Thursday, November 17, 2011

Dumbasses try something in my neighborhood and they'll find themselves surrounded by an elevated field of fire.

American Thinker:

Should I Buy a Gun?
By John Fricke

I have never owned a gun. Matter of fact, I have fired a gun a grand total of one time in my life. I shouldered a shotgun out in the north Georgia woods when I was nineteen years old and fired at a milk bottle filled with water as a target. The kick from the gun nearly tore my shoulder off, since I obviously had no clue what I was doing. I have no idea if I came close to hitting that jug.

I have never wanted to own a gun. I fish. No need to shoot fish, though I am sure that takes place. I have never been hunting. I am not opposed to it in any way; it just works out that I have never been asked to join a hunting party by my father or brother-in-law -- and considering my lifetime gun résumé to this point, that is, for their sake, likely a very good thing.

What I have done is held a pistol in self-defense. Robbed at gunpoint when I was working at a gas station off Interstate 20 east of Atlanta in 1978, I grabbed the pistol the owner kept under the counter and (for some silly eighteen-year-old-full-of-vinegar-manhood-thingy) chased the dirtbag out the door. Of course, I had already hit the silent alarm, and the next person yelling at me to drop the gun was the second person who had pointed a gun at me in the span of six minutes -- only he was wearing a cool blue uniform and waving a standard-issue .357 magnum of the DeKalb County Police Department.

So my personal, limited experience with guns is not good. Actually it's just this side of tragic. But I have considered, and now again am considering, buying a gun. I've been checking them out over the past few months. Looking at pump shotguns, mostly -- the lighter, the better. I think of things like "one round in the chamber in case I have to fire immediately" and "if I can pump it and get the perp's attention without firing, then I need to make sure there are 3-5 rounds loaded and the spread pattern is right" and to make sure I get double-aught ammo to be able to take someone out in one shot if need be. Do I need a trigger lock, or will the safety be fine if the weapon is loaded (who wants to be a rookie fumbling to load shells when urgency is at a premium?).

My stepmother is taking shooting lessons. Seriously. She is trying to choose right now between a couple of guns -- one was a 9-millimeter Luger, I believe. She announced that she was doing this while I was thinking of doing the same. Though I lean shotgun, if for no other reason than, well, easier to hit stuff, y'know. Her motivation for "granny gunning up" is on target with mine: the peace of mind that, should I need a gun, I would have it and know how to use it.

This, though, is not about what type of gun, or really even a gun at all. This is about the tenor of the times. At age 51, I have been around long enough to know the difference between unease and unrest. There are also levels of unrest. Right now, this is unrest that strongly threatens to grow into greater unrest.

While most of us have been rightly concerned about attacks on our soil in this post-911 world, "Washington" has done its "official public warning" best to attempt to convince us that the real and immediate threat is internal.

Now, we conservatives know full well that what "Washington" was talking about was a political ploy aimed at trying to sell the concept to the American voting public that right-wing militias connected to the Tea Party, armed by the NRA and under the direction of the Republican National Committee, are such a direct physical danger to the life and limb of regular people that we need to keep those folks in check.

My current concern is that "Washington" is about to be correct -- only, like my shooting grade,180 degrees off-target.

Across the nation there has been an ongoing debate over the past three weeks or so. Are those troublemakers within "Occupy" really connected to "Occupy"? Are they opportunists seeking to use this "movement" to create havoc and potential anarchy? The reason that question is asked is to seek a biased-journalistic way to distance any violence from those who have supported (and still do, since there has been no condemnation) "Occupy" publicly (read: Democrats and, more expressly, President Obama). That question is nothing but irrelevant spin. We should have a long discussion sometime about irrelevant spin in newsrooms, but let's stay on track for now.

Of course, "Occupy" owns any violence connected to it in any fashion, even if (and that's a strong "if") it did not commit that violence directly. It did, without argument, seed that violence, and then it sought to take advantage of it to place direct blame on the police. I am not absolving authorities, but if there are a couple of veterans who suffered serious injuries at Occupy Oakland, the fact is that Occupy Oakland is responsible for damage done in direct altercations since it initiated those confrontations.

Back to my gun. I am not overly concerned about any direct confrontation from anyone in any current "Occupy" movement. But I am very concerned about the potential for violence coming from the seed of Occupy.

These elements were emboldened by mostly liberal mayors who allowed that seed to be planted in a park in their town. Rather than immediately enforce laws that would apply to anyone else (like, say, at a Tea Party rally), those mayors played political footsie with the Obama administration and Democrat leadership and allowed this "grassroots movement" to ignite the hoodlums, thugs, gangs, Marxists, and general lowlifes that exists on the far left of our political spectrum. Occupy is made up of and attracted (still does) a violence-seeking mob that sought to exploit a political unwillingness in liberal bastions to forcibly tackle them head-on from the jump.

If Occupy wants to burn liberal inner cities to the ground, a lot of Republicans will simply shake their heads. If Occupy spreads beyond that and seeks to do direct damage to traditional Americans in our communities, then Occupy is going to find out fast that the rules of the past, where people like us relied solely on authorities to defend us, won't be in effect. I will be blunt. If they want a fight, they had darn well be ready for what punching back looks like. There is a reason "Occupy Cheyenne" didn't make any real noise. It's not the cops with tear gas guns that would be the problem -- it was the pickup trucks that drive the roads of very conservative southeast Wyoming every day with stickers that say "Hell ya' that's a real gun in that gun rack."

It is that unrest that has settled over me. I have never quite felt this way. That these liberal, indoctrinated morons who defecate in the streets of New York can actually spark a following that would spread to Kalamazoo, Kankakee, or Kearney. And since that happened, we have more idiots jumping on this, and suddenly you have "Occupy (insert name of your subdivision)." Not mentioned, yet, is the potential for what could take place the night of and day after the next presidential election. Especially if Obama loses. Especially if he loses like Al Gore lost in 2000.

No, these are unique times. Times when I consider something that I had not really thought of before. It might be time for me to arm myself.

*For the record, if I do choose to purchase a weapon. I will take lessons. Since I know you would plead for me to do so.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

MR, it's like you read my mind. I have never fired a gun although I did take a gun safety class a couple years ago. Was raised in the suburbs and never till a couple years ago even thought about someday owning or using a gun. And, like you, couldn't hit the broad side of a barn, as evidenced by my hilarious attempts at tennis and baseball as a kid. But times like these have sure gotten me thinking about it. And yes, like you, I will take lessons. And hope it never comes to that. But I WILL exercise my inalienable right to defend my life and limb, and frankly a gun seems like the most efficient and safe way to do it.

midnight rider said...

Anon -- just to clarify I didn't pen this piece, John Fricke at American Thinker did.

I myself began to carry aftet Virginia Tech and have done so and traned ever since. I can hit a bit better than the broadside of a barn (that's a caution to all you pie plates and steel targets who attack me within 15 yards).

Beyond that I agree with everythng you said. And should you decide to take that step yes get good training but also make sure you have someone knowledgable help you choose your Roscoe otherwise you may waste a lot of money and/or not carry it if you're not comfortable with it.

Preferably a friend or relative who knows guns. Store salesman as a last resort since many (not all) of them tryo to upsell.

Epaminondas said...

I feel much better with something that can reach out and touch someone bad.

Anonymous said...

I'm a 65 year old female who has been afraid of guns a my life. Nevertheless, my feelings are precisely the same you all express.

I have three sons who own guns and I'm seriously thinking of getting their advice as to what weapon to buy and get proper training.

I don't believe in violence, but I also believe in my right to protect myself and my family. I hate what is happening to this wonderful country. I'm a foreigner and will never stop thanking the US and its founders for the wonders the country has to offer.

Unfortunately most of those born in the crystal bubble, with their unearned entitlements and self-invested privileges are blind enough not to see or appreciate the blessings they were given by those who preceded them. I know what lies beyond our borders. I know what America is and what America offers. Because of that I'm ready to defend it and if necessary to die for it.

Undaunted said...

Best bet for most people looking for a shotgun is the Maverick 88, as discussed here:

http://freemendo.typepad.com/undaunted/2008/11/bombay-attacks.html

Don't use buckshot, use slugs only, because you are legally responsible for every single pellet that comes fom your gun, so learn to shoot just one, on target all the time. When you get it, keep one round in the chamber at all times, the sound of you racking one into the chamber is "cool" in movies, but it gives a bad-guy a good idea where you are so he can shoot in the direction of the sound you made and have a good chance of hitting you. There is no legal requirement that you give any kind of warning to someone you feel you need to shoot. Much more info like this at my blog.

Undaunted said...

I believe in violence. Violence solves everything.

Undaunted said...

Anonymous: how can you not believe in violence but also but be "ready to die for" what America offers. You need to make up your mind.

John Stuart Mill wrote: "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."

You're afraid of guns all your life, you said. Do you drive a car? Ever been a passenger in a car? Cars kill many more people per year than guns. So does the flu.

Fear creates great confusion.