29 December 2013

Time to Get my Kit Together

Truly, "back in the day", as we are now wont to say, rather than "when I was a kid", or "in the roaring 60's",  the phrase was

GET YOUR KIT TOGETHER

That's when guys carried "kit" bags, because kit became an easier word to use than "dunnage". This is a great historical explanation of my title and has nothing to do otherwise with today's blog, which is really about getting it together, picking it up and doing the right thing with it.



I try to listen to my favorite TV preacher (also is Alice Cooper's favorite, for a good trivia question), Charles Stanley from First Baptist Atlanta. Of course it is going to be Baptist flavored - he has been a Baptist pastor for over 50 years. My Bible does not tell me what denomination Christ is, though, so I figure after you know that he died for you everything else is rather optional and immaterial in many ways.

BUT

Every now and then Chuck will throw out a "squirmer", as my Dad used to refer to some sermons. This is akin to the Holy Spirit hitting you upside the head with a 2x4 or equally significant wakeup call. Dr. Stanley throws this kind of a squirmer about what God wants us to do about once a year; seems like I always catch it and it rattles in my head for weeks thereafter. I suppose that's why they call it the word of God.

ANYWAY


do not bother to watch this video if you already know what your purpose is in the world, what God has asked you to do, how He is supporting you and exactly where to start and how to go about it. {God told me that, today, He wanted me to send this to you, so here it is}.

http://www.intouch.org/broadcast/this-week-on-tv

 

As always, we appreciate your support and welcome comments. Take 45 minutes to let yourself review, or learn for the first time, some fundamental truths that we tend to overlook in a world, today, that needs them desperately.

And, remember a few fundamentals:














12 December 2013

Custom, Routine or Faith?

Thought for the day:
We must be careful when our Christian disciplines become routines. They no longer exist as a part of our faith, but another thing to check off our list of Christian things to do.




We do a lot of things, even the rituals we go through at holidays, such as Thanksgiving and Christmas, that we do not consider "Christian disciplines", without really thinking of the why and wherefor. Faith is, among all else, peculiar.

Most Christians are familiar with, or at least have heard, Hebrews 11:
1 ¶  The fundamental fact of existence is that this trust in God, this faith, is the firm foundation under everything that makes life worth living. It’s our handle on what we can’t see. 2  The act of faith is what distinguished our ancestors, set them above the crowd. 3  By faith, we see the world called into existence by God’s word, what we see created by what we don’t see.



This is likely in the same category as Descartes' "I think, therefore I am." And, as Geddy Lee sings, "if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." So, we believe in something - that is faith - regardless of if we do so consciously and actively, in fact despite our conscious and active attempts to have faith.

We don't make faith. Faith is, like it or not, ask for it or not. It is solely accomplished by the Holy Spirit; for non-Christians who don't believe in the Holy Spirit, any faith you have is accomplished by Him, still, although you think of and refer to him as something else.

 As you go about your "normal" activities of Christmas, then, remind yourself that you do this for reasons other than that you have just always done it this way. Tradition is fine, and remember what family faith originated and sustained that tradition, remember how God brings all these good things to us.

22 August 2013



Back just 3 and a half decades ago or so, I was an aspiring graduate student at Virginia Tech. My advisor was Larry Adler; he had started at Columbia University with a degree in math and went on for his master's and then a PhD in Rock Mechanics at the University of Illinois.

His mentor was Steve Boshkov from Columbia. [ http://www.aimehq.org/programs/award/bio/stefan-h-boshkov ] . Larry invited Steve to Blacksburg for a seminar presentation to the graduate and undergraduate mining students. That evening he invited me over for dinner and brandy, so there we were, student, mentor and übermentor. Being young and brash enough to get away with it, I dared ask Steve what was the most important thing in life.

Without flinching he spent 10 minutes holding my fascination and that of Larry as we both just sat listening to the anecdotes that came following this simple statement:

"In life, you do well if you can get along with people, and you do well if you can get along with money. If you can get along with both you do very well. If you can influence either one you are quite successful, and if you can influence both you are phenomenal. That's all there is to it, purely and simply."

Engineers do incredibly well with numbers, and good engineers are the ones who relate those numbers to money and the wealth of their company. Very seldom, though, do you find an engineer who is really good with people. If you do, you make him a manager. But, the engineer who is skilled with money and with people makes himself your manager and proceeds far beyond any expected level. That's why Steve stayed at Columbia, because he could influence the engineering curricula heavily inserting humanities and arts to give engineers what they really needed much more than another course in mechanics or mathematics.

That's about as far as my tired old brain wants to go this morning, especially with my cluster headache meds kicking in, but it should be food for thought for anyone who wants to bother researching the topic even casually. Think about it.
That is all.
Word.

08 August 2013

 http://www.redstate.com/dloesch/2013/08/07/wife-of-ft-hood-survivor-dod-is-gagging-us/










Call me crazy, but it seems to me like this would-be king is letting the power go to his head more every day. I can understand the legal discussion behind why he wanted to throw a gag order on the victims of the Ft. Hood heretic treasonal seditionist jihadist, Hassan, but the last time I read the Constitution it still said that the Congress shall pass no law restricting the right to assemble and speak; and, to me that points out fairly succinctly that it is, indeed, the Congress that makes laws, not the President. A king, on the other hand, is different, I suppose, in that what he says from the throne goes no matter how absurd it may be.



 I see that The President's city, Chicago, is rapidly taking a lead from Detroit. And, they are leading the league in dead African Americans (black people, persons of color? I never know any more how we are to refer to certain groups). I see that 3 black kids beat up a white kid on the schoolbus, but that the driver did not intervene and the mainstream media didn't report it. Notice that I did not say I was surprised by this happening. Things like this happen every day, more than once, and the only thing I see on TV is "pastor arrested for sexual assault on teenagers" which is about a guy, an assistant youth pastor (general flunky on the staff) that was fired from his position as a youth pastor and later was stupid enough to fool around with a couple of girls to whom he had "ministered" in days of yore. Our friends on TV can sensationalize anything they want to, or subdue everything they want to.

I see Brian Williams is getting a new knee. I see that every night. They certainly did not do 10 minutes with Dr. Nancy Snyderman when I got my new knee. Perhaps that was because it was my left knee and it's Brian's right knee, maybe it's because I am so old that it would not be newsworth, but Brian is so young (!) that we should feel sorry for him.

I could keep going all day. I won't. I'll sign off for now; but, I shall probably be back soon. 

26 June 2013

The POTUS decides what?

The evening news made me think of Buffalo Springfield's "For What It's Worth":

What a field day for the heat
A thousand people in the street
Singing songs and carrying signs
Mostly say, hooray for our side


The court made two decisions. Neither one of them "legalized gay marriage", despite what the thousands of people in the street are saying. 

One was on Proposition 8 in California. What the court decided was that they could not make a decision because the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to sue. So, the ruling of the inferior court negating Proposition 8 still stands until someone brings the matter to the Supreme Court who has standing to do so. The court made no decision on the merit of Proposition 8 itself.

The other was on DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. The Court did not negate the act, again as the media and the demonstrators would have you believe. What the court decided was that one provision of DOMA, the which stated that the Federal Government did not have to recognize same sex unions, was found unconstitutional if the union is recognized by the couple's state. That did not mean that the Federal Government legalized or illegalized gay marriage, it just meant that people who have a legitimate marriage license need to be treated as marriage when the Feds apply the Federal laws and regulations.

I am pretty tired of all of this stuff. The Constitution is silent about marriage; that means it is left to the states. And, if you get right down to it, the only reason the states have ever had anything to do with it is to make money by charging for marriage licenses. Historically, marriages belonged in a church, and men (yes, men) would register a marriage to show they owned the spouse as chattel property. Not a really fulfilling and rewarding approach, I say.

Why doesn't the government just get out marriage altogether? We the people are not going to be collectively satisfied with anything they do. Why should they do anything? Why should they even discriminate between married and not married people? 

Oh, I could roll on this forever ...

08 June 2013

Hey, guys! I haven't been here for a while. I've been preoccupied with ... well with all kinds of stuff. Politically and religiously so many things are happening that make me want to puke and yet nothing I say is going to change the minds of those whos eminds I think need to be changed. I cannot stand lies, either from the government or from the people/sheeple in response to the government or to their church.

Today I realized something. I was considering one of my pet projects, crusading against human trafficking. I thought:
Sure this is right. A woman is put to work as a prostitute so other people make money off of her, and the traffickers never get caught, the Johns get maybe 5 days or a fine, and the girls, who really don't willingly choose that lifestyle as far as I can tell, get a felony conviction.

People abuse women so punish the women. Hey, why not, because
People use guns to kill other people - ban guns
People eat Big Macs and get fat - ban Big Macs
People drink Big Gulps and get fat and get high blood pressure - ban Big Gulps
People use drugs and hurt themselves and others - ban drugs [may be partially appropriate]
People abuse alcohol and hurt themselves and others - ban alcohol
People drive too fast and kill people - put speed restrictions in car computers.
People use Sudafed to make meth - ban Sudafed
People use pitbulls for dog fights - ban pit bulls

Hey, I think I see a pattern here. There is a common denominator. Actually it's a common parameter, a common factor in each function and it is

PEOPLE

Just when I was about to throw away my women, guns, Big Macs, Big Gulps, drugs, alcohol, car, Sudafed and dog because I am an honest law-abiding person and will do what Senator Feinstein asks. Of course. 
Hey, here's a concept. If people do bad things, punish or rehabilitate the people, not what they used to do those bad things.
Too easy, I guess.
 

11 April 2013

Finding Common Ground

"These three ideals – wanting to protect innocents from evil, valuing human life, and cherishing peace – are the same for those who are against guns and for those who are not against guns." - Destinee, of FateOfDestinee

I have a son-in-law who devotes himself to his family and to our LORD. I like to believe that I have and do so also. We concur, as Destinee said, with the three ideals, at least I am pretty sure he does and I know I do. I have never specifically asked, though, about his view of guns, since I am pretty sure we don't share the same views.

I may be wrong. He grew up in Idaho, which is certainly not an eastern bastion of disarmament frenzy like Mayor Bloomberg runs. They really do hunt in Idaho. I am quite sure he is familiar with firearms. Maybe I should ask instead of assuming.

Me, I grew up in Oklahoma. I had the Daisy Red Ryder Carbine (my brother had the pump), we got a Savage/Stevens 15-A for Christmas when I was 9, .22 short/long/long rifle, single shot. We later moved to Wyoming and a friend loaned us a Remington .270 to take with us for hunting. In college, I had a Beretta .25 automatic, a Norwegian 1911 in .45 ACP, a Colt revolver in .45 long Colt, and a Smith and Wesson Highway Patrolman in .357 magnum. After college I picked up a Springfield 1903 in .30-'06 to use hunting. Notice, though, that the Beretta is pretty much only designed and used for personal defense, despite what James Bond used to think, the Colt .45 was, well, a Colt .45, after all, the .45 ACP was designed to stop drug-crazed Moro tribesmen with one shot, the Springfield was the assault rifle of 1903, World War I and the start of World War II, and the .357, sorry Dirty Harry, is recognized by many people as being the best self-defense caliber to have around. [OK, you 1911 fans. A Federal 230-grain +P HST in .45 ACP has a muzzle velocity of 950 feet per second and an energy of 461 ft-lb. A Federal 158-grain tactical Hydra-Shok in .357 magnum has a velocity and energy of 1240 and 539.]

Ephesians 4:15-16 – 5 ThingsTo Consider In Controversy

Completely stolen from the leadoff link, reproduced in case that page should go away


Ephesians 4:15-16 – 5 ThingsTo Consider In Controversy

Daily Devotional Bible Verse
Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. (Ephesians 4:15-16 ESV)
Even amidst our Christian lives, arguments, disagreements, and tension-filled conflict will come, but when it does, here are five Biblical principles to consider before we ever open our lips:
  1. Listen. Be silent in your mind as well as your mouth. “Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding. Even a fool who keeps silent is considered wise; when he closes his lips, he is deemed intelligent” (Proverbs 17:27-28).
  2. Be teachable. Are you in the wrong? If so, how can you respond in humility, grace, and repentance? If you genuinely desire to grow in Christ-likeness, then remember that God uses iron to sharpen iron, and frequently, there will be sparks (Proverbs 27:17).
  3. Think. Take every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Corinthians 10:3-5). We are in a spiritual struggle against an enemy who seeks to divide us. Don’t let your thoughts grow vengeful, spiteful, or believe lies about others. Be disciplined in your thought life.
  4. Seek unity. We are one body with many parts. If this is true (which today’s text says it is), that means each believer’s mission is the same. Think about it, is the eye’s mission different than the heart’s? In its function—what it does—yes. In its mission—why it does it—no. Remember, we are one, a unified whole. Seek unity between yourself and your brothers and sisters because we’re playing for the same team.
  5. Model love over winning an argument. Always speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15), because love seeks unity over division, and peace over strife (See especially 1 Corinthians 13:1-7). Sometimes, though, people are simply wrong, misled, or in sin. When this is the case, don’t shrink from the truth, but don’t use it as a weapon to wound, either. Love reconciles, pride dominates.
Our lives will not be free of controversy until Jesus returns. Until then, let’s remember his words, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).
Copyright © 2013 Daily Devotionals
Reproduced with respect but without specific permission

09 April 2013

Instead of Gun Control, which is really People Control, let's have enforceable laws to eliminate violence and illegal gun use


Monday, April 8, 2013 at 6:23pm

I was watching the news tonight doing my normal seething at the media and the reports of the legislature over this "gun thing." It ISN'T guns. My guns are hanging in my shop and haven't committed any crimes or killed anyone. They don't run around in lowriders, street racers, junkers or Escalades harassing anyone or intimidating and scaring people. They do not randomly discharge through walls or windows.

In Des Moines there are a lot of people WITHOUT GUNS who commit crimes and kill people. They are not particularly linked, guns and crime; but, Barry Soetoro wants to take advantage of a good crisis and make political points out of the tragedy and the deaths of children about whom I do not believe he really gives much of a hoot (yes, I realize that is an incredibly strong statement. It's my opinion and I'm sticking to it).

So, Mr. Obama says "do the right thing for the families in Newtown."  First, shouldn't he be concerned about doing the right thing for the country, for we the people? As I recall, we're the government and he just executes our laws. He does not proclaim them. He does not propose them in Congress. He enforces them once they are passed. So to meet the needs of "we the people" and respect the families of Newtown, I would think that we would pass laws that ensure that violence cannot occur again.

Instead, he wants to pass laws that would do nothing more to stop the illegal use of weapons, would do nothing to provide defensive capabilities for the school, and would have made no difference if they had been in effect for the last 10 years. Actually, they have been. Senator Grassley commented last week that he really was not looking forward to this week, because we would be talking about laws that criminals would still ignore and law-abiding citizens don't need to follow.

It's the behavior, not the tools. Here's a few things that would make sense to me:
1. Life in prison for anyone who commits a felony using a firearm.
2. 30 years, with at least 10 before parole, for anyone who commits a misdemeanor using a firearm.
3. Life in prison for anyone who participates in either selling or buying a firearm in a straw transaction.
4. Life for selling interstate without a license.
5. Life for selling to anyone unqualified to own a firearm. In Iowa, you need a permit to acquire OR a permit to carry weapons - it's easy to ask to see that before selling a firearm to someone. Out of state you have to ship to a dealer, anyway.
6. Size of magazines (they are not clips) is pretty insignificant. The world's fastest REVOLVER shooter shoots six rounds, empties the brass, reloads six round, shoots them, makes all bullseyes and does so in less than 3 seconds.
7. Kind of rifle doesn't matter. A trained former marine using an obsolete and antique cheap Italian rifle with obsolete ammunition pulled off 3 shots in two seconds at 200 yards, including a head shot and brought the USA to a standstill. The Mannlicher Carcano does not use a magazine. Another nutcase occupied a university tower with a good hunting rifle and an assortment of miscellaneous firearms, killed 17 and injured 32 before being "subdued", into pieces, by two rounds of 00 buckshot from a 12-gauge shotgun. Again, his Remington 700 does not use a magazine.

That would be a good start. It does not infringe on rights to keep and bear arms, either, just identifies appropriate punishments for certain crimes involving arms.

13 March 2013

Garbage Collection, Gangnam Style


I am back on Facebook, and even after starting with a stealth name (James Moore, not incredibly stealthy for those of you who already knew my mom's maiden name/my middle name) my beloved convinced me I should truly identify myself as Jim Riddle.

But,

I pledged not to go political on facebook. Now, I will occasionally post something that I think transcends political. Gun control is not in my perspective a political issue as much as it is a legal issue of fundamental right, but I will still control my Facebook postings on the matter. Some things are truly political but to me are common sense, but I will keep them off Facebook. And, that means that the really political things end up here.


Opening Shots:

Brought to you today from Town Hall, if you have not clicked in your own email:

NYC soda ruling just 'temporary setback'

and the law will reappear brought by the ghost of Elvis accompanied by Jimi Hendrix on guitar? Who is Bloomberg trying to kid? His greed for power is now sheerly lunatic as he continues to get away with grabbing rights. If I have the right to choose, that includes Big Gulps. And Super Big Gulps.
Additional: A funny thing happened on the way to the Forum; Emperor Bloomberg was smacked down by a judge that saw a serious problem with separation of power with respect to the controversial large soda ban. The mayor who has taken the nanny state to a level rivaled only by President Obama wants to regulate what we eat, what we use to carry our food and other aspects of our lives that should be protected under that line about pursuit of happiness.In this new realm of redistribution of accountability, he figures Big Macs, Large Gulps, and handguns overpower human will and make us do evil things-he's here to protect us because he's a billionaire and must be smarter than the rest. Talk about executive privilege.

Do our elected officials really believe we are so beaten down that we will forget our rights?

The rule was so absurd it brought together an eclectic bunch to fight back. Action was brought by the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (represents 200,00 Hispanic businesses), the Soft Drink and Brewery Workers Union, the Teamsters, the National Association of Theater Owners of New York State, the National Restaurant Association, and the New York Korean-American Grocers Association (representing 4,000 Korean-American grocery, deli and store owners in New York City).
The rest of Charles Payne's column compares Being a Man...Being a Jerk and is also worth reading


Medicare: Did You Really Pay For That?

No. I am sure, arithmetically, that I didn't. In high school, 1963-64, we debated Medicare as the national topic. It was a bad idea then, it's a bad idea now. But, after 50 years of getting used to it and not figuring out anything else to do, we are stuck with it. When life deals you lemons - hey, free lemons!

Speaks completely for itself. Remember, the number is 1.5 billion rounds. For the Social Security Administration, Food and Drug Administration, Park Service ...

If Obama doesn’t show any leadership on this matter it’s an opportunity for. Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, to summon Secretary Napolitano over for a little … national conversation. Madame Secretary? Buying 1.6 billion rounds of ammo and deploying armored personnel carriers runs contrary, in every way, to what “homeland security” really means. Discuss.

Kim Jong Un, revoked the Korean War armistice

Anyone remember the Korean "Police Action"? Some of us do. I was actually alive then but hardly remember anything about it, other than it was really not nice and was quite a bit uglier than "the big ones", WWI and WWII. Now you have a nation of desperate people led by a total lunatic (Dennis Rodman's buddy?). All bets are off.

'Killer dolphins' escape from handlers

NOT a joke. The finest trained dolphins in the navy armed and dangerous free on the high seas. Seriously. You can't make this stuff up, people!



Educational Rot

Like this is something we didn't know; but, it is still overwhelming to look at all of it altogether.


Have a great day, folks!


28 February 2013

Sequestration



This is NOT a scary threatening cut of massive proportions in critical programs, people! It's a little reduction on some stuff that people do NOT have yet - not stealing money out of anyone's pockets, just limiting the amount that they might get from the government if all of the appropriating goes through.

 I hate to see this sequestration situation coming around. It is a no win situation for a lot of us. I'm fixed income (disability), and obviously I should like to have the government paying me more. Also, I should not want to be paying more taxes. It is a mutually exclusive thing - you wants more money you pays more taxes. But I want the sequestration to go into effect, because it's the only way we are going to quit spending huge amounts of money we don't have.

But - the administration is setting itself up to move into a role of socialist dictatorial control by dealing a death blow to the people and to the Congress. Not just to Republicans, or Tea Parties, or Democrats, or blivnaps or whatever. Don't forget: President Obama designed the sequester and where budget items will be cut. So what he is cutting does not make sense to most people and would really hurt everyone. SOOOOOO, if the Congress does not override sequestration by approving exactly what Obama wants, then the cuts come in. If Congress does pass what the president wants, then any good things will be credited to BO himself - Barry will see to that. If bad things happen, it will all be blamed on "the Republicans", "the Right", "the Radicals", "the Lugnuts", fill in your own noun. The Democrats will then play it for all it is worth to ensure that the Republicans get hammered in the 2014 elections, thereby ensuring his permanency in office. 

Politics stink!

And the sad part is: the money in the sequester is really insignificant. None of that gloom and doom stuff is gonna happen. Have you ever seen a general quit fighting because some politician somewhere didn't pass a certain budget line item? No, doesn't happen. Will schools close because their Federal support is minisculely (really, minisculely) diminished? Not a chance. It is all a manufactured crisis. The great Barry Soetoro himself once said "Never fail to take advantage of a good crisis." He has gone on to become expert at manufacturing good crises, building them out of pure cloth if necessary. 

We'll see over the weekend what happens. 

22 February 2013

So, what DOES the Constitution mean about guns?


I saw this news article in one of my venerable lugnut feeds this morning: New York will prosecute veteran with high-capacity magazines. The first thing I thought was at least they didn't call them clips.

Magazine:                                                       Clips:


















You can obviously tell how felonious this perpetrator is for possessing 5 of these things that he routinely carried every day when he was in Afghanistan. How dastardly!

Contrary to what you read, the Second Amendment reads:


As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 Notice the commas. The version recorded in the records of the Executive Branch, which is the true and correct version, is two clauses instead of the four clauses that are shown many times and truly do show in the one hand-scribed version of the Bill of Rights in the National Archives. Remember - that is a copy of the original text and the law is what was passed by the states.

Notice also: The Second Amendment does not grant a right. The amendment provides that a pre-existing right shall not be infringed. In that it is not granting a right, the Bill of Rights recognizes the validity of the inalienable right to keep and bear arms. Since the right is not granted by the government but pre-existed the government, the government may not alter something that is not its to alter.

At least that's the way my little pea brain breaks down the logic. Being neither an attorney nor a politician I am not invited into the clubhouse to talk about these things though. Nor do any lobbyists pay me to vote one way or the other about this stuff, since I have no vote anywhere. Nonetheless, that's what I think these things say, that's the way I think things are.

Moving Along to More Law that Most People Never Heard of or Know to be Law

Of course, you recognize 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ET AL. v. HELLER
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
No. 07–290. Argued March 18, 2008—Decided June 26, 2008

and, I'm sure the words are right on your lips from

130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010)
Otis McDONALD, et al., Petitioners,
v.
CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, et al.
No. 08-1521.
Supreme Court of United States.
Argued March 2, 2010.
Decided June 28, 2010.

These two court decisions, both fairly recent if you will notice, clearly state what the meaning of the Second Amendment is. Surprise? Of course it is. The media will never just plain read simple statements from these; they always want to take what the media wants to say and wiggle around the words of the court to support their, probably totally wrong, allegations.

That being said, first a direct comment from DC v. Heller:
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
 and, from McDonald v. Chicago:
Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008), we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, and we struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. The city of Chicago (City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws that are similar to the District of Columbia's, but Chicago and Oak
Park argue that their laws are constitutional because the Second Amendment has no application to the States. We have previously held that most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply with full force to both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States.

Now, I am not an attorney; and, I never played one on television or in the movies. But this language seems straightforward. Weapons in common usemay be possessed by an individual and used for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home, and that right is fully applicable to the States. In a case where a veteran merely possesses items that are, indeed, commonly used accessories to weapons, and is not using them for any purpose, and they are in his home, I would offer that the State of New York has no jurisdiction to prosecute. Actually, if they show up to confiscate his magazines, I say he has the right to use his weapons to defend his home and property. This would be viewed dimly, and he would undoubtedly be plugged dead by law enforcement officers "doing their duty", but then I would say his estate should be able to sue the bejabbers out of the state in Federal court.

Like any of that would ever happen.

But, think about it ...

21 February 2013

Absurdity to the nth degree

OK. What are they drinking in Washington? They need some purple Kool-Aid, I think to clear the benches and start again, but ...

News today: the Department of Homeland Security at the request of law-enforcement agencies has paid $2 million to make new training targets of a non-traditional type. Pregnant women, senior citizens, protective mothers, children in playgrounds. Yes, seriously, all of the above:








WHAT POSSIBLE KIND OF THREAT DO THESE PEOPLE PRESENT?

As far as I am concerned, they are just regular people standing their ground to protect themselves and their families. A "hostile young mother depicting a threat on a playground"? The guys that thought these up suffer from severe craniorectal inversion disorder!! Of course, with that 2 billion rounds of hollowpoint .40 caliber and 9mm ammunition that the DHS bought for training purposes, the desk clerks to whom those automatic pistols have been issued are going to need something to practice on. What better than these realistic targets of the great threat to our country: informed citizens protecting themselves from a government that has become destructive of the inalienable rights among which are quite obviously life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I guess they do not count any more under the current administration and their game rules. Obviously the Consitution and the law-making process are insignificant, since so many Executive Orders and recess actions are being taken and made.

Like I say - arm up so when they take you out you can at least take two with you.

19 January 2013

Guns, God and Politics - hey, what else do we need?

I ran into anssemblage of reasonable commentary about guns and religion. Worth a look.
Also interestingly humorous, from the Vice President, Mr. Biden:  "We need more gun laws because we don’t have time to enforce the ones we have"

And, in the inevitable, a study of: To what political party did mass murderers belong over the last 10 years. For you purists: this is a secondary source, but contains a link to the primary source, a video.

Finally, I was blessed today with the Short Devotion's selection. First, it has one of my favorite optical illusions. I see it infrequently enough that when I see it it takes me a while to see the "other" image, although my first impression will, of course, hit me right away. That being the case, it always tells me, when I see it, what my underlying mood is despite how I might say I feel. This morning I felt yucky, but as I looked at:
the first thing I saw was the cute young woman. It took, as a matter of fact, considerable effort to find the old lady with a somewhat ugly nose and non-attractive countenance.

I then read the devotion on John 9:1-3. "that works of God might be displayed in Him" - a simple phrase of deep meaning and complex interpretation and application, to understate the obvious.


In God’s wisdom, he has decided to not divulge too much of where evil comes from or it’s origin (Deuteronomy 29:29). ...[P]eople ...  never forgive God for an event they feel he is to blame for (they focus on the one part of the picture and forget to see it for the beautiful young girl). But, we do know that all things work together for the good of those that love God (Romans 8:28). [ Here let me comment that 8:28 is the most commonly quoted, misquoted, misinterpreted and complicated verse about good and bad that we usually run into. I have written blogs about this. Don't think for a minute it is that easy!!!] Instead of focusing on the “disease”, we should be focusing on the cure that is Jesus.

Yeah, I have to admit it! Just like Paul Hoganmächer has said, not part of the disease but part of the cure, in our pain His grace is made perfect.

12 January 2013

After a good night's sleep, I read the news. oops

Items well worth reading. The first is straight data and analysis, no bleeding heart plea from either side. The rest are recent articles from online.
Here is the only known scientific study, covering a span of 20 years, of multiple victim public shootings and the effects on them of legislation.

John R. Lott Jr.
William M. Landes
University of Maryland Foundation, University of Maryland
University of Chicago Law School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
October 19, 2000
Abstract:     
Few events obtain the same instant worldwide news coverage as multiple victim public shootings. These crimes allow us to study the alternative methods used to kill a large number of people (e.g., shootings versus bombings), marginal deterrence and the severity of the crime, substitutability of penalties, private versus public methods of deterrence and incapacitation, and whether attacks produce "copycats." The criminals who commit these crimes are also fairly unusual, recent evidence suggests that about half of these criminals have received a "formal diagnosis of mental illness, often schizophrenia." Yet, economists have not studied multiple victim shootings. Using data that extends until 1999 and includes the recent public school shootings, our results are surprising and dramatic. While arrest or conviction rates and the death penalty reduce "normal" murder rates and these attacks lead to new calls from more gun control, our results find that the only policy factor to have a consistently significant influence on multiple victim public shootings is the passage of concealed handgun laws. We explain why public shootings are more sensitive than other violent crimes to concealed handguns, why the laws reduce the number of shootings and have an even greater effect on their severity.



Obama himself actually signed into law the NDAA which authorizes secret assassinations of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil. Instead of the red list being “conspiracy theory,” it appears to be a key component of Obama’s domestic policy. It's not an urban legend, it's the law!


Something’s fishy with all this. It’s becoming increasingly apparent that an order has come down from the very top to destroy, silence, threaten or execute true American patriots. OK, think of that as an alarmist statement, then read these two links, again holding facts, not innuendo:

Regis Giles
summarizes and includes a link to naturalnews.com discussing "Prominent rifle manufacturer killed in mysterious car crash days after posting psych drug link to school shooters" addressing the possible use of psycho drugs by school shooters and the lack of any picture from Sandy Hook of Adam Lanza holding a rifle. Then a list of amazing coincidences.

The part-time crossing guard in Yonkers revealed to be a gun owner and now treated like a sex offender.
“Communism begins where atheism begins…” - Karl Marx Friends, distorting American history is a deliberate lie, and lying is not permissible by law.

2 shot at California high school, suspect in custody READ MORE AT FOXNEWS.COM A 16-year-old student armed with a shotgun (not an assault rifle or "automatic" weapon ) walked into class in a rural California high school on Thursday and shot one student, fired at another and missed, and then was talked into surrendering by a teacher and another staff member, officials said.

Virginia voters favor armed guards in schools Two-thirds of Virginia voters say they want armed guards in schools.
[This color is "Hokie Red". In case you ever wondered, a hokie is actually a poor farmer or a neutered turkey, even though we go as the fighting gobblers. When I attended and was on the faculty at Virginia Tech no one worried about gun violence on campus, probably because concealed carry was allowed and everybody knew it. Heck, it's the Corps of Cadets, for goodness sake, for whom military training is a big part. Likewise when I taught at Colorado Mines I feared no evil because there were students in the mining department who OPEN carried - go Blue and Silver Orediggers].

The Second Amendment Foundation, which was formed to guard gun owners’ legal rights, was not invited, even though they asked to come.
As we know now, that was no big deal because the Vice President pretty much ignored the NRA and, instead, lectured them a la' Des Moines Register columnist Donald Kaul [Kaul: Nation needs a new agenda on guns. This time, the debate has to be about more than not offending the NRA's sensibilities.] The column advocated, in case you missed this crowning jewel of journalism defended as sarcasm but accepted by many as sincerity:
• Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.
• Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me.
• Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.
And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures. None of that is going to happen, of course. But I’ll bet gun sales will rise.
In contrast, one of the good old guys, a rational, level, salt of the earth Iowan, John Carlson, retired editorial writer, did give us this to the point article, "It’s hard to have a conversation about guns if everyone’s yelling".

Me? I'm more worried about watching our government than I am about watching anyone's guns. Read how they are scrambling to find a scapegoat for yet another serious security leak.

And now, it's time for breakfast.
When the toast is burned
And all the milk has turned
And Cap'n Crunch is wavin' farewell
When the big one finds you
Let this song remind you:
They don't serve breakfast in hell!


09 January 2013

The Golden Rule, revisited

"O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; and you have no longer an aristocratical, no longer a democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all?" --Patrick Henry, speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, 1788

Patrick Henry's comments regarding benevolence and arms specifically, but overall regarding power, remind me of the Golden Rule of Arts and Sciences:
He who has the gold makes the rules
or, in the case of our government today, he who makes the rules has the gold.

HERE'S THE POINT:

The government will never change, the Congress will never do their job, the President will not be able to do his job, unless the people have power to punish, to alter or abolish, those in charge who fail to do their job. Such a government will just continue whittling away at rights that are not the government's to infringe until one day we wake up and find all of our rights gone.

Obviously there is little, if any, fear with today's politicians of being re-elected or not, and with the pensions they get they really shouldn't care about losing their job anyway unless they are (1) dedicated servants who stand no chance of losing their job, or (2) otherwise incompetent but power-hungry miscreants who will do anything to keep carving the pork to get their own ham. The choice of the people must be to decide that this phrase must be emphatically re-applied:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Remember: rights existed before government. Some governments are established in such a way that they control all rights - monarchy, dictatorship, plutocracy, etc. But, in a republic the people are the government and in our republic we have said that anything not specifically in the Constitution is up to the people, or the states, to control. Further, the Bill of Rights identified certain rights that were definitely NOT to be controlled by the Government - the Bill did not grant any rights at all, it merely lists as sacred certain rights that, again, pre-existed government because all men possess them until they are given away or taken.

06 January 2013

Wisdom

My cousin Norma and I have been emailing about wisdom lately. As a Christian writer, she runs a ministry, 2MeFromHim, a blog-based internet presentation of a daily thought. Lately, it has been wisdom and Proverbs, and today we were joined by my favorite TV preacher, Charles Stanley, with his presentation based on Proverbs 4 and covering pretty specifically this one of my favorite passages:

5 Acquire wisdom! Acquire understanding!
Do not forget nor turn away from the words of my mouth.
6 “Do not forsake her, and she will guard you;
Love her, and she will watch over you.
7 “The beginning of wisdom is: Acquire wisdom;
And with all your acquiring, get understanding.
8 “Prize her, and she will exalt you;
She will honor you if you embrace her.
9 “She will place on your head a garland of grace;
She will present you with a crown of beauty.”


The kicker in this passage has always, to me, been that the way to get wisdom is to get wisdom. It says, "the beginning of wisdom is: Acquire wisdom..." To me, that is sort of a "Well, duh!" moment. At least it was until I thought about it the first time I ever saw it and since then it has been everything but "well, duh!"

Dr. Stanley gave a very specific, detailed and, what I consider loaded sermon on the text, and his conclusion was simply that God has a plan for each and every one of us and if we have the wisdom to follow that plan we will follow "The Road to Life At Its Best." I like that title, and I like to think that is what God has in store for me, and I always pray and hope that I may be granted the wisdom to understand His way and follow the Way to that best of life.

The final point I want to make in today's blog is this: God never said it would be easy, but He did promise you would never be alone. Dr. Stanley paralleled this to his teaching that God says you will always reap what you sow, more than you sow, and after you sow; and, that's the way it is. If you sow a few wild oats, you reap, later, a lot of wild oats. If you sow good things, you later reap lots of good things. If we ask His guidance and help, then we make sure we are following His will and walking in His ways, and therefore we are more likely to be reaping good things from what we have sown.

So, go forth and sow good!

05 January 2013

Norma Gail - 2MefromHim Ministries: 2MefromHim Proverb for the Day - Jan. 5

Norma Gail - 2MefromHim Ministries: 2MefromHim Proverb for the Day - Jan. 5: "My son, be attentive to my Wisdom [godly Wisdom learned by actual and costly experience], and incline your ear to my understanding [of what...

Norma is my cousin, and she frequently posts comments or verses about wisdom. Wisdom is a rough subject. You don't get it unless you get it - I mean, the Proverbs say that the way to get wisdom is to acquire wisdom. Try that one on philosophically.

Solomon was right to ask for wisdom. Nothing else is harder to achieve, nothing else is more worthwhile. My worst times have been when I lost my wisdom, at least momentarily, or it wasn't there to begin with. My best times have been when God leads me with His wisdom despite what I think about or do.

That's it - simple commentary. Maybe you can acquire wisdom from it; God only knows.

04 January 2013

Limiting the Government or Granting a Right?

My gun girl, FateOfDestinee, posted a video as Professor Des today answering the question: does the Second Amendment grant the right to bear Arms or restrict Gun Control? I followed up with a few comments:

Back in ancient history, we "diagrammed" sentences in Junior High English. The Second Amendment's base sentence is: "A well-regulated Militia | shall not be infringed" AND is modified by an adverbial clause of explanation and description: "being necessary to the security of a Free State" AND IN PARALLEL the subject is also a noun phrase "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms". So, it could be written "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed". So, Dr. Puzzle agrees that, just like Professor Des says, the right is not granted by the amendment but is recognized and the government, actually any person or organization, is specifically restricted from infringing on the specific right.

The kicker, that few people know or mention apparently, is that the Second Amendment AS RATIFIED BY THE STATES AND AUTHENTICATED BY Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State [in accordance with procedure and protocol and what actually is in the files, despite the handwritten in the original Bill of Rights] is: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." [Young, David E., The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms, p.222.] Young book

Same bottom line, but even more clear!
Other things to check out:
Of Arms and the Law; commas in the Second Amendment
JOURNAL ON FIREARMS &PUBLIC POLICY.The American Revolutionary Era Origin of the Second Amendment's Clauses

Young's commentary summarized:
  • Jefferson's Official Imprint
  • As a final observation on these interesting Second Amendment variations, Thomas Jefferson as Secretary of State in the Washington Administration prepared an official printing of the amendments. This is the version that he authenticated as being the amendments proposed by Congress, ratified by the state legislatures, and made part of the Constitution under the ratification procedure set forth in Article V. Jefferson's official imprint of the Second Amendment has one middle comma with only the leading word, "A", of the sentence capitalized. [FVRBA pp.221-222]
  • The argument from those who have insisted that the "original" copy of the Second Amendment from Congress containing three commas must be consulted to fully understand its intent is contradicted by these numerous official versions of the Second Amendment as ratified by the state legislatures as well as by Jefferson's printing. Clearly, Jefferson's official imprint, as the National Archives refers to it, is the official version of the ratified Second Amendment recognized and authenticated by the executive branch of the Federal government itself.
  • Commas Don't Count
  • The point here is that it is rather futile and potentially misleading to argue the intent of a sentence written at that time in history and based almost exclusively on how many commas it contained. Arguments about comma count within the "original" copy of the Second Amendment add no clarity to discussion of its intent and have often been used to divert attention away from the Second Amendment's actual Bill of Rights history and context. A full understanding of Second Amendment developmental history makes the meaning of its language very clear and helps avoid the pitfalls associated with deciding meaning based on the number of commas contained in the "original" version.

John Kerry, Famous American Patriot

A very good, longtime friend, sent me this this morning. He is not one who forwards such things typically unless they are really, really to the point and good. This one, for sure, meets the criteria. Please take the time to read it.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:     Fwd: I had a dream about John Kerry
Date:     Thu, 03 Jan 2013 22:36:36 -0600
From:    
Organization:    
To:     jimr48@gmail.com
Thought you might like to see this series of questions for John Kerry....
Subject: I had a dream

I had a dream last night.

There sat the dog faced John Kerry before the Senate confirmation hearings for his appointment to Secretary of State. After the Chair had praised his vast "Diplomatic Experience"... Followed by praise for his integrity, honorable service, etc. He finally turns the hearing over to the rest of the panel for questioning... and here is where my dream turned to fantasy... For in my dream... the first Republican Senator to ask a question starts like this....

Senator... you life story is a long and storied one...well known throughout the world... and the Chair has praised your integrity and diplomatic experience...
I'd like to start by asking you to once again describe your famous Christmas Eve, secret mission into Cambodia... Which I find most interesting since you weren't even in SE Asia during the Christmas time of year?
Then I would like to ask... is consorting with our nations enemies part of your "Diplomatic Experience"... Like North Vietnam while we were at war? The Sandinistas while we were engaged in conflict in Central America? The butcher Assad and Saddam Hussein in the Middle East... and the Russians and Chinese when we were engaged in the Cold War?

And would you explain to us how you recruited your fellow "Winter Soldiers" to come and testify before Congress about atrocities committed by our American Soldiers and Marines... when most of the so called witnesses you recruited... were never even in the military or had ever gone to Vietnam? 

Remind us of your eye witness accounts of our Vietnam Veterans as being as ruthless as the hordes of Gangues Khan? Tell us when and where you observed that first hand Senator Kerry?
And then I'd like to know why your citations for your Silver Stars were signed by a Secretary of the Navy... years and years after the war was over? And also, is it true as charged by eye witnesses... Your Purple Hearts were as a result of your own incompetence? Friendly fire by your own hand? 

These are just some of the questions I have... and should be answered before your confirmation.

And in my dream... I was cheerleading the line of questioning and thinking subconsciously...
"Ask why he couldn't pass the Bar Exam... if he is so brilliant"? 
"Ask him why he parked his boat in Rhode Island... Was it to avoid taxes on it in his home state"? 
"Ask him how he has accumulated such grand wealth on the salary of a Senator"? "Is it true that your wealth was derived by marrying homely, if not downright ugly... rich heiresses and widows"? 
"And ask him why the men who served with him in Vietnam... universally hate his guts... along with 99.9% of all Vietnam Veterans"? 
"Ask him if it is true that of all the men and women in the U.S. Senate... he is known to be the most egotistical of them all... only his good buddy, John McCain comes close. A man who also married well... Birds of a feather"? 

And then... I woke up! Ain't gonna happen... Politicians are gutless!

But I have to ask myself: Is this the face America wants to present to the rest of the world? A man who has made a career of lies, falsehoods and deceit? I can think of no human being... who symbolizes the term; "Ugly American" more than John Kerry. A liar, a phony, arrogant, piece of human dog poop if there ever was one!

Is this a man we should be proud to be hailed as a "Great American"? Can any foreign leader ever trust a single word out of this man's mouth... when it is documented that he has lied to his own countrymen... time after time after time... Is this the best we have offer?

In a perfect world... this man wouldn't even be considered for "Dog Catcher"... even though he did manage to capture two in his lifetime.

He is an insult... a mortal insult... to all who have served.