SPEED KILLS

HIGHWAY SAFETY BILL HB-20014-01
Proposed

Speed Kills

Over the years, the mantra, SPEED KILLS, has been heard over and over again. According to some statistics, from 2009 as example, over 30% of highway fatalities involved speed greater than posted, or speed greater than conditions. More than 10,000 highway deaths per year can be attributed to SPEED.


Yet, American auto makers (and even more so, foreign auto makers) keep building faster and faster stock production models cars that will far surpass our nation’s highest speed limits. In fact, several automobiles will easily accelerate to more than double the speed of any posted highway speed!


These cars are made for one thing, and one thing only – SPEEDING! Speeding, on our nation’s streets and highways. They are built, TO BREAK THE LAW. And drivers of those autos, buy them knowing they are made to exceed all speed limits, otherwise, why spend that kind of money, when similar vehicles with far less capability can be purchased for less. Fact is, the faster a car can go, the more desirable they are to those who wish to SPEED. We should also extrapolate that in doing to, those driver/owners, knowingly buy autos that can not only be driven faster than any posted speed limit, but contribute to the horrible traffic fatalities. While not all drivers of such autos might not commit traffic violations with them, they know the autos have that capability. Speeds of 200 MPH and greater, are not out of the ordinary for some models. And, those autos can achieve those speeds in ridiculously short amount of  time. Speed in acceleration, extreme speeds on the top end, and even hard for law enforcement to match up with. Such advantages, and dangers, must be banned from our roadways.


Why build such a car? Why buy such a car?  One answer for both – BUILT WITH  THE INTENT TO BREAK THE LAW! And every auto dealer of such cars, KNOW IT!


I am proposing a Bill to outlaw the production and sale of any of the excessively fast production cars, referred to hereafter as AEHS (Auto of Extremely High Speeds) capable of powering an auto faster than 20% over any of the highest posted speed limits, or 95 MPH maximum. Such production cars shall no longer be manufactured after Jan. 1, 2015. A full list of those automobiles will be assimilated into the Bill. (Examples: Corvette ZR1, Ford GT-500, Dodge Viper SRT10, Cadillac CTS-V, etc.)


Also, no person shall modify any automobile that can exceed the legal top speed limit of 95 MPH. Any such modifications, mod-kits, accessories, and equipment that can be used to modify such autos, shall be banned.

In addition, to avoid any mis-identification of an Auto of Extremely High Speed, no automobiles shall be painted in colors that might be confused with AEHS autos, such as RED or ORANGE, or Racing Green.

In addition, no “Racing Stripes” shall be permitted, and no “mag” or “racing” style wheels to be applied to any automobile.  Such modifications can only contribute to a driver’s temptation to “speed”.

All importation of automobiles that would fall under the U.S. Automobile AEHS restrictions, shall be banned in the U.S..

All such automobiles, and accessories of a nature described in the aforementioned, shall be turned in for destruction, no later than Dec. 1, 2014.. Possession of such an automobile, or accessories, shall be charged with a Class A misdemeanor, and a second offense shall be a Class D felony. (Exception: Any such automobile, to be kept for collectible purposes, shall be inspected, and governing devices shall be placed upon the motor that will hinder it from accelerating more than parade speeds of 15 MPH , and semi-annual inspections shall be made by the state DMV Enforcement Agents.)

In conclusion, there is simply no lawful need (except for law enforcement agencies who may need the added power and speed to catch violators) for a private citizen to possess any automobile which has but one purpose, and that is to VIOLATE THE LAW, by accelerating to dangerous speeds, risking life and property. And any owner/driver in possession of such an automobile shall automatically be suspect in a crime of SPEEDING, and contributing to the deaths on our nation’s highways.

Gun Registration – Fiction, or Future?

The following is Fiction. However, the first steps are being pressed for by many in government, and this is a fictional account of "what could be", if taken to extremes.

2014, Jun – The President, by Executive Order, signs an “Order” for all citizens to register their firearms with their local law enforcement agency. The President, in a public address to the nation, stated, “If you like your firearms, you can keep your firearms, but you will simply have to register them. This is a reasonable action to take, in effort to curtail the use of firearms used in crimes. This will not affect your 2^nd amendment right and your lawful use of your firearm for hunting, self-defense, and sporting competition. This is for the good of the American people, and I must enact this Executive Order, because the Republicans in Congress have refused to take simple life saving measures as this.”




The “EO” also commands that once the firearms and/or accompanying magazines are registered, they cannot be transferred to any other person, but may only be surrendered to authorities if not retained by the registered owner. Any interested party who such firearm would have otherwise been sold or given to, can simply make an application for it with the local authorities. The disposition of the firearm, by way of re-assigning it, or the destruction of it, will be up to the local law enforcement head, who will follow federal guidelines.

2014, Dec – With approval of the new Democratic majority of Congress and the Senate,  the President asked for and received, the approval for a ban on all “assault style weapons”, as well as for any firearm magazines that are capable, by design or modification,  of holding more than 8 rounds of ammunition. Citizens will have 30 days to turn them in. Within the first 60 days after the turn in period, persons still holding the restricted firearms and/or magazines may be charged with Felony Possession.

While some Republicans objected to the ban, they were shouted down by the Senate and House majorities, as POTUS has been granted extreme latitude in dealing with criminal firearms use. The Republicans are in effect, lame ducks in all three branches of government.

2015, Mar – The Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms agency, in cooperation with local law enforcement agencies, will contact each registered owner of formerly registered and now restricted firearms and/or magazines, and armed with Revised FISA Court search warrants, searches will be made in order to enforce the ban. Such registered owner shall surrender said restricted firearms and/or magazines immediately. Failure to surrender, or on-sight felony violations, shall be cause for immediate arrest.

2015, Sep – With the rise in civil unrest and increased protests, the President, by Executive Order, orders all local law enforcement agencies to require their citizens to turn in all other firearms, those not on the restricted list, excluding shotguns capable of holding fewer than 5 rounds. Citizens will have 30 days to turn them in, or face criminal charges.

2015, Oct - As concerns over citizens taking the law into their own hands, the President has followed Great Britain‘s lead, and will charge any citizen who causes injury to an “unarmed intruder”. If the life of a homeowner, or business person, cannot be shown to have actually been in life threatening danger, then no citizen shall attempt to take laws into their own hands and resist by deadly force. Any firearms used in such a manner, by a homeowner or business owner, shall be cause for immediate arrest and felony charges to be pursued.




2015, Dec – Violent crime has grown to levels not seen in decades, as homeowners and business owners have been attacked, beaten, and murdered, by street gangs. Many of the attacks are by multiple suspects, numbering from 4 to 8 at a time, and physically over-powering their intended victims. While many are only armed with knives, swords, and chains, many small imported handguns are being used. Law Enforcement as also encountering more and more foreign made (Chinese, North Korean, Iranian, etc.)  semi-automatic rifles and automatic machine guns by violent street thugs. With the new “open border” policy, there are no effective controls on what comes across the northern and southern borders. It is no longer the drugs that are the problem, near as much as law enforcement is being outgunned by criminals using the back-market machineguns.

2016, Jan – All citizens are ordered, in accordance to Martial Law being implemented, to stay inside their homes, while Federal Security Forces go door to door to collect any remaining firearms. A “temporary” suspension of CIVIL RIGHTS has been ordered, and all law enforcement agencies may enter any home or business, without a warrant, at any time day or night, to apprehend violent criminals, illegal weapons, and to provide for public safety. Any resistance will be taken as possible threats, and such persons will be handled by whatever means necessary to secure a residence and/or business, and provide for a safety of the Federal Security Forces Agents.

2016, Jan – While the National Rifle Association had already been forced, by recent IRS regulations, to abandon all political activities, and highly taxed for their remaining museum firearms, membership has tumbled, rendering them ineffective in protection what is left of the old 2^nd amendment.

2016, Apr – With a Democratic majority in the House and Senate, and the absence of certain Tea Party Politicians to voice objection, the 2^nd amendment was amended. The old and outdated wording, “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.”, has been amended to read, “A well regulated Federal Militia, being necessary to the security of ‘the State’, the right of the people’s government to control all firearms shall not be infringed.” The formerly permitted shotguns, as well as all antique firearms, were hereby “illegal” to possess, and must be turned over to authorities.




All citizens are to turn in any remaining firearms, within 30 days. After 30 days, a temporary suspension of the 4^th amendment shall apply, in order that law enforcement to be able to enter any home or business, to secure any remaining firearms. Using registered firearm registration records, all State, FBI, ATF, DEA, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management, IRS, and the President’s Federal Security Forces, will aid and assist local authorities as needed, for searches of those owner’s homes and businesses.

2016, Jul – By Order of the President, and to celebrate the New National Dependents Day, all Internet, printed publication, radio, television media sources of any deemed “anti-government” messages and/or material, shall be regulated and licensed, and suspected activists and/or members of the Tea Party, shall be detained while verification can be made that those persons pose no risk to national security.


The President announced that with all the house to house, and business to business searches, a great many firearms have been collected over the past year, taking firearms out of the hands of would-be criminals and gang members. Many arrests have been made by those people who offered to resist and/or hide firearms from authorities. The President announced that great strides have been made to make American safer. A national 1-800 Hotline has been established, so neighbors and friends and report anyone still possessing illegal weapons, or anti-government printed/recorded materials.


2016, Oct  - The infiltration of machine guns and explosives have lent way for an uprising of under-ground terrorist movement cells, and unlawful militias (according to “the government”), and attacks on law enforcement, government buildings, schools, hospitals, and churches have erupted all over the country. The President’s spokesperson, Kalim Abodoti, released a statement to the approved media, that “Home grown militias and former NRA Members were responsible for many of the attacks”. Most citizens can only hunker down and try to stay secured in their homes, while federal and local law enforcement officials try to respond to all the outbreaks of violent attacks.
All remaining Border Patrol have been decimated, and no control over the influx of people, or weapons, exists at any border area. A “Call to Allah”, has caused all the home-grown and illegal alien cell members to come out and attack any and all people and places not displaying signs and flags of the New American Islamic Movement.




2016, Nov – Due to the violence, the national elections have been put on hold, until peace on the streets can be attained. “It is not yet safe for citizens to go to any polling place”, says the President. Elections will return at a later date, to be announced.

2016, Dec – Any and all Christmas displays that can be seen from any public right-of-way, has been banned. Both the freedom from religion and the public safety, are reasons for the restrictions. “No one is saying you cannot observe Christmas”, said the President, “but you must observe it in private. If you like your Christian holiday, you can keep your Christian holiday”, he concluded.

2017, Mar – While Federal authorities now patrol the streets in every city and town, and a cease fire has been agreed to between the New American Islamic Movement” and the government, Martial Law continues until the New Constitution is ratified by the majority in the Senate and House. The new Bill of Government Permitted Rights will also be drafted, and “freedom” will again be allowed in the New America.



For every piece of liberty and freedom we allow to take taken away, the threat of ALL freedoms to be lost is at risk. Just how outside the realm of possibility, is this "fictional" piece?

Concealed Carry and Open Carry

To be sure, I am a very strong supporter of OUR 2nd Amendment, and also support Concealed and Open Carry by lawful citizens.

That said, I will share my views on certain aspects of these issues, and welcome any feedback.


1.  I have written many times about my views on the 2nd Amendment. I don't think I need to repeat all that, except to say that my views haven't changed. If anything, I feel we have grown closer to needing OUR 2nd Amendment to possibly defend against a tyrannical government. I pray we would never actually have to pick up arms, and hope instead, the government would recognize that the 80 + MILLION American gun owners, will not be ruled. Even its only the III% of the American gun owning Patriots who would actively repel such a government, that would still amount to around 2.4 + MILLION well armed Patriots across our land.


2.  As stated, I support "Concealed Carry" by law abiding citizens. While I follow the state and federal laws, as they are today, I feel forcing licensing to do so is a form of "owner registration", and on that basis, I am not in favor of it. I'm obeying the law, but I feel I've backed up as far as I will go.


Hunters, while required to buy hunting licenses, do not have to register what firearm they own or hunt with. However, hunters are required to take a Hunter Safety Course, for hunters (mostly new hunters) to have an understanding of lawful hunting areas and game, and the safe handling of hunting firearms.

I might be in favor of a well conceived firearms safety course, and with that, the issuance of a card of sorts, much like the Hunter Safety Certificate (?), to show you have had and passed the class. The class could be the very CHL classes now required for concealed carry, but it would ONLY be used at the purchase point of a firearm from a dealer. That could be a required "check box" as part of the purchase, but not a registration with the government. The routine "Instant Check" would still apply, to assure compliance with being legally permitted to purchase and own a firearm. In any case, there should be NO registration with any government entity.

I also support as much training as we can reasonably require for that "owner certificate" as we can offer. Education is the key to safety, use, and storage, as far as I am concerned. But the cost can't impede the financial ability to exercise our 2ndA.

3.  I also favor "Open Carry" laws. Some people would chose to Open Carry, and in some sates, its lawful even without a permit.

I do not personally care to Open Carry, and I will go further into that later. But I want legal protection, should my firearm become visible, and otherwise could be in violation because of the exposure. To me, its nonsense, but I know Cops who would pounce all over it, just to bust someone who has a license and is carrying. (I'm a former Law Enforcement Officer, and I've known such ass-holes.)

4.  I am in favor of Concealed Carry in college classes. With campus shootings that have caught unarmed students at deadly disadvantage, I think that anyone who carries concealed, would at least have a chance to save their own life, as well as the lives of others. The legal right to self defense shouldn't end at the parking lot.

However, I am not for Open Carry on campus. Even in a non-law enforcement work place, I prefer Concealed Carry only. Sitting in a classroom chair, or office chair next to co-workers, make curiosity and accidents too much of a risk, in MY view, along with my other reasoning that I'll go into.


Now, on WHY I choose NOT to Open Carry -
Call it paranoia or what ever, but for ME, I don't want to broadcast that I'm carrying. Some choose to do that, as some kind of deterrent. I can't definitively say that it isn't. But I feel if I'm "open carrying", I become a target for the determined ass-hole. Let me provide a scenario to make my point.


Scenario:
I'm Open Carrying my handgun, and happen to be in a upscale coffee shop. The place is semi-busy, and a lot of cash has gone through the register after a busy morning.

Outside, two men watch have been watching the store, and they notice I am packing, Open Carry. The two men are average looking, dressed as regular guys, and otherwise pose no suspicious behavior, and one has a gun concealed under his jacket. They both enter the coffee shop, and as one hangs back by the door, the other walks up behind me in line. While I am now aware of his presence, I have no idea of his plans. Being right handed, I had cash in my hand and was just about to pay the cashier .....

(*) Suddenly, the bad-guy's left hand raises his handgun, and his right hand grabs at my handgun. His words are this, "You try for that, and you're dead." My back is to him, his gun is already shoved into my side, and I'm screwed. He then pulls my handgun from my belt holster, and now he AND his buddy have TWO guns.

(*) Or .... He walks up behind me, and I am his first victim (Lets face it, wouldn't you take out the armed guy first?), before he proceeds to escort the rest of the customers and staff to the back room.


(*) Or ....... He suddenly dashes up behind me and shoves me to the ground, and then shoves his gun in my face, as which point, I'm screwed.

While the chances of any of those happening are very remote, that IS why we choose to "carry" to start with. "Open carry" is simply not MY choice, but understand those who see it otherwise.

Fact is, not even the most experienced Law Enforcement Officer would likely be successful of beating an already drawn gun. Its even less successful if the other bad-guy already knows your packin'! In my past profession, I'd practice close quarter gun take-a-ways and gun retention. But anyone beyond an arms length, is a very deadly opponent if an attempt were made.

For me, I'll keep my "ace in the hole", hidden from plain sight. But if it is inadvertently seen, I want a law, "Open Carry" or otherwise, to protect me from being arrested by an over-zealous cop.




PS. While many don't agree - If any man or women, over 18, who is able to fight and die for OUR country, then they should have EVERY right the rest of us have, to include purchasing handguns and concealed carry.

The Truth About Firearms and Self Protection

I am a former Law Enforcement Officer, with over 13 years "on the street" (with additional years in the jail). I've worked as a Patrolman, a Detective, and a Narcotics Officer. I was also a self-employed Private Investigator for over 6 years.

I have responded to hundreds of calls for help, by people who were, or were about to be, victimized. I've responded to calls of home break-ins, physical assaults (with and without weapons), robberies, etc. And for all my desire to get there in time, the best I could do was to capture a suspect when he was still there. But - the "victim", had already been victimized to some degree. I was too late to keep some degree of victimization from occurring.

Yes, there were times (thank God) that my (our) response time kept from further and/or more serious victimization. But it was a rare thing for us to get there before the impact of being a "victim" hadn't already taken place.

And it's not just injuries of victims that's relevant. But the physiological impact of being a victim, along with the feeling of being so vulnerable, has a very lasting effect on people. From that time forward, most victims no longer feel safe and secure in their own homes and/or businesses. Talk about the lack of FREEDOM! Freedom to feel safe, is often gone forever for many victims. And there was little I could do to change that for them. I was too late.

And frankly, we can't change that for law enforcement. We can't have Cops on every corner, or even in the house or apartment next door. Nor would I want such a heavy police presence!

So ... What do we do? What we do, is accept that each of us are our own FIRST RESPONDERS. Each of us must accept responsibility for our own safety. And if we accept that, then we must EACH evaluate how we can best be prepared to keep ourselves safe (or as safe as we can be).

I'll not go into the whole tyrannical government aspect of the 2nd Amendment purpose, and stick with the natural right of self protection. But every lawful citizen should have the natural right of self protection. And every lawful citizen should be allowed to decide for themselves what tools to have available for that self protection.

We already have tons of laws about the ownership and use of firearms and explosive devices. As a former LEO, I feel we already have all the laws needed (too many, in many states). What is in short supply, is strong enforcement of those laws about the felony uses of firearms and explosive devices! "Use A Gun, Go To Jail" should be the motto in every state. And the use of a gun during a person-on-person felony, should have absolute minimums imposed...period! That use of a firearm, should get its own minimum of time, ON TOP of the time for the base crime.

Otherwise, every law abiding citizen should be legally permitted to have their choice of firearm, and lawfully carry it and travel with it, anywhere in the country. Just because I might decide to travel to another state, doesn't mean my possible victimization will stop at the state line. Every lawful citizen, should have the freedom to defend themselves and/or their families. And if they choose to own and carry a firearm, then they should have that freedom. Be it in Texas, or New York, the one thing we can count on, is that Law Enforcement will be too late to "protect" us. (For this reason alone - Concealed Carry should be nationwide!)

Mean and Rude People

My wife and I were in a business the other day, and one of the clerks had such a scowl on her face, and was anything but friendly.

Last month, I was helping some older folks, and one of the men was being a real pain. He was short with those trying to help him, and was being very demanding about things that couldn't be helped.

Not long ago, I was waited on at a popular restaurant by a young woman who looked like she didn't want to be there, and treated me and a couple other guys like we were a bother to be there for lunch.

My wife has often asked ME, "What's wrong?", even though there wasn't anything that I knew of going on with me at the time. She would say that I had this "look", a scowl on my face.

All this made me think about people we run onto. People that leave us with a negative impression, and being rude to us, seemingly without cause. So why are some people that way? Maybe, just maybe, there is an underlying reason, and its not just to be rude.

The first woman I referred to, I have no idea what was wrong with her. But her "customer service" skills were totally lacking, compared to the two other people working around her. So why was she acting that way? I can't say, but will offer this up for consideration.

Maybe she was in emotional pain. Perhaps she had bad news before going to work. Maybe she was just tired (she appeared to be retirement age), and wished she was home. We can't know, but we need to think about what it could be like to walk a mile in her shoes!

The older man? He's a WWII Veteran, who saw combat during the Battle of the Bulge. Anyone knowing a little history will know that awful battle cost the United States military alone over 19,000 lives. Add to that, this man could not get around unassisted, and his children were not there to see him off. Walk a mile in HIS shoes!

The young waitress seemed distracted. Was she a single mother with kids at home, and couldn't be there with them? Any kids at home sick, while she had to work? Did she just have a bad break-up? No way to know, but people go around all the time with heavier burdens than many of us. Sometimes, those burdens are so heavy, its hard for them to not grimace under the weight that we can't see. To walk a mile in her shoes, would be the only way to know for sure.

I've been in combat, like hundreds of thousands of other guys during the Vietnam War. In some ways, I've had an underlying scowl on my face ever since. Add to that, the perfected a Cop's stare I had for many years, adding to the scowl. No excuses, and not asking anyone to walk in my shoes, but when I don't know it, I let the scowl show, and lead other people (sorry Honey!) to believe something is wrong. Most times, it's a less than conscious thought that shows on my face. Sometimes, and over the years its less frequent, it is a passing remembrance that seeps its pain outwardly.

All over the place, people carry burdens, and worries, and experiences, and can sometimes let that effect our interactions with others in a negative way. I know I need to work on my own issues. But what we can ALL do, is give other people a pass. Maybe even offer a kind word or gesture, when that's the last thing you might want to do under the circumstances.

Try it. I have, when I take the time to recognize the need. And watch the surprise on their face, when in spite of themselves, someone treats them better than the way they were treating others. (Most likely, they didn't even know.) Maybe, just maybe, that little gesture could redirect their day. It costs nothing to do really. And if it doesn't change anything, then you can go about your business, knowing you at least you didn't add to that person's burden.

A smile, a kind word, and gesture of good will, might just go a long way. Since we really can't walk a mile in other people's shoes, its the least we can do. And it costs nothing. (I would also suggest, the gesture might even up your own mood!)

Giving to others

Are you a giving person? Do you have a soft spot for some people and/or causes? My wife and I do.

In many ways, I can be very hard hearted. I don't have a lot of patience for selfish, self-centered people. I have none for bad people and predators! But for some things/people/causes, we can be generous (when we are financially able), and that also means in labor when needed. My wife and I give to dog-related and Veterans causes mostly. We just feel compelled to help in those areas.

Recently, after local flooding, a young man who was recently discharged from the Marines, lost everything in the flood. His wife was in the hospital, being treated for large gash on her leg from flood debris. And, he lost his recently trained "service dog". The dog also had a backpack on, with this young Marine's wallet, keys, and cellphone in it. The dog had been swept away from him in the flood waters, and he needed help trying to find the dog, named "Stash". ("Stash" was named because of the dark band of hair above it lip.) He had gone to the local Red Cross for some temporary help, when another Vet friend of mine called me and asked if I was available to help.

So I drove up to Austin and met with the young Marine, named Kelly. After some exchanges, I drove him to the animal shelter in hopes the dog had been turned in. He hadn't been, yet. The dog was "chipped", but the info on the chip would direct any calls to Kelly's cellphone, which was with the dog, and likely ruined by flood waters. Kelly couldn't even get back to his house, as the flood water was keeping people out, and the Police were keeping everyone away from the hardest hit homes. To make matters worse, Kelly and his wife, had spend their last $6,700 of their savings, to have the house remodeled before they moved in. Kelly wouldn't get his last government check for another week or so. No money, no phone, no family nearby, and little solace from the limited help of the Red Cross.

This young man was in real need, so I then took him to buy a pre-paid cellphone, so he could at least make calls and receive calls about the dog, if it was found. I then took him to the hospital to check on his wife. Kelly told me that the hospital had already told him he could sleep there on a sofa until his wife's released.
By then, I had already talked to my wife, and we decided to make this case our donation for the month, so I  handed Kelly some cash, telling him it was a "gift" to help him  and his wife out a little, until the Red Cross and his homeowners insurance could pick thing up for him. Kelly thanked me profusely, and went into the hospital to check on his wife. As I was leaving, I told him that I hoped his wife was okay, and to call me if he found his dog.

There's more to this whole story, but here's the thing. Kelly, as I learned a few days later from another source, was a complete fraud. He was NO Marine, had NO flooded home, had NO wife in the hospital, and had NO dog either. It was all an elaborate ruse to fraud the Red Cross, while 100's of people were flooded out and really needed help. It just happened that one of my Veteran buddies was there to help the Red Cross, and after talking to "Kelly", this guy developed more of his ruse to fit out veterans association's motto, Vets Helping Vets.

We were taken in by this fraud. Ex-cop and all, I was taken in by the elaborate story, and the belief that he was a recently discharged Marine. No ID to verify anything, and no family in the area to help. It just didn't seem right to turn another "Veteran" away in a time of need, and there was no way under the circumstances to verify anything.

So this month, our usual "donation" to a worthy cause, was sidelined by that con-artist. As my wife and discussed the whole thing, we had "given from the heart", with no expectation of anything in return. The way we saw it, its on that kid and God to work out what ever happens to him next. We gave, more as being the "right thing to do", and not for anything else, so we just can't look back with regret. Regret, that could cause us to not "give" again. On this time, we got burned. But we will not be thwarted from doing what we feel is right the next time.

To us, "giving" is just the right thing for us to do for those in need, or to those entities who care for "service dogs" and/or Veterans. As for people like Kelly? We will do what we can to better screen for such fraudulent people. We'll let God work things out with "Kelly". Who knows, as wrong as it was for him to con the Red Cross and us, he may just have bigger problems than we know.

Heroes

Have you ever know of a true hero? To ME, a "hero" is one who has displayed great acts of bravery in the face of overwhelming danger to self. And with that, I have known some real heroes.

In my many writings (and rants), I get very reflective, wave the red, white & blue, and refer to my past military service in one way or another. Yes, I served in the U.S. Army, and I am a Combat Veteran. I was an Infantry Soldier, served in the rice paddies and jungles of Vietnam, and I served with honor.

But I want to be very clear. I was NO hero. Like I said, I have known heroes, and I am NOT one. I served in a combat unit, but that does not make me a "hero". Hundreds of thousands of other soldiers did too. In all honesty, I was an average soldier in many respects. I did what I was assigned to do. I did it to the best of my ability. And I advanced in rank in what I felt was at an appropriate rise as I would have expected under our conditions.

But "heroes" went beyond that. In the face of danger to "themselves", and that of the unit, they did things that would make most shutter. There were times when I would be almost frozen with fear, and it took the willingness of my "brothers" to watch over this "Friggin New Guy" (FNG), and help me gain the courage to move forward, when that was the last thing I wanted to do. (Frankly, much of my time those the early weeks, was spent trying to not let any of my buddies down while staying alive!)

Today though, I feel that our society has used that title of "hero" too loosely, and such people as movie stars, pop singers, and sports figures, have had that title thrust upon them. In fact, a very few of them have ever placed themselves in actual danger of great bodily harm or death for their fellow man. I worry that our kids will see false heroes, and fail to see and appreciate the real heroes out there.

But "hero worshiping" someone who has never placed themselves in harms way for his fellow man, just seems very wrong to me. I guess "worshiping" anyone is wrong, and a true hero would never want "worship". Most of them are very humble, even denying, of their contribution. We can learn a lot from them.

We find that in most cases, such heroes NEVER felt like a hero themselves, nor ever planned on being a hero. Most of them, for commitment to duty, or personal sudden emotions of the moment, stepped out to help their buddy, ignoring the obvious danger to themselves. Most of them, had they really thought it through, might not have done what they did. Or so they'd tell you. In most cases, I'd reject that. The need for such heroic action would not have changed, really, and the character of such a person would still have risen up. And that too, is the mark of a hero.

In today's world, heroes walk among us, unbeknown to most, and they aren't sports figures, actors, or even a President. They are otherwise average people, like our neighbors, or the man or woman working beside us. They don't boast, and they'd deny they didn't do anything "heroic", and that what ever they did ... "Anyone would have done the same thing."

I have known such people. And likely, there are others around me that I don't know. Maybe its the aging WWII Vet from down the street, helped to and from the car by a family member. Or maybe the young quiet grandpa a few doors down, who served bravely in Korea, or the young woman who recently came home from a tour in Afghanistan, and of whom may be a true "unsung" heroes. And yet, there are no TV Awards Special, no ESPN interviews, and no White House ceremonies in their honor. But there are those soldiers who only came home, because someone else went above and beyond to help make that possible.

To such everyday heroes .... while I might or might not know you, Thank You! I expect I am only here to say that, because some of those around me in the jungles and rice paddies of Vietnam, did things that made it possible for me to come home.

Most humbly yours,
Dan

Benghazi, and one man's view

On Sept. 11, 2012, an outpost of our Libyan Embassy was attacked, along with a Central Intelligence Agency annex, four of our guys were killed.

After a year, and Obama's promise to hold those who did that responsible, NO arrests and NO counter actions have taken place. NONE! (Even though one of those terrorists involved has been identified and even interviewed by 2-3 news agencies.)

I won't go into all the things that precluded at the attacks, but will take a look at the attack time-line, and the lack of response to save any of our four guys.

Sept. 11th, 2012
9:40 pm, Benghazi, Libya time (3:40 pm Washington DC time) - The first sounds of gun fire and explosions occurred at the Benghazi compound perimeter.

10 pm (4 pm DC time) - [20 minutes - Tic Toc]
Those inside, to include U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, along with Sean Smith, had come under on-going direct fire from armed terrorists who had breeched the compound walls and gates.
An alert is sent to the CIA security team at an annex about a mile away, the State Department, and to the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, that the compound was under attack.

11 pm (5 pm DC time) - [1 hr 20 mins - Tic Toc]
A U.S. surveillance drone arrives over Benghazi. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey meet with President Barack Obama. According to testimony from Panetta, at a 5 o’clock prescheduled gathering, the president left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, “up to us.”

12:07 am (6:07 pm DC time) - [2 hrs 27 mins - Tic Toc]
The State Department sends an e-mail to the White House, the Pentagon and the FBI indicating the Islamic militant group Ansar al-Sharia claimed credit for the attack.

2 am (8 pm DC time) - [4 hrs 20 mins - Tic Toc]
Embassy Station Assistant Chief Hicks informs Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that they need to evacuate all Americans from Benghazi. At about the same time, an eyewitness captures on video Stevens being pulled from the smoke-filled building.

4 am (10 pm DC time) - [6 hrs 20 mins - Tic Toc]
The attackers launch a full-on assault against the CIA annex, dropping mortars on the roof. Navy SEALs Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods are killed in the attack. (An unknown number of U.S. personnel were also wounded, and those identities and details have been kept from the Oversight Committee on Benghazi.)

10 am (4 am DC time) - [12 hrs 20 mins] The four dead had been recovered, and along with all the survivors, departed on the last plane out of Benghazi.

So - from the time the gun fire started and the Embassy compound was stormed, to the last man killed on the rooftop at the CIA Annex building, over 6 hours of gun battles and mortar attacks took place .... and NOT A SINGLE Military Response Team was put into the air. NO Gunships, NO armed drones, NO Airpower, NO Special Ops, NOTHING was even put into motion.

Some in DC, stated that they didn't "think" such assets could get there on time. HOW COULD THEY KNOW how long the assaults would take? What IF Doherty and Woods were able to hold off the assault on the CIA Annex for several more hours? WHO was coming? WHO was already in the air, while assault plans were made and finalized? NO ONE!

For the life of me, I can not wrap my head around the fact that THIS Administration DID NOTHING to even get a Military Response team into motion, from very the start of the Embassy attack. And then, for the on-going attacks, spread over a mile away to the CIA Annex, for over 6 hours....and still NO Assets put into motion?

Even IF they would be too late to save anyone....to NOT have them in-route and even circling off the coast while mission plans were made, is UNBELIEVABLE to me.

But Obama went to bed at some point that night, and then went to Las Vegas for a "political fund raiser" that next day of Sept. 12th!

Imagine this - Your home is being broken into by several armed men ... you call 9-1-1 ... gun shots ring out while you're on the phone ... the Police Dispatcher radios the Police Officers of the call and gun shots ..... the Police Officers are told by their Patrol Supervisors to hold off heading toward the scene until they know more ... and the Dispatcher tells you, "Sorry sir, but until we know what we're up against, we're not sending anyone!" THAT is essentially what Obama and Staff did to those in Benghazi!

THAT, to me, should have been enough reason to Impeach Obama, and charge Leon Panetta with dereliction of duty! And if anyone reading this is not disgusted and pissed off ... they ain't paying attention and only see their beloved "Black President"!

By the way - Just MY view - But for ANY Military Commander to sit in silence while this goes unchallenged, is also committing a dereliction of duty to those under their command. Silence, is condoning!

Using Deadly Force, On An Unarmed Person

Well, the criminal trial against "John Smith" is over. JS was accused of killing an unarmed 17 year old during a fight. While there is likely more we may never know, what we do know suggests to me that the Not Guilty verdict was the correct one.

In a very short version, and in MY evaluation of the information known to the public, here is what I believed to have happened:

JS's neighborhood has had a number of residential burglaries and thefts. JS's wife was even a witness to one neighbor's such "home invasion". JS became a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, to try help prevent such crimes, or to help get suspects arrested. And, for his personal protection, JS was legally armed with a licensed handgun.

One night, JS saw someone he did not know or recognize as a neighbor, who was walking in the rain, and seemed to be looking around. To JS, this person seemed suspicious and out of place, so he called the Police while he continued to observe the person.

The person, learned to be little "Jimmy Jones", a 6 ft+ black 17 year old, drew JS's attention. While JS was continuing to observe JJ, and talking to the Police on his cell-phone, JJ came back around to meet JS. JJ confronted JS, asking what his problem was, and quickly thereafter, JJ punched JS in the nose, knocking JS down, then got on top of JS, hitting JS in the face and slamming JS's head onto the concrete.

At some point, in what JS described as a fear for his life and/or serious bodily injury, and completely unable to stop the beating, JS pulled his gun and shot JJ, to death.

The jury found for the defense, as Not Guilty.

Now a few things come to my mind about this, and such matters.

1.  I have personally known a man, who loved fighting. He was strong as a bull, a tough fighter, and he loved beating people unconscious. He admitted to enjoying the feeling his victim's facial bones break under his fists. This man, MAIMED people. In the course of an interview with him, I told him I'd never fight him, and that if confronted by him, I'd just shoot him, because he's already told me he has maimed his victims in the past. Make no mistake, if confronted by this animal, I'd shoot him.

2.  I was reading some FBI statistics about Police Officers killed. In 2010, about 8% of those killed, were killed with their own guns. This means that in some way, they were overcome, and their gun was then available to the assailant. When a Police Officer goes down and is beaten in a confrontation, his gun is then open to be taken and used against him (or anyone else!). At some point, if a Police Officer feels he is losing a confrontation, thus losing control of his own weapon, he can, and should, shoot such an assailant.

3.  The above, should also apply to any legally armed civilian. And in the case of JS and JJ, once JS was down, and in his case, feeling he was in real trouble of serious bodily injury or death, he used his firearm to end the battle.

4.  Aside from the first guy I spoke of, I have also know, and such things have been reported all over the nation, that some people, when their victim is down and defenseless, will continue to beat them to the point of very serious injury or death. Last year, a returning Marine was beaten to death that way.
In the NY Bronx, as just one example, a 61 year old man was mugged, and beaten to death by two people. Also in the Bronx, a 59 year old man was robbed of $20, and beaten to death. In neither case, was a weapon used.

At what point in such an confrontation, does one then fear serious injury or death? Such a beating, even without a weapon, is a felony in most (or all) states, and one CAN use deadly force to stop a felony assault. Unarmed, is not the same as being non-deadly. In about 5-6% of murders in the US, the reported weapons were hands and feet.

I expect some to recall observing a school or neighborhood fight, where one of the "fighters" went down, and the fight was over. One person won, and one loses. However, I know of fights (as well as read about such fights) where one person was down-and-out, and the other person just kept pummeling them. At that point, it ceased to be "mutual combat", and became a felony assault. If engaged in a fight with anyone vicious enough to beat you when you're down and no longer able to defend yourself, you become completely subject to the other person's will. And if that will is seriously injures you, or beats you to death, what could you do about it?

"Fair fights", can no longer be depended on. Too many incidents of "beat-downs" occur, and anyone finding themselves in a situation where they are no longer able to defend against a stronger opponent, one who continues to beat them, has every expectation and fear of death or serious bodily injury.

So you've been rendered defenseless, what can you do? In many cases, nothing but pray you will live through it. In the case of JS and JJ, JS resorted to his legally carried handgun. It could be, that JJ would have stopped the beating at some point. When? At what point, would JS have never been able to defend against a vicious or deadly beat-down? How long should JS have waited? Would he soon have been rendered totally defenseless or unconscious? Would he have further head injuries, causing brain injury? Would anyone is such a position, pinned down, having their head battered against the sidewalk and unable to defend against the stronger person, resort to a weapon? Unless you're there, you can't be sure. But I can tell you that I would. I would NOT allow anyone to put me into a hospital, or a coffin.

Side-note: "Profiling" IS appropriate in may cases. IF those home-invasions and thefts were committed mostly by young males of a particular group, then anyone of that group would be observed long enough to see if they were a possible offender. "Racial" profiling - that is profiling only because of a persons race, may be wrong. But profiling a person of a race, when that "race" is predominately involved in crime, is NOT "racial profiling". That is just profiling, in which race plays a part of the descriptors of offenders.

Rushing To Judgement

We ALL do it. Something happens that in some way touches us emotionally or some other sense of identifying with the situation, and we take a position before we know all the details.

I know I have done that, only to later back away from my first perspective after learning more details. Even as a Law Enforcement Officer, I have found myself in a position to assess a situation one way, only to reverse it later as more facts are learned. (Victims, are not always "victims".)

But I have a real problem with President Obama, and his rush to judgment. If anything, HE should never rush to judgment. His judgment affects the lives and welfare of all our nation's citizens, in one way or another.

Take the case with the Cambridge (MA) Police Officer (who is white) and the Harvard College Professor Louis Gates (who is black). While opinions vary of what the Police should or should not have done, Obama came out of the gate pretty early on, stating, "...the Cambridge police acted stupidly." Obama took a side, and ... sorry ... it APPEARS that Obama took the side of a Black man, over a White Cop, and all before the investigation was fully completed. In my view, Obama had NO business stepping into that situation, and choosing a side. Particularly in a "local" police matter.
(see: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/07/obama_cambridge.html )

Then, we have the death of a 17 year old unarmed Black kid (Trayvon Martin), who was shot by a Hispanic (George Zimmerman) "neighborhood watchman" during a scuffle. This happened on Feb. 26, 2012. On Mar. 23, 2012, while commenting about the case, Obama said, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." Obama, in some attempt to identify with the Black community, says such thing, and takes a side before all the facts are known ... and even before the trial (which, by the way, is going on as I type this, on July 12, 2013!). Obama had NO business commenting to such a degree, and to choose a side in a pending criminal investigation. NONE!
(see: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/obama-trayvon-martin_n_1375083.html )

Fact is, and while NOT a reason to shoot anyone, Trayvon Martin is suspected of being a burglar, a pot-smoker by his own photos, and may have been in procession (illegal, as he was 17?) of a handgun in the past. Really President Obama? THIS is the type son you would have had? Really?

Furthermore, from THIS former Law Enforcement Officer's viewpoint, while George Zimmerman will be judged by a jury for his use-of-force, had Martin kept walking, the police would have arrived to check on him. But he didn't. He went back and confronted Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a right and a purpose for being in that apartment complex. Martin was passing through. Zimmerman may have been following Martin, but Martin was not "likely" in fear, or he would never have come back around to confront Zimmerman. A person in fear, unless there is no exit, will head for an exit from the danger, real or perceived. All that is for the court case to unravel, but point is .. Obama should never have commented in any way to take a side.

As for Professor Gates, had he simply stayed calm, and provided the identification and verification the Officer requested, that matter would never escalated. But instead, the Professor took immediate offense to being questioned, and referred to the Officer with "your mama", which jumped to the racial right away. The Professor was wrong. But Obama took a side.

In any case, Obama had NO business, as THE President of the United States, to make such comments on the Cambridge or Martin matter!  In both cases, he rushed to judgment. Hardly presidential. And to me .... to ME .... it smacks more of taking a racial side, than an objective one.

Obama, to my dismay, IS our President, and with that, should be the President to ALL Americans, and should hold his tongue until all the facts are out. Even then, local matter should be left to local people, and for any President to comment in a way that takes one side over another, is just wrong.

The rest of us may well keep jumping to early conclusions, but for the most part, such rushing to judgments do not impact a nation.