Monday, October 20, 2008
Too good a quote to not post!
I continue to be amused at those who can simultaneously hold the contradictory idea that Sarah Palin has insufficient experience to be president while Barack Obama somehow does. - geekWithA.45
Posted by bwaites at 3:24 PM 0 comments
I had written the post below, then was doing some additional lunchtime reading and came across this, which expresses many of the same thoughts, but in a more enjoyable way:
Well, said, and though my brother is the true LOTR scholar, enjoyable also because of the quotes!
Posted by bwaites at 1:13 PM 0 comments
Thoughts on never giving up!
I've been more than a little concerned by all the electioneering, with seemingly ALL the polls showing an overwhelming win for Obama.I have no doubts that a win by a socialistic Chicago politician will be a disaster for not only America, but for the world.
I am going to dispense with the 2nd Amendment, because Obamas votes on that are so well known as to be superfluous.
However, I refuse to believe that there are NO options other than a loss. Although I have grave concerns about McCain, and see him as he is, a very liberal Republican, I cannot countenance a loss which allows the Democratic machine to place someone in power who:
A) Cannot even provide appropriate documentation that he was born in the United States:
B) Has known association with an unrepentant terrorist:
C) Attended a church for 20 years that has been anti-American, bigoted, and ultimately, rascist. A supposedly "Christian" pastor who spends his weeks not teaching the Gospel of Christ, but politically inflaming those who attend his "worship services" and who has publically decried the government for "creating AIDS" to kill blacks:
D) Has so little leadership experience that he has not produced a SINGLE piece of legislation in the US Congress or the Illinois Congress. Who has never actually worked and accomplished any long lasting benefit to anyone, and who is, basically, nothing but a gadfly on a political stage.
I will quote Winston Churchill, who is one of my heroes:
We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender!
Now is not the time to be faint of heart! Now is the time to gather our courage, to proclaim that we shall not be vanquished, and that all should stand proud to defend the honor of this country.
This country was not won in fear, but in courage. It was not won by the faint of heart, but by the brave. It was not won by weakness, but by strength in the face of great might. It was not won by surrender, but by constant battle against the opposition. It was not won though acquiescence, but the fervent valor of true believers in the cause.We dishonor those who wrote the great words which became the Constitution when we simply cease to struggle.
Thomas Paine said:
"'Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death."
Let us be sure we do so.
Posted by bwaites at 12:29 PM 0 comments
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Reading old blogs can bring back some great information:
Posted by bwaites at 1:22 PM 0 comments
Great Post! Says all I would on the subject, although I would point out that I see no option to a McCain vote in the Presidential Race.
Posted by bwaites at 10:14 AM 0 comments
Lots of talk about "jusitfiable homicide" right now, probably sparked by this article:
Wayne LaPierre notes that "Americans are simply refusing to be victims."
I think we have always refused to be victims, to illegal taxation, to illegal slavery, to a society nearly overwhelmed by those who traffic in illegal drugs, to anything that binds us from our God given Rights.
We have finally reached a point where we now are being more proactive about the refusal to be victims. In the past, we only acted after we were victimized, protecting ourselves from future similar circumstances. Now we are actively taking things into our own hands, preventing ourselves from being victimized in the first place. We have finally said, "enough", and are acting to make sure it truly is!
One of the issues that seems to offend liberals is that mindset of proactive action. From the article, "Northeastern University criminal justice professor James Alan Fox describes an emerging "shoot-first" mentality by police and private citizens. For several years, police departments have armed their officers with higher-powered weapons to keep pace with criminal gangs. "Clearly there is a message out there that citizens may be able to defend themselves" as well, he says."
If "shoot-first" mentality is a bad thing, we could all be mourning the loss of another college student today, but fortunately, this student acted instead of reacting: http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/crime/262693
Since at least one of the "invaders" (I use that term somewhat sarcastically, since both had mug shots, and thus, presumably, criminal records.) was armed, and the student saw that before they entered his apartment, he took action and shot and killed both men when they were in his apartment. In this case, "shoot first" probably was the ONLY action which prevented his own death.
Jeffrey Snyder from "A Nation Of Cowards" phrases it far better than I can: "When a man pulls a knife on a woman and says, "You're coming with me," her judgment that a crime is being committed is not likely to be in error. There is little chance that she is going to shoot the wrong person. It is the police, because they are rarely at the scene of the crime when it occurs, who are more likely to find themselves in circumstances where guilt and innocence are not so clear-cut, and in which the probability for mistakes is higher."
Sometimes, many times even, "shoot-first" is the ONLY mentality that prevents injury or death to the innocent party."Justifiable homicide" often seems like politically correct phrasing for, "I shot and killed the bad guy!" When the near victim acts to save his own or loved ones lives, "justifiable homicide" doesn't do the act justice!
Posted by bwaites at 9:16 AM 0 comments
Soccer mom gets CCW permit back
Posted by David Hardy · 18 October 2008 12:37 PM
She had a permit, but open carried at soccer games. The other soccer moms got bent out of shape, and the sheriff revoked her CCW permit (he didn't like her openly carrying, so he put her in a position where openly is the only way she can carry. Makes a lot of sense.) Fortunately, a court has overruled the sheriff.Hat tip to reader Dave Ladin.... who sends a followup story and a note the spamcatcher blocked:"Soccer parents wince at prospect of guns at games""Gregg-Bolognese said some...fathers have threatened to take a gun away fromanyone who arrives at a game with one, an idea she tries to squelch."QED proof that she needs to carry in that thug league.
Makes sense doesn't it, assault the mom for exercising a Constitutional Right? Posted by bwaites at 8:02 AM 0 comments
A New Start
This is the first post on a new blog I plan to continue relating to Second Amendment Rights, government in general, and the changes our country faces in the future.I'm sure it will contain a fair amount of information that will be controversial to some, while being quite juvenile and ridiculous to others.
I make no pretense that I have any novel or original thought. I am deeply indebted to many who have paved the way before me including Joe Huffman at http://blog.joehuffman.org/, without whom I would not know that these type of blogs exist. I was invited to the Precision Rifle Clinic at the 2008 Boomershoot, and in the process met and conversed with Joe. Through his site, I have read and lurked at many other so called "Gun Bloggers", including: http://smallestminority.blogspot.com/ , http://anarchangel.blogspot.com/ , http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/ , http://heartlesslibertarian.blogspot.com/ , http://triggerfinger.org/ , and too many others to mention.
Now, lets talk about the "gun bloggers" label. It bothers me, not because I think of it negatively, but because I hear too many people derogatorily refer to them as "right wing wackos". I've met some of them, and they certainly aren't wackos in any sense of the word. Professionally I am a medical provider, and I deal with real people who are psychologically handicapped (wackos!), none of the gun bloggers I have dealt with qualify! In fact, some of them aren't even right wing! Some of their politics are far, far left of my acknowledged conservative bent.
We do, however, have some things in common, and generally that is an acknowledgement that the United States Constititution is an inspired document, and that the Rights granted to be inherent in each individual are not given by government, but are part of our very humanity.I happen to believe that they are and were granted by my Creator, but others, who may not believe in a Superior Being, nonetheless recognize that government does not grant rights, they are part of our very being, regardless of what government we happen to reside under at the time.
Those rights are the same whether born under a tyrant or in a "free" country. They may be oppressed by a government who refuses to acknowledge them, but they exist, regardless of any such oppression.Those Rights are protected, but not granted, by our Constitution, and by the attached Bill of Rights.
Whenever anyone tries to restrict those rights, we as citizens have an obligation to rise up and protect the Constitution and that form of government guaranteed to each of us as citizens.As believers in those ideals, we have an obligation to spread those ideals, and more importantly, an obligation to protect those ideals, to all who seek them, whether here or elsewhere. (Remember, I said that I would say some things that would be controversial to some!) To believe that simply because we are lucky enough to be born here or to migrate here, and that we don't have an obligation to ensure those rights for others in other places seems to negate the protection we claim from those rights. Ideally, we should do so in some manner that doesn't actually infringe on those same rights while we try to implement them. History, however, says that it is not always possible to do so.
So how does any of this relate to my blog title? Well, several years ago, (actually, thinking about it, is more like 7 or 8 years ago), I began to realize that I was responsible for my life and what happened in it. (Strange that it took me 37 years to get there!) More importantly, I was responsible for the protection of the people I loved, namely my family. While that protection certainly encompassed things like food, shelter, and appropriate transportation, it extended further also. I realized that no police force could hope to cope with any serious breakdown in society, whether caused by civil unrest, or, more likely, natural disaster.
Realizing that, I began to see that when police were needed RIGHT NOW, they were always at least 5 minutes away, and that 5 minutes might mean the difference between life and death for my loved ones.From that moment, I began to prepare for things I had never considered seriously. In the process, I realized that one of those things required a firearm, or firearms, in the home.
My wife, a wonderful woman with all the best attributes of a mother, worried about the dangers of having a firearm with children in the home, but, after long discussions, realized that our children could be taught to properly respect and even handle firearms.As time evolved, I have come to understand the deep challenges faced by those of us who own firearms, and I now hope to lend my voice to those raised earlier in protection of those Rights.So my blog title has two meanings--the obvious--a gun in MY house--and the less obvious--a gun in the house of government, and how that very issue affects all of us.I salute those who saw the problem long before I did, and I lend my voice and what little strenth I have, to those who continue the battle!
Posted by bwaites at 5:36 PM