(Although I am a Life Member of the NRA, the following are MY personal views only, and not those of any organization, association, or any other entity.)
I believe the fear of guns, is UN-healthy, and even causes our children to be in MORE danger. Fear of anything, may cause a reaction that could be a more dangerous response than the stimulus itself. Having "respect" for a firearm, is much safer than a "fear" of firearms, and can save lives.
Our current rhetoric from political and anti-gun activists, are instilling unnecessary fear, by targeting "guns", and even "gun owners", as evil. Instead of a focus on "evil" people, we are being diverted away from them, to the "gun". Guns are but one of the tools of an evil person may use. (Remember, Tim McVeigh used "fertilizer" bomb to kill 168 people!)
Many people simply get nervous, even fearful, at the mere sight of a gun, on a police officer's belt or otherwise. This is an unreasonable fear, that has been taught and reinforced by anti-gun political forces. I know that from my time as a Police Officer, I would encounter some everyday people who would look at my sidearm, and I could see a slight facial recoil from that sight. I still think that is a silly notion. MY firearm was of NO threat to them. Yet they displayed fear of my police sidearm.
In today's classrooms around the country, we are instilling such a fear, and school children are even being suspended for the simple use of a "finger" held like a pointed "gun", or a pencil drawing of a "gun", and to even include the drawing of a soldier with a "rifle"! How absurd. And I suggest, even dangerous. (You might also read my post, http://american1st.blogspot.com/2012/12/portrait-of-gun-nut.html )
We should be teaching ALL children, a healthy "respect for" and the "safety around", firearms. A healthy respect of what they are, what can be dangerous about them, and most importantly for our children, what to do if they encounter a "gun". NRA's "Eddie Eagle" program school children, is an exceptional one. The taught motto, "STOP! Don't Touch. Leave the Area. Tell an Adult".
But sadly, because it's provided by the NRA, that program is often shunned!
See: http://www.aaof.com/ed1.htm
But we, our country in general, are doing the opposite. We are teaching "fear" to our children. And that "fear" is UN-healthy. By making fearful children, we make fearful adults. Fear is a natural response to danger. But instilling fear of "things" not presenting an immediate danger, is not productive.
In the real world, there is much to fear. School shootings for one. Tragic shootings, by purely evil people, is a problem that causes all parents to fear for their children. That fear, in MY view, is causing people to react by focusing on the wrong things. Focusing on some of the tools of the evil, is not focusing on the evil. Being fearful of any true danger of any one "thing" is one thing. But better placed fear is of an evil person, and what ever method they may use.
In a split second, someone can be so afraid that they may react as if their life were in danger, even if it actually isn't a deadly threat, and their body would initiate the fight-or-flight response that is critical to any animal's survival. Even when there is no danger at all, but the belief that danger is present, caused by a stimulus such as a spider, a sudden sound in the dead of night, or the sight of a gun, can also cause some people to react wrongly, and increase their own danger.
Reactions to fear can be different for different people. I KNOW from personal experience, that fear can cause one to be frozen in place, or if armed (in my case), fire without focus and control, emptying a magazine uncontrollably.
I believe that could be why many do not want armed police/guards in schools. They are so afraid of "guns", or the sight of a gun, that even an armed police presence make people fearful. This is shortsighted, and dangerous, as it leave "guns" to be in the hands of just the bad guys, who will not care a lick about a "Gun Free Zone" sign on the front door! And with over 300 MILLION firearms in this country alone, the "gun" will never go away. NEVER. Even if we stop producing firearms, other countries WILL provide black market guns, true machine guns, to street thugs. (Or Eric Holder will arrange the sale to drug bandits!)
To coin a phrase, that IS appropriate, "If guns are outlawed, then only outlaws will have guns." Deny as some will, but it is absolutely true.
TEACH our children knowledge and respect, NOT fear. Its one thing to acknowledge that "danger" may be present, but knowledge of what to do will provide for a more controlled response, and a safer one.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Thursday, January 24, 2013
What Difference Does It Make?
In front of a Congressional panel on the Benghazi attacks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton got defensive over a question that was asked by Senator Ron Johnson. In an heated response, she stated in part, "...what difference at this point does it make?"
Clinton in essence, stated that those four men were already dead, and that it was time to move forward to avoid that happening again. In that response, I saw someone who was caught in an indefensible position, and instead of confronting that question, lashed out with a very stupid and disrespectful response.
Well Hillary, if we don't fully understand ALL that went wrong, we CAN'T learn from it to avoid future attacks. So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Hillary, FOUR men are dead, and we need to know WHY? So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
From what I've read and heard, the breakdown in security left the Ambassador vulnerable for such an attack. And we must know how and why that happened. From what has been released, there were multiple requests for retaining the security that had been there (and removed), added security, existing threats to our Embassy as well as other foreign offices, and the increased activity of al-Qaeda affiliates. Yet, NO additional armed security personnel were added, and in fact, were reduced. WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES matter!
Every LIE told by members of State and the White House, about some video inspiring riots that evolved into that attack, seems to me to have been an attempt to cover up ALL the failures leading up to the attack. So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
When the attacks commenced, urgent messages were sent to D.C.. Yet, NO security aid, via CIA or Military, was tasked to do ANYTHING. Drone(s) were overhead, but NO combat assets dispatched? WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
The CIA assets who were about a mile away, were ordered to "stand down", when requesting to aid the Ambassador. WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Those CIA Officers went anyway, and attempted to save the Ambassador and his staff. In what has been reported as a 7 - 8 hour firefight, with 2 - 3 requests for assistance, and even "painting the target" with targeting lasers, NO "ready response" assets were sent. For 7 - 8 HOURS! WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
For the self-righteous Clinton to burst out with such a comment, in her attempt to defray the hard questions, is inexcusable. And it was WRONG. It absolutely matters, and it DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Clinton in essence, stated that those four men were already dead, and that it was time to move forward to avoid that happening again. In that response, I saw someone who was caught in an indefensible position, and instead of confronting that question, lashed out with a very stupid and disrespectful response.
Well Hillary, if we don't fully understand ALL that went wrong, we CAN'T learn from it to avoid future attacks. So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Hillary, FOUR men are dead, and we need to know WHY? So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
From what I've read and heard, the breakdown in security left the Ambassador vulnerable for such an attack. And we must know how and why that happened. From what has been released, there were multiple requests for retaining the security that had been there (and removed), added security, existing threats to our Embassy as well as other foreign offices, and the increased activity of al-Qaeda affiliates. Yet, NO additional armed security personnel were added, and in fact, were reduced. WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES matter!
Every LIE told by members of State and the White House, about some video inspiring riots that evolved into that attack, seems to me to have been an attempt to cover up ALL the failures leading up to the attack. So Hillary, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
When the attacks commenced, urgent messages were sent to D.C.. Yet, NO security aid, via CIA or Military, was tasked to do ANYTHING. Drone(s) were overhead, but NO combat assets dispatched? WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
The CIA assets who were about a mile away, were ordered to "stand down", when requesting to aid the Ambassador. WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Those CIA Officers went anyway, and attempted to save the Ambassador and his staff. In what has been reported as a 7 - 8 hour firefight, with 2 - 3 requests for assistance, and even "painting the target" with targeting lasers, NO "ready response" assets were sent. For 7 - 8 HOURS! WHY? By WHO's authority? We must know that. It DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
For the self-righteous Clinton to burst out with such a comment, in her attempt to defray the hard questions, is inexcusable. And it was WRONG. It absolutely matters, and it DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE!
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Would YOU Ride?
Paul Revere, along with William Dawes, at great risk of arrest or death to themselves, mounted their horses and rode to alarm of the coming threat. The British "Regulars" were coming to Concord, to arrest the outspoken Samuel Adams and John Hancock, and to seize the militia's weapons caches.
Adams and Hancock had to grab what they could, and took to hiding before they could be arrested. A good many of our Founding Fathers, risked everything, "Their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred Honor", to get this new country started.
I don't rant, or "sound an alarm" as it might be, because the "Brits are coming. Or that our government is coming for us today. I sound my alarm, because I fear being silent permits such government encroachments to evolve until too late. I feel there are many signs for such alarm. Our President, and not just this one, has cast a larger net of government rules, laws, dictates by Executive Orders, protected possible wrong doing by Executive Privilege, and has essentially ignored half of his citizenry. Even in this President's own words, "...sometime the constitution gets in the way of some things I'd like to do.", is very dangerous thinking, and if not abated, could lead to a President doing what ever he wants. That isn't Presidential. That's dictatorial!
So, in my small way of blogging, tweeting, discussing on-line or in person, I will protest this government at every errant direction I see it take. To be silent, would be the same as leaving my horse in the barn and not taking that ride of 1775.
How many today would risk "Their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred Honor", to take such a ride today? Would you? I promise, I would and will if it comes to that.
Adams and Hancock had to grab what they could, and took to hiding before they could be arrested. A good many of our Founding Fathers, risked everything, "Their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred Honor", to get this new country started.
I don't rant, or "sound an alarm" as it might be, because the "Brits are coming. Or that our government is coming for us today. I sound my alarm, because I fear being silent permits such government encroachments to evolve until too late. I feel there are many signs for such alarm. Our President, and not just this one, has cast a larger net of government rules, laws, dictates by Executive Orders, protected possible wrong doing by Executive Privilege, and has essentially ignored half of his citizenry. Even in this President's own words, "...sometime the constitution gets in the way of some things I'd like to do.", is very dangerous thinking, and if not abated, could lead to a President doing what ever he wants. That isn't Presidential. That's dictatorial!
So, in my small way of blogging, tweeting, discussing on-line or in person, I will protest this government at every errant direction I see it take. To be silent, would be the same as leaving my horse in the barn and not taking that ride of 1775.
How many today would risk "Their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred Honor", to take such a ride today? Would you? I promise, I would and will if it comes to that.
Friday, January 11, 2013
What James Holmes Counted On
This past year, in a movie theater in Colorado, a young man entered, and fulfilled his plan to shoot and kill as many people as he could. We all know the story of James Holmes, who's trial is going on as I write. There is no understanding of why anyone would commit such a heinous crime.
While the trial will go over every known detail of the crime and the planning, there are a few things we should understand. Holmes had a very reasonable expectation of several things in the course of committing this act.
1. Holmes had reason to believe that there would be no one armed inside the theater. The theater was posted to forbid firearms, as Holmes knew before he got there that day. Holmes had been to that theater before, planning his horrific deed, and KNEW the theater was posted for no firearms. So Holmes had every expectation that he would not have to be confronted by an armed citizen. Holmes KNEW he could do as he pleased, at least until the police arrived.
2. When Holmes calculated the arrival of the police, he exited the theater, and waited. Holmes KNEW he would be arrested, but with him remaining compliant, he would not be hurt and would be treated professionally by the police. Holmes was compliant, and did not give them any reason to hurt him.
3. Holmes KNEW this would make huge headlines, and he would become famous, or infamous as it is. In some twisted circles, he knew there would be a following. The headlines, the TV coverage, the stories to be written, would lift him high on the notoriety podium. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't expect fan mail, and even some girlfriends to write him.
4. Holmes KNEW he would be given a fair trial, and knew it would be drawn out as long as his lawyers could make it, thus enhancing his reliving his deeds. And the notoriety would continue all the while he would remain safe from harm in the jail facility. Because that's what our very civil, very humane, society does.
5. Holmes also knows he will be convicted, and will go to prison as a cult hero of sorts, at least until he is put to death. Until then, he may have 13 years, or even many more, to await the sleepy civilized injection of death. So he KNOWS that during all that time, he can have his prepared meals, reasonable access to sunlight, recreation, library privileges, health care, and TV.
Holmes KNOWS these things, because we have a just and fair judicial system, and humane penal systems that make sure that ALL his civil and human rights are afforded to him. And all the while, he can write, be interviewed, and have his exploits live on for decades to come.
Yep, Holmes counted on all these things. And when all of his appeals end, and that needle goes into his arm, we will sit back and proudly profess that "the system worked". Well, it ONLY worked for Holmes. And, it'll work for the next nut-bag who follows in his footsteps. But if it up to me, I'd change that. At least, right after his conviction.
While this will be seen as barbaric to many - After his fair trial, and upon a conviction of "Guilty Beyond ALL Doubt" (which there should be such a judgement outcome), I'd put him the electric chair. I'd slowly turn up the juice, as photos of all his victims were on a screen in front of him. I'd time his slow execution, until all the photos were shown. I'd have his screams echo around the walls of the jail, documented by the media, for all to know that THIS is the cost of such a crime. I doubt that smirk on his face would be there then.
In short, I would want HIS death, to be as horrific as possible. Yes, pretty sick to imagine for many, I'm sure. But we treat such animals so humanely, that there is hardly a fear at all of any real "punishment". I think we're just too damned civilized. And people like Holmes KNOW it. They count on it. (Someone could kill a hundred people in front of TV cameras, and just as the police show up, drop their gun and just give up! Safely!)
Well there should be a FEAR of "punishment". And someone like Holmes, should piss his pants every day of trial, just KNOWING that his end will come like what I described. He should live that FEAR every stinking day he has remaining on this earth. At the very least, we should bring back the electric chair, and fry them! No mercy. The victims received none.
While the trial will go over every known detail of the crime and the planning, there are a few things we should understand. Holmes had a very reasonable expectation of several things in the course of committing this act.
1. Holmes had reason to believe that there would be no one armed inside the theater. The theater was posted to forbid firearms, as Holmes knew before he got there that day. Holmes had been to that theater before, planning his horrific deed, and KNEW the theater was posted for no firearms. So Holmes had every expectation that he would not have to be confronted by an armed citizen. Holmes KNEW he could do as he pleased, at least until the police arrived.
2. When Holmes calculated the arrival of the police, he exited the theater, and waited. Holmes KNEW he would be arrested, but with him remaining compliant, he would not be hurt and would be treated professionally by the police. Holmes was compliant, and did not give them any reason to hurt him.
3. Holmes KNEW this would make huge headlines, and he would become famous, or infamous as it is. In some twisted circles, he knew there would be a following. The headlines, the TV coverage, the stories to be written, would lift him high on the notoriety podium. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't expect fan mail, and even some girlfriends to write him.
4. Holmes KNEW he would be given a fair trial, and knew it would be drawn out as long as his lawyers could make it, thus enhancing his reliving his deeds. And the notoriety would continue all the while he would remain safe from harm in the jail facility. Because that's what our very civil, very humane, society does.
5. Holmes also knows he will be convicted, and will go to prison as a cult hero of sorts, at least until he is put to death. Until then, he may have 13 years, or even many more, to await the sleepy civilized injection of death. So he KNOWS that during all that time, he can have his prepared meals, reasonable access to sunlight, recreation, library privileges, health care, and TV.
Holmes KNOWS these things, because we have a just and fair judicial system, and humane penal systems that make sure that ALL his civil and human rights are afforded to him. And all the while, he can write, be interviewed, and have his exploits live on for decades to come.
Yep, Holmes counted on all these things. And when all of his appeals end, and that needle goes into his arm, we will sit back and proudly profess that "the system worked". Well, it ONLY worked for Holmes. And, it'll work for the next nut-bag who follows in his footsteps. But if it up to me, I'd change that. At least, right after his conviction.
While this will be seen as barbaric to many - After his fair trial, and upon a conviction of "Guilty Beyond ALL Doubt" (which there should be such a judgement outcome), I'd put him the electric chair. I'd slowly turn up the juice, as photos of all his victims were on a screen in front of him. I'd time his slow execution, until all the photos were shown. I'd have his screams echo around the walls of the jail, documented by the media, for all to know that THIS is the cost of such a crime. I doubt that smirk on his face would be there then.
In short, I would want HIS death, to be as horrific as possible. Yes, pretty sick to imagine for many, I'm sure. But we treat such animals so humanely, that there is hardly a fear at all of any real "punishment". I think we're just too damned civilized. And people like Holmes KNOW it. They count on it. (Someone could kill a hundred people in front of TV cameras, and just as the police show up, drop their gun and just give up! Safely!)
Well there should be a FEAR of "punishment". And someone like Holmes, should piss his pants every day of trial, just KNOWING that his end will come like what I described. He should live that FEAR every stinking day he has remaining on this earth. At the very least, we should bring back the electric chair, and fry them! No mercy. The victims received none.
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Arm Teachers?
With the past horrific shooting deaths of school children, and the renewed and intense gun debates, many are seeking some kind of answer. And I agree, we DO need to explore WHY such things happen, and HOW we can curtail such acts.
I'll be clear right here though. I am NOT an advocate of additional gun laws. NONE. We aren't enforcing enough of what we have now. And further laws only serve to restrict freedoms. I'll leave the rest of that argument for later. (Registration? See comments at bottom.)
National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre suggested having armed guards at every school (which I agree with). Others, suggest arming teachers. Others still, want school administrators only to be armed. Well surprise, I have an opinion ... or two!
To start with, I am NOT in favor of - "arming teachers". I AM in favor of "allowing school districts" to be open to teacher/administrators being "permitted" to armed carry in schools. But first and foremost, I want our teachers, the best we can get, to TEACH. Fact is, most teachers would not want to be armed, and shouldn't be armed. They are "teachers" of our nation's schools. They aren't cops, or otherwise trained security guards (*). But they should be permitted the option, same as with our airline pilots.
I am in absolute favor of armed "School Resource Officers" in every school in America. And those assigned, should be proportional in numbers to the school's student ratio, i.e., 1 SRO per 1,000 students (as example). Similar to the average ratio of Cops per 1,000 population. Today, as has been for some time now, many schools already have SROs.
I would also prefer sworn Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs), and not private "security guards". LEOs go through FAR more training than most any security guard ever will. And, they practice shooting FAR more than most any security guard ever will.
(*) Private security guards, like Mall Cop types, are NOT sworn Law Enforcement, and except for trained "personal security" folks, most all Security Guards get very limited training, and are far less screened and vetted.
Add to that, they should get special SRO training to focus on "student safety" and responses. They should not be used to supplement normal Teacher/Admin in-school discipline issues!
Okay, as for the combined issue of - Manpower and Budgets, I'll chip in this ...
Manpower, so as not to take away from much needed LEOs on the street, I would hire more SROs, and I would pull from our returning Veterans. Fully vetted returning soldiers, already well trained in firearms, and dare I say, street diplomacy, I think are an ideal resource to draw from. Besides, who would dare try to challenge one of our Veterans? They have lived in an environment where they faced constant threats, and were ready to commit their very lives to defend and protect their buddies and their mission. (The biggest threat to these folks however, could be boredom!)
Budgets are a concern for every School District. Well, what ever taxes need to be directed toward this, should be done. (How and where to tax, is another discussion.) We find other reasons to tax for other stuff(and pork), and what better reason than that of the safety of our children!
While some (many?) will argue this, I'll say that for ME, I would be willing to work for a little less money, as a SRO, than what street Cops get. Lets face it, active SROs would not be handling day to day, call to call, contacts with dangerous people. Street Cops are paid to address serious and dangerous people every day. A SRO would likely never encounter such a deadly threat, and if so, once would most likely ever happen at any one school. An SRO would not be paid for what they do, near as much as what they may HAVE to do. (What about recently retired LEO's and Military, to supplement their retirement incomes? Hire them part-time [saving expense of benefits], with rotating personnel to cover full weeks throughout the school year. - I'd be willing to do that part-time now!)
It is my belief, that once enacted, that professionally armed presence would thwart most all threats of a violent person attempting anything on our schools.
MAKE NO MISTAKE - There is no such thing, as complete security! Evil people, driven do do evil, will find a way. No matter what we do, that applies!
As for the so-called "assault weapons", well, I ranted on about that before. MY bottom line, is what is legal today, should be legal tomorrow. These type firearms, which I also own, are used for possible defense of person, home, neighborhood. They are also sporting rifles, plinking guns, and competition rifles. So they DO have legitimate sporting purposes. (Anyone who is a "plinker", knows that "re-loading" mags is a pain in the butt, when you want to kick up cans, perforated paper, and hear the ting of a steel target! So extended mags are fun and convenient.)
And on the AW subject, the 2nd amendment was written for ONE reason, and that is so citizens had access to weapons in order to oppose a tyrannical government. If citizens cann't own their own firearms, then ONLY such a government would have them. That was to be prevented with the 2nd. Times may have changed, but the principles have not! Besides, the modern day AW, is yesterdays Musket.
I am a firm supporter of the NRA, and encourage membership for everybody, even non-gun owners. At least get on their website and read what all they do and are involved in. If you don't know them, then you will be surprised.
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?CampaignID=nranews
As for gun registration? I am absolutely against it. We do have criminal background checks on purchases from dealers. And, every firearms dealer licensee (FFL), is required to keep the yellow form that is filled out by the buyer. Those are not sent to law enforcement or the feds, but can be available for review by law enforcement should they need to search a purchase. ATF can check with a manufacturer, and on to a supply house, to track a firearm to a dealer. The dealer can then be contacted to check on that inventoried firearm, then match to a buyer, should a gun be used and recovered in a crime. Registration, logged onto a government database, is the first step in confiscation. Even if no confiscation is planned now, that is NO guarantee that it won't with any new administration. (Years ago, when I closed my little shop, it was only then that I had to turn in all my forms and sales books.)
Disclaimer: I am a Life Member of the NRA, but speak ONLY for myself. I am also a father, former Combat Vet, former Deputy Sheriff and Police Officer, and have been involved in children's programs of all sorts.
I'll be clear right here though. I am NOT an advocate of additional gun laws. NONE. We aren't enforcing enough of what we have now. And further laws only serve to restrict freedoms. I'll leave the rest of that argument for later. (Registration? See comments at bottom.)
National Rifle Association's Wayne LaPierre suggested having armed guards at every school (which I agree with). Others, suggest arming teachers. Others still, want school administrators only to be armed. Well surprise, I have an opinion ... or two!
To start with, I am NOT in favor of - "arming teachers". I AM in favor of "allowing school districts" to be open to teacher/administrators being "permitted" to armed carry in schools. But first and foremost, I want our teachers, the best we can get, to TEACH. Fact is, most teachers would not want to be armed, and shouldn't be armed. They are "teachers" of our nation's schools. They aren't cops, or otherwise trained security guards (*). But they should be permitted the option, same as with our airline pilots.
I am in absolute favor of armed "School Resource Officers" in every school in America. And those assigned, should be proportional in numbers to the school's student ratio, i.e., 1 SRO per 1,000 students (as example). Similar to the average ratio of Cops per 1,000 population. Today, as has been for some time now, many schools already have SROs.
I would also prefer sworn Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs), and not private "security guards". LEOs go through FAR more training than most any security guard ever will. And, they practice shooting FAR more than most any security guard ever will.
(*) Private security guards, like Mall Cop types, are NOT sworn Law Enforcement, and except for trained "personal security" folks, most all Security Guards get very limited training, and are far less screened and vetted.
Add to that, they should get special SRO training to focus on "student safety" and responses. They should not be used to supplement normal Teacher/Admin in-school discipline issues!
Okay, as for the combined issue of - Manpower and Budgets, I'll chip in this ...
Manpower, so as not to take away from much needed LEOs on the street, I would hire more SROs, and I would pull from our returning Veterans. Fully vetted returning soldiers, already well trained in firearms, and dare I say, street diplomacy, I think are an ideal resource to draw from. Besides, who would dare try to challenge one of our Veterans? They have lived in an environment where they faced constant threats, and were ready to commit their very lives to defend and protect their buddies and their mission. (The biggest threat to these folks however, could be boredom!)
Budgets are a concern for every School District. Well, what ever taxes need to be directed toward this, should be done. (How and where to tax, is another discussion.) We find other reasons to tax for other stuff(and pork), and what better reason than that of the safety of our children!
While some (many?) will argue this, I'll say that for ME, I would be willing to work for a little less money, as a SRO, than what street Cops get. Lets face it, active SROs would not be handling day to day, call to call, contacts with dangerous people. Street Cops are paid to address serious and dangerous people every day. A SRO would likely never encounter such a deadly threat, and if so, once would most likely ever happen at any one school. An SRO would not be paid for what they do, near as much as what they may HAVE to do. (What about recently retired LEO's and Military, to supplement their retirement incomes? Hire them part-time [saving expense of benefits], with rotating personnel to cover full weeks throughout the school year. - I'd be willing to do that part-time now!)
It is my belief, that once enacted, that professionally armed presence would thwart most all threats of a violent person attempting anything on our schools.
MAKE NO MISTAKE - There is no such thing, as complete security! Evil people, driven do do evil, will find a way. No matter what we do, that applies!
As for the so-called "assault weapons", well, I ranted on about that before. MY bottom line, is what is legal today, should be legal tomorrow. These type firearms, which I also own, are used for possible defense of person, home, neighborhood. They are also sporting rifles, plinking guns, and competition rifles. So they DO have legitimate sporting purposes. (Anyone who is a "plinker", knows that "re-loading" mags is a pain in the butt, when you want to kick up cans, perforated paper, and hear the ting of a steel target! So extended mags are fun and convenient.)
And on the AW subject, the 2nd amendment was written for ONE reason, and that is so citizens had access to weapons in order to oppose a tyrannical government. If citizens cann't own their own firearms, then ONLY such a government would have them. That was to be prevented with the 2nd. Times may have changed, but the principles have not! Besides, the modern day AW, is yesterdays Musket.
I am a firm supporter of the NRA, and encourage membership for everybody, even non-gun owners. At least get on their website and read what all they do and are involved in. If you don't know them, then you will be surprised.
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?CampaignID=nranews
As for gun registration? I am absolutely against it. We do have criminal background checks on purchases from dealers. And, every firearms dealer licensee (FFL), is required to keep the yellow form that is filled out by the buyer. Those are not sent to law enforcement or the feds, but can be available for review by law enforcement should they need to search a purchase. ATF can check with a manufacturer, and on to a supply house, to track a firearm to a dealer. The dealer can then be contacted to check on that inventoried firearm, then match to a buyer, should a gun be used and recovered in a crime. Registration, logged onto a government database, is the first step in confiscation. Even if no confiscation is planned now, that is NO guarantee that it won't with any new administration. (Years ago, when I closed my little shop, it was only then that I had to turn in all my forms and sales books.)
Disclaimer: I am a Life Member of the NRA, but speak ONLY for myself. I am also a father, former Combat Vet, former Deputy Sheriff and Police Officer, and have been involved in children's programs of all sorts.
Monday, January 7, 2013
Why Vilify The Tea Party?
Recently, someone emailed me and compared The Tea Party movement, and me as a supporter, to the Nazi party. What nonsense. There simply are no reasonable comparisons between the two. To suggest so, is only an attempt to scare people from really looking at and/or joining the movement.
We have seen time and time again, protesters and politicians condemning The Tea Party, painting it (us) as some "right wing" extremists. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has stated in a warning to Republicans, "leave Tea Party 'extremism' behind and learn what legislation is all about.
I would hope that they understand that everything doesn't have to be a fight. Legislation is an art of working together, building consensus, compromise. And I hope that the Tea Party doesn't have the influence in this next year that they had in the previous year," Reid said.
(BTW Reid, I will NOT compromise my "principles"!)
Nancy Pelosi also called us extremists, radicals, and Nazis.
This is all said to try to shut up conservatives, and try to paint them (us) as a movement other people will not want to be part of. Its also said to try to intimidate conservative politicians from linking with Tea Party support, so they don't get labeled "extremist" or "racist". But when you read the platform (below), it shows THEM to clearly to be liars.
The Tea Party, excluding individual members who may takes thing out of context of the platform, is more FOR the constitutional principles. More so than most any politician, specially Reid and Pelosi. And there IS NOT a single racist thing in it. Not one! Anyone who honestly reads the platform, and looks at the vast majority of Tea Party members, can NOT find fault with their (our) standings. What part of this platform does any American disagree with?
Don't believe the bullshit. Read the below information for yourself. Honestly compare any Tea Party protest, to any other peaceful protest, or those of many of the Occupy Wall Street protests.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/15/reid-on-bipartisanship-republicans-drop-tea-party-extremism/#ixzz2HDo398Dn
Copied from - http://www.teaparty-platform.com/
We have seen time and time again, protesters and politicians condemning The Tea Party, painting it (us) as some "right wing" extremists. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has stated in a warning to Republicans, "leave Tea Party 'extremism' behind and learn what legislation is all about.
I would hope that they understand that everything doesn't have to be a fight. Legislation is an art of working together, building consensus, compromise. And I hope that the Tea Party doesn't have the influence in this next year that they had in the previous year," Reid said.
(BTW Reid, I will NOT compromise my "principles"!)
Nancy Pelosi also called us extremists, radicals, and Nazis.
This is all said to try to shut up conservatives, and try to paint them (us) as a movement other people will not want to be part of. Its also said to try to intimidate conservative politicians from linking with Tea Party support, so they don't get labeled "extremist" or "racist". But when you read the platform (below), it shows THEM to clearly to be liars.
The Tea Party, excluding individual members who may takes thing out of context of the platform, is more FOR the constitutional principles. More so than most any politician, specially Reid and Pelosi. And there IS NOT a single racist thing in it. Not one! Anyone who honestly reads the platform, and looks at the vast majority of Tea Party members, can NOT find fault with their (our) standings. What part of this platform does any American disagree with?
Don't believe the bullshit. Read the below information for yourself. Honestly compare any Tea Party protest, to any other peaceful protest, or those of many of the Occupy Wall Street protests.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/15/reid-on-bipartisanship-republicans-drop-tea-party-extremism/#ixzz2HDo398Dn
Copied from - http://www.teaparty-platform.com/
Preamble: The Tea Party Movement is an all-inclusive American grassroots movement with the belief that everyone is created equal and deserves an equal opportunity to thrive in these United States where they may “pursue life, liberty and happiness” as stated in the Declaration of Independence and guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.
No one is excluded from participation in the Tea Party Movement. Everyone is welcomed to join in seeking to achieve the Tea Party Movement goals, which are as follows:
1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics
10. Maintain Local Independence
Friday, January 4, 2013
ENFORCE the Current Gun Laws
While many are rushing to write new gun laws, hoping to stop gun violence, they are ready to trample all over the 2nd amendment. Some of those people, actually want to revise or eliminate the part of the 2nd amendment, "the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed"!
But what is wrong with the laws we have? There are about 22,000 gun laws across the country, so why don't they work? Let's look at just a few things that need to be addressed.
In a recent news article, I read that a New York City Police Officer was shot, and the assailant, who was killed in the exchange of gun fire while in a subway train, was learned to have been a "convicted felon", with five prior convictions, and he was in possession of an unlawful gun.
Let's look at what little we do know on this case. This "felon" could NOT have have legally possessed a firearm, as a start; could not legally purchased a firearm; obtaining the firearm was likely done unlawfully by theft or by a straw-purchase; and the felon was carrying an unlicensed loaded handgun, on a mass transit. So, from what little we know on the surface, this FELON committed a number of felonies, prior to shooting the Police Officer. (If anyone reading this is a NYC LEO, jump in with other gun laws known to be broken.)
But do they try to follow the gun? How many other laws were broken? How many others were involved? The gun was stolen, so was it registered? If so, then laws were broken AFTER it was lawfully owned by a lawful person.
BTW - Some years ago when I was a LEO, a gun store was broken into and many guns were stolen. Many years later, only ONE gun turned up, bought at a garage sale, by a Police Officer! And while we tried to follow the gun back, it had been sold between lawful citizens, unknowing it was stolen, but we could not establish ownership past a few persons. Most the others were believed, by Feds, to have been taken to Mexico.
Then, here is another BIG element to such crimes. Judges have discretion to tailor punishment in most cases. What crimes and punishment did this felon have prior to the shooting? How short were his sentences? How long could he have been in jail, and not on the street?
In another case, a man tried to rob a business with a gun, and during the attempt, an off-duty officer managed to stop the robbery. The robber was part of a known robbery gang, and the gun was found to have been "stolen" from "North Carolina". That gun was stolen in the month prior.
How did a "stolen gun" from "North Carolina", get "across state lines", into "New York" and into the hands of a "New York City" "violent gang" with know "felonies" and "robbery crimes"? Who stole the gun? Who passed it on, illegally, to another person? Who illegally "transported" to New York? How did it end up in the hands of a known felon?
These are the questions that need to be answered. Those involved, are the ones to be targeted for punishment, NOT legal gun owners.
By the way, in New York
Possessing a loaded firearm without permit, outside of person's home or place of business: class C felony, classified as violent felony offense, punishable by up to 15 years imprisonment, with a mandatory minimum of 3.5 years.
N.Y. Penal Law §§ 265.01, 265.03, 265.20
Do other such felons see that kind of sentencing? I can tell you from past experience, that judges fall for all kinds of stupid appeals from defense attorneys, and the lowest of sentences are given all the time. Yet, there are those who want to eliminate MY 2nd amendment right, as well as my property rights, because they can't manage the evil-doers!
Every Cop I know, can tell you about a felon who got NO sentence, or a LIGHT sentence, only to go back on the streets and commit new felonies! And of those, many have been in unlawful possession of a weapon!
Follow the guns. Follow those involved. ENFORCE those laws we have now. Punish THEM. Take THEIR rights away. Do NOT punish ME, for the illegal acts of others.
By the way, of the 300 million+ firearms, legally owned by about 80 MILLION+ law abiding citizens, many of those would be classified as "assault weapons", and those ARE NOT an issue!
Many people, even some gun owners, might be in favor of "gun registration". I am not. Throughout history, we have seen governments go against its citizens, and the first thing they do is it to confiscate the firearms. Registration is the road map to who has the otherwise legal firearms. Without solid protection from confiscation, I will never register my firearm. And there can not be trustworthy protection, if the 2nd amendment part, "shall not be infringed" is ready to be thrown out today, by many in our government!
But what is wrong with the laws we have? There are about 22,000 gun laws across the country, so why don't they work? Let's look at just a few things that need to be addressed.
In a recent news article, I read that a New York City Police Officer was shot, and the assailant, who was killed in the exchange of gun fire while in a subway train, was learned to have been a "convicted felon", with five prior convictions, and he was in possession of an unlawful gun.
Let's look at what little we do know on this case. This "felon" could NOT have have legally possessed a firearm, as a start; could not legally purchased a firearm; obtaining the firearm was likely done unlawfully by theft or by a straw-purchase; and the felon was carrying an unlicensed loaded handgun, on a mass transit. So, from what little we know on the surface, this FELON committed a number of felonies, prior to shooting the Police Officer. (If anyone reading this is a NYC LEO, jump in with other gun laws known to be broken.)
But do they try to follow the gun? How many other laws were broken? How many others were involved? The gun was stolen, so was it registered? If so, then laws were broken AFTER it was lawfully owned by a lawful person.
BTW - Some years ago when I was a LEO, a gun store was broken into and many guns were stolen. Many years later, only ONE gun turned up, bought at a garage sale, by a Police Officer! And while we tried to follow the gun back, it had been sold between lawful citizens, unknowing it was stolen, but we could not establish ownership past a few persons. Most the others were believed, by Feds, to have been taken to Mexico.
Then, here is another BIG element to such crimes. Judges have discretion to tailor punishment in most cases. What crimes and punishment did this felon have prior to the shooting? How short were his sentences? How long could he have been in jail, and not on the street?
In another case, a man tried to rob a business with a gun, and during the attempt, an off-duty officer managed to stop the robbery. The robber was part of a known robbery gang, and the gun was found to have been "stolen" from "North Carolina". That gun was stolen in the month prior.
How did a "stolen gun" from "North Carolina", get "across state lines", into "New York" and into the hands of a "New York City" "violent gang" with know "felonies" and "robbery crimes"? Who stole the gun? Who passed it on, illegally, to another person? Who illegally "transported" to New York? How did it end up in the hands of a known felon?
These are the questions that need to be answered. Those involved, are the ones to be targeted for punishment, NOT legal gun owners.
By the way, in New York
Possessing a loaded firearm without permit, outside of person's home or place of business: class C felony, classified as violent felony offense, punishable by up to 15 years imprisonment, with a mandatory minimum of 3.5 years.
N.Y. Penal Law §§ 265.01, 265.03, 265.20
Do other such felons see that kind of sentencing? I can tell you from past experience, that judges fall for all kinds of stupid appeals from defense attorneys, and the lowest of sentences are given all the time. Yet, there are those who want to eliminate MY 2nd amendment right, as well as my property rights, because they can't manage the evil-doers!
Every Cop I know, can tell you about a felon who got NO sentence, or a LIGHT sentence, only to go back on the streets and commit new felonies! And of those, many have been in unlawful possession of a weapon!
Follow the guns. Follow those involved. ENFORCE those laws we have now. Punish THEM. Take THEIR rights away. Do NOT punish ME, for the illegal acts of others.
By the way, of the 300 million+ firearms, legally owned by about 80 MILLION+ law abiding citizens, many of those would be classified as "assault weapons", and those ARE NOT an issue!
Many people, even some gun owners, might be in favor of "gun registration". I am not. Throughout history, we have seen governments go against its citizens, and the first thing they do is it to confiscate the firearms. Registration is the road map to who has the otherwise legal firearms. Without solid protection from confiscation, I will never register my firearm. And there can not be trustworthy protection, if the 2nd amendment part, "shall not be infringed" is ready to be thrown out today, by many in our government!
Friday, December 28, 2012
How To Disarm Americans
Let's face it, we have those in our own government, who wish the 2nd amendment didn't exist. Many of our own citizens feel the same way. Of those who are on "the fence", they'd be okay with just an "assault weapons ban". In any case, the true reason for the 2nd amendment has been lost on many.
I've shared my thoughts about OUR 2nd amendment, so I won't rehash that now. But there are some pro-firearms, and even those who don't own a firearm, who think our government could not disarm all the 70+ million gun owners. They'd be right to a degree, but I believe there is a way for such a government to fulfil most of that goal. And here is how I believe it could be done, and actually believe we could be headed this direction sooner than later.
To start with, if I was a President, bend on banning firearms, here is what I would do -
* I must first convince "the people" that some guns, in the hands of bad people, need to be curtailed from easy access and ownership. That's easy to go along with. Even those of who legally own firearms would agree that bad people shouldn't have guns!
In times of firearms related tragedy, I would highlight, via the media, the use of a style of weapon, to support the desired ban.
* Enlist the help of media, to float the message to the masses.
* Work with the United Nations, and join them in limiting the world-wide manufacturing of small arms and ammunition. By doing this, I would have the USA simply "join" like minded nations in curtailing gun violence around the world.
* I would sign an Executive Order, bypassing congress, to implement an "assault weapons ban" of all new production and sale of the civilian models of "military type" weapons. That would stop the manufacturing and sale of civilian copies of "military weapons" to citizens. I would site the need for protections against mass killings. Most citizens will go along with that, and the media will promote it, selling it as not impairing the 2nd amendment in doing so.
(By the way - While some say a president can't bypass congress, they're wrong. Such a president can do anything, so long as he/she is not stopped by the other branches of government with a majority!)
* To soften the distaste for such a move, I would announce a program that expands current registration of classified firearms, and citizens would be able to register such firearms and pay a TAX to keep them.
* I would later site the need to also include other "semi-auto" high capacity weapons, those capable of firing more than 10 rounds without reloading. This would then include all the otherwise acceptable firearms, like the common Ruger 10/22, or even a Winchester 9422 lever action .22, that can hold as many as 17 rounds, as examples. The Ruger 10/22 comes with a 10 round magazine, it can accept higher capacity mags.
* With the MILLIONS of "assault weapons" already in civilian hands, I would then begin a voluntary "turn-in" or "buy-back" program, and work with the media to get citizens to turn those types in, without fear of prosecution or penalty. (This has worked in Canada and Australia.)
* For those who have not turned in their otherwise legally owned "assault weapons", another "Executive Order" would be issued, for mandatory turn-in of all such weapons. I also order all Law Enforcement, when in normal contact with citizens and find such weapons in "plain view", to be confiscated. (The government still has not gone house to house to collect them!)
* I would then appeal to all citizens, that while they can still own their "home protection" firearms, maintaining "their 2nd amendment right", such as shotguns and pistols (under 10 rds) and deer rifles, that all other weapons will have to be turned in within 60 days. After 60 days, should a citizen still be found in possession of such a classified weapon, such weapons would be taken as evidence, they would be fined, by way of a heavy TAX. Such a tax would be collected and enforced by the IRS. This would be a tax code violation, tacked onto current tax codes. (Sounds like Obamacare!)
The average citizen, is "law abiding", and that while they won't like it, will continue to be a "law abiding citizen", and follow such law. (The Jews kept following the directions of German officials, right up to the point of not having a choice.) Such a government will depend on the overall lawfulness of the law abiding citizen, to "cooperate".
* The "government" will then make examples of those "unlawfully" possessing a newly classified weapon, with IRS prosecution for Failing to Obtain a Tax Stamp, which would make it a "tax evasion" case.
* In an effort to further the collection of those "classified weapons", I would instruct all Law Enforcement to ask with every contact, if a citizen had such a firearm, then "ask" permission to search their vehicle or home.
(I can tell you for certain that the law enforcement "highway interdiction" program for drugs, works by "asking" citizens if they have anything to hide, and then asking if you can just confirm that a citizen doesn't. Massive amounts of drugs have been found during car-stops this way. Same goes for "knock and talk" when contacting a person at the front door of their home. It works!)
* By now, even it takes a few years to do, I would have removed a huge number of firearms from the hands of citizens. This doesn't even include those taken from criminal investigations. And it would all have been done with mostly "cooperating" efforts by the citizens, and some prodding by the IRS to comply or get fined. Still, NO criminal law was yet needed. The TAX code, which could be expanded, is used to compel compliance.
* With an overwhelming amount of citizen compliance and cooperation, any remaining "classified weapons" in the hands of citizens, would then be targeted with new laws. I would appeal to my majority, to pass a law that would make it a felony to own such a classified weapon, with a TAX stamp, and begin a plan to recover those. I would start something like a DARE program in lower grade schools, and give programs of the dangers of firearms, and let little kids tell about the guns their parents have. Using that information, warrants would be sought, having probable cause to believe an "illegal" firearm is in the house, and conduct a raid to recover them, for the child's safety. (Add it to child protection laws!)
* I would offer rewards, for information leading to the recovery of such firearms. Much like Crime Stoppers, I would provide for rewards so people (family members, neighbors, co-corkers, mailmen, garbage men, etc) could report anonymously, and get money for their tips.
* Now, I have removed MOST semi-auto type firearms, leaving more simple and limited capacity firearms to deal with.
* For those remaining firearms, continue a "buy back" program.
* Increase the media blitz on the dangers of firearms in the homes, and encourage reporting.
* Enlist well know celebrities to help get the message out.
* Have my Hollywood friends make movies about guns being evil.
* By this time, I would have collected a majority number of all sorts of firearms, and the remaining ones would be collected upon detection.
No One, except the Law Enforcement and the Military, would possess firearms. Well except those criminals who get them from the black market.
Now, do you feel safer now?
I've shared my thoughts about OUR 2nd amendment, so I won't rehash that now. But there are some pro-firearms, and even those who don't own a firearm, who think our government could not disarm all the 70+ million gun owners. They'd be right to a degree, but I believe there is a way for such a government to fulfil most of that goal. And here is how I believe it could be done, and actually believe we could be headed this direction sooner than later.
To start with, if I was a President, bend on banning firearms, here is what I would do -
* I must first convince "the people" that some guns, in the hands of bad people, need to be curtailed from easy access and ownership. That's easy to go along with. Even those of who legally own firearms would agree that bad people shouldn't have guns!
In times of firearms related tragedy, I would highlight, via the media, the use of a style of weapon, to support the desired ban.
* Enlist the help of media, to float the message to the masses.
* Work with the United Nations, and join them in limiting the world-wide manufacturing of small arms and ammunition. By doing this, I would have the USA simply "join" like minded nations in curtailing gun violence around the world.
* I would sign an Executive Order, bypassing congress, to implement an "assault weapons ban" of all new production and sale of the civilian models of "military type" weapons. That would stop the manufacturing and sale of civilian copies of "military weapons" to citizens. I would site the need for protections against mass killings. Most citizens will go along with that, and the media will promote it, selling it as not impairing the 2nd amendment in doing so.
(By the way - While some say a president can't bypass congress, they're wrong. Such a president can do anything, so long as he/she is not stopped by the other branches of government with a majority!)
* To soften the distaste for such a move, I would announce a program that expands current registration of classified firearms, and citizens would be able to register such firearms and pay a TAX to keep them.
* I would later site the need to also include other "semi-auto" high capacity weapons, those capable of firing more than 10 rounds without reloading. This would then include all the otherwise acceptable firearms, like the common Ruger 10/22, or even a Winchester 9422 lever action .22, that can hold as many as 17 rounds, as examples. The Ruger 10/22 comes with a 10 round magazine, it can accept higher capacity mags.
* With the MILLIONS of "assault weapons" already in civilian hands, I would then begin a voluntary "turn-in" or "buy-back" program, and work with the media to get citizens to turn those types in, without fear of prosecution or penalty. (This has worked in Canada and Australia.)
* For those who have not turned in their otherwise legally owned "assault weapons", another "Executive Order" would be issued, for mandatory turn-in of all such weapons. I also order all Law Enforcement, when in normal contact with citizens and find such weapons in "plain view", to be confiscated. (The government still has not gone house to house to collect them!)
* I would then appeal to all citizens, that while they can still own their "home protection" firearms, maintaining "their 2nd amendment right", such as shotguns and pistols (under 10 rds) and deer rifles, that all other weapons will have to be turned in within 60 days. After 60 days, should a citizen still be found in possession of such a classified weapon, such weapons would be taken as evidence, they would be fined, by way of a heavy TAX. Such a tax would be collected and enforced by the IRS. This would be a tax code violation, tacked onto current tax codes. (Sounds like Obamacare!)
The average citizen, is "law abiding", and that while they won't like it, will continue to be a "law abiding citizen", and follow such law. (The Jews kept following the directions of German officials, right up to the point of not having a choice.) Such a government will depend on the overall lawfulness of the law abiding citizen, to "cooperate".
* The "government" will then make examples of those "unlawfully" possessing a newly classified weapon, with IRS prosecution for Failing to Obtain a Tax Stamp, which would make it a "tax evasion" case.
* In an effort to further the collection of those "classified weapons", I would instruct all Law Enforcement to ask with every contact, if a citizen had such a firearm, then "ask" permission to search their vehicle or home.
(I can tell you for certain that the law enforcement "highway interdiction" program for drugs, works by "asking" citizens if they have anything to hide, and then asking if you can just confirm that a citizen doesn't. Massive amounts of drugs have been found during car-stops this way. Same goes for "knock and talk" when contacting a person at the front door of their home. It works!)
* By now, even it takes a few years to do, I would have removed a huge number of firearms from the hands of citizens. This doesn't even include those taken from criminal investigations. And it would all have been done with mostly "cooperating" efforts by the citizens, and some prodding by the IRS to comply or get fined. Still, NO criminal law was yet needed. The TAX code, which could be expanded, is used to compel compliance.
* With an overwhelming amount of citizen compliance and cooperation, any remaining "classified weapons" in the hands of citizens, would then be targeted with new laws. I would appeal to my majority, to pass a law that would make it a felony to own such a classified weapon, with a TAX stamp, and begin a plan to recover those. I would start something like a DARE program in lower grade schools, and give programs of the dangers of firearms, and let little kids tell about the guns their parents have. Using that information, warrants would be sought, having probable cause to believe an "illegal" firearm is in the house, and conduct a raid to recover them, for the child's safety. (Add it to child protection laws!)
* I would offer rewards, for information leading to the recovery of such firearms. Much like Crime Stoppers, I would provide for rewards so people (family members, neighbors, co-corkers, mailmen, garbage men, etc) could report anonymously, and get money for their tips.
* Now, I have removed MOST semi-auto type firearms, leaving more simple and limited capacity firearms to deal with.
* For those remaining firearms, continue a "buy back" program.
* Increase the media blitz on the dangers of firearms in the homes, and encourage reporting.
* Enlist well know celebrities to help get the message out.
* Have my Hollywood friends make movies about guns being evil.
* By this time, I would have collected a majority number of all sorts of firearms, and the remaining ones would be collected upon detection.
No One, except the Law Enforcement and the Military, would possess firearms. Well except those criminals who get them from the black market.
Now, do you feel safer now?
Yes, I AM a Christian
Recently, I read some posts by people highly critical of "God", and that "Satan" was more "open minded" and "accepting", than "God". Wow. I was struck by that. Struck, because it MY belief that is exactly what Satan would have people believe, and act on. And they are right! Right, in respect to Satan being more accepting. Absolutely more accepting of "anything goes". After all, Satan will NEVER dissuade anyone from abortions, doing drugs, cheating on spouses, and other wrong doings.
THAT is what Satan is all about, complete acceptance of anything!
Some are also offended by "judgemental Christians". THAT, I understand. I 'm not guilt free, but I can't stand people who "throw stones", while "living in glass houses". But that isn't God's fault, or even Christianity's fault. That's OUR fault! (I saw a great bumper sticker, "Christians aren't perfect, Just forgiven!") If any Christian strays from God's Word, that isn't "Christianity". That's sin by a Christian.
More specifically, some view Christianity as being "anti-gay", or gay hating. I think that is misconstrued. I, as a Christian, do NOT believe being "gay" is following MY understanding of the Bible and God's plan for us. But I AM NOT ANY ONE'S JUDGE. NO ONE, can say a gay person can not go to Heaven. God loves them too. God loves ME, as flawed as I am, but that does not mean he accepts my actions. He doesn't. It is not me to judge, but His on each person's judgement day. I would never exclude a gay person from church, or from any of our nation's rights. But that does not preclude me from believing marriage is meant for a man and a woman. That is MY personal belief, and I feel that is how God intended.
Some don't believe in God, or at least, don't believe a "god" would allow such terrible things to happen to children. Trust me, I have had MANY personal conversations with God about why things happen to people. Try some time after a hot battle in the jungle, after you've lost friends! "Oh God", and "Why God", are common cries at such times. I know!
To ME, and MY belief - God gave us "choice", beginning with Adam and Eve. "Choices" were made, and WE are a result in choices we all make. It is also MY belief, that God, who provides an "eternal" life after this one, does not necessarily intercede on things, as much as gives us peace and spiritual support to endure life on earth. I KNOW that I have had periods of time that without my own prayers, I would not have been as strong to endure. THAT is an extremely valuable aspect of having faith, even faith as weak as mine. Those who have terrible things happen, and have no such faith to fall back on, may be personally strong to endure, but I don't feel I would be at peace with things as much with Him. Even when horrible things happen to children, I feel some comfort, believing that all their pain and suffering are over, as well as memories of such, while they enjoy "heaven". If anyone doesn't have that belief, that's on them, and they are "free" to believe or not. (But don't condemn me for believing ... Bill Mahr!)
With that:
Dear Lord, forgive me, for I am a sinner. Forgive those too, who deny You, and are attempting to persuade others to deny You, for they do not know what they are doing. In light of all MY faults, as well as those of my fellow citizens, forgive us. God, I ask for you to Bless America, and her leadership, and save us from ourselves. In Jesus name, Amen.
THAT is what Satan is all about, complete acceptance of anything!
Some are also offended by "judgemental Christians". THAT, I understand. I 'm not guilt free, but I can't stand people who "throw stones", while "living in glass houses". But that isn't God's fault, or even Christianity's fault. That's OUR fault! (I saw a great bumper sticker, "Christians aren't perfect, Just forgiven!") If any Christian strays from God's Word, that isn't "Christianity". That's sin by a Christian.
More specifically, some view Christianity as being "anti-gay", or gay hating. I think that is misconstrued. I, as a Christian, do NOT believe being "gay" is following MY understanding of the Bible and God's plan for us. But I AM NOT ANY ONE'S JUDGE. NO ONE, can say a gay person can not go to Heaven. God loves them too. God loves ME, as flawed as I am, but that does not mean he accepts my actions. He doesn't. It is not me to judge, but His on each person's judgement day. I would never exclude a gay person from church, or from any of our nation's rights. But that does not preclude me from believing marriage is meant for a man and a woman. That is MY personal belief, and I feel that is how God intended.
Some don't believe in God, or at least, don't believe a "god" would allow such terrible things to happen to children. Trust me, I have had MANY personal conversations with God about why things happen to people. Try some time after a hot battle in the jungle, after you've lost friends! "Oh God", and "Why God", are common cries at such times. I know!
I AM a Christian. I am so very flawed and have been such a sinner all my life, but I DO believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. I DO believe I will be judged by God one day, and also believe that God forgives anyway, when asked for forgiveness and we accept Jesus Christ as our personal Savior (NOT Obama!). Thank God for that! I am NOT a Bible thumper, and for most all outward appearances, a stranger would not know I am a Christian. Also MY fault! I do not attend organized church (For reasons I will not go into.), and that is MY fault too. While I "justify" that to myself, it is still MY fault. Even though I may not be going to a church near you, I will not sit silent and not be vocal in defending MY belief. I know too, that I need to do better at being a Christian, and show it by example. Not in an "in your face" thing, but a public acknowledgment of God and Jesus Christ. Because I DO believe in God, and Jesus Christ as MY personal Savior.
None of this, is to suggest mis-treating anyone else. In fact, mis-treating anyone for their differing view, is NOT what God would have us do. But to accept what is believed to be "wrong", as being "right", I can not do. (Montgomery Gentry has a good song for this occasion, "You do your thing, I'll do mine.") No matter what "in thing" might be, I have to hold to what I believe.
To ME, and MY belief - God gave us "choice", beginning with Adam and Eve. "Choices" were made, and WE are a result in choices we all make. It is also MY belief, that God, who provides an "eternal" life after this one, does not necessarily intercede on things, as much as gives us peace and spiritual support to endure life on earth. I KNOW that I have had periods of time that without my own prayers, I would not have been as strong to endure. THAT is an extremely valuable aspect of having faith, even faith as weak as mine. Those who have terrible things happen, and have no such faith to fall back on, may be personally strong to endure, but I don't feel I would be at peace with things as much with Him. Even when horrible things happen to children, I feel some comfort, believing that all their pain and suffering are over, as well as memories of such, while they enjoy "heaven". If anyone doesn't have that belief, that's on them, and they are "free" to believe or not. (But don't condemn me for believing ... Bill Mahr!)
With that:
Dear Lord, forgive me, for I am a sinner. Forgive those too, who deny You, and are attempting to persuade others to deny You, for they do not know what they are doing. In light of all MY faults, as well as those of my fellow citizens, forgive us. God, I ask for you to Bless America, and her leadership, and save us from ourselves. In Jesus name, Amen.
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Assault Weapons and the 2nd Amendment
In recent days and weeks, more funerals have taken place for murdered children. This time at a Newtown, CT elementary school. An extremely sad and tragic loss, perpetrated by a mentally sick young man, who murdered his own mother, took her guns, went to a school and murdered an additional 26 unarmed adults and children. There is no amount of reasoning that can ever understand such an act.
With such acts, we (society) rush to seek answers and solutions to such an act. In this case, one of the weapons used was a so-called "assault weapon", and the call for a renewed ban is under way, believing that will stop the next such tragedy. We've had one of those before, and it had NO measurable affect on the crime rates, and the 10 year run of that ban was let to expire because it had no affect.
This is a complex discussion, with many sides and issues to take into consideration. First and foremost, is the 2nd amendment, with calls to repeal it, or to re-define it. In either case, the whole purpose for the 2nd amendment would be tossed out in such a process. It was put into our Bill of RIGHTS, as a safeguard over possible government tyranny, not just your personal defense. An "armed" populace, would not be an easily controlled populace. The "right" to bear arms, "shall NOT be infringed". And NO, it isn't about "hunting".
Freedoms are a delicate thing. Freedoms come with responsibilities. Freedoms comes with the freedom of choices. Freedoms, come with risks. To circumvent our responsibilities, to restrict our choices, to attempt to protect us against all risks, would require the elimination of most all our freedoms. So we have to ask ourselves, Is freedom worth the risk of abuses that can go with them? As sad it it can be at times, Yes, I believe so. It is our LAWS that are to handle the abuses, not curtail our freedoms.
The so-called "assault weapons", those by prior definition as civilian versions of current military arms, could hold clips and/or magazines of over 10 rounds of ammo, and/or had a bayonet lug (just silly), and/or were semi-automatic in actions. (Full automatic firearms are already heavily regulated, and not part of this issue.) A lot of weapons were included, and people were surprised at what those were, because aside from lacking the cosmetic features of a military weapon, many fired the same way, fired the same ammunition, and could hold and/or reload in much the same way. Those weapons were far more common for sport shooters and hunters than people first thought. (An Henry Repeating Rifle, holding 15 rounds in the tube, could be classified as an assault rifle!)
But what are AR-15 and other civilian versions of military weapons really used for today? WHY would anyone need an AR-15, is the common mantra of the anti-gun folks.
To start with, they have been and are "legal" to own, by law abiding citizens. And of the MILLIONS of such firearms in civilian hands, those used in crimes are barely measurable. That's MILLIONS of such firearms, in law abiding civilian hands! And while any murder, is tragic and senseless, those murdered by such weapons measure very few by comparison.
The military style weapons, rifles for the most part, have become a huge sporting firearm, used for sport shooting and plinking, and even to more serious competitions around the country. One such sport, known as "3-gun" competition shooting, has grown all over the country. Civilians, police, and military have teams that compete in this shooting sport.
http://3gunnation.com/
http://www.uspsa-nationals.org/
Most people likely don't know, but there has been a Civilian Marksmanship Program for many years. In 1871, the National Rifle Association, backed by the War Department, began a civilian marksmanship program in order to have men become proficient in the use of and marksmanship with firearms of the day. That program continued on, to include the WWII battle rifle, the M1 Garand. The M1 Garand was even offered at a government "at cost" rate to civilians who applied to participate in that program. http://www.odcmp.co/about_us.htm
(A word about the NRA. The NRA was started by a group of National Guardsmen, and it's first president was retired Army General Winfred Scott Hancock, and was followed in later years by General Ulysses S. Grant, General Sheridan, and Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt himself was a Life Member of the NRA. Also, the NRA has been the premiere driver behind Law Enforcement firearms training standards, as well as training armorers for police departments, and is also instrumental in marksmanship programs and competitions for all levels of law enforcement, and branches of the military.)
I would also submit that the AR-15 type firearms of today, are just an extension of the growing technology of firearms development, used largely by the military, but have always been adopted for use by the civilian population. This has always been true, dating back to the Springfield Trap-door that vastly improved the rate of fire in war time of that day, and was adopted by civilians to use. Most such firearm development has grown by the needs of the military, and then have been adopted for use by citizens for sport, hunting, and competition. (Much of the technology we use today, began by the needs of our military in one form or another!)
I find it almost humorous to imagine, but does anyone actually believe that a Minutemen at Lexington would not have chosen an AR-15 to own, had one been developed in that day? The AR-15 types of today, are the muskets of yesteryear.
I think it is important to know that the US, because we do have a "gun culture", likely has the best civilian marksmen in the world. China, who by the way is in favor of more gun control in the US, has NO legal firearms ownership for the citizens, and has about 2.4 million military members. (China, who also has one of the worse human rights records in the world, but hey, they have gun control!) The US has about 2 million military, and over 70 MILLION legal firearms owners. Wow. Now that's a potential "militia" to draw upon!
In the end, there are those who are genuinely trying to find answers to this horrid problem of such mass murders, but I believe are looking at the wrong solution. Mass murder is not new. Even mass murders at schools are not new. A very thorough look at WHY such people, armed with anything, would want to kill a bunch of defenseless children, is a must. No amount of gun laws will answer that or correct that. With over 22,000 gun laws across the country, chasing that dog will not get us anywhere.
With freedom, comes responsibility. And as for such mass murders, our responsibility is do what we reasonably can to protect our children and citizens, to deal with the reasons such perpetrators do such things, and to punish those who abuse our rights, which includes our right to bear arms. I DO NOT support arming everyone. Most people, are ill-equipped to be responsible enough to be proficient. But every law abiding citizen, should never be curtailed from taking advantage of enjoying the benefits of even one of our rights.
Honestly, IF we, as a nation, really cared more about our kids safety, than some political end-game, we would include a good "firearms safety" program in every elementary school. The NRA's "Eddie Eagle" program does NOT support gun ownership, but safety for our children when they encounter a firearm. (If you haven't seen the program, then don't even bother criticising it!) This isn't about teaching them to shoot. It's about how NOT to get shot by a found gun!
As it is, I stand firmly against any "assault weapons ban", and ask for ALL the laws currently on the books, be enforced, while we seek answers as to how and why some people are so mentally deranged, that they would kill innocent children!
By the way - I can verbally demonstrate how a 7 shot pistol, can be used for a high death toll, before the police could ever get to me. See http://american1st.blogspot.com/2012/08/tic-toc-tic-toc-tic-toc.html
With such acts, we (society) rush to seek answers and solutions to such an act. In this case, one of the weapons used was a so-called "assault weapon", and the call for a renewed ban is under way, believing that will stop the next such tragedy. We've had one of those before, and it had NO measurable affect on the crime rates, and the 10 year run of that ban was let to expire because it had no affect.
This is a complex discussion, with many sides and issues to take into consideration. First and foremost, is the 2nd amendment, with calls to repeal it, or to re-define it. In either case, the whole purpose for the 2nd amendment would be tossed out in such a process. It was put into our Bill of RIGHTS, as a safeguard over possible government tyranny, not just your personal defense. An "armed" populace, would not be an easily controlled populace. The "right" to bear arms, "shall NOT be infringed". And NO, it isn't about "hunting".
Freedoms are a delicate thing. Freedoms come with responsibilities. Freedoms comes with the freedom of choices. Freedoms, come with risks. To circumvent our responsibilities, to restrict our choices, to attempt to protect us against all risks, would require the elimination of most all our freedoms. So we have to ask ourselves, Is freedom worth the risk of abuses that can go with them? As sad it it can be at times, Yes, I believe so. It is our LAWS that are to handle the abuses, not curtail our freedoms.
The so-called "assault weapons", those by prior definition as civilian versions of current military arms, could hold clips and/or magazines of over 10 rounds of ammo, and/or had a bayonet lug (just silly), and/or were semi-automatic in actions. (Full automatic firearms are already heavily regulated, and not part of this issue.) A lot of weapons were included, and people were surprised at what those were, because aside from lacking the cosmetic features of a military weapon, many fired the same way, fired the same ammunition, and could hold and/or reload in much the same way. Those weapons were far more common for sport shooters and hunters than people first thought. (An Henry Repeating Rifle, holding 15 rounds in the tube, could be classified as an assault rifle!)
But what are AR-15 and other civilian versions of military weapons really used for today? WHY would anyone need an AR-15, is the common mantra of the anti-gun folks.
To start with, they have been and are "legal" to own, by law abiding citizens. And of the MILLIONS of such firearms in civilian hands, those used in crimes are barely measurable. That's MILLIONS of such firearms, in law abiding civilian hands! And while any murder, is tragic and senseless, those murdered by such weapons measure very few by comparison.
The military style weapons, rifles for the most part, have become a huge sporting firearm, used for sport shooting and plinking, and even to more serious competitions around the country. One such sport, known as "3-gun" competition shooting, has grown all over the country. Civilians, police, and military have teams that compete in this shooting sport.
http://3gunnation.com/
http://www.uspsa-nationals.org/
Most people likely don't know, but there has been a Civilian Marksmanship Program for many years. In 1871, the National Rifle Association, backed by the War Department, began a civilian marksmanship program in order to have men become proficient in the use of and marksmanship with firearms of the day. That program continued on, to include the WWII battle rifle, the M1 Garand. The M1 Garand was even offered at a government "at cost" rate to civilians who applied to participate in that program. http://www.odcmp.co/about_us.htm
(A word about the NRA. The NRA was started by a group of National Guardsmen, and it's first president was retired Army General Winfred Scott Hancock, and was followed in later years by General Ulysses S. Grant, General Sheridan, and Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt himself was a Life Member of the NRA. Also, the NRA has been the premiere driver behind Law Enforcement firearms training standards, as well as training armorers for police departments, and is also instrumental in marksmanship programs and competitions for all levels of law enforcement, and branches of the military.)
I would also submit that the AR-15 type firearms of today, are just an extension of the growing technology of firearms development, used largely by the military, but have always been adopted for use by the civilian population. This has always been true, dating back to the Springfield Trap-door that vastly improved the rate of fire in war time of that day, and was adopted by civilians to use. Most such firearm development has grown by the needs of the military, and then have been adopted for use by citizens for sport, hunting, and competition. (Much of the technology we use today, began by the needs of our military in one form or another!)
I find it almost humorous to imagine, but does anyone actually believe that a Minutemen at Lexington would not have chosen an AR-15 to own, had one been developed in that day? The AR-15 types of today, are the muskets of yesteryear.
I think it is important to know that the US, because we do have a "gun culture", likely has the best civilian marksmen in the world. China, who by the way is in favor of more gun control in the US, has NO legal firearms ownership for the citizens, and has about 2.4 million military members. (China, who also has one of the worse human rights records in the world, but hey, they have gun control!) The US has about 2 million military, and over 70 MILLION legal firearms owners. Wow. Now that's a potential "militia" to draw upon!
In the end, there are those who are genuinely trying to find answers to this horrid problem of such mass murders, but I believe are looking at the wrong solution. Mass murder is not new. Even mass murders at schools are not new. A very thorough look at WHY such people, armed with anything, would want to kill a bunch of defenseless children, is a must. No amount of gun laws will answer that or correct that. With over 22,000 gun laws across the country, chasing that dog will not get us anywhere.
With freedom, comes responsibility. And as for such mass murders, our responsibility is do what we reasonably can to protect our children and citizens, to deal with the reasons such perpetrators do such things, and to punish those who abuse our rights, which includes our right to bear arms. I DO NOT support arming everyone. Most people, are ill-equipped to be responsible enough to be proficient. But every law abiding citizen, should never be curtailed from taking advantage of enjoying the benefits of even one of our rights.
Honestly, IF we, as a nation, really cared more about our kids safety, than some political end-game, we would include a good "firearms safety" program in every elementary school. The NRA's "Eddie Eagle" program does NOT support gun ownership, but safety for our children when they encounter a firearm. (If you haven't seen the program, then don't even bother criticising it!) This isn't about teaching them to shoot. It's about how NOT to get shot by a found gun!
As it is, I stand firmly against any "assault weapons ban", and ask for ALL the laws currently on the books, be enforced, while we seek answers as to how and why some people are so mentally deranged, that they would kill innocent children!
By the way - I can verbally demonstrate how a 7 shot pistol, can be used for a high death toll, before the police could ever get to me. See http://american1st.blogspot.com/2012/08/tic-toc-tic-toc-tic-toc.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)