OddStuffing – Page 12

Criminal (In)Justice System

The United States is considered the global leader of economy, foreign investment, technology and military power. Yet at the same time, our nation incarcerates a higher percentage of its citizens than any other in the world. One would think the leading superpower would do a better job with crime and justice within its own borders for its own citizens.

The symbol of the justice system is Lady Justice. She is blindfolded so as to be objective and impartial, without favoring identity of wealth, power or any other factor. She holds scales to weigh evidence, impartially and on its own merit. She also holds a sword representing punishment.

One of the concepts I recall from studying criminal justice many years ago was that in order for punishment to be an effective deterrence, it must be swift, severe and certain. Unfortunately, American justice has become anything but.

Criminal prosecutions are all but certain. Despite the best efforts of law enforcement to solve cases and apprehend those responsible, criminal cases are not always pursued. The vast majority of cases are plea-bargained for greatly reduced charges. The process is by no means swift. Even simple cases can take months or years to resolve. Complex, serious crimes can take much longer to wind their way through the courts. Where a conviction is obtained and punishment is given to the offender, it is most often far less than the law always. Due to prison overcrowding and initiatives such as California’s Proposition 47, more offenders are spending far less time incarcerated. Those who do serve actual prison time emerge more hardened, connected and willing to continue committing crime than when they went in.

Unfortunately, justice is also recognized as being disproportionately administered depending on the class, status or vocation. Equal crimes should not result in unequal consequences. It’s not hard to immediately think of examples where the punishment did not fit the crime, both to the advantage and disadvantage of person who committed it.

The most common strategy to address crime is to pass more laws making more activities illegal. The rational is that by adding additional ‘crimes’, criminals will be deterred from illegal acts. In reality, it only turns innocent people into criminals and fewer actual criminals are punished for the crimes they do commit.

The result for those who choose to break the law is they have very little fear of the law, law enforcement, the courts or any potential punishment. They know they must be treated properly by law enforcement and if their case ever does get to court and a conviction obtained, the punishment will be more of a temporary inconvenience than a deterrent. Sadly, our system affords criminals more rights than their victims.

The only remaining element a criminal has to fear is from their potential victim. Yet current and proposed laws make it increasing difficult or impossible for the average, non-privileged citizen to protect themselves, their family or their property without becoming criminals themselves.

Dealing with crime by increasing the volume of criminal statutes is not the answer. To reduce crime you have to solve the underlying causes of it. That means dealing with education, poverty, mental health, race, drugs, family, equality and politics – the problems our citizens must cope with every day.

Will we ever stop all crime? Of course not; free will gives us the ability to choose our own path, lawfully or not. But it doesn’t mean we don’t work on the primary causes or correct the justice system by vigorously enforcing the laws we already have to their fullest extent. It also means we don’t eliminate the right of individuals to protect themselves and their families from those who have very little to fear from our criminal injustice system.

Bob

#oddstufing, #crimeandpunishment, #criminalinjustice #victimsrights

Free Speech Will Survive

This past week Facebook announced additional updates and enforcement of their terms of service for individuals offering firearms for sale on the social media platform as well as on its photo-sharing site Instagram. Post, threads and entire pages began disappearing around the country. Not only were individual’s sale posts targeted, but also legitimate retailers and firearms related information exchange groups, both private and public as well as the individuals who served as administrators on the offending pages.

Lesser reported on but also impacted were Curio & Relic collectors who possess Type 3 Federal Firearms Licenses (FFL’s) who are legally permitted to do non-dealer acquisitions in most places outside of California. Also caught up in recent sweeps have been the marijuana dispensaries that, while legal, licensed, taxed and regulated in their area, have also been given the boot.

The seemingly randomness of the enforcement, immediately and unceremoniously unpublishing some pages while leaving other competing pages intact, removing some posts but leaving others of nearly identical content, lead many to believe the cause was everything from algorithms run amuck, solo malcontents with an axe to grind, local activists & NIMBY’ers to a coordinated national gun control group attack. The result has been a lot of confusion, finger pointing and even some allies turning against each other.

Of course, the timing – as the presidential primaries are just getting under way, smack of politically motivated censorship aimed at disrupting opponent’s focus on the candidates and elections. Probably a coincidence, but who knows.

Regardless of how it was implemented, Facebook states the new policy arose from the company’s review of its rules following its recent efforts to encourage new forms of commerce on the site.

Believe it or not, this isn’t something new. Facebook announced restrictions on commercial activity back in 2014. See the press release here: http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2014/03/facebook-instagram-announce-new-educational-and-enforcement-measures-for-commercial-activity/

A couple of things to keep in mind here: We use Facebook’s social media platform for free. Unless you pay for ads for non-restricted products, there is no cost. And to Facebook, YOU are the product. They make BILLIONS of dollars a year selling access to us and information about our likes, habits and… well more information than we really want to admit they have about us.

The discouraging thing here is Facebook has become a staple in a lot of our lives. We use it to communicate and stay in touch with friends, family and other like-minded folks around town, the country and the world with just a few likes. Companies use it to communicate with customers. Government entities use it to inform the citizens they serve. Clubs, religious institutions, neighborhoods and information sharing groups use it to communicate with members. Its ubiquitous nature, being on our computers, tablets, and mobile phones lets us get news about what’s going on in Facebook faster and often more reliably than we can from traditional news outlets. It has connected more people than has ever been possible before. Because of this, we’ve become far too reliant on a single tool that is subject to the whim of someone who may or may not agree with our point of view.

While Facebook is free and open to all, we tend to forget this environment is owned and operated by a corporation; it is not a free, open space like the Internet itself, even though it may feel like it. While I expect there to be 1st Amendment challenges to these latest actions, the private product terms of use will most certainly prevail, even though Facebook seems to have broken some of it’s own rules enforcing it.

If you’re thinking what’s next, you’re not alone. Who’s to say Facebook won’t expand the definition of banned content to include religious practices, the promotion of civil rights, criticism of the government, or even criticism of Facebook policy.

Personally I find it sad Facebook has chosen this heavy-handed approach. One would think they could more effectively encourage legal behavior, even if they don’t especially like it – by facilitating the actions and ensuring it remains legal, instead of slamming the door on those who participate in it.

If nothing else, this latest action provides opportunity to a number of alternative social media platforms and sites such as MeWe, Gun District and many others who are vying for the customers, traffic and revenue Facebook is turning away.

Yes, I have voiced my dissatisfaction to Facebook about their new policy and enforcement practices and will continue to do so. Will Facebook give a tinker’s damn about anything I say, one user out of 1.59 billion? I seriously doubt it. But then again, I’m not the only one.

Legal, responsible commerce will survive. The free exchange of ideas and information will survive. Free speech will survive. It may just happen outside of Facebook.

Bob

p.s. Odd Stuffing content is also available at www.oddstuffing.com and on MeWe at https://mewe.com/join/odd_stuffing – just in case.

#oddstuffing #neverdoubt #facebookcensorship #2ndamendment #freespeech

When Seconds Count…

We’ve all heard the saying: When seconds count, the police are only minutes away. But what does this mean to you and your safety?

All law enforcement agencies have an average response time to emergency calls in their jurisdiction. This is the time from when a call is received at the dispatch center until the first unit arrives on the scene. In small cities, that time may be as short as three to five minutes. In larger cities it may be 10 to 20 minutes, or more. Rural areas may be 15 to 30 minutes, or even as long as an hour for remote areas. This of course is an average and you may have an officer patrolling around the corner or every on-duty officer could already be tied up with an emergency and the responding officer will be coming from a neighboring agency. And no, living next to a donut shop will not guarantee a quick response.

Realize that when an officer is dispatched to an emergency call, they are going to do everything in their power to get there as quickly as possible. I know from my experience as an officer and the officers I worked with, we understood the urgency for the person on the other end of a 911 call. All the officers I’ve ever known and continue to be associated with in one form or another are dedicated to getting to you as fast as they can. If you don’t believe it, look up the statistics of officers injured and killed every year responding to calls for help.

So, best-case scenario you are probably looking at around three to five minutes. How long is that? As a comparison, a professional boxing round is three minutes. How do these professional athletes look after three minutes? If you’ve never tried to fight for three minutes straight, it can be pretty eye opening. Find a gym where you can put on the gloves and all the proper protection and go as hard as you can against an able opponent for one round. It’s a lot harder than you think. In real life you are going to be in a fight for your life and may be facing multiple, armed attackers in your home or on the street. In real life, there are no helmets, no padded gloves and no bell at the end of three minutes.

Now I’m going to toss in another variable that no one ever talks about. That average response time is AFTER someone calls for help. If you are alone and attacked, you’re not going to be picking up the phone and calling 911 while you’re fighting for your life. If there’s someone else with you who is physically able, chances are they’ll be helping you. It’s likely going to take at least a third person or uninvolved witness to see what’s going on AFTER an attack has started to recognize you need help to dial 911.

Why is this important? That time between the BEGINNING of the attack through when someone calls 911 to initiate the response and until the first officer is on the scene is all about YOU. It’s you having to defend yourself with whatever you have at your disposal.

If you are a member of society’s elite, a million/billionaire or political heavyweight, you’ve got at least one person or an entire team of heavily armed professionals whose only job is to keep you safe. You’ll probably weather most any type of attempted attack completely unscathed.

For the rest of us, our personal safety is our own responsibility. The police cannot be everywhere to protect us and quite frankly, we wouldn’t want to live in a society where we were under close government scrutiny 24 hours a day. Read George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four if you’d like a hint on how this world would look.

Each of us must all be responsible for the safety of our families and ourselves. This starts with not putting yourself in situations where you can easily become a victim and becoming a hard vs. soft target. It also means having the absolute best force multiplier you can safely, responsibly and effectively deploy on your person and ready – and willing – to use. Most importantly, it means having the right mental attitude to fight for your life or your family’s life when you have minutes to wait for help to arrive.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #whensecondscount‬ ‪#‎responsetime‬ ‪#‎hardtarget‬ ‪#‎2ndamendment‬

If You Like Your Guns, You Can Keep Your Guns

This quote is of course a parody. Here is one of the President’s actual quotes from the International Association of Chief’s of Police conference on October 27, 2015.

“Every time a mass shooting happens, one of the saddest ironies is that suddenly the purchase of firearms and ammunition jumps up because folks are scared into thinking that Obama is going to use this as an excuse to take away our Second Amendment rights. Nobody is doing that.”

Over and over we’ve heard the President claim nobody wants to take away our firearms or our Second Amendment rights. Unfortunately, as we found out from his Affordable Care Act quote, this is not the case.

“If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period. If you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period. No one will take it away, no matter what.”

Here is the reality of what’s going on. In municipalities, states and in Congress, new draconian restrictions on firearms and ammunition are being introduced at a blistering rate. All claiming to fully respect the Second Amendment, yet at the same time stripping law abiding citizen’s rights, and yes, their lawfully owned firearms away from them.

Much of this is no doubt related to the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the Friedman v. City of Highland Park from the 7th Circuit Court. Invigorated by the lack of high court’s willingness to rule on this case, outright bans as well as registrations schemes are popping up around the country.

A quick note on firearms registrations laws: The reason, the only reason for a firearms registration is to facilitate a government’s ability to confiscate them later on. Long term or short term, all registrations have eventually led to confiscations.

And that’s what we see going on. In areas where certain types of firearms – most often, but not exclusively, those deemed unsuitable for civilian ownership and labeled as “assault weapons” are not being banned outright, they must be registered. These registered “assault weapons” can never be sold or given to another individual in the state, not even to descendants through inheritance. Once the current owner dies, the firearm must be removed from the state or surrendered to law enforcement with no compensation. The full registry of “assault weapons” is eliminated with the current generation.

On one hand we have the President of the United States standing before the American public and swearing that nobody is trying to take your guns. On the other hand, we have members of his own party in the nation’s capitol and around the country pursuing laws on what the President has called his highest priority issue. It leads us to a disturbing dilemma. Either the President does not know what is going on or he is not telling us the truth.

Personally, I find this to be one of the saddest aspects of what is happening. Our nation’s leaders stand up and make up a narrative they want the country to believe with little to no accountability. Press events and so-called town hall meetings are tightly controlled and scripted to create and distribute the story. And while it would never be acceptable to interrupt and call BS on a sitting US President – we must respect the office, even if we do not respect the individual in the position at the time – we absolutely must call these things out. We must call it what it is, BS.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, 2016 will be the year to be heard. Be respectful, be polite, but absolutely be heard.

Bob

#oddstuffing ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎registration‬, ‪#‎confiscation‬, ‪#‎liesandtruth‬

The First Amendment

As we see a plethora of new anti-gun legislation being introduced in California, across the country, and in our nation’s capitol, I thought it might be a good time to remind ourselves of what our 2nd Amendment rights protect.

Like the vast majority of this country’s citizens, I am descendant from immigrants. The matriarch of our family made the difficult decision to leave her home and come to the United States many, many years ago. As an outspoken young woman, something uncommon in the era, she faced a dilemma. In her home country, she was relatively safe walking the streets, as the Crown’s punishment for crimes was extraordinarily severe and exceedingly cruel. At the same time, she was unable to voice any opposition or criticism against the rulers for fear of suffering the same fate, a fate her family would never be able to question. She chose to immigrate to the United States realizing that she would not be as well protected by the State, but at the same time would have freedom of speech, among many others.

The United States Constitution and Bill of Rights are unique in the world. The protections it guarantees have never been duplicated. Our founders set down these principles as the basis for everything that followed and they are reflective of the struggle they faced leading to the formation of this country.

The First Amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

These freedoms are not easy. The First Amendment means we as citizens must embrace and defend these very rights for those we do not agree with. It means others will be able to speak positions opposite to our own and even in disapproval of the very rights that allow them to voice the opinion in the first place. It means our country will be made up of people who exercise all faiths and reported on by a press unencumbered by government censorship. It means being able to associate with people of our own choosing and being able to petition our Government with complaints.

What is the cost? The cost is a less controlling government and more tolerant country. It means we will not live in a police state where our thoughts, our words, our faith, our actions are controlled in order to make us ‘safer’.

This is where the Second Amendment comes in. The right of the “people” to bear arms is what protects the First Amendment and the entire Constitution. It not only allows us to defend our nation and ourselves from others who would do us harm in a free society, but it ensures our government will abide by it’s own promises. Without it, there is no freedom.

We bear the responsibility of our First Amendment rights every day. Some say the Second Amendment is outdated or only refers to muskets or hunting. We disagree, but if we are defenders of the Constitution, we must also defend their freedom of speech and their ability to petition the government for redress. The ultimate measure of the decision on their grievances is of course the Constitution itself and it is in that we must believe.

As citizens of the United States, we enjoy freedoms found no place else in the world. It is an honor to live in this society, as well as a burden – one we are very grateful to have. But these freedoms come at a cost. It means we are responsible to live up to the principles our founders established and defend them – all of them – with all of the rights our founders fought and gave their lives to hand down to us.

Bob

#oddstuffing ‪#‎1stamendment‬, ‪#‎2ndamendment‬, ‪#‎constitution‬, ‪#‎freedom‬

Trust

The simple definition courtesy of Merriam-Webster: belief that someone or something is reliable, good, honest, effective, etc.

Trust is an important concept for all beings, but especially in humans. Trust allows us to proceed with confidence that what we see, what we are told, the relationship we share with another is based on truth and honesty. Being suspicious creatures at heart, trust is earned over time and through evidence of good deeds or intentions. But for as long as it takes to develop trust, it can be destroyed instantly through lies, deceit or collusion.

The trust we place in the people around us is the foundation of a civilization. We trust the officials we have given the authority to govern and regulate our society will do so not in their own best interest, but in ours. We trust they will respect the laws of land and of humanity in general. We trust them with our safety, security and our very lives.

This year more than any, our trust as United States citizens is being tested. We are being told that changes need to be made for our own good, in our best interest – not for the benefit of a select few. We’re being told that the majority of us actually support these changes and we should as well.

At a time in our nation’s history when firearm ownership is at an all time high and violent crime is at historic lows, and continuing to trend downwards, we are told we have a gun violence crisis. This ‘crisis’, the narrative goes, can only be solved through new and severe restrictions of our rights to own firearms. We are told the authority exists to make these news laws without our consent.

We are told the only way to prevent criminals from using guns illegally is to prevent the law abiding from having them. We are told we do not need the best and most effective means of protecting our lives and our families. We are told we can only have a certain, limited set of non-intimidating firearms. We are told we cannot have enough ammunition to practice and prepare for our personal defense. We are told we can only have these if we pay new fees, new taxes and subject ourselves to constant and intense scrutiny by our government. We are told we cannot be trusted to safely defend ourselves. And of course, we are told nobody wants to take the firearms we already have.

We are not being told the truth.

We look at what is going on in our communities and around the country, and we see the attacks on our Second Amendment rights ourselves. We see politicians and the elite, surrounded by the very firearms they say we should not be able to own. We see states, counties and municipalities imposing more and more restrictive firearms and ammunition laws. Laws which will never prevent criminals from obtaining firearms or committing acts of violence. Laws which only burden the law abiding citizen – turning them in to criminals overnight with the stroke of a pen for daring to defend themselves.

We can see the truth.

This is a very important year for the Second Amendment and for our country. At the heart of it, is who do we as citizens trust. Do we trust in the foundations of our nation, do we trust in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Do we trust in ourselves to be able to make the right choices for our families and ourselves?

Who do you trust?

Bob

#oddstuffing, #trust, #2ndamendment #constitution

We The People

I’ve chosen to start the New Year with the Preamble of the United States Constitution. The full text is:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I bring this up for two reasons. First, I want this to be a reminder of the founding principles of our nation. These radical and downright revolutionary ideas at the time were what our founders created to lead this new country into the future and serve as the basis for all that would follow. Second, with this in mind, 2016 will likely see some of the most serious attacks on US citizens individual and collective rights witnessed in modern times.

At the national level we’ve already seen a taste of what is to come:

• Our President threatening to circumvent congress and legislate through executive orders by requiring NICS background checks utilize the non-due process No Fly List for firearms purchases, mandating universal background checks and firearms registration, reclassifying individual sellers as firearms dealers and banning certain types of ammunition.
• A new and expanded version of the ‘Assault Weapons’ ban.
• Presidential candidates jockeying to see who can come up with the most restrictive gun control scheme including Australian-style gun buyback/confiscations and ‘Assault Weapons’ bans.

On the state level, we’ve seen:

• New York’s ammunition proposal to limit individual purchases to two (2) times the maximum capacity & caliber of their registered firearms every 90 days.
• Connecticut’s Governor’s Executive Order to run state firearm purchases through the No Fly List.
• California’s Lt Governor’s 2018 Gubernatorial campaign/ 2016 Ballot Initiative to require permits and point-of-sale background checks for in-state only ammunition purchases and outlawing all pre-ban standard capacity magazines.

On the local level, we’ve seen:

• Highland Park, Illinois banning so-called ‘Assault Weapons’ and standard capacity magazines.
• Various municipalities outlawing all pre-ban standard capacity magazines, bans of self-defense ammo, mandatory in-home storage laws and zoning firearms and ammunition retailers out of existence.

What’s worse, the list above is just the starting point. Inspired by recent case rejections from the US Supreme Court; states, counties and municipalities around the country are emboldened to push their own restrictive agendas. Will any of these measures do anything to prevent violence? No, of course not. All they do is further erode honest, law abiding citizen rights and their ability to protect themselves and their families from those who don’t obey the law in the first place.

Does it have to be this way? NO! But it’s going to take a concerted effort by ALL responsible firearms owners to stop it. It’s going to take everyone’s voices and votes.

If you’ve never been involved before, 2016 will be the year to be heard. It is understandable to want to stay below the radar and not get on someone’s list, especially for those of us in a restrictive and downright vindictive state like California. Well, I’ve got some bad news for you. If you own a firearm, you’re already on the list – and that legal ownership you enjoy today may not last for long.

If you haven’t joined the NRA or your state affiliate organization, now is the time. If you haven’t donated to the organizations fighting to stop these new constitutional infringements, now is the time. If you haven’t written to your representatives at the local, state and federal level to tell them these attacks on our Constitutional rights is unacceptable, now is the time.

2015 saw record numbers of citizens around the country exercising their Second Amendment rights and purchasing firearms, many of them for the very first time. Imagine the power of that many people saying NO to new gun control laws in their communities, in their states and in the nation. Imagine the power of We The People.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #wethepeople‬ ‪#‎2ndamendment‬ #2016

Why Do You Train?

A whole lot of people are buying firearms right now, many of them for the first time. Nationwide, 2015 is on course to be a record year in the U.S. as estimated by background checks through the NICS system. California already exceeded its busiest firearms buying year. Much of this current rush has been brought about by criminal attacks around the country as well as local, state and federal governments all demanding new draconian gun control laws. Sadly, all of these new proposed laws would have done nothing to prevent the tragedies we’ve seen unfold, but instead are designed to punish the law abiding and make it harder for them to defend themselves.

While I am deeply saddened by why it is happening, what is occurring is encouraging. More and more people are taking charge of their own safely by purchasing firearms for self-defense. But having a firearm for protection doesn’t stop there. Buying the tool is only the first step. Training in the proper use, care and legal aspects of the firearm is the responsible thing to do.

I hesitate to say firearms training should be made compulsory, as a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment shouldn’t be conditional. Imagine if you had to take public speaking classes in order to exercise your First Amendment rights. It would also begin a slippery slope of progressively difficult hurdles to ownership. If a mandated four-hour firearms class is a good idea, then eight hours would probably be better, and 16 hours would be even better than that, and so on and so on. Very quickly you would price the ‘privilege’ of owning a firearm out of the hands of many in the community. That’s not much of a right. However I do feel getting training is the correct thing to do. Used properly, a firearm can save your life. Used improperly it can take it. It’s really that simple.

Owners who are new to firearms should be seeking out the training as part of the purchase. In an ideal world, your firearm’s manufacturer and local dealer would help facilitate or even include it with the purchase. Standard training would include the Four Basic Rules of Firearm Safety, basic usage and marksmanship, care of firearm and the law. These things apply to everyone, everywhere. Beyond this, training depends on your intended use.

Training is important. We train to acquire new skills, maintain or improve existing ones and to prepare us for the time when we need to use our skills in real life. There really is no shortcut; training takes time, commitment, resources and the proper mindset to develop the mental and physical proficiencies. Trained skills are also perishable. Just because you could do something years ago doesn’t mean you can do it at the same level today.

Finding a good instructor and training environment is critical. Specifically when it comes to self-defense training, you need an instructor who will provide a realistic, challenging and safe program. Here are a few things you should look for:

• Do the instructors have applicable and current certifications?
• Do the instructors have a relevant background and experience to teach this type of training?
• Do the instructors carry the proper insurance?
• Do the instructors continue to participate in student and instructor level training themselves?
• Can the instructors provide student references?
• Are the instructors willing to discuss their program and your needs with you?

Then there’s this little concept called ‘the fundamentals’. There’s a tendency for those who take advanced level classes to dismiss basic / fundamental level training as being below them. That couldn’t be further from the truth. All those higher-level skills are built on a solid foundation of the basics. You are never too high-speed to practice at that level.

Firearm ownership and use is a right, but it is your responsibility to use it properly. Good training and practice, practice, practice will help you achieve your goals.

For me, I train to protect myself. I train to protect my family. I train so that I can train others. Why do you train?

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #training‬, ‪#‎2A‬, ‪#‎rights‬, ‪#‎responsibility‬, ‪#‎safety‬

Think About The Children!

No gun control argument is complete until someone cries out, “Think about the children!” It is supposed to be the trump card for which there can be no argument. It’s as if the Founding Fathers crafting the Constitution and Bill of Rights didn’t take into consideration their own children or the generations of children to follow. Or maybe they believe today’s gun owners simply hate kids. I’m going to say no.

Yes, I’m a bit older. I grew up in a time when children where allowed to have and use firearms. You were taught firearms safety in school, by your parents, grandparents or extended family and you were taught to respect them. While I didn’t grow up in a school that had a shooting club or marksmanship classes, there were others that did. Students regularly hunted before school and on the way home during hunting season. Talking about guns, going out and shooting guns, hunting and fishing, it was all okay. If you saw someone walking down the road with a rifle slung over their shoulder, there was no need to call the police.

Fast forward to today. A child in school mentioning a gun in any way, shape or form, drawing a picture of a gun, pointing a finger like a gun, or even eating a pop tart into a shape that someone thinks remotely looks like a gun gets the school locked down, a massive police response and earns the child a suspension or expulsion. How did we get to this point?

Here’s a hint. Former United States Attorney General Eric Holder, at the time the U.S. Attorney for Washington D.C. made the following statement in 1995:

“We just have to be repetitive about this. It’s not enough to have a catchy ad on a Monday and then only do it every Monday. We have to do this every day of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

Having earned his JD at Columbia Law School, Holder is no doubt aware of what brainwashing is. For the rest of us, here is a reminder:

“A method for systematically changing attitudes or altering beliefs, originated in totalitarian countries, especially through the use of torture, drugs, or psychological-stress techniques.”

We seem to have traded the three R’s – reading, writing and arithmetic – for the indoctrination of values based on a politically motivated agenda. Perhaps our students would have a better future if our elementary and high school teachers weren’t cross-trained in psychological operations.

Children and firearms do not have to be a bad thing. One of the greatest pleasures I had while working in a gun shop was seeing parents come in with their young children. Of course they would want to see items in the store and the parents would allow them, but not until they correctly recited the four basic firearms safety rules. Then, and only then, they would hand them the firearm and closely supervise them. These kids, some not even big enough to look over the display counters, would then demonstrate the safest handling, muzzle and trigger finger discipline I’ve ever seen in my life.

Children can be taught to use firearms safely and to respect them, as well as the laws surrounding their use – even in today’s society. But I’m going to take it one step further. I’m going to say ALL children should be given the opportunity (note: not mandatory) to know about firearms. Why? Quite simply because we as parents cannot be with them all the time. It will be up to them to decide what to do if they should come across a firearm at some point in their life. If the only information they have received on the topic is from television and movies, it’s probably not going to end well.

I am very strong proponent of Project ChildSafe, a nonprofit charitable organization committed to promoting firearms safety and making communities safer. Even for families strongly opposed to firearms, I encourage them to visit the Project ChildSafe website and view the video on Have a Conversation with Kids about Firearm Safety at www.projectchildsafe.org to help their family stay safe.

Allowing our schools to teach children that firearms in any way, shape or form are bad – is wrong. Punishing them for celebrating their family’s traditions and their country’s heritage – is wrong. Brainwashing them into believing a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment is unacceptable in today’s society – is wrong.

So yes, let’s think about the children and not let political agenda determine their future.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #thinkaboutthechildren‬, ‪#‎secondamendment‬, ‪#‎2a‬, ‪#‎projectchildsafe‬

No More Mr. Nice Guy

Last week, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear Second Amendment case Friedman v. City of Highland Park from the 7th Circuit Court. This case has serious implications for all US citizens, but in particular, us here in California.

The City of Highland Park was one of 20 Chicago area suburbs that, in the wake of the Heller and McDonald decisions, chose to enact ordinances banning “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines.

As part of the logic used in upholding the law from the 7th Circuit stated, “If a ban on semiautomatic guns and large-capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that’s a substantial benefit.”

Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia dissented, saying that lower courts have been ignoring Supreme Court precedents on Second Amendment rights. Still, it is highly unlikely the Court will agree to hear another Second Amendment case until there is substantial disagreement between the Circuit Courts.

Two weeks ago San Bernardino, California experienced a brutal and senseless terrorist attack. Within hours, and without any of the facts of the event, our President and other elected officials immediately called for more gun control. Universal background checks, restricting firearms sales to those on the Terror Watchlist and keeping “weapons of war” off our streets. None of which would have done anything to prevent what happened in San Bernardino.

Fueled by massive media coverage, inflammatory and misleading proclamations incited even more fear. The firearms had been “modified to make them more powerful”, they were “high powered rifles”, “weapons of war, barely modified”, “powerful assault weapons” and the shooters had “amassed an arsenal”. Add in a news report that a bullet button turns a semi-automatic rifle into a fully automatic one, and you’ve created a fable that almost begs for more government regulations.

California considers itself the gold standard of gun control in the nation, a model for everyone else to copy. This attack in our own backyard is a slap in the face to California politicians as it proves their gun control laws mean nothing to someone who is already breaking the law.

In 2013, California Senate Bill 374 was vetoed by the Governor. This Bill intended to classify all semiautomatic center-fire rifles that do not have a fixed magazine, including those with bullet buttons, with the capacity to accept no more than 10 rounds as an assault weapon and require registration. Like currently registered assault weapons, these firearms would be banned from being sold or transferred in California.

Here is where Friedman v. City of Highland Park comes into play. This law is not a registration of currently possessed firearms and a restriction of new sales; it is an outright ban. All current, legally owned firearms meeting the criteria must now be removed from the City.

The timing of this Supreme Court denial could not be worse. Coming just five days after the San Bernardino terrorist attack when anti-gun politicians were falling over each other to be the first to come up with something, anything, to appear stronger on gun control.

Emboldened by the success of Highland Park, California will no doubt copy and push it’s own version even further. Gone will be the registration scheme to be replaced by an outright ban. Currently registered California “Assault Weapons” will most certainly be targeted for an outright ban as well.

When – not if, but when – the new and expanded version of SB-374 is brought up in early 2016, we cannot count on a second Gubernatorial veto. In other words, No More Mr. Nice Guy.

Now is the time to get involved.

Bob

‪#oddstuffing #2ndAmendment‬, ‪#‎guncontrol‬, ‪#‎highlandpark‬, ‪#‎california‬, ‪#‎nomoremrniceguy‬ ‪#‎alicecooper‬