Gun Rights Paradigm

Our constitution provides limits on government in order to protect every individual’s God given inalienable rights.  The right to defend your life, those around you and your property existed long before the establishment of government and is often referred to as a “natural right”; perhaps to assuage the small percentage of folks who would rather avoid involving our Maker’s hand in things.

It has taken nearly two hundred years for our Supreme Court to validate the 2^nd Amendment and clarify our founder’s intentions; that Individuals have the right to own and bear arms; that this right was not singularly for those serving as militia members.  At one time there was a short explanation of the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller ruling at FindLaw dot com which covered the essentials, which is quoted here; but not linked with a specific URL.

“Prior to the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an “individual rights” approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals’ rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a “states’ rights” approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units. Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.

However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.”

Not wishing to appear obtuse; but where in the 2^nd Amendment does it say an individual’s God given right to keep and bear Arms is limited to his/her home?  I’ll save you the trouble, it doesn’t.  Government is limited; an individuals right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”, no different than an individual’s right to free speech.

This morning there’s an AP article which appeared on the Fox News website, House Approves Concealed Firearm Permit Bill . 

“A state permit to carry a concealed firearm would be valid in almost every state in the country under legislation the House passed Wednesday.”

A majority of folks in Congress are attempting to move in the right direction. Those who voiced opinions against this legislation lack faith in the citizenry which placed them in office and the individuals who are America; perhaps lacking faith in the very foundations upon which America was built.  There was a sentence in the article which brought me back to the keyboard to write today’s article. 

“Under the House legislation, people with a concealed carry permit in one state could carry a concealed weapon in every other state that gives people the right to carry concealed weapons.”

Maybe I should highlight the part which jumped out at me, “…every other state that gives people the right to carry concealed weapons”.   States do not give rights, God gives rights.  States hand out entitlements, permission, grants and many other things; but their powers are limited and they can only obstruct or usurp individual’s God given rights.  If you gain no other information this day, understanding this one principle of government is what separates America from all others.   Our founders recognized God as the Author of Liberty and the only Being capable of bestowing rights. 

You and I have the right and the responsibility to properly defend our lives and property by whatever means is prudent and necessary, to include deadly force.  The right to own and bear arms was defined and recorded in the Bill of Rights and cannot be taken away except under specific judicial action as pertain to being of sound mind or having been convicted of a felony rendering that individual unfit; regardless of which State you happen to find yourself. 

In all likelihood the issue of being able to use one State’s concealed handgun permit in other States is a moot point; the left leaning Senate has not addressed the issue and even if such a bill were to pass it would require Obama’s signature to become law.  Obama has in recent days pressured members of the Senate to ratify the U.N. Small Arms Treaty which would, in effect, do away with the 2^nd Amendment. 

Do the elections in 2012 make a difference?  Mind you, the person we elect to the Oval Office gets to pick vacancies on the Supreme Court, sign into law pieces of legislation or veto that legislation; all of which affect each and every individual. 

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Habla English?

 

Last week at church was Stake Conference for our area; various Wards getting together to hear our local Priesthood leadership speak.  There were translators on hand to accommodate Spanish speaking members in attendance which meant audio/visual requirements would have to accommodate the streaming of Spanish into television sets and head phones in rooms set up for them. 

I was recently called as an assistant Stake Clerk/IT specialist; in other words, getting cables and audio/visual equipment set up for presentations; satellite transmission, internet or other similar events.  The equipment room has all manner of fancy gizmos with cables running in and out, here and there and everywhere; how unfortunate, looks similar to the way my stereo, cable television and DVD are wired.  If you listen closely you might hear an old Beatles’ tune, Helter-Skelter, playing amidst the chaos.   

Several of us were hooking up cables, checking audio signals and making sure the camera transmission was working prior to the actual conference.  I happen to mention how it was probably a good thing I wasn’t a member of the Stake Presidency as I would be putting pressure on the various Bishops to have Spanish speaking members learn English.  My remark must have landed on a raw nerve; there was a cold silence where some kind of conversation normally would have happened. 

During the week I was thinking about that conversation, the one which never came about. I challenged myself to figure out why my suggestion garnered such a negative reaction.  The language in the United States is English and while we have immigrants from nearly every nation on the planet; English is the language used by the vast majority.  English is also the “preferred language”, the language which enables folks to climb out of the depths of poverty and achieve substantial rewards in most areas of our society. 

If I were planning to live in a foreign country it would be important for me to learn the language of that country; French if I were planning to move to France, German for Germany and so on.  Those who wish to be assimilated into any society must first learn the language of that society; either that or accept the fact they will forever be relegated as second class members, being denied full status and privileges.  The assumption on my part is these folks wish to eventually be assimilated, become equal partakers in all aspects of our society.  If this is not the case then why bother leaving their country of origin?

As a church it would seem a natural extension of leadership to point this aspect of assimilation to those attending meetings.  How difficult would it be to have Bishops invite Spanish speaking members to attend on-going English as a second language classes?  We certainly have talented people who could be called as instructors, folks who would jump at a chance to improve the lives of fellow church members.  Individuals who learned to speak English would make themselves eligible for upward mobility within the natural framework of our society and could only benefit from having made such an effort. 

There is no intent to ridicule individuals who speak only Spanish or the culture from which he/she came.  The recommendation is to have these individuals adjust to the society which they now find themselves in rather than remain dependent as a result of their not understanding our language.  Up until now I’ve directed my remarks mostly toward Spanish speaking individuals; but the same holds true regardless of one’s primary home language.  Those who are easily offended will continue to be easily offended; not much I can do other than accept the laws which govern percentages. 

Perhaps my communication and diplomacy skills could use improvement; being direct and to the point is not always the best course of action.  In any event, it would be better for my brothers and sisters who are imprisoned, not by cell walls; but their inability to be completely assimilated into our predominantly English speaking society, the society of a nation blessed beyond measure by the Lord for any and all who wish to climb as far and as high as is individually possible.  Learn to speak and understand English and watch as your efforts are rewarded beyond your wildest dreams.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Peter Pan’s Green Cake was Poisoned

I remember watching the movie Peter Pan as a young boy and feeling physically ill at the thought of Peter eating the poisoned green cake which had been placed where the Lost Boys would find it.  The shape of the green cake has changed over the years; now it’s disguised as green energy.  The poison introduced in America has been carefully manipulated; the hoax of man made global warming and the necessary redistribution of wealth to save our planet through socialism.

You might recall a poisonous statement made by Robert McChesney, influential adviser to the Obama administration:

“There is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles”

Watching tax dollars being thrown away is a bit disconcerting; is it due to incompetence of the Obama administration or is such wasteful spending attached to something more sinister and corrupt? 

Not too long ago we learned of the Obama administration full court press to throw money at Solyndra, an unstable green energy company; the Bush administration had turned down the loan previously.  It turns out Solyndra wasn’t the only scandalous loan provided under Obama; this morning Fox News reported about over half a Billion dollar loan to an electric car manufacturing company; in Finland.

“The Department of Energy is standing by a $529 million loan guarantee to an electric car company that is outsourcing production to Finland.” 

{…}

“The ABC News report noted the political connections enjoyed by Fisker and another company, Tesla Motors, which together received about $1 billion in loans. Fisker reportedly is backed by a firm that counts ex-Vice President Al Gore among its partners. The article said just 40 of Fisker's Karma cars have been produced so far, and that Tesla is consistently losing money.”

Fancy that, Al Gore profiting from tax payers in a green energy deal.  I read an article in the New York Times by Joe Nocera which tried to justify wasteful spending of taxpayer money for green projects.  The New York Times was once regarded as something other than a mouthpiece for the progressive agenda; but most recently they seem to be nothing more than useful idiots or worse.

“…if we could just stop playing gotcha for a second, we might realize that federal loan programs — especially loans for innovative energy technologies — virtually require the government to take risks the private sector won’t take.”

Why would American taxpayers risk hard earned tax money on questionable investments; aren’t we depending on those in charge of these funds to carefully discharge their duties?  I keep forgetting the reality of public office; tax payers and their money are endless in the eyes of government bureaucrats and politicians; Fannie Mae, Tarp, Cash for Clunkers and the list goes on and on.
.

An article by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. which appeared in the Wall Street Journal countered the idea that government money wasted on Solyndra was simply an investment in developing energy technology which the private sector would not venture into.

“This illustrates what might be called the macro Solyndra policy failure. A poor commercial risk is a poor commercial risk, whether private or government investors take it.”

{…}

“But, of course, the calculation behind Solyndra was political, not financial. Factories were wanted. Factories suggest jobs. Factories create photo-ops. Oh well. Solar subsidies have been part of the federal panoply since Carter, and even Reagan tried only to trim them, not eliminate them. The second Bush amped them up bigtime as a way to suggest that his only approach to problems in the Middle East wasn't to send in the troops.

 The Obama contribution hardly amounts to more than a banal urge to take whatever government does and do more of it, as if any chance to expand the role of bureaucrats is too good to miss. In one way, however, his Solyndra venture does fit nicely into today's megatrend, which, from here to Athens, consists of embarrassingly poor financial management.”

There you have it; the Obama administration lined their own pockets and the pockets of political allies through the use of bogus and manipulated data which they have proclaimed to be the result of man made global warming.  The promise of green energy, regardless of its practicality has been used to squander billions of dollars, not so much on innovation and new technology; but on long shot ventures which reasoned investors won’t touch.  The taxpayers are being played for suckers while at the same time our free market system is being dismantled brick by brick.

Up until now I’d heard detractors of Obama compare him to many unsavory characters; but until today it never occurred to me how similar he and his administration are to Captain Hook and the pirates of Never Never Land.  The magic of America, the free market system, has taken in the poison; isn’t it time for those who still believe in America to begin clapping in order to save her? 

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Pledges, Oaths and Testimonies

Several years ago there was a movie with Steve Martin and John Candy, Plains, Trains and Automobiles; but that has nothing to do with my title choice for today’s article, Pledges, Oaths and Testimonies.  You’ll have to forgive me; my word association test results given to the police psychiatrist must have been similarly amusing. 

According to a story listed on the Blaze out of McAllen Texas:

“Students in a Texas public high school were made to stand up and recite the Mexican national anthem and Mexican pledge of allegiance as part of a Spanish class assignment, but the school district maintains there was nothing wrong with the lesson.”

Things have changed a bit since I took Spanish in high school.  Back in my day we sang Christmas Carols “en Espanol” and recited how to order spaghetti while at the bibliotheca; it’s been a long time so the recitation might be off a bit.  In today’s public school environment there’s no way students would be singing Christmas Carols; but what’s this nonsense about the Mexican national anthem and Mexican pledge of allegiance?

“School district spokesman Mark May defended the presentations, saying it’s a state requirement for upper-level language classes to teach about foreign culture.”

Let’s say it was a poor choice on the part of the teacher and give her the benefit of the doubt; it might be better for students than eating spaghetti in the library with the chance of getting tomato sauce on all those books intended to indoctrinate our children with progressive leanings.  I don’t believe that any more than you do; but I’m still willing to give it the benefit of doubt.

Back in the late 70’s I thought about taking Kung Fu and began looking at various schools in the area.  Victor Chang’s name came up as one of the better instructors so I went over one day to observe.  

I was asked to quietly sit on a bench during class.  Each student upon entering the room bowed reverently which caught my attention.  There was a recess in the wall which, given my position, kept me from seeing what was within that recess; but clearly each student would bow in front of it.  In my mind there was an immediate “red flag”; I’m a good Christian and there’s no way I was going to bow before Buddha or any other pagan image.

After the class was completed I mentioned my concerns to Victor in his office.  He broke out in laughter as he explained, “There no idol there, student miss target and kick wall, make hole.  Students showing respect for class and teacher.”  

There’s a lesson in there somewhere, something about not jumping to conclusions.  I wasn’t very good at Kung Fu; but that’s a “whole other story” as we say here in Texas.

Several years ago I flew out to see my folks and attended my dad’s Presbyterian church so we could enjoy the morning together.  During the service the congregation was asked to stand and recite the Nicene Creed.  Out of respect for my dad I stood next to him; but remained silent as I found the creed to be in conflict with my beliefs as found in the Articles of Faith .

The words we speak are important, what we pledge allegiance to, what we hold sacred and what we will defend, even until death.  If we raise our arm to the square we are taking a solemn oath, one which requires more than lip service.  Maybe that’s what grabbed my attention to a high school class being asked to recite the Mexican national anthem and Mexican pledge of allegiance as part of a Spanish class assignment; it’s not the same as reciting a poem or any other so called cultural experience. 

I mention this, picturing in my mind every public servant from a local police officer on the day he/she receives their badge with an oath to protect, serve, enforce the laws and defend the Constitution all the way up to the President of the United States of America as the Oath of Office is administered, an oath to uphold the Constitution.  When we raise our arm to the square it is a promise to our fellow citizens that our words are true as well as a covenant with God; there is never a time when Pledges, Oaths and Testimonies are to be treated lightly.

Captive Audience

A woman’s car was having trouble on a major roadway in Houston, allegedly, so it was reported she pulled off to the side of the road; I’ll get to “allegedly” later on.  An officer of the law issued her a ticket for “driving on the shoulder and decided to arrest her”; sounds a little over the top for a minor traffic violation; but having dealt with the public often times things “escalate”.

“To make matters worse, Boyd claims in a lawsuit that the handcuffs were put on her wrists painfully tight and that she was forced to listen to conservative broadcaster Rush Limbaugh “make derogatory comments about black people” all the way to the jail. Boyd is African-American.”

According to the article written by Mike Tolson in the Houston Chronicle, she’s suing everyone involved.

Some folks, upon reading the article may have become indignant after seeing only half the information regarding this incident; there was no comment offered by the Sheriff’s Department.  I began laughing; but it had nothing to do with the actual incident, rather it reminded me of something which happened many years ago on night shift.

My old partner, Bob Kersten, was the station sergeant at NW.  Some of the folks sitting in temporary holding cells were “unappreciative” of the music being piped into the jail; for that matter all over the police substation, don’t think anyone liked Baroque classical.  I happened to wander in off patrol to the pleadings of the desk officer, “Turn that stuff off, please!”   Those in the jail used other words; all things considered there’s nothing worthy of a law suit for damages caused by Baroque music.

At one time I worked downtown during the day and “allegedly” happened upon a woman parked in a moving lane of traffic outside a bank where she was waiting for someone to cash a check.  She was instructed to move along as she was backing up traffic; but she refused saying it would only be a few more minutes.  When asked for her driver’s license she “allegedly” turned up the music so high folks a block away could have heard it and then turned away as if by doing so I’d disappear; I didn’t.

The car she was driving was nifty little sports car, a Nissan 260 Z with the “T-tops” removed as it was a beautiful clear blue sky kind of day.  When I continued to ask for her driver’s license she “allegedly” climbed up on top of the car and sat on the bar which separated the open “T-tops”.  

I commented, “If you want to act like a baboon it’s fine with me; however…”, and pointing to the uniformed supervisor who was standing across the street watching this unfold, “…you can hand me your driver’s license, sign the ticket and move on down the road or go directly to jail.”  She had a sudden change of attitude and signed the ticket.

In other unrelated incidents, when I issued traffic tickets I had my own version of short hand scribbled in a small vacant spot in the corner of the ticket to help my memory of the violation months later in court.  My traffic judge at the time thought he’d figured out my system as I’d testified to red light violations over an extended period of time he’d match my testimony with the numbers and letters coded on the bottom.

One day after I’d testified about a female violator who’d run a red light by 3 car lengths the traffic judge wanted something clarified.  Restating what he thought I’d said, “So, Officer Stern, you said she ran the red light by 3 and a half car lengths?” 

“No, Sir.  I said she ran the red light by 3 car lengths.”  There was a noticeable pause as he looked down at what was written in the corner of the ticket.

“Then what’s this 3 and ½ notation?”  Things like that aren’t supposed to happen; judges aren’t supposed to introduce testimony.  The prosecutor tried looking at the floor as the judge began to blush.

“The 3 means she ran the red light by 3 car lengths while the ½ means she put her foot through the floor and went out of her way to run the red light, Your Honor.”  

The judge considered the information and then asked, “Then what’s this letter “B” for?”  That was an awkward moment as I searched my mind for an acceptable answer which would not be too crude.

“The “B” means, ah…she was, ah…Belligerent, Your Honor”, thinking to myself how fortunate it was to have a better than average vocabulary available on the spur of a moment.

I’ve no idea what transpired the other night when the woman “allegedly” drove on the freeway shoulder and got hauled off to jail and had to listen to conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh; I wasn’t there.  I don’t remember the name of the woman who climbed up on top of her car so many years ago and acted like a baboon; but wouldn’t rule out the possibility of a kindred spirit.  Police officers are faced with all manner of folks.  Depending on how civilized they act often times determines how a minor traffic offense turns into a can of worms. 

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Ring, Ring - This is a Police State

 

Yesterday my attention was drawn to an article written by Buck Sexton which appeared on The Blaze, “Calif. Appeals Court Approves Cell Phone Searches During Traffic Stops”.   I didn’t know cell phones were that big a deal; okay, maybe we shouldn’t text while shifting and most of us would agree that hands free is better than having half your field of view blocked. 

“In a case explicitly decided to set a precedent, the California Appellate court has determined police officers can rifle through your cellphone during a traffic violation stop.”

There is a problem with granting police powers which extend beyond protections built into a citizen’s God given right as covered under the 4^th Amendment.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Times may have changed since this wonderful document was penned; however, the intent to protect a person’s “papers and effects”, which would now include digital information housed in any number of devices, shall not be violated.  Police officers have been empowered to enforce the law and when needed to search suspects for weapons or illegal contraband; but have never had the power to go on “fishing expeditions” under the color of “inventorying” a prisoner’s property. 

Speaking from the standpoint of a retired police officer, the rules of evidence were put in place to secure individual rights; not to empower a police state.  Items found during a lawful inventory which were clearly prohibited such as weapons or illegal substances could be entered into a court of law as evidence; however, there is a limit to what can be considered “in plain view” or what items might be considered “hazardous” and a risk to the safety of either the public in general or the officer’s immediate safety.  

“On December 6, 2009 Reid Nottoli was pulled over for speeding by Santa Cruz County Deputy Sheriff Steven Ryan. Sheriff Ryan then suspected after pulling Nottoli over that the 25-year-old was under the influence of drugs.

As Nottoli’s license was also expired, the Sheriff decided to impound the vehicle. Nottoli requested to leave his car parked on the side of the road. Sheriff Ryan refused, and decided to conduct an “inventory” search prior to the towing.”

Up until this point the police were acting in the interests of the public, taking the suspect into custody as a possible DUI and an expired driver’s license is a lawful arrest.  The officer was obligated by law to inventory items in the suspect’s vehicle prior to having it towed to an impound; again, for the benefit of the suspect and to protect the officer from unwarranted accusations of theft or neglect in the event items later turned up missing or were claimed to be missing.  

“A fully legal Glock 20 pistol with a Guncrafter Industries 50 GI conversion that should have been stored in the trunk of the vehicle. He also noticed Nottoli’s Blackberry Curve which, after it was turned on, displayed a photograph of a mask-wearing man holding two AR-15 rifles akimbo.”

Aside from that first sentence being incomplete, the court was informed that a legal weapon was found during the inventory.  Depending on the laws in California the officer either would file additional charges for improperly transporting a weapon or, since this was a lawful weapon, the officer might have stored the weapon in a proper manner until such time as the suspect was released.

Pay attention; this is where the court has stepped over the line and violated the 4^th Amendment rights of every citizen via this one case.  The officer stated the suspect’s cell phone was not on during the inventory process; this was not a “search incident to arrest”.  The officer turned the cell phone on and at that time observed a photograph which caused him to believe photographs contained therein may link the suspect with an unrelated crime. 

Read the intent of the 4^th Amendment once again.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

If the officer stated he feared for his personal safety or perhaps the phone was hollow and contained illegal drugs it might have been reasonable to play with it.  If the suspect could be connected with terrorist activities in which cell phones were used to trigger explosive devices from a remote location; at that moment the officer might have the authority to turn on the device even if such actions would be fool hearty considering the possibility that the simple act of activating the cell phone might be enough to trigger an explosive device depending on how it was programmed.

Idle curiosity caused the officer to turn the cell phone on; nothing more.  No warrant could be obtained under such circumstances regardless of what images where presented to the officer’s view since he had to turn the device on when it was no threat in its present state.  There was no probable cause to believe the officer was arresting anyone but a DUI traffic violator who failed to secure a legal weapon in the trunk. 

“…the appellate court’s decision, written by Franklin Elia, which read in part:

“The deputies had unqualified authority under Gant (*) to search the passenger compartment of the vehicle and any container found therein, including Reid’s cell phone. It is up to the US Supreme Court to impose any greater limits on officers’ authority to search incident to arrest.”

(*)  

“This case demonstrates that the scope of exception to the Fourth Amendment’s protection against governmental searches and seizures relating to searches incident to arrest is still unclear. Both parties address Belton’s bright-line rule to the Fourth Amendment allowing warrantless vehicular searches incident to a lawful arrest. If the Supreme Court adopts Arizona’s position on Belton, police will have broad discretion to search the vehicle of any arrestee, subject only to the limitation that the arrestee was a “recent occupant” of the vehicle. A decision for Gant, on the other hand, would require an officer to reasonably fear for his safety or the integrity of the evidence before he could search an arrestee’s vehicle without a warrant. In either case, the Supreme Court’s decision may further define the extent of police authority to perform warrantless vehicular searches incident to a lawful arrest.”

I’m sorry Franklin Elia, opening a closed container which may or may not hide from plain view weapons or contraband is not the same as opening a closed digital file belonging to a citizen.  This no different than extracting information directly from the suspect’s mouth and is most definitely a violation of the 4^th Amendment. 

 

As a concerned citizen and retired police officer it is my duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States.  In the long run we are trading security for liberty; and those who do so deserve neither security nor liberty; isn’t that what Benjamin Franklin warned? 

Our judiciary system is being used to transform America into a police state; troubling to say the least.  The rule of law which holds our society together appears to have been abandoned in favor of the police state.  Our founding documents and the limits placed on government act to protect individual God given rights.  Our courts now act with impunity violating individual rights, and with each new decision advance the notion that such actions are justified; not by our Constitution but through each amended court decision linked one upon the other.  It would appear we have already become subjects of the state rather than citizens.

“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.”

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Occupy Wall Street Gibberish

If there was any doubt in your mind about the level of education, or lack thereof, here in America; cast your eyes on some of the demands being put forth by those intent on disrupting Wall Street as reported by Kerry Picket of the Washington Times.  File this under, Gobbledygook!

Star Trek fans will appreciate “demand #3:  “Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.”  Maybe those in the twenty fourth century don’t use money; but here in reality folks who work expect to have more than those who don’t or as the Pilgrims used to say, “You don’t work, you don’t eat”.

I suppose that explains “demand #11: “Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.” 

We don’t need no stinkin’ banks.  Money is the root of all evil; do away with money!  From now on a room at the YMCA and a room at the Four Seasons will be open for anyone on a first come first serve basis at no charge; and we’re supposed to take these demands seriously?

They missed a few demands, other serious issues plaguing the nation; demand #23: Pictures of hamburgers at Burger King, McDonalds or other similar establishments must be realistic.  No more bright red tomato slices carefully placed on top of a perfectly broiled hamburger patty when we all know that will never happen.  No more bright green leaves of lettuce since most of the time it’s a pale gray or white limp excuse for what was promised.  We’re mad as hell and we won’t take it anymore!

Demand #47: Visits from the Tooth Fairy will be paid in one ounce pure Swiss Gold bullion as one child’s tooth is to be valued equally among all races, ethnic and religious groups.  Trips to the dentist and doctor should be free!

Parents who’ve paid countless dollars to have their children gain an education must now face reality; you could have spent that money on a trip to Vegas, pulled a few handles and lost all that money at the crap tables.  Your children would still be blithering idiots, protesting a system along side the likes of Frances Fox Pixen.  Heaven help us, these young people may be the leaders of tomorrow.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Officer Dan Starr is Retiring from HPD

An old friend of mine, Dan Starr, is retiring from the Houston Police Department next month and I was invited to the party; can’t go because of a schedule conflict and so I’ll do my best to recall a couple of events we went through when he was a probationary officer.

One time we’d arrested a real winner of a young woman.  She tried kicking out the windows of our patrol car; can’t remember if she succeeded off hand.  I think she did; but that’s not why I recall the incident.  Dan was standing off to the side while the young woman was being ugly and the next thing you know she’d spit all over him.  He looked at me as if I was supposed to give the nod to inflict serious bodily harm; but I explained to him the rule; not the one which prevents officers from knocking suspects silly; the other rule, don’t stand where you can get spit on so easily. 

The other incident was more memorable and involved the “Killer Dr. Pepper Machine”.  I’ve mentioned it in previous articles, mostly as a footnote without going into much detail.  There is even mention of the Killer Dr. Pepper machine in a novel I wrote, Pecaw’s Gift, chapter 34. 

 Originally there was a homicide investigation dispatched to another unit; if memory serves it was Officer Shaw and his partner.  I had probationary officer, Dan Starr with me and as part of his training he needed first hand experience working a homicide so I picked up the mike and volunteered our unit to be primary. 

Upon arrival, standard police talk, we observed one “suspect” trying to lift the huge refrigerated soda machine off of “suspect #2” who was bent into thirds and “appeared” to be DOA.  I don’t think there’s a delicate way of saying it, he was flat as a pancake and no way was he going to be listed as anything other than DOA.  The fire dept. emergency crew and another couple of HPD officers helped us pick the Dr. Pepper machine off the young man, all the while serious grown professionals were dropping one liners, “Be a Pepper”, “Maybe he wanted an Orange Crush” and other insensitive remarks. 

We had to take the “suspect/witness” down to Juvenile Division where he was to make his official statement; something along the lines, “We were just minding our business, walking down the sidewalk and this soda machine fell over on him”.  Never mind that our “suspect/witness” had been sitting on top of the Dr. Pepper machine rocking it back and forth trying to dislodge the money box inside while his partner in crime was bent down with his arm up inside the machine trying to get the money box loose as well.  That’s when the “law”, meaning the law of gravity, took hold of one of the suspects and pronounced him guilty on the spot.

While standing in the Juvenile Division, the young man put his arm to the square as he swore to the truthfulness of his written statement.  I grabbed Dan Starr by the arm and had him step back a few paces to avoid any lightning bolts that might come through the ceiling tiles striking the little liar dead. 

Officer Starr, here’s to a wonderful retirement and may you have the righteous desires of your heart.  I wish I could attend the informal gathering to honor your service; but, duty calls.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Jihad Deniers

The high priests who run the Church of Man Made Global Warming call anyone who doesn’t become disciples of the environmental whacko movement, “Deniers”; an attempt to discredit folks who don’t agree with a junk science whose main purpose has nothing to do with saving Mother Earth and everything to do with wealth redistribution.   Scientists who don’t sign on to this massive hoax are, after all, “denied” federal grant money or “denied” publication in professional circles; hence the term “deniers” seems quite appropriate. 

Speaking of deniers...

This past week we learned of an individual’s attempt to wage “Jihad” on American soil.  According to an article on Fox News a graduate student from Northeastern University took delivery of the items needed; but, as the authorities were quick to point out, “…the public was never in danger in a Massachusetts man’s alleged plot to blow up the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol using remote-controlled airplanes filled with explosives.”

Clearly the suspect must have been a right wing extremist; probably a devout Christian who covertly meets regularly with fellow Tea Party conspirators. 

‘“They say the explosives delivered to Rezwan Ferdaus were always closely monitored.”

Knowing our government was closely monitoring these dangerous weapons certainly puts my mind at ease; better to hand a small cache of explosives and a couple of assault rifles over to a lunatic who wants to blow up half of Washington then truck loads of assault rifles over to a bunch of Mexican drug lords; that really would be irresponsible, perhaps even criminal. 

What kind of name is Rezwan Ferdau; sounds Irish, doesn’t it?  Maybe Ferdau is a deep cover Irish Republican Army member; what’s the term…Sleeper?   Jihad must be some kind of potato, maybe deep fried or something.  We all need to be on alert, put on our marching shoes and watch for crafty right wing terrorists among us, those who harbor deep resentment to the Changes being implemented by the current régime.

“In recorded conversations, Ferdaus said he planned to attack the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol using aircraft similar to “small drone airplanes” that were guided by GPS equipment, the affidavit said. The plan called for three remote-controlled aircraft to carry out the attacks, along with six other gunmen divided into two teams, with Ferdaus coordinating the operation.”

Now it makes sense; Rezwan Ferdau isn’t an Irish name.  As it turns out he’s of Middle Eastern heritage, maybe even Muslim; dare I say it, a Radical Islamic Terrorist?  I was expecting to hear Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Department of Homeland Security declare a victory in the War Against Terror; how silly of me; there is no war on terror.

‘“I want the public to understand that Mr. Ferdaus’ conduct, as alleged in the complaint, is not reflective of a particular culture, community or religion,” said Carmen Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. “In addition to protecting our citizens from the threats and violence alleged today, we also have an obligation to protect members of every community, race and religion against violence and other unlawful conduct.”

That Politically Correct assurance from Carmen Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts may be more disconcerting than the fact that a Radical Islamic Terrorist obtained sufficient explosives to cause considerable loss of life and damage to property within the borders of our sovereign nation.  Here we have an official statement of denial; an intentional misdirection from the fact that Radical Islam has declared war on Americans and all that we stand for; in other words, Jihad Deniers.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

 

Progressives Hate the 1st Amendment

Tolerance is fine as long as your opinion happens to fall in line with the left; isn’t that what Political Correctness is all about?  This past week KPRC had one of its managers issue an op-ed piece railing against the use of the “Stars and Bars” on personalized Texas license plates.  In essence it was his opinion that such a display would only serve to agitate folks who only see it as a sign of racial prejudice and bigotry. 

When the world was young I was taught the Stars and Bars represented the Confederacy, a link to my ancestors and a proud “in your face” reminder that just because the South lost they couldn’t kill the spirit.  You’d never guess from such a statement my mother was born in New Orleans and kept her accent all these years, now would ya’? 

In the past several years something interesting occurred regarding the Stars and Bars.  On the one hand some rather heavy drinking Neanderthal red neck bigots chose to use that particular logo to emphasize their immaturity.  Then on the other side were the carpet baggin’ progressives who wanted to rub it in a little more that the South had been defeated; don’t show that damned flag or anything resembling it in public ever again. Did I mention my mother was a died in the wool Southerner?

In order to make sure the Stars and Bars was removed from public view it became part of the left’s politically correct black list; only folks who think Blacks should still be slaves would promote it and only folks who hate blacks would show it in public.  You have to be a racist hate monger to even consider the Stars and Bars as anything but pure hate speech.  That is what the current generation has been spoon fed so that is what they believe; pure hogwash!

Never mind history, never mind Confederate Heritage or the Sons of the Confederacy and how that symbol continues to link generations back a hundred and fifty years; no, political correctness has been applied and the Stars and Bars is hate speech.

The issue at hand is the 1^st Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Similarly, it has become hate speech to voice an opinion which violates another of the left’s favorite topics, homosexuality.  I’m not talking about folks who go out of their way to insult some limp wrist panty waist who happens to sashay down the sidewalk in funny looking shoes; but if the shoe fits…; no, just your plain everyday conversation in which an opinion is expressed, something to the effect, “I think homosexuality is a sin”.  
.

Progressives have taken up the banner and so the use of the word homosexual, unless it is to compliment the Mayor of Houston, that kind of talk is now hate speech.  Hey, we are progressives and we get to determine what is tolerated and what is hate speech.

Take for example a Fox News story by Lari Barager out of Ft. Worth, Texas, Student Suspended for Saying Gay is Wrong. 

“Fourteen-year-old Dakota Ary spent most of the day Tuesday serving an in-school suspension. It was punishment for discussion in his German class at Fort Worth’s Western Hills High School.

“We were talking about religions in Germany. I said, ‘I’m a Christian. I think being a homosexual is wrong,’” he said. “It wasn’t directed to anyone except my friend who was sitting behind me. I guess [the teacher] heard me. He started yelling. He told me he was going to write me an infraction and send me to the office.”’

Ary is an honor student and probably has read and understands the Constitution.  Perhaps his German instructor should try reading it.  Come to think of it, the “assistant principal (who) called Ary’s mother at work to let her know he was in trouble” should read it as well.  Maybe the two of them could write on the black board, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Like it or not progressives run our public schools, universities and fill many positions of power throughout government.  This is no accident as Cleon Skousen pointed out in his book, The Naked Communist.  Here are just a few of their goals in no particular order.

“Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.”

How are they doing so far?  Those who would destroy all that is good in America use the text of our Constitution; but only when it serves to advance their agenda.  In actuality these folks hate the fact that freedom of speech applies to everyday conversations between individuals, conversations which depict them as what they are, progressives hell bent on “change”.

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

Don’t Do Anything Stupid

Years ago, don’t think I’m supposed to start off a sentence like that; but years ago a few of my close friends at church would end the Sunday meeting block by saying to each other, “Don’t do anything stupid”.  We each knew how easy it was to make mistakes during the work week so we’d give this light hearted warning to each other.  The list of stupid things was wide open to our imagination; much like the scriptures that tell us to avoid sin, just be careful out there.

This afternoon I called one of my old buddies to let him know he should have called this morning with that warning, “Don’t do anything stupid”.  He immediately broke into a deep laugh while asking, “Okay, Stern, What’d you do this time?”  I then told him and remarked that perfection had yet to grab hold of me as he continued to laugh at such a prospect.

A Ford dealership called me out to make and program a set of keys for a 2001 Mustang which they had sitting on their entry drive.  The customer was waiting and a little upset that a Ford dealership couldn’t make the keys; but the car was ten years old and  Ford had already dumped the key codes.

Once the mechanical key was completed and turned in the ignition to set up the programming of the new transponder keys it was determined the battery was dead.  Subsequent to hooking up a set of jumper cables from my truck the after market alarm kicked in; seems the alarm system had been going off for quite some time and drained the battery.  The customer didn’t have the clicker and the bypass switch didn’t shut the noise maker off while the programming took place, wonderful!

The customer was present the whole time and watched as I explained how the old key (s) that were either lost of stolen would no longer be authorized or start that vehicle; she seemed relieved at hearing this information.  I then programmed the two new keys and demonstrated that they did indeed start the vehicle; the after market alarm sounding each time the key was turned.  I advised her to take the vehicle to where the after market alarm had been installed to acquire another clicker; but she said it had come with the car when she bought it and didn’t know where the alarm had been installed, believing it was a Ford alarm system.

I told her that she could cut the wire going to the sounding horn and still drive the car; but it would be better in the long run to have the after market alarm system removed.  I handed the bill to the service writer and got my purchase order. 

About half an hour later I got a call, “Who’d you give the keys to”?   I’d made sure Not to hand the keys to the lady who owned the car; my customer was the Ford dealership service people, the folks who were paying me.  A sinking feeling came over me as I realized the keys were in my pocket and I’d driven ten miles across town.  After all these years of training myself to make sure the customer handled the keys last, make sure they felt the key turn in the lock, make sure they liked the job; I still screwed up. 

Eating Humble Pie once in a while is healthy for mortals; just wish I didn’t get to eat it quite so often.  I suppose I should be grateful, could have been a lot worse; the customer might not have accepted my sincere apology for having done something dumb.  Here’s the message, “Don’t do anything stupid”, isn’t a one time reminder. 

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.

This will also appear as a feature article on Fiercely Independent Locksmiths of America’s  website.

Government Approved Defense

Waking up in America each morning must be close to having Alzheimer’s; not really sure what memories are working and which are figments of imagination.  Take for example an article by Doug Ireland posted to the Eagle Tribune, Veto override expand NH deadly force law.  

 

“Local police are concerned public safety could be at risk after lawmakers voted yesterday to override the governor’s veto of a bill that allows people to use deadly force in public places.

The New Hampshire House voted, 251-111, to overturn the veto of Senate Bill 88 a week after the state Senate did the same.

Members of the Republican-dominated House praised the move, saying it gives New Hampshire residents the right to adequately protect themselves.

The previous law only allowed people to use a gun or other weapon to defend themselves in their own homes. The new law, which takes effect in 60 days, allows deadly force anywhere.”

Plenty of legislators vote on bills they haven’t read, have no clue as to the content and yet will stand in front of their constituents and claim to have represented them.  I guess the same is true about other important documents; they hold their arm to the square and pledge to uphold the Constitution without having read it.  These same folks want to protect our God given rights as found in the Bill of Rights; but only when it suits their agenda.

The Governor of New Hampshire vetoed a piece of legislation which need not have been written in the first place; individuals already have a God given right to defend themselves and it applies anywhere that individual might be attacked, it’s found in the 2^nd Amendment.  

“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.”

A less controversial term would be “natural rights”, those which exist prior to the organization of government; perhaps the distinction between God given individual rights and natural rights is indeed relevant as “natural” marginalizes mankind’s relationship with God; we are, after all, made in His image.  (I’ll discount non-believers and their protestations regarding America’s dependence upon God without blinking.  When they’ve spent their last breathe and find themselves in the Spirit world somebody can explain it to them.)
.

There are many scriptures which testify of our being children of our Heavenly Father; however one which best applies to the discussion of self defense is found in Genesis 9:6.

“Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” 

Think about that short verse; the acknowledgment of violent acts between men is explained along with the authorization to retaliate or prevent violence.  It doesn’t say the authority or responsibility rests with the police or justice department; individuals have the right to shed blood in response to violence.
.

There’s a short explanation of the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller at FindLaw.com which covered the essentials; or does it?

“Prior to the Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the courts had yet to definitively state what right the Second Amendment protected. The opposing theories, perhaps oversimplified, were (1) an “individual rights” approach, whereby the Amendment protected individuals’ rights to firearm ownership, possession, and transportation; and (2) a “states’ rights” approach, under which the Amendment only protected the right to keep and bear arms in connection with organized state militia units. Moreover, it was generally believed that the Amendment was only a bar to federal action, not to state or municipal restraints.


However, the Supreme Court has now definitively held that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that weapon for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Moreover, this right applies not just to the federal government, but to states and municipalities as well.”

Not wishing to appear obtuse; but where in the 2^nd Amendment does it say an individual’s God given right to keep and bear Arms is limited to his/her home?  I’ll save you the trouble, it doesn’t.  Government is limited, an individuals right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed”.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights outline the Proper Role of Government and were intended to prevent government from infringing on those rights.  Many laws are poorly written, intentionally complicated and unnecessary; beyond that, a goodly portion have been passed in direct conflict with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Come Election Day wouldn’t it be important to elect representatives who’ve read and understand these documents?  We don’t need approval from government to defend ourselves; not in our homes or anywhere else, we already have that right!

This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal, a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.