Skip to content

Gayle Trotter is now officially the most insane gun advocate in America

January 30, 2013

You probably don’t know who Gayle Trotter is. I didn’t either until I saw some of her testimony before a Senate committee on gun violence. You can watch it here, and I beg you to do so.

The crux of her argument seems to be that assault weapons shouldn’t be banned because young women need them to be safe. However, while you know how I feel about assault weapons bans, quotes like these make me question the sanity of every person alive who isn’t me. This is the definition of “crazy talk.”

Young women are speaking out as to why AR-15 weapons are their weapon of choice. The guns are accurate. They have good handling. They’re light. They’re easy for women to hold.

And most importantly, their appearance. An assault weapon in the hands of a young woman defending her babies in her home becomes a defense weapon, and the peace of mind that a woman has as she’s facing three, four, five violent attackers, intruders in her home, with her children screaming in the background, the peace of mind that she has knowing that she has a scary-looking gun gives her more courage when she’s fighting hardened, violent criminals.

Three, four, or five violent attackers? When the fuck does this ever happen except in the fantasies of gun nuts? It’s as if she has never even heard of reality, and has chosen to live instead in a dream like state where the only inputs are poorly written Hollywood action movies. I’m stunned that she was even allowed to continue her testimony after this.

By the way, she also said that she speaks on behalf of “millions” of American women. Please, if you’re one of these women, let me know. Because I want to be sure we’re clear that I’m not a violent criminal myself and don’t want to be gunned down by you should I ever accidentally pull into the wrong driveway.

I have to get off of the internet now and go watch some more realistic television than what I just saw in that C-SPAN clip. When does The Walking Dead come back on again?

11 Comments leave one →
  1. January 30, 2013 3:36 pm

    She DOES NOT speak for me…wow what a nut!!


  2. January 30, 2013 3:53 pm

    I watched her testimony today Mike, and I completely agree. As a woman, I do not need, or want, a gun to feel safe. As I listened to her speak about how it is a necessity for ALL women, I thought of Mad Max scenes where vigilantes roamed a post-apocalyptic America scavenging for food. She DOES NOT speak for me either….so feel free to accidentally pull into my driveway anytime!


  3. rbtaustin permalink
    February 7, 2013 10:31 am

    Dear Author of this article and anyone who agrees with him. You are wrong. You are dangerously wrong, and sexist, and the women of America do not need your permission or comprehension in order to protect themselves from violent threats by any means available to them, and if you think so, YOU are more dangerous than all of them put together. Your failure to comprehend that our right to self-defense comes from GOD and not from columnists or politicians is worthy of ridicule and derision. Go ruin some other nation.


    • February 7, 2013 10:19 pm

      When did the author imply women needed his permission to own a gun? What I read seemed only to be pointing out the insanity of Ms. Trotter’s argument. I find your comment about where our rights come from, and the merit of who gives us hese rights to be the height of irony, good on ya.


    • February 8, 2013 1:35 pm

      Ok, so “the author” of this article happens to be me – Michael Kelly. My name is sort of all over this place, so I’m not sure how you missed it. With that out of the way, thanks for commenting. I always appreciate other points of view.

      You and I disagree, and that’s cool. At least, I think it’s cool. Your language suggests to me that you don’t think it’s cool that people disagree with your interpretation of reality. And I say interpretation because that’s would we all do every day of our lives – interpret the things we see and then make a judgement about them based on our interpretation. It’s how our brains are able to process so much data.

      I think your interpretation of the facts about the world we live in are misguided. So are Gayle Trotter’s. And had you bothered to click through to that link where I discussed Assault Weapons bans, you’d notice that Gayle and I (and I assume you) agree that they’re not particularly useful for preventing gun violence. My issue with her is that her interpretation of reality is severely flawed if she believes that women need AR-15s to defend themselves on a regular basis – which she appears to think.


  4. beancrisp permalink
    February 9, 2013 7:05 pm

    Michael Edward Kelly is an emotional thinker.
    Gayle Trotter is a logical thinker.


    • February 10, 2013 12:54 pm

      It seems we don’t agree upon the definition of “logical thinker” (or “emotional thinker” for that matter). Thanks for stopping by though.


Let me know what you think

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: