Man's best friend

My wife and I love dogs. Both of us have had a canine pet around most our lives. We have two today, and they live indoors with us, sit with us on the couch, sleep on the bed, and are treated like one of our kids. And non-dog owners, would likely not understand any of that. (I would NEVER just keep a dog outside on a chain!)

DO you get a dog video sent to you? Maybe one of those Soldier comes home to dog" videos? Or a bunch of puppy pictures? I'm a sucker for all of those, and except for those that pull at the heart-strings, bring a smile, even in todays often depressing news.

There are dog rescue groups, many are even breed specific. We've bought puppies (not from a puppy-mill), as well as rescued some from a humane society or animal control. My daughter's dog, was rescued from what was to be euthanasia. he rescued dogs, seem to know they were truly "rescued". They seem to be more lovable, staying close all the time.

Our dogs miss us if we've been gone all day. But if either of us is gone for several days, they just go crazy when we come home. We know we are missed. But I've never been gone a year!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0zMzfegs5s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysKAVyXi0J4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD3cgDRsDck

Have you ever felt this loved? There are loads of videos out their like these.

I also follow this Blogger -  http://khanrahan.com/ (check him out)
This guy is an Army Veteran, and his blog has true heart warming stories, as well as the sad ones of "man's best friend" giving their all for their Soldier handlers and those around them. Great Job Kevin!

Service Dogs are proving to be a great asset for returning Soldiers dealing with physical disabilities, and growing help to those suffering with PTSD. Any web-search can yield service dogs for most any purpose.
http://www.hero-dogs.org/veterans.html
http://4pawsforability.org/paws-for-veterans/

Last year, we lost our Irish Setter of 13 years. Age got to her, and letting her go was one of the hardest things I could ever go through. I can barely type this, without getting a little teary eyed at seeing her in my mind's eye, and this picture.

I am not a cat lover, but I've been around cats. I know they can be loving (so I've heard), but I've never seen a pet that loves, unconditionally, like a dog does. I've often joked, "If Timmy fell down the well, a cat would just look down at him." Lassie, always ran for help!

I grew up with indoor dogs around. And I loved the TV shows about dogs, like "Rin Tin Tin", or my first puppy love with "Lassie", and then there was Yukon "King". And a great many movies about dogs, like the movies "Hachi" and "Eight Below" (have tissues handy) and "Turner and Hooch" or "Snow Dogs",  and my first tear-jerker movie, "Old Yeller".

Our two girls today, greet us every time with wagging tails. They are ALWAYS glad to see us. And we're always glad to see them. Both are great and loving companions. And each has their own personality. Hannah has mellowed over the years. And Sadie .... well, even at 3 years old, she bounces off the walls with greetings and antics!

"Man's best friend" is very true, as far as we are concerned. If WE could be as unconditional as our dogs, we'd have a better world. Somehow, I can't imagine our girls not being in Heaven when I get there, greeting me with wagging tails, and slobbering dog-kisses.

(Adopt a rescue dog today. It just might be YOU who gets rescued!)

Obama wants us to TRUST government

On June 7^th (2013), in response to the wide-spread complaints about the National Security Agency’s (NSA) domestic surveillance program, Obama sated: "If people can't trust not only the executive branch but also don't trust Congress, and don't trust federal judges, to make sure that we're abiding by the Constitution with due process and rule of law, then we're going to have some problems here."

Well, I DO have a problem Mr. President!

We have a Bill of Rights. Some of those rights, may seem to protect “guilty” people. That is to say, WHY would anyone need to protect themselves from speaking against themselves, if they didn’t do anything wrong; or, be protected from unlawful searches and seizures, if you’ve nothing to hide; or, own firearms, if the government can protect you from any “enemies, foreign and domestic”?

The Bill of Rights, aren’t there to protect “guilty” people. The Bill of Rights, are there to protect ALL people, against a powerful government doing whatever they wanted.  The Bill of Rights are there to protect us from a government that could use such powers to for all kinds of nefarious reasons.

Obama mentioned the trust of “federal judges”. What IF, like in the case of US Attorney General Eric Holder, law enforcement went judge shopping for a judge that would allow them to do most anything they wanted. After all, they’re Cops, right? In the case of the Department of Justice, they went to three judges, before they found one that would rubber-stamp a really pathetic warrant to search the records of a reporter’s phone and emails, as well as those of his parents!

Second to that example, what IF the government, through the massive power to get information from personal files, phones, emails, etc., found something very embarrassing against a federal judge or other official? Could THAT be used to sway someone to go along with things he or she wouldn’t otherwise do? So there’s my take on federal judges, and unbridled trust.

Trust Congress? I don’t think so. They are elected to “represent” us. But how many times have we seen an elected official do things in their own best interest? How many find themselves getting very rich, while “serving the people”? And WHO in their right mind, would dare trust an attorney who would recommend a client sign an unread contract, yet that is exactly what they did on our behalf, with the Obamacare crap! (and how many more unread bills?) An attorney would be fired, if not brought up before the Bar for malpractice!

And then there’s Obama. There is NO WAY in hell I trust him. He lied about the circumstances around the failed DOJ/ATF Fast and Furious gun running operation, where a couple thousand guns went across to Mexico, and they lost track of them. Then to have at least two show up at a murder scene, where Border Agent Brian Terry was killed! Obama said he wasn’t involved in that, but ended up saving Eric Holder’s ass with an “Executive Privedge” order, which if there was no involvement by Obama, then there shouldn’t have been any communication between him and Holder for an EP to apply! He abused his power and authority, and/or HE LIED!

He LIED about the cause of the attack on our Embassy in Benghazi, and what lead to the deaths of four of our people.  He had a re-election coming up, and he lied to protect his imagine. He’s a lying bastard in my opinion!

As for the 2^nd amendment - It isn’t about hunting. It’s about protection, and that protection includes protection from a tyrannical government, which is what our Founding Fathers experienced with King George. It was added because King George, in order to avert the growing dissention, tried to take the weapons from “the people”. Our Founders included, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”, just because of the actions the British army tried to take against the Colonials.  No sir, I will NOT surrender my arms. I firmly believe that a government that would disregard our other “rights” (currently, the 4th amendment), is more than capable of being the tyrannical government our Founders warned against, and try to disarm us of our means to stop an out-of-control government.

Lastly, the Bill of Rights are in place to protect all of us from such a government that would stretch any law they choose, to get the end result they may want, even if they felt that result was in the best interest of the country. We should NEVER blindly trust this, or any, government. “Rights” given up, may be impossible to regain.

As Lord Acton said in 1887, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Big Brother, 2017

March 23, 2017

“Sir, we now have that break-through we’ve been working on”, said Director Bryan Omar. Omar had just entered the Oval Office at President Zane Ayman’s request.

“So, tell me how it will help us make the changes we’ve worked so long for?”, asked President Ayman.

“The Comprehensive National Security Agency (the newly expanded NSA) can now pull any name in America, even those in most industrialized nations, and we can see every piece of data ever typed onto a keypad of any kind. And with that, we can retrieve any voice communication, along with whomever that person spoke to.  We can do the same with every email, text, social network, and any digital form of communication. And with the new system sir, that data is automatically cross checked.”

“We still have the problem with snail mail, even if it is nearly extinct?”, asked President Ayman.

“Not really. We’ve made headway there too sir.  We are now documenting every piece of mail with the new see-thru scanners, and each piece is coded from each drop-off point, so any piece of mail can be traced back to the sender, as well as automated cross referencing the sender and receiver with the Master Data Bank. Sir, it gets even better. With the new digital postal system tied in with the CNSA, we are tied into each and every public thoroughfare surveillance camera and we can see who drops that mail off! You need anything, on anyone, we can get everything you’d ever want to know about them, and every contact they ever have. Bottom line, there is no more privacy or unauthorized communications. Sir, we OWN all communication in the country!”

“So all I need, is to give you a name, and you can get everything Id ever want to know about that person?”, asked President Ayman.

(Smiling) “Exactly Sir. Tell me who you want about, and we can pull everything you’d ever need to know on that person. Every secret they’ve ever said or put into words, we’d have it for you.”

“Well Mr. Omar, I think we’re ready to commence Phase I of Operation Round-Up. I will issue the Executive Order today, and have all my agency heads to begin tomorrow. It’s time to roundup the dissenters and I WANT those Tea Party leaders locked up. Oh…and I want that NRA disbanded! Have the ‘list’  ready for each department, and the teams can get started.”

“Yes sir, Mr. President. … It’s time sir.”

“Oh thanks Omar, your prayer rug is still here too. Please join me my Brother Omar, and let’s kneel toward Meca.”

March 26, 2017

“Mr. President…I have an update for you”, said FBI Director Lilly Gafar.

“Okay Ms. Rachel, that’ll be all”, says the President as his personal secretary leaves the room. “Go ahead Ms. Gafar.”

“Sir, we have successfully obtained persuasive background information on those targets you wanted, and they have all been contacted personally by my Special Agents. We now have their full cooperation. They’re in a real bind Mr. President, so they’ll give you no problem. Even a couple of the Supreme Court Justices had some things they didn’t want out, so they’ll side with the other Justices on anything you want.”

“I love it. GW had no idea how that Patriot Act could be fine-tuned to do more than he ever dared to dream of. Then, with Barry moving that up, and CNSA completing the system to a full-fledged domestic spying system, we now can find out anything on anyone”, Ayman went on.

“Yes Sir, and those Congressmen that gave you so much trouble during your campaign … well, they have their hands full now putting out their own little fires, so they’ll be hard pressed to do anything against you.”

“Splendid, Ms. Gafar”, the President replied. “I called Barry too. He was elated that we have been able to continue his project. Let’s move forward now with those signed warrants, and begin Phase II of Operation Round-Up.”

April 19, 1017

“Mr. President, can we have a word?”, asked Ms. Gafar, standing in the hallway with CIA Director Alan Rayan.  All three enter the Oval Office.

“Sir, we have begun executing those arrest warrants on all key people on your newest list”, said Gafar.

“Any problems? Anything that could hit the Underground News Corp”, asked President Ayman?

Rayan stepped in closer, “Not really sir. Most were arrested quietly and without incident. We did have a few, like that asshole National Rifle Association president. We had to use a stun gun on him twice. But when he arrived at Bureau Area 6, Dr. Xavier ordered an injection for him. We’ll not hear anything from him anytime soon!”

“How have the black-outs gone?”, asked President Ayman.

“Great sir. Our people have rolled into a neighborhood, commenced Operation Black Out, and we’re in and out of the target location before people know we’ve been there”, said Gafar.  “With the build-up of the Department  of Homeland Security, Marco’s people have simply overwhelmed any attempt of any radicals to form militias. ….(laughingly)…. Sir, it’s been pathetic really. Much of the remaining Tea Party members ran out of ammo days ago. Some are still holding up in remote areas of the country, but they’re completely shut off, and surrounded by DHS.”

“What about the Military?”

“Mr. President”, responded Saad, “the command structure you put in place, is keeping all military off-shore and out of the way. And all civilian communications with them, has been blocked. They are mostly in the dark about what going on, and the Command and Control will keep them from attempting any interference.”

“Yes sir”, Rayan chimed in, “The civilians are powerless too. The gun buy-backs of 2013 & 2014, coupled with the confiscation of all personal firearms in 2016, the civilian population can only stand by and watch if they do see us roll into a neighborhood.”

 “Okay, keep me informed”, said President Ayman.

As the two were leaving the Oval Office, CIA Dir. Rayan stopped and turned to the President. “Sir, that situation with Senator Benyamin has been taken care of. Our office was able to Photoshop some of his family webpage photos, and they’re being released this afternoon. You can expect a recall election!”

June 20, 2017

WHNA (White House News Agency) opened their daily all-channel newscast. “My fellow Americans, it is a great day”, as President Ayman (shown on the screen, with the former President along his side) announced today, “as America is finally free of any religious intrusion in any public place. With the exception of government sponsored sects, all religious signage, symbols, on-air messages, and so on, are out-lawed, and no American will again be offended by such unwanted Christian or Jewish messaging and influence. Special thanks to the ACLU for helping us pin the ears back on some of the stubborn communities.

We are also announcing the appointment of my dear friend, Salim Hasad, to fill the vacated Senatorial seat of Senator Benyamin. We are sorry for the sudden loss of Senator Benyamin in his bout with cancer, and we wish his family well.

My administration is also announcing today, that certain elements of anti-government organizations and those outspoken against the many good things we have been doing, have been effectively dealt with, and the people of America can enjoy the many benefits we have to offer without the descent that has stalled our efforts in the past. And with that, we are a safer nation. While many have complained about the rise in taxes, those taxes have paved the way for a better, safer America, where more citizens can share in the wealth of the many.

Thank you, and good day my American friends.”

 August 5, 2017

In a growing number of areas across the nation, street thugs and bandits plague neighborhoods, with robberies and assaults upon citizens, and even the reported abuses by federal agents. Street thugs are running in gangs, armed with guns bought off the black market, mostly from the open border of Mexico, as well as the open ports of Florida. China has increased their USA sales of AK-47s, using Muslim Brotherhood members of the Alcohol Tobacco & Firearms to sell them on the streets.

While complaints go largely unchecked, many families are upset with federal agents entering their homes with no cause, just to search for possible contraband. The courts have sided with President Ayman’s administration, in that warrantless entries are legal under Patriot Act IV, so long as no arrests result from the search. Federal Law Enforcement continues to seize property in what used to be “Red States”, and political opposition has been all but squashed, except for the Rebel State of Texas, who has all but seceded from the nation. The Rebel State of Texas is the one border area President Ayman has tried to secure, and DHS is patrolling the borders of New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana. DHS has been unable to patrol the Gulf of Mexico area, as the Rebel State of Texas has developed its own Navy, and has sunk many DHS patrol boats.

 October 20, 2017

President Ayman has completed Operation Round-Up, and began Operation Constitution Revocation.

 “Sir, Director Saad is here to see you”, said Ms. Rachel. Saad Steps into the Oval Office.

 “Tell me Ms. Saad, are we ready to move forward? Are ‘the people’ (he smirks) ready to go along with the New Order?”

 “Yes sir”, replies Saad. “With the people polling positively to do away with the old document, they’re ready for your New Order.”

 “Good, the time has finally come. We’ll schedule a public burning of the ‘constitution’. Then we release the balloons and fireworks, when we unveil the New Order that I’m having etched in marble. That will also stop any remaining hold-outs, and what’s left of that fucking NRA, from throwing that whole 2^nd amendment thing up to the courts.”

 “Yes Mr. President, I’ll get with the other directors, and we’ll have security ready for the Burning of the Constitution  celebration.”

==========================================

While the above is an obvious piece of fiction, at what point could the gradual giving up of freedoms and the rule of law, could we see drastic changes to our Constitutional liberties? Obama said during his first campaign, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” From where I sit, it looks like he is getting down that road pretty far, and we are losing our grasp of the freedoms that we’ve known for over 200 years.

 Today, the White House is waste deep in scandals. The newly revealed NSA taking of cellphone, email, and social sites data from EVERY American, WITHOUT a proper warrant; the use of the IRS to go after “conservative” organizations, even sharing “confidential” information with one group’s political  adversaries; the Dept. of Justice, using the ruse of going after a DC leaker to tap into the personal phone call records of a FOX News Reporter, James Rosen, and even Rosen’s parents; lying about the circumstances and cause of the attack on our Embassy in Benghazi, where Ambassador Stevens and three other brave men were murdered (and still the terrorist are at large); Sec. of State Clinton lying about protests causing the attack; Obama lying in front of the United Nations; Obama supporting a UN resolution to control “small arms”, that has the potential of by-passing our 2^nd amendment; the failed Fast and Furious arms running, that got one of our Border Agent killed by Mexican drug cartel members using one of the ATF guns; and it has all the markings of a nation is serious internal trouble.

How much more will we accept from a government, that is taking liberties with OUR freedoms? Like the frog in the pan, are we need to be asking ourselves, “Are WE the frog?”

Our Modern Times, Terrorism, and Our Rights

Admittingly, the world is a dangerous place, with terror incidents occurring in a number of countries around the world. We’ve been at war against terror for over 12 years now, and the actors of bombings, mass murders, and such, have even been in our own country.

Inside the United States, our Law Enforcement, Federal and local, have had to constantly upgrade their training, their exercise of enforcement, and the weapons and tools to counter such threats.

Along with all that, we have technological advancements available to citizens. We have cell phones and smart phones and laptop computers, enabling us to work wirelessly from most anywhere in the country, if not the world. What we hold in our hands today, can do more than the biggest of computers many decades ago. We can conduct business, communicate (voice, text, visual) with friends and family, take and share photos, and search the world of Internet news and information, all while sitting on a park bench thousands of miles away from home.

This also means that any potential “bad guy” has all those same technological advantages. And our Law Enforcement (Fed, State & Local) have their hands full to combat the every growing advantages the “bad guys” have to conduct their evil intentions.

So what do our Law Enforcers do? They use every technological advantage they can, balanced with the constitutional rights of lawful citizens. That’s a tall order, indeed. And with the goal of gaining an advantage, our leaders wrote and passed, The Patriot Act. That act, gives Law Enforcement extended powers to get easier access to communications on potential terrorists.  Many thought from the start such an act went too far, and permitted the government to have too easy of an access to private information. And we have learned recently that our National Security Agency (NSA) has gained access to millions of citizens phone calls, internet searches, texts, emails, on-line photos, etc. Of those millions and millions of data bits on ALL OF US, the NSA does not know who might be the “bad guys”, so they cast the big net to gather information on everybody.

So, what of our Fourth Amendment - The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

But the Patriot Act seems now to allow our Law Enforcement (government) to bypass our 4^th amendment, for the purpose of national security and to go after the terrorists.

Now, if a citizen has no terrorist ties, and hasn’t anything to hide, the government is saying, “Hey, it’s for the safety of our nation, so it’s okay.” But is it?

What IF, someone who gets access to an innocent citizens data, and because of some unauthorized reason, uses some information to get back at someone? Maybe for revenge on a personal matter? Or for a friend, who wants to use it for a child custody dispute? What about gathering embarrassing information, and use that to extort money from a fellow citizen? And then there’s the potential for using such information for an edge over political enemies?

All it takes is for just ONE person with unbridled power, to be less than a top professional in seeking ONLY terrorists, for the abuse to start. And once it starts, then all bets are off. THAT is why the 4^th amendment  exists, and it says it “shall not be violated”. But it is. For the sake of finding the “bad guys”, all “good guys” are subject to losing our civil rights.

I’m not okay with that. And sadly, I understand the difficulty our Law Enforcers are having, but I’m still against the seemingly unbridled power the government has taken. So, what is the answer? Where IS the balance?

Part of the answer, in MY view, is for us, and that means YOU and ME, to help be the eyes and ears of Law Enforcement. We need to be more diligent in reporting suspicious people. But be prepared, reporting suspicious people or activities will be more often be a false alarm than not. But from that reporting, those Federal and Local Law Enforcers can then take a closer look to see if THAT information fits the criteria for then going into the privacy of those suspicious people, and a properly documented and sworn-to application for a search warrant can then be obtained. Not obtained for all of us, but obtained by particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized . Having someone report a suspicious person or activity, would be like a National Crimestoppers! (I’ve used Crimestoppers information in the past, to conduct Narcotics Investigations, and it is a good tool.)

Such a call  by itself should not be the sole basis for a search warrant, but once alerted, authorities can check against other intel, and then move to the next step. (It called, investigating!)

But if “we, the people” place all of the onus on Law Enforcement to deal with evil, then be prepared for Law Enforcement to find other ways to do their difficult jobs!

Giving up essential freedoms, for the sake of security, is a most dangerous proposition. And freedoms once given up, might not ever be recovered.

God Bless America’s Peace Keepers, Law Enforcers, and the American Citizen!

The 2nd Amendment and Your Personal Safety

While gun law debates continue across the country, and even with the United Nations casting some views on “small arms”, our 2nd Amendment remains a sacred part of our Bill of Rights for American citizens. While I have expressed many times my views on the subject, I'm compelled to again dive into the deep end.

With this writing though, I'll stick with the "personal security" aspect of gun ownership. While not a "retired" Law Enforcement Officer (LEO), I do have over 13 years street experience in that field (plus many more years in the private sector), and use those experiences to formulate my own opinions on the subject of personal defense and firearms.

If we, each of us at home, in our cars, or at work, present an easy target of robbery or assault, then it is luck, or a matter of time, that we haven't been victimized. Bad guys, whether consciously or not, calculate their personal risk against any perceived gain in the engagement of a criminal act. If any of us present a low risk to the bad guy, then our own risk increases. If we present a high risk to the bad guy, one that will most likely get them arrested, or seriously hurt, then they will move on to a less risky target. They’re human, and won’t typically walk into a dangerous situation where they don’t have an upper hand.

I believe that by permitting citizens to have "Concealed Carry Licenses", we send a message to the would-be bad-guys. That is, anyone they may consider targeting, may be armed and prepared to defend themselves with deadly force. When states have openly supported such a lawful and licensed "carry" law, the statistics show a decrease in personal crimes.

One only needs to do an on-line search, and any number of stats will either prove out, or argue against the effects of such "carry" laws. But I can’t think of any LEOs who wouldn’t "carry" if they weren't Cops anymore. Most LEOs I know, would never leave home without a handgun for personal protection, even if they stopped being Cops. Speaking only for myself, I don't recall an "armed" citizen that I encountered who was successfully victimized. But I encountered a lot of "victims", who had been ill prepared for what came upon them. The fact is, the only stat that really means anything anyway, is your own!

As an ex-Cop, I don't go anywhere without a handgun on or near me. Am I fearful? No. But I've seen enough people who were unable to adequately defend themselves, and don't choose to be one of them. It’s a matter of being prepared, for the unexpected. As a case-in-point, we recently saw the news footage from London of two Muslim men who had attacked an off-duty British Soldier, hacking him up with a knife and meat clever, nearly beheading him. The only thing the on-looking London citizens could do, was watch! (20 minutes later .... 20 minutes later .... the London Police showed up and shot both suspects, "wounding" them.)

As our 2nd Amendment provides, I have the "right to bear arms", and I choose to do so wherever it’s legal. NO ONE should be able to take MY right away, effectively disarming me at a time I may need to protect my family or myself.

Oh ... Magazine capacity - Who the hell knows how many rounds anyone will need at any given time? NO ONE knows. Cops don't know either, and that's why most of them carry a handgun with an average 15 rounds in the pistol, plus another two mags in their pouches (45 rounds total!). Even then, there have been "Officer Involved" shootings, where magazines had been expended by multiple officers, and the suspect still lived! It's just stupid for anyone to think just 6 or 7 or 10 rounds should be enough for a citizen to have. It sure isn't for a trained professional Police Officer! And a citizen will not have a back-up officer at their side or coming to their aid.

Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity

On May 13th, Colorado mass murderer James Holmes's attorney entered Holmes plea of "Not Guilty", by reason of insanity. His attorney said Holmes was "mentally ill". Well, I have a problem or two with that, and other cases like it.

To start with, while "the law" entitles him to a fair trial with the burden of proof on the "state" to prove he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, I am not a court and I KNOW he is guilty as hell. He was found at the scene, by the police with his weapons, identified by people at the scene, and ALL information points to him killing all those people. There's a lot more to that, but NO ONE has any question that he killed those people. NO ONE! So there really isn't ANY doubt, but he must have his day in court (which I do support).

Secondly, in some respects, any person who would commit such a heinous crime like the murders in a Colorado movie theater, must surely have something wrong inside. But, I believe that "something", is just evil that gets in a persons head. But that doesn't mean by itself that the person is "insane" and had no reasoning skills to know that what they were doing was right or wrong. They just didn't care and maybe even took evil delight in such a deed. Did Homes know right from wrong? From the information that has come to light, his plan to commit such a murderous deed, was formulated and prepared for, for some time. That took planning. And "planning" sounds like he knew full well what he was doing.

Then, there's the whole "Not Guilty" aspect of such an insane act and plea. Doesn't that seem wrong? Doesn't that "Not Guilty" part seem all wrong, when all the evidence proves they did it? Seems to me, we need to change that part of the system, and make it a plea of "Guilty, but Insane". At least that way, a finding of actual guilt for the deed could be determined, and then the court could address the insanity part for any sentencing. People died at the hands of another, and there must be a reckoning.

I could buy into a "Guilty but Insane" plea one hell of a lot better than that whole "Not Guilty" part. People died. In fact, 12 people died and dozens were wounded. There has to be an accountability for such crime. "Guilty, but Insane", could also mean that if he should ever be "healed", he would still pay for the crime his ass committed. Otherwise, if found "insane" enough to not be held responsible for the murders, he could again walk the streets one day. THAT would be a bigger crime, at least in my view.

URGENT 2nd Amendment Warning

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).

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!

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!

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.