Remember this classic movie line?

What a great line! Bob Hope's character, Larry Lawrence in the 1940 comedy, Ghost Breakers takes a stab at Democrats. Funny stuff!

Do They Really Want Racial Bigotry To End?

It certainly seems as though they do not. Who are "they", you ask? Black Civil Rights Activists (at least the ones who are courted by the mainstream media) and a few black Politicians. Now I know there are those who will interpret "they" as a "you people" type remark. Screw them. This is self-evident. "Race Pimps" like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton make their living by seeking out things to throw down the "race card" on, often vague and questionable things like Sharpton did to Golf Network anchor, Kelly Tilghman's use of the word "lynching". They CREATE racial tensions, paint them white and then strive with all their might to shine every media spotlight on them that they can for as long as they can. You see without them, they'd disappear. They wouldn't be important anymore. They'd be out of a job and out of the news. People like Jesse and Al are the biggest racist bigots of them all. They fuel the fire. They feed off of the controversy they create, victimizing the downtrodden, all the while claiming to fight for them.

As far as politicians are concerned, I don't mean to suggest that all black politicians are bigots. Not so. But the ones who run their campaigns on race and seem to make every issue about race, most certainly are. Detroit Mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick is a prime example. You may recall last summer when he and several other "civil rights activists" conducted a mock funeral for the "N" word complete with coffin and grave, comical if nothing else. Well it seems Mr. Kilpatrick is just one of the latest politicians to be investigated for improper conduct. I'm sorry, if you're an elected official, black or white, you are held to a higher standard of conduct than the average Joe. If you're caught with your pants down, you deserve to be dethroned. What he did, isn't important. How he's deflecting attention is. Resurrecting the "N" word he buried amounts to nothing more than "race-baiting". He said that since this scandal broke, he's been called that "N" word more than any other time in his life. Only Kilpatrick didn't feel the need to "abbreviate". He said he's received more death threats than at any other time in his administration. It's the classic "smoke and mirrors" act. It's sad really.

I hear the "N" word all the time, but not from white people. I'm white and I live in the south, the cradle of racial bigotry according to the rest of the country and I NEVER HEAR THIS WORD FROM WHITE PEOPLE, not even in exclusively "white" company. White people are scared of the word. No, I hear it all the time from black people. (None of the black people I call friends, mind you) Many of them call each other that and use it almost as a term of endearment. It is quite confusing, but either way, it is "their word" now. They have staked claim to it. They use it as loosely as they use their own name and they wear it like a badge of honor and to be honest with you, I couldn't give a damn one way or the other. I saw it on a hat the other day in the mall! Obviously the man wearing it wasn't offended by the word, it was embroidered on his apparel!

Fact is, if you want the word to "die", leave it the hell alone. If you want to attain public office or make your living by enraging people then by all means, use it as often as you like. I don't use it, so I refuse to accept responsibility for its offensiveness. I don't know any white people who use it, so I think its perfectly acceptable for me to be offended by the suggestion that they do it all the time. I don't think Jesse and Al believe it, but I think Jesse and Al want black people to believe that white people sit around all day and tell black jokes, send racial death threats to black people in power and conjure new and inventive ways to oppress them, as if we have nothing more constructive to do with our time. Who is weak minded enough to believe that? None of the black people I know pay them any attention or claim to be spoken for by them. They just go to work and pay their taxes like everyone else. So who lends these idiots credence? Not black people, at least not the ones I encounter on a daily basis. So who? Yep, it's white people. White people are the primary audience. White people listen to them and then run for the hills in fear of being offensive for being white.

I don't know any racists. But Jesse and Al and Louis Farrakhan and politicians like Kwame Kilpatrick and Ray Nagin epitomize the image of racial bigotry in America. They serve it up and white people swallow it down like hemlock. Racism happens. I realize that. There are white mental midgets in this country who have been bred (or inbred) to believe that they are supreme. But I honestly believe that the majority of Americans, both black and white are not, and that the world would be a better, more productive place without sawing down the equality tree which has taken so long to cultivate merely to give these chumps a stump to preach from.

Personal Responsibility. What happened to it?

The LA Times article I was going to link to is now dead. So I'll just report. This woman (I shudder to call her that... more like 2 year old child caught in a woman's body), Arelia Margarita Taveras, a well known attorney and media comentator, lost a fortune sitting her dumb ass in a casino gambling away here savings. 1 Million dollars at a craps table! She says it's the casino's fault! They should have stopped her! This blows my mind. I'd like to think she hasn't a chance in hell of winning this ridiculous law suit but I can't put such misguided confidence in our screwed up judicial system. It's happened before. We sue gun manufacturers because a predator used their product to kill someone. We sue Mc Donald's for making us fat. We sue cigarette manufacturers because we smoked their products till our lungs turned black. We sue car manufacturers because we drove reckless and killed our loved one. Where does it end?

We have become a pathetic society of slackers. How did we get here? No one is responsible for their actions anymore. A person can murder someone in cold blood and somehow, inevitably wind up usurping their prey and becoming the victim. It's never the perpetrator's fault. They're just "products of their environment", or "victims of circumstance". "The deck was stacked against them", or "they didn't get a fair shake". "They were poor" or "they were abused". Anything do shift the blame from the person who's screwed up to anyone/everyone else. The bleeding hearts say things like, "We failed them as a society", or "We should have noticed something was wrong and gotten them help...we missed the signs". Well guess what? IT AIN'T MY FRIGGIN' JOB TO GET YOU HELP!

We have moved from a respectable country of hard working people who loved liberty enough to embrace it wholesale and be responsible for their own successes, their own failures and their own destinies to a nation of whining, spineless, finger pointing ingrates who don't know the meaning of honor or integrity, the concept of pride in a hard days work, stuffing money in a sock drawer for a rainy day or, God forbid, earning what we have and being just a little bit embarrassed to sit with our hand out waiting to get fed! Instead we have evolved into a self destructive group of lemmings willing to continue to write ourselves generous checks from the public coffers until we're damned near bankrupt for various "social programs" that serve to encourage people from earning their keep rather than providing them with an incentive to do so.

Personal Responsibility. How did that become a bad idea? Stop the planet... I'd like to exit now.

Defensive Shotgun 101

Do you own a shotgun? Is it your primary defensive weapon for protecting your home and family. If not, it should be. In the realm of defending one's home, there is no better choice than a shotgun. If things have gotten bad enough that you must use a firearm inside your home, understand, you are in a desperate situation. Your first shot must be accurate and decisive. It must count. It must incapacitate your intruder. It must end your confrontation. Experts, overwhelmingly agree that no other weapon can provide the assurance of instantaneous incapacitation like a shotgun can.

Various shot sizes provide the user a wide range of choices in power and caliber of projectiles. When listening to people about what size shot they use in their home, I've heard it all. From #12 birdshot to four-ought Buckshot and one ounce slugs. It can be quite confusing. Your choice may prove to be lethal not only to your intruder but also to your family, or your neighbors. At a velocity of over 1200 feet per second for heavy buckshot loads, over penetration is an issue that must be considered.

00 (pronounced "double ought") buckshot is a very common load for Law Enforcement, Military, and home defense. In fact it is the most popular. But is it the best choice? Here comes my "opinion" backed up with a few facts. It is my belief that 00 Buck is best suited for "offensive" situations, such as those which would commonly be encountered by Law Enforcement and Military. There are tactical situations where it is conceivable that they would need a great deal of penetration. If their target is behind soft to medium cover, lighter loads just won't cut it. 00 Buck provides adequate penetration and an excellent transfer of energy into the target. But what is right for a police officer or soldier in the field is not necessarily right for the home owner in a defensive situation. My choice is #1 Buck and I'll try to explain why.

It is first important to understand what exactly is the "stopping force" behind a shotgun, or any firearm for that matter. In stark contrast to what Hollywood would have you believe, men are not knocked off their feet from the blast of a firearm, shotguns included. Though the sheer pain and shock of being shot by any firearm over 30 caliber is usually enough to halt most attackers, if they are juiced up on some type of drug such as PCP, methamphetamine or cocaine, it is very likely that they won't feel it at all. So then what? A defender's shot must be accurately placed center mass (torso) and must reliably penetrate deep enough to intersect a major cardiovascular structure or organ causing the rapid hemorrhaging and loss of oxygenated blood to the brain needed to remain conscious. This must happen very quickly. The large vascular structures in the abdomen and upper torso including the heart are the primary targets for such a rapid incapacitation to take place. This may seem like a gruesome subject. It is. But understanding it is necessary to taking proper action should the unfortunate situation of having to defend your own life or that of your loved ones befall you. Be crystal clear on this point, you are not shooting to kill. You are shooting to stop, and the quickest way to stop someone is to cause the rapid loss of consciousness and the most reliable way to cause the rapid loss of consciousness is to deny oxygenated blood to the brain. Dying is merely a side affect to being quickly incapacitated and one with which one ought not have to concern themselves should a defensive situation arise where they must use their firearm.

The FBI has determined that to effectively stop a human, a projectile must penetrate at least 12 inches. While the heavier buckshot loads have no problem penetrating this deep, they sacrifice mass and surface area in order to project a larger caliber pellet and they have the real possibility of over penetrating the target and harming or killing an innocent person behind. Remember, you are responsible for the projectile from the time it exits the barrel to its terminal resting place. If that terminal resting place is inside your neighbor or your family member, not only will you have a heavy weight to live with but you'll very likely live with it in prison. #1 buckshot is the smallest load that reliably penetrates 12-14 inches of ballistic gelatin. A typical 2-3/4 inch tactical 00 buckshot load will have a total of nine .33 caliber pellets providing a combined cross-sectional surface area of .77 inches. However, a typical 2-3/4 inch #1 buckshot load has sixteen .30 caliber pellets providing a combined cross-sectional surface area of 1.3 inches. Thus #1 Buckshot has the capacity to produce 30% more wound trauma. The added comfort of the pellets having a minimal likelihood of over penetrating makes #1 buckshot ideally suited for home defense.

So don't get overzealous by loading slugs or heavy buckshot for home defense. It is a personal choice but one that should be made by an informed homeowner. Keep your family safe. Don't accept more risk than necessary when choosing a defensive shotgun load for the home. Remember too that shotguns do not produce a hallway sized spread of pellets at typical combat range. You must aim the gun. Though it is more forgiving than a centerfire cartridge in terms of accuracy, merely pointing it in the general direction of your assailant is not sufficient, you can and will miss if you don't shoulder and aim the gun.

Creeping Socialism

Anyone who doesn't think it's happening, has a serious case of cranial rectumitis. Take a look at this. If that doesn't piss you off, then you have no business living in a free republic. A California (go figure) court, composed of a panel of three judges has decided that parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children without first obtaining teaching credentials. Read that again. "do not have a constitutional right". It seems that is becoming an all to common phrase these days. Justice H. Walter Croskey penned the courts final opinion which contains the following:

"Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children... Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program."

That, my friends is the government occupying a much larger swath of your life than was constitutionally afforded it. I could quote for you study after study showing the exceptional performance of home schooled students on standardized testing. I could provide for you volumes of data indicating that children who are home schooled, by and large, score up to 30% higher than those who are publicly educated. I could show you where adults who were home schooled as a children have higher participation in their communities, vote more often and are less likely to commit a crime. I could eat up a hell of a lot of broadband cutting a pasting links and completely lose my point within it, but it is easy enough to find yourself. So why? What's so wrong with home schooling that the government would step in and put a stop to it? You ready? Here it is: It is largely dominated by evangelical Christians. That's it folks. That's all thats wrong with it. Not because these stay at home parents can't do the job without some piece of paper, not because these kids are growing up to be completely inept from lack of socialization, not because they can be proven to have any deficiency compared to publicly educated students... it's because these parents teach their children things like creation in lieu of evolution. It is because they may spend as much time on Bible studies as they do social studies. The government has a lumbering monstrosity of a monopoly on education. It is a dinosaur, dominated by left wing liberals that lets so many children fall through the cracks that it is a wonder we've let them maintain a strangle hold this long.

Don't think the NEA isn't behind this! This reeks of the NEA! This is right in line with their agenda. The NEA is a socialist organization from top to bottom. Championing pro-homosexual (not homosexual tolerance but PRO-homosexual) and atheist agendas, they all but openly admit it to indoctrinating kids into socialism. Their bully union tactics sicken me. What if your public schools suck? What if they're not safe? What if you don't approve of their curriculum? What if you can't afford private education? What right does the government have to force sub-standard public education on you? How long will we let our rights be whittled away. California is fast becoming a moonbat nation all its own. Every infringement on the Constitution, every wacko oddity and perversion of mankind, every assault on our men in uniform, every tree hugging eco-terrorist maniac, every challenge to our national sovereignty, every quack court ruling, from county to Federal seems to originate in this nut house of a State.

We should let Mexico annex them. They damn near have, anyway. I'd tell you not to let this happen in your state, but as long as we allow little demi-god judges to legislate from their bench, we don't really have a choice, do we? I know it was a state court that made this ruling, but I've no doubt that were it to somehow make it to the lunatics on the Ninth Circuit that it would be upheld. You really want Hillary or Obama appointing any more judges? Can our freedom stand for it?

Preach on, playa!

Found this over at FIU. Rob raised the point: "....imagine what would happen if a white man had said it. Any of it." Indeed. He would be lynched. Ooops! Sharpton says that's a "racist" word..."lynched". Sorry. He'd be mobbed and hanged. Hmmm... sounds like the same thing. Anyway, I kinda like the guy. I think trashin' the ol' "Obama Momma" was way outta line though but there's a lot of truth here too.

A preacher, cussing... in a pulpit? Who'd have thunk it. Obviously, the man's a bigot too 'cause it sounds like he's got no love for white women but all that aside...he's preaching accountability, and that...I like! Falls right in with my post below. So I can deal with a little bigoted madness. To each his own. Preach on preecha man, preach on!

On a stump, ranting about something or another...

I count myself fortunate to have a profession which reminds me daily how blessed I am. I think it is human nature to take certain things for granted and were it not for my job, I'd stand guilty of that very sin. But I often reflect on what life would be like if I were dealt someone else's hand. I pray that I never lose that empathetic ability. It makes me good at what I do and it makes me thankful for what I have. Bad stuff happens, and not just on Television.

Everyday, working middle class Americans go about their daily grinds oblivious to life outside of their bubbles. With bills piled on the kitchen table, we peer over our cups of morning joe and bat nary an eye at the sadness that blankets our world. How is it we've become so jaded? I work in an average middle sized population on the Gulf Coast of Florida. Its a "destination" for many. People actually come here to relax and vacation. It's beautiful here. For others, its not so much a destination so much as just a place where they've landed. Economic woes are painfully evident here. Wages are low and unemployment is high. This is the Southland. Social services are sucked up by 4th and 5th generation recipients of government handouts as fast as they can be conjured.

We still have "Dixiecrats" here, though they are increasingly rare. Those "Southern Democrats" are people with conservative values wrapped up in a liberal social spending package. God fearing men in overalls with calloused hands and sore backs. No, I'm not a "Southern Democrat", but despite our differences in fiscal and economic philosophies, I respect the hell out of them. Honest folks with a home they worked hard to get and work harder to keep. Kids with fresh haircuts and bibles with creases in the spine. People who say "yes ma'am" and "thank you" as a matter of course. A bounty on the table at the expense of a name brand label on their jeans or a car that was built in the past two decades. Priorities that fall neatly in order with what is important in life. Does that guy deserve a break? Yeah, probably. Is it my responsibility to ensure that he gets it? No, I don't believe it is, but I'll bitch a heck of a lot less at the prospect of dropping money in his pockets than in the pockets of the new recipients of social services that have supplanted him.

He's being systematically replaced by people whose kids go without while they drive Lexus' and Cadillacs with rims and stereo systems that cost more than my whole car. Wearing expensive name brand clothes, women with new elaborate purple and red hairdo's, gold and platinum jewelry and ridiculous manicures swipe EBT cards at the register then shuttle their truant kids back to their poverty stricken, crime ridden government subsidized housing. Dysfunctional violent households in dilapidated trailers give shelter to those who would ignore a help wanted sign in favor of cooking methamphetamine. Priorities entirely out of whack and no intent to get better.

Meanwhile, Obama runs for the highest office in the land on a campaign of magnanimous generalities describing "new hope" and "change"... empty promises of prosperity with no specific plan and no pocketbook to pay for it. Hilary peddles her socialized medicine package to a roaring crowd of hapless sheep who actually believe that she can pluck them from their plights by giving them something for nothing. Modern day "Robin Hoods", they take from the "haves" and give indiscriminately to the "have nots". Seemingly striving to increase the "crush factor" of social equality while tearing apart any notion of the "American Dream", and like freewill busting juggernauts they remain bent on providing for people instead of teaching them how to provide for themselves and more importantly, holding them accountable for the responsibility of doing so. I think that's really where we miss the boat as a society. We can have all of the subsidies and handouts our imaginations can fathom to try to ease the pain of the downtrodden but unless people are held accountable for what they do with the opportunities afforded them, we will continue to see one generation begetting to another a sense of "entitlement" for those handouts.

I'm thankful for what I have. I'm thankful that my parents instilled in me a sense of pride in a days work. I've hoed some hard rows. There have been days in my past when I honestly didn't know how I would pay for my next meal. But God has provided for my family and I and not a day goes by that I don't value the comforts we've accrued. I remember those days as a young adult when I didn't have a nickel to my name fantasizing about how great it would be to just press the fast forward button to a day when I could just go to work and come home, pay my bills and live my life. I'd imagine having a famly, a house and a car, food on the table and gas in the tank... a normal life. Now that I have those things, I've come to realize that my "American Dream" exists on a sliding scale. The more I have, the more I want. I struggle against the tide to go from financial equilibrium to financial independence. That is my natural tendency. To be farsighted. To lose the present in the haze of the future.

But by a firm hand, God has given me a flush valve for all of those selfish tendencies because just as soon as I lose sight of all that is important to me, along comes my job everyday to remind me that I AM living the American Dream. That's what it's all about... the struggle. Reaping the benefits of my own labor. Knowing that nothing is certain, my successes are all the more satisfying having earned them myself. I am not rich nor is it likely that I will ever be. I am not meant to be. I wouldn't be very good at it. I wouldn't be a better man for it. This I know of myself. So it is with a generous portion of humility that I have learned to be happy with what I have. Slightly more than a meager existence, we have some of the things that we want, but we have all of the things that we need. So, what's so wrong with that? I may have to plan and budget for every dollar I spend but I'll not soon complain about it, not so long as I am fortunate enough to work in Public Safety and be confronted daily with the stark reality that life is so very short yet so very sweet. It gives me pause. And pause is all I need reflect on what I have. So chew your food slowly so as to savor the flavor. Take the scenic route home every now and again and hug your kids every chance you get. Take a look around your house and love the junk you've accumulated. It's yours. Smile and be happy with today because today is all you have. Tomorrow might not come. I see sadness everyday, and I am a happier man for it.

Abusus non tollit usum. (Misuse does not preclude proper use)

In keeping with the subject matter of the past three posts, I've felt it necessary to compose yet another. Why? Because I have more to say, that's why. And the more I think about it, the more pissed off I get.

Take a look at the map above. You'll see that there are 4 colors on this map of the 50 States. The blue States are called "Shall Issue" States and have adopted a "Florida style" policy on the issuance of concealed weapons permits. That simply means that when applying to obtain a concealed weapons permit, unless you are legally disqualified you "shall be issued" the license provided you complete all of the required steps.

The yellow States are known as "May Issue" States. In these States, you must demonstrate a "need" above and beyond the simple desire to obtain one to be issued a license to carry a firearm. For instance, carrying large sums of money as a condition of one's employment might be a qualifying "need" to be issued a concealed weapons permit in California or New York.

The green States have little or no restrictions on firearms. Anyone, save convicted felons and children under 18 can purchase, obtain, possess, and carry a firearm on or about his or her person, either concealed or openly with no licensing or registration requirements.

Then there are the red States. In these States, the right to bear arms is unconstitutionally denied. No one is issued concealed weapons permits. No demonstrated "need" is good enough. No one can carry a gun on their person under any circumstances except law enforcement and criminals. Everyone else must fall into the inevitable and unfortunate category of "hapless and helpless victims".

One of those red States, you may notice, is Illinois. Illinois is where the most recent university shooting happened. Illinois is where the department store shooting that killed 5 women happened. Illinois is also where one of the most violent cities in America happens to be. No one had a snowball's chance in hell of stopping these men because no one had a firearm. Had one not killed himself and the other not fled, more people would have surely died in a cowering heap of pathetic pleadings for mercy.

How can this not anger the hell out of you? Who the hell is the State Legislature to tell you that you cannot protect yourself? Who the hell are these self-righteous imbeciles at the Brady Campaign to assume that you cannot safely handle the situation of using a firearm to protect your own life and should therefore just die? What gives them the right? Who gives them the authority?

I am constantly outraged by the audacity of those who speak for the Brady Campaign when they argue against legislation that would allow law abiding, adult citizens to purchase, own, or carry firearms. Their arguments are never based on statistical data or facts. On the contrary, they are nearly always based on assumptions and opinions and always presented as though they were fact. They cannot argue with statistics that show that States with looser gun laws suffer less violent crime. They cannot discount the factual data that shows that legal gun owners are far less likely to commit violent crimes. They cannot argue, intelligently so they don't. Instead, they appeal to the audience's emotions by postulating, speculating and theorizing based solely on conjecture or otherwise using the SWAG method to presuppose what they think might happen. SWAG...that stands for Scientific Wild Assed Guess!

In a recent Newsweek interview with a nonprofit organization called Students for Concealed Carry on Campus or SCCC (referenced in a post below), Brian Malte, the State Legislation and Politics Director at the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said, of course, that the legislation that SCCC seeks simply would not work. He had no valid reasoning for such a conclusion, mind you...just speculation. "It's ridiculous to say someone with a gun could have saved the day"..."with people running all over the place and people getting caught in the crossfire." Newsweek went on to quote Malte as saying that "...his group opposes the concealed-carry legislation, because allowing firearms to saturate college campuses, where young people drink heavily and live communally, would only heighten the danger of deadly violence."

Did you see that? Did you see what he did? He made an assumption and then projected that assumption onto you as fact. How does he know that people would be running into the line of fire and not taking the natural reaction of getting as low as possible? How does he know that the person who may be carrying concealed would not exercise due caution so as not to shoot innocent bystanders? How can he say that college campuses would be "saturated" with guns if this legislation is passed? Saturated? Not everyone qualifies. Not everyone would want to carry a gun. One would have no reason to believe that any different proportion of the campus population would choose to carry concealed firearms than the general population as a whole. And because stereotypical college students binge drink on movies like Animal House and Revenge of the Nerds, it would be irresponsible to allow such an out of control group to have guns. Never mind the fact that these same people already have the permits necessary to carry guns concealed in places like restaurants and malls and marketplaces. Somehow, this genius concludes that the specific surrounding of a college campus makes it too dangerous for these same people to carry those same guns under the same constraints of the law with the same responsibilities and with the same standards and expectations of reasonable behavior. Why? How?

Can you smell the bullshit? These people are living in a fantasy land. A land where they honestly believe that it is possible to get control of all of the hundreds of millions of guns out on the street. They envision a day where guns are only in the hands of the police and the military....preferably only the military. They are delusioned idealists who couldn't rub two statistical facts together to come up with a coherent conclusion to save their pathetic pacifist butts. If you could magically wave a wand and make all privately owned guns, both legal and illegal just disappear from within the borders of our country today...then tomorrow, people would kill, rob and carjack other people with knives, baseball bats, claw hammers and power drills. History supports this. People have been killing people since Caine smacked Abel over the head with a rock! And people will continue to kill people no matter what sorts of primitive or technologically advanced weapons are afforded them. But the simple fact is, you have no magic wand. You can never get control over all of the guns available on the black market...ever. The German Gestapo couldn't do it in WWII, and you most certainly cannot do it with any of the First Ten Amendments to the Constitution of the United States intact.

Guns aren't going anywhere, folks. This is about evening the odds. This is about allowing victims to have a sporting chance at survival and giving predators a legitimate deterrent. This is about recognizing that the right to live and the right of self-preservation is inherent and inalienable to all sapient beings and cannot by their very nature be relieved from one by another because, despite any law prohibiting them, they will be enacted anyway as a natural course of instinctual reaction. You cannot make it illegal for me to meet a force likely to cause death or great bodily harm with the same or a greater amount of force anymore than you can make it illegal for me to breath. My life depends on both and despite any law to the contrary I will continue to do both. On the same side of that coin, depriving me of the very means of self preservation is akin, in my opinion, of depriving me of oxygen to breath....tantamount to murder. It is not for the law to presume whether I will act reasonably in any given hypothetical life threatening situation. It is only for the law to decide whether I have acted reasonably after the fact. For the law to step in and preemptively judge that I might act unreasonably and then, for that reason, remove from me the right or ability to act in that instance, forces the law to act in my place. Any failure of the law to act in my place under such circumstances should thus constitute negligence or malpractice, up to and including not having any representatives (ie, law enforcement) nearby.

Now I know that might be a far reach in legal interpretation on my part but theoretically it is sound and there are integral parts of that theory that cannot be refuted, such as the inherent instinctual compulsion to act with deadly force in defense of one's own life. If it is true that access to black market firearms cannot be feasibly curtailed, especially in a free state, and it is also true that all humans have the right to defend themselves and others with deadly force if a force likely to cause death or great bodily harm is met and it is also true that to deny a person either the right or the ability to apply that force in a situation where it is needed might cost that person their life, then it must be reasonably concluded that a person has the inherent right to arm themselves with weapons likely to be capable of deterring, repelling, or quashing an encountered deadly force. Whether I act reasonably and in accordance with the law is up to a jury to decide after the fact, not for legislators to decide before it ever happens under hypothetical presumptions.

How to keep your kids safe from gun accidents

In light of recent events, I thought I'd take a some time to dispel a nasty little myth about firearms often peddled by anti-gun scaremongers. The loony "Brady Bunch" would have you believe that guns kill kids. Bullshit! Careless, untrained kids kill kids. You want your kids to be safe behind the wheel of a car, you teach them to drive safely. You want them to remain safe from gun accidents? The solution is no different. You teach them. You shoot with them. You remove the Hollywood instilled novelty of guns by giving them plenty of supervised time putting lead down range. Make them fully aware of what happens on the business end of a handgun, rifle or shotgun.

Both my 12 year old daughter and my 14 year old autistic son know how to safely handle a firearm. Both of them have a great deal of respect for firearms and understand the immense responsibility that comes with handling one. They understand this because they've grown up around guns. They've been taught and they will continue to be taught. For instance, our next range lesson will focus on safely clearing various feed and ejection malfunctions and misfires. I'm proud of their progress. They have both become quite proficient shooters. Neither of them have any desire to play with a gun because they see it as a tool not a toy. That's my daughter showing perfect form in the photo above. Warms the cockles of my heart! She's got a mean right hook too! Keep yer hands to yourself boy!

Fish In A Barrel

It's just too damned bad that no one told the suicidal gunman at Northern Illinois University that he was in a "Gun Free Zone". Maybe if he knew that it were "against the law" to have a gun on campus, he would have refrained from going on this rampage. Good thing that everyone else there was following the law, though huh? I mean at least they died as "law abiding citizens", right? That's all that really counts, isn't it? I wonder how come you never hear of a "crazed gunman" going on a shooting spree at an NRA convention? Quite puzzling.

This is getting old, folks. It's getting ridiculous. Anti-gun moonbats continue to demand that college students remain defenseless while a crazy man takes as many as he can with him to his grave. The law protects no one. No law ever has. The law punishes offenders "after" they have committed their crime. So what if it's "illegal" to have a gun on campus? It's also illegal to shoot people! So when a man sets out fully intent on killing a bunch of people and then ending his own life, he surely doesn't care that it's illegal to possess the tool with which he plans to execute them. Any laws that supposedly "prohibit" such actions mean absolutely nothing! And this is not unique to college campuses, either. It is true of any place where the government says you cannot carry a weapon to defend yourself.

I propose that instead of posting a sign that reads "No Firearms Allowed", or "This is a Gun Free Zone", that they advertise with the following words: "It is illegal for you to defend yourself in this place. If attacked by someone with a gun, yell, scream, pray, or cower but you may not use deadly force to protect your own life." As sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, one thing will always remain true: The only thing that will ever stop a person with a gun, is another person with a gun. That is an indisputable fact. The question is: Who will that person be? A cop? Yes, that would be nice and tidy provided there happens to be one nearby. But just as a kid doesn't stick gum under the desk when the teacher is looking, neither will a criminal decide to act when a police officer is present.

So let's say you're the helpless citizen trapped in a building with a crazed gunman or worse yet, more than one. What will you do? Call the police? Yeah, that's a good idea. What's that? They're on the way, you say? Oh, OK! Well then, that makes it all better now doesn't it? We'll just wait for them to arrive and put a stop to this madness. Good thing this gunman is busy shooting "other people" while we all wait on the police to arrive and not YOU, right? Oh, look! Look out there! There's a policeman outside. Hurry, dude! What's he doing? He's hiding behind his car with his gun drawn and talking on his radio! Why is he not rushing in to save the day? My God, there are people dying in here! What the hell is he waiting for!!?? BACK UP? We don't have time for back up! He's coming my way, I'm going to be next. Oh my God, here he comes! Please! Please! Oh God, PLEASE DON'T SHOOT ME!

So what will you do when there's no cop around? You don't know? I'll tell you what you're going to do. If you are a law abiding citizen in a "Gun Free Zone", YOU WILL DIE! In an horrific and grotesque fashion, you will meet your end at a time of someone else's choosing. No glory or purpose shall have come from your sacrifice. No greater good shall have been served by your willingness to adopt no means of protection. All of your struggles and pleadings will have been in vain and it will be then, amidst your suffering that you will come to the stark realization that no sign, no policy, no law, no court opinion or interpretation, no blind faith in the gentleness of mankind, no pacifist philosophy and no chanted slogans, could have saved you nor prevented the tragedy you have become a part of. Like so many cattle, you and those around you will have been put down, all without a single means of protest. Death will be the only release from your pain. You will have been forced to this point. You will have followed the wide, paved, well beaten path of law abiding citizenship to this very cliff's edge. You will have had no choice. You will have had no alternative. You will have had no escape and above all....You will have had no protection. You will have met this demise....because the government says so.

How long can we stand for this madness?