Another Kid is Shot and our 2nd Amendment Cringes

handgun

In the Seattle area three kids have been shot by handguns in the past three weeks. According to The Seattle Times the third happened at a gas station near the Tacoma Mall. A man with a license for carrying a concealed weapon placed the gun underneath the driver’s seat as he exited the car to fill the gas tank. A three-year old in the car got the gun and fatally shot himself in the head.

This kind of tragedy is avoidable if only people exercise a little more common sense when it comes to the ownership of handguns. Don’t. Don’t own them. Far more people are shot with guns they or their family members own than by the strangers with guns. If you want to dramatically increase the likelihood that you or a member of your family is shot, own a handgun.

Where I put my foot down is on government getting involved and telling us we may not own guns. The government is not needed in this discussion. Just common sense. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: “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.” 

The Founding Fathers thought so much of this Right that they placed it second on their list of the first ten amendments, commonly known as The Bill of Rights. But a key aspect of the amendment is frequently ignored by 2nd Amendment advocates, “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state…”.  Remove that phrase and the amendment takes on more meaning. It does not say “We shall have the right to keep and bear arms in order to kill our fellow man”

World Peace

. So some regulation of firearms can and should be exercised. To say there should be none is to argue that anybody can own, build, and possess a nuclear weapon; for what is that if not a more extreme form of “arms”.

Still I oppose government banning or severely restricting handguns. But there are lots of things we as people have a right to do that common sense dictates we avoid. I always tell my kids to look both ways  and make eye contact with drivers before crossing the street, even at a cross walk. Entering an unregulated cross walk in heavy traffic may be your right. But you’ll be dead.

I’m a gun owner. Rifles and shotguns, for hunting. I have been since I was twelve years old and my Grandpa gave me a .22 rifle as a Christmas present. He had made an annual gesture of giving guns to the boys in my family for a couple of years. So in a very real sense guns are a tradition in my family.

The author with his shotgun

But for reasons I’ve already explained I have never and would never own a handgun. The only time I would ever own a handgun is if I lived on my own. Then I can be sure to never angrily use it or accidentally use it against a person in my family; and I would be sure to not have it used against me either angrily or accidentally. It’s all well and good to claim I would never use my gun in anger. But I’m sure there are many, many murders behind bars who said or thought the same thing.

Three children shot and severely injured, or killed in only three weeks in the Seattle area is too much. It’s too painful. How much do you really need your gun. Does it really protect you? Or does it just excite you? Perhaps the more important question should be, does having it increase your chance of being shot or of someone you care about being shot, or does it increase your chance of you or someone else you love ending up dead? I’ll answer the obvious question: own a handgun and dramatically increase your chances of a quick, tragic death.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

If you like this blog or find it interesting please do the author the honor of sharing it. TY.

EDITORIAL: Obama’s goofy green gas – Washington Times

The Washington Times Printing & Distributi...

Washington Times building

My Conservative friends may find it surprising that I think we as a nation should go green. My Conservative friends would appreciate that I don’t think government should be directing that movement.

As gas prices sore past $4-per gallon President Obama acts helpless. But as is pointed out in this Washington Times editorial he doesn’t need to be standing in the way of us doing for ourselves what he refuses.

EDITORIAL: Obama’s goofy green gas – Washington Times.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

(Credit to Gds44’s blog where I first came across this commentary)

Racism and Obama. For better or worse?

“My prayer is that Obama’s soaring rhetorical skills truly inspire Americans toward the better angels in our nature. And that the symbolism of a black man in the highest office in the land ends forever what little racism still exists, or the claims that racism is the cause of victimization of the African-American community in this country.”

November 5, 2008

ME

Official photographic portrait of US President...

Our President: Barrack Obama.

I wrote those words three years ago in a blog called “The New President” in which I made what I thought was an obvious statement that our nation could no longer be looked upon by its toughest inner critics as a racist nation. In the article I wrote that no predominantly white nation in world history had ever elected a person of color as their head, their president, their leader. In writing that blog the day after Barrack Obama‘s election to the most powerful office in the world I was complimentary and optimistic. Pointing out, perhaps naively, that Obama would be judged as were the 43 white men who preceded him in the office; by his accomplishments and not by the color of his skin.

It seems I may have been wrong. I’m beginning to think it’s entirely possible that Obama could be the ignition to a worsening of race relations in this country. How bad could it get? Let me put it this way: I’m fearful. I am fearful that Obama’s defeat in 11 months will be blamed on racism rather than on his failed leadership, and policies.

Yesterday a friend with whom I have profound political disagreements posted an article onto Facebook that she referred to as “the truth”. The article was called “Racism and President Obama”. In the first sentence the author, who calls themselves Jueseppi B., alleges that the United States became the model for a racist nation the day Obama was sworn in.

Though I provide a link to the article in this blog I don’t recommend reading it. It’s nothing but an idiotic racist rant. By someone in love with government hand outs and jobs all around, apparently for all his African-American friends. Unfortunately his view is increasingly common. It’s a common tactic by the political black community to scream racism every time something goes wrong for one of their own. It’s silly and lacks imagination and intelligence to presume that a nation is a model of racism when it’s population is made up of 12.6% blacks and that same nation has a black leader.

Racism still does exist in this country and its repugnant. Sadly these imbeciles who harbor such hateful views far too often reside on the right or conservative side of the political spectrum. And far too often Americans with better hearts and minds fail to loudly condemn the bigotry that is quite often directed at our President. And the problem with these facts is that you give aid and comfort to the black racists who paint all white people with the same broad brush.

This used to be a racist country. And in fairness to those who still look for it, institutional, government sanctioned racism existed during the lifetimes of most African-Americans or their parents. Thank God, and some very strong people, it does not any more.

But speaking as a white person with no racism or love of Obama I am fed up with racism being thrown out as a reason for opposing our President, or for opposing the type of governmentprograms that create an entitlement mentality and diminish personal fortitude and commitment. It’s and old song that needs to change. What is sad is that, like the boy who cried wolf, every time racism is falsely cited as the cause for a black persons failure white Americans are hardened against such claims in the future including the legitimate ones. And that’s wrong.

English: This is the long form birth certifica...

Oabama's long form birth certificate

ALL Americans should have soundly condemned the “Birther” movement against Obama and the subtle racism that was not-so-hidden in the claims that the President wasn’t born here. ALL Americans should condemn the Photoshop images of Obama made to look like some tribal medicine man. Avoid posting them on social media or waving them at demonstrations. If you can’t see the racism in such images YOU really are a bigot or an insensitive jerk.

Lastly accept that jerks like I just described DO exist and probably always will. Just like the racist Pastor Jeremiah Wright, there are always extremes on every side of an issue. But quit calling our nation and by implication all Conservative white people racist. It doesn’t help your cause.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

Did they die for more government or more Liberty?

English: U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosev...

Franklin Roosevelt address a joint session of Congress, December 8, 1941.

“A date which will live in infamy.” That’s what President Franklin Roosevelt called December 7, 1941 as he addressed Congress asking for a Declaration of War against the imperial nation of Japan. He made this call for war following the “surprise” attack on the

The U.S. Navy battleship USS California (BB-44...

Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor 70 years ago today.

U.S. Navy base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii that left over 2300 dead; nearly half of which were entombed on the battleship U.S.S. Arizona.

It’s worth noting that today’s 70th Anniversary of that infamous day follows by one day President Barrack Obama‘s biggest, latest speech in Osawatomie (pronounced oh-suh-WAHT-ah-mee) Kansas. The symbolism of Obama’s speech is supposed to be found in the location in which he chose to make it and how it was nearly 100 years from when former

English: Orotone of Theodore Roosevelt as Pres...

T.R.

President Theodore Roosevelt made his famous “New Nationalism” speech. The speech was in August 1910, more than 101 years ago; and it was nearly 50 miles away in Kansas City, Kansas. Nonetheless the current day White House nearly pulled a hamstring stretching to connect the two speeches.

In his speech Obama again made the call for more government and more regulation of business. He referred to the need to level the playing field for the great middle class of Americans. And he tried to make the connection with TR and the turn of the 20th century when he said: “At the turn of the last century, when a nation of farmers was transitioning to become the world’s industrial giant, we had to decide: Would we settle for a country where most of the new railroads and factories were being controlled by a few giant monopolies that kept prices high and wages low?” The statement is patently false. The tycoon industrialists of the late 1800s and early 1900s made their money by providing products at low prices, thus serving the masses instead of catering to the rich. Same as today.

John D. Rockefeller

John D. Rockefeller founded the University of ...

Image via Wikipedia

became at one time the richest man on earth by building Standard oil into not only an oil production business, but into an oil refining and distribution business. As written in the Wikipedia biography of Rockefeller Standard Oil replaced the old distribution system with its own vertical system. It supplied kerosene by tank cars that brought the fuel to local markets and tank wagons then delivered to retail customers, thus bypassing the existing network of wholesale jobbers. He made the price of gasoline low so that more people could buy it. And in so doing he saved the whales. Prior to Rockefeller’s success whale oil was the primary means by which people burned oil. The whaling industry couldn’t compete and very quickly died.

Henry Ford

Portrait of Henry Ford (ca. 1919)

Henry Ford paid his workers sufficient wages to be able to buy his product.

didn’t become fabulously wealthy by making the most expensive car on the market. Just the opposite. He created the assembly line; a much faster and more financially efficient way to build an automobile. Thus we had the Model T a car that was affordable to the average worker. And Ford famously said his success was predicated on building a product that his employees could afford to buy.

Andrew Carnegie, American businessman and phil...

Andrew Carnegie

Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan and others all had riches and power. But those riches and power were bestowed upon them by the American people buying their products because they made there products affordably.

How is that different from today’s tycoons? Bill Gates built computer software that was easy and compatible with multiple hardware manufacturers thus bringing the personal computer to a size and affordability of most Americans and business. Steve Jobs also built computers; but his greatest success began with his company’s invention of the Ipod; an easier and more affordable way to buy and listen to music. In doing so he turned the music industry upside down and changed it forever.

Image representing Mark Zuckerberg as depicted...

Image via CrunchBase

Mark Zuckerberg is the CEO of Facebook. Did he achieve his billionaire status by “keeping prices high”? Absolutely not. He took the idea of a social “facebook” (small f), distributed it more widely and made it  FREE to everyone.

Obama said yesterday about Republicans: “And their philosophy is simple: We are better off when everybody is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules.” If only it were true. The fact is GOP politicians are nearly as guilty as Democrats in forcing government intrusion onto the lives of increasingly more Americans. The President went on to say we’re all better off when “we’re together than when we’re on our own”. On this we agree. But who made him Community Organizer in chief for my life? Who says government needs to force us together in order to benefit the most people. Rockefeller, Ford, Jobs, Gates, Zuckerberg and countless others have repeatedly demonstrated that the philosophy of 18th economist Adam Smith was right.

Smith is the author of the seminal economic book “The Wealth of Nations” which correctly pointed out that the less government interferes with a free-market system the more people will prosper. Smith pointed out that when left on their own people had a selfish interest in serving people, community, the masses. Failing to do so meant a failure of a business. Doesn’t that make sense?

Official photographic portrait of US President...

President Barrack Obama

Obama’s repeated stated resistance to leave us to our own devices demonstrates a clear lack of faith in the Capitalist system and in the moral fiber of Americans. As we remember the brave souls who lost their lives 70 years ago today its incumbent upon us to ask ourselves why they died and why so many other Americans have fought and died in the name of our country through the past 2 1/4 centuries. Did they die in defense of a bigger Government controlling more and more of our lives; helping us along as Obama would want me to say. Or…did they die for our own individual liberty? Isn’t it obvious? And to properly honor their memory don’t we owe it to them and our own ancestors to struggle and succeed. For one always precedes the other.

Thanks for visiting. Your comments are welcome.