Former Congressman says Orlando attack wouldn’t happen in TEXAS because…

Ever since the news first broke of the Orlando terror attack, guns have become the favorite target for blame and scorn from liberals as they continue to demand more laws be passed to restrict the Second Amendment.

Leftists seem to be under the delusion that had stronger gun laws been enacted, the tragedy at the Pulse nightclub might have been avoided, a statement which defies logic since murder has been illegal for what seems like eons, yet that wasn’t enough to dissuade Omar Mateen from slaughtering 49 people.

A former congressman from Texas has a different theory as to what might have actually prevented this horrific tragedy.

Liberals will most definitely hate the answer.

TheBlaze is reporting, Former U.S. Rep. Steve Stockman suggested Thursday that the Orlando shooting wouldn’t have been as deadly in a Texas bar.

In a tweet from the Houston Republican’s Twitter account, Stockman said that Sunday’s massacre — which killed 49 and wounded dozens more — wouldn’t have claimed so many lives in his home state.

The reason? In Texas bars, “we shoot back.”

Though Texas’s gun laws are fairly lax and allow for open carry in many places, the exception to that rule is “any establishment with a Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission permit,” according to Austin’s KUT news.

And in “bars or a businesses that make 51 percent of their money from the sale of alcohol, all guns are banned – even if you have a concealed handgun license,” KUT reported.

It seems Stockman is no stranger to controversy as he has slammed Obama in the past for wanting to “make your neighborhood as safe as Chicago and as prosperous as Detroit.”

The one thing known for sure here is gun-free zones have failed countless times to provide people with safety from deranged radicals, creating more victims and easier targets.

Given the hilariously high failure rate of such measures, perhaps it’s time to go a little “old fashioned” and actually allow folks to exercise their Second Amendment right to carry a firearm to protect themselves and their families?

After all, the very purpose of putting the right to bear arms in the Constitution was to prevent the government from being able to disarm citizens and to guarantee we’d have the right to own tools for defense of life, liberty, and property.

Whether or not being armed would’ve stopped Omar Mateen is debatable, but there’s no doubt many of these awful incidents could be stopped by armed citizens or at the very least, knowing someone could have a weapon might discourage radicals and thugs from taking the chance to begin with.

[Note: This article was written by Michael Cantrell]


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here