Saturday, March 30, 2013

How old is too young -- to tote a gun?

March 30, 2013
Colorado USA

Here it comes, people. We have regulations designating the age when one can attend school, legally drive, drink alcohol or smoke. We have regulations designating the age when one may view a movie, purchase music, video games, and books or magazines deemed (by some other regulation) only suitable for mature audiences. We have regulations designating the age when one is considered old enough to work and pay taxes, engage in sex, vote or marry or serve in the military. In short, we have regulation upon regulation governing what age specifically signifies adult status. And of course, we have regulations that designate the age when one may purchase a firearm and/or ammunition.

But! We do not yet have widespread regulations that designate how old one must be to handle a firearm (although it is a given that many states govern how old one must be to handle a firearm without adult supervision). I predict regulations that dictate when one may school a child in the protective arts specifically by means of a firearm is coming to a state house near you very, very soon.

I reference the kindergarten kid that was suspended from school for putting her kinder-peers in the cross hairs of a Hello Kitty bubble gun. I reference the seven year old who was suspended for chomping a pop tart into the shape of a gun. I reference the third grader whose Mom topped cupcakes with little green army men (yes of course they were armed - duh) that were removed by school officials who claimed the decorations were insensitive (to anti-gun parents). All three headlines poked me in the eye and made me holler WHAT the !!##$**^#%*!! We are talking about toys and pastry and little kids! I wonder why the puffed-up, self-important, whacked-out, zero-tolerance bullies don't pick on somebody their own size? I wonder what would happen if somebody (over three foot tall) made a significant show (maybe post it on Facebook) of biting the head off the donkey and/or elephant in a handful of animal crackers? Would some busybody call PETA or DHS about the perceived threat to animals and/or both political parties? Would SWAT arrive at my door? Good grief!

Josh Moore - age 11Finally, I reference the eleven year old boy (his name is Josh) whose proud Dad posted a pic of his son on Facebook holding his birthday gift, a 22 rifle. This family suffered the invasion of home and privacy by New Jersey law enforcement and CPS acting (make that over-reacting) on a report of child abuse from some (I am guessing anonymous) busybody. As it turns out, the young man has been handling a gun since about the age of five. Oh the outrage! Having read some of the comments (he's too young, his parents should be ashamed or jailed) posted by gun control nazis - oops! I mean advocates - I have to wonder again as I do quite often just how old does a child have to be to understand they will not always be so? Who really gets to decide whether any activity is age appropriate for our children? Because, it appears a host of busy-bodies are signing up for the job. I wonder where does one draw the line between what we (as parents) think is good or safe or proper for our children and where other parents (even non-parents) and the state tells us what is good or safe or proper for our children?

Growing up was not mandated by others when I came of age. It was expected. Some of us got there quicker than others. Never were we given to understand that growing up was an option.

For most boys, handling a gun (usually a rifle) and eventually owning a gun is a right of passage to manhood and usually follows the right to stay out after dark and ride out of sight on a bicycle and precedes getting the keys to the car. My husband says he was about the age of nine when he was first allowed to shoot a gun. He was probably 15 or sixteen when he inherited a 12 gauge shotgun after the death of his step-dad - a treasure he still owns. My Dad was probably of a similar age when he carried a gun to hunt for the family's supper and as protection from coyotes and rattlesnakes and other pesky critters on the farm. He tells a story of my gentle grandmother handing him two shells after school and pointing him in the direction of a gaggle of geese she spied in the field or otherwise indicating they needed two squirrels for supper. Two shells. Two squirrels. Dad was gifted a 410 shotgun on his 14th birthday I believe - a treasure he still owns. My brother received a 410 shotgun as a gift in his early teens (after learning to handle a BB gun). I am not being sexist here, just relating my own experience. Guns for girls is something I whole-heartedly appreciate! In those days (50s and 60s), gender equality was a non-issue, at least in little town America. I was not taught to handle a gun as a child or a teen (I am certain I have my gentle Mom to thank for that - try as she always did to make me into a proper young lady.) nor was my daughter taught to handle a gun (also out of unspoken courtesy to my gentle Mom and Grandmothers). It is odd only in that I witnessed both a great grandmother and a paternal grandmother handle themselves well with a shotgun. Until recently, I never thought to own a firearm of my own, those available to me by right of marriage seemed sufficient. I have rectified that thinking.

Granted, the way we molly-coddle today's youth, keeping them as young as we can for no apparent reason I can fathom - I would hesitate putting a gun in the hands of most youngsters of my acquaintance. I think most of them (in their current state-approved, parental-induced, mostly-stupefied condition) are just barely responsible enough to drive, own a smart phone, or hold down a job. I did not say they are not capable - I say they are not responsible - enough - quite likely through no fault of their own. Most I say, not all. Still, it should go without saying that most but not ALL parents raise their offspring to be perpetual children. While some parents whisper the R-word (responsibility) or the A-word (accountability) like dirty words, other parents actually teach responsibility and accountability as the way to best get by in this world.

I say youngsters are not given the opportunity to prove themselves and they go through life thinking there is no need to prove themselves. Actually, I think we are cheating them out of the opportunity to earn trust - not to mention a liberal amount of self esteem. Ownership of a gun was not granted among the menfolk of my generation unless one proved themselves worthy of the privilege.

I worry nanny state mentality will be the death of self-sufficiency and independent-thinking. In a society where everyone-gets-a-trophy I worry that the last couple of generations have produced young people who cannot be trusted with their own welfare or self preservation or, for that matter, the welfare of others. Are we doing right by our youth to teach them that all guns and other inanimate objects are bad and that people who own them are all bad? Would we not rather teach them respect for firearms as well as a healthy wariness of those they may encounter in life who do not necessarily play by the same rules as polite society? Are we actually somehow conveying the message that they are safe in gun free zones? The idea of that is sadly ludicrous! And how quick we are to blame completely unrelated external forces for tragedy! I have to wonder at the obscure thinking of those who advise our youth to pee their panties, attack with ball-point pens or kick their flip-flops off and run to a safe house (if they can find one) in the face of a real threat. We teach our youth to embrace fear, accept defeat and advise the use of moronic self defense mechanisms. I am not much comforted by that.

It is interesting to note, that the average age soldier serving in wars of this nation's history were between 18-29 in years but you can bet in the early revolutionary wars that earned our country's freedom, the younger brothers and sisters they left behind could load and shoot a gun as well as their pro-liberty fighting siblings. Firearms and those who bore them (young and old alike) have played a significant and vital role in the founding of this country. This is just an interesting bit of New Jersey history circa 1776: One historian found that in nine New Jersey towns nearly 75 percent of boys who were fifteen and sixteen at the onset of hostilities served in the army or the militia. It is just an off-hand observation, but I suspect that a certain amount of skill in the use of a firearm was a prerequisite for-- not a result of-- militia service.

So how old is too young to be responsibly relevant in our world? Is that a parent's call or should it be mandated by the state? Right now we are talking about bubbles and pastry, toys and birthday presents - sooner or later the talk will turn to guns and bullets.

Here's another question - Likewise, how young is too old to be responsibly relevant in our world? Because I have read comments by anti-gun nimrods suggesting that some old folks are too old to own guns. Hmmm...

One final thought - How much fun is a bubble toy of any sort if you cannot pop the bubble off the nose of a friend?

Respectfully yours in unfailing allegiance to the USA,
Dissident Daughter
Because: Silence is the most insideous form of consent.

Kinder Kid suspended - packing Hello Kitty 02/08/20013
Seven year old suspended for pop tart gun 03/03/2013
Army Men Ordered to Stand Down - The Cupcake Wars 03/08/2013
New Jersey Law Enforcement Makes 11th Birthday Something to Remember 03/20/2013
A Common American Soldier

Friday, March 29, 2013

Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day

March 29, 2013
Colorado USA

Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans

They were Momma's boys. Daddy's sons. High school sweethearts. Big brothers. Somebody's Dad. Football heroes. Baseball stars. Fresh. Young. Agile. They were the embodiment of apple pie and ice cream, fireworks on the 4th of July, home-spun, home-grown, farm-raised, city-slicker, chevy-driving, Harley-riding, blue-jeans-n-t-shirt America. They were our best and brightest.


We shipped them away from America's promise, still wet behind the ears - out of our lives with tears, wrenched hearts and prayers. Duty called. They answered. They fought. They bled. They died.


Unwelcomed by a silent and disapproving homeland - no parades, no flags, no confetti, no back-slapping speeches. Some braved the hissing, spitting gauntlet of mindless protest and disrespect.


Standing in the embrace of a tiny knot of family whose prayers were answered, they faced a world they once knew which held no welcome and little promise. The world did not understand, could not understand and did not care.


Some of them proud. Some of them bitter. Some of them broken. Most of them defiant. All of them survivors.


In rage. In tears. In silence... for the brothers in arms who did not come home and for those who would never come home and for the selves they left in a distant land. With firm resolve and stoic calm - they buried some who never witnessed the appreciation of their countrymen that was ultimately too little, too late.


They perservered. They overcame. They survived. Some of them. Vets proved the other they were wrong by living the dream and fulfilling America's promise.


About heroism. About respect. About principle. About patriotism.


And now we as a nation know what real humility is.



Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day
Today is Welcome Home Vietnam Veterans Day, designated so because this is the day in 1973 the last of our troops left Vietnam - although any survivor will tell you that is hardly the case. Not all of them (POW-MIA) returned. Currently there are 58,261 (most of them KIA) on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall.

March 29, 1973 - That was 40 years ago today and only in recent years has the day been designated as memorable or the Veterans themselves recognized as deserving of long overdue respect. They deserved better than the silence and derision that greeted them upon their return from the horrors of war. Such were the times... they say... they that do not know... they that do not get it. Lives changed both abroad and at home... forever.

Even now people forget... Soldiers do not wage war. Soldiers bravely fight war. Soldiers bear the burden of war. Soldiers bear the scars of war. Soldiers pay the toll of war.

No event in American history is more misunderstood than the Vietnam War. It was misreported then, and it is misremembered now. Rarely have so many people been so wrong about so much. Never have the consequences of their misunderstanding been so tragic. -- Nixon

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Vickie's Corner 03/27/2013 - Civil Unions = Gay Marriage

March 28, 2013
Colorado USA

Charley Barnes Peeks Into This Week’s Edition Of “Vickie’s Corner” – Equal Rights

By Charley Barnes March 28, 2013 4:42 PM

Vickie’s Corner is a feature I started last week after I asked a friend of mine to share some of her thoughts. She has a lot of them, and they are always well versed, written and thought out so this was my way of giving someone a platform to share their thoughts as a member of society and non media based. Enjoy.

It’s a hot topic and on everyone’s news feed this week; equal rights. Right or wrong or is there such a thing. Vickie D shares her thoughts on the subject this week.
Unfortunately, our day is sometimes defined by a headline (or in this case a comment about a headline) that compels one to decide on which side of an issue one stands. Today that issue is civil union vs. gay marriage.

I reference a comment from a social media site that made me go hmmm…

I truly believe that civil unions should have all the legal rights by man’s law with the regards to the benefits hetero couples have. My qualm is it should not be called marriage as God’s law states “Marriage” is between a man and a woman.

What seems to have escaped notice in at least one aspect of this argument is not all marriages are religious in nature. For instance, I was married by a justice of the peace in what can only be described as a five minute-five buck civil ceremony nearly 42 years ago. The only difference between that ceremony and what is being proposed today to accommodate gays is the gender of the happy couple.

A civil union is marriage. If it is not, then I have been happily flaunting convention for over four decades.

Apparently, labeling controversial issues in socially acceptable language makes it easier for the masses to reconcile life in the real world with things they personally find morally reprehensible. I believe that is how most people reconcile religion and popular culture.

•Case #1 – Christmas vs. Santa Claus
•Case #2 – Easter vs. that pesky rabbit
•So why not God vs. Gay Marriage?

I am out of my comfort zone when religion enters just about any debate but it does not take a particularly religious person to wonder how religious or openly anti-gay organizations and establishments will be able to reconcile their principles of operation with what in their view has become (at least in Colorado) lawful immorality.

The biggest problem I see with all of the above is people in general refuse to take a stand. I call it conscientious ignorance. Concerns about operating contrary to popular opinion, is the source of most social dysfunction.

When words like legal fail to mean lawful or illegal fails to mean unlawful where exactly does that leave us when we try to define marriage? Or maybe that is the problem – we have not defined marriage. Personally, I don’t hold out much hope of the Supreme Court doing much more than muddying the waters.

Populists and politicians fear a person who knows and speaks their own mind, rightfully so.

I live by this byline… Silence is the most insidious form of consent.

With that said, I will go on record: I believe in the literal language of the Bill of Rights – unabridged and free of compromise. I believe the definition of illegal is unlawful. I believe marriage (even a civil marriage) is a contract between one man and one woman. My personal moral code does not change because some pinhead lawmaker signs a poorly conceived bill into law. I am not anti-gay nor am I pro-gay. To be honest I rarely give gay issues much thought as I am certain they rarely give straight issues much thought.

What I believe does not matter much in the grand scheme of things but being firm in my convictions allows me to get through the day and sleep at night after confronting something that in my mind simply is not right.

Source: K99/Charley Barnes Equal Rights

Charley Barnes is a friend and fellow rabble-rousing patriot. He is a DJ at K99 Colorado's Best Country Station. He personally contributes and organizes several charity and fund-raising events in northern Colorado including the Sleigh Riders Motorcycle Toy Run. We met in 2011 when he and a couple of buddies rode their motorcycles across Kansas to Topeka (the home of the Westboro Baptist Church Cult and gave the WBC a dose of their own medicine. That's how Journey 4 Justice began. J4J teams from across the nation travel to Topeka KS and deliver a counter protest to the WBC's hateful message. The difference is: they do it with class. No nasty signs or subversive messages are needed - they simply show up and wave the flags of country, state and armed services. A few weeks ago Charley offered me an opportunity to sound off occasionally on current events in a spot called Vickie's Corner in his little neck of the woods at K99. Is that kool or what?

Main Stream Propagandists

March 28, 2013
Colorado USA

From My Cold Dead Hands - Charlton Heston

March 27, 2013
Colorado USA

Every time our country stands in the path of danger, an instinct seems to summon her finest first — those who truly understand her.

When freedom shivers in the cold shadow of true peril, it’s always the patriots who first hear the call.

When loss of liberty is looming, as it is now, the siren sounds first in the hearts of freedom’s vanguard. The smoke in the air of our Concord bridges and Pearl Harbors is always smelled first by the farmers, who come from their simple homes to find the fire, and fight, because they know that sacred stuff resides in that wooden stock and blued steel – something that gives the most common man the most uncommon of freedoms.

When ordinary hands can possess such an extraordinary instrument, that symbolizes the full measure of human dignity and liberty. That’s why those five words issue an irresistible call to us all, and we muster. So – so, as, ah, we set out this year to defeat the divisive forces that would take freedom away, I want to say those fighting words for everyone within the sound of my voice to hear and to heed – and especially for you, Mister Gore: From my cold dead hands!”

Charlton Heston

Source: YouTube

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Monday, March 25, 2013

The Gun is Civilization

March 25, 2013

FYI: The blog post below is making the rounds again, this time, mostly on social media sites. I first saw it years ago in a forwarded email. The internet being what it is (as far as I am concerned, fiction until proven factual) the article is currently circulating with the attribution by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret). Sites and blogs of a more conscientious demeanor that have reposted the excellent pro-gun argument for the individual at least refer to the Major as mostly mythical which is what I believe. When I sourced the article years ago I found the author to be Markoo Kloos (see the link below to what I believe is the source). I sourced it again today easily enough. While it may make it [the article] more palatable to some for the author to be a member of the US armed forces (a Marine no less), Kloos, if I remember correctly - is actually a German military veteran and has 60 some odd blog posts (on the old blog) about guns in his rather diverse offerings. I have provided links to the old and new blog for this individual.

why the gun is civilization.
March 23, 2007 by Marko Kloos

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

why the gun is civilization March 2007
Munchkin Wrangler

Guns: A Moral Argument

March 25, 2013

Guns - moral argument - Molyneux

Saturday, March 23, 2013

Note: DHS should be disarmed

March 23, 2013
Colorado USA

Just sharing something kool that landed in my inbox:

Retired Arm officer writes Senator John Cornyn (TX)

The Honorable Senator John Cornyn, State of Texas
United States Senate
517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510

Re: Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and that agencies preparation for war against citizens of the United States of America.

Dear Senator Cornyn,

It is with gravest concern that I write to you today concerning the recent appropriation of weapons by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that can only be understood as a bold threat of war by that agency, and the Obama administration, against the citizens of the United States of America. To date, DHS has been unwilling to provide to you, the elected representatives of the People, justification for recent purchases of almost 3,000 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) armored personnel carriers, 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (with associated weapons), and other weapons systems, when, in fact, the DHS has no war mission or war making authority within the limits of the United States of America.

Significant is the fact that at the same time the Obama administration is arming his DHS for war within the limits of the United States against the People of the United States in accordance with his 2008 campaign speech claiming,

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve gotta (sic) have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded [as the United States military]“–Candidate Barack Obama, 2008.

The Obama administration is deliberately defunding, overextending, and hollowing the Department of Defense; the only legitimate agency of the U.S. government with a war mission.

This act of the Obama administration stands as a glaring threat of war against our nation’s citizens! This act of the Obama administration can only be understood as a tyrannical threat against the Constitution of the United States of America! If left unresolved, the peace loving citizens who have sworn to defend the United States Constitution “against all enemies, both foreign and domestic” are left no option except to prepare to defend themselves, and the U.S. Constitution, against this Administration’s “coup” against the People and the foundations of liberty fought for and defended for the past 238 years. We have no choice if we honor our oaths.

The only proper response to this threat against the American people is for the representatives of the People, the members of the U.S. House and Senate, to demand in clear terms that the Administration cannot ignore, that the Department of Homeland Security immediately surrender their newly appropriated weapons of war to the Department of Defense (DoD). Further, since the DHS has assumed a position in the Administration to enforce the tyrannical acts of this president against the People of the United States against the limits of the United States Constitution, it remains for the United States Congress to exercise its limiting power in the balancing of powers established by our founding fathers, to disestablish and dissolve the DHS as soon as possible. One needs only to look to the rise of Adolf Hitler, and his associated DHS organizations, the SA and the SS, of 1932-1934, to see the outcome of allowing an agency of government this kind of control over the free citizens of a nation. The people of Germany could not have imagined, until it was too late, the danger of allowing a tyrant this kind of power. We must not be so naïve as to think it will not happen to us as well if we remain passive toward this power grab by the Marxist Obama administration!

Finally, for more than two centuries the nation has lived in peace at home because of the protections of our legitimate military and the many appropriate state and federal law enforcement agencies, supported by Constitutional courts. We stand today at a cross-road. Will we allow this present Administration to overthrow our United States Constitution and its legal processes to amend injustices, or, will we honor our obligations to defend the Constitution against a “domestic” enemy? Our Constitution lays out the proper methods of resolving our differences; and it does not include its overthrow by a rogue agency of a Marxist leadership at home. You, sir, are our constitutionally elected agent to defend our Constitution at home. We are counting upon you. We remain aware, however, of this present threat and will not expose ourselves as an easy prey to the authors of the destruction of our nation.

I know that this letter demands much of you. We elected you because we, the citizens of the State of Texas, believe that you are up to the task at hand and will, against all threats, honor your oath and office. We are also writing to your fellow members of the House and Senate to stand in integrity with the Constitution and against this present threat by the Obama administration and his DHS.

We refuse to surrender our Constitution or our nation!

Captain Terry M. Hestilow
United States Army, Retired
Fort Worth, Texas
March 23, 2013

God bless you as you honor your oaths and your obligations as citizens of this free nation. May we once again know honorable leadership and peace at home.

Sourced this article to: Freedom Outpost

All power is inherent in the people

March 23, 2013

The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves in all cases to which they think themselves competent (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved), or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press. --Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824

Friday, March 22, 2013

Colorado Backfire

March 22, 2013

Colorado BackfireThis is what is known as a Colorado Backfire I believe. In an over-reaching, liberty-killing effort by liberal-minded, do-gooder lawmakers to curtail gun ownership in Colorado, stats and figures indicate that the number of gun owners (or at least new guns in the hands of gun owners) in the state has virtually exploded. These numbers just refer to firearm sales and transfers that require a background check. Under current law only retail and gun show sales require a background check.

The universal background check legislation just signed into law yesterday does not go into effect until July 1 today. Yes, effective today - actually, the 20th.

Source: HB-1228 went into effect on March 20, 2013. It requires a $10.00 fee to be collected during the sale of a firearm in Colorado.

Using my best Rod Serling Twilight Zone voice -- Imagine, if you will... how many private transfers have occurred in the last sixty days or so.

Since the start of 2013, the number of criminal background checks for gun purchases in Colorado jumped 112 percent over the same period last year.

Between January to February 2012, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation processed 48,780 background checks, compared with 103,381 this year.

Digression: It's just an observation - the population of Colorado is estimated at just over five million. I wonder how many of those millions are free-thinking, gun toters? Fortunately, for now - Colorado Law prohibits gun registration so the number on that is a complete ???unknown???. The governor does not believe they amount to much nor does he believe they will have an impact on his re-election. Hmmm...

In my limited experience of the "banning" of things (books, music, movies, alcohol, tobacco and now guns) the result is never what the censor (in this case lawmakers and their do-gooder minions) had in mind. Never. It cannot work without further legislation and sooner or later the governor is going to have to retract these ill-fated words about gun owners, Not only do they not represent the middle, I don't think they represent the Republican party. I don't think they represent a large number of people.

What gun owners do represent is freedom-loving political dissent - the kind that built this country.

Read more: Background checks for gun purchases in Colorado moves to Hickenlooper's desk - March 15, 2013

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Vickie's Corner - 03/20/2013 - A Crime Against Country & State

March 20, 2013
Colorado USA

Subject: Gun Control Legislation


By Charley Barnes March 20, 2013 6:03 PM

I have been very fortunate in life to surround myself with some amazing people. Vickie D is a long story on how she came into my life but let’s just say that I have again been blessed.

Vickie D is a native of Texas and transplanted to Colorado years ago. She came into my life when Journey 4 Justice was formed back in June of 2011. Being from Texas she knew a bunch of friends and extended family would want to do what we did in Topeka KS and so Texas 3 was born headed by Gary Fortner.

I write this post today to share some of Vickie’s thoughts. She is a great writer and I wish I had her skills, but I don’t. Today I wanted to start a new feature that hopefully she will jump on board with called “Vickie’s Corner” and today’s feature piece is her thoughts on the new gun legislation passed today here in Colorado.
Well here is my knee jerk reaction since that’s pretty much how we deal with things these days, especially in the state house of Colorado where reason and intellect, not to mention integrity have all but left the building.

James Madison said, “There are more instances of the abridgement of the freedom of the people by the gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpation.” Make no mistake – that is the only way to see the gun legislation that passed into law today in Colorado – usurpation.

If one shred of evidence or a scientific study (which I might add the lawmakers ramming this bill home refused to consider) could be offered up as proof that requiring extended background checks, limiting a weapon’s capacity or making law abiding citizens culpable for the actions of the criminal element would make our volatile world any safer –
I believe most people would actually take a hard look at it.

But the fact is, what our lawmakers are selling is a particularly low-minded brand of deceit that alludes to a false sense of security. Any abridgement to the freedoms prescribed by the law of the land and the law of Colorado is not an inconvenience – it is a crime against country and state. Vickie D/Fort Collins CO

As another Texan friend, Nubbin Johnston told me, “You can take the girl out of Texas but you can’t take Texas out of the girl.” Feel free to leave your comments for Vickie directly below and as always, please keep things clean and friendly.

Source: K99/Charley Barnes Fans react to the new gun bill passed in colorado today

Charley Barnes is a friend and fellow rabble-rousing patriot. He is a DJ at K99 Colorado's Best Country Station. He personally contributes and organizes several charity and fund-raising events in northern Colorado including the Sleigh Riders Motorcycle Toy Run. We met in 2011 when he and a couple of buddies rode their motorcycles across Kansas to Topeka (the home of the Westboro Baptist Church Cult and gave the WBC a dose of their own medicine. That's how Journey 4 Justice began. J4J teams from across the nation travel to Topeka KS and deliver a counter protest to the WBC's hateful message. The difference is: they do it with class. No nasty signs or subversive messages are needed - they simply show up and wave the flags of country, state and armed services. A few weeks ago Charley offered me an opportunity to sound off occasionally on current events in a spot called Vickie's Corner in his little neck of the woods at K99. Is that kool or what?

The Gov of Inanity thinks Criminals are Stupid - Applies Colorado Background Check Band-Aid to make it All Better

March 20, 2013

Today Colorado Governor Hickenlooper said with just the right tone of inanity, It turns out that many criminals are stupid, as he signed the legislation requiring universal background checks for all gun sales, purchases and transfers into law. This is one of three absurd gun control measures signed into law today. (More on the specifics of the laws as I get them read.) It does not take a rocket scientist (which good ol Hick - ain't) to figure out the law derived from HB 1229 basically only applies to law-abiding citizens who now have to file a background check and pay a fee (law derived from HB 1228) to legally sell or transfer a firearm. The other law HB 1224 makes it illegal to transfer a firearm if it was designed with a convertible magazine virtually banning all semi-automatic weapon transfers. Effective July 1 it is possible law-abiding citizens will unwittingly become immediate criminals simply by trying to sell a gun or merely transfer ownership of it. Break the law even by error and what happens? Can anyone say gun confiscation? Stay tuned...

Colorado Background Check Band-aid

I challenge the governor's inane criminals are stupid comment by saying that it is not much of a stretch for a even a stupid criminal to outsmart lawmakers. Criminals have been circumventing the law since anyone ever conceived of legislating right and wrong. Lawmakers in this instance have stupidly crafted laws that demonize gun owners and create more red tape not to mention antithetical issues between oath and duty for law enforcement.

I find it just a tad bit egotistical of the Governor to think he is outsmarting anyone with a law that is clearly and specifically designed to do little more than generate revenue from law-abiding citizens and does absolutely nothing to deter the criminal element. Granted, criminals do stupid things (actually, I would love to see the data on how many criminals are caught trying to pass a background check) but some of the most heinous criminals in recent history "passed" their background checks. Case in point #1: Jared Lee Loughner had a history of drug possession charges and had been suspended by his college for disruptive behavior but he passed the FBI background check and went on to shoot 19 people in Tucson, AZ in 2011, killing 6. Case in point #2: James Holmes (no known criminal record but was described as weird) passed multiple background checks (because he spread his arms purchases over several stores) before walking into a theater in Aurora Colorado killing 12 people and injuring 58 others.

Somebody please explain how universal background checks/fees counter evil intent because my powers of deduction just cannot travel that trail of logic. Seriously - how did we get there? If you ask me - stupidity - is not exclusive to criminals. Just sayin'...

Respectfully yours in unfailing allegiance to the USA,
Dissident Daughter
Because: Silence is the most insideous form of consent

Source Links:
About James_Eagan_Holmes
James Holmes passed background checks
About Jared_Lee_Loughner
Jared Loughner passed background checks
Hickenlooper says criminals are stupid

Saturday, March 16, 2013

Attention Political Populists

March 16, 2013

Courage is an inner resolution to go forward despite obstacles;
Cowardice is submissive surrender to circumstances.
Courage breeds creativity; Cowardice represses fear and is mastered by it.
Cowardice asks the question, is it safe?
Expediency ask the question, is it politic?
Vanity asks the question, is it popular?

But conscience ask the question, is it right? And there comes a time when we must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because it is right.

― Martin Luther King, Jr.

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Open letter to governor

March 13, 2014

Subject: Parting Shot

Gov John W Hickenlooper
136 State Capitol
Denver CO 80203-1792
Phone (303) 866-2471
Fax (303) 866-2003

Governor Hickenlooper,

I write one final time to urge you to reconsider signing the heinous gun ban bills that will soon arrive on your desk. Make no mistake, those of us who actually know our second amendment rights understand that Colorado intends to register, confiscate and eventually ban guns. The laws cannot be enforced otherwise. Lawmakers cannot refrain from calling this a first step toward a total gun ban. I will add my voice to the many who believe Colorado as a government entity has lost all integrity by demonizing law-abiding gun owners and stripping away gun ownership rights. Aside from the assault on the second amendment, for a politician who campaigned on the promise of building the economic structure of the state I find it the height of hypocrisy to see you not even flinch at the prospect of running business out of the state.

It might come as some surprise to you that until Colorado threatened our right to keep and bear arms, the firearms we own had not seen the light of day in over 20 years. That neglect has been corrected and we own a few more now.

It is a sad day to hear what was once a proud freedom-loving state compared to New York and California.

I have to tell you I was sorely disheartened when I heard this statement from you about gun owners.

Not only do they not represent the middle, I don't think they represent the Republican party. I don't think they represent a large number of people.

You are correct sir in one regard. I am not a republican. I am not a democrat. I am an American first and an Independent always in all aspects of my life - not just politics. Oh, and I understand exactly what that means for me and for politicians. I was disheartened by the statement because you spoke as a politician and a democrat not as a governor. Call me naive but it was my understanding that a governor, much like a president is supposed to represent the interests of all the people in the state. I do not see any evidence of that in this state or in the country at large. I sincerely believe that you, speaking specifically have woefully underestimated the opposition.

Colorado was a dream I had as a girl. Once I laid eyes on the Rocky Mountains (about the age of 12) I knew I wanted to live here one day. I moved here with my husband in 1998 with nothing more than a truck full of stuff, the dog, very little cash and a pocketful of dreams, ready for a grand adventure. Well, we have lived the dream. Fortunately, we got most of that done before you and the last round of democrats took office. We have worked hard and played hard. We have camped and fished and ridden our Harley all over this glorious state and enjoyed every freedom-loving minute of it. But, in 60 some odd days the Colorado we knew and loved is fast becoming nothing more than a pleasant memory. Our dream of Colorado is now a nightmare. If anything could ruin this state for us - it is the politics of the day. With a single scrawl from what can only be described as an assault pen you will mark the day that I/we go in search of a new dream because this one is as dead as if you had put it in the cross hairs of a rifle and emptied a 30 round clip in it.

If I had wanted to live in California or New York or Illinois - I would have chosen to live there 13 years ago. You will not know when we cross the state line for the last time. And I doubt you will feel the impact of the loss of our tax dollars. I have advised the small population of friends and family in my little world to visit and vacation elsewhere and we will meet them anywhere but here. I have told them that the Rocky Mountains are not exclusive to Colorado. I will not contribute more than what is absolutely necessary by way of tax dollars to benefit this state while I still call myself a resident. And I live close enough to Wyoming for that not to pose much of a problem.

I will not live with the mockery lawmakers have made of the fundamental rights formerly known as the law of the land. I will not live under tyranny. I will not live where the fundamental rights granted to me by law and providence are ground under the feet of smug, over-reaching, pretentious, do-gooder lawmakers who blatantly refuse to listen to the people and demonize the ones they do allow to speak.

I ask that you do not sign HB 1229/1228 (extortion) and especially not HB 1224 (gun BAN) into law.

It is a sign of our times that all Americans will have to eventually pick a side and make a stand. I stand on the side of freedom as our founders conceived of it. I will draw a line in the sand a bit further south to make my stand.

This geographically-challenged Texan (make that two of us) can and will secede from the state of Colorado.

Signing off with respect under duress,
Two Dissenters

Signatures removed for blogging purposes - original including signatures faxed 03/13/2013

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Rocky mountain highs and lows in the house of unintended consequences

March 12, 2013

I don't know about you but reading headlines these days (especially in Colorado) is about the same as getting poked in the eye with a stick - repeatedly. After 63 days (that's how long the lawmakers have been at their jobs this session) the face and culture of Colorado (I have been a geographically-challenged Texan since 1998) is almost unrecognizable. That whole reach across the aisle thing - yeah - that concept is all but extinct. Sadly, I must report that common sense, reason, logic, intellect, and integrity have vacated the state house of Colorado. It is now mostly known as the house of unintended consequences.

House of Unintended Consequences

What follows are a few generalizations in overview of recent events - detailed posts will follow as new laws roll off the governor's desk. I refuse to sit down and shut up. Just because the president of our senate advises his lawmakers NOT to read email from constituents does not mean I will stop sending them. Further, most will become open letters here, on social media sites and on editorial pages in newspapers across the state and if need be - the nation.

Yesterday, as a result of overzealous democratic liberalism, the second amendment [the right to keep and bear arms] simply vanished with the stroke of just shy of two dozen assault pens in this state. I can guarantee they (I call them Obamarodoans) are not done with the second amendment - the goal is to bury it or at the very least ban the free exercise of it. So far they have done a decent job of that very thing by instituting invasive universal background checks, undetermined tax for background checks, and an arbitrary ban on what they call high capacity (over 15 rounds) magazines that makes just about every semi-automatic hand gun in Colorado illegal, non-transferable and subject to confiscation. The laws as they are written are unenforceable without universal firearm registration which will lead to firearm confiscation. The lawmakers in support of this bill made it quite clear - this is only the first step toward a total gun ban (at least for law-abiding citizens). I have to wonder what democratic gun owning voters have to think about the people they put in charge of things. Would you call that unintended consequences? Make no mistake - these laws are privacy-invasive, freedom-infringing, tyranical overreach which will not recognize party lines in breadth and scope. Equality in action - Democrat/Republican, Liberal/Conservative gun owners all got the shaft - equally. Yeah, this one is primed to get ugly.

Unintended consequence: The gun control legislation basically makes every gun owner in Colorado (resident or not) a criminal - oops.

A while back marijuana was made legal in Colorado - sort of. I have not followed that issue as closely, other than to smirk at the headache it has caused lawmakers. I do not care beyond the fact that we will have more people driving and performing other hazardous duties under the influence. Between people getting high, getting drunk, taking happy pills, hugging trees and texting - well, it can get a bit dicey out there. Call me responsibly antiquated. I do some of the above. I drink. I text. I do neither while I am driving or engaged in activity that requires concentration or undivided attention. Those people that laughably argue they can multi-task - I laughably argue that just because they are capable of doing several things at one time (as most of us are) does not mean they are doing any of them well. I do not indulge in marijuana and so far I have managed to get along in this world without happy pills, although I could have used alcohol therapy after yesterday's debacle in the state house. But I digress, as to the legality of marijuana, I am thinking I cannot be too far off the mark when I say that marijuana, now that it is legal, is probably more illegal now than before it became legal. Put that in your brownie and munch it.

Unintended consequence case in point: I believe it might have been 24 hours before the marijuana law was called into question when the drug via brownies made it into the hands of innocent, unknowing school children - oops.

Today a Civil Union law (I don't know why they don't just call it gay marriage) will sail on through to the governor's desk and the governor will sign it. Civil Unions mean nothing to me other than, again, it will give lawmakers headaches for not researching the unintended consequences of said legislation especially since it is my understanding that certain exemptions for religious concerns failed to get written into the law.

Unintended consequence: Religious organizations will be required to acknowledge same sex unions which is in direct conflict with religious beliefs - oops. This one is going to get ugly, too.

Also making its way via the fast track to the governor's desk is the first step in negating the whole idea that illegal aliens are actually illegal - meaning, they are breaking the law. That's what illegal meant pre-Obama. This fine piece of paper crap allows lower tuition for illegal immigrants (aka illegal aliens). The governor will sign this anti-American student bill - I can guarantee it.

Unintended consequence: I cannot begin to imagine all the consequences of this BS but the first thing that came to mind was the question - is this geological or statist racism or discrimination?

We have Pelosiesque law making in Colorado now. We pass illogical bills into law without reading them or studying the possibility of unintended consequences. Our lawmakers do not even bother to adequately debate the enforceability of the laws they pass. No, we pass the bills into law so we can see what's in them and then spend time and money (tax payer money) trying to make them more palatable to the public and law enforcement, the result of which involves making them even more offensive.

Attorneys! Sharpen your pencils!

Overreaching government is not just a Colorado issue - it is a national issue. The Bill of Rights is under full scale attack in this country and only those of us who know what they [the unperverted rights] are actually get it.

Unintended consequences. Zero accountability. OOPS is an unacceptable response to sloppy job performance. Why do we tolerate it? Well, maybe we won't - I have signed a few recall positions today for all the good it will do.

I believe what is most exasperating about politics gone awry is the sad fact that we get the government we deserve. We vote for it. What we have is decided excess of ill-informed voters who vote their ignorance and a decided excess of non-voters who do not vote for the very same reason - ignorance. Whose fault that is encompasses a wide spectrum.

I will share an example of this. Earlier today, while I was defiantly surfing eye-poking headlines I glanced at comments posting literally by the hundreds on a headline about the Civil Union legislation. A young woman (hopefully youth is the excuse for her ignorance) claimed that "all gun owners cared about were their rights". I admit, I paused, snorted and moved on. But, as you might have guessed I returned to that comment and read it again. She continued by jubilantly saying that she was happy that the state of Colorado was finally (gush-gush) going to recognize that civil unions are a right. Her right.

So yeah, as you might expect - I went there.

Of course, I felt duty bound to point out that the second amendment actually specifically supports my right to keep and bear arms -- I asked her to please point out the amendment in the Bill of Rights that supported her claim. She could have side-stepped the Bill of Rights and made a weak argument through the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness clause in the Declaration of Independence or at the very least made just about as weak an argument using the life and liberty and equality clause in the fourteenth amendment (which is usually pulled out of the closet in defense of this claim) - but no - I got dead silence on that end... Another person later on made the fourteenth amendment argument for her pointedly directing his response at my comment.

So yeah, as you might expect I went there again.

I told him I could care less about Civil Unions. Since the legislature had opened the door - they can deal with it and from what I am reading - deal with it they will. I said since the woman's comment was specifically directed at gun owners that she needed to specifically support her statement. I simply explained that the Bill of Rights (See second amendment - ratified 1791) specifically and in crystal clear language supports my right to keep and bear arms and that I had found no such language in the Bill of Rights that speaks specifically to Civil Unions or, for that matter the rights of same sex couples.

Amendment #14 Section 1 (ratified in 1868) further supports my right while vaguely addressing her alleged right.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So while I (being the constitutionalist that I am) would support (or at least hear with an open mind) the argument for civil unions based on the constitutional language of the equality clause what do you think the odds are of that young woman caring or supporting the more constitutionally specific language that protects gun owners?

Clearly, the general consensus is gun owners should support and/or defend the rights of others without the expectation of reciprocity in that regard. This is what entitlement mentality yields. These are my rights - I don't care about your rights. Equality means nothing if you do not understand the concept of reciprocity.

Basically, I closed my contribution to the thread by offering this thought for consideration - that if lawmakers can choose to ignore the shall not be infringed clause of the second amendment based on the grounds that the founding fathers (in 1791) could not have conceived of an AR15 or magazines that hold 15 or more rounds then I guess the argument could be made that the lawmakers who added the equality clause to the fourteenth amendment (in 1868) could not have possibly conceived that it would be used as the stepping stone to same sex marriage.

Mission accomplished - that part of the thread - died. I love intimidating the ill-informed.

Still, in Colorado - Civil Unions will become okay by state law. Whether that be the case with constitutional law is still debatable. The person who offered the fourteenth amendment argument for the civil union case also referenced the 1967 supreme court decision concerning marriage as a fundamental right but if I remember correctly the ruling specifically addresses interracial marriage or the legality thereof. I do not know the specifics and how that applies to same sex marriage other than through the fundamental clause. This argument is put out there every time same sex marriage enters the debate and the debate is heating up so given the careless lawmaking climate that is running rampant in Denver these days - it is possible that marriage will be redefined - look for Colorado to lead the charge on that piece of nonsense, too.

And finally, I have to say I am dismayed by lawmakers crying foul and demonizing anyone who dares to oppose their actions. The first amendment is under fire because of one such recent instance. One lawmaker had a person incarcerated for sending hateful, racist emails about gun legislation. Yep, this guy was out of line (at least the socially acceptible line) for certain but he is now a felon, will likely be deprived of his firearms and he has lost his job. He is accused of trying to sway or influence a public official. It will be interesting to see how threat/hate/racism by email holds up under the first amendment. Another lawmaker accused a newspaper executive of using threatening language when he simply asked her not to vote for gun control. If I were him I'd counter sue on the grounds of libel or at the very least slander. Once the outcry looked like it was playing well in the media then one liberal after another tried to trump each other with tearful stories of receiving meany, threatening emails from gun-loving conservative constituents. Oh me! Of course, it should go without saying if lawmakers were not threatening law-abiding citizens with liberty-killing legislation, the issue of meany emails might not be an issue at all. Thankfully, a couple of conservative lawmakers countered with the fact that they had received plenty of threatening emails from liberal constituents - their advise was to hit delete and just consider it a hazard of the job. Or they could simply follow the advise of the president of the Senate and not read email from their constituents.

But it's just a thought: Last I checked hate is not illegal nor is racism nor is stupidity or ignorance. It is not even illegal to teach your children to be a hate monger. Just ask the Westboro Baptist Church.

Anyway, I am closing this rant with a simple question still unanswered in my mind. How is attempting to sway or influence a public official, specifically a lawmaker by threat or intimidation unlawful? OK - barring the alleged threats against the person's body, property or relatives. I mean, who writes a lawmaker and says HI! I just wanted to let you know I am thinking about you. Have a nice day! I mean, who writes a lawmaker without the intent to sway that official's thinking on any given issue? And, if you state the fact that if the lawmaker votes a certain way on any piece of legislation that you will not vote or support that lawmaker in the next election - how is that not perceived as a threat or intimidation? Elections have consequences. Actions have consequences. I fail to see how we get from if you vote for that, I will not vote for you = jail. Hmmm...

Unintended consequences... it is food for thought.

Respectfully yours in unfailing allegiance to the USA,
Dissident Daughter
Because: Silence is the most insideous form of consent

Monday, March 11, 2013

The Heavy Hand of Government just smacked We the People - OOPS!

March 11, 2013

Stay tuned... it aint over

Obamarado Gun Grabbers 5 - Colorado Gun Owners 0

We have lost the battle - not the war.

Sunday, March 10, 2013

Open letter to Colorado Lawmakers

March 10, 2013

Senators of Colorado,

I wrote a few days ago and received only one response in regards to my concerns of the over-reaching gun control/gun ban legislation before you. To that single lawmaker - thank you for your timely and almost immediate response and candor. To the Senators who are fighting this legislation - our deep appreciation - please keep up the good work.

Govenor Hickenlooper dismisses gun owners as inconsequential in Colorado. He is on record as saying... "Not only do they not represent the middle, I don't think they represent the Republican party. I don't think they represent a large number of people." It is really disheartening to think that comment is likely indicative of the overall sentiment in the state house. He is right about one thing - I am not a Republican. I am not a Democrat. No - I am one of those scary, unknown entities - an Independent. Boo! Talk about underestimating the opposition. It makes me smile, actually.

I can deal with the bills passed concerning background checks and fees as exactly what they are - extortion. Sadly, 1st amendment rights were extorted long ago. The right of the people to speak freely requires a fee (we call it a tax). The right of the people to assemble peacefully also requires a fee/tax unless you dub yourself as occupy this, that or the other of course. I am assuming that's why lawmakers think they have a green light to go after other rights. Please be advised, my 2nd amendment rights are not for sale or barter. I will not presume to speak for other gun owners - I will simply take my gun money elsewhere and when small gun shop owners in Colorado start to fold along with the other businesses that will leave the state you have only yourselves to blame or congratulate depending on which way you look at it.

Voting yes on HB1228/1229 demanding arbitrary background checks and fees (really a tax) for private gun sales is indicative of the mercenary approach to lawmaking. The money man is urbanite public opinion I guess. So we get a legislature who thinks we have to do something even if it makes no difference - we cannot do anything about violence or the criminal element - so we will compromise the rights of and penalize law abiding citizens.

Demonizing gun owners is simply the politically correct and fashionable the "thing" to do these days it seems. I guess if one is easily swayed by the current administration in DC or large metropolitan areas that bear no similarity to Denver or more importantly, Colorado at large - it would be the easy way to go. It is just a thought but if I had wanted to live in California or Illinois or New York I would have moved there. It pains me to think that the state formerly known as Colorado aspires to be some perversion of states I bear no respect for at all -- shall we rename ourselves Californorado or NewYorkorado or Chicagorado - or here's a good one Obamarado?

We chose to live in Colorado back in 1998. We can and likely will choose to live elsewhere. We will simply vacate the state taking our tax dollars and freedom-loving frame of mind with us. We are not so arrogant to think that will make the least bit of difference to a single lawmaker. But, just so you know - we will likely be here long enough to vote our conscience in 2014. I hear that phrase often when I speak with lawmakers and often I hear it in a condescending manner... Lawmakers are not the only ones who vote their conscience. By the way - voting along party lines is not voting your conscience - it is simply a sign that you lack imagination, or heaven forbid are just too lazy to think for yourself or do your job.

Simply stated: Voting yes on HB 1224 (to ban - yes, call it what it is - a ban on guns and magazines and only a prelude to gun registration/confiscation) is a deal breaker for our household.

Signing off with reluctant respect,
Substituting Dissident Daughter for real name here for blogging purposes
The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself. ~~ Archibald Macleish

P.S. It should be interesting to note that we have guns that have not been out of the closet in years - nearly 20 years I think - until recently. They are out now and cleaned and oiled and in fine working order. We have not added to our firearm collection in years but now those old guns have new company. We did not arm ourselves because we feel extraordinarily threatened by the criminal element in suburbia. We have armed ourselves because we believe it is our right to do so. Most constitutional rights lay dormant until threatened. Current legislation is a threat to our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms. There is no other way to see it. It is a sad thing to think we have more to fear from an over-zealous, gun grabbing, presumptuous we-know-what-is-best-for-you legislature than from the criminal element that allegedly lurks on every corner now in America. We do not buy into the chicken little histrionics coming out of DC and we are not buying into the chicken little histrionics coming out of getting-too-big-for-its-britches Denver either. I have said it before. I will say it again. Denver is not Colorado.

Evil is out there and should be dealt with accordingly with laws (most of them already on the books) that make a difference - but Evil is not resident in my tax-paying, law-abiding, freedom-loving, gun-toting, flag-waving, Harley-riding, patriotic heart and I resent that you think so.

Lawmakers are going to have to work a little harder to root out what is wrong with our society and fix it.

Hint: It is not me.


March 10, 2013

Daylight Savings Time

Saturday, March 9, 2013

A picture worth 6001 words

March 9, 2013

Cartoon-We the people vs war powers
The Constitution, 4543 words
+ The Declaration of Independence, 1458 words
Freedom, 6001 words

Thursday, March 7, 2013

War: Freedom vs Fear

March 7, 2013

Bush - Freedom and Fear

Freedom and fear are at war said President George W Bush over a decade ago when the hearts of this country wept. I remember thinking at the time how such a profound a statement could fit so neatly in six little words. That short sentence in all its simplicity conveys the essence of humanity's struggle - the struggle for individual liberty.

The struggle is old and it is weary but still it goes on. And every time a tragedy happens freedom must remain stalwart in the face of fear.

Reason and power are at war

When the outcry of the demoralized and disheartened and the sorely used is not enough to shake freedom's foothold the result is a power struggle.

Reason and power are at war say I.
RE: In the gun control debate (especially in states where recent tragedies have occurred), the sore-hearted are being fed a pack of lies and empty promises by politicians with an agenda. Politicians always have an agenda - it is the nature of the beast. The fearful and the innocent almost always fall victim to power hungry tyrants who use misery for ill purpose.

In turbulent times (like now) when people fear for the safety of what is most precious to them we hear bitter language that no one should ever have to suffer so and in their grief and ultimate disillusionment people often become blind to reason. This is never more true than with the loss of children in a tragedy. Rightfully so. This is when a tyrant or tyrants step in with the miracle cure... reason vs power... the prescription of power always calls for the death of one or more liberties - always.

Reason loses to power when freedom loses to fear. Punishing the innocent to salve our pain is a hollow exercise in vengeance. The reward is pitiful while the cost is great. It is a perversion of justice to demand innocent, law-abiding citizens sacrifice their lawful right to keep and bear arms so the fearful can be assured the world will be a safer place - even though that assurance fails to meet the test of logic or reason.

What is right and what is wrong lies solely in the domain of man. Good and evil are the provinces and the burden of man. A gun may be construed as an instrument of evil but it is only so in the hands of evil. To use a harsh example, to say all gun owners are violent is the same as saying all Catholic priests are child molesters. There was death before there were guns. There was murder in the name of religion and greed, hate and avarice, and even love long before the discovery of gunpowder. Evil has always walked among us. Innocence is always the prey.

I do not have all the answers... but here are a few thoughts: When we do not teach respect for life - we do not get respect for life. When we do not protect freedom for all - the result is freedom for none. If we do not consider what is reasonable - then reason deserts us and there is nothing but chaos.

Punishing, penalizing and taxing innocent gun owners is asking them to pay for a crime they did not commit. Doing so makes every innocent a victim. And that, my friends is evil's reward.

Sadly, none of us have the right to live without fear... without pain... without loss...

None of us have the right to demand of another the sacrifice of freedom to assuage our fears...

Whether we choose to live in fear or in freedom is our choice, an individual choice, an honorable All-American choice. Of the two I prefer the label survivor over victim. Again, it is my choice how I choose to get on in this world. I would never dream of making that choice for another - reciprocity in that regard is appreciated.

I leave you with the words of a founding father: They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

Respectfully yours in unfailing allegiance to the USA,
Dissident Daughter
Because: Silence is the most insideous form of consent

Source: Quote from Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People, September 20, 2001

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Texas Senator gets it right on Chavez

March 6, 2013

I was appalled when I heard some of the reports about the recent demise of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Democrat Rep. Serrano (NY) tweeted Chavez “was a leader that understood the needs of the poor. He was committed to empowering the powerless. R.I.P.” !!!WHAT!!!

ABC News said Chavez "was revered by Venezuela’s poor, who considered him one of their own..." !!!WHAT!!!

The moron actor Sean Penn called him a "great hero". !!!WHAT!!!

I could go on but Breitbart did a good job of compiling the particulars (see the source link below).

So, it was a blessing to run across a statement that was not revisionist history.

Texas FlagSenator Ted Cruz

This week, President Hugo Chavez went to meet his Maker. His legacy will not soon be forgotten. Chavez's death has left the people of Venezuela with the world's 2nd highest misery index, 4th highest murder rate, and a 22% inflation rate. His record is a prime example of how socialist policies degrade freedom, stifle innovation and, and hurt those least off in society. Regimes like those under Chavez are a stark reminder of how much we have to be thankful for here in America, where our Constitution guarantees our liberty and ensures freedom to pursue opportunity, no matter one's background, race, or status.

Our prayers are with the people of Venezuela. We can only hope that the results of Chavez's tragic record will spur Venezuela to fight for a brighter, freer future.


Source: Texas Senator Ted Cruz Media Mourn Brutal Dictator Chavez

Monday, March 4, 2013

This is not my America - this is not my Colorado.

March 4, 2013

Adams - Liberty Once Lost is Lost Forever

Today is a sad day in my freedom-loving world. I watched the second amendment all but go up in flames in Colorado. I watched individual liberties one after another sacrificed on the pyre of sanctimony. I watched as the first amendment and probably the fourteenth amendment fell victim to collateral damage without even a sigh from the lawmakers who apparently falsely, or at least selectively swore to uphold the law of the land. (The Congressional oath of office is: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.) I watched as lawmakers blatantly, obstinately and collectively dismissed the rights and concerns of a vast segment of Colorado's population as irrelevant.

I watched as a group of brave sheriffs stood in mostly silent dissent against legislation that makes it impossible for them to uphold the oath of their office. I watched as anyone who spoke against the liberal gun-grabbing mindset were rudely and abruptly silenced. I watched as sad people, deep in the throes of the grieving process grasped at the hollow promises of vapid lawmakers. I watched those lawmakers vow to end the violence, knowing that they cannot possibly keep those promises - not if they disarmed the whole of Colorado, not even if they incarcerate every law-abiding gun owner, not if they trace our gun owning roots back to our freedom fighting ancestors in their ineffectual background checks. I listened as they grouped gun owners in with criminals or accused gun owners of consorting, aiding and abetting criminals without batting an eye. They claimed innocent tax payers bear the burden of gun ownership completely ignoring the fact that gun owners are taxpayers, too. I realized as I watched or listened or read about the events unfolding that this is only the beginning of the push and shove of the matter. I fear Colorado, like our beloved country as a whole will spend decades trying to undo the damage caused by over-reaching, ego-maniacal, radical politicians - likely to no avail.

Our Consolation must be this, my dear, that Cities may be rebuilt, and a People reduced to Poverty, may acquire fresh Property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the People once surrender their share in the Legislature, and their Right of defending the Limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every Encroachment upon them, they can never regain it. -- John Adams to Abigail Adams 1775

By the end of this week, gun ownership will no longer be a freedom enjoyed by Coloradoans. No, it will be crippled by burdensome, over-reaching restrictions and compulsory infringement of individual rights. Colorado will become a camping ground for the likes of numb skull neophytes signing on to the anti-American agenda of political tyrants like Biden, Boxer, Emanuel, Feinstein, Cuomo, Pelosi, Reid, Fields, Morse, Hickenlooper and yeah, I will say it - Obama. The list is long and tiresome to behold. By the end of this week Colorado will have joined ranks with a select group of states that by mere association is viewed by most Americans as disgraceful. By the end of the week we can expect Colorado to change its name to something akin to Californorado or Newyorkorado.

This is a preemptive statement - nothing has been signed into law yet, but we cannot expect Govenor Hickenlooper to put up much of a fuss. He doesn't put up much of a fuss about anything except the shape and color of his tie I think. He swings the way liberal Denverites swing, he panders to Obamalogic, and the rest of Colorado be damned. Sigh!

In an interview today with Channel 9, the NBC affiliate in Denver the governor dismissed gun owners as a threat of any sort - hmmmm...: For all of their fervor, Hickenlooper sees the demonstrators a small minority. "Not only do they not represent the middle, I don't think they represent the Republican party. I don't think they represent a large number of people," said Gov. Hickenlooper.

Aside from signing petitions too numerous to mention, honking horns and waving signs, nothing can be done at present to combat an out of touch, out of control, over-bearing, elitist legislature. It is not a matter of IF -- it is a matter of WHEN the liberties of what was formerly know as a free state go up in smoke. So, in the brief interim (between the time the bills are heard and passed into law) I am making notes and taking names... lots and lots of names.

One of the bravest comments I heard today: was in opposition to gun control and universal background checks... from a young woman named Krista whose mother was the victim of the murderer Gary Davis, the last man executed by the state of Colorado in 1997. Krista claimed that had her mother been able to defend herself with a gun, she might be alive today.

“Background checks won’t stop the next Gary Davis,” Krista said. “They’ll just make my world less safe.”

One of the saddest comments I heard today was from Arizona's Mark Kelly, husband of Gabby Giffords... "We're both gun owners... but we're anti gun violence and this bill will prevent violence." He was referring to the need for universal background checks.

I find myself shaking my head wondering how that statement as passionate as it sounds makes any sense. I am annoyed by it because it implies that law abiding gun owners resisting freedom killing gun control legislation are somehow pro gun violence. First of all, and I will not make friends by saying this - in this type of over-reaching gun control I think it safe to say that Gabby would not pass the background check and would likely have to surrender her weapons - I reference (not without a wince of consideration for the circumstance thereof) what is certainly a mental health point to be made. Second, if I am not mistaken, the criminal who attacked the representative and other Arizona citizens that fateful day had indeed passed a background check. Finally, if paper and a few dollars from hard-working, tax paying, law abiding citizens were enough to stop violence, we would not be having this conversation today or ever.

The biggest issue with the passage of any of the proposed bills is they must be seen as only the beginning... liberties are rarely lost in a giant sweep - they are lost incrementally - one tiny line of seemingly harmless text at a time.

Stay tuned... freedom of speech is not dead yet in the Centennial State proudly called such because (and perhaps we should remind our lawmakers) it became a state in the year 1876, 100 years after the signing of our nation's Declaration of Independence.

Respectfully yours in unfailing allegiance to the USA,
Dissident Daughter
Because: Silence is the most insideous form of consent

Source for comments: The Denver Post Colorado gun bills: Hundreds swarm Capitol on historic day
Channel 9 News/NBC: Hickenlooper doesn't think gun control will cost him re-election

Gun control measures under consideration by lawmakers in Colorado:
UPDATE: All bills were passed by the House - all but one has moved forward to the Senate as of midnight mountain time 03/04/2013. All seven have moved forward to the Senate as of 03/05/2013.

BACKGROUND CHECKS: House Bill 1229 would add a background-check requirement for many guns sold in private transactions. It passed a Senate committee in a 3-2 party-line vote. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

MAGAZINE LIMITS: House Bill 1224 limits gun ammunition magazines to 15 rounds. The Democratic-sponsored bill has cleared the House, and passed Senate Judiciary on a 3-2 party line vote.

FIREARM BAN FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENDERS: Senate Bill 197 would expand a ban on gun ownership for people convicted of certain domestic-violence offenses. The bill passed the Senate Judiciary Committee on a party-line 3-2 vote Monday. One more committee vote awaits before the full Senate considers it.

GUN LIABILITY: Senate Bill 196 adds legal liability for gun sellers and owners. The bill faced its first test Monday.

GUNS ON CAMPUS: House Bill 1226 would end Colorado's unusual law barring public college campuses from banning concealed weapons. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

ONLINE GUN TRAINING: Senate Bill 195 would require people seeking concealed carry permits to take gun training courses in person. The bill faced its first legislative review Monday.

BACKGROUND CHECK FEES: House Bill 1228 would revive fees for gun purchasers who need background checks. It passed a Senate committee in a 3-2 party-line vote. The Democratic-sponsored bill has already cleared the House.

Since the lawmakers of Colorado accepted the input of non residents to push their gun-grabbing agenda - and since they feel that legal gun owners are an inconsequential group I urge resident and non-resident gun owners to make their voices heard... pick one or all of the following and let them have a piece of your mind.

Gov John W Hickenlooper 136 State Capitol Denver, CO 80203-1792. Phone (303) 866-2471. Fax (303) 866-2003

Dem. Rep. Mark Ferrandino 303-866-2346
Dem. Rep. Claire Levy 303-866-2578
Dem. Rep. Rhonda Fields 303-866-3911
Dem. Sen. Morgan Carroll 303-866-4879
Dem. Sen. Evie Hudak 303-866-4840
Dem. Rep. Beth McCann 303-866-2959
Dem. Sen. Lois Tochtrop 303-866-4863
Dem. Rep. Jenise May 303-866-2945
Dem. Rep. Lois Court 303-866-2967
Dem. Sen. Rollie Heath 303-866-4872
Dem. Sen. Mary Hodge 303-866-4855
Dem. Sen. John Morse 303-866-6364
Dem. Sen. Jessie Ulibarri 303-866-4857
Dem. Sen. Irene Aguilar 303-866-4852
Dem. Sen Lucia Guzman 303-866-4862

Silent Encroachment

March 4, 2013

Madison - Abridgement of freedom