You mean like, go to church instead of a bar, or maybe stay home instead of going to a demonstration of loonies? I’m likely to recommend that too, but if recent headlines are correct, then even those places aren’t necessarily safe any more. If taking a knife to a potential gun fight is folly, then how much more so a rubber band shooter, or a can of burglar spray?

http://www.creekbank.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Far-Side-ON-off.jpg

Then there is this – the determined armed attacker, most likely Bryna will be useless to prevent harm to the victim.

TESTED: Byrna Kinetic & Max Rounds in Tactical Live Fire Defense Drills Against Armed Threat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl7DXd4SBKw

Byrna and Byrna users like to think that Byrna is a solution for every situation of attack – its not. For example, Byrna has a video they showcased they called ‘If they only had a Byrna: Store Owner Attacked by Crazed Individual’…but when you look at the video and the mode of attack and think about it, a Byrna would have been useless because the attacker already had their hands on the victim from behind and had complete physical control of the person already. And maybe a firearm use here too would not have worked, but the attacker knocked the person to the ground too thus more chance to deploy a firearm to stop because using a Bryna at that close range would not have rendered the deterrence needed quickly enough even with kenetic rounds because they do not cause damage enough to keep body parts from functioning so and would have been useless in that attack.

this is the video > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL-pMx7eec0

here’s the thing about Byrna – it doesn’t actually cause a ‘more assured stop’ of the attacker. Its more of a slow and hinder deter thing, and the effects of that can vary as some can push through getting hit with “Solid shot and tear-gass/ pepper spray pellets” and still press the attack long enough to do harm or inflict serious injury. It’s designed to deter, not neutralize or stop an armed attacker – deterrence depends on the willingness of the attacker to not continue, if the deterrence factor is a firearm that’s different from a Byrna as an attacker most likely knows they can die with the firearms use where as with Byrna its less likely they will die and they may be more willing to push though with the Byrna and press the attack. There have been many cases of taser and pepper spray use where the attacker still pushed though to inflict serious injury and even death upon the victims, and although there have been cases where firearms wounded the attacker and the attacker still pushed though to press the attack its different because each round has the capability to ‘stop’ rather than just deter and Bryna just doesn’t have that.

And the thing about ‘Less Legal Risk’ if you use a Byrna – not really less, just different. Because it does fire a ‘projectile’ it can still be treated as though a ‘firearm weapon use’ in law in many states depending on the circumstances if there is some type of harm caused that exceeds or is outside or happens as a result of that needed to deter an attacker. For example, if you use it and others are nearby and one of those bystanders has a serious allergic reaction to the pepper spray in the air its possible you could still be held criminally or civilly liable for that ‘injury’ the same as you would have been if a bullet you fired struck an innocent bystander. Then having to use it indoors around very small children or infants, the chemical residue in the air from pepper spray can detrimentally affect them.

https://byrna.com/?pb=0

And generally a “back the Blue” guy, but give the cops “phasers on stun” mode and anyone that looked “nervous” would be waking up in a cell with their rights being read to them. We’d need a million more jail cells and a million more courts.

Margaret Sanger’s extreme brand of eugenics…. had been defended aggressively by the left wingers up until about 2020 when such defense began to to be dissected time and time again and debunked to show that Margaret Sanger was indeed a racist and supporter and practitioner of eugenics. She just disguised it as ‘birth control’. One of Sanger’s most cherished initiatives was the ‘Negro Project’, which targeted predominantly black neighborhoods for birth control programs, not the kind we have today with pills and the sort as the goal but rather sterilization was the goal behind the program and thousands were sterilized. It was specifically targeting the black community for extermination.

Sangers “My Way to Peace” (1932) presents Sanger’s eugenics platform. It argues that to preserve racial hygiene, the government should enact three coercive measures. First, it should sterilize those with mental and physical disabilities, including ‘morons, mental defectives, epileptics.’ Second, it should segregate on state-run concentration farms a much broader public of impoverished and criminal citizens, including paupers, prostitutes, drug addicts, illiterates and the unemployed. If the second group reformed its behavior and accepted sterilization, it could return to mainstream society. By Sanger’s own estimate, 15 million to 20 million citizens would live under this regime of segregation and sterilization. The third initiative would be obligatory birth-control training for mothers with serious diseases, such as heart disease, in an effort to persuade them to renounce any future childbearing. This program was not about the “choice” that Planned Parenthood and the liberals and the pro-abortion-my-body-my-choice screamers worshiped Sanger as a hero for – it was far from ‘choice’ and one only need to look at the eugenics platform of Nazi Germany where it was put in wide spread use and expended to include even more to “preserve racial hygiene’ of the aryan race and was part of the drive behind enacting the holocaust to murder millions.

Based upon Sangers efforts, 30 states enacted laws aligned with Sangers racism and eugenics concepts and at least 70,000 people in the United States were forcibly sterilized under the laws promoted by Sanger and her associates, and far more especially women on welfare and in prisons were surreptitiously forcibly sterilized.

But in 2020, the Planned Parenthood apologists, who insisted that the charges of eugenicism and racism were false, were finally over whelmed when the black community its self started debunking and writings by Sanger were exposed after being hidden so many years by Planned Parenthood…when Planned Parenthood of Manhattan decided to remove the name Margaret Sanger from its headquarters and had encouraged other Planned Parenthood affiliates to do the same. They cited Sanger’s eugenicism and racism as the motives for this dethronement of the founder of the Birth Control League and its successor, Planned Parenthood.

Margaret Sanger was indeed a racist and supporter and practitioner of eugenics.