The Curious Picture of an Apparent Unannounced Meeting John Kerry Had with a Controversial Turkish Dad

As Heard on Beck Radio: Wait Until You Read that Poem By One of Those Punished for Benghazi Lapses

Media

Why Aren’t Dems ‘Pro-Choice’ When It Comes to Guns and Women? O’Reilly Clashes With Guest Over That Question

Mar. 13, 2013 10:22am Billy Hallowell

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly, once again, clashed with Democratic commentator Kirsten Powers on Tuesday night, as the two debated gun control and the impact that bans on firearms have on women. The discussion initially surrounded the viral clip of “gun girl” Celia Bigelow questioning Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), but it expanded into a spirited back-and-forth on the issue of female endangerment.

As TheBlaze previously reported, Bigelow recently asked him, “Why aren’t you pro-choice when it comes to self-defense for women?,” at a townhall event. The congressman subsequently refused to answer the question. O’Reilly used this scenario to enter into a discussion with Powers about female gun rights.

“This is interesting, turning the pro-choice phrase around to promote gun protection for women,” O’Reilly said of Bigelow’s comments, asking the Democratic commentator for her thoughts on the matter.

Powers said that she didn’t really understand why “pro-choice” was being brought into the mix, noting that she believes the gun control debate is more rooted in figuring out which measures are best for society.

Bill OReilly and Kirsten Powers Clash Over Gun Laws and Their Impact on Women and Men

Photo Credit: Fox News

“We have to have some laws that restrict guns a little bit,” she said. “I don’t think it means we don’t want to protect women or have women protect themselves — I just don’t think you need an assault weapon to protect yourself.”

O’Reilly agreed with Powers on the pro-choice front, noting that “there’s no comparison toward choosing what to do in a pregnancy and choosing what to do in protecting yourself — that’s apples to oranges.”

But the two disagreed over whether restrictive gun laws place women at a disadvantage. While O’Reilly contended that women are in a more vulnerable spot in locations where handguns are banned due to issues pertaining to physicality and other related factors, Powers disagreed.

“I’m a woman and I don’t have a gun and I feel safe,” she responded.

From there, the situation turned somewhat more contentious, with the two going back and forth over whether women should have the choice to protect themselves with firearms.

“I think that you’re putting more women in more danger than men,” O’Reilly said of measures that don’t allow females to have guns, if they so choose.

“I reject this whole ‘choice’ thing. I reject it when used for abortion. It’s a silly argument,” Powers responded.

Watch the back-and-forth, below:

The two previously clashed last week over spending cuts.

(H/T: Mediaite)

–

Other Must-Read Stories:

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (86)

Sargeking
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:57pm
Kirsten also once dated Anthony Wiener. After he flapped his tool on the NET, she stood-up for him on FOX. Today, he’s over cooked eggs in that you can put a fork in his political ambitions. She is burned toast because her credibility is in the crumb tray. So much for their little breakfast nook!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ishka4me
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 1:09am
  watchingMika on msnbcgoafter the soda industry calling it poison. Samelasy that went off saying it is a womans body and she can do what she wants with it. Doesn’t matter the freedom confiscation law proposed by the communists, they always use the same defense; people are dying and more will die unless we take your freedoms. Doesn’t matter if it is guns, soda, carbon tax, it is always the same; we must take your freedoms to save one life.
  
  Report this comment
THX-1138
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:53pm
“I just don’t think you need an assault weapon to protect yourself.”

Well, I *might* not need one to ward off a rapist but I *will* need one to defend myself from Nazis like you. Clear enough? If not, I suggest you read the Constitution…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Fenrirsulfr
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 1:41pm
  Roger That!
  
  Report this comment
- jhrusky
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 4:03pm
  ““I’m a woman and I don’t have a gun and I feel safe,” she responded.”
  
  For Kirsten’s sake, I hope she never has to experience what might happen to cause her to change her mind.
  
  Report this comment
- DaddyJeb
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:43pm
  Kirsten is the typical facist & cannot see her own hypocrisy.
  Kirsten, you who thinks you are amongst the sharpest of crayons in your fascist box composed of 63 other fellow fascists.
  Riddle me this: You can choose liberty they way you interpret the 2nd Amendment, up this other woman cannot do the same? Why don’t you get the hell out of other peoples’ lives?
  
  Report this comment
Sargeking
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:32pm
I’m relieved that she doesn’t have a gun. Liberals aren’t smart enough to handle the responsibility of gun ownership and handling.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DoseofReality
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 1:56pm
  if you look at stats – liberals and democrats are much more intelligent, more educated, and higher IQs than republicans…..
  
  Compare New England to those great bastions of conservatives like Mississippi, West Virginia, Alabama, Oklahoma, etc….its masters degrees vs high school drop outs….no comparison. You just dfont have the capability to understand due to your lack of education
  
  Report this comment
- Evan B
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 3:35pm
  @DOSEOFREALITY – Then why are several of the top ran states predominantly Republican while most of the states in the worst economic status ran by Democrats? I know people who hold multiple degrees from great schools that do not have the sense to use an umbrella in the rain. I also know several people who only have a high school diploma that have an understanding of life and useful intelligence that surpasses most college professors. Your statement only shows the lack of intelligence of most liberals. Going to college and obtaining a degree does not make you smart, it merely teaches you the skills to learn. I am currently working on my 3rd degree, and most of what I know and use in life was not gained at school. The degrees are just something I can hang on a wall and to show my employer that I can learn new skills.
  
  Report this comment
- Hermit-The-Crab
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 4:34pm
  @ DoseofReality
  
  “liberals and democrats are much more intelligent”
  
  In the eyes of a liberal, you are just too dumb to make decisions for your own self. You are too uneducated to take care of your own needs. You don’t have a high enough IQ to be a free man.
  
  The true motivation of “liberals and democrats” is to control and subdue those they see as the dumb masses.
  
  All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. – Orwell
  
  Report this comment
toledofan
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:29pm
These people like Powers, Combs, Williams, get paid because of their left leaning views and honestly to stir up the pot. But at the end of the day, everyone is different and I suspect that there are more women who favor the use of a gun rather than not, especially depending on the neighborhood you live in or the environment. Its easy for anyone who lives in a safe, comfortable and non violent place and when people are isolated from danger they tend to think that’s like that all over.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- CaliforniaBlues
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 7:25pm
  All the higher intelligence, education, and higher IQs don’t means anything when you lack common sense! FYI, the most dangerous “Assault Weapon” I know of is a Democrat; they assault everything!
  
  Report this comment
rosegrower
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:22pm
“I’m a woman and I don’t have a gun and I feel safe,” she responded. – she just made herself a walking target, unless she forgot to add “But I have an armed bodyguard with me at all times.”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AZsparrow
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:21pm
Progressives always want to decide for you what you need, and mandate your behavior for your own good as they see it. They really aren’t liberals, they have killed that ideal, and adopted the ant farm mentality of the collective. Do a ‘scratch and sniff test’ on a progressive, and what you smell is a form of Fascism by another name.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- naughtycal
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:35pm
  If she feels that way then she shouldn’t arm herself. But because she feels that way does that give her the right to deny others their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS to defend themselves.
  I don’t like califlower so I don’t buy it.that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have the right to buy it.
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:36pm
  Progressive is another word for fascist
  
  Report this comment
- mikem1969
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:51pm
  They all would prefer for us to be defenseless victims dependent on the government for any and everything. That is pretty much what they have done with the moochers on the entitlement system
  
  Report this comment
justiceday
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:17pm
I find it funny that Democrats are ok with killing babies but don’t want women to protect themselves. The fact that rape and sexual assault in the military is so extensive, and has been for decades, and democrats haven’t done a thing, but we can’t have guns? Where is Obama over military rape and even the girl that was raped in Steubenville, OH. They claim republicans hate women but they seem to be the only ones worried about our safety!
http://www.theusmarinesrape.com/HideTheTruth.html

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Uechi
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:15pm
Kirsten is a ditz, hack lefty and Billy is anti 2nd amendment follower. He stated he agrees with an ” Assault Weapons Ban” and thinks Registration of firearms is just fine. Neither of these miserable excuses for the Media are qualified to make judgements on any political issue.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Verceofreason
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:20am
What moron comes up with these “comparisons”?
Oh, right.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IndyGuy
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:29am
  Kirsten Powers used to see the idiocy of the left’s arguments and say so…I’m sure that Obama had her spoken to and told to start defending the Administration’s agenda….In other words be a good little Brownshirt…
  
  Report this comment
Smokey_Bojangles
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:20am
O’Reilly is anti-second amendment and had to settled a sexual harassment lawsuit by his former producer.Maybe someone else should have asked the question.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
HelloWorld
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:15am
Kirsten Powers can not possibly be that ignorant and uneducated. So Powers lived in a high crime area where her father felt it was in her best interest to own a gun, and she thought a can of pepper spray would suffice. I wonder how many cans of pepper spray have stopped crack addicts in their tracks when they were robbing and raping. What a joke. If she only knew how idiotic she sounds then she would quit talking. I actually cringed when that comment was made. I am embarrassed for her. Obviously she does not have the good sense to be embarrassed by her own comments.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Locked
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:12am
If we’re opening up that can of worms, then the reverse would also be a valid analogy: how can you be pro-gun, but anti-abortion? Answer? Easily. O’Reilly himself said as much: “there’s no comparison toward choosing what to do in a pregnancy and choosing what to do in protecting yourself — that’s apples to oranges.” It’s was foolish of him to even bring up the analogy in the first place. Contrasting the two is foolish.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- rickg62
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:15pm
  I disagree. I can see where O’Reilly might be coming from. If you argue for pro-choice from the standpoint of defending the right to an abortion, then you are saying that by removing the choice of an abortion you are allowing yourself to be a “victim” of an unwanted pregnancy, possibly from rape. Without the possibility of an abortion the woman is now at the mercy of someone else’s control. If you remove the choice of whether you wish to protect yourself with a gun, be it handgun or AR-15, the woman is once again being put into the position of being the “victim” not only from the would-be rapist but from those forces in government which has taken away her choice of, or the ability to mount a defense against attack.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:30pm
  @Rick
  
  It’s a terribly flawed analogy though. First, you’re comparing a potential attack to a pregnancy. No one EVER wants to be attacked; pregnancy may be wanted. Second, while a gun may stop an attack, it is hardly the only option. There are many weapons that could prevent an attack, many non-lethal. Whereas with a pregnancy you can argue there are several types of abortions, but none that allow the fetus to be born. A pro-lifer would argue that all abortion is fatal; even when a gun is used to stop an attack, 95% of gun wounds are non-lethal. Third, very few gun-control proponents call for an outright ban on all guns; O’Reilly himself, for example, is fine with an “assault weapons” ban. But how many pro-life groups still call themselves “pro-life” and then say “Well, you know, the first two trimesters are fine. I’m only against the third trimester abortions”?
  
  As said, it’s a lousy analogy. But O’Reilly is famous for making or echoing flawed statements.
  
  Report this comment
- rickg62
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 1:09pm
  Locked…. Unfortunately, as soon as the word abortion is mentioned people’s thought process goes out the window. The analogy isn’t between an abortion and a rape. The analogy is between the ideology that says that a woman has sole control as to the decision of what to do if she becomes pregnant when it might not be planned or it was forced on her through rape or incest, (I was going to use the term wanted, but decided that brought emotion into the discussion.) and the ideology that says that she does not have sole control as to the decision of how to protect her body from assault. All the statistics that you can quote on the lethality of guns are irrelevant to the question of choice, as is listing alternative weapons. By telling a woman to use something besides a gun you are assuming control of her choice. Any other weapon that would choose requires the assailant to be in either close proximity or in physical contact which puts the woman at a disadvantage.
  Sexual predators and potential victims are on opposite sides of an invisible war. As in war,all conditions being equal, overpowering force usually predicts the winner. The defender in an attack must have the more effective weapons available to ward off an attack by a superior force. As in was hand to hand combat is the last resort in the imminent threat of being overrun as in the imminent success of a sexual assault.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 3:12pm
  @Rick
  
  “The analogy isn’t between an abortion and a rape.”
  
  Who made this analogy? As far as I know, not myself, nor the article. The analogy is between a woman’s right to choose an abortion, and the right to own a gun to fend off attacks (not one time did I mention rape; it’s ANY attack).
  
  I think you’re doing a fair point proving it’s a lousy analogy; and as said in the article, it’s comparing apples and oranges.
  
  Report this comment
- DMANFLA
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 7:52pm
  The point I see is, why can’t anyonemake their own “choices” for whatever they want? I may not agree with abortion as a form of birth control, but I would not deny it to someone wishing to have an elective procedure (a choice once again).
  Who is anyone to tell me what kind of weapon I “need” or “don’t need”. Where is freedom of choice anymore. You are getting lost in the comparison, which is a stupid way to debate 2 totally different ideas. I dont think anyone should eat ……, therefore no one can have it is idiotic. I do not need anyone to think for me. I am an adult and was raised to think for myself~!!
  Those that have abducated the raising of a child to an uncaring, unfeeling government deserve the results. Which we are seeing come about now from “The Great Society” programs.
  Why are there signs in Yellowstone Park asking us not to feed the bears because they will lose the need/ urge to hunt for themselves and become “dependant” upon those that started feeding them.
  Thats a great analogy!!!
  
  Report this comment
- rickg62
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 8:52pm
  Locked… How can comparing the right to make a choice in any such serious discussion be apples and oranges? When talking pro-choice the only thing being discussed is the right to have an abortion, not the choice between that and giving birth and keeping the baby or putting it up for adoption. In the case of choice of protection, the subject is protection from rape. Outside of domestic disputes, that’s the number one reason for a man assaulting a woman. The right of a choice is the right of a choice irregardless of the subject matter. In your other response you attempted to delegitimize the choice of a gun for protection by quoting irrelevant statistics. By the way you’re trying change the basic premise and confuse the issue, it appears that when discussing issues involving women and rights that connecting choice with anything outside of abortion is a no-no, because then it would no longer be the supreme statement of a woman’s right to the control of anything else with respect to her body.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 14, 2013 at 8:50am
  @Rick
  
  “How can comparing the right to make a choice in any such serious discussion be apples and oranges?”
  
  Because, while apples and oranges are both fruit, they’re distinctly different. You’re not comparing a Granny Smith to a Red Delicious; the two concepts are far enough apart to make a comparison worthless. So when you say “They’re both choices!”… yeah. That’s all that they have in common. Hence why it’s a lousy analogy. You could have used ANY choice.
  
  “In the case of choice of protection, the subject is protection from rape”
  
  YOU made that argument – the article did not, nor did I. Again, you’re proving what a lousy analogy is, because you’re moving the goalposts to make it a better comparison.
  
  @Dmanfla
  
  “The point I see is, why can’t anyonemake their own “choices” for whatever they want?”
  
  That’s exactly the point. ANY choice would suffice, but comparing gun rights and pro-choice/life is not a good analogy because the situations of being attacked and being pregnant are too different.
  
  Report this comment
AverageWhiteMale
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:07am
So why is it that DHS ordered the same rifles and call them Personal Defense Weapons?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
DesertRose1960
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:04am
Speaking as both a Democrat and a small woman, I don’t think a gun is necessary for my feeling safe and secure. Statistically speaking, most rapes are committed by a man known the woman, a friend, relative, or date. Most rapes occur in homes and alcohol is involved. Most rapes are committed against women under age 30. Rape has gone down by about 85% in the last few years; there seems to be a link with the rise of internet pornography. A woman is much safer if she doesn’t drink on a date or allow drinking on a date than if she carried a gun.

Yes, there are stranger rapes and rapes in public places. Lets’s give the favorite TV scenario, I’m shopping at the mall and I head to my car, somene reaches out and grabs me, I’m carrying my gun in my purse, so I unbuckle the lock or unzip the bad and then I have to feel around for the gun and then pull it out of the case it’s snapped into. In the meantime, I’ve been raped! Try this again, it’s a sketchy mall, so I walk around with my gun in my hand from the store to my car. In the meantime, someone reports me to security or the police. Third scenario, I put my keys in my hand in the store, I stick the longest key between my fingers and I head to my car. If I’m grabbed, I stab the guy. Fourth scenario, I do all of Scenario 3 but I have a small pepper spray on my ring; after I stab him, I spray him and run. (Legally obtained and licensed if necessary.) See, no guns required. Only about 10-15% of women own guns, b

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- HelloWorld
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:15am
  I agree, you shouldn’t own a gun.
  
  Report this comment
- maverickm808
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:17am
  stab him with your keys? really? thats just gonna piss him off….
  
  Report this comment
- garbagecanlogic
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:34am
  DESERTED: First of all, you failed to state where you reside at. Second, you sound like a person who has no idea of the skills needed to possess a gun – so in that case, you probably should not own one. Third, your depiction of events is poorly presented in that you make it sound like a situation most dummycrats want us to live in, namely with our guns “properly” secured so that it would take us a half hour to find and unlock them. Again, with your attitude and knowledge of the situation, I would be against your owning a gun. Stick with the keys and then complain later. Note: You might be more realistic speaking with women who have suffered through rape. I am a man and would hate to have some man molest me. Course I would shoot him first and therefore eliminate anyone else from going through the ordeal.
  
  Praise Be To Obama. Psalm 109:8
  
  The U.N. Out Of The U.S.
  The U.S. Out Of The U.N.
  
  Report this comment
- Female
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:35am
  At what 52 going on 53, you don’t fit the likely demographic for potential rape to old to be a young girl and not old enough for the grandma rapers. That said, One of the things rs look for is a woman, who is distracted, lacking confidence, or just nice (likely to comply). A woman with a concealed weapon and additional defense training will carry herself differently then one who doesn’t. A woman with a gun in her purse is not inclined to leave it lose at the bottom but purchased a holster type purse. A woman is not likely to walk to her car openly carrying it like “Charlie’s angels” lookingpointing. at everybody as a suspect. Again, she would have it in a holster and practiced how to stomp a perk, turn around and quickly retrive and point, if not shoot. You words are ridiculous.
  
  Secondly, the primary purpose of gun ownship afforded by the 2nd Amendment is not for personal defense against violent criminals but to protect citizens from a “Tyranical” government. The reason why it should not be infringed upon is so the citizens would be able to have the same weapons as the government.
  
  So, when they come knocking to take away your property you can defend it.
  So, when they come knocking to take away your children to re-educate them, you can defend them.
  So, when they come knocking to take away your guns to disarm you, you can use them.
  So, when they come knocking to take you away all swat like, you can fight.
  
  Report this comment
- Hockeytown
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:35am
  What the heck are your keys going to do? Not much! Just because you don’t want to own a gun doens’t give you the right to tell me I can’t. I live just outside of Detroit and would much rather have a gun to protect myself than a can of mace or a long key that will probably just piss off the attacker.
  
  Report this comment
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:37am
  @Helloworld, I suppose you meant that to be cutting and clever. I’ve never owned a gun in my life, never even held one. I’ve traveled half way around the world alone and never needed one. Never been raped, either. I agree with LBJ, guns should be licensed and registered. If you can pass the security check and the safety courses, go ahead, get a gun.
  
  @Maverick, Go ahead and laugh, but if you take a self-defense class, that is the first thing they teach women. Even yelling and resisting is often enough to scare them away. But paying attention to your surroundings and being alert is the best defense. Acquaintance rape is much more common; should I carry a gun all the time and shoot my date because he was drunk and thought it was funny to play rough?
  
  Report this comment
- MarvinMr
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:44am
  If someone were to try and purported a rape on you, statistically speaking you are what we would call a “victim.” My daughter would be a “survivor.” Please rethink your views and don’t be a victim. I wish you well. Statistically speaking, that is.
  
  Report this comment
- addie
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:44am
  Fool! First off, if you are a liberal woman, you have no fear of getting raped because liberal woman are butt ugly, even a bag over your head doesnt help.
  
  Secondly, unless you have ever been in that situation, keep your stupid comments to yourself! Even when someone you know is raping you, you still should have the right to protect yourself! Are you saying because you drank or you knowingly went on a date with someone you should not have the right to protect yourself against a rapist? You are a fool! Again, the only reason You say what you did is because no one would ever think of raping you, not even getting paid to.
  
  Thirdly, you cant not stab someone with a key, they are too blunt! Go ahead and try it, it wont happen.
  
  Forthly, you dont carry a gun in your pocketbook! I carry mine on my person! In your little situation,i drop everything in my hands and reach in my belt strap and pull my gun. It takes less than 3 seconds!
  
  You liberal love when women get raped! You love nothing more than a victim! You are a sick MF to want to take a womens CHOICE and RIGHT to protect herself!
  
  Report this comment
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:58am
  @Female, Yes, I am past the demographic where I am likely to be raped. But it also means I survived going to college and living on my own without getting raped. Yes, a woman who seems distracted is more likely to be a target, that is why I’m always aware of my surroundings when I am out in public. But, again, 66% of rapes occur in homes and with someone known to the victim. And alcohol is often involved. Holster purses? Okay, yes, that might be useful if I were in law enforcement, but I still don’t want to go around with a gun.
  
  Your premise about the Government that they’re going to come knocking and you need to be prepared to meet them with the same weaponry is ridiculous. Really, you want Level IV body plate body armour and fully automatic weapons? Oh, maybe you need grenade launchers and tanks, too? That’s tin foil hat talk.
  
  @Garbagelogic, I’m a woman, I have gone shopping at night all alone, I used to wait for the bus at 9:30 at night as a pretty little co-ed. I’ve been friends and relatives of women who have been assaulted. I know what they’ve gone through. When was the last time you talked to a woman about sexual assault? When was the last time you spoke to a woman who wasn’t your wife or your mother? Oh, and the police think that having loaded guns in unsecured places is a scenario that gets people killed by accident, just saying.
  
  Report this comment
- DTfinancial
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:58am
  I like the use of pro-choice in this regard. You choose to use your keys to stop a rapist yet you wont let other women choose to use a gun? There are situations where your key might work but there are others where it won’t and a gun would. Why do you think it is right to take that choice away from others?
  
  Report this comment
- deskjockey
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:09pm
  You could have just stopped after the first sentence. Speaking as an American Citizen (and a small woman) I have the right to bear arms and you don’t have the right to take them. If you don’t want to carry a gun, great. You sound too stupid to carry one anyway. I don’t care if I am being raped by a man I know or a stranger if he is about to rape me and I have a gun-he’s gone. But the real issue (again, how you dems can still be missing this is beyond me) is that violent crime goes UP not DOWN when you take guns away from citizens. Criminals don’t follow gun laws and governments do not fear citizens who can’t protect themselves. Try repeating those sentences over and over until you get it. Despite your attempt to quote “facts” and appear pragmatic, you are dogmatically refusing to acknowledge any real statistical evidence.
  
  Report this comment
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:10pm
  @Addie, Wow! What a kind and Christian person you are. All Liberals are ugly? Well, I’ll be sure to tell that to the next person who compliments me for my flawless complexion and waist length blonde hair. You carry your gun on your person. I’m supposed to go around with a gun belt at my waist? I’m 5ft tall, I wear a size 6 shoe. Do you know how heavy and awkward that would be? And how exactly does that work with a dress or a silk blouse? An ankle strap with heels? Really, you think I’m the one presenting an unrealistic scenario? I have a better idea, maybe we should teach men not to rape.
  
  Report this comment
- country_hick
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:30pm
  Desertrose1960; You state, “You carry your gun on your person. I’m supposed to go around with a gun belt at my waist? I’m 5ft tall, I wear a size 6 shoe. Do you know how heavy and awkward that would be?”
  
  Yes, I do…19.4 oz fully loaded. How heavy is your purse?
  
  Report this comment
- jujubeebee
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:48pm
  And your point is what? That you don’t want a gun or that you think you should tell everyone that they should not have a gun either. The discussion was about freedom and not about the necessity of having a gun.
  
  Report this comment
- DesertRose1960
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:49pm
  @Country_hick, As far as purses go, mine is lighweight, I don’t carry a lot of extra stuff. Adding a 20 oz gun to my purse would probably double the weight I’m carrying. Body holsters wouldn’t fit me very well and would not be concealed by my clothing.
  
  Report this comment
- Female
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:56pm
  I also, had long flowing blond hair, tan, 5’6″ 118 lbs considered by others as beautiful and was raped at 23, at 2 am. in the middle of the night, in my home. Cops first question: Had I been drinking.
  
  NO.
  
  Would a gun have helped me?
  
  No, because the bat under my bed didn’t. It was inassessable when awoken with a knife to my throat, pillowcase over my head, tied hands behing my back before I even realized it was happening. or just Maybe, given confidence in public?
  
  No, it wasn’t anybody I could recognize their voice as being. But I did listen for the voice and accent in everybody I knew, afterward.
  
  Do I have a gun now?
  
  No, personally I don’t like them very much and really wouldn’t want to be shot by the government, either.
  
  However, I stand by the 2nd amendment and understand/support its purpose.
  
  “Tinhat” well, history demonstrates tyrants take away guns to control citizens …nazis. If somebody wants to have those weapons and go down that way: they have the Right to fight! Also, in time of natural or military assault from other govts. being prepared to protect self and others……could prove prudent.
  
  Congrats, on living such a priviledged and well protected life above the fringe.
  
  BTW: Just because I don’t assert a right; doesn’t mean I want it taken away from myself or others who do assert it…
  
  Also, BEING RAPED is quite different then condecendingly knowing a survivor.
  
  Report this comment
- THX-1138
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 12:59pm
  ‘Rape has gone down by about 85% in the last few years”
  
  Absolute and total Bull****.
  
  USA – 2003 32.2 / 100,000 -> 2010 27.3/100,000
  
  A drop of 15%. You either failed basic Math or you’re a horrible liar.
  
  Report this comment
- THX-1138
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 1:08pm
  @DesertRose1960
  
  So, you’re plan to avoid rape is to be careful and Lucky? I imagine that’s why you bought Hope and Change as a brilliant political plan. I won’t get into my personal life but people close to me were not as lucky as you. You would strip these people of their only real defense. You are a Useful Idiot. You encourage Rape by your desire to disarm your fellow citizens. You should be ashamed but you aren’t smart enough to figure that out by yourself.
  
  You’re welcome. Now STFU and go away.
  
  Report this comment
- pat84
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 1:19pm
  dont own a gun. dont expect anyone with one to come to your aid. live with your choices. ill make my own
  
  Report this comment
- codygreenhalgh
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 2:55pm
  @DESERTROSE1960
  
  If your date is trying to rape you then sure, shoot them dead, they don’t get a pass just because they were drinking.
  
  Report this comment
- OIF3survivor
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 6:29pm
  Desert:
  “Oh, and the police think that having loaded guns in unsecured places is a scenario that gets people killed by accident, just saying.”
  
  No…just misleading because that is absolutely false. Although, the very political chief’s of police organizations, and FOP will certainly lobby for safe storage laws and such nonsense, the rank and file are demonstrably and consistently against the same. This is because they understand these as part of a make-believe world where one hopes an assailant will kindly wait long enough for their intended victim to go ahead and remove said weapon from a ‘safe’ storage method.
  But don’t take my word for it. Mafia strongman Sammy ‘the Bull’ Gravano said it best as a convicted fellon:
  “Gun Control? It’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I’m a bad guy, I’m always gonna have a gun. Safety Locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I’ll pull the trigger. We’ll see who wins.”
  
  Report this comment
SaturdaysWarrior76
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:00am
Ohhhh the hypocrisy of the left! It’s about having a choice stupid! I can’t wait for the trolls to come out on this one…. sigh…

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
nattybrooks
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:49am
how can anyone be pro-choice, and use the argument ” if it saves just one life”.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Ben__Franklin
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:49am
Why is it when ever I hear a Liberal debate gun control that they always use the terms “I don’t think….” or “I feel…..”?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Cavallo
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:06am
  Because the facts are not on their side. Their entire motivation is a hoplophobic dysfunctional philosophy based solely on feelings and a hatred of the concept of self reliance and a love of the fascist State authority.
  
  Report this comment
- joeslick
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:07am
  Because they don’t think…they react out of feelings alone. It’s easier.
  
  Report this comment
perry1980
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:44am
Kirsten is just another brainwashed liberal progressive with Talking Points. No common sense

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Berbel73
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:37am
“We have to have some laws that restrict guns a little bit,” she said. “I don’t think it means we don’t want to protect women or have women protect themselves — I just don’t think you need an assault weapon to protect yourself.” Typical liberal, I don’t think… I just don’t think… Pretty much says it all!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
DougHuffman
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:36am
Kirsten Powers, “she believes the gun control debate is more rooted in figuring out which measures are best for society.” Is that the standard from which pro-feticide choice is made, or from personal privilege damning society and the future? MOLON LABE Lord of Flie’s mother.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
00100111
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:35am
Of course she rejects it. The questions point out that her side is nothing but hypocrites and thieves. Despicable creatures, all of them. Democrats are the filthiest creatures I’ve ever met. They should be put down with extreme prejudice.
Log in to Reply Reply
shammo
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:33am
Powers is a hack for the democrats not a journalist. She has never had an original idea. A poster child for what is wrong with the press.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:32am
The hypocrisy of the left is absolute, they demand complete compliance with their radical ways and will not allow anyone any room for dissent or disagreement: nanny-state to the extreme.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- gyro
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:03am
  The lady carrys a pen ?
  Remember the *The Pen is Mightier than the Sword*
  Exept when your being attacked or robed or worse
  
  Report this comment
ozchambers
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:31am
Us guys wanna be able to defend ourselves with rifles too!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Fubared
Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:28am
Her whole argument is suspect as she has no idea what an assault weapon is. Could be a 32 oz soda.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ozchambers
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:39am
  The politicians certainly don’t know what an assault weapon is either. An assault weapon is any weapon, tool or device that is employed to physically assault another person or persons.
  
  Report this comment
- DougHuffman
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 10:49am
  Weapon is not essential to the legal definition of assault, it may be essential to the definition of battery. In some jurisdictions harsh speech is legally assault. Some years ago, in Wisconsin, a bill was presented that would make a cops use of deadly force defending himself from The Finger legal.
  
  Report this comment
- hi
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:27am
  Haha! So funny!
  
  Report this comment
- addie
  Posted on March 13, 2013 at 11:52am
  You are abosultely right! Cars are assault weapons too.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.