stolen borrowed from Free North Carolina, courtesy of Gabe Suarez)
The concern is that the good guy CCW, or off duty LEO for that matter, taking out the bad guy might be misidentified by responding police and shot. Police shoot one of their own every 18 months around the nation so it is a very plausible event. Contributing factors seem to be as follows -
You are more likely to be mistakenly shot by police in areas where the carry of weapons by citizens is not common. Places like New York or Los Angeles immediately come to mind. The notion seems to be that only cops or criminals have guns. This is not the attitude I see nationwide but it is prevalent enough in those areas to be aware of it.
You are more likely to be shot if the first thing the police see is the gun….specially if it is pointed in their direction. Understand that not all officers are well trained by their agencies and some may over react to the obvious sight of a weapon, not stopping to think of who is holding it or why.More @ Suarez International
(I’m doing MY part! – Guffaw)
I’ve said it here and elsewhere, but I’ll say it again:
Democrats are the party of hatred, envy and bigotry. It’s the basis of everything they do, and they use it at every opportunity.
If you disagree with them on race, it’s because you’re white (even if you’re Thomas Sowell, Mia Love or Marco Rubio). If you disagree with them about women’s rights, it’s because you’re a man (even if you’re Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter or Megyn Kelly). If you disagree with them about gay rights, it’s because you’re straight (even if you’re Liz Cheney, Jimmy LaSalvia or Chris Barron). They’re not interested in empowering minorities, they’re only interested in punishing white people. They’re not interested in empowering women, they’re only interested in punishing men. They’re not interested in empowering gays, they’re only interested in punishing straight people. They’re not interested in helping people become successful, they’re only interested in punishing the wealthy. They don’t want justice, in fact they work hard to subvert it… because they pander to those who want revenge.
Of course, they’ll always claim the opposite. But it isn’t the Republicans who wanted a Supreme Court Justice who thought she could do better than others because she wasn’t white. It isn’t the Republicans who called a black politician a “house nigger.” It isn’t the Republicans who coined the term “white hispanic.” It’s not the Republicans who TO THIS DAY call Justice Thomas an “Uncle Tom.” It’s not the Republicans who delight in “Teabagger” as a derogatory term.
It isn’t the Republicans who are proud to be associated with openly racist organizations like the NAACP and La Raza. It wasn’t the Republicans who proudly put a sexual predator in the White House in the 90s. It wasn’t the Republicans who were proud of voting for our current President because he’s not white. It’s not the Republicans who have fought tooth and nail to make it easy to get on welfare, but hard to succeed in business.
Democrats have spent the last several years calling Republicans “terrorists,” “suicide bombers” and “hostage takers.” But virtually every supporter of Hamas in America is a Democrat.
I’m an agnostic, and yes, I find it annoying when Christians act as if I’m some poor deluded soul who must be saved from his own stupidity. But at least Christians treat me as if I am a human being, and by their lights they are trying to help me. They’ll try to change my mind, but they don’t try to have me arrested or outcast when I don’t. The anti-Christian left thinks I should be punished for daring to disagree with them, IF they concede that I should be allowed to exist AT ALL.
“Diversity” my hairy butt. I want my doctor, my lawyer, my local police and firefighters, to be the best, and I don’t care what color they are, whether their underwear has a fly, or who they kiss when they go home in the evening.
My largest bone of contention with this rant is two-fold. First, they say Democrats, when I would say PROGRESSIVES – not necessarily the same thing. Second, they don’t rant at the Republicans, for all their misdeeds – The Patriot Act and it’s evil children, for example.
I’m a libertarian (small L), and I say vote ‘em ALL OUT! Of course, the only problem with that, of course, is with whom do we replace?
Rand Paul:”If I had been told to get out of the street as a teenager, there would have been a distinct possibility that I might have smarted off. But, I wouldn’t have expected to be shot.”
The outrage in Ferguson is understandable—though there is never an excuse for rioting or looting. There is a legitimate role for the police to keep the peace, but there should be a difference between a police response and a military response.
The images and scenes we continue to see in Ferguson resemble war more than traditional police action.
Glenn Reynolds, in Popular Mechanics, recognized the increasing militarization of the police five years ago. In 2009 he wrote:
Soldiers and police are supposed to be different. … Police look inward. They’re supposed to protect their fellow citizens from criminals, and to maintain order with a minimum of force.
It’s the difference between Audie Murphy and Andy Griffith. But nowadays, police are looking, and acting, more like soldiers than cops, with bad consequences. And those who suffer the consequences are usually innocent civilians.
You should go and read the whole article.
Now I’m in no way suggesting disarming the police. However, as with so many things, this is about mindset. When I took Police Science courses (1973-75), it was about apprehending lawbreakers and protecting the rights and persons of all involved – suspects, subjects, witnesses and police. For some reason, we seem to have lost that. And the term Peace Officer is no longer in use. The doctrine of posse comitatus is no longer in effect. We are no longer worried about the military being used as civilian police. The police have become the military.
h/t Brock Townsend
Yeah, it’s a song title, above.
Sometimes, I get down on myself, because I once had a wife, a daughter, a home, a ‘career’.
No wife, no daughter, no ‘career’ (I’m disabled). I DO
have share a home, though.
And that’s my point.
Living Freedom recently had a posting entitled
It mentioned traits of folks down-on-their-luck who, if they are not thriving, do more than just survive.
I could have been worse off than I am. I lost my home as my income decreased, and a good friend took me in.
But, that’s not my point.
MY POINT IS I’M GRATEFUL FOR HER HAVING DONE SO!
Certainly, I wish things could be different. It would be nice to have a wife, to have my daughter back. To have my house back. To have the income I once had.
But, not being a child, I know wishing doesn’t make it so.
So (most days) I choose GRATITUDE!
A few years back Superman (2011 in DC Comics) announced he was renouncing his U.S. citizenship! Now, I’ve not been a comic book reader/consumer since I was 10-11 years old, but I was always a big Superman fan.
I found this action repulsive. One – that the beloved character would do such a thing, and Two – that in so doing such a children’s fictional comic would make the national news. After all, they ARE just comic books.
Fast-forward to NOW. It was announced a couple of months ago (and made the national news again recently) that beloved perennially-in-high-school everyteen comic book character Archie Andrews would die in the comic book. This was NOT due to his having been in high school 78 years.
It was because he would dive in front of an assailant attacking his friend with a gun, and his taking a bullet for him! Archie’s GAY friend!
What do I make of this?
Political correctness aside, I like to believe I would have done the same thing for any good childhood friend. My best friend from third grade through college was a legitimately brilliant. IQ off the charts. Socially, less skilled. But, except for his studies and church, my constant companion. He was the geek I aspired to be, even though I didn’t have the mental acuity.
After his own father disowned him when he came out of the closet as a college freshman, and my own father lampooned his gayness, I had to stand up for Carl. Fortunately, no one shot him. And I, myself, had to overcome childhood indoctrination regarding gayness, and what that means. After all, sexual preference aside, he remained my friend!
I’m not yet certain how I feel about comic books being tools for political correctness. Of course, even Peanuts eventually had a Black character. I suppose comic books must change with the times, as well. I don’t know how the Archie friend’s character’s gayness is shown to the comic book audience. Obviously kids are more aware of such things than I was 50-60 years ago.
But, I know one thing.
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. – John 15:13 (ASV)
If we can teach this to the self-absorbed-faces-glued-to-their-cell-phone adolescents, then all is not lost. If only adults read comic books.
(re: ‘offensive’ sports team names…)
Just call them the Redskin Potatoes. That way nobody gets hurt.
And no one gets to amputate the dictionary.
Light pink/tan people remain white.
By now you’ve likely seen the suggestion to drop Washington
from the name, because it’s too embarrassing too.
Hypocrisy though is no longer racist, according to The National Council for La Raza, speaking for the United Negro College Fund, according to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, at a meeting of the Black Congressional Caucus. It remains improper to call mulattos mulatto.
This is cultural Marxism, an effort to control thought and language, by applying opprobrium, cultural taboos and using social constructs designed to pit classes against each other in a power struggle. It leads up to use of force justified by new law, to exercise political control over a population. It’s a very effective political technique and tearing at the fabric of America.
(from Page Nine #136 – Alan Korwin – the Uninvited Onbudsman)
On a similar bent, have you seen the TV commercials for a Blacks Only on-line dating site? Can you imagine the furor if there was a Whites Only dating site? THAT (of course) would be racist!
I believe for CCW folks to ‘fit in’ with the mainstream, they must dress in a similar fashion. Most of the time here in the Southwest, this is not a problem. Hawaiian shirts, square-cut camp shirts, and Mexican wedding shirts are in abundance, and even the lowly colored T-shirt can provide enough concealment for casual wear in this 100+ degree environment. (not me in the photo!)
This has not always been so for me. Working @ TMCCC, initially men were required to wear shirts and ties (management being from the Eastern United States clothing meme) and as the company prohibited weapons, one had to be discrete with regard to what kind and where one was possessing. Being a known quantity (the gun guy) in my department, I was especially singled-out for surveillance. One time, a black nylon eyeglass case I wore was accused of being a holster, another time, management prohibited all personnel beneath a certain level from carrying brief cases!
Style also enters into this equation. Col. Cooper oft made pronouncements pooh-poohing fashion, saying the utility of proper concealment was of more importance. Of course, he lived in the high desert outside a small town and could pretty much wear whatever he wanted. He wasn’t constrained by a business environment expecting 80’s cut suits (with tiny belt loops – in the 80’s). Last time I saw him in person was a warm day during which he wore a very heavy (and not stylish) suit coat over his 5″ 1911 (in a holster on a beefy belt). I know he was wearing the 1911, as he removed the coat, much to the consternation of the young turk law enforcement types in the audience at the time. You see, he was speaking on a community college campus and firearms were not permitted there. A couple actually lunged out of their seats, as though they were going to wrestle the old man to the ground and arrest him!
Women who CCW are a whole different issue. Many choose not to carry on their bodies, but use purses, briefcases and backpacks designed for such a purpose. This, of course, has both utility and drawbacks. If one chooses to leave their purse in the car, or with an unknowing luncheon partner while visiting the restroom, for example. Or grabs their wallet out of the armed purse to run into the
stop and rob convenience store, because the purse is such a pain-in-the-ass to lug around!
Of course, they might utilize one of those new bra holsters, and carrying something like a .32 or .380?
The point is that one must make allowances for fashion, but decide what works specifically for them. I’ve a fused right hip. Wearing an ankle holster on my right leg is hardly a valid choice for me. And wearing a heavy suit jacket in the Summer just invites attention. (Reminiscent of those ‘guys in suits’ (security) who hang around Las Vegas casinos not gambling in the Summer!)
I remember visiting the shopping district in a high-end neighborhood some years ago. I paid particular attention to the men I thought might be carrying a concealed weapon. I think I spotted nine men, no women, because their clothes didn’t quite fit right (they kept adjusting their belts) and seemed overly concerned about how their jackets or shirts were riding. One doesn’t do that with a cell phone.
Make right choices, for both your clothes AND your armament.
Be safe, but be comfortable. And inconspicuous.
A Federal court in Denver ruled that it is acceptable for a police chief to order subordinates to attend an Islamic event — even if they object based on religious reasons.
When Paul Fields, a Tulsa, Oklahoma police officer, objected to being forced to go to an Islamic mosque that had featured a controversial speaker (who promotes the destruction of Western civilization and the creation of an Islamic caliphate), he was ordered by superiors he must attend the mosque or suffer the consequences.
Paul Fields is a Christian.
As a Christian, his unwillingness to attend centered around the fact he did not want to go to a religious event where the topics being covered “discussed Islamic beliefs, Muhammad, Mecca, and why and how Muslims pray.”
Fields, who was one of the key officers that lead a protection program for the mosque, …
Now, I believe in the rights enumerated in the First Amendment. Speech, Press, Assembly. Freedom of Religion (or from Religion) as mandated by State authority.
Doesn’t such an order violate such a Right?
I’m betting this was all done in the name of political correctness and inclusion. Because, after all even the opinions of those seeking to destroy us have value. (yeah, right – Guffaw)
I’m certain Hillary Clinton would agree. Except she stated legal firearms owners are terrorists and as such have no right to an opinion!
h/t Preserve Freedom
(courtesy of Say Uncle…)
Did you know that the number of Americans getting benefits from the federal government each month exceeds the number of full-time workers in the private sector by more than 60 million? In other words, the number of people that are taking money out of the system is far greater than the number of people that are putting money into the system. And did you know that nearly 70 percent of all of the money that the federal government spends goes toward entitlement and welfare programs? When it comes to the transfer of wealth, nobody does it on a grander scale than the U.S. government. Most of what the government does involves taking money from some people and giving it to other people. In fact, at this point that is the primary function of the federal government.
Just check out the chart below. It comes from the Heritage Foundation, and it shows that 69 percent of all federal money is spent either on entitlements or on welfare programs…
So when people tell you that the main reason why we are being taxed into oblivion is so that we can “build roads” and provide “public services”, they are lying to you. The main reason why the government taxes you so much is so that they can take your money and give it to someone else.
(income redistribution – who knew? – Guffaw)
We have become a nation that is completely and totally addicted to government money. The following are 18 stats that prove that government dependence has reached epidemic levels…
Of course, this is what the
Fabian Socialist, Utopian, Communist, Socialist, Progressives have wanted all along. Collapse the system from within; a fundamental transformation if you will…
*the end of the world as we know it