Iowa Sheriff Asks CCW Permit Holders for Y2K Help
- Thread starter nralife
- Start date
- Status
oatka--well done.
Yes, I suspect that if word gets around of the sheriff's adherence to ancient American principles he will become a man much hated by gun prohibitionists and other zealots. We are all too familiar with the attacks of violent gun haters on peaceable gunowners.
But the sheriff will be much respected by those who have kept their sanity on firearms issues.
Yes, I suspect that if word gets around of the sheriff's adherence to ancient American principles he will become a man much hated by gun prohibitionists and other zealots. We are all too familiar with the attacks of violent gun haters on peaceable gunowners.
But the sheriff will be much respected by those who have kept their sanity on firearms issues.
Remember the sheriff is the only legal law man in our constitution. The rest of these "cops' are just corporate revenue gathers. Support this sheriff. A good sheriff is priceless in the coming hard times. THe state I live in,Maryland,has a law which can draft veterans from as far back as Korea into state service in a emergency. I dont like this at all because my state is basically a communist Nwo stronghold with a commie governor and Kennedy as Lt. Governor. THese politicians hate gunowners and they can go to H--- ! I amj not leaving my home to report to some NWO military outfit.
Pulling this up out of the archives for an update. My brother sent a Y2k clipping cut from the Columbia State (S.C.) a few days ago, with an L.A. Times byline.
The pertinent parts were, "In Sioux County, Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow said he believes he will be ready, but he has his own ideas how to get ready. In July, he mailed a letter to 285 of his constituents, whom he had granted permits to carry concealed weapons, asking them to volunteer as deputies to help police their pocket of northwest Iowa."
Their then was a reprint of the sheriff's statement. The article ended with "He said 250 volunteers have signed up so far."
I go back to my earlier post on this and wonder how many of us with wives and families would answer that call if it came locally.
I get a warm feeling that 250 out of 285 volunteered. Hopefully, that will send a message to SOME of the pols. The Minuteman concept is still alive, if only officials would use it. But then, that's not politically correct.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
The pertinent parts were, "In Sioux County, Sheriff Jim R. Schwiesow said he believes he will be ready, but he has his own ideas how to get ready. In July, he mailed a letter to 285 of his constituents, whom he had granted permits to carry concealed weapons, asking them to volunteer as deputies to help police their pocket of northwest Iowa."
Their then was a reprint of the sheriff's statement. The article ended with "He said 250 volunteers have signed up so far."
I go back to my earlier post on this and wonder how many of us with wives and families would answer that call if it came locally.
I get a warm feeling that 250 out of 285 volunteered. Hopefully, that will send a message to SOME of the pols. The Minuteman concept is still alive, if only officials would use it. But then, that's not politically correct.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
I have a little bit of a problem here, folks.
People should help maintain law and order.
However, his last appeal to a specific
religious creed and implications that
the US is based on this, is not the USA
I am proud of. If this letter is real,
in an official pronouncement an agent of
the government should keep his beliefs to
himself.
Are the Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Atheist
or whatever CHLs supposed to feel at ease
with this guy? There are more amendments
than the 2nd.
This is not to insult religious beliefs
or argue that one should not help out.
But I find the last part really offensive.
People should help maintain law and order.
However, his last appeal to a specific
religious creed and implications that
the US is based on this, is not the USA
I am proud of. If this letter is real,
in an official pronouncement an agent of
the government should keep his beliefs to
himself.
Are the Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Atheist
or whatever CHLs supposed to feel at ease
with this guy? There are more amendments
than the 2nd.
This is not to insult religious beliefs
or argue that one should not help out.
But I find the last part really offensive.
Glenn,
Are you saying that the USA was not based upon this?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Our nation was founded by mostly Christian men and any authority the federal government was allowed to possess was to derive solely from the purposely narrowly drawn tenants of the Constitution. Sadly and tragically this nation has renounced the Christian principles upon which it was founded. [/quote]
Not that Christianity has a monopoly on such principles (for they do not), but that is the particular religion that he ascribes them to.
------------------
John/az
"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited December 22, 1999).]
Are you saying that the USA was not based upon this?
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Our nation was founded by mostly Christian men and any authority the federal government was allowed to possess was to derive solely from the purposely narrowly drawn tenants of the Constitution. Sadly and tragically this nation has renounced the Christian principles upon which it was founded. [/quote]
Not that Christianity has a monopoly on such principles (for they do not), but that is the particular religion that he ascribes them to.
------------------
John/az
"The middle of the road between the extremes of good and evil, is evil. When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited December 22, 1999).]
This is the LAST place I expected to see such politicaly correct bs. I'm not one to flame any individual, but listen to yourself. He may be a sherrif, but he is also an American Citizen with the RIGHT to express his own view, regardless of whether or not you agree with it. If he were saying you must agree with him or pay a penalty, that would be one thing, but he is simply offering a word of support backed by his own faith. Along those lines, if you don't believe this country was built by people who, by and large, placed their faith in God, you are sadly misinformed. It is simply historical fact. Now, with that said, you are under NO obligation to believe in God yourself, nor will you be forced by law to believe one way or another. You ARE required, however, to let anyone else believe what they wish, and express what they believe, as long as it doesn't infringe on your right or ability to believe otherwise. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it." What he is doing, regardless of religious differences, is helping shed a positive light on gun owners and the modern day application of the Second Article of the Bill of Rights. Think about it.....
-Spyderman
-Spyderman
bestdefense357
New member
After reading all the posts on this thread, there are some interesting points made. If this is not a hoax, it would certainly be great publicity for CCW. Hopefully, Vin and Charley Reese and others will investigate it and publicize it, if true.
I used to belong to a metal detecting club. We were approached by the local sheriff's department to form a group of select members who would be available when necessary for mounting a search for small metal objects at crimes scenes. Bullets, guns, jewelry, coins, knives, ect. were a few of the items we helped locate. The group got some good PR during a time when metal detectors were receiving mostly negative PR ("grave-robbers and thieves," we were called by archaeologists).
I would suggest a lot of mileage could be gained from this. It speaks to the law-abiding nature of concealed permit holders.
Robert
[This message has been edited by bestdefense357 (edited December 23, 1999).]
I used to belong to a metal detecting club. We were approached by the local sheriff's department to form a group of select members who would be available when necessary for mounting a search for small metal objects at crimes scenes. Bullets, guns, jewelry, coins, knives, ect. were a few of the items we helped locate. The group got some good PR during a time when metal detectors were receiving mostly negative PR ("grave-robbers and thieves," we were called by archaeologists).
I would suggest a lot of mileage could be gained from this. It speaks to the law-abiding nature of concealed permit holders.
Robert
[This message has been edited by bestdefense357 (edited December 23, 1999).]
George Hill
Staff Alumnus
Even with all the changes I have had since my last post in this thread - I would still help out.
As a Patriot I still have a duty to my community. I wont let a mob tear up my house - or the houses next to mine. Or the corner 7-11... Or anything that I come across.
Citezenship is a little more involved than being a simple civilian.
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
As a Patriot I still have a duty to my community. I wont let a mob tear up my house - or the houses next to mine. Or the corner 7-11... Or anything that I come across.
Citezenship is a little more involved than being a simple civilian.
------------------
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
In plain unambiguous language the first document drafted in America was the Mayflower Compact.
Mayflower Compact
Drawn up by forty-one leaders of the Pilgrims, November 11, 1620.
In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&.
Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.
In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.
------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
[This message has been edited by jimpeel (edited December 23, 1999).]
Mayflower Compact
Drawn up by forty-one leaders of the Pilgrims, November 11, 1620.
In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord, King James, by the Grace of God, of England, France and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, e&.
Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.
In Witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord, King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620.
------------------
Gun Control: The proposition that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her own panty hose, is more acceptable than allowing that same woman to defend herself with a firearm.
[This message has been edited by jimpeel (edited December 23, 1999).]
America was founded on Christian principles. But let us remember that our
country embodies tolerance for other beliefs as well. Including, for *this*
discussion, non-belief as well as belief in God.
First of all, we are supposed to have freedom of religion in America so long
as it does not infringe upon others’ rights. So religion should be a unifying
force rather than a fragmenting force in America. If there is a God, and
people truly believe in Him and worship Him in varying manners, is there
anyone here so bigoted that they truly believe only their group is acceptable in His
sight? For this reason, the (arguable) fact that our country was founded on
Christian values becomes irrelevant if used to differentiate and exclude!
It would seem to me that, more important than our original values, we
should examine our CURRENT values!
-----
Secondly, from an RKBA viewpoint, we should set aside our differences and
stress our similarities so we may unite against those who would enslave us.
We must unite to save our Constitution.
Otherwise, our fragmented efforts will be overwhelmed by greater federal and globalist beliefs and forces.
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
country embodies tolerance for other beliefs as well. Including, for *this*
discussion, non-belief as well as belief in God.
First of all, we are supposed to have freedom of religion in America so long
as it does not infringe upon others’ rights. So religion should be a unifying
force rather than a fragmenting force in America. If there is a God, and
people truly believe in Him and worship Him in varying manners, is there
anyone here so bigoted that they truly believe only their group is acceptable in His
sight? For this reason, the (arguable) fact that our country was founded on
Christian values becomes irrelevant if used to differentiate and exclude!
It would seem to me that, more important than our original values, we
should examine our CURRENT values!
-----
Secondly, from an RKBA viewpoint, we should set aside our differences and
stress our similarities so we may unite against those who would enslave us.
We must unite to save our Constitution.
Otherwise, our fragmented efforts will be overwhelmed by greater federal and globalist beliefs and forces.
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
If the Sheriff lawfully asks my assistance in peacekeeping, I could not do otherwise. It is my duty under the 2nd amendment as a citizen.
What I don't understand is why only CCW holders are considered citizens in Iowa. This sounds like yet still another reason to oppose CCW.
So now I must register and seek approval for permission to apply for citizen status in my home country? Where is this stated in the United States Code, or the Constitution?
What I don't understand is why only CCW holders are considered citizens in Iowa. This sounds like yet still another reason to oppose CCW.
So now I must register and seek approval for permission to apply for citizen status in my home country? Where is this stated in the United States Code, or the Constitution?
If you truly are against CCW, you can find reasons to oppose it in any thought or action. However, for a moment, put yourself in the position of the sheriff.
If you were going to recruit people who might be required to use force or deadly force, wouldn't you rather have people who are trained and have the required implements?
Armed people without training are a danger to everyone. People who refuse to use force may not be able to control illegal force.
In his position, I would do the same.
What better definition of "militia" could you have nowadays?
If you were going to recruit people who might be required to use force or deadly force, wouldn't you rather have people who are trained and have the required implements?
Armed people without training are a danger to everyone. People who refuse to use force may not be able to control illegal force.
In his position, I would do the same.
What better definition of "militia" could you have nowadays?
As far as I know, neither Suprinowiscz nor Reese ever printed this, although I gave them chapter and verse on the story. Somewhat disappointed in these guys as they didn't do anything with the Hobgood story either.
Maybe there's a legal problem (they seem to be everywhere these days).
Well, I'll try again with that excellent "how to" post about writing anti-gun articles.
dog3, I sympathize with your position, but look at it as incrementalism for our side. This was the FIRST instance I have seen of the authorities EVER calling on the citizens for backup outside of the CB and shortwave people.
Let's get this to be the common denominator, THEN we can push for non-CCWs. To me it seemed a reasonable middle ground position.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
Maybe there's a legal problem (they seem to be everywhere these days).
Well, I'll try again with that excellent "how to" post about writing anti-gun articles.
dog3, I sympathize with your position, but look at it as incrementalism for our side. This was the FIRST instance I have seen of the authorities EVER calling on the citizens for backup outside of the CB and shortwave people.
Let's get this to be the common denominator, THEN we can push for non-CCWs. To me it seemed a reasonable middle ground position.
------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
Despite the various personal beliefs of the
Founding Fathers, the country is not
a Christian, Jewish or Islamic nation.
Find a specific faith for me in the Constitution.
Public officials should keep their
religions to themselves when acting
in a public role.
As far as this being PC - oh, bull**##.
If the sherrif was Islamic and ended his
letter with a call to return to the Koran,
you would have a big old hissy fit.
It is simple not to be racist, sexist,
or talk about your own religion in a public
role. Do it privately. George W. Bush thinks
Jesus influenced his life. That's legitimate
to say to when asked the question. If
any candidate becomes president and says
the country should turn to a specific faith,
he is as unworthy to president as any
anti-RKBA president.
Founding Fathers, the country is not
a Christian, Jewish or Islamic nation.
Find a specific faith for me in the Constitution.
Public officials should keep their
religions to themselves when acting
in a public role.
As far as this being PC - oh, bull**##.
If the sherrif was Islamic and ended his
letter with a call to return to the Koran,
you would have a big old hissy fit.
It is simple not to be racist, sexist,
or talk about your own religion in a public
role. Do it privately. George W. Bush thinks
Jesus influenced his life. That's legitimate
to say to when asked the question. If
any candidate becomes president and says
the country should turn to a specific faith,
he is as unworthy to president as any
anti-RKBA president.
Hi Dennis;
Certainly. I concurr with your point completely and without reservation.
I wholeheartedly support this man in this. Wish there were more like him.
My point in elaboration;
Were there no more infringments and restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, then there are on the 1st, and all the others, I would suggest that such a call to arms would need not go out in the first place as we would already be living in a well ordered and polite society.
I live in a shall-issue state. As prior enlisted/le with an honorable discharge and no felonious convictions or active peace warrants I am pretty sure I fully qualify.
My High Crimes and Misdemeanors go on and on. I have fat record. One guilty (no arrest) for tresspass and mischief for springing my dog out of an animal control trap. I didn't know it was animal control, thought it was just my hateful neighbor, honest! I contested it in court myself and lost. Guilty! court costs: $23.00. Misdemeanor. I was 19.
The others are more in the line of being charged with Battery and Criminal Mayhem. A plainsclothesman was chasing a female subject who was screaming for help down an alley as I exited a movie, I read the situation wrong, it was pretty brutal, I submitted when I saw the badge, and took a good beating. I was already charged and booked before the interview. Lots of apologies and handshakes all around, It was just one of those things, happens. I was arrained by the night court judge uncuffed in my own clothes and shoes and never had to speak, the arresting detective spoke for me. We went to breakfast and argued over the check. Charges dropped, no trial. (She was apprehended by 2 uniforms in the next block)
Many incidents of charges dropped, no trial. But the charges are still there, the arrest records are still there and always will be.
I've had 7 polygraphs and I don't like them.
The work I used to do after I got out of the service required entry to a lot of government places included inner senate chambers during session, Air traffic control towers and such. I was subjected to a *LOT* of background checks. I can promise you that the stuff listed above makes for a notable stack of fanfold from the NCIC.
I tell you straight up that sitting in an interview room in the company of a few co-workers listening to the printer continue to work long after my co-workers checks came back under the scornful eyes of a couple of older FBI guys sighing with that "knowing" look, with my head hung down in shame over a past rife with offical incidents in which I did what I felt and still feel was the "right thing" and would do today and tomorrow if able, was just too much and I resigned from that job which I enjoyed and promised myself to not allow myself to be subjected to the scrutiny of "Officials" ever again excepting I have no choice in the matter.
I have borne arms in the company of the second highest official of the land in a foreign country. I have borne arms in the defense of my country and our way of life. I took an oath to lay down the only true possession I have -my *life*- (I gave my soul to Jesus) in their defense. Last I checked, no one with authority has relieved me of that oath.
If I bear arms in the form of a sidearm in the Capitol of our Nation, I will be a felon. A felon, will loose my ability to be among other free persons, will loose my right to vote and will be deprived of most things I hold dear. I will become an evil person in the eyes of the law. To bear arms in the form of a sidearm in my home state, I must be "approved" by "Officials" to be granted permission to exercise my RIGHT that exists by and above and separate from the Law.
I may very well be totally off base. I have definately eaten my words before, and although I haven't aquired a taste for them, will eat them again.
Yes Dennis and Oatka, A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State. I accept that the State may very well have authority to regulate arms. It is said that young couples once walked down lighted streets arm in arm on their way from the library to the theatre in cities in the middle east many centuries before Christ was born. The wolf is *always* at the door. Great civilizations come and go. We live in troubled times, and always have.
Maybe CCW is different. Maybe CCW is the Governor saying to the free people: "Come and show your arms, come and be counted among free people who will stand in the gap and defend against those who study evil and seek our downfall." Maybe CCW is showing that a person has a rifle and sidearm and is capable and willing to act in concert for the protection of the land and defense of themselves and families. Maybe the State keeps a record of all those who have a rifle and sidearm of perference in what calibre and what level of qualification in order to know the resources available to answer hostility and to keep an ever growing Federal government in check. Maybe that is what CCW is. Do you think so?
I do not think so. I think that Gun Control in this country from its outset was not an accidental opinion of the day, but rather has been a course persued unaterably through the many changes of ministers for many years to a time even before the Jim Crow gun laws of post Civil War. I believe that Registration+Time=Confiscation, which +Time=Enslavement, which +Time=Bloody Revolution and I think that history bears this out. I think that CCW is a scrap of appeasement tossed from the Kings table that in no way affirms the Bill of Rights but rather undermines it. "Those who register may go their own way knowing their rights are secure." Which is saying "Only those approved by the registration process may be citizens." Now, believe it or not, I don't actually have a problem with that so long as it is equal and fair. As in "Only those approved by the registration process may peaceably assemble, may be secure in their homes, may enjoy the right to a speedy trial of their peers, may not be put twice in jeapordy and so on." But I do have a problem with it in prevailing contemporary hostility that the vast majority of States and the totality of the Federal Government shows towards the ownership of arms.
The reason I don't really have a problem with that is that I don't for a moment think that such an edict would last a week. I think it would harken in a clean slate as it were.
Certainly. I concurr with your point completely and without reservation.
I wholeheartedly support this man in this. Wish there were more like him.
My point in elaboration;
Were there no more infringments and restrictions on the 2nd Amendment, then there are on the 1st, and all the others, I would suggest that such a call to arms would need not go out in the first place as we would already be living in a well ordered and polite society.
I live in a shall-issue state. As prior enlisted/le with an honorable discharge and no felonious convictions or active peace warrants I am pretty sure I fully qualify.
My High Crimes and Misdemeanors go on and on. I have fat record. One guilty (no arrest) for tresspass and mischief for springing my dog out of an animal control trap. I didn't know it was animal control, thought it was just my hateful neighbor, honest! I contested it in court myself and lost. Guilty! court costs: $23.00. Misdemeanor. I was 19.
The others are more in the line of being charged with Battery and Criminal Mayhem. A plainsclothesman was chasing a female subject who was screaming for help down an alley as I exited a movie, I read the situation wrong
, it was pretty brutal, I submitted when I saw the badge, and took a good beating. I was already charged and booked before the interview. Lots of apologies and handshakes all around, It was just one of those things, happens. I was arrained by the night court judge uncuffed in my own clothes and shoes and never had to speak, the arresting detective spoke for me. We went to breakfast and argued over the check. Charges dropped, no trial. (She was apprehended by 2 uniforms in the next block)Many incidents of charges dropped, no trial. But the charges are still there, the arrest records are still there and always will be.
I've had 7 polygraphs and I don't like them.
The work I used to do after I got out of the service required entry to a lot of government places included inner senate chambers during session, Air traffic control towers and such. I was subjected to a *LOT* of background checks. I can promise you that the stuff listed above makes for a notable stack of fanfold from the NCIC.
I tell you straight up that sitting in an interview room in the company of a few co-workers listening to the printer continue to work long after my co-workers checks came back under the scornful eyes of a couple of older FBI guys sighing with that "knowing" look, with my head hung down in shame over a past rife with offical incidents in which I did what I felt and still feel was the "right thing" and would do today and tomorrow if able, was just too much and I resigned from that job which I enjoyed and promised myself to not allow myself to be subjected to the scrutiny of "Officials" ever again excepting I have no choice in the matter.
I have borne arms in the company of the second highest official of the land in a foreign country. I have borne arms in the defense of my country and our way of life. I took an oath to lay down the only true possession I have -my *life*- (I gave my soul to Jesus) in their defense. Last I checked, no one with authority has relieved me of that oath.
If I bear arms in the form of a sidearm in the Capitol of our Nation, I will be a felon. A felon, will loose my ability to be among other free persons, will loose my right to vote and will be deprived of most things I hold dear. I will become an evil person in the eyes of the law. To bear arms in the form of a sidearm in my home state, I must be "approved" by "Officials" to be granted permission to exercise my RIGHT that exists by and above and separate from the Law.
I may very well be totally off base. I have definately eaten my words before, and although I haven't aquired a taste for them, will eat them again.
Yes Dennis and Oatka, A well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free State. I accept that the State may very well have authority to regulate arms. It is said that young couples once walked down lighted streets arm in arm on their way from the library to the theatre in cities in the middle east many centuries before Christ was born. The wolf is *always* at the door. Great civilizations come and go. We live in troubled times, and always have.
Maybe CCW is different. Maybe CCW is the Governor saying to the free people: "Come and show your arms, come and be counted among free people who will stand in the gap and defend against those who study evil and seek our downfall." Maybe CCW is showing that a person has a rifle and sidearm and is capable and willing to act in concert for the protection of the land and defense of themselves and families. Maybe the State keeps a record of all those who have a rifle and sidearm of perference in what calibre and what level of qualification in order to know the resources available to answer hostility and to keep an ever growing Federal government in check. Maybe that is what CCW is. Do you think so?
I do not think so. I think that Gun Control in this country from its outset was not an accidental opinion of the day, but rather has been a course persued unaterably through the many changes of ministers for many years to a time even before the Jim Crow gun laws of post Civil War. I believe that Registration+Time=Confiscation, which +Time=Enslavement, which +Time=Bloody Revolution and I think that history bears this out. I think that CCW is a scrap of appeasement tossed from the Kings table that in no way affirms the Bill of Rights but rather undermines it. "Those who register may go their own way knowing their rights are secure." Which is saying "Only those approved by the registration process may be citizens." Now, believe it or not, I don't actually have a problem with that so long as it is equal and fair. As in "Only those approved by the registration process may peaceably assemble, may be secure in their homes, may enjoy the right to a speedy trial of their peers, may not be put twice in jeapordy and so on." But I do have a problem with it in prevailing contemporary hostility that the vast majority of States and the totality of the Federal Government shows towards the ownership of arms.
The reason I don't really have a problem with that is that I don't for a moment think that such an edict would last a week. I think it would harken in a clean slate as it were.
Glenn,
Easy, friend. The country was founded, at least in part, by people who
came here to practice their religion freely. People who would leave their
homelands and make such a perilous trip (in those days) must have had
pretty strong beliefs. Let them rest in peace. The Mayflower Compact was
a specific group - not the present general population - some 379 years
ago.
I believe our country was founded on Christian beliefs - not necessarily on
Christianity. Many beliefs are universal among religions. As you note,
there’s not a single faith listed in the Constitution regardless of the specific
beliefs of the founders. That speaks well of them! Note they also forbade
any “official” belief.
I agree politicians should not preach their specific faith but, with the
exception of the reference to Jesus Christ, the good sheriff’s comments are
pretty universal among religions - including Islam. Note that he was
bemoaning a fact he perceived - not requiring his “posse” to become
Christians.
As far as a public official abiding by his religion, my comment would be,
“Cool!”, if that means he sticks to universal concepts of decency.
However, as you note, when he becomes “faith specific” (if that’s a term
we can coin?) we may have a problem.
------
Dog3,
We agree on so much, and disagree on so little, that I see no problem in
practice.
As far as CHLs, I’m against them on the basis of our Second Amendment.
However, I support them because:
- CHLs provide an opportunity to prove to all concerned parties that guns
don’t make crime any more than stink makes garbage.
- my CHL is NOT a get-out-of-jail free card, but it shows the nice officer
that I’ve gone through the same background check as the State Troopers.
Therefore, he is dealing with an honest man who screwed up rather than a
long-time felon.
- as a CHL Instructor I had the opportunity to bring many people into the
gun fraternity who previously were non-believers. (Sorry
just *had* to
say it that way!!! )
- I was able to get some fine training at little cost (from the Texas
Department of Public Safety).
- I’ve been able to meet some fine people because of the CHL program.
- my CHL eliminates the point of illegal carrying if (God forbid) I ever have
to use that .45.
I agree many laws violate the Constitution but being in violation of those
illegal laws would work against me and my family in a time of need.
Like you, I am working to eliminate these illegal laws. You may have
noticed. (
)
------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited December 23, 1999).]
Easy, friend. The country was founded, at least in part, by people who
came here to practice their religion freely. People who would leave their
homelands and make such a perilous trip (in those days) must have had
pretty strong beliefs. Let them rest in peace. The Mayflower Compact was
a specific group - not the present general population - some 379 years
ago.
I believe our country was founded on Christian beliefs - not necessarily on
Christianity. Many beliefs are universal among religions. As you note,
there’s not a single faith listed in the Constitution regardless of the specific
beliefs of the founders. That speaks well of them! Note they also forbade
any “official” belief.
I agree politicians should not preach their specific faith but, with the
exception of the reference to Jesus Christ, the good sheriff’s comments are
pretty universal among religions - including Islam. Note that he was
bemoaning a fact he perceived - not requiring his “posse” to become
Christians.
As far as a public official abiding by his religion, my comment would be,
“Cool!”, if that means he sticks to universal concepts of decency.
However, as you note, when he becomes “faith specific” (if that’s a term
we can coin?) we may have a problem.
------
Dog3,
We agree on so much, and disagree on so little, that I see no problem in
practice.
As far as CHLs, I’m against them on the basis of our Second Amendment.
However, I support them because:
- CHLs provide an opportunity to prove to all concerned parties that guns
don’t make crime any more than stink makes garbage.
- my CHL is NOT a get-out-of-jail free card, but it shows the nice officer
that I’ve gone through the same background check as the State Troopers.
Therefore, he is dealing with an honest man who screwed up rather than a
long-time felon.
- as a CHL Instructor I had the opportunity to bring many people into the
gun fraternity who previously were non-believers. (Sorry
just *had* tosay it that way!!! )
- I was able to get some fine training at little cost (from the Texas
Department of Public Safety).
- I’ve been able to meet some fine people because of the CHL program.
- my CHL eliminates the point of illegal carrying if (God forbid) I ever have
to use that .45.
I agree many laws violate the Constitution but being in violation of those
illegal laws would work against me and my family in a time of need.
Like you, I am working to eliminate these illegal laws. You may have
noticed. (
)------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!
[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited December 23, 1999).]
- Status