(NaturalNews) It's one thing for Americans who don't believe in the Second Amendment to refrain from carrying or owning a firearm for self-defense if they choose to do so, but it's a completely different thing for an anti-gun politician to push for laws that disarm Americans and put them at risk of harm from criminals.
That is especially true for women, who are often victimized by much stronger, much larger men.
But that doesn't matter to Colorado state Rep. Joe Salazar. As far as he's concerned, even women at risk of being raped should not be allowed to carry a gun.
Get a whistle, not a gun
While arguing for the disarmament of college students recently on the floor of the state Legislature, Salazar said guns weren't the answer for women at risk - "call boxes" and "whistles" were better protective choices.
"It's why we have call boxes, it's why we have safe zones, it's why we have the whistles. Because you just don't know who you're gonna be shooting at. And you don't know if you feel like you're gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone's been following you around or if you feel like you're in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop ... pop around at somebody."
In Salazar's world, absurdity obviously knows no bounds.
To his way of thinking, potential rapists would back off if they encountered a woman in a "safe zone." If she were near a "call box" or had a "whistle," her protection would be exponentially stronger because, you know, rapists pay attention to such things when planning their criminal acts.
Well, I can't rape her. She's got a whistle. She's in a 'safe zone.' And look - she's carrying a whistle.
"Representative Joe Salazar (D-Colo.) isn't a 'boorish, macho Latino' as some have stated. In his zeal to ban guns, he's shown himself to be a Todd Akin-level fool," writes Amy Sterling Casil at PolicyMic.com. "Akin's 2012 comments to the effect that women could 'prevent pregnancy' in the case of 'legitimate rape' arose from his desire to ban abortion, no matter what the circumstance of pregnancy. The statements of both men arose from political zeal which led them to voice opinions at odds with common sense and human decency."
Adds St. Louis-area talk radio host Dana Loesch, "This is the real 'war on women' I've talked about: the progressive insistence that women disarm. Women, according to Rep. Salazar, are hysterical things which shoot indiscriminately at any and everything."
Loesch goes onto back up her assertions with hard stats:
-- In the vast majority of self-defense cases involving a firearm, the potential victim will only brandish a weapon or fire a shot in warning;
-- In less than 8 percent of such incidents, the person bearing the firearm will even wound the attacker;
-- Over 1.9 million self-defense instances annually involve defending oneself with a gun;
-- Nearly a half-million self-defense incidents take place away from the home;
-- And the one statistic that is most pertinent to the issue of self-defense involving women, almost 10 percent of self-defense instances are women defending themselves against sexual assault or abuse.
For real and future female victims of sexual assault, apology should not be accepted
So, not only do one in 10 cases of self-defense each year involve women defending themselves against sexual predators, these women do so a) without wounding or maiming innocent people; and b) without using a "call box" and "whistle."
Salazar has since apologized - sort of - for his idiocy.
"I'm sorry if I offended anyone," he said in a statement. "That was absolutely not my intention. We were having a public policy debate on whether or not guns makes people safer on campus. I don't believe they do. That was the point I was trying to make."
He's wrong, of course, but when you're an anti-gun hack apparently any form of logic is applicable.