Thinking about the past couple of years today was enlightening in that what is- and is not- happening these days has confirmed so much about peoples' beliefs.
Mostly, I'm talking about all those 'nay-sayers' from two years ago who were so very adamant that, "Obama won't take our guns". Strangely silent these days, I imagine they're hiding in the weeds, afraid to show their faces and be told, "I toldja so". How well I recall the many arguments - almost war-like vehemence - they held toward any who made comment about not trusting him, because/though he has always been anti-firearm. From the first post anyone made that offended their dem-lib-consciousness to the very last posting after the election, these people were so ready to defend their racist viewpoint, to violently defend with their last breath this empty suit they wanted to become President, if for no other reason than to prove to themselves they weren't too prejudiced to vote for a black man.
"The United States reversed policy on Wednesday and said it would back launching talks on a treaty to regulate arms sales as long as the talks operated by consensus, a stance critics said gave every nation a veto..." So reads the Reuters article headline.
In the past, such as when G.W. Bush was President (Oh, gosh-golly-gee, a Republican! Oh! No!), the United States has always refused to enter into any kind of arms trade agreement. And the United States has always held to every nation having a vote or veto.
Now, with U-no-who acting as Presidential as a Communist can, we have Hillary Clinton agreeing to sign onto this United Nations disarmament proposal. Of course, it's being touted under "controlling international trade in firearms", but we know better.
"...Consensus is needed to ensure the widest possible support for the Treaty and to avoid loopholes in the Treaty that can be exploited by those wishing to export arms irresponsibly," Clinton said in a written statement..." Of course not. We just can't have gun show loopholes showing up on the international scene. How abhorrent! (Just so you know: that's sarcasm on my part!)
An interesting point about the people objecting to this treaty are- get this: Israel, China and Russia. (I know: swallow my tongue surprise!)
The whole reason for this is to ask a question, anyway, hopefully getting an answer from those lib-tards who so vociferously insisted that the Dark Lord wasn't after our guns. Seriously- how can he and his satanic horde control the populace unless they disarm us?
So my question is this...
"Do you people still doubt he wants to disarm Americans?"
There are 700,000 physicians in the United States...
Number of accidental deaths by physicians per year are 120,000...
which makes the average number of accidental deaths per physician to be 0.171...
(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.)
Now consider these stats...
There are approximately 80 million gun owners in the United States...
The number of accidental deaths, per all age groups, in the United States per year is 1,500...
which means that every gun owner in America has killed .000188 persons per year...
(Statistics courtesy of the F.B.I.)
So, statistically, doctors are 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Fact number three: not everyone in America owns a gun (though they should),but everyone will see a doctor. Before your next appointment, consider this: You are 900 times more likely to be killed by your doctor than by a gun owner.
So, please, alert all your family and friends of this new threat to our health. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!
The new mantra for gun owners should be, "Guns don't kill people-- doctors do."
(Out of concern for the public-at-large, I have withheld the stats on lawyers out of fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.)
Michael Bane has a couple of good posts concerning Open Carry going on and he really lit a fire under me with them. Go read, join the discussion and consider what's being said, how it's being said, and who's saying it. Then put it to practice in your life.
For my part, I'm going to try throwing gas on the fire. Not because I want to be mischievous, but to really heat the hearts and minds of Americans who still believe in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Personal Freedom and Liberty.
Then there's the JFPO and their challenge to Ted Nugent. Or more specifically, to the NRA.
Both are well written and thought out ideas that need propagating throughout the Land of the Free. To all the world, really. Every person living should consider these words and how to apply them in their lives. But especially we Americans.
Now, back to Michael Bane and Open Carry.
To begin, I carry, both openly and concealed. Just depends on the time of year. Usually, even my Open Carry is 'concealed' under winter garments so technically, it's concealed carry. Until I take my jacket off.
"...The simple truth is that rights are really only rights if we're willing to protect/accept those on the fringes of that right. If we believe what we say we believe. then we are obligated to stand up for that belief not just when it's easy. If instead our standard is that no right exists if the exercise of that right makes anyone uncomfortable, then there are no rights, because it's a big world full of diverse people, and everything makes someone uncomfortable...." (Michael Bane)
And there is the crux of what Open Carry, or any carry, is about: "Are we making 'others' uncomfortable by our beliefs put to action?"
In two words: "Who cares?"
If my weapon scares these KumBaYa Bambis, so what? I am no more concerned with how frightened they are of my gun than they are of how frightened I am by their desire to strip me of my rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
If my carrying a weapon in the open disturbs some limp-wristed wussy of a lib-tard, why should it bother me? It isn't I who has the problem- it's the person who doesn't see my God-given and Constitutional right to self protection who has a problem.
It's their problem if they think they have a right to control how I live my freedoms, how seriously I take the rights I have from Higher Authority than they or the dotgov they want to impose upon me. It is not my problem to consider their poor sissified feelings and surrender my rights (or my own feelings, since they want to live by feelings).
The message I'm sending may not be good P-R for their nanny state of mind, but I don't care: I'm not carrying because I'm trying to create good Public Relations- I'm insuring my safety just as I buy car insurance. I'm not going to rely on the local fuzz at 9-1-1 to protect me when I need to. Not that they have any inclination to protect me, or anyone, or even a legal minder to do so, as has been documented. Their job is not to protect me, it's to gather information and capture the criminal who has offended my sensibilities and rights. Nor do I expect them to have to put themselves in harms way for me. Especially when I have the means and where-withal to protect myself.
And if I can't, then they can do their job.
To conclude this rant, I'm going to declare May Fifth to be "Open Carry Day, 2010" and encourage every person in America who owns a firearm to carry it openly. I don't care if it's a rifle, a shotgun, or pistol/revolver- carry it. Carry two if you're so inclined.
Why May Fifth? Because it's Cinco de Mayo and more people will be celebrating a Mexican War holiday in America than will be celebrating their own Independence and Constitutional Rights and God-given responsibility to take care of themselves and their loved ones.