The Liberal Case for Gun Ownership

The Terrierman laid out an excellent case for why gun ownership and gun rights advocates should never be confined to a single party, but rather should be embraced by every American.

The Liberal Case for Gun Ownership

. . . The old liberals know the value of guns.

They know that after the Civil War, southern whites denied blacks the right to own guns, because it was easier to lynch an unarmed black man than it was one who owned a deer rifle and 200 rounds of ammunition.

Some gay Americans have discovered this secret knowledge as well. As Jonathan Rauch wrote in Salon magazine back in March of 2000:

"Thirty-one states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible."

If this sounds like Revolutionary talk, it is. It is the kind of language our revolutionary Founding Fathers might have used if they were gay and living in America today. . . .

Mark Vanderberg's Gun Rights Advocates Podcast (download it here) a few weeks ago featured a reading of the entire blog post. Truly, it was awe-inspiring and brought tears to my eyes at one point.

We need to help everyone realize that just like the 1st Amendment where people may not agree with what is said when others exercise their rights, they still, for the most point, support people's rights to exercise them.

It should be exactly the same way with the 2nd Amendment.

Remember:
Armed Gays Don't Get Bashed!

First Honor Killing in U.S.?

'Honor Killing' Motive for Slain Sisters?

It's been one week since two teen sisters were found shot to death inside a cab outside a Texas hotel, and their father, who police say is the sole suspect in the New Year's Day killings, remains at large. . .

Before the funeral Saturday, Patricia Said made a public appeal for her husband to turn himself in. "We will not quit until we find you," she said. "If it's the last thing I do, I promise, I will find you."

The couple's son... spoke to the media, saying that his father had "messed everything up" by murdering his sisters, who have been described as popular students at Lewisville High School and inseparable siblings.

At the vigil Thursday, Islam Said also tried to squash rumors that the family's Muslim heritage may have had something to do with his sisters' murders.

"Religion has nothing to do with this and it was very wrong," Islam Said said, according to the Star-Telegram in Texas. "Islam is not a bad religion."

Still, the case has generated significant speculation — including by some friends of the girls — that the father's motive may have been some sort of an "honor killing" in the Muslim tradition. Specifically, the reported Westernized behavior of the teens, including the boys they dated, may have brought shame to a father said to be strict and religious, prompting the killings.

There are several things that prompt me to believe that this is an honor killing:

• First of all, both sisters were murdered. There doesn't seem to be any indication that this murder was a robbery gone wrong.
• Secondly, the father who happens to be the prime suspect has gone missing since the murder.
• Next, the slain's brother admitted that his father "messed everything up" by murdering his sisters.
• Lastly, the family's Muslim heritage cannot be forgotten. After all, honor killings aren't associated with Zoroastrianism.

I hope and pray that the police are able to find and capture the father so that they can ascertain the motives of the killing. However, if the father is found to be guilty of murdering his daughter in an honor killing he needs to be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

We cannot tolerate murder under the guise of cultural differences.

Maher: Bitter Atheist Attacks Americans Everywhere

OR
Maher: "Majority of Americans Crazy, but I'm sane."

Bill Maher... offending the majority of America, the majority of the time.

The vast majority of Americans are people of faith. The majority are people who understand that we are not masters of our own destiny, people who believe that there is something greater than themselves in this life, but mostly people humble enough to admit that they don't have all the answers; can't save themselves; and that they would be incredibly foolish to think they know better. Bill Maher however, is not like the majority of Americans. Bill Maher, one of the 'elitists', who represents such a small minority of anyone's ideology garners quite a bit of attention, hell he even has a has a crappy show on HBO because of it.

Maher, as he's accustomed to doing, let loose on a tirade seeing how many Americans he could offend at once during a recent interview on the Late Show with Conan O'Brien a few nights back. I'm fairly sure that Conan was just happy that the interview was over. In fact, you could hear quite a few nervous laughs come from Conan.

What follows is a partial transcript (go easy on me I transcribed it myself) of the interview.

Conan: What's up with the Republicans now?
Bill: I'd love to talk about the Republicans...
Conan: Let's talk about Mitt Romney...
Bill: Mitt Romney's an interesting case, it's funny the Christian hillbillies that make up the majority of the base... you have a very sensitive crowd (Remarking on the lack of laughs and utter silence when the crowd was stunned in shock realizing that this man just said something so offensive. His attacks continue...)
Bill: So mitt romney had to make a speech... That's not what Mitt Romney said, "Look I believe in something completely crazy just like YOU do, what's important is that we're all religious and we believe in something completely irrational that's completely [censored]."



(anti-religion rant continued)
...You can't be a rational person 6 days of the week and put on a suit and make rational decisions and go to work and on one day the week go to a building and think that your drinking the blood of a 2,000 year old space god... that doesn't make you a person of faith... that makes you a schizophrenic. Um..
Conan: You're saying anyone who's religious is a schizophrenic?
Bill: Well yes, sort of because they have walled off a part of their mind. Do you believe in a talking snake?
Conan: a.. no not a talking snake.
Bill: Then you're not a religious person. Mike Huckabee, who won the Iowa Caucus, doesn't believe in evolution. And he's not that sure about gravity.
Conan: I don't remember him saying that about gravity.
Bill: Well, do you believe in evolution?
Conan: Do I believe in evolution? Yes, I do
Bill: Right, he thinks the world is 6,000 years old. Senator Robert Byrd is 8,000 years old.

Wow, who's logic is faulty there. Since when did biology have anything to do with physics? Good logic there Bill. Evolution (i.e. Darwin's theory of evolution) = Gravity, so that must also mean that Centripetal Force = Photosynthesis.

What are you going to do with the guy... he's like an aged senile Bill Murray, and that's only because he shares similar facial features. Believe me, it's really a big insult to Bill Murray to imply that they even resemble each other. Bill Maher's not funny, he's not entertaining, he's actually kind of sad, but really he's just mostly pathetic.

I'm kinda glad someone felt bad for him and gave him a show on HBO.
After all, I don't get HBO.

Please keep him on those channels so I won't to listen to his lunacy.

Caucus?

Did you know what a caucus was?

This is a great video explaining the caucus progress.

Happy New Year!

Dang this is the third time at least that I've started a post and lost part or all of it... third times' the charm.

I hope everyone's 2007 went well, and I hope everyone has a great 2008.

Now that it's a new year it's important to start the year off right, by reminding our Senators and Congressmen that they're only in office to represent their constituents.

I thought I'd like to alert you to some of the most notable acts that need to be acted on of 2007.

One of the best resolutions introduced in 2007 is HR 4900 which was introduced just before the winter recess of 2007. It's called, The “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007".

For too long the BATFE has has been able to make and change it's own rules and has had to answer no-one. Hypothetically speaking if one were to convert a firearm to an illegal machine gun it would be illegal. However, if an employee of the BATFE were to convert a firearm to an illegal machine gun and mail it (illegally) to a private citizen the private citizen would be guilty of possessing a machine gun while the BATFE would be exempt from any repercussions.

However ATF abuses aren't just hypothetical situations, just ask Red's Trading Post (Interviews 1, 2) and KT Ordnance (Alert, Interview, Newstory). In addition to these two businesses many others have been targeted unfairly or even lost their FFL (Federal Firearms Liscense) completely as a result of small paperwork errors.

Among some of the more noteable provisions are:

• Requires BATFE to establish clear investigative guidelines.
• Clarifies the standard for “willful” violations—allowing penalties for intentional, purposeful violations of the law, but not for simple paperwork mistakes.
• Permanently bans creation of a centralized electronic index of dealers’ records (read as a list of who to confiscate from)
• Repeals the Brady Act’s “interim” waiting period provisions, which expired in 1998

While this act isn't perfect, it's a good start.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 4900, the “Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Reform and Firearms Modernization Act of 2007.”


Secondly, there are two other bits of legislation which desperately need to be acted upon and passed so they do not die like in past sessions of Congress.

These two are the Senate S. 388 (govtrack.us) and the Congress' H.R. 861 (govtrack.us), National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2007.

I've had my concealed carry permit for several years now.

Like every other legal concealed carry permit holder of The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I've never been convicted or found guilty of a violent crime or felony; I've never renounced my citizenship; I am a legal resident of the United States; submitted myself to background checks; I am not an unlawful user or addicted to any drugs or alcohol legal or illegal; I've submitted several character references; and I've had the approval of my county's Sheriff in order to receive my Concealed Carry Permit.


However, while my driver’s license that bestows me the privilege to drive (automobile related deaths are nearly twice as high as firearm related deaths, and nearly 5 times as high for deaths of children) is recognized by every state of the union; several foreign countries; and our own federal government the same is not true for my Pennsylvania License to Carry Firearms with legalizes me to exercise my Constitutional Right.

Unfortunately, none of the states which share a border with Pennsylvania recognize Pennsylvania’s License to Carry Firearms; that means that I have to remove my firearm and leave it at home to legally travel to neighboring states.

The notion that I need to be disarmed before I can legally travel to a neighboring state is ridiculous and frankly it discourages me from visiting those other states. After all, I stand a much larger chance of dying as a result of a violent crime when I'm disarmed so why would I want to put myself at risk?

Please read the NRA’s fact sheet regarding concealed carry and these two pieces of legislation.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and urge him or her to cosponsor and support H.R. 861, the “National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2007.” Also, please contact your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121, and urge them to support S. 388, “… to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.”