Veteran Appeals to Authority to Relieve You of Your Rights, Fails

Veteran Appeals to Authority to Relieve You of Your Rights, Fails

Veteran Appeals to Authority to Relieve You of Your Rights, Fails

A couple of years ago there was this “violence planner” named Bob Bateman, whose hoplophobic keyboard emissions became infamous on the Internet as arrogant, disingenuous, and tyrannical, drawing the ire of such defenders of the Constitution as Tom Kratman, Michael Z. Williamson, and Jonn Lilyea. Bateman was a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel, who claimed the moral authority and expertise to relieve you of your rights, because he was a planner of violence. “I orchestrate violence,” he claimed, and then proceeded to cry about how gun rights advocates “threatened” him and made him cry. As you can imagine, the ridicule was epic.

More recently, another Army occifer dope named Dan Helmer, who is running for Congress in Virginia’s 10th District, tried to use a similar appeal to authority (and a whole lot of obfuscation and lies) to derp about “assault” weapons, of which he showed precious little knowledge.

And now there’s Becky. Becky, you see, is a veteran, which she repeatedly points out, whose “vast” knowledge of firearms includes hunting trips with Daddy when she was 12 and “honing” her skillz with an M-16 at West Point.

I remember learning that the 5.56 mm ammunition used in assault rifles is intentionally designed to slow down upon impact so that it can tumble through the victim’s organs and inflict maximum casualties.

Let’s put aside this claim, because I know others who claim to have been taught this in the military. Let’s focus on the fact that the rifles used in school shootings from Columbine to Santa Fe had nothing to do with rifles we used in the military. Semi-automatic rifles, handguns, improvised explosives, but no select-fire or automatic firearms. The fact that Becky tries to conflate military weapons with the firearms used in school shootings shows her to be either ignorant or disingenuous. Neither one is good.

Following graduation from West Point, I commanded two Special Operations companies – small forces structured to complete the most physically and politically challenging missions. Multiple times a year, year after year, we underwent recertification on the weapons that were most central to our mission. Going to the range was treated with the utmost of gravity and military discipline. There was no joking around on the range. Every single round of ammunition was accounted for every single time.

Note the following:

Becky tries to create the impression that she was some kind of kickass female who was in charge of commandos. She wasn’t.

Becky was in when women weren’t allowed in combat, and certainly not in Special Forces. From everything I’m reading, she may have been Civil Affairs. Nothing wrong with that, but the fact that she obfuscates her actual experience by claiming to have commanded SpecOps companies and doesn’t give details about her job, tells me she is intentionally masking her real background to bolster her “street cred” as a firearms expert, vice just another troop who qualified once per year like the rest of us.

I left the Army after completing nine years of service. Right around that time, the shooting at Columbine High School happened. I was heartbroken and horrified to hear how the weapons I had trained to use so carefully – including weapons that don’t belong in civilian hands – had been used in a school to end the lives of 13 innocent children and educators.

Someone please tell me what Army issues these.

  • Intratec TEC-DC9.
  • Hi-Point 995 Carbine.
  • Savage 67H pump-action shotgun.
  • Stevens 311D double barreled sawed-off shotgun.
  • 99 explosives.
  • 4 knives.

These were the weapons used in Columbine. I’d like to know what Army carefully trained Becky to use these weapons.

I never would have imagined that nearly two decades later, gun violence would still plague our communities. Gun violence still takes an average of 96 lives a day in our country. And, as the years have passed, we’ve mourned the lives taken at mass shooting after mass shooting – Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Orlando, Sutherland Springs. The list goes on and on.

Fact: in 2016, according to the CDC, there were 38,658 deaths by firearms, including homicides, suicides, legal interventions, and accidents.

Fact: 22,938 – or 59.3 percent – of those deaths were suicides.

Fact: A suicide is not gun violence. Suicide is feeling so much agony, that you feel only ending it permanently will stop the pain, and no amount of legal maneuvering, policy changes, or regulations will change that. As a matter of fact, Japan – where guns are effectively banned – has a much higher suicide rate than the US, where guns are aplenty.

Fact: 38,658 deaths per year is less than one percent of our population, and when you subtract suicides from this scenario, the 15,720 people who died from gun shot wounds in 2016, (which includes not only legal intervention, but accidents and other undetermined causes) is such a tiny percentage of the population, my calculator, can’t even fathom it.

Recently, we’ve added two devastating school shootings to the list – Parkland, Fla. and Santa Fe, Tex. As a mom to two young children, these shootings have forced me to reflect on who we are as a nation. I find myself wondering: Should we be homeschooling our children? I increasingly wonder if they are safe in their school. With school shootings occurring once a week on average, I would have to be a fool to think “it can’t happen here.”

Nice Everytown talking point here, Becks, but even Snopes is calling bullshit on that one, because it includes a BB gun shooting, a shooting at a school that had been closed for several months when the “shooting” occurred, an incident in which someone fired shots at students from a vehicle in the school parking lot, with no one injured by gunfire, and stray bullets hitting a school building.

Once again, I have to wonder if Becky is simply ignorant of the facts, too lazy to do her research, or is intentionally misleading. Given her obfuscation of her job in the military in order to create the illusion of firearm expertise, I’m thinking it’s the latter, because the information from unbiased sources is out there for anyone to find.

I don’t want homeschooling to be the solution. I want my kids – everybody’s kids – to go to school, play and learn with their friends, and be confident that they will come home to our family at the end of the day. I want our kids – everybody’s kids – to be safe. Evil flourishes when good people shutter their windows and hide. Evil flourishes when people with privilege – people like me – engage in conceptual debates about protecting ourselves from government tyranny (good luck against a drone strike) when every day we lose 96 of our brothers and sisters.

You know when evil flourishes? When clueless princess snowflakes like Becky engage in debates and reductio ad absurdum fallacies and use doctored statistics and outright lies, while appealing to their alleged “authority” and firearms “expertise” to push a bullshit political agenda.

I know that as a country, we can do better. If we work together, we can fix the gun violence problem that plagues our communities. We are the people who put a man on the moon. Surely, we can find a way to stop shooting our children. We must lean into our discomfort together across all sides of this issue and find common ground.

So while Becky takes a backhanded swipe at Americans who discuss legitimate concerns about citizen disarmament, the historical reasons for the inclusion of the Second Amendment in our Constitution that protects an existing right to stand up against a tyrannical government by snarking “good luck against a drone strike, proles,” and lies about… well… pretty much everything relating to guns, she claims wants us to work together. She reminds me of David Hogg, who has denigrated law-abiding gun owners murderers and terrorists, while calling for civil discourse on gun control.

Whatever, Becks.

Oh wait – we already have common ground. We need to stand firmly in that common ground and not allow the gun lobby to purchase our politicians who have done absolutely nothing to prevent these tragedies. And we need to not be duped by elites using wedge issues to divide us. We have so much more to gain by standing together across this issue and many others.

The common ground is that we all want kids to be safe. We differ in our solutions and approaches to this problem. Becky lies, obfuscates, and insults the American people, and the rest of us understand that banning guns, outlawing private sales of guns, and other gun control measures punishing those of us who did NOT commit crimes with our guns, will do nothing to solve the problem.

The reality is that we know a lot about how to prevent gun violence. For example, we know that in states that require a criminal background check on every gun sale, lives are saved. Many people who commit mass shootings have a history of red flags – and we know that disarming people who have demonstrated that they are a threat to themselves or others helps reduce firearm suicides. We know that every single civilized nation in the world does better on this issue than we do, so I recommend we also suspend our arrogance long enough to get curious about what they’re doing.

Lie: in states that require a criminal background check on every gun sale, lives are saved.

Fact: Only eight states, including DC, according to Factcheck. org, that have “universal background checks,” and despite what the statist prick Chris Murphy (D-umbass, CT) will tell you, there’s been no research showing a causal relationship between firearm mortality rates and universal background checks.

Much like Becky, Murphy has been doctoring his statistics.

In fact, Murphy is citing an average firearm mortality rate for states with universal background checks. But the states’ individual rates vary. Some of them have higher firearm mortality rates than states that don’t have universal background checks.

[…]

Colorado, the District of Columbia and Oregon had rates higher than the national average, which was 11.8 deaths per 100,000 in 2016, according to the CDC.

They also had higher rates than Maine (8.3 deaths per 100,000), New Hampshire (9.3), and Vermont (11.1) — three states that have no state laws on background checks and received an “F” grade for the strength of their overall gun laws from the Giffords Law Center.

When FactCheck.org shows you to be a disingenuous dildo, you might want to reconsider your life choices.

Lie: We know that every single civilized nation in the world does better on this issue than we do, so I recommend we also suspend our arrogance long enough to get curious about what they’re doing.

Fact: Becky might want to look in the mirror and suspend her arrogance long enough to do research that is not doctored by Everytown or gun grabber politicians.

The U.S. has a violent crime rate lower than 12 of 17 industrialized countries due in large part to the 2.5 million annual defense gun uses.

The top 100 countries for homicide do not include the U.S. The top ten countries all have near or total firearm bans.

Since gun banning has escalated in the UK, the rate of crime – especially violent crime – has risen.

Ironically, firearm use in crimes in the UK has doubled in the decade since handguns were banned.

Britain has the highest rate of violent crime in Europe, more so than the United States or even South Africa. They also have the second highest overall crime rate in the European Union. In 2008, Britain had a violent crime rate nearly five times higher than the United States (2034 vs. 446 per 100,000 population).

I could go on, but you get the message.

Becky makes deceptive claims quoted nearly verbatim from biased “sources,” if you can even call them that, which makes her either ignorant or a liar. (Although, in this case, I would probably embrace the healing power of “AND.”)

And speaking of deceitful claims…

She falls back on her appeal to “authority” again, so hard that the Fallacy Ref may have fainted from having to wave his arms so hard.

As a veteran, I’m intimately familiar with the destructive power of firearms. And, I know how important it is to make sure they don’t fall into the wrong hands. I also know that many Americans look for leadership from veterans on issues like gun violence prevention.

Yeah, Becks. I’m fairly sure that since you popped smoke before seeing any real action, and would have likely ridden that FOBbit desk had you stayed in, your “intimate” familiarity with firearms smacks of massive exaggeration, unless you’re referring to that pistol-shaped dildo your wife got you for some role playing action.

I’m also fairly sure many Americans look for leadership from veterans who aren’t bloviating liars and who aren’t trying to trample on their Constitutional rights, especially on matters that affect their ability not just to protect their loved ones and their property, but also stand as a last bulwark to tyranny.

So as a veteran, I humbly suggest to Becky that she needs to go back to what she knows. And that isn’t firearms or gun policy.

Written by

Marta Hernandez is an immigrant, writer, editor, science fiction fan (especially military sci-fi), and a lover of freedom, her children, her husband and her pets. She loves to shoot, and range time is sacred, as is her hiking obsession, especially if we’re talking the European Alps. She is an avid caffeine and TWD addict, and wants to own otters, sloths, wallabies, koalas, and wombats when she grows up.

35 Comments
  • Cameron says:

    “find common ground.”

    No. There is not common ground with people like her. I am not going to compromise or back down from these cretins. They have had their way for far too long and it’s time we start pushing back.

    • Marta Hernandez says:

      This.

    • Jack burton says:

      I am more than willing to compromise with people like Becky. she wants to see all ARs removed from civilian use and I would like to see another 20 million added to the civilian community over the next few years. I will happily compromise on only seeing 10 million added

  • SFC D says:

    Becky started as a Signal Officer in the 112th Signal Battalion. It DOES support special operations. It IS NOT special operations. Big difference. Yuge. Becky, you are a liar who is willfully ignorant of the truth regarding gun control. Your NCO’s failed you.

    • tokyov says:

      It’s also interesting to note that military training with firearms, except for certain elite units, tends to be extremely unrealistic and, as she described, more focused on “safety” than on “training”. After all, bureaucrats have careers that must be protected at all costs, even if this makes the trainees less safe when they leave these highly controlled range environments. Just look at that pathetic exhibition on CNN by retired LTG Mark “Shoots Like A 5 Year-old Girl” Hertling. Like Hertling, Becky was undoubtedly more familiar with the intricacies of the clearing barrel than the tactical use of her weapons. Her fundamental dishonesty is clear when you hear the obviously made-up story of her supposed reaction to Columbine.

    • Munge says:

      Her NCO’s didn’t fail her, she failed herself plain and simple. Even the best NCOs out there can’t fix stupid, it’s just not curable.

  • David says:

    That’s a man, baby.

  • Scott says:

    Thisainthell had a great thread about this skank.. she admits that she left the Army so she could “quit lying about , who she was”.. of course that means that given the time frame during which she was in the army, she fraudunlently enlisted (back then, they asked if you were gay, and it was a disqualifier), then continued to lie about it throughout her period of service.. so she’s a proven, self admitted liar… and one quick look at her social media presence shows that she’s nothing but an angry lesbian leftist, lying, or at least obfuscating about her military service, in an attempt to shit all over the oath she took to uphold the Constitution….I think that covers everything…

  • Orchestrator or organizer of violence my ass. As a lieutenant colonel, at the level headquarters he was at, Bateman made the coffee…or perhaps the tea. One doubts he did it well.

    • tokyov says:

      What offends me is that these careerist bureaucrats are stupid enough to think that their military training has anything to do with, or gives them any special expertise regarding, civilian ownership and use of firearms in the US. Not to mention that they seemed to be asleep when they took that oath to “…support and defend the Constitution…”.

    • Oldav8r says:

      Well, to be fair, if he made crappy coffee that have orchestrated plenty of violence in my office.

  • By the way, what really offended me about Bateman was that he was NOT a retired lieutenant colonel. He was active duty, seconded to a foreign headquarters, and had no business criticizing or critiquing the constitution in public. Son of a worthless bitch should have been court-martialed for it, too.

  • willis forster says:

    Her kids?? She looks like a lesbian, i doubt she has or will have any kids.

    • Miles says:

      There’s artificial insemination and – legally mandated – adoption.
      Don’t doubt the LB desire to reproduce, one way or the other

  • Fen says:

    The Army Colonel is a poser. “Marines don’t fire warning shots” is a good rule of thumb in these instanced, ie. someone who claims they “deal in violence” does not. The lethal ones don’t feel the need to boast about their lethality. For the same reason Chuck Liddell doesn’t need to talk talk talk about how he can knock you out. He doesn’t care about convincing you how dangerous he is.

    Becky is a Pogue. I’ve shot more rounds through my M16A2 over a weekend than she has her entire life. I’m an infantry Marine 0313. I qualed expert on the M16, expert on the 9mm, am proficient with the M249, the M240G, and my TO weapon the M242 25mm automatic chain cannon. Do you know how much I know about firearms? Not much. I’m not even a subject matter expert.

    Becky is also not too bright. The 2nd Amendment was designed to protect us from a tyrannical government, and tyrannical governments have military forces. So OF COURSE it was meant to allow us use of the same firearms that military would employ against us. Else why bother having the 2nd in the first place?

  • Fen says:

    “organizer of violence”

    Yah, you coallated and stapled Warning Orders and copied map overlays for TRAP missions. Now go get me a cup of coffee bitch.

    Violence Coordinator. Janitorial Engineer. LMAO. You’re out of paper clips.

  • Edward Lunny says:

    When your first and only solution is to punish and penalize those who did not commit the crime, did not participate in said crime in any fashion ; you’re doing it wrong.
    Gun control kills, every day.
    Gun control is tyranny, always.
    Gun control is abject cowardice, always. Gun control isn’t an answer, ever, criminal control is. These folks haven’t the courage or morals to confront the real problems, criminals and mental health issues. And, they never will because it doesn’t fit their meme, and ,it exposes the continuing failures of progressive policy.

    Bugger off you ignorant twit.

  • GWB says:

    Let’s put aside this claim
    Well, no, let’s NOT. Because it has nothing to do with the firearm being automatic or not.
    The claim of “extra wounding” is silly. An expanding round would do much more trauma. Which is why the Geneva Convention bans them (which is really a whole special level of international do-gooder progressive DERP).
    EVERY bullet tumbles when it enters flesh. It’s a matter of PHYSICS. (Unless it’s super high energy when it enters, and it doesn’t hit anything, and it’s not in the flesh too long. We call those bullets “lucky” for the recipient.)
    Oh, and you don’t *want* a bullet to not tumble, either – at least in a home or public defense situation. If it carries through, you might hit someone or something you don’t *want* to hit.

    Yes, I heard some variation of this dumb-assery in my Academy time, too. What the person passing it along did was conflate “not designing for those things – like hollow points – that are more likely to kill” with “maximum military effect is to have lots of enemy wounded, not just KIAs” and “the M-16 was designed for modern combat.”
    The 5.56 was chosen due to weight, recoil, and ballistics concerns, and the bullet is not designed in any way to be “extra wounding”. *EYEROLL*

    [I have a long day, and will be back to read the rest, Marta.]

  • I am a retired Army artillery officer. I ended my career serving in my alternate specialty as a principal staff officer of US Army Criminal Investigation Command, abbreviated CID. This quote particularly caught my eye:

    “… 5.56 mm ammunition used in assault rifles is intentionally designed to slow down upon impact so that it can tumble through the victim’s organs… .”

    ALL bullets slow down upon impact, duh. You cannot “intentionally” design a bullet to slow down. It’s like saying that you intentionally designed an object to fall to the floor when you let go of it.

    Even so, however inartfully she wrote, she does have a point. Last February, after Parkland, I wrote a technical explanation of the flight ballistics and wound ballistics of the 5.56 and .223 round used in civilian versions of the military rifle. I gained my expertise, such as it may be, from CID agents who are true experts in the field. I asked CID agents to review my final draft of the article and received very learned and concise additions and emendations, which I incorporated. One retired agent who reviewed it spent 40 years in forensic ballistics work, including wound ballistics. He had investigated a large number of cases involving military rifles.

    The fact is that because of its ballistics, the civilian AR-type rifle is especially deadly in school shootings – note that at Parkland, more victims died than survived. Anyway, the essay is here. And see this, too: “Mass shootings: “Hope is not a method and wishes are not plans.”

    • Scott says:

      It’s nice to see someone make a post that they at least try to back up with data, and in your article, I’d agree about not letting 18 yo’s vote.. but here’s the thing, if we can trust them in the military with weapons much bigger than an M-4, we should trust them with the same in civilian life.. as well as allowing them to drink alcohol… but those issues are tangential to your argument about the damage caused by the 5.56 round.
      first, all of the effects you ascribe to this round, as far as it’s velocity, and the fact that the nose of the bullet decelerates before the base, causing yaw is true about all supersonic rounds, and would actually be ore prominent in larger calibers, due to greater surface area.
      second, your description of the flight characteristics, ie: the yaw tendencies in the first part of flight, this is something I’ve never heard described by any ballistician before, and even if we assume that it is accurate, at least in some cases, this would be a function of the weight (and therefore length and sectional density of the given bullet), as well as the twist rate of the rifiling in the individual rifle. To make it simpler, different bullet weights require different rates of twist to stabilize properly, so to generalize as you did in your article leaves so many variables out of the equation as to make your conclusion irrelevant, and misleading.

    • DJ says:

      I notice you do not allow comments on the posts you linked, preventing people from pointing out erroneous viewpoints and assumptions in your essays.

      For instance, in the Hope/Wishes article, you automatically assume the attacker will be effective at hitting targets, while any defender will simply miss, even at close range. You assume defenders have never fired a weapon under stressful conditions, ignoring the many veterans, retired police and even competition shooters who carry daily. While I won’t equate competition or qualification stress with the life-threatening stress of being attacked, delivery of at least one effective shot to a single 8-yard target is certainly not as impossible as you make it seem, at least for most of the potential defenders I know.

      Even if the defender is totally ineffective at eliminating the threat, and (as you assume) does attract attention and eventually become a casualty themselves, during that short time-frame when the killer is interacting with the defender, the attacker is NOT KILLING UNARMED INNOCENTS. We know that any delay in killing unarmed people/kids is good (some will escape), and ANY circumstance that promotes that outcome, even briefly, should be embraced.

      And one thing we’ve learned about these attackers, it’s that as soon as they are confronted by an armed defender, the killing often stops RIGHT THEN. Whether that’s due to the attacker being hit by effective fire, surrendering, running away, or committing suicide, is really unimportant. In the vast majority of cases, the sooner the attacker is challenged with lethal force, the sooner the killing stops. Once all security preps have failed and the shooting has begun, THIS becomes the overriding need, and a single armed person already on-scene is far better than tactically-armed and well-trained cops who are minutes (or longer) away.

    • GWB says:

      the civilian AR-type rifle is especially deadly in school shootings
      This is just idiotic. The weapon is SUPPOSED TO BE DEADLY. It’s why you have a firearm in your inventory: because you need to visit violence on an animal or person. The civilian rifle is “especially deadly in school shootings” because it’s an EFFECTIVE FIREARM. You seriously contending we should make LESS EFFECTIVE firearms?
      *smdh*

  • […] Victory Girls Blog: Veteran Appeals to Authority to Relieve You of Your Rights, Fails. […]

  • DG Heck says:

    The above statement, “Fact: 38,658 deaths per year is less than one percent of our population…” is technically true….but it should be restated as being less than one percent of one percent.

  • Rivahmitch says:

    This septuagenarian ‘Nam Marine just says “MOLON LABE”. I’ll stand with Patrick Henry and Charleton Heston.

  • Chuck Cochran says:

    From a statistical viewpoint, you are in more danger from crossing a street and being struck by a car, than you are from a shooting occurring at a school. What the antigun folks want is total disarmament of all but the military and the police. This is communism/socialism/fascsism’s first goal. To disarm the population. Once the population is disarmed, the remova of other rights, including freedom of speech quickly follows. This happened in Russia, with the loss of 60+million lives. China killed 73+ million. North Korea 3+ million. Cambodia 2.6 million. Afghnistan 1.75 million. Vietnam 1.67 million and of course the Nazis wiped out upwards of 16 million including 8+ million Jews. What every one of these atrocities has in common is the disarmament of the population prior to the executions starting.
    Whether this “veteran” is conveniently ignoring history or whether she’s an idiot is a moot point in the face of these numbers and the annals of history. At this point, she’s an oath breaker. She swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign or domestic. This oath does not let you choose which parts you may agree or disagree with to defend, but the whole thing. Any Politician, Judge, Veteran, LEO and other Civil Service employee who has sworn this oath, and now chooses to try to remove, repeal or restrict any part of the Coonstitution is by definition, an enemy of the United States, and should be carged as such. Treason begins at home.

    • Chuck Cochran says:

      Please forgive my spelling lapses, my keyboard is giving me fits.

    • GWB says:

      Any Politician, Judge, Veteran, LEO and other Civil Service employee who has sworn this oath, and now chooses to try to remove, repeal or restrict any part of the Coonstitution is by definition, an enemy of the United States [emphasis added]
      Well, no. Repeal (specifically *amendment*) is a process provided for in the Constitution. Following that process is not treasonous, nor an enemy of the US.

  • Jim says:

    Sounds like she might have been in charge of some operators in SOCOM, but the kind that say:
    “Hello? Extension 253? One moment please”

  • GWB says:

    Every single round of ammunition was accounted for every single time.
    This is anal bean counting, and in-related to whether you handled firearms seriously or well.

    the lives taken at mass shooting after mass shooting – Sandy Hook, Aurora, Virginia Tech, Orlando, Sutherland Springs. The list goes on and on.
    Well, no, actually, the list does NOT go on and on. You’ve pretty much listed the recent ones. “On and on” is a way of saying “I really hope this makes you think this is a horrid epidemic but I’ve actually run out of data.”

    Should we be homeschooling our children?
    Why, YES! You really should be. Not just due to physical safety, but for intellectual safety. Because then, a lot fewer kids would be exposed to this hoplophobic baloney.

    I don’t want homeschooling to be the solution.
    Oh, well, of course not. Because then children might escape your propagandistic clutches.
    (Oh, and Becky – can I call you Becky? – homeschool children learn and play with their friends all the time. And they probably “come home safely” at a much higher rate.)

    I know that as a country, we can do better.
    Well, we certainly used to do a lot better. Back when we didn’t teach hedonism, post-modernism, and savior government. Back when guns were actually in schools, but hardly anyone was shooting them up.

    Oh wait – we already have common ground.
    We do?!? Be nice if you pointed out what it was, since I don’t see it here.

    The reality is that we know a lot about how to prevent gun violence.
    We sure do! Look here:
    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-06-07/how-reduce-your-risk-death-gun-violence

    For example, we know that in states that require a criminal background check on every gun sale, lives are saved.
    No, we most certainly do not know that. As a matter of fact, we see quite the opposite.

    We know that every single civilized nation in the world does better on this issue than we do, so I recommend we also suspend our arrogance long enough to get curious about what they’re doing.
    What are they doing? Giving up their freedom. Sorry, but I’m not giving up any of my “arrogance” about my freedom. (Plus all the stuff Marta wrote.)

    I’m also fairly sure many Americans look for leadership from veterans
    Probably way too many, given veterans like Becky. Too many people assume the good veterans (who have decent American principles, etc.) they have met are the totality of the veteran corps. Becky puts the lie to that.
    Do not look to ANYONE as your savior. Understand you will have to get your hands dirty if you want to live in freedom.

    Nice fisking, Marta.

  • Trotsky's Icepick says:

    Becky is not a badass, only Jennifer Garner is a badass. M-16? Isn’t that Vietnam era tech?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram