[The thing is, many would find this a humorous joke. I can't laugh through because honestly he nailed it.
I did see something else interesting last night on the news. A man was eager to get people who lost family in the Oso mudslide in front of state legislators to push for more logging regulations. He even stated while we don't have the facts currently, we do have emotional support and hopefully that should be enough for emergency measures.
Excuse me? I swear people would rather live in a world governed by emotion instead of reason and logic. They'd rather live by their feelings and intuition even if all facts, logic, and reason proved those things to be false.
Where did everyone go and how the hell can I get off the crazy train? -B]
I’ll summarize the full details real quick for everyone. A county in Oregon lost a federal grant for timber that was a large source of revenue for them. The county attempted to pass a tax levy to make up the difference, but it was voted down. Because of this, they cut law enforcement back because that’s the obvious area to reduce funding. *SMH* One of the officers who was forced to retire early because of this mess decides to create a neighborhood watch group that is basically performing some of the duties of law enforcement mainly focused around property crime. They’re not handing out tickets or arresting anyone, at least from what the article said.
It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out. There are obviously legal ramifications here. There are liability issues and then the question of what they do when they are in a situation where they should arrest a person. So far it seems like everything they’ve been involved in has been pretty harmless, but I’m sure that won’t last forever. While I don’t agree with the scope of law enforcement at times, I also don’t want to trivialize their job and make it sound like anyone can do it. Since it’s a prior officer that’s running this thing, I’m hoping that there is some good quality training going on and that the people doing this are prior MIL/LEO.
Some of the citizens are saying that the local government is cutting law enforcement to basically force their hand and get them to approve the levy. I haven’t seen their budget, but I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if this was the case. Regardless of whether or not there is enough money, I’m impressed with the citizens’ willingness to step up and get the job done. While law enforcement isn’t the first place I would think that we should have citizens stepping up to fill the gap, I am glad to see them doing what needs to be done, and I’m really hoping they do it right since this is the type of thing that can set a precedent going forward.
These are the people who consider themselves more enlightened than you or I and who think they have what it takes to rule your life. It’s like watching a retarded kid scream about how your tying your shoelaces wrong and then gets confused over the Velcro straps holding his sandals on his hands.
I said, “Well, you know, my shotgun will do better for you than your AR-15, because you want to keep someone away from your house, just fire the shotgun through the door.” Most people can handle a shotgun a hell of a lot better than they can a semiautomatic weapon in terms of both their aim and in terms of their ability to deter people coming.
All I have to say is yeah Joe, and then you find out it was your kid running up to the door afraid of the same noise you heard. How many different times can you give a rule 4 violation as good advice? Seriously, WTF Joe? -B]
Defending yourself is not a matter of “punishment.” You’re not out to correct your assailant’s behavior, you’re wanting to stop it, as quickly and effectively as possible, with the least collateral damage. Whatever does that is what you should do.
[I've never quite understood the method of thinking that ties self-defense into punishment. Can I not kill someone until after they've killed me? Is that the new standard now? When it comes to rape then, can a woman only rape her assailant back after she's been violated? Why is she not allowed to stopthe threat. Yes some times stopping the threat does involve the assailant's body reaching room temperature but that's the risk of their profession.
“I didn't kill him, he killed himself. I just carried the bullet for a while.”
The criminal made his choice and in the middle of the crime the victim can, and should, do all that he can to protect himself and family. Someone is threatening force against them and they are not and should not be required to be mind readers to determine if the threat is real or just words. If you use something that looks like a gun in a threatening manner, it's a gun, and I will not fault the individual who defends himself from you.
The criminal takes a risk that someone might defend himself, and if the criminal continues to fight even when presented with force being applied back from the victim, the onus for the outcome lies squarely with the aggressor. Stop blaming victims for the outcome of actions and choices made by criminals. -B]
So I have seen this before but I figure it’s a nice refresher.
Note the results, still think those little boxes you see will keep your property safe? Especially those quick access boxes some end up buying when they’re stuck in one of those states lacking in freedom and pushing tyranny. Still think the arguments are really about your safety or preventing theft?
If you think curious kids can’t figure out how to pick a lock, you obviously never saw me as a child. I figured out how to pick locks at first just with paper clips. Making my own tension fork and rake to pop simple locks. Eventually I got my hands on a real set. Yeah, beyond a real safe and educating your children, you’re not going to do much other than increase curiosity.
So consider this a public service announcement and a warning. If you’re using any of these items, be damn sure of their capabilities and weaknesses. In so doing, be sure to use them in a manner consistent with their abilities. I happen to fully agree with the presenters final conclusions.
This giveaway is not about gun ownership (which is cool by itself). It is about trying to help empower a woman to see herself in a new and powerful light and it is about encouraging her to take positive steps in her own life to help her be more free, more in control, more peaceful, more safe.