When I saw the news on Friday about actor James Handy being murdered, allegedly by his girlfriend's son, the name didn't register. Handy was one of those actors you recognized when he appeared, but whose name wasn't likely to make a lot of headlines because of his day-to-day life. He just wasn't that guy.
Honestly, it's probably kind of a sweet spot for an actor. You can still live a semi-normal life, but you're working doing something most people can only dream of doing for a living.
Still, not everything was puppies and roses.
James Handy, an actor known for various roles in films like "Jumanji" and "Top Gun: Maverick," was allegedly killed by his girlfriend's son this week, police said.
The Los Angeles Police Department said officers responded to a residence in the 19200 block of Erwin Street on Wednesday morning.
According to police, a 911 caller stated: "I am the son of man, I just killed the man of sin."
When officers arrived, they found Handy, 81, unconscious in the front yard suffering from a stab wound to the chest.
Now, that 911 call is kind of cryptic, and more than a little creepy. It suggests things weren't good, that maybe Handy was a terrible human being or something. I can't find any history of Handy having criminal issues, so it doesn't seem like it, though anything's possible. It's also possible that the accused killer is just bat-guano crazy.
However, something we need to consider here is gun control.
Why? After all, wasn't he stabbed to death?
Yeah, he was, and that's my point.
California's gun control laws are often premised as being essential to public safety, but guns are far from the only weapon that can be used to kill someone. As I've often said, you can trust a law-abiding citizen with a nuke and have nothing to fear, but a violent person will use a rock or their bare hands to hurt people, no matter what laws you put in place.
But how, exactly, is an 81-year-old man supposed to defend himself from someone half his age armed with a knife?
There's this whole culture of morons who think a gun is some kind of cope, but the truth is that when you're that old, you'd better grab any "cope" you can find if it means stopping someone from murdering you.
But California's gun control laws actively discourage that, all in the name of public safety, even as the violent among us simply hurt others in some other manner.
It's worth remembering that we have a non-gun homicide rate higher than most developed nations' total homicide rate, so even if every "gun murder" vanished tomorrow, there would still be enough homicides like Handy's to make us look like the most violent first-world nation on the planet.
I'm not saying that Handy would have had a gun if the laws had been different, mind you. I didn't know the man, so who knows how he felt about any of it. I'm saying, though, that the laws that are supposed to discourage gun ownership don't stop violent people from being violent. Even if the guns vanished tomorrow, they'd still be violent.
It just means 81-year-old men won't possibly have the means of protecting themselves.
Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member