The U. S. Constitution doesn’t guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself.
— Benjamin Franklin
Unfortunately today too many people think that the job of the government is to provide them with the happiness (and security) they deserve.
Via Tam I read about a spectacular case of PSH.
PSH – Pants Shittin’ Hysterics
So a man with a gun comes into a city council meeting in Chico, California, addresses the council in support of a library, then leaves. Wow, nothing happened. The gun didn’t just jump and start shooting people. No blood was shed. No one died. Wow. Unbelievable.
Thing is, the man is a former California Highway Patrol officer and had permit to legally carry. So thus, no laws were broken.
But lots of hysterics:
Although the man didn’t violate any laws, it made Mike Maloney uncomfortable as the interim chief of police, he said.
“From my perspective, I can’t see any reason for someone who’s not a peace officer to carry a weapon to the City Council,” Maloney said.
He was uncomfortable. He got his feeling hurt. Time to call the waaambulance.
“The million-dollar question is, why would you bring a weapon to the City Council meeting when we’re talking about library funding and the budget?” Vice Mayor Tom Nickell asked.
Those police officers in the chambers and around the building, why do they have guns at a City Council meeting when you’re talking about libary funding and the budget? Perhaps because the potential for bad guys to do bad things doesn’t get scheduled on your meeting agenda? Back to that whole “Be Prepared” thing. Again, the guy’s an ex-cop and probably has enough personal direct experience to know that it’s wise to be prepared to defend yourself because shit happens.
“My opinion is that members of the public should allow trained professionals to carry and use firearms,” Maloney said.
Hrm. The guy in question? He’s an ex-cop. So I guess as soon as he took off the badge, all of his training was immediately removed from his brain, body, and soul. Now he’s suddenly one of those dangerous citizens that we just cannot trust. Sure 5 minutes ago he was a cop and we trusted him fully with a gun, but now he cannot be trusted!
Wow.
Having seen the effects of gun use, Maloney thinks citizens should instead be good witnesses if they spot a crime, he said.
OK ladies. While you’re being raped, just be sure to be a good witness. That’s what Chico, California Interim Police Chief Mike Maloney wants you to do.
And gosh, if that’s how the Police Chief wants things to be, how much can you expect the police will do anything to protect you? Especially how later in the article it mentions how Chico is down on police officer positions. They just don’t have enough cops to go around to even come and protect the legislators in their meetings, so how are you mere citizens going to be protected on a daily basis? But just remember, be a good witness so you can help the Chico police clean up afterwards.
[Mayor Ann] Schwab was concerned when she heard about the gun, especially considering children were in the audience and the council had a heated discussion on budget issues, she said.
Ah good! Someone was thinking about the children. You know, those children that weren’t harmed at all by a law-abiding citizen doing lawful things; in fact, a law-abiding citizen participating in the legislative process… arguably being a more productive citizen than most! Gosh now, we can’t have any more of that. Children are watching!
Thank God we have hysterical Mayors, Vice Mayors, City Councilmen, and Police Chiefs to keep us safe…. safe from what, I don’t know, but thank God we have them. I would add “Thank God they’re thinking of us” but that implies thinking, and it appears not a lot of that is going on.
… just a question of who does it work for.
Over at Howard Nemerov’s website, a little back and forth in one article’s comments lead to Howard writing a full follow-up article asking if civilian gun ownership causes bloodshed.
His conclusion? Gun control works:
Don’t like Jews or Catholics? Hitler disarmed them and then murdered millions in concentration camps, along with Gypsies, homosexuals, etc.
Hate Christians? After Uganda banned guns, 300,000 were rounded up and murdered.
Don’t like “smart” people? After banning guns, Cambodia rounded up and murdered over one million of them.
Hate people who disagree with you? After the Soviet Union established gun control, over 20 million dissidents were rounded up and killed.
Of course, if it works or not all depends whose side you’re wanting it to work for.
Howard continues:
By comparison, the Second Amendment has actually saved millions of lives. It also protects your right to religious freedom, your pursuit of happiness, and your opportunity for upward mobility. It raises the cost for thugs who want you rounded up and murdered.
It also shows that anybody who is against the civil right of self-defense is a person who hates your life, liberty, and happiness.
Why would you want to be disarmed before such a person?
Indeed, why would you?
For all those that love the protections 1A gives to the God-given rights enumerated therein, remember that it’s 2A that helps to preserve those rights. The facts of history bears this out.
Via SaysUncle I read that Chicago’s Mayor Richard Daley has the luxury of armed guards.
A third escapee, a convicted murderer, had the misfortune early Monday of stumbling upon a Chicago police officer who was guarding Mayor Richard Daley’s vacation home that is about a block from Lake Michigan.
The officer, Michael Smith, chased the suspect on foot and handcuffed him at gunpoint.
In a statement, Smith said he had just checked his BlackBerry for a physical description and photos of the three escapees from Indiana State Prison about 10 miles away.
Shortly after, Smith, who was sitting in a car while guarding Daley’s home, said he looked in the rearview mirror and spotted two disheveled men.
Gosh, isn’t that just dandy? The Chicago Mayor — notorious for his anti-gun stance — has people that guard his house. And those guards, they have guns. To boot, Mayor Daley doesn’t have to pay these guards out of his own pocket: the taxpayers do that. Boy, that must be nice!
So let’s see: he doesn’t want Chicago citizens to have guns, he does what he can to make it difficult or impossible for the citizens of Chicago to be able to protect themselves and their homes (let alone their vacation homes!), but he has them for himself. And it’s most evident that guns can be used by good people for good things.
Mayor Daley, you’re quite the hypocrite. Unfortunately I don’t see you doing anything to resolve that.
… of course, I’d rather not see about that, but given the way things are going these days I get the feeling that Sotomayor is going to be confirmed for SCOTUS.
So when pressed about Heller, she reluctantly admits that yes RKBA is an individual right (contrary to her previous words, actions, and beliefs).
Then I hear she’s not going to let her personal views affect how she would rule on cases.
Sotomayor said flatly to Alabama’s Sen. Jeff Sessions: “I do not permit my sympathies, personal views or prejudices influence the outcome of my cases.”
I’ll believe it when I see it, but frankly I’d rather not have any chance to see it in the first place.
Updated: Bitter has some coverage.
John Stossel makes a good point:
during [President Obama’s] trip to Africa, he said: “No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top”.
But of course the American government skims off much more than 20%. Â Federal taxes alone are roughly that, and when you add in state and local levies, plus the burden of regulation, government in America eats at least 40% of GDP.
If African governments’ skimming off 20% is a bad thing, why is America’s 40% okay, and why is the President trying to make government bigger?
Eugene Volokh discusses the notion of “sporting purposes” when it comes to firearms.
He discusses how the San Francisco, California Police Code explicitly delimits firearms based upon “sporting purposes” and denies hollow-point ammo, mentioning many established brands by name. His main point:
Rather, my point is how the ordinance seems to deliberately marginalize defensive purposes for gun ownership. Sporting purposes are labeled legitimate, and other purposes, including defensive ones, are labeled illegitimate.
This is quite true, and even from within the ranks of gun owners you can find a split along these lines.
Why isn’t self-defense a legitimate purpose? I’m not asking this rhetorically, nor am I asking this to those that consider it to be legitimate. I’m asking this specifically to those that think firearms are only legitimate for sporting purposes, or that think firearms are not legitimate under any circumstances. I honestly want to know what and why you think defensive uses of guns are not legitimate.
Furthermore, working to ban hollow point bullets demonstrates ignorance of the topic. Yes I know, they love to refer to them as “cop-killer” bullets, anything to get an emotional rise. Are hollow point bullets more effective at stopping? Yes they are, when compared to “ball” ammunition. Furthermore, hollow point bullets are safer because they are designed to stop within and not continue through. Look at these numbers. If you must defend yourself against a bad guy, you want to ensure to stop the bad guy, not that the bullet might pass through the bad guy and hit an innocent on the other side. When it comes to stopping an attacker, hollow points bullets are more effective in stopping power and safety; there’s no reason not to use them. Can a bad guy use a hollow point to kill a cop? Sure. But hollow points work quite well in the hands of us good guys against bad guys too. They don’t discriminate. 🙂
While I may enjoy sporting activities with my firearms, my primary purpose for having firearms is defensive. I may study all sorts of empty hand martial arts, even weapon-based martial arts (sticks, swords, etc.). But because I know those things, I also understand their limitations. A gun isn’t a be-all-end-all, but it serves a good purpose towards keeping me and my family safe. It goes back to the Boy Scout motto of “Be Prepared”; better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
But hey, if you don’t think defensive purposes are legitimate, then I’ve got a yard sign for you. Are you willing to post that sign?
For those that wish to ban guns or think that guns serve no useful purpose, are you willing to have such a sign relative to your home?
Howard Nemerov examines if the Second Amendment to the US Constitution actually works.
But he goes further than that:
According to some, every crime victim must successfully use a gun to fight off an intruder, and every criminal must be unable to use a gun in furtherance of their enterprise, or else the Second Amendment is a failure and should be removed from the Bill of Rights.
Curiously, these complainers never apply the same criterion against other rights. Since their comments seem to consistently evoke counter-points from other readers, it would seem their exercise of free speech isn’t getting them anywhere, so are they going to lobby for repeal of the First Amendment?
OH! They already have!
McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform.
Fairness Doctrine.
Old Media coverage of the civil right of self-defense.
Their actions identify them as anti-Liberty. It’s not about guns.
Suzi brings up an article by a Feminist on Feminists hating Sarah Palin.
Regardless of my or your feelings in Sarah Palin, there’s no question the way she was handled and portrayed during her time in the national spotlight during the 2008 US Presidential election was just … well … mindboggling.
I did think it was most curious how the feminists were all up in arms and probably her biggest bashers. I guess Sarah Palin wasn’t “female enough” for them.
Anyway, give the article a read. It even acts as a bit of a microcosm for the whole election itself:
None of these characters are real, of course. Yet, weirdly, people were much more interested in these fictional beings than they were in the real individuals who were vying for political office last year. There were times in 2008 where I felt that the entire national discourse had become one of those scripted faux-reality shows, where nothing is real and the producers edit everybody into barking stereotypes. And the people at home just watch and point and snicker. We’re actually having an election here, I kept wanting to say. These are the people who want to run the country. Don’t you want to know who they really are?
Stuff From Hsoi 