Rebane's Ruminations
January 2013
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

Do you notice that on all the media (Fox included) it’s a big no-no to piss off Muslims?  Now with all the action going on in Mali, Obama’s lie about Al Qaeda being on the ropes is exposed, and the reporters are again having to talk about “the war on terror” a lot.  But when they get down to reporting against whom the war is fought, they get all mushy and wind up calling them “Islamic militants”.  That’s it, there are no other enemies in that misnamed conflict called “the war on terror”, except the ragheads who keep killing innocent civilians by the thousands wherever and whenever they can do it.  But no one dare report that we are fighting ‘Islamic terrorists’, that’s a big no-no.  It is politically very incorrect to juxtapose Islam and terrorism, or to call them bad names like ragheads.  Those folks are only militants, you know, just like people all over who happen to be 'militating' for what’s good and right.

And there’s more.  The WH spin is that Al Qaeda is just “shifting its focus” to north Africa, as opposed to expanding its operations from the middle East.  I don’t know, given all the stuff that’s going on and growing in Afghanistan as we prepare for our victorious exit, it sure looks like more than a little shift of focus is going on.  After all they are now operating in two theaters with boots on the ground and guns in hand, and kidnapping Americans.  Oh well, I hope everyone here knows who is fighting whom for what.

Wonder what Hillary will say about Benghazi on 23 January?  Maybe it will be the Richard Pryor confession about when he screwed up heating his heroin or something – ‘Best we can tell, the ambassador and his aides were in the compound getting ready for bed.  They decided to have some milk and cookies in the kitchen before turning in.  And when one of them dunked a cookie into his glass of milk, suddenly the whole thing blew up.  Then a lot of people showed up.  It was terrible.  We really don’t know much more than that.’

Oh yes, the gun banners have gained another public relations advance.  Recall that they went from wanting to ban guns to just ‘controlling’ them.  Well, after Newtown, outlets like National Propaganda Radio have been reporting on Joe Biden meeting with all kinds different groups in order to fashion his recommendations that the President received this week.  So here’s the new look for those who really don’t like guns in civilian hands, they’re now called the ‘gun safety groups’.  Yep, the whole 2nd Amendment debate will be divided into folks belonging to the ‘gun rights’ groups opposing the ‘gun safety’ groups.  Now which of you out there are against gun safety?

Remember all that blather for months and years about not raising taxes on the middle class.  Bygones.  The guy needed to get re-elected, and dammit he had to promise something, don’t you see?  We now find out that taxes are going up for as long as this bunch is in Washington, and don’t you forget it.  Why?  Because that is the way we’re going to get the economy going again and reduce the deficits.  They’ve looked at the whole mess from every which way, and that’s clearly the only solution that will work.  Besides, you didn’t really think he wasn’t going to raise taxes on everyone who still pays them.  After all, there aren’t that many of us suckers left out there – it’s either us or who?

Finally, we recall how responsive this White House was going to be to the people's inputs?  You know, using the internet and all that.  All it would take was 5,000 of you good folks out there signing a petition about some concern, then this White House would jump on the case and provide an answer.  Well, that was a bit low, lotta petitions – how about 10,000?  No, nope, that was still too many petitions.  Let’s make that 25,000.  Whoa! Now that didn’t work; how about we bump it to 50,000 little siggies required on a single petition.  Well hell! Whatsamatta you out there, no one got a job or nothin’, signing petitions alla time!!  Today the WH asked ‘how’s a cool 100,000 sound before we even peek into our inbox?’  I guess the real message is that all such bets are off until 2016 when Hillary can have a go at it.  In the meantime you all can shove your ‘vox populi’ up where the sun don’t shine.

[18jan13 update]  I was waiting for John R Lott Jr to weigh in on the current gun ban imbroglio.  Lott has been the leading researcher on gun laws, and has published extensively on the subject.  In the 18jan13 WSJ he writes ‘The Facts About Assault Weapons and Crime’.  It’s worth a read, especially by those enthralled with all the ‘benefits’ to the safety of school children promised by Barack and Dianne when their next gun bans go into effect.  This is bullpucky season in spades, and it might help to throw in a fact or two on the matter, even if they are inconvenient.

Posted in , , ,

194 responses to “Ruminations – 17jan13 (updated 18jan13)”

  1. Gregory Avatar

    “Crush the bastards” works, if you actually can, and then not lose badly in the next midterm elections. Good luck.
    Expending a huge amount of political capital to criminalize the ownership of ugly rifles or all but the smallest detachable magazines is certainly an option. Go for it, guys.

    Like

  2. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 139am – I don’t exactly know how places like Citadel fit in with the idea of a Great Divide. But I’m sure that all such culturally cohesive communities have had and will have a part to play. But in the interval I look at them as just another strongly felt expression of values like that of Mormons, Amish, Branch Davidians, …, and even some of the more recent attempts at starting bohemian style communes.
    And you correctly detect a fear that runs through such planning today. Hearing about being joyfully “crushed”, and/or having your cherished traditions and beliefs being proscribed, or even criminalized, is a scary thing for anyone.
    A better example than SteveF’s 1247am re this feeling of aggression and total misunderstanding of ideas is hard to find. People like he are not prepared to discuss such themes and ideas. Their counter is to attack individuals.
    To demonstrate the disconnect, he continues to assert that people like me want to force our way of life and culture on others. And from his own words he is 180 out; it is he and his who want everyone to hew to their mode of thinking and accept their prescriptions for society.
    I and mine do not want the whole world to do as we please. But for whatever measures are being prepared for us to be brought to heel, we must first be painted as ideological waywards and dangerous aggressors from a backward era. Unfortunately the approach works. It is easier to crush petulant bastards, than people whose belief systems deserve an equal place in the sun.
    Re “pieces on the ground”, please review previous offerings in RR’s Great Divide category. As mentioned before, this is an evolving commentary that builds on what came before. In every piece I write, I cannot present a comprehensive development that starts from the beginning. If you want to converse with a person who has more than two ideas and three brain cells, you have to remember what was discussed before. But then again, maybe there’s a deeper message in your request.

    Like

  3. Steve Frisch Avatar
    Steve Frisch

    “Their counter is to attack individuals”….nonsense George, no one has been more “attacked” by posters here than I have been….the point I am making is that you, and each and every one of your posters here live in a society, and perhaps they should look that word up and learn what it means. No man is an island, least of all the one who fashions himself one.
    To you an yours there is no ‘compromise’ with living in a society; you want it your way, all the way, all the time. You really are the “baby state”. Just read the words of McD or Walt; or note the hypocrisy of loving Galt’s Gulch which has to be processed under zoning laws, and calling new urbanism collectivism which is processed under the same laws. It will never be that way…….you will never get to be an island….living in society means we become part of the social contract…and we derive both rights and responsibilities from that…… I don’t want the world to do as I please…I recognize that the world is not black and white…it is a nuanced place…….it is a place where compromise between conflicting philosophies and ideologies must occur… it is a place where other people may have some say over some aspects of my life in exchange for liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and security.
    The point that you guys have such a hard time with that is why I continue to point out that you live in Candyland.

    Like

  4. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    “Mending Wall” is a metaphorical poem written in blank verse, published in 1914, by Robert Frost (1874–1963). The poem appeared as the first selection in Frost’s second collection of poetry, North of Boston. It is set in the countryside and is about one man questioning why he and his neighbor must rebuild the stone wall dividing their farms each spring.
    The neighbor rebuilds the wall without question, quoting “Good fences make good neighbors,” a line listed by the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations as a mid 17th century proverb. But Frost’s narrator questions the proverb, noting that neither his apple trees nor his neighbor’s pine trees are likely to encroach on the other’s property. He says, “Before I built a wall I’d ask to know / What I was walling in or walling out / And to whom I was like to give offense.” He also observes, both at the poem’s opening and again midway through the poem, “Something there is that doesn’t love a wall,” referring to the forces of nature that bring a wall to decay and require it to be repaired and rebuilt. But the neighbor is not receptive to the narrator’s doubts, quoting again at the poem’s close that “Good fences make good neighbors.”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mending_Wall
    What Was the Berlin Wall?
    The Berlin Wall was both the physical division between West Berlin and East Germany from 1961 to 1989 and the symbolic boundary between democracy and Communism during the Cold War.
    Dates: August 13, 1961 — November 9, 1989
    Also Known As: Berliner Mauer (in German)
    Overview of the Berlin Wall
    The Berlin Wall was erected in the dead of night and for 28 years kept East Germans from fleeing to the West. Its destruction, which was nearly as instantaneous as its creation, was celebrated around the world.
    http://history1900s.about.com/od/coldwa1/a/berlinwall.htm
    We know you know about Berlin. http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2010/04/1945—the-year-easter-was-cancelled.html#more
    A major feature of The Citadel in a wall, seven miles long,
    So how can you say “I don’t exactly know how places like Citadel fit in with the idea of a Great Divide” ???
    You can’t get much more devisive than that, and 7 mile walls don’t come cheap. Ask Hadrian and the Chinese.
    Greg, only asking for gun owners to make an advanced commitment of financial responsibility and a real commitment to “keeping” the guns you supposedly are so fond of. Go ahead, buy a howitzer, but make sure you hang onto it, and that you don’t lose your house should you fail in your responsibility. Yes indeed, the illegal gun market prices will rise, as illegal guns are harder to get. Deal with it!

    Like

  5. George Rebane Avatar

    DougK 935am – as long as you understand that the Citadel-like walls are 1) not meant to keep anyone in against their wishes, and 2) only meant to keep out those who want to come in by force and force their own agenda; and what the purpose of the Berlin Wall was, then we can understand in what sense the desired division is implemented.
    You seem to be attempting to counter something that was not proposed by anyone. Clearly the residents of Citadel will be those who fear a physical assault on them because of their beliefs not shared by the attackers. A fortress is for defense, not offense.
    But what no one on the Left wants to discuss is the motivating phenomena that lead people starting to again build such redoubts. Why are some minorities beginning to take that extra step now? The Mormons did it 150 years ago for obvious reasons. The Amish and other religious groups forming in the past saw no need for such defenses, as ultimately did the Mormons (although even today they are more than ready for a physical confrontation).

    Like

  6. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Assume it is built, George, and now ask any kid 16 or older if they are “happy” there. Against their will? 18th birthday will be Freedom Day.

    Like

  7. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Here’s another system for controlling the illegal use of guns that should be implemented, nationwide:
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/20/us-usa-guns-ammunition-idUSBRE90J02K20130120
    Just out of curiosity, is it illegal to go to Nevada, buy ammo, and come back to California? Gun powder sniffing dogs at the fruit fly inspection stations? Where do Greg, George, and Walt buy their ammo? Best deals?

    Like

  8. Gregory Avatar

    Ref. 9:35
    Should Keachie be forced to buy liability insurance before posting to blogs (his or anyone else’s) or writing to a newspaper editor? Just because there’s a constitutional right to free speech doesn’t mean he should be able to exercise it without having the means to pay for the damages he’ll cause from the occasional defamation.
    Maybe we should also charge jurors for an insurance policy in case they violate the law and damage the process. Just think of all the possible revenue enhancements!
    In short, Keach, don’t expect infringements like requiring someone to buy insurance before they exercise their 2nd amendment rights to survive court challenges.

    Like

  9. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Nothing I’ve written has ever killed anyone. You’re the living proof.

    Like

  10. Gregory Avatar

    How sad for you, Keach.
    Driving is a privilege, self defense is a right, and it’s completely transparent that the insurance idea is not to solve an existing problem of liability but rather to infringe on the right to possess and use arms.

    Like

  11. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    You’ll note that my ideas have focused on the first five years, of a decreasing bonding expense, not insurance, but the concepts are related. Steering the vehicle may be a privilege, but using public right-of-ways is, guess what? A Right! Remember that wonderful rantfest on The Union about Newtown Road, where somebody never heard from on any other issue, claiming to be a female resident of the area, carried on and on about her “right” to run over the bicyclists? Ah, the good old days….do you suppose she was a he in drag, maybe even someone you know? hehehhee…

    Like

  12. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    If you own a vehicle, whether you are the driver or not, you can be held responsible for any damage it causes. Just ask any company owner who’s idiot choice of a delivery person results in an accident. Thus your use of the public right of ways, in this case, freeways, where pedestrians and bicycles are forbidden, is restricted by the need to insure, either self insure or pay a company to take on the risk. Using a public right of way is therefore pretty much requiring of insurance, even those the use of those right of ways is a right. Being the active driver is the only part of that equation that is a privilege. It’s kinda like your pilot’s license, just saying, no one can stop me from hiring a pilot. as freedom to travel is probably more basic than self defense. Ask any prisoner in a jail.

    Like

  13. Gregory Avatar

    Keach, how sad for you,. No, the owner of a stolen vehicle is not responsible for damages caused by the thief, only authorized drivers and you do have the right to walk wherever you want, assuming you have the right of way.
    Regarding arms, what part of ‘shall not be infringed’ are you still unclear on?

    Like

  14. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    How sad for Greg, as there are mixed cases on what happens when you leave the keys in the ignition and thief B runs off and injures C, and C then attempts to recover damages from you.
    http://digitalcommons.law.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3457&context=lawreview

    Like

  15. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    And do you really think the parents of Sandy Hook will be unable to recover from the mother Lanza’s estate for negligence? The brother better hope dad’s got something for him, mom’s money is done history.

    Like

  16. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    “Regarding arms, what part of ‘shall not be infringed’ are you still unclear on? ”
    The part that says, “move along, there’s nothing to see at Sandy Hook, no laws need to be changed or added.”
    Yup, I’m unclear on that part, and addressing mental health alone will not do the job that needs to be done. Let’s see how many net members NRA has two years from now. NRA type money will show up on the other side, and you can have a taste of your own medicine in Congress.
    “Regarding arms, what part of ‘shall not be infringed’ are you still unclear on? “

    Like

  17. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    Doug,
    Lets look at a few things here.
    Amendment I
    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.
    Yet all of these go against much of the rhetoric on RR. We are supposed to believe we are a Christian nation, Islam should be censored and suppressed, protesters who peaceably assemble to redress their grievances on public property should be arrested, free speech zones are OK.
    “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.”
    Yet with the very next amendment we should ignore the regulated part of the amendment because regulations are equal to infringement or “taking our guns away”.
    It appears to be very selective and hypocritical on both counts. Right Wing Ideologues are hilarious with their lack of comprehension of the US Constitution and the history behind it.

    Like

  18. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 553pm – “Yet all of these go against much of the rhetoric on RR. We are supposed to believe we are a Christian nation, Islam should be censored and suppressed, protesters who peaceably assemble to redress their grievances on public property should be arrested, free speech zones are OK”
    Ben, where oh where do you get all this crap? And this is the scary part about you progressives, such reasoning for/from you would be admissible in a court of law.

    Like

  19. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    The only way a person can have the opinions expressed above by BenE is if they are an absolute moron. How a supposedly intelligent person, (self described) such as BenE can interpret the writings an desires to protect the freedoms of our Constitution as some form of tyranny shows how well the system has dumbed down the morons. Amazing!

    Like

  20. Ben Emery Avatar
    Ben Emery

    George,
    I find it amusing that you guys get so bent out of shape when somebody uses a general brush to categorize a common theme on your blog. Nobody has to directly say it for it to be true, most conservatives that comment on RR believe we are a Christian nation. I come to this conclusion by what is conveyed in the discussions on RR among other right wing places.
    I will say this and leave it alone. George Rebane and virtually all conservative participants on RR have no idea what motivates liberals/progressives/collectivists/socialists/communists (Fill In The Blank/ FITB) or what ever is the name of the day for those who disagree with your positions. The great divide is never more apparent when you try to explain the reasoning being a FITB motivations. Broad brushing isn’t only misused but abused at nausea by the Rebane’s, Steele’s, Juvinall’s of the world.
    In the most simplistic terms I can think of.
    Equality doesn’t mean everyone gets the same end result
    Equality means everyone gets the same access and opportunity

    Like

  21. Walt Avatar

    Ben works on the old school LIB principal. Like his fessing up to vandalism just because “he” didn’t like what was going on.
    Then there is that pesky 2ND he dislikes so much. Ben posts the wordage, then tries to rewrite the meaning of those words. Right back to ” Yes, that want the words say, but this is what they “really” meant to say”. Hence their “revisionism”.
    “In the most simplistic terms I can think of.
    Equality doesn’t mean everyone gets the same end result
    Equality means everyone gets the same access and opportunity”
    And just what’s wrong with that? OH… That IS what’s wrong in your LIB eyes
    ” everyone should have an “equal” cut, without doing their “equal part”
    That’s the diff between you and me. ” Say” we have a (ha)partnership on a job, I do MOST of the work, (if not all) and you would demand your 50% no matter how little of a contribution you made.
    YUP,, that sums up LIBS in a nutshell.

    Like

  22. Gregory Avatar

    “”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.”
    Yet with the very next amendment we should ignore the regulated part of the amendment because regulations are equal to infringement or “taking our guns away”.”
    No Ben, a well-regulated militia isn’t a reference to regulations passed by Congress and signed into law.
    Ben appears to be saying infringements that are regulations enacted into law are OK because of the “well-regulated” mention in the prefatory clause; sorry, Ben, but it’s a “well-regulated militia” that is desired, not a “well-regulated people”. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed BECAUSE a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state.

    Like

  23. George Rebane Avatar

    BenE 1011am – That you find amusement on these pages is good, and most certainly one of my objectives for laboring in this vineyard. Thank you for the kind sentiment.
    Any model is good only to the extent that it reliably explains and predicts observations. Posit that my understanding of progressives’ motivations is poor (or as you claim, non-existent). Nevertheless, I am most satisfied by what you leave me (us?), because the performance of the model used to understand and then predict leftwing doings continues to be unerring. Perhaps that’s all that we can ask for.
    And thank your for your “simplistic terms” on equality. While all may agree on the first one, the rub is in how one defines “same access and opportunity” in the second. I suspect we may differ on that. Stay amused.

    Like

  24. Gregory Avatar

    “I find it amusing that you guys get so bent out of shape when somebody uses a general brush to categorize a common theme on your blog.”
    Ben, what you call a “general brush” are your usual ludicrous caricatures “generally” unsupportable by any close reading of anything that George or the other conservatives have written.
    “[M]ost conservatives that comment on RR believe we are a Christian nation”— Not being one, I’d not deign to speak for conservatives in general, but as the Wiki states “The majority of Americans (73%) identify themselves as Christians and about 20% have no religious affiliation”; mix that with Frisch’s general opinion that as long as you get a 50% +1 majority, anything goes, it would appear that the USA is a Christian nation. However, we still have a Constitution to limit those pesky Christians:”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”. Now, why did those now dead white guys who were virtually all Christians put that in?

    Like

  25. Walt Avatar

    Has “O” signed the ” Barney Fife” addendum to the 2ND?
    That is were you can only carry one bullet in your “left”
    breast pocket ( otherwise a felony) and you can only insert
    that cartridge upon approval from a higher authority. ( submitted in writing, three individual copies, for City, state, and FED)
    You must allow up to two weeks for proper authorization to do so.( circumstances be damned)That includes any private residence.( we have to keep them locked up, trigger locked, disassembled, and well out of reach at any given time as it is.)
    See, in the LIBS mind, they can get ya’ for excessive ammo possession, if not for anything else. This is one way for them to try and get around the backlash of just how much ammo a gun can hold.

    Like

  26. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    BenE once again shows the arrogance of a liberal buffoon. They are too stupid to know how ridiculous they sound (Constitutionally and p;practically) . But keep it up BenE, you are a textbook example of a “clueless” American voter.

    Like

  27. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    I suppose General Colin Powell doesn’t understand the 2nd amendment as well as Greg and Todd?
    http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/21/colin-powell-the-second-amendment-calls-for-regulations-you-know/

    Like

  28. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Exercise your right to CCM in FL and get busted: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkclsB7M0g4

    Like

  29. Gregory Avatar

    Well, let’s see: “The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause.”
    -Thus Spake SCOTUS in DC v. Heller
    “A well-regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state” just announces a purpose for the second part. In short, it ain’t about duck hunting and no, there is not a single item in the Bill of Rights that is an expansion of Federal power, including the 2nd. No, neither MSLSD or Gen. Powell have it right.

    Like

  30. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    “Well-regulated,” and Lanza’s mom was a member of what “well-regulated” militia? It’s got the strangest interpretation of what behaviors are called for, in regards to keeping guns away from those she at least felt should be committed. BTW, Reed’s locksmiths has some good deals on used and new safes these days.

    Like

  31. Ryan Mount Avatar

    “Well-regulated,” and Lanza’s mom was a member of what “well-regulated” militia?
    Just like the Citizen’s United thing, Militias are made of people (citizens). It’s not an abstraction. So in order to have a armed militia, we need to have armed citizens to make up that militia. One is predicated (literally here in the grammar of the 2nd Amendment) on the other.
    And also just like the Citizen’s United thing, if we are serious about gun control, and I believe we are substantively not, we are going to have to amend the Constitution to define specifically what guns people can have, and which they can not. Wondering out loud, I have to think someone as smart as Madison would have thought about that already. Why not exclude a cannon or a bombs which were around in the late 18th Century?

    Like

  32. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    “Why not exclude a cannon or a bombs which were around in the late 18th Century?” ~Ryan Mount~
    Puzzlement here. Bombs and cannons are excluded under current laws. Is the NRA now arguing against those laws? An AR-15, with a maxi sized magazine, in the hands of someone who can pull the trigger as fast as possible, does an excellent rendition of a unidirectional bomb, with similar effects, in a very short span of time. When done, “There’s no There, There.” or living human beings.

    Like

  33. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    “In order to have a well regulated militia…” I note that the SIZE of the militia is not specified. Do we need to arm the kiddies an have one 310 million strong? Seems to me that 10 times the size of the current US of A armed forces should do. Certainly 20 million would do, out of 310 million folks. I think I read somewhere that there are 80 million gun owners in the US of A, so 3/4ters of them could lose their rights through one technicality or another or inability to afford insurance, and we’d still be able to come up with a 20 million person armed militia.
    Tell me again how the lax system of laws and regulations that led to Sandy Hook and so many other tragedies, is the best we can do?

    Like

  34. Ryan Mount Avatar

    [face palm]
    Doug, it’s almost not worth dignifying such a misrepresentation of what I said with a response. I would appreciate it if you would be considerate and include things in context instead of being drawn to the dog whistle rhetoric. Tempting, I understand. Everyone is out to score a quick win these days.
    However, since you’ve put me a defensive position, I’m not one to turn the other cheek.
    1) If you want to undo the 2nd Amendment, you’re gonna need to amend the Constitution. It’s not a tricky proposition to understand. What’s stopping the gun-reform crowd? (Answer: the answer to that is endless, as in non-stop, equivocations about things like “keep” and about what a “militia” is.)
    Passing more laws that won’t be enforced is not going to get us anywhere except for more gun sales, although not all of Obama’s recent executive orders are unreasonable like universal/uniform background checks and increased research.
    2) Regarding the cannon thing, the point was, Madison was no dummy. He was a hell of lot smarter than anyone in these blogs. And he and the country were surrounded by all kinds of weapons of mass destruction, for lack of a better term. Did Madison simply ignore them? Why not just say muskets instead of arms? That’s what I was asking. It was a question, not an assertion.

    Like

  35. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Well, we could just “Repeal the 2nd Amendment”….if you all are not careful, that’s what will happen. Make up a bumper sticker, put it on obnoxious or poorly driven cars.

    Like

  36. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    On even numbered days, gun owners profess that the 2nd amendment is necessary so that they can form up as a militia to fight of the Russkis, or Chinese or Al Qaeda. On odd numbered days they claim it is so that they can make sure our existing government militia, AKA, Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force, stays “well regulated.” Two wildly different interpretations for that part of the 2nd, but, boy, try messing with the “shall not be infringed” part and that means only one thing, “We keep our guns, and the public keeps Sandy Hook.” And they ignore the fact that the military can buy all the guns of the citizens, for less than two weeks of their yearly budget.

    Like

  37. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    You want to arm me? Good. Then arm me with a school psychologist at my school who has time to do more than test and sit in meetings about testing.
    Arm me with enough counselors so we can build skills to prevent violence, have meaningful discussions with students about their future and not merely frantically adjust student schedules like a Jenga game.
    Arm me with social workers who can thoughtfully attend to a student’s and her family’s needs so I. Can. Teach.
    Arm me with enough school nurses so that they are accessible to every child and can work as a team with me rather than operate their offices as de facto urgent care centers.
    Arm me with more days on the calendar for teaching and learning and fewer days for standardized testing.
    Arm me with class sizes that allow my colleagues and I to know both our students and their families well.
    Arm my colleagues and I with the time it takes to improve together and the time it takes to give great feedback to students about their work and progress.
    Until you arm me to the hilt with what it will take to meet the needs of an increasingly vulnerable student population, I respectfully request you keep your opinions on schools and our safety to yourself NRA. Knock it off.
    -Mary Cathryn Ricker, President of the St. Paul Federation of Teachers.
    This was shared on my wall today. I thought I would share it with you and I hope you share it with others.

    Like

  38. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    In case yesterday’s “Adventures in Educatyion” in Texas didn’t amuse you enough, try this: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/23/ca-school-district-buys-14-military-grade-weapons-to-defend-against-shootings/

    Like

  39. George Rebane Avatar

    DougK 857am – Huh??!!
    900am – Until she gets ‘armed’ with all those prophylactics whose cost is trans-astronomical, in the interval she might consider a legal gun or two on campus. And we note again that the progressive response is ever more government of demonstrated ineffectiveness, and never an attempt to re-culturate ourselves to behaviors that then benefited all and did not annihilate the public purse.
    922am – the piece is only amusing in the sense of the lamestream’s continued ignorance about firearms (the liberal chorus across the land just acts as an echo chamber). The offending ARs were neither “military grade” nor “high caliber”. But they would be effective against any shooter(s) attempting to replicate Newtown. The policy of their use is the final determinant.

    Like

  40. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    If they are not “military grade” there goes the argument in favor of the citizens regulating the US of A armed forces.

    Like

  41. George Rebane Avatar

    DougK 1137am – You have totally lost me. Wiser heads than mine need to continue this thread.

    Like

  42. Douglas Keachie Avatar
    Douglas Keachie

    Frankly, those who go on and on about either martyrdom via taking out our armed forces, or by the other interpretation, taking out the armed forces of a foreign invader, are simply out to enjoy the glow of pre-martyrdom adulation among themselves. In the second case, they might have something of a helper effect. Local citizens do have one advantage, they know the local terrain. In the first case, the argument has been made that the US of A armed forces would turn on the government that tried to get them to attack the citizens of the USA. If that is the case, the US of A armed forces will be doing the job handily, and the citizens do not need to get hurt, trying to do a Pros job, with amateur equipment.

    Like

  43. JesusBetterman Avatar

    I think a pair of cops, carefully concealed, at opposites of every school in SoCal, would be a good idea until this nutcase is eliminated or locked up. Put inflatable dummies in uniform in the police car and park it on the street, if it is safe to attract fire without collateral damage. In twelve hours (if he’s using backroads) we might have to do the same in NorCal.

    Like

Leave a comment