I have noticed this for quite some time now so it is not new news but it is curious.
Have you ever clicked on the "Next Blog" button at the top of the page?
I have. Mainly out of boredom or curiosity. The thing that caught my attention is this; in the several years now that I have been clicking on that button, I have yet to come upon a conservative site of any kind or a gun related site. Now I know I am not the only conservative site on blogger.
I have seen and read other conservative sites so I know they are there. The odds of never running into a conservative site have to be small but even at 50/50 I should have run into one by now. So. . . . what gives?
Censorship? Nah, not Google.
FREEDOM ~ LIBERTY ~ LOVE OF LIFE~ FREE MAN~ WE THE PEOPLE!
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Give me liberty or give me death!
I've been thinking about the way things are going in this country. Reading a lot. This speech, I hadn't read since high school. I think it is very appropriate for today.
Dec. 16, 1773. American Colonists dump 342 containers of tea into the Boston harbor. The British Parliament enacts a series of Acts in response to the gauntlet thrown down by the colonists in Massachusetts. Rebellion is at hand.
Boston, May of 1774, General Thomas Gage; commander of all British military forces in the colonies, arrived, followed by the four regiments of British troops.
The First Continental Congress met in the fall of 1774 in Philadelphia with 56 American delegates, representing every colony, except Georgia. On September 17, Congress declared opposition to the repressive Acts of Parliament, declaring; "they are not to be obeyed," and also promoted the formation of local militia units.
Economic and military tensions between the colonists and the British were so thick you could have cut it with a knife. February of 1775, a provincial congress was held in Massachusetts and began defensive preparations for war. The English Parliament declared Massachusetts to be in rebellion.
On March 23, 1775, a meeting of delegates was held in St. John's church in Richmond Virginia. Resolutions were presented by Patrick Henry placing the colony of Virginia at odds with the Crown. Basically a bid to arm the militia.
Before the vote was taken on his resolutions, Henry delivered this speech imploring the delegates to vote in favor. Henry believed the War with England, The War for Independence, had already begun in Boston.
This guy spoke with fury, loyalty and truth. He did not use notes, spoke in a bold voice building to a cresendo and ending with his now famous words. His resolutions passed by a narrow margin and so; Virginia joined in the American Revolution. History had been made.
No man, Mr. President, thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.
And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained — we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Dec. 16, 1773. American Colonists dump 342 containers of tea into the Boston harbor. The British Parliament enacts a series of Acts in response to the gauntlet thrown down by the colonists in Massachusetts. Rebellion is at hand.
Boston, May of 1774, General Thomas Gage; commander of all British military forces in the colonies, arrived, followed by the four regiments of British troops.
The First Continental Congress met in the fall of 1774 in Philadelphia with 56 American delegates, representing every colony, except Georgia. On September 17, Congress declared opposition to the repressive Acts of Parliament, declaring; "they are not to be obeyed," and also promoted the formation of local militia units.
Economic and military tensions between the colonists and the British were so thick you could have cut it with a knife. February of 1775, a provincial congress was held in Massachusetts and began defensive preparations for war. The English Parliament declared Massachusetts to be in rebellion.
On March 23, 1775, a meeting of delegates was held in St. John's church in Richmond Virginia. Resolutions were presented by Patrick Henry placing the colony of Virginia at odds with the Crown. Basically a bid to arm the militia.
Before the vote was taken on his resolutions, Henry delivered this speech imploring the delegates to vote in favor. Henry believed the War with England, The War for Independence, had already begun in Boston.
This guy spoke with fury, loyalty and truth. He did not use notes, spoke in a bold voice building to a cresendo and ending with his now famous words. His resolutions passed by a narrow margin and so; Virginia joined in the American Revolution. History had been made.
No man, Mr. President, thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging.
And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained — we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Thank You. . . . .
Thank you to my father who fought in Korea while serving in the US Army , the Forgotten War. He never spoke about what he did but later I found out he was an advance patrol soldier manning a 50 Cal. I am proud of him and thank him. He was 62 when he passed.
I want to thank my Grandpa. He fought in the Pacific during WWII in the US Navy. I didn't know him very well but I am told he was a good man and a tough New York cop. He was 61 when he passed away.
Thank you to my Uncle Al who was a US Army sniper in WWII, Fought in the Battle of the Bulge. I was privileged to know him and spoke at his funeral. He was 89.
Thank you just doesn't seem to be enough but that's all I got today. These men fought for the Liberty and Freedom I enjoy today. I am grateful for their sacrifice, commitment and devotion to duty. Proud to be my dad's son.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Simply because it is right. . . . .
"It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man who knows what the law is today can guess what it will be tomorrow." -- James Madison, Federalist no. 62, February 27, 1788
"Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a Citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the Citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." --Michael Rivero
"A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers." --Aldous Huxley (1894-1963)
"Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it political? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor political, nor popular - but one must take it simply because it is right." --Martin Luther King, Jr.
"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think." --Adolf Hitler
"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."--James Madison
"When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket, and then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter. Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch Money. Money is a barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that our society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-! property, half-loot. Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection, and the base of a moral existence." --Ayn Rand,
"Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a Citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the Citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." --Michael Rivero
"A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers." --Aldous Huxley (1894-1963)
"Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it political? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor political, nor popular - but one must take it simply because it is right." --Martin Luther King, Jr.
"What good fortune for those in power that people do not think." --Adolf Hitler
"If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."--James Madison
"When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket, and then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter. Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch Money. Money is a barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that our society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-! property, half-loot. Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men's protection, and the base of a moral existence." --Ayn Rand,
Treason from within. . . .
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear."
--Cicero Marcus Tullius - Born on January 3, 106 BC and was murdered on December 7, 43 BC
"Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you" -- Benjamin Franklin
--Cicero Marcus Tullius - Born on January 3, 106 BC and was murdered on December 7, 43 BC
"Make yourselves sheep and the wolves will eat you" -- Benjamin Franklin
Friday, May 22, 2009
American capitalism gone with a whimper
Scary PRAVDA article, written by Russian.. 'American capitalism gone with a whimper'
From http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/
Is this anything we didn't already know was happening?
Quote:
| American capitalism gone with a whimper 27.04.2009 Source: Pravda.Ru URL: http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/col...n_capitalism-0 It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people. True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists. Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters. First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy". Pride blind the foolish. Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations" were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America. The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe. These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them? These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters. Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions. So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK's Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride. Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper...but a "freeman" whimper. So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive. The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left. The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker. Stanislav Mishin |
From http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/
Is this anything we didn't already know was happening?
Thursday, May 21, 2009
The Open Carry Argument
This article is "excellent" food for thought.
The Open Carry Argument
My primary goal when I’m out and about, besides whatever I went out and about to do, is to go about peaceably and not be the victim of a violent crime. To that end I carry a firearm whenever I go out as well as follow all the other standard safety practices like maintaining situational awareness, staying out of high crime areas, and avoiding confrontation. I also have a larger overall goal of making it through my life without shooting anyone. Simply put, I don’t want to be responsible, legally or morally, for another’s death. Those two goals might appear at first blush to be mutually exclusive, and with concealed carry it would be a difficult set of goals to realize.
Carry of any firearm or other weapon for defensive purposes is a solemn responsibility. Those of us that do (openly or concealed) are mortified by the idea, constantly promoted by the pacifists, that our behavior is more reckless because we are armed. In other words, because we carry a handgun we take more risks than we would if we were unarmed. While it would be dishonest to claim we are all responsible gun owners, it is my belief that the vast majority of us are. Regardless of what or how you carry, you need to come to the realization that you are setting yourself up to lose. Whenever you are placed in a defensive situation, you will always lose; it’s only the degree of loss that’s negotiable. Ayoob hits on this in his book, In the Gravest Extreme. He suggests tossing the robber a small wad of cash and moving off, even if you could prevail with a weapon. There’s a very good reason for this. Regardless of how skilled you are at drawing your weapon, you are going to lose. It may be only a minor loss, like being very shaken up and not sleeping well for a few days, or it may be a major loss, like becoming fertilizer, or (most likely) it may be somewhere in-between, but you always lose. Your life will not be the same even if you prevail.
Carrying a concealed firearm presents to a criminal that I am unarmed. Every study I’ve ever read, not most but every study, says that criminals will avoid an armed person or home when selecting a victim. That only makes sense, right? Robbers, rapists, or carjackers might be dumb and opportunistic, but they have the same instinctual sense of self preservation we all have. Hyenas don’t attack lions to steal the gazelle the lions have just killed. It’s all about risk management; are the potential gains (a tasty gazelle dinner) worth the risks (pain and damage the lion’s teeth will cause), and does the hyena really need to test the lion to figure out the answer? No, the hyena can see the lion’s teeth and knows to stay well clear.
Deterrent Value:
When I’m carrying concealed I feel like my ‘teeth’ are hidden, and thus of no real deterrent value. If I appear unarmed then I am unarmed in the eyes of the robber, I appear as easy a target as almost anyone else out on the street. My probability of being a victim of a crime, violent or otherwise, is completely unchanged by the fact that I have hidden beneath my shirt the means to defend myself. My goal, however, is not to be a victim in the first place, remember? I don’t want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. I recognize that there are some people who (think they) want to be victimized so they can whip out their concealed firearm and ‘surprise’ the mugger; that is, in my opinion, foolish immaturity. Concealed carry is good; it throws a wrench in the works for criminals who might see the teeming masses as a smorgasbord of financial gain. This deterrent effect is, nonetheless, indirect and often nil. At some point the thug will weigh the risks vs. the gains; is his current desperation for money/drugs/booze/gold grille greater than the gamble that one of those people might be carrying a gun? If he decides to play the odds, which helped along with surprise tip the scale in his favor, he will attack. Will his attack allow enough time for me to draw my concealed firearm to affect a defense? Maybe, but then again, maybe not.
Remember, I don’t want to be a victim and I don’t want to shoot anyone. So how do I realize both goals; or how do I make them inclusive? I can do that through open carry. By making it clear and obvious that I am armed, that I have teeth, I tip the risk scale to the point that the criminal’s gains are far outweighed by the risk. There is no ambiguity when the thug is doing his risk assessment, there’s something right there in plain sight that can quickly and painfully change or terminate his life. You may not think his life has much value, but as I mentioned before, he has the same sense of self preservation as any other living creature and to him it’s every bit as valuable as yours is to you. It would be foolish to ignore this indisputable fact when you develop your overall tactical strategy.
The Five Stages of Violent Crime
I am a firm believer in this defense theology and urge anyone who carries a firearm for protection (and even those who do not) to follow the link and read it carefully. Please, for your and your family’s sake, read that. Drill down into the hyperlinks for better explanations; absorb as much information as you can. A violent crime does not begin at the point where one person with ill intent draws a weapon or attacks another.
I do not believe the act begins after the BG has made his intentions known by drawing on you (attack); it began when he formed the intent. Well, there’s not a lot I can do personally to stop another’s intent, so I need to look a little farther along in the sequence and try to derail that train before it gets to the attack. For the sake of argument, let’s remove weapons from the equation for just a moment. A 5’2” unarmed attacker isn’t going to choose a 6’6” victim over a 5’1” victim, right? He’s going to attack the easier target. Now let’s come back to the reality of violent crime and add back the weapons. Concealed carry presumes it is better to wait until the opponent has drawn his knife or gun and then try to ‘fix’ the situation. It’s seems a bit foolish to promote the idea that it’s better to attempt to stop a violent crime in the fourth stage when you could instead prevent it in the second. A concealed weapon cannot deter an attack at the ‘interview’ stage; it’s completely ineffectual in that role. Open carry is the only method that provides a direct deterrent. Let’s say the bad-guy missed the openly carried pistol and holster during the interview stage, and has proceeded to the ‘positioning’ stage. Chances are pretty good he’ll see it at some point then, right? Then, let’s say the planets have all aligned just so and he, for whatever reason, has begun his attack despite your openly carried sidearm. At this point, the OCer is on level footing with the CCer, the attack has begun. Who has the advantage? Well, I’m going to say that with all things being equal (skill level and equipment) the OCer has a speed of draw advantage over the CCer.
First One To Be Shot:
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.
Surprise:
Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter. Although this was touched on in the previous paragraph about deterrence, I’ll expand on it specifically here because there are some important truths you need to consider before you lean too heavily on this false support. Surprise as a defensive tactic is often based on unrealistic or ill-thought out scenarios, and seems to exist only in the minds of concealed carry firearms proponents. The circumstance where several street toughs surround and taunt you for a while before robbing you, like in some Charles Bronson movie, is not realistic; the mugger wants to get in and out as fast as possible. In most cases you will have only seconds to realize what’s happening, make a decision, and react. Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent was to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you will likely forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. What many internet commandos call ‘defensive surprise’ is nothing more than damage control, a last ditch effort to fight your way back out of a dangerous situation. I am not aware of any army that teaches using surprise as a defense against attack. No squad of soldiers goes on patrol with their weapons hidden so that they can ‘surprise’ the enemy should they walk into an ambush.
It Will Get Stolen:
Another common criticism of open carry is that the firearm itself will be the target of theft, prompting a criminal to attack simply to get the gun from you. Like the previous example of being the first one shot in a robbery, above, this is despite the fact that there is no credible evidence it happens. It also blindly ignores the more obvious fact that anything you possess can make you the target of a crime, be it a car, a watch, or even a female companion (girlfriend, wife, or daughter). Crooks commonly steal for only one of two reasons; to get something you have that they want, or to get something that you have so they can sell it and buy something they want. I don’t claim it could never happen; just that it’s so remote a possibility that it doesn’t warrant drastic alterations to our self defense strategies. If you believe otherwise, leave your wife, children, watch, sunglasses, jewelry, and cell phone at home, hop into your Pinto wagon, and head out to do your thing. Very often, someone critical of open carry will cite some example of a uniformed police officer who was targeted by a violent criminal. They assume the officer was targeted solely to steal his firearm but there is never any real proof of this. What is more likely is that the officer was targeted merely for being a police officer and the gun was stolen as a byproduct of the attack. However, let’s suppose, for argument, that a police officer really was attacked just to get his firearm. What actions did the police department take to prevent it from reoccurring? Did they demand that their officers carry concealed? No, of course not. You should, like the police, prioritize your defense strategy for the most likely threat first, and the least likely last.
It Scares People:
One other statement against open carry I hear is that it damages public perception of firearms owners, or that by carrying openly we are not being good ambassadors to the public. While there are some people who have a genuine fear of firearms, due either to some horrible past experience or anti-gun indoctrination, the majority of people are either indifferent to them or quite fascinated by them. I’ve never kept track of the dozens of fellow citizens I’ve encountered who have marveled at the idea of open carry, but I do know exactly how many have expressed displeasure at it; one. People are scared of many things for many reasons; however, pretending those things do not exist only perpetuates the fear. Someone who is disturbed by open carry is going to be every bit as disturbed by concealed carry. The only effective way to overcome a fear is to come to the intellectual realization that the phobia is based on emotion and not on fact. By being a firsthand witness that a firearm was carried responsibly and peaceably, and wasn’t being carried in the commission of a crime, one who was apprehensive about firearms discovers their fear is not fact based, but emotional. Thus, open carry can be a very effectual way of helping to overcome the emotionally based fear of the firearm. After all, you’d be much more likely to believe in ghosts if you saw one rather than if you listened to a ghost story around a campfire. In other words, we give significantly more credibility to the things we experience than we do to the things we hear. The bottom line is that this argument is made by people who don’t, cant, or haven’t carried openly; those of us who do so on a regular basis have an entirely different experience.
I’m Not Comfortable Carrying Openly:
This is really the only reasonable argument against open carry for an individual. We all have a comfort zone for any aspect of our lives and we prefer to stay within that comfort zone. We all agree that it’s better to be armed and never need the firearm than it is to need it and not have it. There is a point where concealing your firearm becomes so problematic, due to conditions like temperature or comfort, that some choose to either leave it behind or carry in such a way that it would be difficult or impossible to draw it quickly. If it takes me five or six seconds to draw my firearm from deep concealment and I had sufficient time before hand to actually do so, I would prefer to use that five or six seconds to avoid the entire encounter. I’m glad we have concealed carry laws in most of the states; it empowers and protects not only us but the general public through the offset deterrent effect. Some of us, however, choose the more direct deterrent effect of open carry.
Conclusion
No, open carry is not the be-all-end-all of self defense any more than concealed carry is. The purpose of this essay is not to convince you to carry a firearm openly, but to merely point out the reasoning I used to determine that it is often the best option for me. If you think otherwise, please feel free to write an essay of your own outlining the reasoning you used. I would suggest that you avoid the intellectual mistake of emphasizing rare or unlikely defense scenarios that many of us will never experience. I believe one should prioritize for the most likely threat, not the least likely threat. I don’t put Hollywood style bank robberies high on my threat list because I rarely go into a bank and those types of robberies are very rare themselves. I live in the most crime riddled city in the northwest; the most likely threat here is some young male with a knife or gun trying to carjack me or mug me on the street, in the park, or in a parking lot. With this knowledge I build my personal self protection plan based on that manner of attack. This may not suit you, especially if you live in Hollywood.
I would like to thank Mainsail for graciously allowing this reprinting.
Original article found on:
USA Carry
The Open Carry Argument
My primary goal when I’m out and about, besides whatever I went out and about to do, is to go about peaceably and not be the victim of a violent crime. To that end I carry a firearm whenever I go out as well as follow all the other standard safety practices like maintaining situational awareness, staying out of high crime areas, and avoiding confrontation. I also have a larger overall goal of making it through my life without shooting anyone. Simply put, I don’t want to be responsible, legally or morally, for another’s death. Those two goals might appear at first blush to be mutually exclusive, and with concealed carry it would be a difficult set of goals to realize.
Carry of any firearm or other weapon for defensive purposes is a solemn responsibility. Those of us that do (openly or concealed) are mortified by the idea, constantly promoted by the pacifists, that our behavior is more reckless because we are armed. In other words, because we carry a handgun we take more risks than we would if we were unarmed. While it would be dishonest to claim we are all responsible gun owners, it is my belief that the vast majority of us are. Regardless of what or how you carry, you need to come to the realization that you are setting yourself up to lose. Whenever you are placed in a defensive situation, you will always lose; it’s only the degree of loss that’s negotiable. Ayoob hits on this in his book, In the Gravest Extreme. He suggests tossing the robber a small wad of cash and moving off, even if you could prevail with a weapon. There’s a very good reason for this. Regardless of how skilled you are at drawing your weapon, you are going to lose. It may be only a minor loss, like being very shaken up and not sleeping well for a few days, or it may be a major loss, like becoming fertilizer, or (most likely) it may be somewhere in-between, but you always lose. Your life will not be the same even if you prevail.
Carrying a concealed firearm presents to a criminal that I am unarmed. Every study I’ve ever read, not most but every study, says that criminals will avoid an armed person or home when selecting a victim. That only makes sense, right? Robbers, rapists, or carjackers might be dumb and opportunistic, but they have the same instinctual sense of self preservation we all have. Hyenas don’t attack lions to steal the gazelle the lions have just killed. It’s all about risk management; are the potential gains (a tasty gazelle dinner) worth the risks (pain and damage the lion’s teeth will cause), and does the hyena really need to test the lion to figure out the answer? No, the hyena can see the lion’s teeth and knows to stay well clear.
Deterrent Value:
When I’m carrying concealed I feel like my ‘teeth’ are hidden, and thus of no real deterrent value. If I appear unarmed then I am unarmed in the eyes of the robber, I appear as easy a target as almost anyone else out on the street. My probability of being a victim of a crime, violent or otherwise, is completely unchanged by the fact that I have hidden beneath my shirt the means to defend myself. My goal, however, is not to be a victim in the first place, remember? I don’t want to be a victim that fought back successfully and triumphed; I prefer to not be victimized at all. I recognize that there are some people who (think they) want to be victimized so they can whip out their concealed firearm and ‘surprise’ the mugger; that is, in my opinion, foolish immaturity. Concealed carry is good; it throws a wrench in the works for criminals who might see the teeming masses as a smorgasbord of financial gain. This deterrent effect is, nonetheless, indirect and often nil. At some point the thug will weigh the risks vs. the gains; is his current desperation for money/drugs/booze/gold grille greater than the gamble that one of those people might be carrying a gun? If he decides to play the odds, which helped along with surprise tip the scale in his favor, he will attack. Will his attack allow enough time for me to draw my concealed firearm to affect a defense? Maybe, but then again, maybe not.
Remember, I don’t want to be a victim and I don’t want to shoot anyone. So how do I realize both goals; or how do I make them inclusive? I can do that through open carry. By making it clear and obvious that I am armed, that I have teeth, I tip the risk scale to the point that the criminal’s gains are far outweighed by the risk. There is no ambiguity when the thug is doing his risk assessment, there’s something right there in plain sight that can quickly and painfully change or terminate his life. You may not think his life has much value, but as I mentioned before, he has the same sense of self preservation as any other living creature and to him it’s every bit as valuable as yours is to you. It would be foolish to ignore this indisputable fact when you develop your overall tactical strategy.
The Five Stages of Violent Crime
I am a firm believer in this defense theology and urge anyone who carries a firearm for protection (and even those who do not) to follow the link and read it carefully. Please, for your and your family’s sake, read that. Drill down into the hyperlinks for better explanations; absorb as much information as you can. A violent crime does not begin at the point where one person with ill intent draws a weapon or attacks another.
Quote:
| The Five Stages of Violent Crime: Crime and violence are processes that take time to develop. The attack is not the first step, the preliminary triangle must be built. There are five distinct stages that are easily identified: 1) Intent 2) Interview 3) Positioning 4) Attack 5) Reaction |
First One To Be Shot:
There are some who criticize open carry and claim it will make you more of a target or ‘the first one shot’ when a robber walks into the 7-11, despite the absolute lack of credible evidence that this has ever happened. If the robber walks in and sees that you’re armed, his whole plan has encountered an unexpected variable. In bank robberies where he might expect to see an armed guard he will have already factored that possibility into his plan, but only for the armed guard, not for open or concealed carry citizens. No robber robs a bank without at least a rudimentary plan. Nevertheless, being present for a bank robbery is an extremely remote possibility for most of us regardless of our preferred method of handgun carry, so let’s go back in the 7-11. If the robber sees someone is armed he is forced to either significantly alter the plan or abort it outright. Robbing is an inherently apprehensive occupation, and one that doesn’t respond well to instant modifications. He is not prepared to commit murder when he only planned for larceny. He knows that a petty robbery will not garner the intense police manhunt a murder would. He doesn’t know if you’re an armed citizen or a police officer and isn’t going to take the time to figure it out. Either way, if someone in the 7-11 is unexpectedly armed, how many others might be similarly adorned and where might they be? Does this unexpectedly armed individual have a partner who is likewise armed nearby, someone who is watching right now? Self preservation compels him to abort the plan for one that is less risky. So we see that the logic matches the history; open carriers are not the first ones shot because it doesn’t make sense in any common street crime scenario that they would be. If your personal self protection plan emphasizes “Hollywood” style crimes over the more realistic street mugging, it might be best to stay home.
Surprise:
Probably the most common condemnation of open carry comes from the armchair tacticians who believe it’s better to have the element of surprise in a criminal encounter. Although this was touched on in the previous paragraph about deterrence, I’ll expand on it specifically here because there are some important truths you need to consider before you lean too heavily on this false support. Surprise as a defensive tactic is often based on unrealistic or ill-thought out scenarios, and seems to exist only in the minds of concealed carry firearms proponents. The circumstance where several street toughs surround and taunt you for a while before robbing you, like in some Charles Bronson movie, is not realistic; the mugger wants to get in and out as fast as possible. In most cases you will have only seconds to realize what’s happening, make a decision, and react. Imagine you’re walking along the sidewalk when two gangsta looking teenagers suddenly appear at the corner coming in the opposite direction. You have only seconds to react if their intent was to victimize you. Do you draw your concealed firearm now or wait until there’s an actual visible threat? If they are just on their way to church and you pull a gun on them, you are the criminal and you will likely forever lose your firearms rights for such a foolish action. If you don’t draw and they pull a knife or pistol when they’re just a couple steps away, your only options are draw (if you think you can) or comply. Imagine staring at the shiny blade of a knife being held by a very nervous and violent mugger, three inches from your or your wife’s throat and having to decide whether or not you have time to draw from concealment. The element of surprise may not do you any good; in fact the only surprising thing that might happen is that your concealed carry pistol gets taken along with your wallet. The thug will later get a good chuckle with his buddies about how you brought a gun to a knife fight. The simple truth is that while surprise is a monumentally superior tactical maneuver, it is exclusively an offensive action, not a defensive one. What many internet commandos call ‘defensive surprise’ is nothing more than damage control, a last ditch effort to fight your way back out of a dangerous situation. I am not aware of any army that teaches using surprise as a defense against attack. No squad of soldiers goes on patrol with their weapons hidden so that they can ‘surprise’ the enemy should they walk into an ambush.
It Will Get Stolen:
Another common criticism of open carry is that the firearm itself will be the target of theft, prompting a criminal to attack simply to get the gun from you. Like the previous example of being the first one shot in a robbery, above, this is despite the fact that there is no credible evidence it happens. It also blindly ignores the more obvious fact that anything you possess can make you the target of a crime, be it a car, a watch, or even a female companion (girlfriend, wife, or daughter). Crooks commonly steal for only one of two reasons; to get something you have that they want, or to get something that you have so they can sell it and buy something they want. I don’t claim it could never happen; just that it’s so remote a possibility that it doesn’t warrant drastic alterations to our self defense strategies. If you believe otherwise, leave your wife, children, watch, sunglasses, jewelry, and cell phone at home, hop into your Pinto wagon, and head out to do your thing. Very often, someone critical of open carry will cite some example of a uniformed police officer who was targeted by a violent criminal. They assume the officer was targeted solely to steal his firearm but there is never any real proof of this. What is more likely is that the officer was targeted merely for being a police officer and the gun was stolen as a byproduct of the attack. However, let’s suppose, for argument, that a police officer really was attacked just to get his firearm. What actions did the police department take to prevent it from reoccurring? Did they demand that their officers carry concealed? No, of course not. You should, like the police, prioritize your defense strategy for the most likely threat first, and the least likely last.
It Scares People:
One other statement against open carry I hear is that it damages public perception of firearms owners, or that by carrying openly we are not being good ambassadors to the public. While there are some people who have a genuine fear of firearms, due either to some horrible past experience or anti-gun indoctrination, the majority of people are either indifferent to them or quite fascinated by them. I’ve never kept track of the dozens of fellow citizens I’ve encountered who have marveled at the idea of open carry, but I do know exactly how many have expressed displeasure at it; one. People are scared of many things for many reasons; however, pretending those things do not exist only perpetuates the fear. Someone who is disturbed by open carry is going to be every bit as disturbed by concealed carry. The only effective way to overcome a fear is to come to the intellectual realization that the phobia is based on emotion and not on fact. By being a firsthand witness that a firearm was carried responsibly and peaceably, and wasn’t being carried in the commission of a crime, one who was apprehensive about firearms discovers their fear is not fact based, but emotional. Thus, open carry can be a very effectual way of helping to overcome the emotionally based fear of the firearm. After all, you’d be much more likely to believe in ghosts if you saw one rather than if you listened to a ghost story around a campfire. In other words, we give significantly more credibility to the things we experience than we do to the things we hear. The bottom line is that this argument is made by people who don’t, cant, or haven’t carried openly; those of us who do so on a regular basis have an entirely different experience.
I’m Not Comfortable Carrying Openly:
This is really the only reasonable argument against open carry for an individual. We all have a comfort zone for any aspect of our lives and we prefer to stay within that comfort zone. We all agree that it’s better to be armed and never need the firearm than it is to need it and not have it. There is a point where concealing your firearm becomes so problematic, due to conditions like temperature or comfort, that some choose to either leave it behind or carry in such a way that it would be difficult or impossible to draw it quickly. If it takes me five or six seconds to draw my firearm from deep concealment and I had sufficient time before hand to actually do so, I would prefer to use that five or six seconds to avoid the entire encounter. I’m glad we have concealed carry laws in most of the states; it empowers and protects not only us but the general public through the offset deterrent effect. Some of us, however, choose the more direct deterrent effect of open carry.
Conclusion
No, open carry is not the be-all-end-all of self defense any more than concealed carry is. The purpose of this essay is not to convince you to carry a firearm openly, but to merely point out the reasoning I used to determine that it is often the best option for me. If you think otherwise, please feel free to write an essay of your own outlining the reasoning you used. I would suggest that you avoid the intellectual mistake of emphasizing rare or unlikely defense scenarios that many of us will never experience. I believe one should prioritize for the most likely threat, not the least likely threat. I don’t put Hollywood style bank robberies high on my threat list because I rarely go into a bank and those types of robberies are very rare themselves. I live in the most crime riddled city in the northwest; the most likely threat here is some young male with a knife or gun trying to carjack me or mug me on the street, in the park, or in a parking lot. With this knowledge I build my personal self protection plan based on that manner of attack. This may not suit you, especially if you live in Hollywood.
I would like to thank Mainsail for graciously allowing this reprinting.
Original article found on:
USA Carry
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Thought for the day.
"Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance. The history of liberty is a history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it." --President Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924)
We The People . . . . .
Though you or I may not agree fully with every point, this dynamic speach certainly gives one pause.
Delivered at the Lubbock , Texas , TEA Party! A powerful message from a patriot.
by Dr. Donald May
This is A Time For Courage
April 15, 2009 - 11:49 pm
Ladies and gentlemen, This is a Time For Courage.
We are gathered here today on the Plains of West Texas in common purpose. We are here to remind our government that this is our country, We the People are still in charge, and our government is still our servant and not our master.
Our Nation's founding document is The Declaration of Independence . It tells us that our rights come from God and not from a small group of Elite men and women.
Our Constitution starts with the words "We the People." Our Constitution was written for ordinary Americans like you and me. Our Constitution protects us from our government and from the politicians.
Our President has complained that our Constitution gives ordinary people too much protection.
He has ridiculed us for the high value we place on our Bibles, our guns, our personal property, and our Liberty . He tells us we do not deserve to keep the money we have earned.
We are told freedom has not worked. Personal responsibility, free enterprise, and Liberty have not been effective. Our government will now make more of our decisions for us.
Other than our military, I can think of not one government agency I have ever found to be helpful
And speaking of our military, how about those Navy Seals blowing the heads off those three terrorist pirates? Don't you just wish our entire government would function with such efficiency, professionalism, and courage?
We watch in disbelief as our beloved United States is weakened economically, militarily, and morally by a Radical President
and his eager accomplices.
What has taken generations to build is systematically destroyed and replaced with the same Socialist Evil that brought poverty, destruction, and despair to untold hundreds of millions.
The problems we face today have occurred because we have not defended our Nation from Socialism. For too long we have allowed the wrong people to make the worst possible decisions.
The Bible warns us of class hatred. The Radical leadership of our government daily fans the evil flames of class envy.
Our European and Canadian friends beg us to not make the same Socialist mistakes they did.
The President of the European 20 Union warned our President that his Socialist economic plans are taking the World down the "road to Hell."
The path to power for Socialists includes taking God and guns from the citizens. Without spiritual and physical protection, people cannot defend themselves and their Liberty . They soon become slaves
We are angered that our President apologizes for the exceptionalism and heroism of the United States of America . We are deeply troubled he told others the United States is not a Christian nation.
We are angered that we have been called cowards and racists because we oppose Socialism. Socialism is not racial. Socialism is an equal opportunity destroyer.
We are angered that a recent Department of Homeland Security report has singled out our military men and women who are returning home as being radical threats.
The report also characterizes you and me as right-wing extremists and radicals because we favor smaller government and lower taxes.
You and I are average citizens who believe just like most of our fellow Americans. We want our government to leave us alone and to keep its hands off our money, our religion, or guns, our private property, and our lives.
We demand that our government stop spending money it does not have.
Stop confiscating our money and private property.
Stop printing money.
Stop subsidizing Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the other failed financial institutions and companies.
Mr. President, stop appointing tax cheats to positions of power and influence.
Mr. President, secure our borders.
Mr. President, do not divert money from our missile defense, F-22 Raptors, and other vital military equipment. This gives encouragement, aid, and comfort to our enemies. Protecting us is your number one job.
Mr. President, do not give voting rights to millions of illegal aliens and felons. You have no more right to create new voters for your benefit than you do to use our money to buy the 2010 and 2012 Elections.
We gather peacefully here today because there is a growing concern for what our government is doing to us and to our future. We fear for the very survival of our Republic.
Yet there is much to make us hopeful and to fill our hearts with optimism and courage. This is still our country!
The Constitution of the Unites States belongs to We the People. Our Constitution still protects us fro m our government.
Call every possible elected official, including our President, Vice President, and the Speaker of the House.
Demand that they stop stealing our money and giving it to ACORN and their other political supporters in order to buy votes.
Call Senators Cornyn and Hutchison, and Representative Neugebauer. Thank them. Urge them to do much more. Remind them now is a time for action and not for campaigning.
Volunteer to work on our 2010 Census. Confront ACORN. Keep our Census honest. We must not allow our President to take control of our Census for his political advantage.
We must replace as much of our Far Left Congress as possible in 2010. Get involved. Do not let the ACORN control our 2010 Election.
Talk with someone every day who does not understand our nation's history and our great heritage. Tell them why the United States is a good and prosperous nation. It still remains that brightly lit city on the hill. It still is the best hope for all mankind.
Talk with all of the young people you can find. They are our future. Many do not understand what they have and that their future is being destroyed.
Encourage your elected State officials to pass legislation that will protect us from our Federal government. Governor Rick Perry and others are doing that right now for Texas . Thank them and pray for them.
This is a time for strong peaceful action. Let us pray that We the People can quickly return our government to its Constitutional responsibilities.
Our President and Congress were elected to be our servants and not our masters.
May God help our President and Congress to quickly realize the error of their ways and stop their reckless and unwarranted spending, cut our taxes, and reduce the size of our Federal bureaucracy.
If they do not, may God grant us the courage and determination to vote them out of power next year.
May God richly bless and protect each of you, and our Constitution, as together we pursue Liberty !
Just a note of interest to dissuade anyone who would call this racist. The speaker is a black man.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
SOS for the GOP. . .
What Republicans need is a mutiny
The party establishment is out to sea, so conservatives need to start rocking the boat.
By Richard A. Viguerie
May 10, 2009
Click here to read the story:
The idea that a new candidate or an election in the near future will repair the damage done is ludicris.
"..Conservatives should no longer look to Republican politicians for leadership and should assume the role of leading the opposition to Obama and the Democrats. We believe we have a party and a country to save, and the GOP establishment is in our way. Let the rebellion begin...".
So, you believe a new party, a new candidate, a new election will solve the mess we are in? Have any of you looked around? Do you see how deep the rabbit hole goes? Did you guys all take the blue pill?
You are dreaming if you think that your vote or your candidate: libertarian or whatever, will make one iota of difference in the political landscape. Rock the boat all you want.
Look at what is happening and where. Every corner of the government is compromised. Thieves and liers. Everyone is just laying down for the Obismal. The only stand up guy anywhere to be found is Dick Cheney and I wouldn't trust him much further than I could throw him.
We are at the end of things as we know it and it will take a lot more than the next elections to change this situation let alone recoup the incredible losses.
The sooner people realize the truth of it, the better. Naiveté only works if you are a cute 19 year old French girl on spring break. Otherwise it is just plain stupid.
Doesn't anybody get what happened here. You may as well just drink all the tea in China at the next tea party for all the good it will do you. He's already done it. There is no recovery. There is no coming back. Just paying and paying.
And do you think "they" will ever let you back in, if you ever were "in" to begin with. The money is gone and the banks and insurance companies need more billions or so. Geithner says we gotta help em or it's the stone age for us now.
I am not given to conspiracy theories or paranoia. Oh, and it is not paranoia if it is true.
I believe we must present ourselves in a peaceable, respectful manner until that day.
I am advocating a vigilance, a watchful eye and full use of the brain we have all been supplied with.
All one need do is a casual perusal of mainstream double speak and trusted media to form an opinion that holds little hope for repair.
voting? Protesting?
While illegal laws are made and actions taken to corral those of us who could be described as extremist. . . You know, conservatives, Libertarians, Protesters of various wrongs. etc.
This is little different than a time some two hundred plus years before us.
It's just this time the threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness comes from within.
It is as if we are too stunned, wearing blinders or some other hindrance exists to comprehend that our government and way of life have been usurped. The rug has been pulled out. The next shoe has already dropped. And yet there is no response.
No sir, haven't given up hope. Just vigilant and ready.
Hey, I'm voting for a libreconservindie candidate next election.
The party establishment is out to sea, so conservatives need to start rocking the boat.
By Richard A. Viguerie
May 10, 2009
Click here to read the story:
The idea that a new candidate or an election in the near future will repair the damage done is ludicris.
"..Conservatives should no longer look to Republican politicians for leadership and should assume the role of leading the opposition to Obama and the Democrats. We believe we have a party and a country to save, and the GOP establishment is in our way. Let the rebellion begin...".
So, you believe a new party, a new candidate, a new election will solve the mess we are in? Have any of you looked around? Do you see how deep the rabbit hole goes? Did you guys all take the blue pill?
You are dreaming if you think that your vote or your candidate: libertarian or whatever, will make one iota of difference in the political landscape. Rock the boat all you want.
Look at what is happening and where. Every corner of the government is compromised. Thieves and liers. Everyone is just laying down for the Obismal. The only stand up guy anywhere to be found is Dick Cheney and I wouldn't trust him much further than I could throw him.
We are at the end of things as we know it and it will take a lot more than the next elections to change this situation let alone recoup the incredible losses.
The sooner people realize the truth of it, the better. Naiveté only works if you are a cute 19 year old French girl on spring break. Otherwise it is just plain stupid.
Doesn't anybody get what happened here. You may as well just drink all the tea in China at the next tea party for all the good it will do you. He's already done it. There is no recovery. There is no coming back. Just paying and paying.
And do you think "they" will ever let you back in, if you ever were "in" to begin with. The money is gone and the banks and insurance companies need more billions or so. Geithner says we gotta help em or it's the stone age for us now.
I am not given to conspiracy theories or paranoia. Oh, and it is not paranoia if it is true.
I believe we must present ourselves in a peaceable, respectful manner until that day.
I am advocating a vigilance, a watchful eye and full use of the brain we have all been supplied with.
All one need do is a casual perusal of mainstream double speak and trusted media to form an opinion that holds little hope for repair.
voting? Protesting?
While illegal laws are made and actions taken to corral those of us who could be described as extremist. . . You know, conservatives, Libertarians, Protesters of various wrongs. etc.
This is little different than a time some two hundred plus years before us.
It's just this time the threat to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness comes from within.
It is as if we are too stunned, wearing blinders or some other hindrance exists to comprehend that our government and way of life have been usurped. The rug has been pulled out. The next shoe has already dropped. And yet there is no response.
No sir, haven't given up hope. Just vigilant and ready.
Hey, I'm voting for a libreconservindie candidate next election.
Monday, May 11, 2009
USA Silent as Nation Destroyed
They watch Obamanation grow in unbridled power
Americans Largely Silent as Their Nation is Systematically Destroyed
By JB Williams Tuesday, March 24, 2009
After trillions in taxpayer debt has been foolishly poured into the bottomless black hole of leftist wealth redistribution programs, under the guise of economic “stimulus” or “stabilization” legislation, the new “ONE World” government running Washington DC announces; Geithner, Bernanke Call for New Wind-Down Powers After AIG… and the people still sit silent as they watch Obamanation grow in unbridled power.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
Chains you can count on. . . . .
Recent posting on a forum I frequent (the words in black are mine):
"This is the great question that must be answered: Do we, as individuals, own our land, water, possessions, property and wealth, or does the government own all those things and determines who gets what?
Let's not ponder this too long."
I would that you ponder and ponder hard that moment which is at hand. This is obviously a turning point in history.
My desire is for those who come after me to look back on this moment with pride and a grateful spirit for the freedom and liberty I and my fellows were able to preserve for them.
I would ask; do you pay real estate taxes? If you quit paying your real estate taxes, what will happen to "your" real estate and belongings? No! you don't own anything.
You came into this world with nothing and you will go out with nothing. Ultimately, we are just leasing, using, borrowing, etc.
Even the super rich, the shadows. . . . even they will perish. The only thing that separates us from them is power built on centuries of stepping on folks just like you and me. Their fortunes have been made on the backs of peasants, peons and slaves throughout history, then passed on down through the centuries. They all have blood on their hands.
When you have had enough, when the chains you are bound by, choke and the rhetoric is finally to much to swallow, join with me and stand for something other than a stepping stone.
Step up! Write, speak, do.
HOMELAND INSECURITY
This should raise a flag or two. One if by land. . . .
Next step? No guns allowed for right-wing 'extremists'
Bill empowers attorney general to forbid firearms for those 'suspected dangerous'
A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential "threats, "could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential "extremism."
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any "known or suspected dangerous terrorist." The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is "appropriately suspected" of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general "has a reasonable belief" that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.
Read the full story here:
Next step? No guns allowed for right-wing 'extremists'
Bill empowers attorney general to forbid firearms for those 'suspected dangerous'
A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential "threats, "could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential "extremism."
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any "known or suspected dangerous terrorist." The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is "appropriately suspected" of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general "has a reasonable belief" that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.
Read the full story here:
OATH KEEPERS - Orders We Will NOT Obey
Must watch video! 
This one is a bit scary
U.S. Prepares to Invade U.S.
CIA - FEMA Death Camps
MTV Martial Law Commercial
This one is a bit scary
U.S. Prepares to Invade U.S.
CIA - FEMA Death Camps
MTV Martial Law Commercial
Friday, May 08, 2009
Anti-Gun Senate to Ban Private Gun Sales
Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), Jack Reed (D-RI) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) have joined Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and victims and family members of the Virginia Tech tragedy, to introduce legislation to eliminate the private transfers of firearms and close the nation's "gun show loophole."
YOU ARE IRRATIONAL IF YOU SUPPORT PRIVATE GUN SALES
"There is no rational reason to oppose closing the loophole. The reason it's still not closed is simple: the continuing power of the special interest gun lobby in Washington" Sen. Lautenberg said ignoring the Constitution.
Click Here to Reject All Gun Bans and Fax All 99 Senators
Lautenberg went on to add still more to the "90% Obama Mexican Gun Lie":
"Thirty percent of the guns that go to Mexico are bought at gun shows." With NO supporting evidence Lautenberg continued, "We don't know whether they're bought from unlicensed dealers, but logic would say let's have some idea who it is that bought those guns and what their intentions might be."
Lautenberg and the Gun Grabbers in the Senate are also lying about the Virginia Tech gunman who had a background check at a legal gun store to justify themselves. There were abundant warning signs that he posed a serious threat to the campus. Yet he was running loose because the gun check system failed.
NO SUCH THING AS 'GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE'
Independence Institute researcher David Kopel has written about the "gun show loophole," concluding that it is a myth: Says Kopel:
"Despite what some media commentators have claimed, If a dealer sells a gun from a storefront, from a room in his home or from a table at a gun show, the rules are exactly the same: he can get authorization from the FBI for the sale only after the FBI runs its "instant" background check"
CRIME GUNS DO NOT COME FROM GUN SHOWS
The Bureau of Justice Statistics report entitled "Firearms Use by Offenders" found that less than one percent - 0.7%, to be exact - of guns used in crimes originated at gun shows.
NICS: DEFACTO GUN REGISTRATION
New York (D) Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand proposed computerized background checks be retained creating a de facto gun registration system and Lautenberg's Bill proposes private transactions be added to this registration system.
LAUTENBERG'S MOTIVES
Motives for eliminating gun shows are twofold:
First, gun shows are a powerful tool in defeating gun control legislation.
Second, eradicate the gun show and gun culture altogether.
All that seems to be on the minds of the Anti-Gun Senators and at the offices of gun control extremists is figuring out how to exploit tragedy to erode and eventually destroy the right, and the means, of self-defense.
Click Here to Reject All Gun Bans and Fax All 99 Senators
Now the Anti-Gun Coalitions are trying to use tragic events to destroy gun shows and the right of all Americans to keep and bear arms to protect themselves under the law. They are attacking and hiding behind an Anti-Terrorist Agenda while getting political and financial support from:
George Soros a Hungarian-born billionaire bank rolling efforts with his check book and spending more that $100 million to destroy the Constitution.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (CA) admitted that "guns would be banned and confiscated" if she could have her way.
The United Nations actively pushes globalism seeking to disarm all Americans.
We must Stop the Anti-Gun Coalition and get ready for the biggest gun control fight of the year from coast to coast. We can not do that without your support.
Stand up against this attack! Stand up for the right to not only defend yourself, but to defend your family, your children, your friends, and your classmates!
Click Here to Reject All Gun Bans and Fax All 99 Senators
Like all other threats against our freedoms, we must rise and defeat this bill, slap it down hard.
The legislation is cosponsored by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Charles Schumer (D-NY), John Kerry (D-MA), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Carl Levin (D-MI), Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ).
In order to stop Schumer, Kerry and Kennedy and there fellow gun-grabbers-we need to let the Congress know with thousands of faxes telling them to leave guns alone.
Americans like you who understand what our Founding Fathers envisioned for our nation...and who are willing to fight to defend our Constitution and for what it stands.
So please, help the Citizens Committee and me defeat those who wish to gut and trash the United States Constitution.
Help me flood the U.S. Senate with a sea of FAXES big enough to drown each and every Senator willing to vote away the Second Amendment.
Please, send your Donation and FAX TODAY!
Click Here to Reject All Gun Bans and Fax All 99 Senators
Keep calling your Senators today, toll free numbers include 1-877-851-6437 and 1-866-220-0044, or call toll 1-202-225-3121 AND REGISTER YOU'RE OUTRAGE at ongoing efforts to take guns away!
CALL PRESIDENT Obama, 202-456-1111 and 202-456-1414 expressing your disdain and ABSOLUTE REJECTION of all GUN BANS.
DO NOT BE SILENCED - MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!
NOTE: We need TENS OF THOUSANDS of faxes and PHONE CALLS and EMAILS delivered to ALL Senators right away!
For our projects to be successful, we must count on the voluntary financial support from individuals like you who care.
Your contribution of $20 or $25 is urgently needed today.
Your donation for just $10 will help so much. If you can afford to send $50 or $100 or more it would truly be a godsend.
Remember, protecting our freedom is not inexpensive.
But then, it's impossible to put a price tag on freedom.
CLICK HERE to DONATE NOW.
The rights you save may be your own!
Together, we can preserve the Constitutional rights our Founding Fathers intended our people to have forever.
For more information about CCRKBA click here.
Please let me know your decision right away. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Alan Gottlieb
Chairman
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
If you prefer to donate by check, please mail to:
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms
12500 NE Tenth Place
Dept Code 2365
Bellevue, Washington 98004
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Scores Killed, Hundreds Injured as Para-Military Extremists Riot in Boston Area
Riot in Boston
Scores Killed, Hundreds Injured as Para-Military Extremists Riot in Boston Area
National guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned
assault weapons were ambushed on April 19th by elements of a
paramilitary extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.
Speaking after the clash Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared
that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to
the radical right-wing tax protest movement. Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices.
The governor, who described the group's organizers as "criminals,"
issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government's efforts to secure law and order.
The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed widespread refusal
by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons. Gage
issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in
the week. This decision followed a meeting early this month between
government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms. One government official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, pointed out "none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons
voluntarily."
Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of
outlawed weapons and ammunition.
However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met
with resistance from heavily armed extremists who had been tipped off
regarding the government's plans.
During a tense standoff in Lexington's town park, National Guard Colonel
Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed
group to surrender and return to their homes.
The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by
one of the right-wing extremists.
Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange. Ironically, the
local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the
civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from
surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units.
Colonel Smith, finding his forces over-matched by the armed mob,
ordered a retreat.
Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national
joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor has also
demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the
attack against the government troops.
April 20, 1775
(How Today's Media Would Have Reported It)
anonymous
Scores Killed, Hundreds Injured as Para-Military Extremists Riot in Boston Area
National guard units seeking to confiscate a cache of recently banned
assault weapons were ambushed on April 19th by elements of a
paramilitary extremist faction. Military and law enforcement sources estimate that 72 were killed and more than 200 injured before government forces were compelled to withdraw.
Speaking after the clash Massachusetts Governor Thomas Gage declared
that the extremist faction, which was made up of local citizens, has links to
the radical right-wing tax protest movement. Gage blamed the extremists for recent incidents of vandalism directed against internal revenue offices.
The governor, who described the group's organizers as "criminals,"
issued an executive order authorizing the summary arrest of any individual who has interfered with the government's efforts to secure law and order.
The military raid on the extremist arsenal followed widespread refusal
by the local citizenry to turn over recently outlawed assault weapons. Gage
issued a ban on military-style assault weapons and ammunition earlier in
the week. This decision followed a meeting early this month between
government and military leaders at which the governor authorized the forcible confiscation of illegal arms. One government official, speaking on
condition of anonymity, pointed out "none of these people would have been killed had the extremists obeyed the law and turned over their weapons
voluntarily."
Government troops initially succeeded in confiscating a large supply of
outlawed weapons and ammunition.
However, troops attempting to seize arms and ammunition in Lexington met
with resistance from heavily armed extremists who had been tipped off
regarding the government's plans.
During a tense standoff in Lexington's town park, National Guard Colonel
Francis Smith, commander of the government operation, ordered the armed
group to surrender and return to their homes.
The impasse was broken by a single shot, which was reportedly fired by
one of the right-wing extremists.
Eight civilians were killed in the ensuing exchange. Ironically, the
local citizenry blamed government forces rather than the extremists for the
civilian deaths. Before order could be restored, armed citizens from
surrounding areas had descended upon the guard units.
Colonel Smith, finding his forces over-matched by the armed mob,
ordered a retreat.
Governor Gage has called upon citizens to support the state/national
joint task force in its effort to restore law and order. The governor has also
demanded the surrender of those responsible for planning and leading the
attack against the government troops.
April 20, 1775
(How Today's Media Would Have Reported It)
anonymous
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Oblivious. . . .
I was reading a comment the other day and a fella stated; "Now, it is time to do something, get involved." A little slow on the uptake I'd say.
I am speaking with this young fella at a local farm store. They have tools, feed, garden stuff, canoes, boat motors, camo clothes, guns, ammo etc. Perfect men's store here in the Mid-West.
He and I get to speaking about things and the recent events at the polls come up as well as the direction things are going with Eric Holder and the rest. This fella is the lead in the gun dept. Knows nothing of what transpired in recent history and repeatedly told me that he hoped it would not impact his hunting rights.
He loves to hunt turkey.
I am feeling so very alone here. Kind of fragile. All this stuff going on, can I get a hug when it's all over?
Sheesh! It is no wonder things have gone the way they have. I mean, COME ON! This guy was barely aware that a new president had been elected. Regardless of how. We are surely lost if someone in his position; with his obvious ties to the 2nd Amendment, can be so very oblivious to current events.
Good Grief!
I am speaking with this young fella at a local farm store. They have tools, feed, garden stuff, canoes, boat motors, camo clothes, guns, ammo etc. Perfect men's store here in the Mid-West.
He and I get to speaking about things and the recent events at the polls come up as well as the direction things are going with Eric Holder and the rest. This fella is the lead in the gun dept. Knows nothing of what transpired in recent history and repeatedly told me that he hoped it would not impact his hunting rights.
He loves to hunt turkey.
I am feeling so very alone here. Kind of fragile. All this stuff going on, can I get a hug when it's all over?
Sheesh! It is no wonder things have gone the way they have. I mean, COME ON! This guy was barely aware that a new president had been elected. Regardless of how. We are surely lost if someone in his position; with his obvious ties to the 2nd Amendment, can be so very oblivious to current events.
Good Grief!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)