billofrights – Page 5

Firearm Owners’ Resolutions for 2017

The New Year is finally offering firearm owners hope for the survival of the Second Amendment. With an incoming administration and Congress who are NOT actively looking at repealing, restricting or otherwise minimizing the Bill of Rights, firearm owners are taking a deep sigh of relief. This is good. A lot of people worked very hard to make this happen. But the celebration and rest time is over and it’s time to get back to work.

Whereas we may be feeling more secure at the national level and with the prospect of a Constitutional jurist being seated on the United States Supreme Court, the gun-grabbing elitists are now shifting their fight to a different battleground. They are now working on local and state infringements by spreading their misinformation campaigns in the traditionally liberal population centers.

As the usual rhetoric continues and we are labeled as domestic terrorists and haters by those who destroy private property and attack our law enforcement officers in the name of peace, tolerance and inclusiveness, we need to rise above. We must be better than the prejudiced stereotype they manufactured for us and show the nation what we stand for.

Here are some New Year’s resolutions:

The Four Rules

Live by the four basic firearms safety rules like your life and everyone else’s depends on it. Live them everywhere, everyday in every situation.

Treat all firearms as if they were loaded.
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Never place your finger on the trigger until your sights are on target and you have made the decision to fire.
Know your target, what is in front of it and what is beyond it.

Take the High Road

Be polite, respectful and non-emotional whenever you discuss firearms and the Second Amendment. It is an emotional topic for many but a screaming, name calling match never accomplishes anything. Remember, only the part with a Second Amendment supporter losing control will be seen in the evitable viral video.

Join

If you haven’t joined one of the state or national organizations fighting for your Second Amendment rights, do it now. These organizations are critical to protecting and furthering our rights and there are many battles to be fought this year.
2. Donate

For each firearm you purchase during the year, donate to one of these state or national Second Amendment groups. Pick a percentage that works for you or simply donate the value of a box of high quality ammo for the firearm you purchased. If everyone gives a little, we can make a huge difference.

Training

Take a firearms class. It doesn’t matter how high speed-low drag you are; firearms skills are perishable. If you haven’t done actual training with a qualified instructor for a while, it’s time to get back on the firing line. Anyone can pick up a firearm and pull the trigger. We must clearly demonstrate we are the ones who take our right to bear arms seriously and responsibly.

Take a medical aid class. Likewise, if you haven’t taken first aid, CPR or trauma care since you were in the Scouts, it’s time for a refresher. Times have changed and your life or the life of someone you care about could very well count on you knowing what to do in an emergency.

Take a friend to the range.

We all have friends that shoot and friends that don’t shoot. The shooters will always go, so ask one of your non-shooting friends if they’d like to come with you. Instruct them on safety and the mechanics of shooting and help them with their first shots. You’ll help to break down some barriers to understanding and you might just get someone else hooked on the shooting sports.

Volunteer

Get out in your community and lend a hand. There are opportunities all around us for needs large and small. It doesn’t have to relate to firearms. In fact doing something other than firearms is actually a positive thing. When the community wants to know what kind of people we are, it shouldn’t always be about firearms. We are all well rounded, complete people interested in travel, food, art, the environment and international politics (etc. etc. etc.) as well as being gun nuts. The more everyone sees us as a part of the everyday community, the better off we all are.

The fight for our rights will be shifting closer to our homes and will involve our family, friends and neighbors like never before. More than anything else in the coming year, we need to be the best example of what a law-abiding, safety conscious, firearm owning, Second Amendment supporter really is.

Let’s make 2017 a year where we lead by example.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #constitution, #billofrights, #secondamendment, #2A, #FirearmOwnersResolutionsfor2017, #2017, #leadbyexample, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

They DO Want To Take Your Guns!

The gun grabbing elitists’ favorite saying is always “Nobody wants to take your guns”. These are the same folks who also say, “I support the Second Amendment”. The problem is, it’s just not true.

Before we dive into the latest set of lies and infringements on our rights, let’s take a look at what they want to take away… all firearms they do not personally control. In other words, any that are not owned by the government or their personal protection details. They simply do not believe the civilian population should own firearms.

A little preface about firearms. They are not consumable products. They are finely crafted, complex and durable machines. They are designed to reliably and accurately propel a projectile towards its target. The target is solely based on the intent of the person using it. A firearm has no will of its own. It can be used for hunting, sport, recreation, self-defense and enforcing the law – as well as for evil.

I make the special note that firearms are not consumable goods as many of us have firearms that have been passed down from father to son or daughter for generations. It’s not at all uncommon to have firearms well over a hundred years old that are still operational and as mechanically sound as they were on the day they were created. Firearms destined for the next generations can be individual specimens or part of considerable collections. It is very common for an owner to expect to pass on his or her firearms to their children when the time is right.

Let’s also take a look at the trend in firearm ownership. The most conservative estimates say there are roughly 350 million personally owned firearms in this country. For the past 19 months, inquiries to the NICS background check system have set new records. While not an actual count of the number of firearms sold, it is the best indicator of consumer demand for firearms. While some of this may rightfully be attributed to fears about the 2016 Presidential election, the Black Friday background checks – AFTER the elections – also set a new record. Americans are not rejecting personal firearm ownership; they are choosing to buy more.

Now let’s look at the newly enacted laws in California. Previously safe and legal firearms are no longer safe or legal to own – unless you pay a fee and register them as a so-called ‘assault weapon’. Among the list of draconian regulations your new ‘assault weapon’ must comply with, you will no longer be able to sell, transfer or pass it down to your descendants. Of course, you can alter it to remove the cosmetic features that make it too deadly to own and de-register it, making it transferable – at least for now.

Since the rules for ‘assault weapons’ have changed numerous times already, there’s nothing to guarantee your featureless rifle won’t be considered a nontransferable ‘assault weapon’ next year. Oh, and that firearm you built yourself and dutifully placed a new state issued serial number on? You can’t sell, transfer or pass that one down to your descendants either. There’s no deregister path there. It’s just plain nontransferable.

What are your options for your non-transferable firearms? Sell them to someone out of state OR take them to your local police department and turn them in for destruction. And no, they won’t pay you for them. Simple right?

So how is this not taking my guns away? Until the State of California changes it’s mind and says I can no longer posses my so-called ‘assault weapon’ or self-built firearm, I can keep them myself. But I can’t sell them, I can’t transfer them and I can’t pass them down to my children. These are not pieces of property that are used up and discarded; they are pieces of our American heritage and family heirlooms no different than grandfather’s pocket watch or grandmother’s thimble collection. Why does the State of California have the right to determine what is passed on to the next generation and what is not?

The gun-banning elitists are continuing their long con game on the American firearm owner. But continuing to impose incremental ‘common sense gun safety’ laws that do nothing to improve safety and only take rights away from the law-abiding, they are working to eliminate firearm ownership within a single generation.

As optimistic as we are, California may be a lost cause. So many rights have been taken away for so long that it will be very difficult, if not impossible to get them back. The only hope rests with the next Supreme Court striking down some of these constitutional infringements.

Of course, appeals are the hard way. We need to stop these laws from being passed in the first place. Every elected seat at every level counts, now more than ever because they really do want to take your guns.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2A, #SecondAmendment, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #nobodywantstotakeyourguns, #theyreallydowanttotakeyourguns, #mewe, #oddstuffing

No Need To Have A High-Capacity Magazine?

Fresh off the razor thin victory (50.45% to 49.55%) of Question 1 – universal background checks for firearms in Nevada, the anti-gun forces are ready to start the new year with their next gun control push, banning so-called ‘high-capacity’ magazines.

It’s worth noting Question 1 was sponsored by the national anti-gun / anti-rights groups at the cost of over $20 million. It was passed by one county and one county only, Clark County; the home of Las Vegas. Like so many areas around the country, a densely populated urban area has claimed the moral high ground for senseless laws.

What exactly is a ‘high-capacity’ or ‘large capacity’ magazine? According to the anti-gun elite, it’s any magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds. Why 10? There really doesn’t seem to be any logical rational behind it. They point to the revolvers that typically held six rounds and say semi-automatic firearms are just a new deadly phenomenon.

Of the states that currently have bans on ‘high-capacity’ magazines, most have the limit set at 10, a couple at 15. New York, in a late night knee-jerk reactionary legislative session, set theirs to seven. You can still purchase and possess a 10 round magazine in New York, but you can only put seven rounds in it – unless you are at a shooting range.

What the fringe call ‘high-capacity’ magazines, the rest of the world knows as standard capacity. Standard magazine capacity has increased over the years as technology has improved. An original standard capacity Colt 1911 magazine holds seven .45 ACP rounds. Today a standard capacity Glock 17 magazine holds 17 9 mm rounds. Standard capacity for rifles and shotguns ranges from as little as three to 30, or more. Standard capacity depends on the size of the ammunition and the firearm it is made for. Just as technology has advanced cars, telephones, printing and every other aspect of our lives, firearm technology has advanced too. Capacity increased a whopping six times from the single shot muzzleloader to a six shot revolver. Today, semi automatic, magazine fed firearms are by far the most popular firearm for sport and self-defense.

Back in Nevada, the anti-gun elitists, emboldened by their victory in November are queuing up their next Second Amendment rights infringement. Clark County, Nevada’s Sheriff Joe Lombardo is now leading the fight to ban ‘high-capacity’ magazines in the state. Commenting: “I’m a very avid hunter, I was in the military myself, and there’s no need to have a high-capacity magazine for any practical reason,” He also came up with a new gun control fallacy: “It’s also not uncommon for guns to jam during magazine change-outs.”

It is very unfortunate that a veteran law enforcement officer and former US Army Lieutenant would take a stand like this. Instead of working to protect the rights and security of the residents of his state, he is working to make life safer for criminals. But as we are seeing more often these days, many chief law enforcement officials are politicians first, law enforcement officers last.

The photo that accompanies this article is from a Fremont CA home invasion burglary on August 28, 2016. It shows five armed men coming into the house, one carrying a handgun with a magazine extending below the pistol grip. Fortunately, the residents were not home at the time. Even if the resident was armed with a California 10 round magazine, he would most certainly have been killed in this encounter. In this burglary the homeowner was able to call the police while watching the burglary on the home cameras. Unfortunately they left before the police arrived and were not caught.

Burglaries and robberies with multiple armed attackers are far more common than ever. Yet the anti-gunners say you have no need to have a ‘high-capacity’ magazine. Apparently you have no need to stay alive either.

So exactly how will a ban on law-abiding firearms owners having standard capacity magazines make everyone safer? It won’t. Shockingly, criminals get the tools of their trade by criminal means. If it’s not available here, it’s available from somewhere else in the world. Everything from drugs, watches, handbags, cars and people are smuggled into this country every single day. Yes, guns are smuggled into this country too.

Limiting the ability of law-abiding citizens to effectively defend themselves under the guise of making everyone safer implies everyone who buys a firearm with a standard capacity magazine is the next mass shooter in waiting. The vast, Vast VAST majority of the 350 plus million personally owned firearms in this country are owned and utilized lawfully. They prevent crime and defend their owners an estimated one to two million times per year in the United States, with defensive uses of firearms outweighing felonious uses by 30-80 to one.

Nevada has only to look at what has happened in California to see their future. A ban on ‘high-capacity’ magazines with a grandfathered clause for currently owned ones will only be the first step. Then, a little time in the future, a new law will outlaw those grandfathered magazines as well. It will be just one in a long series of ‘common sense’ gun control measures which will do nothing to stop or prevent any crime, just systematically eliminate firearms from the law-abiding community.

Despite the ongoing optimism of the few remaining patriots in the state, California may be a lost cause. But Nevada doesn’t have to be. It’s still early in the game and if the Second Amendment supporters there get their act together now, they may be able to save their rights from being flushed down the toilet.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #gunrights, #standardcapacitymagazines, #highcapacitymagazines, #Nevadagunrights, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

A New Hope

At the risk of serious reprisal from the Empire (Disney) as the new Star Wars movie is about to be released, today I present – A New Hope.

Firearm owners around the country have been living in dark times. Self-proclaimed ‘gun safety’ elitists have been attacking the very foundations of our freedom, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They have been slowly but surely whittling away our Second Amendment rights in the name of “common sense gun safety measures”.

Nowhere has this been more evident than here in California. Every year, new draconian legislation is pushed out upon the citizenry with the promise to make them safer. Every year the rights of law-abiding firearms owners are restricted a little bit more. Every year Second Amendment rights are eroded a little further. Yet every year the rights of criminals are expanded, more criminals are released early from prison, crime gets worse and we are less safe in our homes and communities.

But now there is a new hope. While the 2016 general elections were a mixed bag of results for many, firearm owners are feeling a little safer knowing an outright repeal of the Second Amendment, or having it effectively gutted by executive order, legislative action or judicial activism is NOT the priority of the incoming administration.

One of the most critical elements of hope will be the appointment of a new Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court, replacing Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Scalia, who advocated originalism in constitutional interpretation, wrote the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. This ruling found an individual right to own a firearm under the Second Amendment. This ruling, which simply confirmed the right Americans have understood and exercised since the founding of our country, is based on the original meaning of the words at the time the Bill of Rights was written. As such, Justice Scalia’s replacement with a strong supporter of the Bill of Rights is a critical appointment in the struggle to retain our rights.

But with hope comes caution. The Heller decision was only 5-4 in favor and still left many questions unanswered. The Supreme Court has also been reluctant to take on new Second Amendment cases since District of Columbia v. Heller and the related McDonald v. City of Chicago. Even with the strongest case there is no guarantee the Court will either accept it or rule in a way firearm rights advocates hope for. Each case is heard and decided on its own merit and could pass or fail at any time regardless of the makeup of the Supreme Court.

We must also realize the United States Supreme Court is the final stop, the last court of appeal. Appeals here mean cases have already been through all other courts and this is the absolute last chance for them to be overturned. What we should be doing is stopping the laws before they are implemented in the first place. Repealing a law, ordinance or regulation is ALWAYS going to be more difficult, more costly, more time consuming and more risky than stopping it in the first place. Once our rights have been stripped away, it is much harder to get them back.

During this last election, a group of elitists took advantage of a contentious national election to put their money into vulnerable states where they could spend millions creating a false narrative to further their agenda. With this they gained important ground to base their next level of infringements upon. Each gain they make costs law-abiding citizens their rights.

So while we have hope with the incoming national administration, legislative branches and with the highest court, our rights in some state and localities are being systematically eroded. Each one of these infringements need to be fought, and fought vigorously. At the same time we need to stop the flood of new and diabolical ways that are being devised to strip away rights and make us all more unsafe.

Every elected seat, at every level, in every jurisdiction counts. Every race is local and every vote counts. If you don’t think the people who have been taking away your rights aren’t already working on the next elections, you are wrong. They most certainly are and we should be too.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #anewhope, #constitution, #billofrights, #secondamendment, #2a, #pleasedontdeathstarmyhousedisney, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

Odd Stuffing Star Wars Parody

Gun Control Discrimination Part II – May Issue

A while back I wrote about how those who believe in Gun Control also believe in discrimination. Now I want to take that one step further and discuss an even more flagrant discriminatory practice, May Issue.

I am referring to the issuance of concealed carry permits, also known as CCW, CCL, CPL, CHL or other TLA’s. They are government permission to carry a concealed firearm in public and are issued by either a state, county or local entity. This is the opposite of Constitutional Carry, which refers to the view that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution permits no restrictions or other regulations on gun ownership or possession. It is also referred to as permitless carry or “Vermont carry”

Having grown up and lived a considerable portion of my life in a constitutional carry state, I’ve always viewed the need to obtain a permit to carry a firearm with a certain level of disdain. The Second Amendment has always seemed pretty clear.

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

However governments always have and always will insert themselves into places where they don’t exactly belong, and licensing the carrying of firearms is a good example. After all, it’s my life and my family’s life – and if you’re not going to be there to effectively protect it 24/7, why shouldn’t I be able to?

Shall Issue vs. May Issue

Shall Issue jurisdictions require a permit or license to carry, however the applicant generally only has to meet certain objective criteria, such as submitting fingerprints for a background check, to be free of disqualifying criminal or mental health issues and passing a firearms training class or qualification. Note that there are fees for all of these steps.

May Issue jurisdictions on the other hand impose additional, non-objective criteria, which include justifying the ‘need’ to carry a firearm beyond that of simple self-defense. Applicants must show this ‘good cause’ is above and beyond the level of protection currently offered by law enforcement in the area. In addition to training classes and qualifications, May Issue jurisdictions also typically impose additional psychological testing requirements. These add to the cost and time commitment required to obtain the permit and serves as yet another barrier to those who cannot afford it.

May Issue criteria tends to be more arbitrary than not. Since the determining authority has the full, ultimate and non-appealable discretion of who gets a permit and who does not, the deciding factors are purposefully nebulous. What is ruled a valid reason for one person, may not be considered for another. Many May Issue jurisdictions liberally issue to some but not to others. Even the most restrictive jurisdictions, the ones where the normal citizen is flat out told no before they even apply – or who won’t even accept an application – do in fact issue to a select few. Typical among these are the wealthy, famous and close family and friends of the issuing authority.

So what is the difference between a simple self-defense need and a ‘good cause’ self-defense need? That is usually the million-dollar question. The ONLY reason why anyone, including law enforcement and everyone other than criminals, carries a firearm is for self-defense. The average citizen can be a victim of violent crime at any time, in any place and their expected response under May Issue is to call local law enforcement that may be minutes away, at the absolute best, and only if someone else is able to call them.

Then there is the argument that having more people carrying firearms will make all citizens less safe and put law enforcement in more danger. Having been a citizen and law enforcement officer in a Constitutional Carry state I can tell you flat out that this is not true. The only impact is the criminals don’t know who is and who isn’t able to defend themselves. In other words, it’s a deterrent to crime.

It boils down to who is entitled or is privileged enough to be able to defend their lives. The wealthy, famous or connected justify it by saying they are more of a target for crime than others. While they may attract more attention to themselves, they are also in a position to have more personal protection barriers than the average citizen and are actually less of a potential target.

The most likely target of crime is always going to be the most disadvantaged in the community. Without the financial or political clout to obtain a permit, they are denied the most effective means to defend their lives and their family’s lives.

Denying that a basic right to self-defense exists in the name of ‘keeping everyone safer’ separates the haves and have-nots. You don’t have a higher level of ‘need’ simply because of who you are, what you do or whom you know. Personal safety and security is everyone’s right and May Issue is simply another discriminatory system to keep the privilege in the hands of a select few.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #self-defense, #2ndamendment, #constitution, #Vermont-carry, #discrimination, #mayissue, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

Gun Control Equals Discrimination

Here is my bold statement of the week. If you believe in gun control, you believe in discrimination.

The whole concept of gun control is to keep guns out of the hands of someone else. In order to do this, you have to have people WITH guns in the first place. These chosen people will be the only ones allowed to have guns. You, as someone who won’t have guns, will be safer because only THEY will have guns. At least that’s what you’re told.

So what’s wrong with this progressive utopian dream? Well, to start off with gun control only takes firearms from the lawful citizens. It never has and never will take firearms away from criminals. Remember, the definition of criminal is someone who doesn’t obey the law. Why in the world would you believe adding more laws about not owning firearms would take firearms away from people who don’t obey the law in the first place? Guns are their tools of the trade and, with lawful citizens not being able to own firearms, it makes their job all the easier.

If you think new gun control laws are going to make it harder for criminals to get them, think again. Smugglers move tons upon tons of drugs and goods into and out of this and every other country every day of the week. Firearms of every description are already part of program. Don’t believe it? Take a look at how many firearms the London UK police or law enforcement in Australia seize every day. These aren’t World War II relics someone dug out of grandpa’s old Army footlocker. These are state of the art, modern semi and full automatic firearms being brought in to feed the criminal demand. How is making this a little bit more illegal than it already is going to change this?

And let’s take a look at who is promoting this gun control agenda, a close-knit group of politicians and ultra-wealthy elitists. The political gun control extremists have police and federal agents to protect them 24/7. At home, traveling or making appearances in public, law enforcement officers we pay for guard them. The economic elite employ private security companies drawn from the ranks of the best police, federal agencies and the military. They are well trained and well armed to keep the elite safe. These are the people telling you you will be safer unarmed.

Who isn’t safer with more gun control? You and everyone else that can’t afford the privilege of having armed security protect them. Your publicly sponsored protection is the law enforcement agency of wherever-you-are-at-the-time. They will respond to your call for help after something bad has happened to you as quickly as possible, anywhere from a few minutes to an hour or more.

The more economically disadvantaged you are, the less likely you’ll be able to defend yourself and the more likely you are to be victimized. Firearms, or any force multiplier for that matter, are costly. Add in ammunition and training and you’ve got a very expensive entry point into self-defense. Now add in the additional government imposed transfer, license and permit fees, special “gun violence prevention” fees and “anti-gun violence” taxes on ammunition and you’ve essentially priced the right to effective self-defense out of the hands of people who need it the most.

Politicians often say they ‘stand with the people’ when in reality they stand with them just long enough to ask for their money and votes – and only at arms length with their armed security in between. Once the election is over the closest the ‘people’ get to them is seeing their motorcade speed by on the way to meet with the other elites.

You are responsible for your own safety at home, at work, traveling, shopping or out for a walk with your family. Allowing a group of political and economic elite to take away your right to self-defense, a privilege they enjoy and will never give up, is wrong. Being wealthy or politically connected shouldn’t be the deciding factor in whether or not you can defend yourself.

Your safety, your life, your family’s life may mean nothing to them but it means everything to you. If you aren’t fighting to defend your rights today, you may not be able to defend your life tomorrow.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #guncontrolequalsdiscrimination, #gunvote, #2ndamendment #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

If It Saves Just One Child’s Life…

It’s the ultimate tug-at-the-heart gun control argument. If it saves just one child’s life, isn’t it worth it? How could any intelligent, caring, common-sense person disagree with anything proposed under such an umbrella? After all, it’s for the children!!! Well, I guess I’m just a despicable human being since I disagree.

Let’s say for just a moment that we comply and implement every one of the gun control elitists’s draconian, anti-constitutional measures. This would include, but not be limited to, a complete ban on so-called “assault-weapons”, semi-automatic and pump operated firearms, “high capacity” magazines and handguns. Bolt-action hunting rifles and single-shot shotguns, all that are legitimately needed for hunting can be kept with a license, for now, since the government respects the Second Amendment. Australian-style buybacks (a.k.a. confiscations) are implemented and “Mr and Mrs America turn ’em all in” is the new law of the land. What then?

First, let’s look at what this will accomplish. Law-abiding citizens will turn in their previously legal firearms for mass destruction. Very few firearms will be in the hands of the civilian population and those that remain, along with restricted quantities of ammunition, will be under strict regulations for storage, transportation and use. The days of carrying or keeping a firearm for personal protection will be gone. We will save that one child’s life.

But what about the criminals, gang bangers, thugs, hoodlums and terrorists? The law now says no one can own firearms, certainly they will comply, right? Umm.. No. These are people who, by the very definition of them do not follow the law. They have never been able to legally own firearms or ammunition and their use in criminal activity breaks even more laws. They now enjoy a government imposed armed advantage over every single law-abiding citizen in this country. What in god’s green earth would make anyone believe they would willingly give up the tools of their trade when they know the incredible advantage they have gained against their intended victims?

Well, at least the supply chain of guns will be shut off now and they won’t be able to get any more, right? Umm.. No. Every day, tons and tons and tons of illegal merchandise is smuggled into this county. Everything from drugs to jeans to electronics to automobiles to people. How are firearms going to be a problem? It already happens today, packed in right along with everything else. And we aren’t alone here. Australia and the United Kingdom, whose gun control models our elitists seek to emulate, have HUGE illegal firearm smuggling problems. It just isn’t part of the narrative we are told to believe. Take a look at what the London police confiscate every single day to see how ineffective a ban would be for criminals.

Certainly violent crime will drop and we will all be safer, right? Umm.. No. Criminals, who have long since lost their fear of the law, law enforcement and the courts, have really had only one obstacle left, an armed citizenry. With this obstacle removed, very little stands in their way. Again, go to the most gun controlled countries around the world and see what their violent crime rate is.

But what of the police you say? They will protect us, right? Umm.. No. You’ve heard the phrase “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away”? Even with a vastly increased police presence, demanded by an ever increasingly victimized populace, the best police response is going to be minutes away at best at any given time.

Try this simulation if you would. Do burpees or run in place while holding your breath for two minutes to simulate fighting for your life. Assuming someone called for help the instant you were attacked AND the police can take the call, dispatch an officer and the officer arrives in that two minutes, you’ll be just fine, right? Umm.. No. All this assumes the most ideal circumstances which sadly, will never apply to you. It also assumes you were not shot, stabbed, strangled, poisoned, folded, spindled, mutilated, stapled or paper clipped in the process by someone who really doesn’t care about your life or anyone else’s.

So why do I disagree? Because if we decide to trash the Constitution and Bill of Rights with the promise to save that one child’s life, we will sacrifice scores more in cities and towns all across the country. No, I’m not saying it’s acceptable to lose a single child’s life or that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. But how do you justify sacrificing so many for the hope, the dream, the fantasy, of saving just one?

How many children would grow up without parents because the parents couldn’t protect themselves? How many wives and husbands would lose their partners because they were not allowed a means of defense? How many parents would lose their children because they are not allowed to keep them safe?

Yes, let’s save that one child by not letting someone else decide who lives and who dies.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #constitution, #billofrights, #tosaveonechildslife, #notavictim, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

A Fight Worth Losing

I read an article recently that really disturbed me. The gun control / ban elitists were predicting a clean sweep of new gun control initiatives in Maine, Washington and Nevada during this year’s general election. Much of the success they were attributing to the massive amount of money they had poured into these initiatives compared to that of the national gun rights groups. Funding here had all but dried up for fights that were not considered winnable.

I find this disturbing because without the support of larger state and national organizations, it is nearly impossible for local grassroots groups to successfully fight off the extremely well funded and well organized national gun control / ban elitists who are systematically chipping away at their rights. Propped up by billionaires who have no interest in the Bill of Rights for anyone other than themselves, they are pouring millions into these states to buy all the votes they can.

The people living in these states are fighting for their core constitutional rights, and eventually for their actual lives as they are faced with losing their ability to defend themselves and their families. Why are these fights not worth fighting?

I understand the realities of national politics and that appearance is everything. Appearing invincible can dissuade others from fighting you in the first place. However I also understand that an advantage not used is a disadvantage.

I am reminded of a story from my past; a K-9 officer with a new drug detection dog. When called to assist another department with a vehicle stop or search, he would not deploy his dog unless he first evaluated the circumstances and was completely convinced a hit by his dog would produce the desired contraband. He explained he was protecting his dog’s stats so they would be more solid for future court cases. With this approach, his dog had an impeccable search record. The unintended consequences however were that other officers would not call for K-9 search assistance when he was working. A powerful advantage that could have been used in a wide range of situations was not in order to protect a reputation.

We can’t always pick and choose the fights we fight. Sometimes they are thrust upon us and we have no choice but to fight the best we can. More than a few of us can recall a time in our lives where we walked into a situation and quickly realized – yup, I’m gonna get my ass kicked today. Bloodied and bruised, most of us survive these things and wind up a little stronger and wiser because of it.

But what about fights that involve others? Here we have more than just our own flesh or reputation to think about, we have to consider what the fight means for them. We fight to help those who cannot win alone. We combine our efforts and fight side-by-side. Tested by adversity, we forge alliances that might never have been possible and become stronger together.

Not fighting can have far more consequences beyond losing the single battle we avoid. It demoralizes those who are committed to the cause and can set up a series of future defeats when our adversary no longer sees us as a threat to their cause. This is what we are witnessing in Maine, Washington and Nevada. Small victories on prior campaigns exposed weakness that are now being exploited to take even more rights away from law abiding firearm owners.

No one goes into a fight intending to lose and let’s face it no one likes to lose. But sometimes, the fight is more important than the outcome. Sometimes fighting the good fight and losing is better in the long term than the victory would have been. Our history is full of tragic losses that inspired and invigorated populations to be better and stronger than they ever thought possible.

In 430 BC, King Leonidas lead a combined Greek city-state force of roughly 7,000 men, including his infamous 300 Spartans to stop Xerxes Persian army estimated in the hundreds of thousands. After holding the Persians for seven days, three of them in combat at Thermopylae, Leonidas learned he was being flanked and dismissed the vast majority of his troops, remaining to cover their retreat. While nearly all that remained were killed, Leonidas’s fight turned out to be critical to the eventual defeat of the Persian army the following year. His response to the Persian king’s demands for his weapons remains as inspirational for us today as it was then; Molon Labe – Come and take them.

With the lack of support from state and national organizations during the recent unsuccessful Veto Gunmageddon ballot measure signature drive in California, I’ve heard a lot of patriots denouncing these groups’ inaction and cancelling their memberships. This is a sad and not entirely unexpected result of feeling like someone you support is not supporting you in a time of urgent need. Even though we all have the same goals, the lack of cohesion and cooperation on these critical local and state issues only serves to further fracture the firearms community and set us all up for more losses at a time when we should be working together.

Wanting to win every fight is natural, but sometimes you have no choice but to fight the fight you are handed. Sometimes the fight itself is the prize and the unity it creates, the community it inspires, the passion it invokes in others is worth far more than the cost of not winning. Sometime, it really is a fight worth losing.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #constititution, #billofrights, #Thermopylae, #molonlabe, #wearesparta! #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

Who’s Going To Stop Them?

I don’t normally badmouth a community I am a proud member of, actively promote, advocate for, teach in and stand by with my very life and the lives of my family, but today I make an exception. To be fair, I’m not trashing the entire community, just 99 percent of it.

This past week it was announced Veto Gunmaggedon failed to get the required number of signatures to place any of the seven referendums on the 2018 ballot. Obviously, none made the 2017 ballot either. In order to make the ballots, each referendum would have had to obtain 365,000 validated signatures. The referendum with the most signatures got just 174,128 . Out of an estimated 12 million firearm owners in the State of California, that’s a bit over one percent. That is beyond pathetic.

Some warned against this effort saying it was too risky. Indeed it was risky, risky as hell. It was the Hail Mary of all Hail Mary passes, but it was also the only game in town and the right thing to do. Nobody else, not the NRA, CRPA, FPC or anyone else, had anything in the works that would have directly reversed these new anti-lawful firearm owner / pro-gun toting criminal laws. Yet, it still failed.

So why did this fail so miserably? It certainly was not due to the incredible efforts of a lot a dedicated, hard working men and women who gave their time, money and signatures to get this done. These folks, who it seems make up about one percent of California’s lawful firearm owners, are patriots who worked to salvage the rights of all legal firearm owners in the state. It failed because the other 99 percent either believe California’s increasingly oppressive gun control laws are going in the right direction OR, they just don’t give a damn.

While I strongly disagree with them, I understand some firearm owners are also gun control advocates just as the gun control elite are. They have their guns to protect themselves and believe keeping them out of the hands of other people will keep THEM safer. I can even understand the firearm owners who only have shotguns, revolvers or lever actions and think the black rifle crowd is just too dangerous. Nobody needs those military-style “assault weapons”. The laws don’t effect them and will keep THEM safer too. What I can not understand are those who just didn’t give a damn enough to be bothered with going out and signing these petitions.

Not only are these people wrong, they are sacrificing their own safety too. This effort was not about black rifles, standard capacity magazines or ammo background checks, it was about all firearms, all ammunition and the ability of all free men and women to own and use firearms for sport, hunting and to protect themselves & their families.

Here’s what the failure of these initiatives in California will do: The gun control elitists, including the Governor, State Legislature and Courts will all see that they have absolutely nothing to stop them in their quest to rid California of firearms in the hands of private citizens. Who’s going to stop them, the people? The ‘people’ just gave them a mandate to impose every draconian gun control measure they can dream up. And of course, local governments will need to get in on the action and impose their own even more restrictive local laws to show that they care MORE about “safety” than the State does. Who’s going to stop them, the people?

So for all the 99 percent of California firearm owners who don’t believe this will ever impact them, or were just too damn lazy to get off their asses and sign a few pieces of paper, know that at least 174,128 of us are going to be laughing our asses off when they come for YOUR guns and you scream for help. Nobody is going to help you because by then all of us will be laughing our asses off in prison. But hey, the good news is with California’s revolving door justice system, we’ll be out in time to see the trials for those who woke up too late for the party.

Will this be the last we hear from the valiant Veto Gunmageddon sponsors & volunteers? Absolutely not. A lot of lessons were learned from this experience and they have vowed to continue the fight. But with the lack of true support and backing of the state and national firearms groups, it’s anyone’s guess if future efforts will be able to break the apathy barrier in California. Meanwhile, all of this country’s worst gun control laws will begin going into effect on January 1st, 2017. And if you think this year’s legislative session was bad, 2018 is going to make it look like the good ol’ days.

So, I’ll leave you with a few questions: Do you really think it doesn’t matter who you vote for in November? Do you really think it won’t matter who picks the replacements for the next four or five Justices of the United States Supreme Court? Do you really think it doesn’t matter who runs for Governor or any of the State or Federal Representatives? Do you really think it doesn’t matter who runs for your local school board, water board, county board or city council?

Sadly, apathy in the firearm community is going to be the direct cause of everyone in California losing more of their Second Amendment rights and even worse, many innocent people losing their lives. It doesn’t have to be this way, but who’s going to stop them?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #Constitution, #2ndamendment, #vetogunmageddon, #voterapathy, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com

He Who Controls The Present

You may recognize this snippet and what it means. The full quote is “He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.” It is from George Orwell’s 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, a futuristic portrayal of a post world war society dominated by government surveillance and public manipulation. It is also one of the few books I’ve read that gave me a serious case of the heebie-jeebies.

So why dust this off now? With the movie “Snowden” recently released, it seemed the appropriate time to see how we are measuring up.

Regardless of if you consider Edward Snowden a patriot, whistleblower or traitor, the information he disclosed is significant. It confirmed what few knew, many suspected and most feared; the depth of the United States government’s worldwide surveillance program. While there are many different programs covering telephone, Internet, email, encryption, commerce and geolocation; the end result is the government’s ability to monitor and connect every aspect of a target’s electronic life in ways we wouldn’t have thought possible. To accomplish this, everyone’s data is harvested en masse. Innocent, law-abiding citizens’ information is collected and stored right along with the terrorists.

In Nineteen Eighty-Four’s reality, citizen monitoring was done by undercover agents as well as by two-way telescreens in public places and individual homes. It not only distributed content, but also monitored the people, listening and watching for signs of subversive tendencies or rebellion.

Even George Orwell couldn’t have envisioned the world we live in today where we have so willingly embraced the technology that monitors us. We have devices that listen to our every word and waits for commands. Our email providers electronically read our messages so they can provide us with additional relevant content. We carry with us devices containing all our contacts, emails, browsing history, financial information and so much more. These devices can pinpoint our locations to a few feet anywhere in the world, 24/7/365. Video surveillance is ambiguous with cameras in our phones, cars, homes, stores and in public places. And of course we share where we are, what we are doing along with pictures for everyone to see. We accept all this enthusiastically and rejoice at the great convenience it provides. We also look at those who shun the technology with distrust for surely they must be hiding something.

While the control of our language hasn’t gotten to the level of Orwell’s Newspeak yet, we are being provided with new euphemisms such as “justice involved individuals” or “undocumented immigrant” to replace words that are no longer politically correct.

We are told to trust that government access to the most sensitive information about every aspect of our lives is protected and only granted ‘legally’ and for our own safety, even if the laws and processes for accessing it cannot be disclosed to us. At the same time we are told the government cannot recover its own emails because a single server, laptop or handheld device has been corrupted.

We look at the books being put out by those in power now. Even when the so-called biographies are revealed to be factually inaccurate, we know that one year, five years, 20 years from now; all that will remain is the carefully crafted narrative and none of the dissent. By creating their own version of the past today, they are insuring their legacy in the future.

While we try to balance the benefits of technology with the intrusiveness that comes with it, we also have to remember our basic rights. For this, we return to the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Fourth Amendment.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

If we believe the Fourth Amendment still applies in our modern digital world, then we need to be a lot more concerned with our data and who has access to it. We need to reject the argument of “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear”. Our Constitution, our Bill of Rights, our way of life does not say it’s okay just because it’s the government that is doing it.

I’ll leave you with a quote from Benjamin Franklin. “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #constitution, #billofrights, #4thamendment, #1984, #liberty, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com