Gov. Rick Perry: opposes any handgun restrictions

youngins · May 01, 2007, 10:11:24 PM

I had to post this:

http://cbs11tv.com/local/local_story_121182129.html

Perry Wants Handguns Allowed Everywhere

(AP) AUSTIN Governor Rick Perry says he believes Texans should be allowed to carry their concealed handguns anywhere.

That's the Republican's conclusion after pondering how to stop the kind of mass killing that left 33 dead at Virginia Tech.

Under current law, secured airport areas, hospitals, courthouses, bars, churches and schools are among the places where weapons can be banned. That's even if someone has a state license to carry a concealed handgun.

Perry says he opposes any restrictions.

Perry made the remarks at a news conference after meeting with U-S Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt to discuss ways to prevent mass shootings and enhance school safety. The discussion stems from President Bush's drive to find solutions to such tragedies in the wake of the carnage at Virginia Tech.

About 260-thousand Texans who have undergone mandatory background checks and training are licensed to carry a concealed weapon. In the last fiscal year, 180 licenses were revoked and 493 were suspended for unknown reasons.

© 2007 The Associated Press.

glenn-k · May 01, 2007, 10:31:41 PM

Well at least he finally got something right. That's much better than only letting the criminals keep their guns.

May 02, 2007, 12:36:22 AM

I am all for having a gun to hunt and for protecting your property...

I am against people having guns when they venture out into Public

I saw That Tucker Carlson or whatever say on TV the other day that if someone had a gun at the Campus they could have disabled the Guy that killed 30 + people at Virginia tech

Problem with that line of thought is that people think it is up to them to carry guns and administer justice.

In a lawful society we have to try to trust the police (yes Glenn I said it) To uphold the law and if necessary shoot threats to society

Under our system of law the individual does not have the right to take such measures into their own Hands ...Vigilante Justice is strictly opposed and violators almost always get persecuted under the fullest extent of the law to set firm Examples.

Guns in Schools is absolutely completely Moronic....Ditto for a Church...Or any public place where masses gather such as the supermarket etc...

It is prohibited to enter any government building with a gun...why should the people in a government building be provided such luxury and safety measures and the common person in Public do without?

I do not feel that anyone should ever be able to tell someone else what they can or cannot do on their own land....

We have a messed up set of values and laws....There are zoning ordinances and covenants that restrict what you can do on your own land that you own and pay taxes on....Yet there is no restriction on what you can do with a gun once you leave your land and go onto someone elses....

Sorry guys that is F*cked up...And yeah Glenn I know you are going to remove the "F" word on me...and I do not care.

You are some kind of Punk or a P*ssie if you feel you need a gun out in Public

Maybe Karma will bite this backward moron Govenor and he will get shot in a 7/11 Stickup.....Do the world a favour

glenn kangiser · May 02, 2007, 12:57:30 AM

OK - so you're a star now Peter. I thought those two were on the bad word blocker - guess not. Leave it to you to find out. :-/

Peter , in many cases the police are not anywhere nearby to stop criminals. They are usually out on radar patrol.

MountainDon · May 02, 2007, 01:13:14 AM

QuoteGuns in Schools is absolutely completely Moronic....Ditto for a Church...Or any public place where masses gather such as the supermarket etc...

I just can't let that go by without a comment. The City of Albuquerque Public School Division is the largest in the state of NM; too big but that's another story. They have their own police department, cars that have lights like police cars, the cops have uniforms just like all the other cops, etc. etc. Yet the school police are not allowed to wear their holstered weapons during school hours. They have to keep them locked in the trunks of their cars. One school board member was quoted as saying the children might be frightened by them. Crap, cops need guns to do their job! Period!! How's that for stupid; ya' want to steal a gun..... go pop the lid of an APS police car during school hours.

Now that I have that out of my system I feel a little better.

One more... there was a guy beating up his ex wife in a local Walmart, clubbing her with something. A retired gent with a carry permit and the gun to match was there. Saved the woman from a continuing beating while the cops hurried to the scene. The guy turned on the armed protector, who shot him. Good thing I say. I know of another couple local instances where responsible gun owners stopped a crime in progress or one about to be perpetrated without a shot being fired.

Unfortunately, or maybe that should be fortunately, the police are not lined up on every corner ready to protect us.

I do not go looking for trouble. I do not have a gun with me everywhere I go. But I do have the permit. I resisted obtaining the permit, in the first year of the program here because of the $100 fee that the state collects every 2 years. I see that as an unfair tax. However, I did decide to take the 15 hours training, allow the intensive personal scrutiny take place, and obtained a permit.

Until the day comes along when "they" can guarantee that all the bad guys are abiding by the laws that restrict them possessing firearms I'll keep my guns thank you. And my wife will keep hers too. (That surprised the bejeebers out of me!) The only thing we can't agree upon regarding guns is the best caliber.

I do believe there are some places; courthouses, secured areas of airports, bars ? where a ban may be logical.... Although that immediately runs smack into the same old situation where the law abiding will not carry into the bar, but the outlaws won't be deterred. :-/

May 04, 2007, 06:00:32 PM

Don

I am all for people having guns in their homes...Protecting their property....I think it is wrong for guns to be out among society

the guy at the walmart that shot that guy...He is not authorized or qualified to shoot people....

No it is not okay to let some asshole beat his wife...But we do not have the right to kill people we see breaking the law either

I am as anti police officer as they come....But until we come up with a new system of laws...The police are officers of the courts which determines justice (as screwed up as it may seem sometimes)

We as free people have avenues to pursue change if we feel a law or a system of the law is unjust...We have the right to organize and educate ourselves about the law to seek changes we can rally and put pressure on elected officials to make amendments to existing laws and even to remove some laws or pass new laws...

We do not have the right to assume we are serving the best interests of the law by killing other people.

Don I think it is great you went and had 15 hours of gun training...Safety is important...But why does someone ever feel that they have the right to take a gun into a public domain?

A courthouse is no different than a church or a grocery store...If it is a public domain where masses of people come together then guns should not be allowed

The arguement that the criminals will have guns is always going to be out there...

This is a cut and dry case of 2 wrongs not making a right....If someone raped your wife should you go rape his?... of course not it is moronic illegal and morally reprehensible...

Same thing about a gun at the wal mart.... Saying that you need one because a criminal may have one is not a valid or moral arguement.

Just as some kid could break into the trunk of the car...Some kid could steal your gun.... and shoot innocent people with the weapon you brought into the wal mart....

Guns in public are never under any circumstances a good idea... You endanger the safety of everyone in public when you carry a powerful weapon in public.

They would not let you carry a Ninja Sword in Public....Try getting into the movies with a machete on your hip....If it is wrong to carry those weapons then a gun is wrong also

glenn kangiser · May 04, 2007, 07:21:51 PM

Quotethe guy at the walmart that shot that guy...He is not authorized or qualified to shoot people....

Actually looks like it worked just fine, Peter. Guys like that that think they can attack anybody including their wives, then attack someone who is trying to intervene to prevent a crime are not of benefit to anyone.

Rapists are a scourge on society also. Its not a question of going to rape his wife-- there was probably a good reason he was looking for someone to rape. If caught in the crime he has no right to expect others to feel sorry for him and get a lawyer like OJ's to get him off. It should be handled with a bullet to the head right then and there and save the taxpayers and courts money and time.

Not that it is likely to be done or that I would be the one to do it. It's just the way it should be. I am also not opposed to graffiti taggers etc, getting the same kind of justice. Today I was trying to see the speed limit on a sign and the taggers had painted their crap over the numbers. If one was shot while defacing safety signs I wouldn't shed a tear for him.

Some kids thought it was funny to take down stop signs - rich worthless spoiled drunk kids of wealthy farm owners. A lady was killed because the sign was gone and she collided with an oncoming car. (Grape vineyards are too high to see over and many times they are planted on the public right of way just so they can make that extra $50.) If one of them was shot while tearing down the stop (public safety) sign -- again I probably wouldn't do it but I wouldn't mind spitting on his body if someone was killed because he tore down the sign.

MountainDon · May 04, 2007, 07:47:40 PM

QuoteThey would not let you carry a Ninja Sword in Public....Try getting into the movies with a machete on your hip....If it is wrong to carry those weapons then a gun is wrong also

Actually Peter, I could carry a Ninja Sword. I'm sure I'd cause a commotion and be interviewed by the police, but the act of carrying/wearing a sword is not illegal; not in NM, UT or CO. Not sure about all the other states.

NM Criminal Code 30-1-12. Definitions. (1963)
B. "deadly weapon" means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded; or any weapon which is capable of producing death or great bodily harm, including but not restricted to any types of daggers, brass knuckles, switchblade knives, bowie knives, poniards, butcher knives, dirk knives and all such weapons with which dangerous cuts can be given, or with which dangerous thrusts can be inflicted, including swordcanes, and any kind of sharp pointed canes, also slingshots, slung shots, bludgeons; or any other weapons with which dangerous wounds can be inflicted;

30-7-2. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon. (2001)
A. Unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon consists of carrying a concealed loaded firearm or any other type of deadly weapon anywhere, except in the following cases:
(1) in the person's residence or on real property belonging to him as owner, lessee, tenant or licensee;
(2) in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person's or another's person or property;

Perhaps I need to look into acquiring a sword. :-/ Could become handy.

And the 2001 law listed above has been amended to include the legal carry of concealed firearms if over age 21, not a felon, etc. Restrictions as to caliber same or smaller than trained on. I'm ok with a .45 or smaller, my wife a .357 or smaller.

MountainDon · May 04, 2007, 07:53:40 PM

QuoteYou endanger the safety of everyone in public when you carry a powerful weapon in public.

I don't see any logic behind that statement.

May 04, 2007, 07:53:44 PM

We have many Sikhs from India here who wear a knife to prevent violence. Their religion requires it.

QuoteKirpan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Typical Kirpan worn by modern Sikhs
Typical Kirpan worn by modern Sikhs

The Kirpan (IPA: [k[ch618]r[ch712]p[ch593]n]) (Punjabi: [ch2581][ch2623][ch2608][ch2602][ch2622][ch2600] kirp[ch257]n) is a ceremonial sword or dagger worn by all baptised Sikhs.

In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh told his Sikhs at the Baisakhi Amrit Sanchar to constantly and regularly wear a Kirpan at all times. This was an article of defense which together with the other 4 Kakars formed the external visible symbols to outwardly display ones commitment to the Hukam of the tenth master. The five Kakars clearly and instantly identify a Khalsa Sikh. The Kirpan is worn on a cloth belt called a Gatra.

This injunction was primarily in order to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery, to maintain a state of harmony and security, to allow for the free development of trade, craftsmanship, arts & literature and to safeguard and protect the universal right of all beings to live their lives in a peaceful, stable and sheltered environment.

The kirpan has both a physical function, as a defensive weapon, as well as a symbolic function. Physically it is an instrument of "Ahimsa" or non-violence. The principle of ahimsa is to actively prevent violence, not to simply stand by idly whilst violence is being done. To that end, the kirpan is a tool to be used to prevent violence from being done to a defenceless person when all other means to do so have failed. Symbolically, the kirpan represents the power of truth to cut through untruth. It is the cutting edge of the enlightened mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirpan

and, yes - They Walk Among Us.

glenn kangiser · May 04, 2007, 09:51:41 PM

What do you think of this, Peter? :-?

QuoteIn Canada

In the 2006 Supreme Court of Canada decision of Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite[ch8209]Bourgeoys the court held that the banning of the kirpan in a school environment is against Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms as a reasonable accommodation. The issue started when a 12 year old student dropped a 20 cm (8 inches) long kirpan in school. School staff and parents were very concerned, and the student was required to attend school under police supervision until the court decision was reached.

MountainDon · May 04, 2007, 10:35:13 PM

I just read that an hour ago too... :-?

benevolance · May 05, 2007, 12:46:32 AM

I do not care if someone fought for their right to take a weapon to school...It is wrong!

I have never, ever needed a weapon...I am not 6 foot 6 or tough as nails either.... I find it ridiculous that people think they need a gun to be safe.

I am also of a mind that when on your land nobody should ever tell you what to do...Or what laws apply to you.. In my opinion on your land your laws should reign supreme...

When you leave your land and mingle among society then the rights concerns and safety of society become prevalent over your rights as a individual...

That is the logic behind not having the right to take a weapon out in public among masses of people...You do not have the right to endanger them.

Glenn I shed not a tear for the guy that got shot beating his wife...Should have tied the son of a bitch up and let her beat him to death....But you Don or I have no right to decide who lives and who dies...It is not upto us...We have elected officials.. appointed officers who have that responsibility.

Taking a human life is too horrid and controversial....For everyone to have the right to do it at their own discretion....

On your land when someone is tresspassing or acting violently or agrresively...You get to decide what is the appropriate course of action....In Society we as individuals do not have the right legally to make those decisions....That is called vigilante justice and it is illegal.

fourx · May 05, 2007, 03:27:52 AM

Well, benevolance, if I had even a tiny bit of confidence in the police and the ""law"" to protect me and my property, I would perhaps agree with you that guns in public places are not necessary- and perhaps, prior the closing down of the mental hospitals, and the misguided, starry-eyed Leftist displacement of those who were protected by them into wider community, along with the streaming of children with serious mental disorders into the general school community, where they are not treated but instead expected to conform ( and as a High School teacher I have had more than my share of them to deal with since the 1970's when the move to ""non-discrimination"" started- two years ago I had a lump of concrete the size of half a brick thrown at my head by a 13 year old who, when I was in High School, would have been in a mental institution ) to the norms of a society that has no time or inclination to be caring about those with mental problems. They don't stay 13- they don't just keep wetting the bed, torturing small animals and lighting fires- they grow up...and they buy guns.
Taking a human life is far easier than pulling a trigger- a can of gas and a lighter will do the same, and in the wake of the disgracefull ""gun control"" bullshit here in Austraia, the only group of firearm deaths that have decreased are suicides...but suicides have increased, by rope, or gas or any of a dozen other ways.
In a perfect world, it would not be necessary to protect oneself- this world, post Leftist social engineering, is very far indeed from perfect.

May 05, 2007, 09:24:09 AM

I have to agree with you Pete.

I don't think Peter has been around the "kids" we see nowadays. Many of these "kids" are hardened criminals by the time they are 13 and the law doesn't touch them.

Giving it a bit of slack, I would say that 25% of the police officers are the good guys. The rest would be considered criminals in one way or another if the law applied to them also. I knew many officers when I used to repair their cars as a mechanic. One told me they always carried an extra gun and misc. extra "materials" in the trunk in case they goofed up on a bust. Need something to plant, eh? :-?

Our local police used to run the meth labs here on the Indian reservations. The Indians complained years ago. They allow the pot growers to farm the marijuana in the woods only showing up to chase them off and harvest the crop. (Don't want to catch them - who would farm the next crop :-?)

An acquaintance told me of a officer who has a new house - speed boat - cars - trucks - etc. from his officers salary. He was told by the officer it was financed by marijuana sales. That was within the last 2 years. Marijuana busts get made and publicized here. It gets packaged and hauled in for evidence. We never hear how it gets disposed of. Nice perks. Yeah -- I trust these guys to take care of me.

And why wouldn't anyone trust our government to take care of us. Yeah I trust these guys.

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/printer_1918.shtml

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13893143/the_last_confessions_of_e_howard_hunt/1

These criminals all started out as criminals at the local level before they graduated to politics at the federal level. Nothing has gotten any better. If it seems that way either they are better at hiding it or you are not looking deep enough.

Trust them to protect me? :-? I'm, so sure.

MountainDon · May 05, 2007, 12:05:59 PM

Quote...no right to decide who lives and who dies...

Regarding this situation, the gent with the gun didn't just pull out his gun and begin to blaze away. He pulled his gun, shouted several warnings and it was only when the assailant turned and advanced on the gun holder that he fired . Some of the details were fuzzy so I looked it up... the guy was not simply beating on his wife, he was stabbing her multiple times. It was when he turned the knife to the man attempting to stop the carnage that he was shot. The police said the man with the gun was correct in his handling of the situation. The man with the gun did not make the decision as to whether or not the knife attacker lived or died... the knife attacker made that decision when he began his attack.

QuoteI have never, ever needed a weapon... .... I find it ridiculous that people think they need a gun to be safe.

You are a lucky guy, Peter. I have twice been in a situation where a weapon would have been nice to have, once right in the middle of an old downtown area in a city, the other out along a remote stretch of highway. In the downtown situation the young punk wielded a knife and wanted my money or he was going to "cut" me. I had nothing that would have been defense against him, and don't consider myself a bare-fisted street fighter. I was lucky in that I saw an opening in the traffic flow on the street and ran away. Of course I could have been struck by a car, but at the time it seemed like the best thing to do. What bothered me a lot was that he got away to try again on some other person.

The highway situation had, in retrospect, some comedic elements. I had stopped for an electrical repair/jury rig. This guy in a pickup came along and asked if he could help. He put me ill at ease right from the get-go.... didn't strike me as the good Samaritan type. He produced a tire iron and tried to strike me. I dodged and we played tag around the Jeep for a minute or so; him yelling threats and saying he wanted my money. Everything I could have used as a weapon was bolted, clamped or otherwise not easy to get at. (Don't want stuff bouncing off) The guy finally gave up, ran back to his still running truck and sped away. I was too shocked to think about trying to do anything but write down the plate number. It was stolen and I'm not certain he was ever caught, as I never heard back on my police complaint.

If either of the roadside event happened today, well it wouldn't today because today when I'm out like that I have one or more of my weapons along. Out in the boonies like that I wear it visible. I am convinced that having my holstered 45 visible prevented an "event" from occurring a few years ago out in the middle of nowhere, Utah. There probably wasn't another human within 50 miles, let alone any law enforcement. I had hiked into a canyon looking for Anasazi ruins and on returning to my Jeep found another Jeep and 2 guys looking mine over. They had only been there a few minutes as I had seen their dust cloud from a short distance away. Anyhow, most often when one jeeper meets another jeeper, we admire each others equipment, trade stories of good places to go etc. In any of similar encounters where I was wearing my gun I've never had a negative reaction (to the gun). But these 2 guys couldn't get back into their Jeep and out of there fast enough. I have no proof, but I think they were about to do some parts "shopping" and had second thoughts. Maybe they were simply frightened of the presence of my gun? Nah!

So when I hike I more often that not wear the revolver holstered and visible. In the Jeep out on the boonies, ditto. Sometimes I carry one concealed because the visible gun does make some people nervous. And it attracts un-needed attention.

QuoteI don't think Peter has been around the "kids" we see nowadays. Many of these "kids" are hardened criminals by the time they are 13 and the law doesn't touch them.

I was in Harbor Freight yesterday, inspecting some of our trade deficit, and was somewhat surprised by a conversation I overheard. Two gang banger types greeted each other, one said to the other he hadn't seen him around for a while. The response was that he'd been in jail. What for, he was asked? Oh, stealing a car, burglaring a house, beating up someone.... To them this was an ordinary everyday conversation. This was their life. It seemed he had no gult, no remorse, no shame about what he had done, what had happened.

Articles of interest
http://ohiovalleyoutdoors.com/no_gun_signs.htm
http://www.lewrockwell.com/perry/perry32.html

glenn kangiser · May 05, 2007, 04:11:45 PM

QuoteI was in Harbor Freight yesterday, inspecting some of our trade deficit, and was somewhat surprised by a conversation I overheard. Two gang banger types greeted each other, one said to the other he hadn't seen him around for a while. The response was that he'd been in jail. What for, he was asked? Oh, stealing a car, burglaring a house, beating up someone.... To them this was an ordinary everyday conversation. This was their life. It seemed he had no gult, no remorse, no shame about what he had done, what had happened.

These are the ones I am talking about.

Don't get me wrong - there are a lot - a majority of good kids. I do all I can to help and teach them what little I know whenever possible. They are a joy to work with and be around. Its these little no direction - world owes me a living and destroy everything that isn't mine bastards that I don't mind seeing cured with bullets. If they just use guns, only on each other, I am all in favor of arming gangs.

About 25 years ago my brother was following his sister-in-laws home after the fair to make sure they got home OK as they were walking. They were attacked by a group of second generation (legal-illegals) wanting to have their way with them. He told them to leave the girls alone - a fight ensued - he was taking down about 2 or 3 of them so the rest of them stabbed him while he was fighting the others. A gun would have stopped the whole thing with no one hurt as the little cowards would have run off.

It was about this time that one of the local policemen was arrested for driving down the sidewalk drunk (actually the same one who told me about keeping the spare unregistered gun in the trunk incase of a screw-up during an arrest etc.). It was also near the same time that another local officer forgot that there were no door handles on the inside of the back seat area of a police car and locked himself in the back of the car with a gal who was paying off her ticket.
Farmer found them there in the morning in his field. This was also near the time two of them were responding to a false alarm in the middle of town speeding in the city streets --- one passed the address - made an illegal u-turn mid-block (didn't check traffic) and his cohort in the other speeding police car t-boned him.

This was also about the time a Sheriff pretended to be a drunk driver behind my son as he was getting off work about 9:30 PM - He kept running up on him to get him to speed then turned on his red light after about 5 miles of that to give him a wreckless driving ticket. I had internal affairs investigate him. The IA guy was an honest officer and told us to get an attorney to fight it. He got off with traffic school -$400 to the attorney -- settled in court but not before the judge as my attorney - a shrewd Indian (from India) told the cop that if he went before the court he was going to make him look so stupid he would never be able to show his face in town again. Sheriffs dept and DA allowed it to be reduced and basically dropped. Judge and DA and Sheriff were ALL real wise asses. My ex-wife wanted to explain the situation to the judge before I got the attorney. He was absolutely incensed that she would even try - rude uncaring god's right hand. I did it my way from there.

I have more.

Yeah - I trust these guys to protect me.

Hey, man, I got your back. --sorry about the knife. :-/

benevolance · May 05, 2007, 09:49:19 PM

Well I am not in any way advocating that the police are great or even close to 100% effective...Nothing in life is...People taking guns into the Wal Mart is not 100% effective either

We need to let the justice system decide who lives and dies...We are not capable of making those decisions....Society itself would deterioirate quickly if everyone starting shooting people that pissed them off...

We need to allow the justice system to work...Or we need to disband it...There is no way we can effectively have a justice system and the public arming themselves with the intent to shoot and kill who they see fit.

To err is human and we have a system in society where only the harshest of crimes warrant death....So if someone is running out of the grocery store with a candy bar...We do not have the right to kill them...It is upto the store to press charges... and our system of government and laws therin to determine punishment...

If people in society want tougher laws we can get them by asking for amendments...Talking with local politicians lobbying for what we believe and change is possible.

What I am seeing in posts from other people is a completely lawless society aka wild west where there is no law no sherrif nothing...Everyone has a gun and anyone can shoot anyone they like...

And their arguement for this kind of tom foolery is that the bad guys might have guns,,, so everyone better have one too....And we should just shoot first and ask questions later because we are better judges of who lives and dies than a system of law

Come on people....There has to be a stronger sign of civilization than this here?

MountainDon · May 06, 2007, 02:01:18 AM

Peter, your comments are so out of context they are almost beneath comment. Almost.

You have taken some statements and added your personal bias against guns to totally distort what I am stating. For you to imply that I advocate shooting down a candy bar thief or that I advocate shooting first and ask questions later, is an absolutely ludicrous exaggeration of what I stand for.

I believe in law and order, actions and consequences, personal liberties and personal responsibilities, the pursuit of happiness, the golden rule, honest pay for honest legal work...

Something like 35 states allow concealed carry permits to those who pass investigation, training and testing, etc. The license allows them to carry, not to murder. The license is revocable. Our laws allows anyone (concealed carry or not) to use force if necessary to save life or limb, not to simply shoot someone for a crime against property with no danger to person(s). That will get you into trouble with the law.

People who go through the training program for concealed carry not only learn gun safety, they learn about safe and unsafe reactions to situations where a gun might be used. They learn about the laws that are involved. There is psychological screening in written testing. Sure if you are of criminal intent, and as of yet un-felonied, you might be able to get thru the training/testing and obtain a concealed carry permit that you really do not qualify for.... But hey, if you're a criminal element you're not going to bother with the red tape. You're just going to carry your guns no matter what. The folks that go thru this are upstanding stalwart citizens with grave concerns for law and order and proper criminal justice.

(An aside; ....self induced thread drift.....Yesterday there was a police chase that ended about a mile from home. The five fleeing ~~criminals,~~ pardon me, alleged criminals tossed no less than three illegally possessed firearms out the car windows during the pursuit.)

Many an assault, a beating, a holdup or burglary has been stopped dead in its tracks by the simple act of an innocent producing a weapon. It does not always have to be fired. Most of those events are never reported beyond the local small newspaper crime page because they are not spectacular enough for the media in general. Or the event does not mesh with the liberal media bias against guns. "Guns are not good"

I might not be able to access my weapon in many cases of danger I suppose. But if I found myself in a situation where I could be of assistance to someone else in mortal danger, or did find myself in personal danger, I would much rather have the opportunity to put up an equal or better defense and die trying, than to cower and wait for the police to arrive.

I recall the story of a young woman a number of years ago. She went into a restaurant (McDonald's or a Luby's ??) with her parents. She left her handgun in her vehicle as a law abiding citizen. (I think at the time there was either no concealed carry law, or maybe she just never had the permit...) Anyhow, apparently she was a decent shot with her gun. She was recently re-interviewed in the wake of Virginia Tech. To this day she wonders if she could have prevented the deaths of her Mom and Dad and others (approx 20 dead, as many injured) if she'd been able to legally have her gun with her. Maybe she could have, maybe she would have been shot as well. But at least she would know she'd been able to do all she could to save the people who died. I'll buy her lunch any day of the week.

That is the type of situation I'm talking about. The police can't be everywhere, but a vigilant citizenry can be.

As for trusting in the police to protect you, I do believe they will come to your aid as soon as they can, in the order of the perceived urgency of your situation. But sometimes they are too far away, too busy with "trash", to be as effective as we'd like them to be. There are also a good number who are not averse to stretching the truth, to bullying. It seems I've run into a few of those in traffic situations. There's one particular South Dakota trooper.... but I'll let that go by. It didn't cost me anything but a 15 minute delay and having to stifle my disrespect for his attitude/actions....

On the other hand I personally know or am acquainted with several police officers, including our past Chief, who are the salt of the earth. Good hard working, honest individuals I'm proud to call friends.

My mouth has overrun the allocated space.... to be continued, next post

MountainDon · May 06, 2007, 02:01:31 AM

Anyhow, we have established the two sides of the fence here. Mine and Yours. My fence up in the mountains has a sign that proclaims "Private Property, No Trespassing, No Guns, No Hunting, No Fishing (No Water), No Hiking, No Skateboarding (attempt at humor), Beware of Dog's Owner (another humorous attempt), No Horses. No S**t." I'll have to take a picture to post. I'm also going to add a sign like this one http://www.landrights.com/NoTrespassing.htm

Your sign at your personal property, Peter, may state pretty much the same thing... you do have the right to prohibit others from entering your property in possession of any firearm or weapon, etc.. However, in between your place and my place, the law of the land prevails. If the law of the land allows me to bear a concealed weapon then I am able to, and I very likely will, exercise that right. Period! And you or any of your neighbors have nothing to be fearful of, unless you decide to perform some overtly criminal, dangerous act towards myself or some other person.

glenn kangiser · May 06, 2007, 08:57:24 AM

Friday we were working at a school in the valley. Mexican gang signs were graffiti'd on the bathroom walls along with the message " My friend will stick (knife) you without a second thought." The message wasn't lying. These guys have no respect for life of anybody including gang or non-gang members. Most of that area is about 60 to 70% Mexican.

The Sheriff posted a article in the paper stating that they were worried that the mountain kids (in HS) didn't realize that when one of these gang members tell them that they will come back and kill them, that they mean it.

We have our own redneck justice at our High School here in the mountains but it doesn't include six on one and stabbing in the back. The kids up here don't understand that yet.

I have lots of Mexican friends and I know lots of trash whites. They both have good and bad. I have no use for the bad of any race. I have no problem with the good of any race. Trash is trash - good is good.

I don't carry a gun with me but I'm probably stupid for not doing it. :-/

MountainDon · May 06, 2007, 10:04:20 AM

Thanks for chiming in John C. I'm finished with writing essays on the subject.

youngins · May 06, 2007, 10:40:46 AM

I think I have been lucky due to the fact my dad has been a certified firearms instructor most of his life. As kids growing up, we were always exposed to all sorts of weapons but he was very conscientious about teaching us the importance of safety. In his law enforcement days, we were exposed to what he dealt with every day (ie, made us ride in the back of a squad car, walked us through holding cells, etc) It seems to have worked...so far.

I rarely see my dad because he will never fly due to the conflict it would present with airport security. I respect anyones CHOICE to carry. In some respects, however, it seems we are not any more civilized (if that is the word I am looking for) then what we were like 150 years ago. HATE and INTOLERANCE seem to persist, and time has only improved the means to spread them.

MountainDon · May 06, 2007, 11:02:50 AM

... mandatory firearms education classes to go along with mandatory sex ed classes ?

:-? :-/

Gov. Rick Perry: opposes any handgun restrictions

youngins

glenn-k

John_C