No Guns in the Library

I read this article posted by The War on Guns which tells about a law abiding citizen who went to the library armed with a pistol on his hip. He caused no trouble, did want he went there to do, and left. BORING!?!?!?! Apparently not, the fact this man had the audacity to come into a library armed caused such a ruckus that Library Director, Larry "I'm a Sheep" Frank, put into motion steps to get signs that say no guns allowed.

This story, while mundane and boring, brings so many anger inducing thoughts.

• Signs do not prevent crime or stop bad guys/gals!
• Signs let bad guys know good guys are unarmed!
  
• How does a law abiding citizen cause such an uproar?
• This is the reason concealed carry is so important.
  
• The sheepdog scares the sheep if he walks around with his teeth showing.

Those would be the headers of most of my thoughts. I will spare you the listing of my subheadings and just get down to the meat.

A sign doesn't do a damn thing. Just as laws are made to be broken; signs are made to be ignored. A sign does announce that there is a great chance that 99.99% of the people obeyed it so you can feel free to go do bad guy stuff. This story also shows that anyone with a gun is scary and it demonstrates the importance of keeping your firearm concealed. It makes the armed person less worried of what people think and it allows the sheep to keep grazing undisturbed.

Sick Thought or Teaching Moment?:

I would like to walk into a library, restaurant, or some other event with no security but a sign that doesn't allow individuals to bring their own security. I would then like to pull out a bright orange fake gun, something obvious, and here is the speech I would give:

A lot of you are dead!!! The ones who would have made it out alive would have had to do it while climbing over dead bodies. I walked by that sign with this gun and it did nothing to try and stop me. I was going to go shoot up the place across the street but it didn't have a sign so I was worried there might be someone with a gun over there. I figured in this place with a no gun sign only criminals would be carrying a firearm. So I came here where I know I can take at least 25% of you with me before I commit suicide because I am a depressed loser who blames all of you for my lack of a life. I got my idea after watching that guy in Pittsburgh who shot up that gym because the women wouldn't go out with him. Have a nice day!!!

I would then walk out and leave everyone to ponder what the hell just happened. I would never do this for the simple fact that I do not know the legal ramifications for such an act and I have no urge to go to jail much less prison. But it would sure be fun to see all the faces and be a fly on the wall afterward.

I am interested in knowing if any of my readers has a valid argument on why it should be illegal to carry a gun anywhere there is not armed security present for your protection? I add that caveat because I understand the need to prevent strangers from carrying guns in certain venues, but all those venues provide armed security, ie: Courts, White house, Congress.

British Ex-soldier faces jail for handing in gun

I can not find any sources that dispute this story as false or misleading. Every article I have found says the same exact thing. This is causing an uproar in England as it should. To go to jail for turning in something you found is ridiculous and a crime in itself. Glad this is not happening in the USA.

I have attached the article below.

Ex-soldier faces jail for handing in gun
Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 12:15

A former soldier who handed a discarded shotgun in to police faces at least five years imprisonment for "doing his duty".

Paul Clarke, 27, was found guilty of possessing a firearm at Guildford Crown Court on Tuesday – after finding the gun and handing it personally to police officers on March 20 this year.

The jury took 20 minutes to make its conviction, and Mr Clarke now faces a minimum of five year's imprisonment for handing in the weapon.

In a statement read out in court, Mr Clarke said: "I didn't think for one moment I would be arrested.

"I thought it was my duty to hand it in and get it off the streets."

The court heard how Mr Clarke was on the balcony of his home in Nailsworth Crescent, Merstham, when he spotted a black bin liner at the bottom of his garden.

In his statement, he said: "I took it indoors and inside found a shorn-off shotgun and two cartridges.

"I didn't know what to do, so the next morning I rang the Chief Superintendent, Adrian Harper, and asked if I could pop in and see him.

"At the police station, I took the gun out of the bag and placed it on the table so it was pointing towards the wall."

Mr Clarke was then arrested immediately for possession of a firearm at Reigate police station, and taken to the cells.

Defending, Lionel Blackman told the jury Mr Clarke's garden backs onto a public green field, and his garden wall is significantly lower than his neighbours.

He also showed jurors a leaflet printed by Surrey Police explaining to citizens what they can do at a police station, which included "reporting found firearms".

Quizzing officer Garnett, who arrested Mr Clarke, he asked: "Are you aware of any notice issued by Surrey Police, or any publicity given to, telling citizens that if they find a firearm the only thing they should do is not touch it, report it by telephone, and not take it into a police station?"

To which, Mr Garnett replied: "No, I don't believe so."

Prosecuting, Brian Stalk, explained to the jury that possession of a firearm was a "strict liability" charge – therefore Mr Clarke's allegedly honest intent was irrelevant.

Just by having the gun in his possession he was guilty of the charge, and has no defence in law against it, he added.

But despite this, Mr Blackman urged members of the jury to consider how they would respond if they found a gun.

He said: "This is a very small case with a very big principle.

"You could be walking to a railway station on the way to work and find a firearm in a bin in the park.

"Is it unreasonable to take it to the police station?"

Paul Clarke will be sentenced on December 11.

Judge Christopher Critchlow said: "This is an unusual case, but in law there is no dispute that Mr Clarke has no defence to this charge.

"The intention of anybody possessing a firearm is irrelevant."

When Terrorists talk I listen

My New Favorite Blogger

Please read the blog post pasted below, written by The Northern Muckraker. He is quickly becoming a favorite read and a man after my own heart.

I can not say it better so I will not add anything to it. Feel free to comment though and to check out Muckraker's site.

Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 25

Because brutal sociopaths like Vincent Scott, Gary Solomon and Marcus Solomon roam the streets of the metro area where we currently reside. These "men" beat and robbed a man simply because they felt a need to "get out some aggression", the trio apparently told Mesa, Arizona police.The total haul this group of feral parasites on normal society gained from this unprovoked attack on an innocent pedestrian, which left the victim with multiple injuries?

"Fritos, bean dip, M&Ms and a Kit Kat bar".

We certainly hope those tasty snacks were worth the years in prison these scumbags are facing for their senseless act.

No amount of proactive policing could have prevented this assault, and the cops certainly weren't around to interrupt these animals in the middle of carrying out their random, spur of the moment crime. If the victim had been legally armed with a handgun, the odds certainly would have been changed in his favor, and he just might have been able to successfully fend off his attackers before suffering injury.

Tell us again how firearms never benefit polite society at large or are simply of no use to victims of violent crime, Ms. Brady?

Bias in the news: Guilty until proven innocent

I found this on another blog: The War on Guns

If things went down as they are explained in the original article who do you think is at fault?

Apparently, the author or the editor saw the error of their ways. I doubt they understand the error, they understand that people were upset about the wording.

You just can't believe the idiocy of these people. Even the title makes it sound like the shooter is the criminal. How hard is it to realize that defending yourself is not a crime, but a right?


Original:




Edited:

Man shot in apparent Detroit road rage incident
Christine MacDonald / The Detroit News

Detroit -- A 33-year-old man is in critical condition at a local hospital after he was allegedly shot by another man following what appears to be a road rage incident in Detroit on Friday afternoon.

Two men -- the 33-year-old male who was shot and another driver, a 29-year-old man -- were traveling east on I-94 when police say the 33-year-old was cut off by the other driver, said Detroit Police Sgt. Eren Stephens. Both men exited the freeway at Cadieux and pulled up next to each other at a red light.

The older driver got out of his car, knocked out the other driver's window and began to pull the man out of the vehicle. The 29-year-old then shot at the 33-year-old, hitting him twice, Stephens said. The 29-year-old had a valid permit for the gun.

The 33-year-old was driven to the hospital by a female passenger and was in critical condition as of Friday night, Stephens said.

The 29-year-old remained at the scene of the shooting and was interviewed by police. A report will be forwarded to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office, which will determine if any charges will be filed, she said.

San Francisco Thinking

I am back in San Francisco and always gets my political juices flowing. I have not encountered any real liberalism today but I did catch a clip of a liberal radio program that was talking about weed and incredibly complaining about Obama not holding up his end of the liberal deal.

What I am thinking about is Obama bowing to Japan's emperor. What I read was that it is not acceptable for any foreign leader to bow to another foreign leader, even if it is the custom of that nations people. Some may think this is trivial in itself, but when you put all the stuff Obama has done together I see a trend.

Internationally:
- Apologized for American missteps with Muslim people.
- Stopped the miss shield.
- Won't engage in Afghanistan.
- Closing (maybe) Guantanamo.
- Trying terrorists civilly as if they have the same rights as Americans.
- Going after the CIA for following orders, orders that arguably saved lives.

Internally:
- Agrees with Mexico that weapons dirt bag drug dealers use are coming from America and that it is some how our fault.
- Pushing health care that maybe, but not certainly, 51% of Americans want but 100% will be forced to pay.
- Bought GM and Chrysler then gave them to the Unions who put them out of business in the first place.
- Lied about not increasing taxes for the middle or lower class.
- Lied about transparency.
- Giving money to increase certain businesses sales.
- Increased the time people can be on unemployment.

I was going to link for every point, but am too lazy. Google them!

My point here is that Obama seems to care about what foreign countries think and wants to take away from every day American citizens.

I am not a fool. I know that Obama inherited a mess. I also know that his plan is not going to fix anything in America and I know he is weakening our position in the world.

But here is the tough part that WE, the American Citizens, have to realize. It is our fault more than his. We spend with no regard to how we are going to pay. We look the other way when friends and family make horrible decisions. We spend money like it grows on trees and forget that there is a tab to be paid later.

Only a small percentage of us vote. We complain about everything but do nothing. We as a people always think that someone else will take care of it.

We rely on our government for far too much and then bitch about about how intrusive they are. We live in a place that is below sea level and think that it is some how the governments fault that we are drowning, yet the majority of us didn't make any sort of plan to survive.

We forget that the government is US. We, the people, make up the government. We think that only "those" people can run for government. ANYONE CAN RUN FOR A GOVERNMENT POSITION. It may not be easy but it can be done and if you succeed, well you then become "them".

Become a part of the solution, not a part of the problem. Start small, talk with your friends, then join the PTA, attend town halls and city counsel meetings, write letters. Get educated and just do something!!!

Chavez making ready for War

I wrote a blog on Myspace back in 2008 (see below) when Chavez first started making a push to become president for life of Venezuela. From the start of Chavez making the papers I new this guy was trouble and he has steadily been making waves ever since. I do not believe I am omnipotent but I am a student of history and this guy just followed the path of so many other tyrants we all learned about in grade school. Slowly take away freedoms, silence decent, nationalize resources, manufacture an enemy and secure permanent power. All five objectives have been met.

Now what is the next move? Expand!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573048,00.html

Chavez has been preaching to his people and the world that the USA is going to invade his country to take the oil. He is now provoking a war with our ally in an attempt to make his proclamation come true. If or when we come to Columbia's aid he will stand before the UN and declare that he was right and that the Evil Empire is doing exactly as he said they would.

Chavez wants to be the next Castro. He took power democratically and supposed voting secured it for life. The legislation that repealed term limits was packed with incentives for the poor. Increased taxpayer support and government hand outs. It was basically like saying if you allow me to be president for life I will guarantee you make more money. Ah, but alas just like all socialist countries Venezuela is having issues with providing power and water to its people.

Is this new threat from Chavez the test of Obama that Joe Biden warned us about before the election? Maybe, lets hope for our sake that the President does not fail this test. We may want him to fail in his fundamentally changing America, but we do not want him to fail when it comes to international threats to America.

So I wanted to write a blog on Chavez over a year ago but got bogged down on my reference to him and Hitler. If you know anything about Hitler other then only the war and his killing Jews you might know what I am referencing. Remember Hitler was ELECTED. I missed having my views dated and having everyone see them come to fruition like they are. [My wife] and I had an argument about him [Chavez] when he nationalized utilities and oil. So she knows of my foresight.

Oddly, Chavez lost an election that would have made him president for life. I am not sure how this happened. Either democracy won or something fishy is going on and he is pulling one over the world's eyes. We will have to see. [He ran the legislation a second time and surprise it passed]

Currently, Chavez is preparing to start a war in South America. He is treating the death of a REBEL (FARC) leader as if he was Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria. For those of you who did not see the one freaking blip on the news, Colombian commandos raided a Rebel camp and killed Raul Reyes, leader of FARC. FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) was created by the Columbia Communist Party in 1964. The controversial part is that they crossed over into Ecuador where he was hiding. Chavez has sent troops to the Columbian border and is saying that Reyes was a "good revolutionary leader". Information found on a laptop retrieved from this raid or another, not sure which, documents Chavez giving millions to the rebels. This is a world leader supporting insurgents if you will.

The Question: Why is the media not covering this more? Will Chavez succeed in starting a war? Is this part of his plan to be leader for life? Hitler did something very similar, coincidence?

-Warthogspec on Myspace Blog Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Army Massacre

I want everyone who reads this to take a moment of silence and remember those who died yesterday at the hands of someone they called a brother. I didn't write about this yesterday and am hesitant to write on this now. It is too soon to why this happened and I do not want to join the millions of speculators out there. We do know that an officer with a middle eastern name and "peaceful" religion committed a crime worse than just murder. He became a traitor to the people he took an oath with and shot them down like dogs.

The media has started speculating on the reasons for his betrayal. He was an alcoholic, he was a jihadist, he didn''t want to go to war, he was against the war, blah blah blah.

I do not know why he did this, but I do know he is a coward.

Pay attention to the news and watch how the different anchors talk about him. Listen to what they say and what they don't say. Just the big three cable news and multiple local stations has told me a lot about the mentality of either the anchors individually or the station as a whole.

Take a look and comment below on what you find. Regardless of what station it is on, I want to hear what you hear. Provide links if you can to provide proof. If you can not, then make sure you give good details and state whether it is your opinion or quote from them.

NPR blogger poll

I received an email this morning from my cousin about a NPR blogger poll asking for an opinion on whether Fox News is a real news organization. If the email is to be believed the numbers were against Fox News. By the time I went to take a look, Fox News was 86% in favor.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2009/10/in_white_house_vs_fox_news_war.html


Normally, I would not care about a blog poll, but I am fascinated. Has the power of the internet become so powerful that an email being circulated around by everyday people can change something like this? Do people actually read these emails and act on them? If I am understanding this data correctly, then people do.

It is also fair to assume that the opposition to Fox News also sent out an email and asked people to vote. If that is the case then doesn't that mean the poll starts have some meaning? Not scientifically of course, but meaning none the less.

This is interesting to me and if you have any thoughts on this or think it is insignificant say drop a note.

Health Care Shoved Down Your Throat

The town hall meetings that caused a stir over the summer have come and gone. Now that there is no easy forum for everyday American's to express themselves the time that has passed has allowed the politicians to forget all about it. Where once the bills were thought to be dead or dying they are now alive and thriving.

My thoughts are now dwelling on the fact that 51% vs 49% does not make a majority vote. It doesn't make sense that 51% of a population can have that much control over the other 49%.

Who has the power in this country? So called moderates. These are the people who really have the power and unfortunately, I feel that these "moderates" are the idiots who are easily swayed by the loudest voice coming out of their TVs. This week it might be Glenn Beck and next week Keith Obermann. Either way, they are uneducated to the issues and easily manipulated. These are the people who make those polls swing all over the place.

Lets use a rough made up number and say that 45% of people will always vote Democrat and 45% will always vote Republican. That means the remaining 10% are the decision makers. I do not think the numbers are close to being accurate but the percentage of decision makers are still a minority compared to the other too.

So what does this mean? It means that our countries direction is dictated by the minority. A minority that is flaky and easy manipulated. It is why the Democrats and Republicans are constantly swapping power.

What's the answer? Go back to the basics. Bring the power back to the states. Let the people of the state vote on whether they want to foot the bill to cover everyone who needs health care. Make it so 51% is not the majority and instead 75% is needed to pass a new law.

Add a run off system to our election so that when Dem, Rep, Independent, Libertarian, and Green party candidates run for office, the people can vote for who they want without fear. The candidates with the two highest number of votes run against each other. Then a person who preferred the libertarian but would take the Republican or the Green who would accept a Democrat, still get a voice and don't have to worry about their vote allowing someone they hate to get the majority. Think George Bush Sr. in '92 or Al Gore in 2000. Bush had Perot who siphoned votes and Gore had Nader who did the same. The people who voted their conscience and went for the third party candidate lost entirely because of it.

Conclusion: We a screwed and I see no end in site. No one trusts anyone, personal responsibility is gone, the hands are all reaching out for free gifts, and not one politician has come forward to say STOP WE NEED TO STOP.

I will campaign, fund raise, and vote for any politician regardless of party who comes out and tells this country the truth. That we need to stop spending, stop giving money away both inside and outside of this country, and that things are going to hurt worse before they get better. We, America as a whole, had a great run, but now we have to pay the credit card bill. Just like a family looking over their finances and realizing they are spending more then they make, we must tighten the wallet strings, cut our spending, get a second job, and start saving.

Things are not looking up, there is no silver lining, and there is no one in Washington who gets it. Do you at home get it?