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.