most peaceful one in human existance where everyone loved everyone else and planted flowers by the roadside. Armour was worn because it was fashionable since there was no need to defend oneself. The serfs were protected by their well-armed masters who lived in the castles that overlooked their shacks. The serfs didn't need swords and shields and claymores... just the lords and kings and barons.

Yes, let us all return to the Dark Ages...

YOU MORON!


Disclaimer: any similarities between you and an actual moron are purely coincidental.

[This message has been edited by Mikul (edited June 17, 2000).]
 
Mikul, you're right. Calling Amanda a moron is insulting to morons. :D

------------------
If you're not a little upset with the way the world is going, you're not paying attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top