gun control – Page 4 – Odd Stuffing

Baton Rouge Prayers / California’s Powdered Wig Governor

A note before this weeks post:

Once again there has been a cold-blooded, hate fueled attack resulting in the deaths of three law enforcement officers, with three more injured, one barely clinging to life as I write. Elsewhere in this country, other officers have been shot and assaulted in the past 24 hours. While we wait for the details to come out, I ask you please take a moment to keep these offices and their families in your thoughts and prayers.

I also say to not let the coward thugs; punk criminals; terrorist wannabes and idiots of the world dictate our lives to us. If anyone is going to live in fear, it should be them. It IS time for a change.

Bob

—

California’s Powdered Wig Governor

Unless you were living under a rock over the 4^th of July weekend, you heard California’s Governor signed a series of draconian gun control bills into law, then ran off to holiday in Europe. How positively colonial of him.

Less than 24 hours from when the bills were sent to him by the State legislature, the Governor signed six of them into law. Apparently he needed no further reflection, analysis or input on whether or not to strip the Second Amendment rights from the law-abiding firearm owners of his state. It’s almost as if they were predestined to be law and his signature was merely a formality.

The timing couldn’t be more of a slap in the face to citizens of our state and nation. Just days before Independence Day; the day thirteen former British colonies declared their independence from their oppressive British rulers. To top it off, California’s Governor then quickly scuttled off to Europe for a two-week vacation before the ink was even dry on these new authoritarian laws. His British Colonial Governor predecessors would have been proud and even a bit jealous. California’s Governor didn’t have to endure a slow sailing ship across the Atlantic to escape criticism from the commoners; he simply hopped on the private jet of a rich friend.

As is the norm for California’s government, all of the laws were in the name of “public safety” yet not a single one targeted criminals. Each and every one signed by the Governor targets law abiding firearms owners in the state.

So, what happens now?

Some are petitioning for a recall of the Governor along with calls for non-compliance and non-registration, plans to store firearms out of state with family and friends as well as plans to purchase of pallets of ammunition. Several manufacturers have already come up with new workarounds to the bullet button ban and even more hardware to eliminate “evil features”.

While all of these responses are laudable, there are some problems with them. The chances of successfully recalling the current Governor over this issue alone are exceedingly remote. Non-compliance may not be an option for some, as their professional licenses would be put in jeopardy if discovered. Taking firearms out of state does protect your ability to sell or hand down firearms to your descendants, but only if they move out of California. It also serves the State’s purpose of removing the “evil” firearm from its borders. Buying ammunition in bulk now to avoid the new in State-only purchase and background check system is a stopgap measure at best. How much ammo would you need to buy now to last the rest of your life? And finally, while I applaud the industry for coming up with the next great bullet button workarounds, these too are just temporary measures. Keep in mind one of the bills that did not pass this year would have made ALL magazine fed centerfire rifles a California “Assault Weapon”. Just as they successfully targeted bullet button firearms this year, you can be sure it will be proposed again and again and again until it does pass.

It’s important to remember the long-term goal of the anti-gun movement in California; the complete elimination of private firearm ownership. Each one of these laws moves them closer to that goal. Each firearm registered to become extinct with the current generation of owners and each firearm moved out of state gets them closer to that goal. Each firearm owner who gives up and moves out of the state removes another voice and another vote from California, gets them closer to that goal.

What needs to happen? California needs to stop blaming crime on the law abiding. California needs to stop blaming inanimate objects or irrelevant cosmetic features for the actions of criminals. California needs to punish those who commit crimes instead of those who have done everything by the book all their lives. What California needs is to take back our state in the name of sanity.

So while our Governor is in Europe being fitted for his new powdered wig to go along with his British Colonial way of thinking, it’s time for the citizens of California to start standing up to the government that no longer represents them. It’s time for real leaders who believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the ideals this nation was founded on to step forward. And right now may just be our last opportunity.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndAmendment, #kalifornistan #gunvote, #gunrights, #prayforleos

Morality Lost

Like most normal people in this country, I watched last week’s events in downtown Dallas unfold with horror and disgust. In total 14 were shot, 12 were police officers, five of the officers were killed. The officers were doing nothing more than protecting a peaceful protest, a protest of the very police who were protecting them – for the actions of other police officers. My heart is absolutely broken for these officers and their families.

I say “most normal people” here because not everyone reacted this way. A disturbingly large fringe element celebrated these cold-blooded domestic terrorist killings and vowed to kill even more officers. They claim all officers are bloodthirsty racists who deserve to die because of the actions of individual officers. What kind of a nation have we become?

More than any time in my more than half century of life I see a highly polarized “us vs. them” mentality. It doesn’t matter if it is related to race, religion, politics, profession or any of a list of preferences that make up our lives. It’s as if the moral fabric that bound us together as a nation, as a people, has been ripped away and every conceivable faction is now violently fighting for dominance claiming they ‘matter’ more than everyone else.

Where does this come from? Sadly, I say it comes from the top. Our local, state and national leaders who refuse to hold individuals accountable for their own choices and actions and instead use the publicity of select, hand picked criminal and terrorist events to further their political agendas. They blame public intolerance and a lack of moral sophistication for the criminal actions of one. They blame entire classes of law-abiding citizen for the criminal actions of one. They blame inanimate objects for the criminal actions of one. Our President, once again mere hours after this senseless violence occurred and while victims were still bleeding and fighting for their very lives; called for more gun control.

In 2008 our nation elected our first African-American President. At the time I thought to myself – This could finally bring an end to the racial divide in our country. Instead, I’ve seen the leader of our nation stoke the fires of race and hatred even further. Instead of moving us forward to fulfill the destiny of Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech, he has pushed us back 50 years to the era that prompted King to march. One passage from King’s speech seems to have been lost by the current generation of citizens and leaders.

“But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.”

We as a nation cannot place the needs of anyone or any group above that of others. In order to be a nation of laws, a nation of morals, a nation of equals, no one must be above the law or subject to a different set of rules than others. Those individuals who break the law – and those individuals alone – must be brought to justice and suffer the consequences of their actions in order for all of us to be equal and free.

There is absolutely no justification in the world for this type of indiscriminate attack on our nation’s law enforcement officers. The vast, vast, vast majority of our officers serve with honor and distinction each and every day; in conditions and through issues most would turn their heads in disgust or flee from. Yet they continue to serve as the thin blue line that separates us from lawlessness, making themselves a target of contempt and bullets.

A quote from Dallas Police Chief David Brown in the immediate aftermath of this attack adds some well-needed perspective. “We’re not gonna let a coward who would ambush police officers change our democracy. Our City, our country, is better than that.”

To those five officers in Dallas and numerous more around the nation who have given their lives in the service and protection of others, we salute you and vow to honor your sacrifice by never succumbing to the hate, the rhetoric or the violence of others.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #dallaspd, #moralitylost

National Disarmament Day?

Without question, the ultimate goal of the gun control movement is complete civilian disarmament. While feigning respect for the Second Amendment, they have been working tirelessly towards their goal for years with incremental “common sense” restrictions to “keep the public safe”. Limits on the types, brands and styles of firearms you can own, how many you can purchase, where and when you can carry your firearm for protection and limits on the type and amount of ammunition you can purchase are common. Add in a host of new laws on who can be stripped of their right to own a firearm without due process of law and they are well on their way towards the presumptive Democratic nominee’s desire to abolish the Second Amendment.

So, why not give them a day to try this grandiose plan out? We’ll call it National Disarmament Day and it will be on Monday, November 7, 2016, the day before the general elections. It will be 24 hours of gun control paradise.

Since the law abiding firearm owner is the only target of all the current and proposed gun control laws, on National Disarmament Day all lawful firearm owners will leave their firearms at home. You may have and use your firearms at HOME only. Outside the home, there will be no open or concealed carry. No carrying your firearm in your vehicle or at your place of business. No armed guards and no bonded, licensed or private armed security of any kind. The only ones legally armed in public will be law enforcement.

Understandably, there are some who will not want to go along with this plan. The good news is this is several months away and you have time to put in for the time off or close your business for the day. You may want to stock up on a few essentials ahead of time.

What will November 7, 2016 look like? One of two things will happen.

The first possibility is nothing will occur. There will be no crime, no violence and zero shootings. All of the legally owned firearms normally circulating in public will be gone. It will be the most peaceful day this country has ever seen.

The second possibility will look a little like the movie The Purge. Those who have the ability to protect themselves in their own homes will do so successfully. Those who venture out will be subjected to the wrath of an unchecked criminal element that will not hesitate to victimize anyone they come across. Businesses will be unable to protect themselves and will be looted. Law enforcement will quickly be overwhelmed and the National Guard, put on standby by the Governor of each state, will be activated to restore order. The number of injured and killed will be staggering.

Ready to sign up? Just go to www ARE YOU FREAK’N NUTS!?!?!

NONE of the “common sense”, “for the children”, disarm the law abiding citizen laws will ever do anything to disarm or discourage any criminal. In fact, it only emboldens them further. We are already at the point where the criminal or thug-terrorist has no fear of the law, the police or the courts. The only element they still fear is their victim. If that potential victim can adequately defend themselves, they will move on to a softer target. There is always a softer, easier target. They will go to a place and to people who do not have the ability to defend themselves. They will go to a “gun free zone” where they can act with impunity.

If you’re asking who in their right mind would go along with something like this, just look at the laws in place and being enacted or proposed in places like California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. This is the utopian vision of the gun control. It is brought to you by a group of political and economic elite who will never have to worry about their own security or the safety of their families.

Would you send your family out in public on National Disarmament Day? If the answer is no, then don’t allow your community, your state or your nation to become National Disarmament Day EVERY day.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #righttobeararms, #nationaldisarmamentday #getoutandvote!

Not So Smart Guns

Bond… James Bond. When it comes to high tech gadgets, nobody does it better than 007. Through the Bond movies we’ve seen cars that fly, swim and are invisible, jet packs, mini-rocket cigarettes, watches with lasers powerful enough to cut through inches of steel and of course, a signature gun – a gun that can only be fired by the owner.

While many of the Q inspired gadgets are pure movie fiction, some have come to exist in the real world, but with real world limitations. A couple of cars can fly, but they don’t look anything like a regular car. Some cars swim, but they are the odd ducks of the auto and boat world and they can’t go under water. And then there are signature guns, now called “smart guns” by those who believe they are the next greatest gun safety, a.k.a. gun control measure.

The technology has been around for years and generally relies on a ring, watch or band that must be held in close proximity to the firearm to activate it. The theory is if the owner is not holding the firearm with the appropriate activation device, it will not fire. The only current production firearm is a .22 LR pistol made by a German company, which uses a radio frequency identification (RFID) chip and requires a five-digit pin code for an eight-hour activation period. It is not currently available in the United States. A few tech entrepreneurs have jumped on the bandwagon and are working on prototypes with remote controls, electronic ammunition and RFID chips embedded in the firearm owner’s skin. Firearms with pin codes, fingerprint readers, sensors to identify the owners grip, Bluetooth activation and Internet connected schemes are out there as well.

Despite the lack of demand from firearms community, it is being legislated as a requirement. The President’s latest set of Executive Orders included a provision for federally funded research into “smart gun” technology. A 2002 New Jersey law stipulates that three years after “smart guns” are available anywhere in the United States only smart guns can be sold in the state of New Jersey.

It’s worth noting the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the National Rifle Association (NRA) have both been very clear that they are not opposed to “smart gun” technology. What they are opposed to, and I firmly agree, is a government mandate for it. If the market decides they want it, then the products will flourish.

What could be wrong with a “smart gun”? In a word: technology. Aside from the issues of adding sensitive electronics to a machine with heavy shock and vibrations; batteries die and usually at the worst possible time. Add a little moisture, heat or cold and they’ll die quicker. Radio frequency connections are not only highly prone to interference but hacking as well. Being tethered to a device of any kind means you must always be wearing that device on the hand you will be shooting with. Take it off and you’ve got access to an ugly little brick. If you’re wearing gloves or have dirty hands with devices that check fingerprints, you’ll be out of luck.

In the research I’ve done (yes, I really do research) the inherent unreliability isn’t the worst part. The most frightening part is what is hidden inside the “smart gun” technology. Two core features are part of nearly all “smart gun” technologies; GPS and remote deactivation. GPS integration allows tracking of the firearm at all times, similar to your cell phone. Remote deactivation allows you, or someone else to remotely disable your firearm. That alone should scare the pants off you. At any time your family, employer or coworker – under California’s latest proposed enhancement to the Gun Violence Restraining Order law – could file a complaint against you and your firearms can be deactivated without your knowledge.

The real danger surfaces when those two features are combined. Similar to GPS software in newer drones, geofencing allows a virtual barrier to be placed around sensitive areas disallowing operation. The most common areas for drone operators are airports. Now move this into firearms restrictions. Government buildings, Post Offices and courts are the first to come to mind. But what about schools? Since anything within 1000 feet of a school is already a federally defined gun free zone, your firearm won’t work there. If you live within 1000 feet of a school – guess what, the Second Amendment won’t apply to you. Certainly banks will want to get in on the safety of geofencing their property. Who would need to use a firearm at an ATM?

Now consider a riot, protest or disturbance of any kind in your neighborhood. The beauty of connected systems is a geofence can be set up anywhere, anytime. The first action taken to an incident in your neighborhood can easily be a gun-free geofence set up around it to protect the first responders. It won’t matter if you are the one lawfully defending yourself at the time, all “smart guns” will be shut down.

Here’s the funny thing about so-called “smart guns”: The ONLY people who this will impact will be the law abiding citizen who wants to protect themselves or their family using their Second Amendment rights. It will have ZERO impact on criminals who will be using the plain old-fashioned pull-the-trigger-and-it-fires firearm that the rest of the world will still produce and can smuggle into the United States.

Firearms are supposed to do one thing and one thing only, reliably and accurately send projectile out the end of the barrel each and every time the trigger is pulled. Anything that has even the remotest possibility of preventing that from happening is a threat to your life. Safety, security and marksmanship are the sole responsibility of the owner, not a computer chip.

Is a “smart gun” right for you and your family? If so, that should be your choice, and your choice alone. If you prefer to have the regular, reliable kind of firearm then that should be your choice also, not the government’s.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #smartguns, #guncontrol, #gunconfiscation

Remember the updated malfunction drill: Tap, rack, check GPS, change battery, run setup, re-sync, bang.

United We Stand

This is a difficult year for those of us in the firearms community. Attacks on our rights are occurring at the local, state and national level. Traditionally gun hostile states are doubling down on new and creative ways of whittling away Constitutional rights. Firearm friendly states are being forced to defend themselves from external forces funded by political motivated elitists. Presidential candidates are vowing to destroy guns with Australian style confiscations.

While some states are making strides towards a return of Constitutional rights, others are working to strip them away. This conflict of ideology across the nation will undoubtedly wind its way through the judicial system to the Supreme Court. The next Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court has the potential to trigger the reversal of the Heller and McDonald decisions and fundamentally reinterpret the Second Amendment into oblivion. Our next President will likely appoint an additional two to three Supreme Court Justices during his/her term.

Let’s be very clear on what is going on. The attacks on our rights, on our ability to own and use firearms, to defend our families, and ourselves is well funded and well coordinated. While feigning to support the Second Amendment, the goal is crystal clear; the elimination of private firearm ownership. This is a long-term strategy to systematically minimize then eliminate rights. Every incremental “common sense gun reform” “in the name of public safety” or “think of the children” restriction is another step towards the eventual outright ban.

So with all this at stake, why are we fighting with each other?

Lately I’ve been seeing a lot of time and energy being expended bashing other firearm owners who flee to other states or are not doing ‘enough’ for the cause. Not only is this foolish, it’s counterproductive. If we can’t treat each other with respect, how do we expect the rest of the nation to treat us?

A lot of good people will undoubtedly migrate towards more free states. Let’s face it, even the most hardened, battle tested troops deserve a little time off the front lines and we know nothing of each person’s struggle. Consider how many firearm makers and related manufacturers have moved out of restrictive states. We haven’t stopped supporting them and we shouldn’t condemn some of our own for doing the same. Instead of ridiculing or berating them, we need to be understanding so they will continue to support those of us who remain and be strong proponents in their new home state.

Not all firearm owners can take the time to go to a rally or participate in a demonstration. Despite firearm ownership being lawful, some still need to live in relative secrecy because of their jobs or location. They are supporters just the same, but cannot be as vocal as others. Not everyone can speak to an audience, but they can write an email, a letter or contribute to an organization fighting on our behalf. There are many roles to play and we can each do our part in some way. But no matter what, we all must vote.

There are an estimated 350 million legal firearms in the United States, and the number grows every day. The owners span every possible race, culture, status, age, gender, religion and political affiliation. Imagine the power of that many united voices.

Without cooperation and participation from all firearm owners, the second half of Founding Father John Dickinson’s phrase is certainly going to kick in. And we will be the generation that allowed it to happen.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #unitedwestand, #gunconfiscation

Gun Confiscation Made Easier

This week the California legislature made progress on new ways to deny residents their Second Amendment rights by moving forward on a number of new anti-gun bills. None have anything to do with reducing crime or punishing criminals. All are aimed at taking gun rights – and guns, from law-abiding citizens. One of the most dangerous is AB 2607, an expansion of California’s unique in the nation Gun Violence Restraining Order law. This Bill would add employers, coworkers, mental health workers and employees of secondary or postsecondary schools to the list of persons who could deny you of your Second Amendment rights without due process.

For those who are unaware of how we got here, California’s Gun Violence Restraining Order law came in the aftermath of the Santa Barbara murders of six individuals – three stabbed, three shot plus an additional 14 injured – by a disturbed college student who killed himself as police tracked him down.

The perpetrator had posted a number of disturbing videos online. Disturbing to the point where his family contacted the police about them. Six law enforcement members, four deputies, a university police officer and a dispatcher in training spoke with him outside his apartment. While typically two deputies are sent on welfare checks, officials said they sent a bigger response because they “were familiar with (him*)”. Before, during or after the 10-minute conversation with him, none of the law enforcement there, or at the two departments, looked at any of the videos or checked to see if he had firearms registered to him; an easy check in California. Shortly after the visit, the perpetrator took down the videos so as not to be discovered. He carried out his plans 30 days later.

According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence in San Francisco, “The fact of the matter is our gun laws are so weak that when someone openly exhibits that violent behavior, they can still access guns.”

Hours (emphasis on HOURS) after the Isla Vista shooting, Nancy Skinner, a California state assemblywoman from Berkeley, drafted a bill that would create a system for “gun violence restraining orders” in which relatives, friends and intimate partners could ask a judge to temporarily block someone who is exhibiting violent tendencies from getting a firearm.

I’m going to make a comment here which may not go over very well with some people and for that, I apologize. While the internal departmental reviews concluded the officers acted appropriately, I say the California’s Gun Violence Restraining Order law is a political knee-jerk overreaction that came into being from an inadequate police response.

Six law enforcement personnel on scene, plus however many in dispatch in two departments, were aware of the videos and nobody thought to look at them. While the officers may not have had the “right” to search his room, nobody thought to ask for consent either. We’ll never know if the information from a firearms registration search and the videos, combined with the family’s report would have lead the officers to do a more in-depth interview or search. But summarily rejecting the investigatory value of that information and advocating a ‘we need more laws’ attitude is an insult to all officers who do the job.

Having succeeded at getting their foot in the door with a new way to strip you of your rights, California wants to extend this no due-process tool to a larger group. Any of your managers, coworkers or employees can say you are a danger to yourself or others – real or imagined – and your rights and firearms will be taken away. Consider the power anyone at your company will have, someone who didn’t get a promotion, got a bad evaluation or just doesn’t like that you own firearms. While making a false report is a misdemeanor, nobody will ever be able to prove or disprove what was said in a private conversation.

The burden of proof then falls on YOU to dispute the accusations to get your rights back and your property returned. The costs, not counting your own time, will easily be in the thousands or tens of thousands of dollars over months to years for legal expenses and costs associated with getting your firearms returned.

If you don’t live in California and think this will never happen where you live, think again. California likes to believe they lead the nation in rights smashing laws. Depending on how the elections go in November, this could very well affect you next.

If there is ever a time to get involved, it is now.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #gunconfiscation, #2ndamendment, #firearmsrestrainingorder

* I don’t find it necessary to carry on the legacy of psychopaths by continuing to name them.

Arsenals, Stockpiles and Caches – Oh My!

We’ve all seen the press conferences where a high-ranking law enforcement official or political gun grabber stands up with a crew of concerned cronies looking on from behind. In front of them, a table of scary looking guns and accessories is displayed. The description of the items usually includes terms such as ‘high-powered’, ‘assault weapon’ or ‘weapons of war’. Then, the requisite quote to emphasize how serious this really is: I’ve never seen a stockpile like this in all my years…

Whether called arsenals, stockpiles, caches or something else, the perp walk of guns is also commonly witnessed as ‘evidence’ is being staged on the front lawn of the suspect in question. The spectacle serves no crime fighting purpose other than to scare the neighbors and let the invited press get some good close-ups so the story will stick in the mind of potential jurors. I suppose it does also send a message. If you have a lot of guns and ammo, this could happen to you.

Just to be perfectly clear: I do NOT object to removing firearms from criminals. I DO object to using the criminal justice process to further political agendas with exaggerations and half-truths.

So, what exactly is an arsenal? In 1994, Handgun Control Inc., which later became The Brady Campaign, was trying to get legislation passed to create Arsenal Licenses using this definition:

Any person who owns 20 or more firearms or more than 1,000 rounds of ammunition or primers would be required to get an “arsenal” license. To obtain a federal arsenal license, a person would need to be fingerprinted, obtain permission of local zoning authorities, and pay a $300 tax every three years. Their home would be subjected to unannounced, warrantless inspection by the government up to three times a year. “Arsenal” owners would also have to obtain a $100,000 dollar insurance policy.

When was the last time a criminal used 20 firearms and a thousand rounds of ammunition in the commission of a crime? Is that even possible? And other than the obvious Second Amendment argument, why are these numbers so completely meaningless?

Collectors acquire firearms for the love of the craft, the history as well as for investments. Hunters, sport shooters, competitors and those who simply own firearms to defend themselves and their families know one firearm isn’t appropriate for every use. You probably own more than one pair of shoes too since even something that simple is purpose driven.

Buying ammo in bulk is no different than buying toilet paper in bulk; it’s cheaper in larger quantities. For anyone who shoots on a regular basis for training, competition, sport or recreation, buying in quantity and when it’s on sale can reduce the cost up to 50%. A single two-day training program can require over a thousand rounds. Buying in bulk also helps to insulate the firearm owner from temporary price spikes caused by political speeches about banning some kind of firearm or ammo.

Yet in the name of public safety and security, national, state and local politicians are trying to limit how many firearms or how much ammo you can have. In California where there is already a one-in-30-day limit on the purchase of handguns, anti-gun politicians are trying to extend that limit to include rifles and shotguns as well as party-to-party transactions. The result would be a strict one firearm a month acquisition limit. In New York, one ammunition-banning proposal would limit purchases to two times the capacity of your registered firearm caliber every 90 days. If you own a six-shot .38-caliber revolver you can buy 12 rounds of .38 ammunition every three months.

Are any of these laws going to prevent crime or limit it in any way when crimes are committed? Of course not. It’s as if these legislators are purposely trying to create a class of owners who are less competent to defend themselves because they can’t properly train with their firearms. Personally, I am a lot less concerned with someone who is investing their time and money in firearms, ammunition and training than with the gangbanger whose stolen six-shooter has five mismatched rounds because that’s all he has until he steals more.

So fellow patriots, be sure to hide your extravagant shoes and excessive rolls of quilted two-ply well. As soon as someone decides you don’t need those either, they’ll be laid out across your front lawn for all to view in horror and shame.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #2ndamendment, #gunandammobans, #gunconfiscation

Second Amendment Voter

Gun grabbers love to refer to Second Amendment supporters as single-issue voters. Portraying 2A supporters as being out of touch with the reality of the modern world and narrow minded is an effort to shame and ridicule them so they won’t be taken seriously. As you might expect, I disagree.

Let’s approach this from the context of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Maslow ranked needs from bottom to top starting with physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem, and self-actualization. The psychological theory is that the lower level needs must be met before the individual will have a strong desire for the upper level needs. In a very simple example: if you don’t have food, water and shelter, your desire for the fine arts and cultural pursuits are going to be pretty dim.

You are supposed to progress upwards as stability is gained in the lower levels but may drop back down through the list at any time due to your individual circumstances. When your lower level needs erode due to a change or loss, your primary concentration will be on fixing those foundational needs before you go back up.

So what does this have to do with the Second Amendment and voting? Think of the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights as the foundational, base level need on Maslow’s chart. Everything that was built in this country, by this country, was born as a result of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by these documents. Freedom of speech, religion, assembly, the press, the right to bear arms – all necessary and the basis for the success of the nation we live in today.

Unfortunately, the foundation of our nation is under attack nationally and locally. The presumptive Democratic nominee for President is steadfastly opposed to the Second Amendment and will do everything in her power to gut this right or repeal it outright. In addition, an anti-Second Amendment appointee to the US Supreme Court, as has been proposed by our current President, would most certainly guarantee any future firearms rights cases would be rejected. Landmark cases such as District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago would be in jeopardy of being ‘reinterpreted’ or repealed.

Here in California, the list of anti-Second Amendment ballot initiatives and bills grows almost daily. Each new one coming up with unique ways of stripping rights away from honest, law abiding firearms owners while doing absolutely nothing to increase safety or reduce crime.

Some contend the Second Amendment is outdated and an unnecessary relic from colonial times. This couldn’t be further from the truth. The protections expressed in these documents were the result of living under an oppressive government that no longer represented them. If that doesn’t apply to all of the rights today, nothing does.

It’s not that Second Amendment supporters aren’t concerned with international monetary policy or global environmental issues, it’s that they are focusing on an essential principle of our country first. Destroying the Second Amendment would eliminate a key part of the foundation of our nation. Just as the foundation of a single story house is critical to it’s stability, the foundation of a 100-story building is even more critical.

Patriots fought and died for our liberty. Our Founding Fathers had the courage to defy their oppressors, risking their lives and the lives of their families, to document what our new nation would be established on. The men and women of our armed services have been protecting it with their lives for nearly 240 years now.

For me, a free citizen of the United States for the sacrifices of those who have come before me, walking into a voting booth and placing my ballot for candidates who will support and protect the Second Amendment is an honor and my duty as a voter.

And when someone calls me a single-issue voter, I just reply: Damn right I am – for now.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #billofrights, #2ndamendment, #1stamendment, #2ndamendmentvoter, #singleissuevoter, #gunvote

European Terror Bombs = US Gun Bans

Last week we saw another pair of terrorist attacks in Europe, these two at the Brussels airport and a subway station. The weapons of choice were bombs. Almost immediately anti-gun zealots put out a call for expanded gun control in the United States. The logic escapes me.

First off, let’s separate the two non-related issues. A terrorist attack using suicide bombs in Europe vs. United States gun control.

If you’ve seen any of the images from Brussels, you know the carnage of the attacks and the tragic loss of innocent life. Desperate people with no regard for human life willing to blow themselves up along with scores of innocent men, women and children for their ‘cause’ is nothing short of disgusting.

Already airports around the world immediately increased security in hopes of preventing similar attacks. The Belgium airport attacks were in the public, non-secure departure halls, before passengers are screened to go into the secure, gate areas. No attempts were made to go into the secure areas or on to the planes; the departure halls victims were the intended targets.

The debate is now on pushing the secure area of the airport out even further to the main entrances of the buildings or even to the entrances to the airports themselves. Of course, each time the security ring is pushed out further, it creates a human queue at that point, which then becomes the next soft target. Relying on barriers and safe vs. non-safe zones only relocates the threat to the next target. It does nothing to stop it.

As we’ve seen in these attacks and others around the world, lone wolf or small teams of individuals who are willing to martyr themselves in the name of a cause are extremely difficult to stop. It can be done and is being done, but the efforts are the most effective when their own community identifies the threats before they are in play. Once out in public, a suicide bomber can simply detonate themselves to kill and maim innocents if discovered at a security stop. Even if this is not their primary target, they still kill – and more likely than not, our first responders.

So, the connection between European terror bombings and US gun bans? It goes back to the Rahm’s Rule, the product of Chicago mayor and former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, which says, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

Of course there is no connection but the anti-gun proponents want you to believe you will be safer if you and everyone around you gives up your firearms. After all, once all the legally owned firearms are gone, nobody will be able to hurt you.

But wait… What about the criminals who get their guns by illegal means? What about the terrorists, a.k.a. thug criminals with a cause who can get guns by illegal means? What about the guns that come into the country illegally? What about the guns that are made here illegally? And what about the other illegal weapons, the ones that are actually the weapons of choice for terrorists, the bombs that can be made by anyone with common every day items from the local hardware or auto parts store?

Disarming innocent people – people who have done nothing, committed no crimes and never will – in the name of protection from terrorists only turns them into innocent victims of terrorists. These are honest men and women who only want to protect themselves and their families and are in the best position to do so.

Preventing attacks like we’ve witnessed in Brussels, Paris, Madrid, Istanbul, Ürümqi, Tokyo, Oklahoma City, Boston, San Bernardino… is possible, but it takes time and hard work. It’s not just intercepting emails and phone calls, or de-encrypting cell phones. It means identifying those with the intent to kill early and deigning them the ability to do so. It means solving deeper national and international problems and reestablishing a moral compass in all communities that says it’s not okay to commit mass murder over ideological differences. It means leading by example.

The answer is certainly NOT disarming a population of law-abiding citizens leaving them with fewer rights and protections than the terrorists who are trying to kill them.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #terrorism, #2ndamendment, #righttobeararms

The Boss vs. The Leader

Sorry Springsteen fans, he isn’t The Boss I’m talking about. This is nonetheless a slight tangent from my usual post topics. A Facebook post I shared this past week brought to light a topic I have been thinking about for a while and I thought this would be a good opportunity to explore it further. Bear with me for a bit and I’ll bring it back around.

The boss is known by many titles: owner, manager, supervisor, crew chief, team lead and so on. Unless you work for yourself, it’s the person you work for. The leader on the other hand is the one who leads or commands others. Is there a distinction? I say there is. While a boss may be a leader, the leader doesn’t necessarily have to be the boss.

Workplace bosses may or may not be person we want to work for. They may just be the person who has been there the longest, had the right connections or was in the right place at the right time to get the job. Managing other workers or operations isn’t always the career path people want. Some get tossed into it with hopes they’ll be able to make it work. Some absolutely excel while others do not. Often times the only choice for unhappy employees is to go elsewhere.

If it sounds like I’m being hard on the boss, I am. It’s an extraordinarily difficult job and not everyone is cut out for it. It’s a lot more than policies, processes, procedures and catch phrases. I’ve always contended that managing mechanical, technical or other ‘things’ is easy, it’s the human part of the job that is difficult. Like many people, I’ve been on both sides of the equation and have seen the good, the bad and the very, very ugly.

Leaders on the other hand tend to be those we make a conscious decision to be with. In employment, we gravitate towards or stay with those we see as leaders with a vision we share. Leaders take the time to understand motivation and how it relates to individual and group success. They are fiercely protective of those they lead and are often more critical of their own abilities than of those around them.

Leadership skills, just like management skills, can be taught, trained, nurtured and grown. However just as wealth, stature, family or association does not equal success; education, training and experience don’t make one successful either. There is that something extra, that personal secret sauce an individual brings with them that determines the outcome.

Leadership is also very situational dependent. The individual contributor in one situation may be the leader in the next. Each of us has times we lead as well as times we follow. And not every situation demands a strong and dynamic leader to be successful. Standing in the produce section of your local market with a dory yelling THIS IS SPARTA!! isn’t going to get you extra discounts at checkout. There is also one of my favorite leadership quotes: “You know what they call a leader with no followers? Just a guy talking a walk.”

So why is this pertinent? This is an election year and a lot is riding on our vote. Our next President will shape national and foreign policy as well as determine the balance of the Supreme Court for at least the next generation to come. The results could very well gut the protections we now enjoy under the Bill of Rights. Elements of the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments could be dramatically reinterpreted or revoked in totality in the name of progress towards a self-serving political agenda.

Our votes will decide who sits in the President’s chair as well as many other critical matters on Election Day. We can choose the leader we want to follow, or the boss we have no choice but to follow.

Bob

#oddstuffing, #thebossvstheleader, #leadership, #2016elections, #billofrights, #bornintheusa