Another child dies from a preventable cause.

Here it is again in the news. Another child dies because a known violent sex offender is released from prison.

How is this preventable? Easy. Lets never let these guys ever see the light of day again, or go a step farther and never let them breath again. This guy Terapon Adhahn was convicted of a prior violent sexual assault. If that was not bad enough, he did it against his half sister!

Adhahn
served two months in jail and completed five years of sex offender treatment
following a 1990 incest conviction after he violently raped his half-sister,
court records say.
During an evaluation in August 1990, Adhahn told a
therapist he'd been sexually molested countless times by an older brother when
he was between 7 and 9 years old, according to court records. He also said his
biological father was an abusive alcoholic.
The therapist called Adhahn's
personality profile "extremely problematic." But by the time Adhahn completed
sex offender treatment in 1997, his counselor wrote that he had made adequate
progress and was actively involved in weekly group therapy.

Two months of jail time? I've seen guys get worse for having a joint on them, or for stealing a VCR. This is just plain stupid. How is it that this man "violently raped" a family member, and he got out in two months? In Colorado, we have the death penalty on the table as a punishment for rape! Oh, but maybe we should feel sorry for him because he was abused when younger and forgive him for his Violent Sexual behavior, is that it? BS! That does not cut it in the least bit.

Have we not learned our lessons yet? Are the stories of Alfonso Rodriguez Jr. who was released later killing Dru Sjodin, and Joseph Edward Duncan who killed Dylan Groene after being released for prior Violent Sexual Assaults easily forgotten? They are not alone, and it will continue to happen. Even after all the attention Jessica Lunsford got after John Evander Couey killed her, we still haven't moved in a direction that I see suitable enough in punishment. Why do we release these guys to do what they have done before? And isn't it easy to correlate that after their prison and so called treatment that they will kill the victim to possibly avoid being caught and sent back to the treatment which was to cure them?

I am ashamed of our legal system when these events continue and little changes. I am ashamed of our Representatives and Senators for not passing laws which permanently remove these people from our society. Why can't we just say that these people are so damaged that we need to flush them away and put them in the ground? If you do something like this, you forfeit your right to live. Why do we believe these people can be fixed? Show me a sex offender which has not re-offended, and I will say it is a ticking time bomb. And honestly, I do not care, because why should they even be given a chance!

The only reason for keeping them alive would be to let science study them so we can weed these people out. If it is a genetic fingerprint shared between them, or a chemical imbalance which can be proven to fix them forever which is found, I still do not want them walking the streets. I wish I knew the name and case information of a sex offender who was chemically castrated who talked his nurse into giving him Testosterone injections to reverse the effects of his treatment. Guess what he did later? He was caught re-offending!

I believe in monsters, and these people are examples of true monsters. Monsters should not exist except in stories. I do not believe all people can be treated and released. Would we have treated Hitler and released him to live a life of forgiveness? What are we really losing or giving up if we just removed these people from the world? Tell me, I want to know what they offer which is so great that someone feels we need them around and allow them to re-enter society? Is it in the Bible that once you rape and kill someone that you get a pass after so many days to go and do it again? I have not seen this issue addressed in the Constitution or Bill Of Rights saying that sex offenders should get special treatment and released to take more life. If so, show me exactly where it says "a sex offenders life should be forgiven and allowed to offend again, even if they take an other's life!"

I want to hear how anyone can justify and clearly explain to everyone in the world without disagreement that we are doing something right by letting these people enjoy life after they have scarred others in ways they will always have with them. Until there is some world wide consensus in total harmony that they should live after such an act, I will want their blood wetting the earth I stand on! And if that day happens, I will know for a fact the Devil is walking among us.

I pray for those hurt, and damn those who did it!

Our closest to a dictatorship? Errors with that.

I heard Sen. Barbara Boxer say that we are now the closest to a dictatorship in our history.

Well, she cannot be more wrong. Maybe in her world it is, but in mine, it is not. In dictatorships people are usually living in a country with far less crime, and doesn't have the problems we experience here in our country. Why is this? Quite simply countries which are under the rule of a dictator are SO under the control of that dictator, no one can get away with anything. If our current government is the feared "Big Brother" of the book 1984, they really suck at it.

If our government was so powerful, why are there groups like MS 13 running around on our streets? Our government cannot even stop the Hells Angels or the Sons of Silence from anything they do except an occasional bust now and then. But personally, I would rather have the last two mentioned running around our country than the first.

If you look to North Korea, you will see a dictatorship. And even with them, there have been worse. At least for what we know, Vlad Tepes or Idi Amin are not in North Korea. In terms of Hitler, North Korea seems tame. So, if we are close to, or part of a dictatorship, where are the mass killings and complete loss of freedoms?

Barbara can take this hyperactive imagination and use it on something else. If President Bush is a dictator, he is the weakest and lamest dictator this world has ever seen.

When Bill Clinton was in power, he killed more Americans against their will. Anyone remember Waco? Our soldiers were not drafted. Our soldiers signed up freely without any guns to their heads. When we have the Stalin-esque tactics of putting our soldiers in harms way without guns and the threat of death if they turn back to our lines, I will agree with her, but this is not our way, nor has it ever been.

Isn't amazing that if anyone on the right said statements like this they would be forced from office, or out of any public job they held within days, but on the left it is par for the course. People, do your homework. Do not fall for this kind of BS. It is part of why I changed parties and while it continues, I will never go back.

It doesn't sound so tough to me.

Since I started talking about immigration, I figured I would do more research on our laws to see if they are unfair. While reading, I found some information which defines certain terms I use in my writings here. These are taken from rapidimmigration.com.

Illegal Entrants and US immigration Violators: These include aliens who
have
entered the United States without admission or parole; those who have
failed
to attend a removal proceeding; those who have willfully misrepresented a
material fact, or committed fraud in seeking entry to the US; or have
falsely
claimed US citizenship; or a nonimmigrant alien who has fraudulently
obtained a
public benefit; and stowaways and alien smugglers.

So, I think they have "Illegal" stated fairly well. So, what else under current law is of interest to me? How about these.

Ineligible for Citizenship: Any alien seeking to enter as an immigrant who is
permanently ineligible to citizenship is inadmissible. This includes those who
have evaded the draft, but does not include those aliens who seek to enter the
United States only as non-immigrants.

This one seems quite simple. If you dodged the draft and gave up your American citizenship, you are inadmissible. This one is pretty much defunct due to the fact President Carter pardoned most draft dodgers.

Public Charge: Any alien who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the
time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the
time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time
to become a public charge is inadmissible. The factors to be taken into
consideration in determining whether an alien is likely to become a public
charge include the alien's age; health; family status; assets, resources, and
financial status; and any affidavit of support given on behalf of the alien.

Public Charge is defined as a person who would have to be cared for by our government. Again, this is simple because we do not want to create a wellfare state where Americans will have to provide care via taxes to new immigrants, as that is unfair to those already here.

Security and Related Grounds: This ground of inadmissibility relates to any
alien who seeks to enter the United States to engage in espionage, to import or
export any illegal security items, who seeks the overthrow of the US government,
who has or seeks to engage in terrorist activities, whose actions will have
serious foreign policy consequences for the United States, is a member of a
totalitarian party, or participated in Nazi persecution or genocide.

Again, really simple. If you are a spy, drug dealer, slave trader, Nazi, terrorist, or other unwanted person, we do not want you!

Criminal and Related Grounds: An alien who has been convicted of a crime
involving moral turpitude, or of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to
violate) any law or regulation of a state, the United States, or a foreign
country relating to a controlled substance is inadmissible. Likewise, any alien
convicted of two or more offenses, even if they did not involve moral turpitude,
is inadmissible if the aggregate sentences to confinement actually imposed were
5 years or more. An alien who the consular or US immigration officer knows, or
has reason to believe, is or has been an illicit trafficker in any controlled
substance is inadmissible. Additionally, any alien who is involved in
prostitution or commercialized vice is inadmissible. An alien inadmissible on
criminal grounds may be granted a waiver under section 212(h) of the US
immigration and Nationality Act if the alien is the spouse, parent, son or
daughter of a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for
permanent residence; can establish that the US citizen or lawful permanent
resident relative will suffer extreme hardship if the waiver is not granted; and
that the admission of the applicant would not be contrary to the national
welfare, safety, or security of the United States. In addition, if the crime was
committed more than 15 years before seeking admission, the alien need only show
rehabilitation and that the admission of the alien would not be contrary to the
national welfare, safety, or security of the United States. The waiver
application is filed on US immigration form I-601, together with a filing fee,
and proof of the qualifying relationship. Also, you must attach whatever
evidence you have that extreme hardship will be caused to the US citizen or
lawful permanent resident relative if the waiver is not granted. Under the US
immigration Reform Act of 1996, no waiver may be granted under this section if
the alien had previously been admitted to the US as a permanent resident, and
since said date had been convicted of an aggravated felony, or the alien had not
resided lawfully in the US for at least seven (7) years.

Wow, so even if you commited a crime, you can still get in if you jump through the hoops. If you are still commiting crimes, we do not want you. Also, if you have not been rehabilitated, we dont want you. Seems fair to the American citizens who do not want to be preyed upon.

Aliens Previously Removed: This class of inadmissibility applies to those aliens
who have been ordered removed from the United States. In general, they are
ineligible to reenter the United States for a period of five years following the
removal order. The period is increased to twenty (20) years if it is a second
removal, or it is a permanent bar if the alien was removed for the commission of
an aggravated felony. This section also contains a ground of inadmissibility for
aliens who are "unlawfully present" in the United States. The US immigration
Reform Act of 1996 added this section, and it is considered one of the most
extreme measures contained in the new act. This provision provides that any
alien who was unlawfully present in the United States for a period of more than
180 days but less than 1 year, (after April 1, 1997), voluntarily departed the
United States, whether under a removal order or not, and who again seeks
admission within 3 years of the date of the departure or removal, or has been
unlawfully present in the United States for one year or more, and who again
seeks admission within 10 years of the date of such departure or removal is
inadmissible. Unlawful presence means the alien's presence in the United States
after the period of stay granted by US immigration, or if the alien is present
in the United States, without being admitted or paroled. Several exceptions
exist. These include minors under the age of 18; those who have filed a
bona-fide application for asylum; those who qualify for the family unity
program; battered women and children; and those who have filed a non-frivolous
and timely application for extension of stay or change of status and have not
been employed without authorization in the United States. In addition to all of
the above, an alien who has been unlawfully present in the United States for an
aggregate period of more than 1 year, or has been ordered removed and who enters
or attempts to enter the United States without being admitted is inadmissible. A
waiver is available under the three (3) and ten (10) year bars for an alien who
is the spouse or son or daughter of a US citizen or permanent resident, and if
it is established to the satisfaction of the US immigration service that the
refusal of admission to such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to
the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such alien. As with many
other provisions of the new act, no court review of the US immigration decision
is permitted.

So, even if you have been deported, you can still have a chance to come back in legally? Is that amazing? So we are willing to give second chances on many fronts. None of this seems impossible or unfair.

However, I guess these can be seen as unfair and impossible to some. I am guessing that if you are a sedition supporting, drug smuggling, terrorist aiding, formerly deported spy it would be tough to get into our country via legal means. So, it may not be easy to get here, but if you do it the right way, and stay out of trouble, you can stay and become a citizen.

If you cannot pass the above quoted requirements, I do not want you here. If these are things you can complete and get legal, why not do it?

Again as I said in my last post, if you do not disagree with people living in our country ilegally, send me your address so I or someone else who many not live in a house as nice as yours can move in. We will send you the bills, and if you do not pay them, it is your fault. If you try to move me out, I will call you racist. Hope you have a hot tub.

Look who's moving in! By the way, do you have a hot tub?

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in
good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be
treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to
discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.
But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and
nothing but an American...
There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man
who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all.
We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red
flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much
as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have
room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have
room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American
people."
--Theodore Roosevelt, 1919

So, almost a hundred years ago, people in charge of our country understood what it meant to be an American. One country, one language, one flag. Anyone who says they are here to take anything away from us is declaring war. The people who say they are here to take back parts of the United States and make it part of Mexico is committing grievous crimes against our country. Sedition is still a capital offence, and should be punished by death. We fought a civil war against our own people over their attempts to do such. So I ask, why do we allow people today to say these things?

We always hear that the criminal immigration crowd is coming here to make their lives better for them and their families. But then if this is truth, why are some of them wanting to make our country more like the one they ran away from? Not only make it more like, they want to make it a part of. My confusion grows at this point. If life sucked so bad there, why come here and make it like, well, there?

If they actually accomplished their goal, wouldn't it make sense that after a short time, they would run away again? This makes me think that this would be like the Jews escaping the German forces showing up elsewhere and saying they want to install the Third Reich into power. They haven't and never will, but what I hear in the news, this is what the Mexicans are saying.

Now, perhaps it isn't about escaping corrupt government. Perhaps it really isn't about escaping poverty. Perhaps it isn't about finding a better life. Maybe, just maybe it is about theft. Theft of our jobs, land, homes, business', and medical care. Truly throughout history, theft on this scale is war. When Saddam took Kuwait, that was an act of war. When the Germans took Poland, that was an act of war. We can even go back to World War 1 to examine this. When the Germans took part of France because at one time it was part of Germany, it was war.

If you believe and support this retaking of our lands, lets go all out. France should come and take over Canada again, plus whatever else they once had control over. It would solve the post Katrina problems because the French would own New Orleans. We can give up the upper east coast to Britain. I am sure they would love that. Russia can have Alaska back as well in all of this, even though we bought it fair and square from them when Seward made the deal. But under that line of thought, Mexico should return to Spain, as well as most of South America. But what if we go even further back in time.

Rome should be re-established and given back all of of their lands, but this would only last until the kingdoms which pre-dated them are re-established, so it would leave their hands at that point. So lets get to work. Oh, if we follow this model, the Inca's, Mayans and Aztec's would enslave the people of their lands. Hmmm, perhaps we should get to work building a temple and altar for blood offerings again.

People, history is full of wars. Borders move all the time. We now have more countries in our world than anytime before this. If we went back to the beginning and gave back everything to people who didn't like the way it changed, we will never be done.

Today in Africa, there are wars being fought by kids. I do not mean the western idea of kids which include people until their mid-twenties. I mean children of the ages 16 and down. Would you want your 11 year old son shooting your neighbors? Perhaps the other side, do you want your daughter of 10 being claimed against her will to be a mans fifteenth wife being raped at will? Now if you wonder what happens to those who complain, or even cry about this, they either cut off their arms and legs, or just have the 11 year old soldiers hack them up in front of the newly kidnapped kids to show them what happens if the resist.

I am sure someone somewhere says that this is because someone wronged them, and it is ok.

Our country was created to go in a different and never before tried direction. It gave unquestioned rights to our people. After slavery was abolished, we still had to tweak the system. Even as long ago as the 1990's we are still trying to get things right for our citizens. Oh, what, who? Our American Citizens.

So clarify something for me. Are these illegal immigrants citizens? No, because they are illegally here. So why do we even allow them the rights and protections of our own people? Because our country is better then where they came from. So again, why do they want to take our lands and make it part of a place that sucked so bad? Maybe because we are being flooded with uneducated fools.

Our country is going to have to make a choice. If we want to maintain our freedoms, we need to control our borders. If we want to maintain our liberties, we need to have accountable citizens. Without borders and citizens, we are a lawless wasteland in which war lords will rise.

Maybe I am wrong. Maybe I should be moving into the really nice house down the street from me and claim it as mine. I will send you all the bills, and if you do not pay them, I will blame you for allowing me to have moved into the house in the first place. If you disagree with me on illegal immigrants, send me your address, because me and my family are moving in the next day! Then we will see how you feel about this issue.

"Non-rocket science questions" and AM I NOT AMERICAN?

I just read this article on illegal immigration and I only can say Right On!

I wish more people would look at this issue through this lens.

I am upset at criminal immigration due to many reasons. I have seen wages either stay low or be lowered because of this influx of people. When I was a kid growing up, we would work the fields for summer jobs. I did day labor with kids from school or church. Sometimes we would use our schools and churches to line up jobs. We would use that money towards things we needed, or put it towards church trips, boy scout trips, or even some school trips. It was awesome and fun to get friends together and do jobs for people. It didn't matter if it was shoveling snow, moving dirt and gravel, planting trees, or cleaning up after construction sites. When I got older, I would work in the fields doing whatever they asked of us.

So, am I not an American? I keep hearing that Americans will not do these jobs, but I could call up friends and we would go as a group. One friend John is not a cop. Was he not an American while he helped me and others? This statement is BS to its core, and I wish people stop using it. Another friend of mine took college classes in the morning, and she cleaned hotel rooms in the afternoon and night to pay for these classes. Was that un-American?

Another difference between now and then was what we got paid. We made a heck of a lot more then an illegal would accept. They work for dimes compared to what we were GIVEN as teens.

Maybe it is because kids today would rather leach off of their parents while playing x-box all day, but I do not think that is the problem. I remember the guys I went to school with who worked at McDonald's. They always had money for movies and the other things we did. They had cars. My friend Paul did office cleaning at night. He paid for his trip to Europe with that money. Now, go try to do that today when you want just a fair wage, and an illegal is willing to take half. Think you will get what you want?

Today I hear from painters, sheet rockers, masons, and others about how they used to make twice as much, and that is being halved because of cheap illegal labor being hired. Is this fair to them? They either worked under a parent to learn a skill, or started right out of high school to learn their skills. When they started, they could make great money. Now, they watch as they lose bids to cheaper contractors hiring illegal labor. Oh, is this because they were doing jobs Americans wouldn't do?

Hear me on this point! I do not care about what color your skin is, race, religion, or creed. If you came here in a legal manner, welcome! Now, you could be extended family of mine, but if you came here illegally, go away. Go home! Go back and do it the right way. Heck, if i can spare ten dollars to help you, I will send it, but wait your turn.

My family is new to the USA in terms of the countries age, and compared to some families. When my family arrived, it was during the Great Depression. Think they had it easy? No. Did they work their ass off to make a living, and to provide for the future? You bet they did. My family has had members in every war since then. All of them joined without the draft taking them. They fought for the land they joined legally. My grandfather built the first school in there area for other families and our own. He built the first church there also. He is buried just a short distance away from that church which is still used by local families. No one paid him for this, he did it to help and develop our country.

I can still go to dinner back where my grandparents ended up. I hear the old language spoken around the table. But did they refuse to learn English? No. Did they blame America for their problems? No. They fought for everything they had with hard work! I have great uncles missing arms, fingers, and sometimes legs. Did they quit working and live off of the system? Hell no! I grew up watching them work harder then most uninjured men day after day. They never quit because that was not the America they grew up in. When they got old, the family did everything they could to care for them. Did we ask for handouts? Here it comes, NO.

So, since my family farmed, were they doing jobs Americans won't do? Because some of my family worked construction, were they not American?

The next time I hear someone say that statement that Americans won't do something, I will have to ask them, then who did it all these years prior to this day?

The only reason I see every day of why an American won't do a job is because illegals took it first for half the pay. If we can get rid of the illegals, wages will have to rise again. If we kick the illegals out, the jobs will open up for us again. If we only allow legals to work, then it by default becomes American jobs again. It is that simple.

I will end with one piece of advice to these illegals coming here for a better life.

Do what Americans did when they were being held back by British rule. Revolt! If the powers to be are corrupt and evil in your country, quit being a coward that is running away and fight! You need arms? We have plenty here in our country to arm you! Heck, we will make more just to help you. If criminals are making your life so bad you have to leave, then stand up and do something about it! You want to be like us AMERICANS? Then act like us and stand up and take the power away from those who wrong you! Do not ruin my country because you cannot stand up for yourself, or you will see Americans standing up against you! Quite simply, go home and fix your problems. Otherwise, I call you a coward.

Police going to far

I will start with this.

Elderly Woman Arrested in Clash Over Dry Lawn Calls Experience
'Nightmare'
Monday , July 09, 2007
Associated Press and Fox
News

A 70-year-old Utah woman, who was arrested last week for
refusing to accept
a ticket for a dry lawn she couldn't afford to water,
told FOX News Monday that
the arrest was her "worst nightmare."
Betty
Perry, of Orem, Utah, was
arrested Friday after police tried to ticket her
for her brown, sickly
lawn.
"It was horrible," Perry told FOX News,
describing her arrest. "It was
like your worst nightmare."
The police
officer who arrested her has been
suspended by his red-faced
bosses.
"Life is a learning experience, and each
officer learns over the
course of a career that tactics and responses are not
absolute in each
situation," said Lt. Doug Edwards, a spokesman for Orem
police.
When the
officer knocked on Perry's door, she refused to identify herself
or accept a
citation and said she wanted to call her son.
As the officer tried to take
her hand, Perry tripped on the front step, cut
the bridge of her nose and
rolled onto her stomach, putting her hands under her
to foil the officer,
Edwards said.
Perry was eventually handcuffed and taken
to jail, where
she spent more than an hour before officials decided custody was
inappropriate.
The woman hasn't watered her lawn in a year, a violation
of a
city ordinance, Edwards said.
"I've never been attacked before like
that,"
Perry told KSL-TV. "I can't afford to turn my water on for $50 a
month. ... I
just hope he can apologize and this can all be
forgotten."
The officer's name
was not released. Orem is in Utah County,
30 miles south of Salt Lake
City.
"There were other options available to
handle this situation besides
making an arrest and holding the woman in
jail," Edwards said.
"Certainly had
the woman been a shoplifter at the
mall who refused to identify herself, no one
would question or be surprised
that she was arrested and handcuffed, regardless
of her age," he
said.

I am usually a huge support of Law Enforcement, and I do understand that sometimes officers make mistakes, but wow. This guy went way above and beyond. Perhaps he missed the fact that yard watering might not be an arresting offence. I would hate to see what this guy would do if he saw a dog watering a city lawn somewhere. Would he cuff the dog? Maybe taser it.

Understand your rights, because I love the rule of law. I especially love the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Even though sometimes I really dislike the ACLU, they do keep us all honest.

Here is a video by the ACLU to check out.

I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to say it.

Bounty Hunters for Concealed Carry

OK, maybe I do not represent all bounty hunters here, but everyone I have worked with supports this.

Now I am not saying all persons should be armed in the least, nor am I saying certain persons should be required to bear arms. I am saying that some changes in laws should take place, and here I mainly target GUN FREE ZONES.

Perhaps all gun free zone laws should be revisited and add a couple of lines to this effect. All persons not currently holding a valid concealed weapons permit are not allowed to carry firearms in this area. Lets go farther with this. Lets select and train certain school personnel who volunteer to be armed get screened and trained. If this person passes a pychological background check, criminal background check, a lengthy training program by a professional and certified instructor, and pass tests of skill, let them carry to defend our kids. Apply this to all schools. Keep the identity confidental except to police and administation, but notify the public that our GUN FREE ZONES are defended on site by highly trained persons. Think that might scare away the people looking for easy kills if they do not know which person on campus is armed and prepared to kill them to save others? I bet it would.

If you didn't see the news, before Cho went nuts on Virginia Tech's campus, there were students requesting to be allowed to carry under their permits on campus. They were even willing to allow the school to know who they were if allowed. Now, I want to know, what would the outcome have possibly been if they weren't stopped from having a pistol on them that day? What would have happened if we had our selected staff trained and in place? What would a combination of these two, have they been in place? No realist would ever say it would have stopped it, but no one can answer what would have happened if these steps were put in place. Lets get rid of these Murder Freely Zones.

I felt strongly enough about this that I wrote up a letter suggesting that a bill be entered during the next session of the Colorado House and Senate making it law that we select, screen, train, and arm our teachers in our state. I also asked that vaild concealed weapon permit holders be allowed to carry on school grounds. I received emails back from a few supporters, and this even included the Speaker of the House. Now I can only hope they carry through with this.

Certain things are evident and with little doubt. A home with an angry and large dog in the yard will scare away people meaning to do you harm. A dog, just like a firearm requires you make sure that you keep it in a safe manner. Security lights will make a thief pick a different location because they do not want to be seen. Keeping your garage closed and valueables locked up prevents easy crimes. Add an alarm to your dog, security lights, locked up goods, and a trained person with a firearm, only an idiot of a criminal would attempt to rob you. Now all these things only ring true if you turn on the alarm and lights, train the dog to defend your home, lock your doors and windows, and carry your gun. If you do not do these things, a high school freshman can rob you blind.

Now I have heard people say that it is the job of the police to protect and defend us. Hmmm, are you sure of that? Can you show me a law proving that? It isn't what I learned in my Criminal Justice classes. Heck, it isn't even what certain courts have decided. Here is an example of what I am saying.

Police aren’t required to protect you. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection. . . a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, “[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.”

Now, ask yourself this question. Is the Army here to protect you or our government? Wanna place bets on what their orders would be to do if we had civil war or an attack on our nation would be? Saving the public would come well after protecting our strategic assets and themselves. If I am wrong, let it be so, but honestly, I do not have a problem with that.

A true and honest look at our countries past shows that our country is based on the people defending themselves. Did police on horse back arrive to defend our settlers? No, they had their own guns. Who really made up our armies in the war for independence? Was it a professional group of men who just suddenly appeared, or was it we the people standing up?

No one wants to have to defend themself. No one wants to go fight a war. No one wants to stand up when everyone else runs away, but there are times when wants fall behind the needs. There are times where we need to defend ourselves and others. There are times when we need to go to war, and there are times when we need to stand up while others run for cover, if it means giving up our own life so they can get away safe.

I love my family, so I will defend them. I love my country, so I will defend it. I do not agree with most people in our country, but I will defend them to be able to disagree with me.

The issue of defending life is not a left or right issue. The idea of defending self is not a Red State or Blue State issue. It is a human issue. I do not care how you vote. I only care that you care enough about human life, freedom, and liberty to defend that which you believe in. If you believe in not owning a gun, fine, just realise that right you enjoy is maintained by those who do.

It comes down to one thing. If you hate gun wrongs, then support gun rights.