Search Results for: open carry

Open Carry and Ass Clowns…

There is some yahoo running his mouth currently that those who open carry for any other reason than practicality are ass-clowns
Then another yahoo came in to say something that people exercising
their rights caused California legislators to double down on stupid.

Here’s the thing, when people open carry firearms, 99.99999% of the time not a damn thing happens
Most of the time no one cares.  When someone does care they are so
irrational about it it would be funny if it wasn’t for the danger they
create by calling 911 one in a panic.  Here’s some extra qestions that
are valid:

  • Is the gun in his hand?
  • No, then what the hell is the problem currently?
  • Is he physically assaulting someone or provoking attack?
  • Other than the fact he has a gun, what is he doing that is illegal or worth of suspicion?

Guns being openly carried by law abiding citizens is not a problem. 
Yes some times cops are harassed by people saying, he has a gun.  Good
one’s just inform them it’s legal and carry on about their business.  OK one’s ask you to cover up to save them time.  Bad one’s falsely try and arrest the carrier.

Open carry though helps desensitize those who would go into PSH over
the sight of someone carrying a gun.  Doubly so if you actually get
either of those first two officers.  (The second officer isn’t really a
bad guy, he’s just tired of answering the same question over and over. 
He proves his intent when after covering he says thanks and doesn’t even
bother to ask for your permit.)  The problem we get into is that we
have those third officers, who by their illegal actions reinforce the
PSH as being positive.

The open carrier has every right to exercise his rights within the
law.  If a decent population doesn’t exercise the right, just the same
as your legislators used the hammer of legislative force because you
did, they have no reason to preserve the right.  If no one exercises it,
why do we need to have it legal right, it’s just those nasty bad men
who do it then!  This also ignores the fact that California is honestly
not the best example to be using.  But that’s beside the point given
that the law they changed resulted in a legal case to push for shall
issue. 

Back to the overall theme and out of specifics; it is not the fault
of the open carrier that the officer charged with enforcing the law
decided to break the law and violate his rights for merely exercising
them.  It is not the fault of the open carrier that the officer decided
to reinforce the PSH as being positive.  It is the fault of their
leadership and departments for allow their officers to get away with
that behavior.  Why do they get away with that behavior, because we have
men like Pincus who say open carriers are ass-hats.

Are there actual ass-hats who open carry that I wish they shouldn’t? 
Yes there are, but they’re not actually as common as someone makes them
out to be.  As Robb said,


Do
the loud people get attention? Yes, they will and you won’t be able to
stop them by making their goals harder to achieve. Instead of expending
the energy ripping the few, problem OC’ers because they’re a danger to
your rights, use that effort to call your representatives and explain to
them why they should support the 2A. Do like I do and host calm, non
threatening Open Carry events.

The trick is to speak softly and still be louder than the fools.

Instead of bitching about people who open carry and calling attention
to open carry as if all who do it politically are “ass-clowns” that are
nothing but detriments to the fight for the Second Amendment, step up
and talk about the good they’ve done.  It’s not my fault that some idiot
doesn’t understand that discretion is the better part of valor, and
that in chess the game is to not loose
Calling me an ass-clown because I’m trying to help desensitize those
people while also being considerably more comfortable while carrying
doesn’t exactly win you any points either.  It paints you as nothing
more than your generic FUD of the same type as those who gifted us the
GCA 1968, the Hughes Amendment, and the ’94 assault weapons ban.  Guess
what, shut the hell up, go sit in the corner, no one gives a crap what
you have to say.

Doubly so since you’re so smart as to put cameramen down range next
to a target with someone shooting live ammunition, it begs the question,
who listens to the idiot when he speaks?  He obviously doesn’t have any
credibility, integrity is questionable since he’s providing ammunition
to the enemy, and his attitude is in the gutter with regards to those on
his own team.  Maybe he should go sign up for Smoke and Chunder,
obviously with how he feels open carriers are detrimental to the gun
rights movement Pincus and the Admin should get along great.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m pissed when an open carrier does something
stupid
.  Especially when they’re stupid and they loose.  However I
direct my anger directly at that specific target.  I spend my time
making a lesson out of them to educate others.  I call them out as a
specific example because they are.  They are not common, they are are
rather the exception.  Open carriers as a whole are not the problem, no matter their reason for carrying openly.

*I realize Pincus probably didn’t mean to lump all open carriers under that umbrella but that’s exactly what he did.  That’s why you need to be very careful with your words when you’re directing an insult at someone.  You need to make sure it’s directed in the correct direction.

Unofficial Open Carry Non-event 2011

The Husband and I were planning on participating in the non-event a day early while at the Palouse car show. But, we all know that no plan survives first contact with the enemy.  Grocery shopping was going to follow the car show, but it was delayed by a day.  I went out by myself to Wal-Mart and Winco and open carried the entire time.  Though I did not get actual action shots since I was going about my business as usual and therefore had no camera.  However, I did get a shot before I left.

June 5 2011 oc

Wal-mart was a complete non-event with maybe a look, but then again I always smile and act pleasant whether I am openly carrying or not.  Win-co for the most part was a non-event.  I was going about my business choosing bacon when a gentleman rounded the corner and almost immediately said something along the lines of “ now that’s cute” in reference to my .357 snubbie safely secured to my hip.  A very long conversation ensued and sadly the man has a lot of misguided knowledge.  To be nice, I listen to what he had to say.

This man felt that concealed carry on the person was much better than open carrying or even purse carrying, which is what I normally do as I don’t have any other option for the time being.  He wanted to make sure I knew the dangers of open carry with respect to someone approaching me and removing my side arm and using it against me.  As I open carry with a Bianchi AccuMold® Belt Slide holster, I would know if someone were to try to take it and act accordingly.  As for purse carry, the man mentioned razor blades being used to slice the purse straps and stealing the purse before you even knew what happened.  My purse happens to be a backpack style and I think that would be rather difficult to remove when actually worn as a backpack as the straps would be harder to slice without slicing the person carrying it.  There were many more things he mentioned, but I don’t really feel like going into all that detail.

I think he was a little disappointed when he learned that I was married because he is looking for a girlfriend who shares his interest in guns.  He asked me if I knew any single ladies around who are interested in guns.  I don’t and as he had a mullet, I’m not sure many woman would go for him, even if he is super nice.

I ended up getting home much later than planned and the husband was actually worried that he was going to have to bail me out of jail.  Usually my grocery shopping trips last about an hour and a half including drive time.  This one, however, lasted almost twice as long because of the man at Win-co being excited to see a woman out carrying a firearm.

When open carrying, you are a diplomat

The whole open carry incident in Michigan is getting annoying and it’s becoming annoying for numerous reasons.  I stopped commenting on different threads because it seemed the majority of people just lacked critical thinking ability.  It turned into a pointing game with people screaming that people were actually the equivalent of Joan Peterson and the Brady Campaign.  All because they voiced their OPINION that carrying a long arm was unnecessary and runs a serious risk of causing damage.  As Robb said, “you need to be prepared for the consequences”, that includes having people angry at you that would normally support you.

This morning Uncle posted that Michigan Open Carry has now been served with a restraining order and civil suit.  Fan-freaking-tastic,  from reading the suit I have a strong feeling that MOC is going to win, however there are some questions the court is going to have to settle and the win isn’t cinched.  The big item is who exactly the preemption law actually applies to, and does it actually restrict the library.  If you read the law word for word the answer is the library is not restricted. 

What many fail to realize is there is absolutely no correlation between the law and justice. Laws are not created for justice, and if there was a correlation it would imply that there could be no law which could violate our natural rights.  So when someone goes and picks a fight like this it’s unnerving.  It is unnerving because those who started it usually didn’t actually think the whole episode through as if they were on the other side.  Which leads me to why many people are upset over the incident, and why Breda, PDB, and others made posts regarding being on your best behavior.

What happened in Michigan was unfortunate and totally avoidable.  The major complaint has been about behavior and how people acted.  It sounds as if the people who were involved were not regular patrons of the library, were not known by the library staff, and the all around behavior created the mess that we now see.

The individuals involved in this incident could have easily preceded their "political action" by actually regularly using the library and being regular customers.  Got to know the library staff and talk with them prior to even open carrying in the building.  While they did this they could still conceal carry as to be armed, but plant the seed of trust.  Instead some loitered as irregular customers, who from the description of the article weren’t really in the library for related business, openly carrying weapons, and refused to leave until the police asked them to.*  Being unknown to the staff or anyone else around, while openly carrying a holstered firearm shouldn’t be cause for alarm, it does panic some, especially those whose support we are trying to win.  It is doubly compounded when said individual dresses in such a way to fit the media stereotype.  You should look like someone you would want your daughter to marry, professional and kempt.

If they had introduced themselves to the staff prior to the actual event, become known to staff, they could easily have protested the wrongful regulations of the library without any serious negative effects.  The conversation between the protesters and staff would have probably been much more open and comfortable.  When approached by the staff, the staff would have been more comfortable and the staff would also been more receptive of the information the carriers were conveying.  The staff could have also just told patrons, “Don’t worry about it, they’re regulars.”  Not to mention the fact if the protestors actually had business to conduct in the library it probably would have aided their case.  I’m willing to bet none of the individuals from MOC involved in this incident even have a library card for that branch. 

This was not people acting in a normal capacity (conducting every day business), it was group of armed people gathering in a location as a form of political protest.  While within their rights and the law to do so, their lack of planning, forethought, and actions prior to the event have created a mess of legal litigation and negative public relations which is very damaging to both open carry and well as the right to keep and bear arms in general.  I like being able to open carry and when I hear about events like this, it pisses me off because instead funding serious action, the community is now going to also be funding a skirmish that is actually going to result in zero legal gain, possibly lose ground, and could have been dealt with easily by thinking and diplomacy.

Michigan law was in their favor, at that point you don’t need to be a dick, you need to be diplomatic.  It’s a policy problem, not a law problem.  They were dicks because they didn’t properly engage their targets in polite conversation, they may have tried, but they had created a hostile atmosphere that shut down the people they were trying to talk to.  Going “It’s my right” doesn’t change this fact, it also doesn’t alter the fact that some of those that shut down may have been positive if it was a pistol to start with, or hadn’t been loitering in a section they probably weren’t really interested in.  It’s a consequence of the decisions they made.

All I want is for people to think ahead and use the grey matter between their ears, and most especially show some empathy towards the people we’re trying to persuade.  Be tactful and think your actions through.  In this case they took the frog and tossed it into the pot of boiling water and some people seem surprised that the frog wanted out.  Now the gun community has to fight a battle here, for a right already won back, because someone couldn’t just think and be diplomatic with the library.  It’s much easier to convince them if you know them on good grounds first.  While this won’t work for every occasion, in this case it was certainly possible, and it’s true 99% of the time.

*Some have said they were never asked to leave, others claim they left immediately when asked.  I find it hard to believe this brouhaha is happening if they had left immediately.

**Also JayG nailed another thing that pissed me off on the head.

*** Just found three updates from Robb.

Open Carry Weekend…

As usual, nothing happened!  The wife and I went out to lunch after the USPSA match specifically because it was “open carry weekend”.  TMW did it last year as well, for us though it’s really just more of the same.  I normally either open carry or concealed carry, the difference is whether or not I’m wearing a coat.  What was different for today was that laziness won out and I just continued wearing my whole rig after the match.

I snugged down the the holster to increase the retention but didn’t bother changing for a different holster and left the stack of 4 magazines on my left hip.  I know you can barely see the gun, black shirt plus black gun equals find Waldo.

IMAG0268

I will say, yes that shirt was picked on purpose… You shoot the paper bastards twice, other wise they call out Charlie Mike, and I don’t know why they call his name so much when I shoot.

The wife was open carrying as well:

IMAG0269

I don’t know if Erin has her shirt or not.  If she doesn’t, she should go get one.  No one said anything, I think a couple people noticed and I just smiled as I walked by.  I think for the most part the 4 spare magazines drew more attention that the gun itself.

Cops, Parades, and Open Carry

No surprise to the rest of us though absolutely NOTHING happened.  While at the Genesee community days today the wife and I were open carrying.  There were numerous sheriffs deputies and state patrol walking around the area.  While there we saw something quite interesting form in the sky.

DSC_0823

We stopped and chatted with the local sheriff after spotting a funnel cloud and took the opportunity for pictures.

DSC_0830

We actually chatted with him for an extended period of time about open carry and different things he’s run into.  Evidently people often come up to him when working events like this and the county fair informing him of people who are carrying firearms.  His response to them is usually along of lines of, "and this is a problem because.”  It reminded me of the Pullman PD officer I met who looked at the person freaking out and pointed at the gun on his hip and said, “I have a gun, what’s the difference?”

DSC_0831

It’s Idaho and as he put it, “It’s all that remains of the Western frontier.”  It’s talking with officers like him that reminds me while some are driving the us versus them wedge, it is by no means all officers doing it.  Especially since he has evidently gone to Boomershoot.  I told him he needs to come again.

To further put the icing on the cake, I gave Mike one of my blogger cards.  He had mentioned having a holster shirt but couldn’t remember the manufacturer.  After I was going to finish this post I was going to email him for the brand.  In my email I just got a message from him.  He has one of these and really likes it.  Anywhere else that whole exchange would probably have been forgotten.

There was a nice car show, here’s a simple set I did.

ChevyBelair

I got a bunch of pictures from the car show as well, but those will be processed slowly and will probably end up dumped on my photography site.

Open Carry and BBQ

Some friends have a barbeque joint in Moscow, and they give a 10% discount for open carrying.  I was in Moscow so I decided I’d stop in, and ended up hanging out for four hours.  While I was there I couldn’t help but take pictures.

Their wall of awesome.

DSC_5412

Since there were three Kimber’s in the room we decided to have a group photo, can’t argue with some gun p0rn.

DSC_5410

The left full size is a Custom II, the right is an original Custom.  The left two can also be seen here.  The Big Bear is an awesome sandwich, but seriously, cutting it in half is a pain in the ass.  The thing is freaking massive.

DSC_5400

They also sponsor a local hockey team, with the most awesome name ever.

DSC_5385

If you root for the other team, you’re wrong. For those who noticed yes, they do have beer on tap,

DSC_5374

and they have many signs now advertising it.

DSC_5415

Beer is served the way god intended.  Chilled and in mason jars.

DSC_5413

If you haven’t been there, I highly suggest it;  If you went there previously prior to the new ownership, go back, it is wonderful now.

[end shameless plug]

*note: I was in no way compensated or paid for this, it’s just that awesome, and I like the barbeque and the owners that much! Seriously.

An Open Response to Joan Peterson

Joan,

One must be very careful when writing a response.  If you’re not careful you can come across as two possible things:

  1. A hypocrite
  2. Crazy

Your response (link warning) does both of those quite handedly.  So I am not sure you will be able to understand any of this or comprehend the logical reasoning, but as one of the men who is responsible for what the CSGV considers the most offensive response I can’t sit back and ignore this.  I cannot sit back and ignore it as you spread lies and attack those who are my friends.  My comments will remain open as always, and the only thing to be deleted from this thread will be SPAM, personal attacks, and things that wouldn’t be allowed in a decent society.

So first let me apologize since I have no doubt this post is going to go Kevin Baker.  So let’s get the broad facts out-of-the-way.


Fact:  On the 8th of January 2012 there was a  Brady Campaign organized vigil held for victims of Gun violence.  The Brady Campaign defined this vigil as being for victims of gun violence.  This statement was issued in a Youtube video posted December 18th, 2011.

“On January 8th, we’re focusing on people. Real people, men, women, and children.  Mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, sons and daughters, friends and coworkers, Americans, taken too soon by gun violence.  On January 8th we ask you to take part in a nation wide candle light vigil to remember those who have been lost.  And to let our elected leaders know that we want action to prevent these tragedies….”

Those words are right straight out of the video from the Brady Campaign, and the video emphasizes that “Too Many Victims” was just about gun violence.

Update: Further the website (link warning) also stated:

“Imagine stopping a bullet before it kills a child. Impossible? Not with
your help! All across America people are coming together to save lives
from preventable gun violence. Will you join them, and the Brady
Campaign, as we host a nationwide candlelight vigil to honor victims of
gun violence?”

via Joe


Fact:  Weer’d on or about the 28th of December issued a statement that gun-rights advocates should participate and memorialize all violence, not just gun violence.

So on January 8th I ask everybody to post a picture of a lit candle and you carry gun. Because lit candles don’t do a whole lot but cast a meager amount of light…but a loaded gun in the hands of lawful citizens can do wonders to protect innocent lives from harm.

Also “Gun Violence” is a bogus and made-up term, so on January 8th I ask you all to light a candle to stop VIOLENCE, and show you have the means to do just that.


Fact: On the 8th of January a pair of gun bloggers and a group of USPSA competitors created a video of their vigil to violence.  This was a vigil to all violence, not just gun violence.  Shooters iterated how candles don’t stop violence.  One shooter, myself, relayed a personal story.

Both of my parents had defensive gun uses, it wasn’t a candle that stopped the violence, it was a gun.

It closed with remembrance to two victims of violence.

A candle would not have helped Kim’s husband who was stabbed.

Nor would it have helped her grandmother who was violently beaten for her purse.

That video focused on remembering violence and illustrating two important facts.

  1. You don’t have to be a victim.  You can fight back.
  2. There are more victims out there than just victims of “gun violence”.

Fact: There was a very nasty response to our vigil for all victims of violence with our statement of how we refuse to be a victim.

image_2_3

This included name calling and another outing rampage by the CSGV.  The CSGV on their Facebook also twisted words attempting to turn our vigil into something it was not.

CSGV-Correction

image via Miguel


Fact:  The Anti-Rights supporters have a history of threatening rhetoric and ill will towards who have different view points.  Unlike you, when I make a statement, I present facts and evidence to prove it.

CSGV_Harm1

This isn’t a one time occurrence either.

CSGV_Harm2

See this post from Joe as well for even more.


Now lets talk about your response.  Your response towards Jennifer shows your lack of critical thinking.  Writing in red is Joan’s own words.

So Jennifer thinks no one would light a candle for Lydia? Who says? Why didn’t Jennifer come to one of our vigils and light a candle for Lydia? Because she would rather attack the vigils which were in honor and memory of shooting victims. So, Jennifer-sorry you missed our vigils. We would welcome you.

Did you even read the story of Lydia?  Joan, you stated right there in your own words that Lydia wasn’t welcome.  The Brady Campaign video as shown above in the facts that Lydia wouldn’t count as a victim in your vigil.  Lydia wasn’t a victim of “gun violence” so why would she be included?

There is only one option as to why you would want other victim classes to appear at your vigil for gun violence.  You want to dance in their blood as well to make it appear they are victims of gun violence to provide you another political tool.

The real reason you dislike Jennifer’s post is because it shows your bias against other victims of violence.  Jennifer herself is a victim, yet you attack her without thinking about what she is saying.

You specifically call out comments that prove what I have said above.  My personal favorite is that you attacked the comment from A Girl and Her Gun.

That is more powerful than anything Joan or the likes of her could ever say.You are the one I admire. The one who fights for the victims and for the fight against violence. I am immensely thankful I am getting to get to know you. Also, Joan is stupid.

A Girl and Her Gun is another victim of violence Joan.  You even point it out earlier in your post as if some how citing it makes it irrelevant.

The truth is though it’s that other victims of violence make you uncomfortable Joan.  They illustrate that Gun Violence is a horrible metric and ignores a large segment of the population.  Gun violence implies that those victims are some how worth more than someone who was violated without the use of a gun.

You say the following:

These are the people who read my blog and then go and comment on other people’s blogs. These are the people who the NRA represents. These are the people who think they can threaten, demean, name-call, abuse, belittle, and mock. During and after the candlelight vigils  to honor victims of gun violence, the gun rights extremists ramped up their rhetoric.

When did we threaten, demean, name-call, abuse, belittle or mock?  We didn’t ramp up our rhetoric, we called for remembering all victims of violence, not just the one’s you find politically convenient.  Which brings us to the next part of your statement.

Victims make them nervous. They don’t like victims. They say we are “dancing in the blood of victims” when we light candles and ring bells. What’s that all about anyway? It’s a statement made often.

I’m down right offended at that statement.  I absolutely care about anyone who is a victim.  I will do anything and everything to help them recover.  What we don’t like, and despise, is some victims being treated as if they are some how not significant or worthy of notice.  We don’t like the fact that anyone has become a victim in any type of crime.  Victims, the real ones, we love and support.  What we do want to accomplish is to lower the victimization rate.  Where you would prefer the law-abiding disarmed, we would prefer them to fight back.  We are willing to spend our time and money to help people not become victims.

Here is a nice presentation of the differences between our culture and yours with regards to how we treat victims.

Now why would I make a comment about “real victims”?  Well it’s because in your effort to inflate your gun violence statistics you include criminals in your count.  Criminals such as the man who broke into a woman’s house with a 12 inch hunting knife after she just lost her husband.  The woman shot and killed the attacker, yet you include him as a “Victim of Gun Violence”.  You know who was the real victim in that incident?  The poor woman who was not breaking the law and was forced into a situation to defend herself and her child.

Who really cares about victims Joan?  I wanted that woman and her child to survive.  I wanted that store clerk at the Kroger’s robbery to remain unharmed.  You however step up and defend the criminal.  You wanted that poor woman to be shot so she could be another clear-cut victim for you to exploit for political gains.  That’s why you’re a blood dancer.  You prey upon the suffering of others to push your political agenda.  Even with the positive outcome, you actively pursued the incident in furthering gun control.

There is a distinct difference in reaction after a horrible event occurs between our cultures Joan.  While we immediately lower our head in mourning, sad at what we have lost.  You go into overdrive pushing political legislation, giddy inside at the fuel it provides to pull at the emotional strings of the public.  You know when people are emotional they very rarely are thinking rationally.

Then you continue with:

What these folks don’t see is that their rigid resistance to any common sense gun laws that might actually prevent some of the shootings in this country results in more victims. Do they want more shooting victims? It’s odd that they don’t see how failure to do something has resulted in more victims.

That’s the thing Joan, we care about all victims.  Even more than that we want to enable people to have a choice and not be forced into victimhood.  As for the last sentence, your assumption is that doing anything is some how good.  What if you’re actions actually raise violent crime?  Oh that’s right, you would consider more overall crime for less gun crime a win.

And then, cynically, they try to find their own victims. The truth is that there are too many victims and they know it.

Are you questioning whether or not A Girl and Her Gun or Jennifer are victims of violence?  If so Joan, that’s just so wrong it’s not even funny.  You’re less of a victim than they are since they both experienced it in the first person, they have the point of view of your sister, not yourself.  Now if you’re not questioning that, are you saying we can’t find victims of Gun Control?   Because lets ask Suzanna Hupp about that one.  Honestly any victim in a gun free zone is a victim of gun control.  They have had their choice regarding their own self-defense made for them.

There are too many victims and it’s baffling that someone would be saying that victims should be disarmed.

So to the pro gun bloggers who find it amusing to mock victims and survivors of gun violence, your words are here for all to see and they aren’t pretty. They portray a group of people who seem to believe that anything can be written with no consequences. Their voices represent a few loud, obnoxious and offensive people who are attempting to influence public policy in our country. Shame on anyone for listening to the voices of these people. We should all be offended.

Again, you say we were mocking, where were we mocking?  Our words aren’t pretty because we’re telling the truth Joan.  You don’t find them pretty because the facts don’t support your false view of the world.  As for our voices only representing a few loud people, here’s a loud dose of truth.  Our impromptu effort that was completely unorganized resulted in well over a hundred of blog posts talking about victims they know and how they themselves are going to refuse to be a victim.  So if we’re in the minority, why isn’t our video disliked overwhelmingly?

That’s the difference between us Joan, you memorialize the past and twist history to infringe the rights of others.  We on the other hand memorialize, learn, and act.  We learned from our friends and family who were victims.  We learned that there is evil in the world and you don’t know when it will arrive on your door step.

You attempt to shame people for seeking more knowledge on the subject.  Here I am reading your post, I find it deplorable that someone could so readily come to the defense of criminals by attacking the law-abiding, but I’m not saying you don’t have a right to say it.  You’re upset because you don’t want people to see the truth.  You don’t want people to realize that they don’t have to be a victim, that they can fight back, and if they do fight back they can win.  You want us to be silent, well many of us would rather speak up because we find our lives worth it.

And one last thing- I wonder how the bloggers and the people who comment on them would like to see things like this said about them in public? It’s something to consider before posting offensive things about another person. Do people like this think they can say anything on the internet? Do they know the person on the other end of the offensive and rude comment are humans with feelings and families and friends who fear for them when they see stuff like this? There’s the thing about “turning the other cheek” and there’s the thing about “doing unto your neighbors”. Those are things I learned in my church and practice every day.

I don’t hide Joan.  I post blogs under my real name.  If you’re offended by us saying you don’t have to be a victim I suggest some serious therapy.  Who wants more victims in the world?  As for turning the other cheek and doing unto your neighbors, we do that.  We do it better than your side possibly can.

You, you who hate guns, you gave me nothing.
No hope.
No tools.
All that was offered me was a life of fear, of resentment, of bitterness, of dependence…
The gun community has offered me hope and strength, and courage.
They have taught me to have belief in myself.
They have asked nothing of me in return and, yet, I would give them my life.
Funny thing is, they would never ask me to.
This is where I belong.
These are my people.

As for myself personally I stop and help people all the time.  I’m also ready should that person in need of help actually be a predator preying upon the good.  The best compliment I ever received was not even directed at me, it was someone explaining my character to someone else, “He’s an Eagle Scout both literally and figuratively.”  I am the guy that goes and shovels his elderly neighbors driveway and then turns around and helps the single mother next door with hers.  I’m the guy who will get up and Oh Dark Thirty and come get you because you just had an auto wreck and you’re car is totaled.  I am the guy who will go out of his way to help anyone.  I am not the guy however who will stand to the side and let evil triumph.  I am not the guy who will surrender to criminals who have violated me and thus surrendered the right for me to be civil to them.  I don’t know where it says in the Bible that I should surrender Gods greatest gift to a criminal.

I am reminded of a lesson told by OldNFO recently.

One evening an old Cherokee told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside people.
He said, “My son, the battle is between two wolves inside us all.
“One is Evil –  It is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.
“The other is Good –  It is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith.”
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: “Which wolf wins?”
The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”

Think long and hard about which wolf you are feeding Joan.  Our hand is extended to everyone Joan, any victim can come to us seeking help, and we will help them.  I will live my life with zero regrets and I resent people trying to force regrets upon me.  In the words of Sean Sorrentino:

When I reach the Pearly Gates, I want the first thing I will hear to be “Unload and show clear.” I don’t ever want to hear, “Why weren’t you carrying your gun?” Or worse “Because you weren’t carrying, your wife will be along as soon as her killer finishes up.”

If I were to arrive in heaven prematurely and not have fought every step of the way I feel that god would be disappointed that I would waste such a wonderful gift.  Those who would force others to waste that gift are most guilty of that sin.

I also wonder if these folks have mothers, sisters, children, brothers who see what they write and what they would think about their father, brother, son or daughter writing such vile things on the internet for all to see. At least I know that my integrity is in tact because I don’t choose to deploy tactics such as these. No comments will be published from pro gun activists on this post.

Lastly Joan, my mom does read my blog.  She sees exactly what I write.  Sadly my father passed away, but I know he would be proud of me for standing up to those who would force victimhood on others.  My mom is proud that I am willing to stand up and say what needs to be said despite the fear that I would be disliked for speaking my mind.  Being despised by someone who would force others to be disarmed and strip away their rights is not an insult to me Joan.  It is a badge of honor and one that I will gladly carry with me until the day I die.

As for my integrity I have a very strict set of rules to protect it.  I do so because “Integrity once lost can never be regained.”  As such I never make a statement that I am unwilling to defend in public.  This includes having open comments.  Integrity means being willing to stand up behind that which you say.

I suggest you really think long and hard about your response because you haven’t presented a single element to support your case.  Also those you attack are also standing out in the open willing to freely debate, yet you hide unwilling to defend your position in public.  That is a sign of someone who lacks integrity.

Sex, Drugs, and College Students

I previously wrote a response to someone who sent a letter to the editor of the WSU Daily Evergreen.  Given the events in Texas over the past couple days this has produced renewed vigor on the topic.  If you haven’t read my previous response regarding concealed carry on campus, go read it.

Yesterday, I don’t remember where I saw it first, but this doozy of a line has taken off like wildfire since Uncle posted it this morning.

When you think of it like that: giving guns to young students largely interested in sex and booze, I’d wager it seems less of a genius idea.

As everyone has already stated, but it bears repeating, no one is giving anyone guns!  All this bill is doing is allowing people who are licensed to carry concealed weapons to carry to class and other places the would normally go while obtaining their education.

This statement of students being largely interested in sex and booze is down right offensive to me.  I did not have the benefit of my parents being able to support me through my entire college career as my father passed away from cancer when I was 19.  Prior to that though I knew my job was getting that degree.  As that was my job, I did not drink, I did not carouse, I knew my goal and I worked my ass of for it. 

While many college students go on a “21 run” for their 21st birthday, I went to bed early.  Why, so I could be at the sheriff’s office as they open to file for my carry permit.  People who get their carry permits are an entirely different breed of person.  All these laws seek to do is allow someone who has a permit, which allows them to already carry elsewhere, to continue to carry when they attend their classes.

What is most disturbing is I see claim after claim of sex and booze, yet I do not remember seeing anyone drinking while attending a lecture.  I do not remember hearing about anyone having sex while in class.  I rarely if ever drank while going to college, certainly not on weeknights.  Yet these people say I was properly disarmed because of my “constant drinking” and “carousing”.  And I went to a school rated #18 by the Princeton Review for top party schools in 2002, in 2009 it was rated #16.  Please note I attended 2004-2008.  I and others like me went to college for an education, not to get drunk and have sex.  I don’t need to pay someone tuition to do that.  Most of my friends were either ROTC, or former military there on GI bill, none of them were out partying every night.

This statement is projection and nothing more.  This individual spent his college career drinking and carousing and does not see how anyone else could not have done that while in college.  I keep hearing statements regarding drinking and campus carry, yet actually on campus, where this discussion is centered, you rarely see people drinking alcohol, it is an educational institution after all.  How is there a magical line that a permit holder crosses and all the sudden he becomes a raving lunatic bent on killing everyone?  The fail to comprehend that a potentiality is not an actuality

Gun free zones and high Brady scores mean nothing to criminals, don’t believe me, look at San Jose State.

The only people who follow the laws are the law abiding.  By the gun grabbers own admissions, they would rather disarm people preventing them from fighting back to “lower gun violence” than have a lower violent crime rate overall.  Everyone who wants campus carry wants it because they don’t want to be disarmed to be an easy victim to make the Brady Campaign or Collation to Stop Gun Violence feel better.  Feelings have nothing to do with it, this side is fighting with facts and logic, but those are disregarded by the other side. 

Please: If you see any grammatic, spelling, or flow errors let me know. I wrote this while foggy headed from a head cold.