I am passing this blog post on to everyone I know, and hope every freedom loving, Constitution supporting, America reads this and passes this on.
This is a WARNING that we are about to lose our 2nd Amendment right!
The gun control fervor is reaching a point that may very well open the door to repealing the our 2nd Amendment. And I can PROVE IT.
But first, for any regular citizen concerned about violence upon our children, as am I, do NOT be fooled by the Obama side. Don't believe that they do not want to take our guns away, but simply want "common sense" gun control measures. That is a LIE. And according to some cited polling, many well meaning and concerned citizens are falling for that LIE.
It seems very reasonable to many for such simple measures be added, like the "universal background check" for all buyers. On the face of it, and if it were just that, then I understand that. And it may sound reasonable for some, to limit magazine capacities, or ban certain type of firearms that are currently legal. That I do not agree with at all, but we'll go there another time (I have before in prior posts).
But in Austin yesterday (4/10/2013), Democratic City Council member and potential next mayor Mike Martinez, admitted during a speech that the Obama administration’s long term gun control agenda is focused on banning firearms altogether. Martinez continued, by pointing out a sign held by a protester which read, “stop gun ban!,” and remarked, “someone needs to inform him that there is no gun ban currently, but because of the work we’re doing here today, we will make your sign legitimate shortly, so you hang on to that.” The crowd cheered as Martinez made his vow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4EjvyX_Q_M
Dianne Feinstein told '60 Minutes' in an interview, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States, for an outright ban, picking up [every gun]… Mr. and Mrs. America, turn ‘em all in.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJAvULtsQAQ
Chuck Schumer, Mayor Bloomberg, and many others, also want to do away with gun ownership by average citizens (the 2nd Amendment). These elected and sworn officials took an OATH to protect and defend the Constitution! In effect, they want to repeal of the 2nd Amendment, or at least a violate of our rights.
Do I oppose a "universal background check"? On the pure face of it, No. But what I oppose, as does the NRA, is the subtle infringement of our rights, buy whittling them down a little piece at a time. And ANY capitulation with these people, IS letting them advance their real desire to repeal of the 2nd Amendment. SO because of their subtle diluting of all our rights, I oppose ANY attempts to do so. And these so-called "common sense" gun control measures, are BULL SHIT! All they want, is a little giving in here, and a little giving in there, and the door would be open to do what they really want - to repeal the 2nd Amendment.
I'm calling my Texas reps this morning, and ask that for every freedom loving, Constitution supporting American, to do the same.
"A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The US Supreme Court has confirmed, that the 2nd amendment right to bear arms, is an INDIVIDUAL right! District of Columbia v.
Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Monday, April 8, 2013
One if by land...
While there are those, to include some friends I expect, who think that I am an alarmist. I do not believe so, and is it my believe that Paul Revere and those other Patriots of that day, were also thought to be alarmists before that famous ride. I don't mean to equate myself with Paul Revere, but would we recognise such a person today? I believe there are many who are trying to wave the lantern of alarm on the coming threat to liberty.
I saw a Youtube video today ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1ABw6IMKn0 ) that everyone should watch. Even if you don't like guns and want them banned, you should still watch this. This is not the first I've seen either. While this man had come from Communist Cuba, I've seen a presentation from a woman who survived NAZI Germany too ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvLdRz5pF7s ).
I have been alarmed about Obama since he started campaigning the first time. The vetting process by an engaged media, never happened, and the connections with Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Rev. Wright, were just ignored by at least HALF the nation, and most all the media.
And when Obama said, "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.", ALL my alarms went off. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s )
WHY would our government, with the best civilian law enforcement in the world, and the best military in the world, need its own "civilian national security force" Sorry, but that smacked of Hitler's SS to me. Call me an alarmist if you want, but at what point should the frog in the pan get out of the friggin' water!
Today, while our government is broke, the DHS (Department of Homeland Security [George W did us no favors with starting this!] has purchased at least 1.6 BILLION rounds of ammunition, at least 7,000 Assault Rifles, and over 2,000 Armored vehicles. WHO is this to be used against? The DHS is NOT our military, yet that agency is arming itself to more than match round for round our fighting military in Iraq and Afghanistan, for the next 20 years! I wish I could say they are arming to protect our borders, but those DHS vehicles are NOT being sent to the borders to support the Border Patrol.
Janet Napolitano has said that the purchase of that ammo is for spending efficiency. Really? Enough for how many years? When we are broke? Sorry, but that's a bullshit explanation. And I am suspicious as hell that THIS is Obama's move toward having the DHS be that "civilian national security force". THAT should cause everyone to be alarmed. It should be especially alarming to all those 60's types who so fervently opposed BIG GOVERNMENT back then!
Until "the people" are alarmed enough to wake up, I will continue to wave the lantern, and in this case, it's One if by land!
I saw a Youtube video today ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1ABw6IMKn0 ) that everyone should watch. Even if you don't like guns and want them banned, you should still watch this. This is not the first I've seen either. While this man had come from Communist Cuba, I've seen a presentation from a woman who survived NAZI Germany too ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvLdRz5pF7s ).
I have been alarmed about Obama since he started campaigning the first time. The vetting process by an engaged media, never happened, and the connections with Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Rev. Wright, were just ignored by at least HALF the nation, and most all the media.
And when Obama said, "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.", ALL my alarms went off. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s )
WHY would our government, with the best civilian law enforcement in the world, and the best military in the world, need its own "civilian national security force" Sorry, but that smacked of Hitler's SS to me. Call me an alarmist if you want, but at what point should the frog in the pan get out of the friggin' water!
Today, while our government is broke, the DHS (Department of Homeland Security [George W did us no favors with starting this!] has purchased at least 1.6 BILLION rounds of ammunition, at least 7,000 Assault Rifles, and over 2,000 Armored vehicles. WHO is this to be used against? The DHS is NOT our military, yet that agency is arming itself to more than match round for round our fighting military in Iraq and Afghanistan, for the next 20 years! I wish I could say they are arming to protect our borders, but those DHS vehicles are NOT being sent to the borders to support the Border Patrol.
Janet Napolitano has said that the purchase of that ammo is for spending efficiency. Really? Enough for how many years? When we are broke? Sorry, but that's a bullshit explanation. And I am suspicious as hell that THIS is Obama's move toward having the DHS be that "civilian national security force". THAT should cause everyone to be alarmed. It should be especially alarming to all those 60's types who so fervently opposed BIG GOVERNMENT back then!
Until "the people" are alarmed enough to wake up, I will continue to wave the lantern, and in this case, it's One if by land!
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Drugs, Murder, and the American Drug User
Recent Headlines:
January 31,2013 - "Kaufman County Courthouse Shooting: Two Suspects Open Fire On Prosecutor In Texas"
April 1, 2013 - "Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland, wife killed "
While the investigation into all three murders go on, I'm jumping in ... with both feet ... to condemn a group of people.
While it is entirely possible that the murders, 2 months apart, are unrelated, I can't imagine them not to be. And it is also possible, the murders were part of some revenge for other than gang/drug related convictions. But I seriously doubt that.
What I do suspect is that when the investigation is concluded, drug trafficking will play a part, in part or in whole. Whether its the Aryan Brotherhood, who funds themselves in large part by trafficking in drugs, or drug gangs working directly/indirectly for Drug Cartels, I'm betting the bottom line is drug money related.
Now add to that, the drug related murders in the US and Mexico, over the turf wars and enforcement of, the drug trade. The murders do not just involve other gang members, who no one would miss, but public officials (like the Kaufman County DAs), uninvolved bystanders, and those who have some peripheral association with those killed (death by association).
So where am I headed with all this? Here it is - ANYONE, who buys cocaine, heroine, imported marijuana, etc., are CONTRIBUTORS to all that death. I know many will jump on this with some justification or denial, but here is the absolute truth of the matter -
Regardless of any one's argument for legalized pot or such, we ALL know such substances are currently ILLEGAL. We also know that by buying any of those, we are committing a crime, most often a felony. So those who engage in those activities, KNOWINGLY commit crimes, to include felony crimes. And we ALL know that with cocaine especially, the Mexican cartels run the drug trade and are behind most of all the drug related deaths, in one way or another. Those illegal drug cartels, and all the dealers big or small, make money off the drug trade, and that money helps fuel the the murders.
So ... EVERY purchase of illegal drugs, contributes to the end result of death. And by extension, bare some responsibility for the deaths of those Prosecutors, and one wife, in Kaufman County Texas. YES, they DO! The profits, which start at the lowest street user, helps pay for guns, assassins, government pay-offs, even drug production slavery. Like any legitimate business, every dollar gets pieces of it taken out for each participating entity along the way to the top.
If ANYONE buys/deals drugs, that person CONTRIBUTES to the DEATHS of all those murdered for that drug dollar! If you use illegal drugs, those murderers KILL to get and keep YOUR DOLLARS!
January 31,2013 - "Kaufman County Courthouse Shooting: Two Suspects Open Fire On Prosecutor In Texas"
April 1, 2013 - "Kaufman County District Attorney Mike McLelland, wife killed "
While the investigation into all three murders go on, I'm jumping in ... with both feet ... to condemn a group of people.
While it is entirely possible that the murders, 2 months apart, are unrelated, I can't imagine them not to be. And it is also possible, the murders were part of some revenge for other than gang/drug related convictions. But I seriously doubt that.
What I do suspect is that when the investigation is concluded, drug trafficking will play a part, in part or in whole. Whether its the Aryan Brotherhood, who funds themselves in large part by trafficking in drugs, or drug gangs working directly/indirectly for Drug Cartels, I'm betting the bottom line is drug money related.
Now add to that, the drug related murders in the US and Mexico, over the turf wars and enforcement of, the drug trade. The murders do not just involve other gang members, who no one would miss, but public officials (like the Kaufman County DAs), uninvolved bystanders, and those who have some peripheral association with those killed (death by association).
So where am I headed with all this? Here it is - ANYONE, who buys cocaine, heroine, imported marijuana, etc., are CONTRIBUTORS to all that death. I know many will jump on this with some justification or denial, but here is the absolute truth of the matter -
Regardless of any one's argument for legalized pot or such, we ALL know such substances are currently ILLEGAL. We also know that by buying any of those, we are committing a crime, most often a felony. So those who engage in those activities, KNOWINGLY commit crimes, to include felony crimes. And we ALL know that with cocaine especially, the Mexican cartels run the drug trade and are behind most of all the drug related deaths, in one way or another. Those illegal drug cartels, and all the dealers big or small, make money off the drug trade, and that money helps fuel the the murders.
So ... EVERY purchase of illegal drugs, contributes to the end result of death. And by extension, bare some responsibility for the deaths of those Prosecutors, and one wife, in Kaufman County Texas. YES, they DO! The profits, which start at the lowest street user, helps pay for guns, assassins, government pay-offs, even drug production slavery. Like any legitimate business, every dollar gets pieces of it taken out for each participating entity along the way to the top.
If ANYONE buys/deals drugs, that person CONTRIBUTES to the DEATHS of all those murdered for that drug dollar! If you use illegal drugs, those murderers KILL to get and keep YOUR DOLLARS!
Friday, March 29, 2013
Universal Gun Background Checks?
Gun Control legislation in all forms are being cast upon the desks of politicians to vote on. Some are just plain alarming to me, and others could be painted in such a way to seem quite harmless to the law abiding citizen.
Of those, the "Universal Background Check" comes to mind. So the question may be, "Why would anyone oppose a 'universal background check' for anyone buying a firearm in a private transaction?"
On the face of it, it is a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Speaking ONLY for myself, I could see such a plan, if written and implemented properly. In a perfect world of firearms purchasing, what could be the harm? If we had such a reasonable plan, where all firearms purchasers, even from neighbor to neighbor, would require an Instant-check, what could be wrong with that? Nothing ... on its own.
But we don't have a perfect world, or more to the point, perfect politicians and others of authority. So what could go wrong? Why could it be a problem? The abuse of power is my fear, and that of most people I know!
To start with, we have an abundance of gun laws already. Speaking as an Ex-Cop, I can tell you that a good many of felony crimes committed with firearms, do NOT receive the prescribed minimum punishment they should get just for the firearm part of their crime. In fact, just recently one of the "straw purchasers" of all those guns bought/sold/delivered to drug cartels in our government's Fast and Furious fiasco, plead guilty and received "52 months" prison. 52 months, for the "52 guns" the guy bought for the cartel. ONLY "52 months"! That isn't even a 5 year minimum for just one gun! That's nothing, in the big scheme of things. And other criminals in various plea deals, also receive lighter sentences for gun crimes and avoid the minimums on the gun crime itself, in exchange for speeding up trials.
Secondly, I believe we are at a point where ANY slight impediment of individual freedoms, will be the proverbial "nose under the tent" for increasing to the next steps in curtailing our freedoms. It seems to me that a seemingly simple law, once enacted, can be too easily amended later, and/or enhanced, or just abused. Or, get the public to accept one restriction, and the next one will be less of a fight. (I've written before with the question, "Are we the frog in the pan?" http://american1st.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-frog-in-pan.html )
Lastly, I don't know of a time where the government enacted controls, restricting freedoms, where they were relaxed and/or give back later. One new law, just opens the door to the next one. And THAT is why I oppose ANY new gun laws. Enforce what we have ... FULLY. Make the violation of gun felonies be so costly to those criminals who use a gun in the commission of person felonies (*), that the "risk" is greater than any perceived "reward". But giving "the government" more authority over law abiding citizens, is a sure way to lose more freedoms, and potentially subject us to the tyranny (see 1938 Germany!) most of us vigilantly protect against.
(*) "person felonies", refers to a crime of intended or enacted violence to a person(s), and does not intend to include such crimes as damage to property or the like.
So yes, I AM opposed to any such law. That said, as a responsible gun owner, I never buy or sell to anyone I do not know or identify for myself, and always document that transaction date and to whom. I do this, not to report them, but to have available should a firearm I own/bought/sold is found to have been involved in a crime. If law enforcement comes to me abut a gun that was traced to me, I will cooperate as a responsible citizen, and point them to the next person in line of such ownership. THAT is what I would encourage every gun owner to do. THAT, I believe is being a responsible citizen. Law enforcement is NOT just the job of police. We are all part of that enforcement, by being responsible and cooperating in a constitutional way.
Add to that, a more complete data bank of those persons legally/medically found to be incompetent be part of the background check system, and I believe we have all the laws needed to take care of all but the insanely evil and heat-of-passion crimes. In the end, there are NO protections against EVIL.
Enforcement is the key! NO NEW GUN LAWS.
Of those, the "Universal Background Check" comes to mind. So the question may be, "Why would anyone oppose a 'universal background check' for anyone buying a firearm in a private transaction?"
On the face of it, it is a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Speaking ONLY for myself, I could see such a plan, if written and implemented properly. In a perfect world of firearms purchasing, what could be the harm? If we had such a reasonable plan, where all firearms purchasers, even from neighbor to neighbor, would require an Instant-check, what could be wrong with that? Nothing ... on its own.
But we don't have a perfect world, or more to the point, perfect politicians and others of authority. So what could go wrong? Why could it be a problem? The abuse of power is my fear, and that of most people I know!
To start with, we have an abundance of gun laws already. Speaking as an Ex-Cop, I can tell you that a good many of felony crimes committed with firearms, do NOT receive the prescribed minimum punishment they should get just for the firearm part of their crime. In fact, just recently one of the "straw purchasers" of all those guns bought/sold/delivered to drug cartels in our government's Fast and Furious fiasco, plead guilty and received "52 months" prison. 52 months, for the "52 guns" the guy bought for the cartel. ONLY "52 months"! That isn't even a 5 year minimum for just one gun! That's nothing, in the big scheme of things. And other criminals in various plea deals, also receive lighter sentences for gun crimes and avoid the minimums on the gun crime itself, in exchange for speeding up trials.
Secondly, I believe we are at a point where ANY slight impediment of individual freedoms, will be the proverbial "nose under the tent" for increasing to the next steps in curtailing our freedoms. It seems to me that a seemingly simple law, once enacted, can be too easily amended later, and/or enhanced, or just abused. Or, get the public to accept one restriction, and the next one will be less of a fight. (I've written before with the question, "Are we the frog in the pan?" http://american1st.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-frog-in-pan.html )
Lastly, I don't know of a time where the government enacted controls, restricting freedoms, where they were relaxed and/or give back later. One new law, just opens the door to the next one. And THAT is why I oppose ANY new gun laws. Enforce what we have ... FULLY. Make the violation of gun felonies be so costly to those criminals who use a gun in the commission of person felonies (*), that the "risk" is greater than any perceived "reward". But giving "the government" more authority over law abiding citizens, is a sure way to lose more freedoms, and potentially subject us to the tyranny (see 1938 Germany!) most of us vigilantly protect against.
(*) "person felonies", refers to a crime of intended or enacted violence to a person(s), and does not intend to include such crimes as damage to property or the like.
So yes, I AM opposed to any such law. That said, as a responsible gun owner, I never buy or sell to anyone I do not know or identify for myself, and always document that transaction date and to whom. I do this, not to report them, but to have available should a firearm I own/bought/sold is found to have been involved in a crime. If law enforcement comes to me abut a gun that was traced to me, I will cooperate as a responsible citizen, and point them to the next person in line of such ownership. THAT is what I would encourage every gun owner to do. THAT, I believe is being a responsible citizen. Law enforcement is NOT just the job of police. We are all part of that enforcement, by being responsible and cooperating in a constitutional way.
Add to that, a more complete data bank of those persons legally/medically found to be incompetent be part of the background check system, and I believe we have all the laws needed to take care of all but the insanely evil and heat-of-passion crimes. In the end, there are NO protections against EVIL.
Enforcement is the key! NO NEW GUN LAWS.
Thursday, March 21, 2013
ENOUGH - We have RIGHTS!
In the news on 3/20/2013, another story of over-reaction about a feared "gun" was highlighted. This time, a father, who is a NRA Hunter Safety Instructor, had taught his 10 year old son to safely shoot and get his Hunter Safety certification. With that, the boy was given a new rifle for his birthday. A photo was posted on facebook with the boy and his new rifle (AR look-alike, in .22 caliber).
Reportedly, someone, upon seeing the facebook entry, called the child abuse hot line and reported a possible child abuse. The New Jersey authorities, the local Police and the New Jersey Department of Children and Families personnel, showed up at the family's door. The dad was told that a call had been made to the NJDC&F about a possible child abuse, and they were there to look into the report.
Point - I'll make something clear on this. In all the states I know of, any call to report a possible child abuse is mandated by law to be investigated. And "hot lines" that people can call anonymously are a critical part of that. And I fully support that!
I ask, what part of that facebook picture, supported possible "child abuse"? A child, legally of age to hunt, having a gun? MILLIONS of kids hunt and shoot. I have taught 4-H Shooting Sports (Air Rifle marksmanship) to children 10-18! Have we conditioned people to fear the mere sight of a gun? Yes, we have. And that is an irrational fear, as MILLIONS of lawful gun owners, and MILLIONS of legal guns, cause NO deaths and pose NO threat.
But here is where this incident went wrong, VERY wrong in my view - The Police, and the NJDC&F, attempted to intimidate the family into letting them in, and to allow the authorities to search the home and family's gun safe for unsafe/illegal weapons without a warrant.
As an ex-Cop, I know about going confronting someone and asking permission to conduct a search of their person, car, or home. But in this case, they threatened to take the children away if the family failed to comply. That, they CAN NOT do. They also said to the father that he was "being unreasonable" and that he was "acting suspicious", because he wouldn’t open his safe. So ... IF we choose to not allow authorities unwarranted searches of our home, we're "acting suspicious"? Seriously? And another ploy that was used, "If you have nothing to hide, then you'll let us look into your safe to check out your guns." (This is classic "interdiction" ploy to get permission to search.) If this were a valid concept, then we wouldn't even need the 4th amendment!
Pay attention! THIS is the ploy to come to more gun owners. And ANYONE can make an anonymous call and have to authorities visit YOU! KNOW YOUR RIGHTS! Unless the immediate safety of someone inside is believed to be in jeopardy, no entry may be made without a warrant. DO NOT be intimidated into giving up YOUR rights. If someone does have something to hide, then the authorities can investigate further, and get a warrant. I did that MANY times in my career.
Another part of this fear of guns, or even the word "gun", is exampled by the many cases of schools suspending children for such things as pictures of guns, paper cut-outs of guns, fingers held like a gun, etc. In this case, someone viewing the facebook photo, had an irrational fear of even seeing a gun, and reported a possible child abuse.
Our society is moving more and more toward teaching kids a fear of things, such as guns, and creating phobias, and I suggest, a weakness. Instead of using such moments as teaching moments, let alone not being practical with how kids (more boys than girls) play and imagine, a disservice is done by teaching fear. We don't teach safety about guns, which is a greater disservice, because children who get overly inquisitive can get themselves into more dangerous trouble out of curiosity. The NRA has an Eddie Eagle Child Safe program, but schools run from anything NRA. And it's a better program than the NOTHING about gun safety the schools teach!
The anti-gun people have schools and citizens running in fear of anything "gun". While tragic deaths with guns are worthy of a discussion, teaching FEAR is not a solution. Neither are gun bans and confiscation from lawful citizens, when we have an abundance of guns laws now, that aren't being fully enforced.
But after school suspensions for such stupid things as toys and pictures, and now unlawful attempts to violate our civil rights, it's time to say ENOUGH! ENOUGH abuse by over-zealous law enforcement, politicians, school officials, etc. STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. And DO NOT let more of our RIGHTS be whittled away by laws that only restrict freedoms, or violated in the false name of safety.
Say - ENOUGH!
Reportedly, someone, upon seeing the facebook entry, called the child abuse hot line and reported a possible child abuse. The New Jersey authorities, the local Police and the New Jersey Department of Children and Families personnel, showed up at the family's door. The dad was told that a call had been made to the NJDC&F about a possible child abuse, and they were there to look into the report.
Point - I'll make something clear on this. In all the states I know of, any call to report a possible child abuse is mandated by law to be investigated. And "hot lines" that people can call anonymously are a critical part of that. And I fully support that!
I ask, what part of that facebook picture, supported possible "child abuse"? A child, legally of age to hunt, having a gun? MILLIONS of kids hunt and shoot. I have taught 4-H Shooting Sports (Air Rifle marksmanship) to children 10-18! Have we conditioned people to fear the mere sight of a gun? Yes, we have. And that is an irrational fear, as MILLIONS of lawful gun owners, and MILLIONS of legal guns, cause NO deaths and pose NO threat.
But here is where this incident went wrong, VERY wrong in my view - The Police, and the NJDC&F, attempted to intimidate the family into letting them in, and to allow the authorities to search the home and family's gun safe for unsafe/illegal weapons without a warrant.
As an ex-Cop, I know about going confronting someone and asking permission to conduct a search of their person, car, or home. But in this case, they threatened to take the children away if the family failed to comply. That, they CAN NOT do. They also said to the father that he was "being unreasonable" and that he was "acting suspicious", because he wouldn’t open his safe. So ... IF we choose to not allow authorities unwarranted searches of our home, we're "acting suspicious"? Seriously? And another ploy that was used, "If you have nothing to hide, then you'll let us look into your safe to check out your guns." (This is classic "interdiction" ploy to get permission to search.) If this were a valid concept, then we wouldn't even need the 4th amendment!
Pay attention! THIS is the ploy to come to more gun owners. And ANYONE can make an anonymous call and have to authorities visit YOU! KNOW YOUR RIGHTS! Unless the immediate safety of someone inside is believed to be in jeopardy, no entry may be made without a warrant. DO NOT be intimidated into giving up YOUR rights. If someone does have something to hide, then the authorities can investigate further, and get a warrant. I did that MANY times in my career.
Another part of this fear of guns, or even the word "gun", is exampled by the many cases of schools suspending children for such things as pictures of guns, paper cut-outs of guns, fingers held like a gun, etc. In this case, someone viewing the facebook photo, had an irrational fear of even seeing a gun, and reported a possible child abuse.
Our society is moving more and more toward teaching kids a fear of things, such as guns, and creating phobias, and I suggest, a weakness. Instead of using such moments as teaching moments, let alone not being practical with how kids (more boys than girls) play and imagine, a disservice is done by teaching fear. We don't teach safety about guns, which is a greater disservice, because children who get overly inquisitive can get themselves into more dangerous trouble out of curiosity. The NRA has an Eddie Eagle Child Safe program, but schools run from anything NRA. And it's a better program than the NOTHING about gun safety the schools teach!
The anti-gun people have schools and citizens running in fear of anything "gun". While tragic deaths with guns are worthy of a discussion, teaching FEAR is not a solution. Neither are gun bans and confiscation from lawful citizens, when we have an abundance of guns laws now, that aren't being fully enforced.
But after school suspensions for such stupid things as toys and pictures, and now unlawful attempts to violate our civil rights, it's time to say ENOUGH! ENOUGH abuse by over-zealous law enforcement, politicians, school officials, etc. STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. And DO NOT let more of our RIGHTS be whittled away by laws that only restrict freedoms, or violated in the false name of safety.
Say - ENOUGH!
Monday, March 11, 2013
Patriots, or Hate Groups?
I am a self-professed "Patriot", as well as a "conservative", a "Christian", a "Vietnam Veteran", a Caucasian male ("white" man), supporter of "capitalism", a Tea Party member, a believer and supporter of the foundation of the 2nd amendment, am a Life Member of the NRA, and I am an absolute believer that we need to be following the "constitution".
I am against much of what President Obama stands for, and believe he wants our nation to mirror a Socialist/Marxist society, and I am vocal in my opinions of Obama, the left, and other people/things I see as anti-American.
There are some, who would suggest people like me are liken to some "hate group". Or maybe, I'd could be labeled as "anti-government", and therefore should be watched, because they (the left, or some in government) think I could be a "domestic terrorist" threat. Others would have me branded as part of the growing "militia" groups (to say, paramilitary anti-government types).
Well, I don't believe I am any of those feared sort. To start with, I am NOT "anti-government". What I am, is pro-limited-government. I believe that the powers of the government, are spelled out in the constitution, and all powers not granted to the federal government, either rest with the states, or with "the people". Government, limited as it should be in "power", IS essential for maintaining a strong defense, and providing essential services the states alone can not do.
I do NOT belong to any militia. But I stand at the ready to join other "Patriots", should a rapid need arise for armed citizens to come to the defense of our nation, or even our local neighborhood. Such citizens did group together, armed, during Katrina. I also know of some who guarded, with arms, their neighborhoods during the Texas wildfires a few years back. (I have personal knowledge of such, and they turned back likely looters.)
I believe our Constitution and Bill of Rights lay out the framework for living together, and the rules we live by, come from the foundation of those documents. I also take Obama at his word, when he says he wants to "fundamentally change America", and I will NOT stand silent while any such person attempts to do that. If anything, it is the "fundamentals" we need to more closely adhere to!
I also support the 2nd Amendment, and fully believe that article in our Bill of Rights was written NOT for hunting, or even personal protection, so much as it was to help deter any government from trying to "rule" us again. Yes, that means the taking up of arms against such a government. And I stand ready to do just that. I do not wish for such an event, and pray we don't have that happen. But we should forever stand vigilant to protect against such a thing. While many think that could never happen in America, we are NOT immune to such a thing. All we have to do, is stand by and not restrain powerful people, and we will end up with those who want to rule us.
That also leads me to the so-called "assault weapons", and the extended magazine bans some want to levy against us. I am AGAINST such measures. We already have plenty of gun laws to follow, but many of those are NOT being enforced! It has been proven, that most all gun purchase applicants who fail the background check, are NOT prosecuted for lying on their applications. And I KNOW of cases where violators do NOT get the minimum sentences they should have gotten, and serve far less than the time they should have, for a firearms related crime. While some states have "5 year minimums" for just the gun crimes, that were to be added to their primary crime, those sentences are not seen near as often as they should be. Otherwise, I stand on the concept that IF "we, the people" should have to take up arms to protect our country from a tyrannical take-over, limiting us any further on choice of weapons and attachments/accessories, would only hinder us in matching the force of our enemies.
While I am a Life Member of the NRA, to anyone suggesting the NRA, and the membership, want unlimited guns on the streets, knows NOTHING about the NRA, or me! The NRA has been one of the strongest supporters of heavy sentences for people who use firearms in the commission of felonies.
The NRA has helped obtain congressional funding for state programs, like Project Exile in Virginia, to more fully prosecute gun offenders. (as an example - http://cnsnews.com/news/article/virginia-attorney-general-wants-project-exile-expanded-nationwide ) Add to that, NRA's long standing support of Law Enforcement, LE training and competitions and Armorer programs, and the NRA has a long proven record of being PRO-law enforcement. In fact, I am a NRA member with many years of prior law enforcement experience, as are many of my friends!
I love my country. I still keep my Flag out every day, always stand in respect of its passing, and at the singing of our National Anthem. I own several firearms, some of which could fall into some description by some, as "assault weapons". I blog, write my representatives, and am open in disagreeing with my government. Those are my RIGHTS, and in no way should the exercise of my RIGHTS label me as some type of threat to a lawful and constitutional government. I also am NOT a racist, and don't care one tiny bit what Obama's skin color is, nor anyone else's for that matter. I DO judge a man (or woman) by their deeds, and NOT by their color (any color).
But I AM a threat. I AM a threat to any intrusion upon my RIGHTS, or the rights of my neighbors, by any government or groups of people. That does not make me an anarchist or anti-government, or part of a some hate group. That, makes me a Patriot!
I am against much of what President Obama stands for, and believe he wants our nation to mirror a Socialist/Marxist society, and I am vocal in my opinions of Obama, the left, and other people/things I see as anti-American.
There are some, who would suggest people like me are liken to some "hate group". Or maybe, I'd could be labeled as "anti-government", and therefore should be watched, because they (the left, or some in government) think I could be a "domestic terrorist" threat. Others would have me branded as part of the growing "militia" groups (to say, paramilitary anti-government types).
Well, I don't believe I am any of those feared sort. To start with, I am NOT "anti-government". What I am, is pro-limited-government. I believe that the powers of the government, are spelled out in the constitution, and all powers not granted to the federal government, either rest with the states, or with "the people". Government, limited as it should be in "power", IS essential for maintaining a strong defense, and providing essential services the states alone can not do.
I do NOT belong to any militia. But I stand at the ready to join other "Patriots", should a rapid need arise for armed citizens to come to the defense of our nation, or even our local neighborhood. Such citizens did group together, armed, during Katrina. I also know of some who guarded, with arms, their neighborhoods during the Texas wildfires a few years back. (I have personal knowledge of such, and they turned back likely looters.)
I believe our Constitution and Bill of Rights lay out the framework for living together, and the rules we live by, come from the foundation of those documents. I also take Obama at his word, when he says he wants to "fundamentally change America", and I will NOT stand silent while any such person attempts to do that. If anything, it is the "fundamentals" we need to more closely adhere to!
I also support the 2nd Amendment, and fully believe that article in our Bill of Rights was written NOT for hunting, or even personal protection, so much as it was to help deter any government from trying to "rule" us again. Yes, that means the taking up of arms against such a government. And I stand ready to do just that. I do not wish for such an event, and pray we don't have that happen. But we should forever stand vigilant to protect against such a thing. While many think that could never happen in America, we are NOT immune to such a thing. All we have to do, is stand by and not restrain powerful people, and we will end up with those who want to rule us.
That also leads me to the so-called "assault weapons", and the extended magazine bans some want to levy against us. I am AGAINST such measures. We already have plenty of gun laws to follow, but many of those are NOT being enforced! It has been proven, that most all gun purchase applicants who fail the background check, are NOT prosecuted for lying on their applications. And I KNOW of cases where violators do NOT get the minimum sentences they should have gotten, and serve far less than the time they should have, for a firearms related crime. While some states have "5 year minimums" for just the gun crimes, that were to be added to their primary crime, those sentences are not seen near as often as they should be. Otherwise, I stand on the concept that IF "we, the people" should have to take up arms to protect our country from a tyrannical take-over, limiting us any further on choice of weapons and attachments/accessories, would only hinder us in matching the force of our enemies.
While I am a Life Member of the NRA, to anyone suggesting the NRA, and the membership, want unlimited guns on the streets, knows NOTHING about the NRA, or me! The NRA has been one of the strongest supporters of heavy sentences for people who use firearms in the commission of felonies.
The NRA has helped obtain congressional funding for state programs, like Project Exile in Virginia, to more fully prosecute gun offenders. (as an example - http://cnsnews.com/news/article/virginia-attorney-general-wants-project-exile-expanded-nationwide ) Add to that, NRA's long standing support of Law Enforcement, LE training and competitions and Armorer programs, and the NRA has a long proven record of being PRO-law enforcement. In fact, I am a NRA member with many years of prior law enforcement experience, as are many of my friends!
I love my country. I still keep my Flag out every day, always stand in respect of its passing, and at the singing of our National Anthem. I own several firearms, some of which could fall into some description by some, as "assault weapons". I blog, write my representatives, and am open in disagreeing with my government. Those are my RIGHTS, and in no way should the exercise of my RIGHTS label me as some type of threat to a lawful and constitutional government. I also am NOT a racist, and don't care one tiny bit what Obama's skin color is, nor anyone else's for that matter. I DO judge a man (or woman) by their deeds, and NOT by their color (any color).
But I AM a threat. I AM a threat to any intrusion upon my RIGHTS, or the rights of my neighbors, by any government or groups of people. That does not make me an anarchist or anti-government, or part of a some hate group. That, makes me a Patriot!
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
You Can Tell a LOT About a Man
For most men, we were young contemptible boys at one time or another. Some of us had moments of rebellion, obstinance, and just downright disrespect for our elders. And that included at times, our own mothers.
I know I was guilty in some of those respects when I was young. We all do in one way or another. For the most part, I believe I've been respectful to women, and to my mom. I'm sure there were times I may not have shown it, but I always respected her. She was a hard worker, with keeping house AND an outside job to help with the family finances. She was strict, but never abusive (spankings were not abuse!). And I learned a LOT from how I was brought up.
In my adult years, I have had jobs where I saw every kind of man, young and old, one could run across. They ran the gambit of criminals, juvenile delinquents, abusers of women, and abusers of "mothers". In many such cases, there was either no father involved, or a father leading by a bad example, who was abusive to his wife and/or his own mother. So there was little chance of a "good" male role model to help guide a kid into proper behavior toward others, specially women and "mothers".
As a Cop, I often saw such young men who abused women, to include girlfriends, sisters, and mothers. And for some of those, I just didn't see much that would change who they were. Mostly, because there didn't appear to be any chance of a change of heart within such a kid. The bad lessons were too deep, and the law was usually there to just pick up the pieces, delivering the misguided young man to the courts to deal with. No real lessons were to come with that either, except to maybe not get "caught" next time! Even then, many "mothers" let them back into their lives, because "mothers" do that. That kid, no matter what, is a mother's child.
But even today, I see "men", to use the term loosely, who disrespect women in general, and their own mothers. Such disrespect can come in the form of physical abuse, mental abuse, or taking advantage of a mother's goodness and love. While some don't commit actual crimes, their mark on the those moms leave a deep hurt. No such hurt should be felt by a "mother". And again, that is more often than not without a "father" involved, or a "father" was there and who abused her as well. A mother, who carried that child, nurtured that child, and raised the child the best she could, deserves respect. No mother is perfect, but every "mother" is a "mother", and respect for her is due every mother. (Abusive mothers not included. But we do need to ask "why" such mothers abuse. That's a different topic.) And may I dare say, NO ONE could cause such a deep hurt to a mother's heart, than her own child can.
Many of these men go on to commit crimes, or constantly run into law enforcement in one way or another. Others, perhaps more of these, go on to treat their mothers with disrespect in various ways, such a mental and verbal abuse. Or worse yet, abuse a mother's heart by intentionally bringing emotional hurt to the very person who brought them into the world. A mother's own child, forsaking the love of that mom, and turning his back on her emotional needs, needs an ass whoopin'! Above most anything on earth, and I can only imagine this, a "mother" needs the love of her own child, above ALL that from any other.
I have no use for abusers, and that includes abusers of the heart to such mothers. Any "man" who treats his mother with disrespect, could just as well do anything to anyone. For such men to disrespect their own mother, the very person who held them to her bosom, is a low-life in my book. But while I say that, "mothers" would still come to their child's aid and defend them.
Young women pay attention! Young women need to really know a guy they may be interested in. They need to know how a guy treats their female friends and family. Know how they treat their own mothers. As far as I'm concerned, such disrespect and/or abuse, is a sure sign of a flawed man, and a wide berth should be given to such a person. If a man abuses his own flesh-n-blood mother, then a young women has a similar fate to come. I give such men a wide berth too, and have no use for them in my space. Such tolerance for them, would be like condoning their behavior. Honestly, I'd rather just slap the crap out of such men!
Men - Fathers - It is up to YOU, to help bring the young men of our nation up to show respect for the women in their lives, ALL women they come into contact with. But most importantly, teach them - SHOW them - how to treat their mother. Chances are, knowing how to respect women, specially their own mothers, will usually guide them to respect all people. But respect starts at home, by respecting their own MOTHERS!
Yep, you can tell a lot about a man, by how he treats his own mother.
I know I was guilty in some of those respects when I was young. We all do in one way or another. For the most part, I believe I've been respectful to women, and to my mom. I'm sure there were times I may not have shown it, but I always respected her. She was a hard worker, with keeping house AND an outside job to help with the family finances. She was strict, but never abusive (spankings were not abuse!). And I learned a LOT from how I was brought up.
In my adult years, I have had jobs where I saw every kind of man, young and old, one could run across. They ran the gambit of criminals, juvenile delinquents, abusers of women, and abusers of "mothers". In many such cases, there was either no father involved, or a father leading by a bad example, who was abusive to his wife and/or his own mother. So there was little chance of a "good" male role model to help guide a kid into proper behavior toward others, specially women and "mothers".
As a Cop, I often saw such young men who abused women, to include girlfriends, sisters, and mothers. And for some of those, I just didn't see much that would change who they were. Mostly, because there didn't appear to be any chance of a change of heart within such a kid. The bad lessons were too deep, and the law was usually there to just pick up the pieces, delivering the misguided young man to the courts to deal with. No real lessons were to come with that either, except to maybe not get "caught" next time! Even then, many "mothers" let them back into their lives, because "mothers" do that. That kid, no matter what, is a mother's child.
But even today, I see "men", to use the term loosely, who disrespect women in general, and their own mothers. Such disrespect can come in the form of physical abuse, mental abuse, or taking advantage of a mother's goodness and love. While some don't commit actual crimes, their mark on the those moms leave a deep hurt. No such hurt should be felt by a "mother". And again, that is more often than not without a "father" involved, or a "father" was there and who abused her as well. A mother, who carried that child, nurtured that child, and raised the child the best she could, deserves respect. No mother is perfect, but every "mother" is a "mother", and respect for her is due every mother. (Abusive mothers not included. But we do need to ask "why" such mothers abuse. That's a different topic.) And may I dare say, NO ONE could cause such a deep hurt to a mother's heart, than her own child can.
Many of these men go on to commit crimes, or constantly run into law enforcement in one way or another. Others, perhaps more of these, go on to treat their mothers with disrespect in various ways, such a mental and verbal abuse. Or worse yet, abuse a mother's heart by intentionally bringing emotional hurt to the very person who brought them into the world. A mother's own child, forsaking the love of that mom, and turning his back on her emotional needs, needs an ass whoopin'! Above most anything on earth, and I can only imagine this, a "mother" needs the love of her own child, above ALL that from any other.
I have no use for abusers, and that includes abusers of the heart to such mothers. Any "man" who treats his mother with disrespect, could just as well do anything to anyone. For such men to disrespect their own mother, the very person who held them to her bosom, is a low-life in my book. But while I say that, "mothers" would still come to their child's aid and defend them.
Young women pay attention! Young women need to really know a guy they may be interested in. They need to know how a guy treats their female friends and family. Know how they treat their own mothers. As far as I'm concerned, such disrespect and/or abuse, is a sure sign of a flawed man, and a wide berth should be given to such a person. If a man abuses his own flesh-n-blood mother, then a young women has a similar fate to come. I give such men a wide berth too, and have no use for them in my space. Such tolerance for them, would be like condoning their behavior. Honestly, I'd rather just slap the crap out of such men!
Men - Fathers - It is up to YOU, to help bring the young men of our nation up to show respect for the women in their lives, ALL women they come into contact with. But most importantly, teach them - SHOW them - how to treat their mother. Chances are, knowing how to respect women, specially their own mothers, will usually guide them to respect all people. But respect starts at home, by respecting their own MOTHERS!
Yep, you can tell a lot about a man, by how he treats his own mother.
Friday, February 22, 2013
Why the FEAR of Gun Registration?
I, along with millions of other gun owners and the National Rifle Association, have been steadily resistant to any "gun registration". Many non-gun owners (and even some gun owners) can't understand such a simple measure being a bad thing and may appear harmless. In fact, some politicians claim the "gun registration" will NOT lead to confiscation of lawful citizen's guns.
I don't believe it, and do NOT trust ANY proposal for national firearms registration. Period.
Is the basic idea of firearms registration a bad idea? Not in my view. It would be like registering one's car, as far as pure "registration" goes. But car's ARE NOT for self defense, or national safeguards, or subject to confiscation! So let's not compare any of the apples and oranges BS.
Why object so soundly, many might ask? To start with, there are some outspoken, and dare I say honest, politicians who have flat out said they want to confiscate all guns, or at least all guns of some menacing nature, or some variation of confiscation. Some even believe the 2nd amendment should be repealed altogether!
Of late, one of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia Washington this session, calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners, at least once a year....WITHOUT a warrant! All owners would be required to register such guns (all guns?), so the county sheriffs would know whose home to go to. WITHOUT A WARRANT ... (in case you missed that)! Once that section was discovered, the bill’s backers say that was just a mistake, but no one is fessing up to who put that in.
(Like so many bills, they may have hoped people would just glance over it, and it would be signed into law before anyone "knew what was in it"! Obamacare anyone?????)
Canadian gun owners, as well as "former gun owners" from Great Britain and Australia, have written warning in blogs and other on-line pieces, decrying America's government attempt to register firearms, telling how those measures lead to the confiscation of their own firearms. I wish I had kept a copy of it, but one writer said, in essence, America is the last bastion of freedom, and if the 2nd amendment goes away there, there will be no more real freedom anywhere in the world.
Here it is - Unless someone can prove .... prove ... that there would NEVER be a general confiscation of firearms in the future, then I won't go along with ANY registration. And NO ONE can promise that, because right now, our "shall not be infringed" right under the 2nd amendment is already under attack!
As for our 2nd amendment right, ANY "right" we currently have that could be taken away, opens up the next "right" as an easier one to be taken next. Those foundational building blocks of a FREE America, are all we have to stay a FREE nation.
No sir. NO registration. And HELL NO - NO confiscation .... EVER!
I don't believe it, and do NOT trust ANY proposal for national firearms registration. Period.
Is the basic idea of firearms registration a bad idea? Not in my view. It would be like registering one's car, as far as pure "registration" goes. But car's ARE NOT for self defense, or national safeguards, or subject to confiscation! So let's not compare any of the apples and oranges BS.
Why object so soundly, many might ask? To start with, there are some outspoken, and dare I say honest, politicians who have flat out said they want to confiscate all guns, or at least all guns of some menacing nature, or some variation of confiscation. Some even believe the 2nd amendment should be repealed altogether!
Of late, one of the major gun-control efforts in Olympia Washington this session, calls for the sheriff to inspect the homes of assault-weapon owners, at least once a year....WITHOUT a warrant! All owners would be required to register such guns (all guns?), so the county sheriffs would know whose home to go to. WITHOUT A WARRANT ... (in case you missed that)! Once that section was discovered, the bill’s backers say that was just a mistake, but no one is fessing up to who put that in.
(Like so many bills, they may have hoped people would just glance over it, and it would be signed into law before anyone "knew what was in it"! Obamacare anyone?????)
Canadian gun owners, as well as "former gun owners" from Great Britain and Australia, have written warning in blogs and other on-line pieces, decrying America's government attempt to register firearms, telling how those measures lead to the confiscation of their own firearms. I wish I had kept a copy of it, but one writer said, in essence, America is the last bastion of freedom, and if the 2nd amendment goes away there, there will be no more real freedom anywhere in the world.
Here it is - Unless someone can prove .... prove ... that there would NEVER be a general confiscation of firearms in the future, then I won't go along with ANY registration. And NO ONE can promise that, because right now, our "shall not be infringed" right under the 2nd amendment is already under attack!
As for our 2nd amendment right, ANY "right" we currently have that could be taken away, opens up the next "right" as an easier one to be taken next. Those foundational building blocks of a FREE America, are all we have to stay a FREE nation.
No sir. NO registration. And HELL NO - NO confiscation .... EVER!
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Obama, Our Best Gun Salesman!
Since Obama's re-election, and along with his and other's increased rhetoric about new gun control legislation (Executive Orders), gun sales in the U.S. have soared. Check out just a few headlines I found on-line:
NYTimes - "Sales of Guns Soar in U.S. as Nation Weighs Tougher Limits"
NBCNews - "Gun stores running low on weapons as sales surge, owners say"
REUTERS - "Gun checks soar 39 percent, set new record: FBI"
UK Telegraph - "US guns sales soar after Barack Obama's re-election"
Along with the soaring sales, are a record number of "new" gun buyers. And of those, a record number of new "female" gun buyers.
These are not "gun nuts". These are everyday folks who have for one reason or another, decided to buy a gun, while they still can. Obama has them worried. Worried about losing their right to buy a gun of their choice, or maybe one at all!
I routinely visit a near-by major chain gun store, and with each visit, I see a variety of people at the gun counter, making mostly handgun purchases. I have seen on several occasions, older (retirement age) couples buying firearms. Or younger (20's-30's) men with their wives or girlfriends, looking over assorted firearms, again mostly handguns.
I've listened in, as the gun counter salesperson has described the differences between semi-auto and revolvers, to obviously new gun owning prospects. Or heard one older couple discussing the cost of one selection over another.
And, since around Christmas 2012, the shelves began emptying. As of this past week, all popular handgun and rifle ammunition shelves were empty from that store, and from other stores in the area I decided to check on. This is nation-wide too.
Yes, Obama has become our nation's best gun salesman! So much so, a friend of mine sent this bumper sticker to me. I guess he felt Obama needed the recognition for his unintended award!
If you would like one of these, he is selling them for $5 each, postage paid. Contact me through my email here, Hunter3187@gmail.com and I'll forward your order request to him.
By the way. All those sales could be in vain. IF Obama and friends get their way, CONFISCATION will be coming sooner than later, and they will attempt to have those new (and old) guns THEY decide we shouldn't have, taken away. DO NOT be fooled into thinking that can't happen. Where there is a will, there IS a political way!
Oh ... Almost forgot. Obama has also increased the National Rifle Association (NRA) membership to over 4 MILLION and climbing!
As a Life Member, I'd ask you to - Join the NRA!
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?campaignid=bonusgiftwy&EK=Y3ARPPBD&pubID=148.30&hid=21903151
NYTimes - "Sales of Guns Soar in U.S. as Nation Weighs Tougher Limits"
NBCNews - "Gun stores running low on weapons as sales surge, owners say"
REUTERS - "Gun checks soar 39 percent, set new record: FBI"
UK Telegraph - "US guns sales soar after Barack Obama's re-election"
Along with the soaring sales, are a record number of "new" gun buyers. And of those, a record number of new "female" gun buyers.
These are not "gun nuts". These are everyday folks who have for one reason or another, decided to buy a gun, while they still can. Obama has them worried. Worried about losing their right to buy a gun of their choice, or maybe one at all!
I routinely visit a near-by major chain gun store, and with each visit, I see a variety of people at the gun counter, making mostly handgun purchases. I have seen on several occasions, older (retirement age) couples buying firearms. Or younger (20's-30's) men with their wives or girlfriends, looking over assorted firearms, again mostly handguns.
I've listened in, as the gun counter salesperson has described the differences between semi-auto and revolvers, to obviously new gun owning prospects. Or heard one older couple discussing the cost of one selection over another.
And, since around Christmas 2012, the shelves began emptying. As of this past week, all popular handgun and rifle ammunition shelves were empty from that store, and from other stores in the area I decided to check on. This is nation-wide too.
Yes, Obama has become our nation's best gun salesman! So much so, a friend of mine sent this bumper sticker to me. I guess he felt Obama needed the recognition for his unintended award!
If you would like one of these, he is selling them for $5 each, postage paid. Contact me through my email here, Hunter3187@gmail.com and I'll forward your order request to him.
By the way. All those sales could be in vain. IF Obama and friends get their way, CONFISCATION will be coming sooner than later, and they will attempt to have those new (and old) guns THEY decide we shouldn't have, taken away. DO NOT be fooled into thinking that can't happen. Where there is a will, there IS a political way!
Oh ... Almost forgot. Obama has also increased the National Rifle Association (NRA) membership to over 4 MILLION and climbing!
As a Life Member, I'd ask you to - Join the NRA!
https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp?campaignid=bonusgiftwy&EK=Y3ARPPBD&pubID=148.30&hid=21903151
Friday, February 15, 2013
Being a Responsible Gun Owner
Okay, at the risk of offending some of my gun owning brethren, I'll delve into this anyway.
To be clear, I do not support any gun laws that keep lawful citizens from buying and owning currently legal firearms and/or accessories. PERIOD. True "assault weapons", those like our military use, are already heavily regulated, and no change is needed.
I am also totally against firearms "registration". Registration, i.e. registering a gun and owner with a governmental agency. In my view, that IS a required first step to confiscation, and I do not trust ANY administration from taking that step. Any time we "trust" some government to not do that, we open up any government from doing just that!
I AM for instant checks, as we see that with all dealer sales. And I COULD be in favor of extending that to private sales, and I believe I can describe how that could work.
But before I go there, I will say this - I am an ex-Cop. With that past profession, I can tell you that of the many gun thefts cases I've seen, one fact existed - most all of them end up somewhere other than in the hands of a lawful gun owner! I recall one store in particular that was broken into, and over 25 guns were stolen. Years later, only one gun turned up. An out-of-state off-duty Cop bought a handgun at a garage sale. When he later checked it against NCIC, he found it had been stolen from the store in our town. That gun had been gone for more than 4 years! And with that, it is believed to have changed hands many times over. The trail could not be followed backward for very far.
As for me, I have never sold one of my own firearms to anyone without knowing who I sold it to. One guy was unwilling to provide any ID or divulge who he was, so I didn't sell it to him. I did explain to him that I would only share his information with authorities, IF a crime was committed with it. I had bought it new, so MY name was connected to it. And if a crime was committed with that gun, I would want to point the authorities to the next in line of ownership. I later sold it to him, after he thought it over and came back. I recommend everyone KNOW who you sell to, who you buy from, and document that date and to/from whom, in the event a crime is committed with that gun.
As a responsible citizen, I would hate to have a gun I had owned, used in a crime. And if it was, then I want to point Law Enforcement to the next person in line of that ownership, so the end user could be more easily found. I want laws enforced, and bad guys to go to jail. And I don't mind in the least to help law enforcement out, if a crime was committed. Remember, for a crime to be committed, means there was at least ONE victim. Who wouldn't want to help a victim out, by providing good information.
But to my point of "instant checks". As it is, manufacturers list each firearm made, then where and to what supplier. Those records are then kept as to which dealer they go to. The dealer sells the firearm, following the law and running an "instant check", and that firearm sale is documented as to what it was, and who bought it. Unless that firearm is sold or pawned to a federal firearms license holder, the documentation stops with the last person to be on a yellow form.
To those not familiar with such sales, the federal government can NOT keep records of gun buyers (acknowledging that some may be doing that in violation already). THAT would be registration. Those yellow forms, and even the "instant checks" are not, BY LAW, to be maintained by anyone other than the dealer. BUT - Law Enforcement can trace the firearm back from the manufacturer, to the end dealer. From there, they can find the buyer from that dealer. At that point, it is on the buyer as to what happens with that firearm.
It is MY opinion, that even with a private sale, a firearm buyer could be required to get a form signed by local law enforcement, that shows an "instant check" was done, on the same day as the sale (or reasonable time of the check). I would feel very good about having that form in my hand, when I sold my gun. And, like I have in the past, I'd keep that info along with my own firearm inventory information. I believe THAT is a responsible thing to do, and would be an added protection for a prior gun owner, should that gun be used in a crime later on.
Each state could adopt a "Shall check", so local agencies would be required to provide, with reasonable fees, an "Instant Check". No form, no sale. Who would want to risk selling a gun that would later be used in a crime?
In the end, if a gun is found at a crime scene, that gun could be traced to the end dealer, and to the last person listed as a buyer. It would be up to that buyer, upon a "search warrant" (unless volunteered), to provide the name of whom bought that gun, and so on down the line.
A word about extended magazines - A magazine is NOTHING without a gun to shoot with. Control the guns from getting in CRIMINAL hands, and let the rest take care of itself. Leave our mags alone!Its a worthless argument in my opinion, and I've written about it before (see my blog post, TIC-TOC TIC-TOC).
Bottom line for me - Protect ALL my rights, while not impeding law enforcement from investigating gun crimes. NO registration should be involved, and only requiring gun owners to take responsibility in the chain of possession, should law enforcement need to track a gun crime weapon.
If we are to combat confiscation by the government, we need to take our own measures to help curb the tide of illegal weapons, some of which could be coming from our own unknowing sale to a bad-guy or straw purchaser.
Meanwhile, I will keep and enjoy shooting my AR, semi-auto handguns, extended mags, and what ever else I choose that is legal today. And I will not forfeit ANY of those. And I will continue to cover my own ass, by documenting who I buy from, as well as who I sell to.
I'll close by asking this one question: If you family member was killed with a gun, and the suspect with prior felonies was found with that gun, wouldn't you want to know how he/she got it?
To be clear, I do not support any gun laws that keep lawful citizens from buying and owning currently legal firearms and/or accessories. PERIOD. True "assault weapons", those like our military use, are already heavily regulated, and no change is needed.
I am also totally against firearms "registration". Registration, i.e. registering a gun and owner with a governmental agency. In my view, that IS a required first step to confiscation, and I do not trust ANY administration from taking that step. Any time we "trust" some government to not do that, we open up any government from doing just that!
I AM for instant checks, as we see that with all dealer sales. And I COULD be in favor of extending that to private sales, and I believe I can describe how that could work.
But before I go there, I will say this - I am an ex-Cop. With that past profession, I can tell you that of the many gun thefts cases I've seen, one fact existed - most all of them end up somewhere other than in the hands of a lawful gun owner! I recall one store in particular that was broken into, and over 25 guns were stolen. Years later, only one gun turned up. An out-of-state off-duty Cop bought a handgun at a garage sale. When he later checked it against NCIC, he found it had been stolen from the store in our town. That gun had been gone for more than 4 years! And with that, it is believed to have changed hands many times over. The trail could not be followed backward for very far.
As for me, I have never sold one of my own firearms to anyone without knowing who I sold it to. One guy was unwilling to provide any ID or divulge who he was, so I didn't sell it to him. I did explain to him that I would only share his information with authorities, IF a crime was committed with it. I had bought it new, so MY name was connected to it. And if a crime was committed with that gun, I would want to point the authorities to the next in line of ownership. I later sold it to him, after he thought it over and came back. I recommend everyone KNOW who you sell to, who you buy from, and document that date and to/from whom, in the event a crime is committed with that gun.
As a responsible citizen, I would hate to have a gun I had owned, used in a crime. And if it was, then I want to point Law Enforcement to the next person in line of that ownership, so the end user could be more easily found. I want laws enforced, and bad guys to go to jail. And I don't mind in the least to help law enforcement out, if a crime was committed. Remember, for a crime to be committed, means there was at least ONE victim. Who wouldn't want to help a victim out, by providing good information.
But to my point of "instant checks". As it is, manufacturers list each firearm made, then where and to what supplier. Those records are then kept as to which dealer they go to. The dealer sells the firearm, following the law and running an "instant check", and that firearm sale is documented as to what it was, and who bought it. Unless that firearm is sold or pawned to a federal firearms license holder, the documentation stops with the last person to be on a yellow form.
To those not familiar with such sales, the federal government can NOT keep records of gun buyers (acknowledging that some may be doing that in violation already). THAT would be registration. Those yellow forms, and even the "instant checks" are not, BY LAW, to be maintained by anyone other than the dealer. BUT - Law Enforcement can trace the firearm back from the manufacturer, to the end dealer. From there, they can find the buyer from that dealer. At that point, it is on the buyer as to what happens with that firearm.
It is MY opinion, that even with a private sale, a firearm buyer could be required to get a form signed by local law enforcement, that shows an "instant check" was done, on the same day as the sale (or reasonable time of the check). I would feel very good about having that form in my hand, when I sold my gun. And, like I have in the past, I'd keep that info along with my own firearm inventory information. I believe THAT is a responsible thing to do, and would be an added protection for a prior gun owner, should that gun be used in a crime later on.
Each state could adopt a "Shall check", so local agencies would be required to provide, with reasonable fees, an "Instant Check". No form, no sale. Who would want to risk selling a gun that would later be used in a crime?
In the end, if a gun is found at a crime scene, that gun could be traced to the end dealer, and to the last person listed as a buyer. It would be up to that buyer, upon a "search warrant" (unless volunteered), to provide the name of whom bought that gun, and so on down the line.
A word about extended magazines - A magazine is NOTHING without a gun to shoot with. Control the guns from getting in CRIMINAL hands, and let the rest take care of itself. Leave our mags alone!Its a worthless argument in my opinion, and I've written about it before (see my blog post, TIC-TOC TIC-TOC).
Bottom line for me - Protect ALL my rights, while not impeding law enforcement from investigating gun crimes. NO registration should be involved, and only requiring gun owners to take responsibility in the chain of possession, should law enforcement need to track a gun crime weapon.
If we are to combat confiscation by the government, we need to take our own measures to help curb the tide of illegal weapons, some of which could be coming from our own unknowing sale to a bad-guy or straw purchaser.
Meanwhile, I will keep and enjoy shooting my AR, semi-auto handguns, extended mags, and what ever else I choose that is legal today. And I will not forfeit ANY of those. And I will continue to cover my own ass, by documenting who I buy from, as well as who I sell to.
I'll close by asking this one question: If you family member was killed with a gun, and the suspect with prior felonies was found with that gun, wouldn't you want to know how he/she got it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)