A buddy got his Indiana Lifetime License To Carry (his firearm) today, and posted about it to his friends…

Lots of them had questions for him about how long the process took, etc., so I stuck my foot in to play Cliff Claven… the following was my comment:

indiana-firearms-licenseI don’t know what the current stats are; but 10 years ago, 1 out of every 15 adults in Indiana had a carry permit.

A little background for the uninitiated: Indiana does not differentiate between concealed carry and open carry — though there are philosophical and tactical arguments for either preference, Indiana folks tend to carry concealed much more than openly; so chances are, you are sitting beside, and shopping beside, people who responsibly carry firearms every day.

To get a permit to carry, you are subjected to a federal background check, your fingerprints are recorded, and a fee is collected. We are a ‘shall issue’ state, which means unless the Sheriff or the State can find a reason that you don’t qualify (criminal background or mental instability), they grant the permit regardless of their personal opinion on the subject (many other states are ‘may issue’, which means they grant permits on a subjective basis — do they ‘believe’ you need it?).

If you are pulled over by a police officer, you are advised to alert the officer that you have a license to carry FIRST, then explain whether you are carrying at the moment, and where that firearm might be on your person (rather than saying, “Hi officer, I have a gun!”).

Having this permit does not give you legal license to ignore posted signs; having a firearm on federal property (even in the parking lot of the Post Office) is a federal offense, even with this card. Having a firearm in a privately-owned business that has posted a ‘no guns’ sign is not a federal crime — it is trespassing; and if you leave when an employee asks you to, they have no legal standing to pursue you.

However if you are of the mind to ‘stand up for your rights’ and argue with the business owner, I would direct you to a re-read of the Constitution, which limits the power of the Federal government, not the local ice cream shop, to decide how your rights extend across the boundaries of other’s rights. If you don’t like the stance of a business on the subject, feel free to educate them on your difference of opinion — but do so while respecting their right to tell you to go away.

TheFourRulesMost states honor other state’s carry permits (this is called ‘reciprocity’) — but Illinois does not honor ours, and Ohio only recently changed to be more permissive… not every lawman in Ohio is aware of this yet. So putting it in your trunk may avoid some heated discussions. Without a carry permit, people in Indiana can have as many firearms as they like in their home and in their car — it is preferred that no loaded weapons be accessible to the driver unless he/she has a carry permit (this relates, I think to statistical truths concerning the background check). But any adult can be armed without this documentation — it just gets harder to explain your good intentions without going through the process.

Statistically, people who are licensed to carry commit far fewer crimes than those who are not (again, relating back to passing the background check), and even a smaller percentage misbehave who are members of various associations and clubs that foster training, safety, and political awareness of firearm-related issues.

Regardless of who’s statistics you most believe, more than twice as many people use a gun successfully to defend themselves as those who use a gun to misbehave… and also statistically, gun ownership nationally and here in Indiana has exploded, while violent crime has continued to decline.

Though opponents of firearm ownership will point out that ‘Correlation Does Not Imply Causation’, the opposite is also true… in areas where gun ownership has been infringed upon, violent crime increases.

Suicide statistics that imply the presence of firearms contribute to the the number of attempts, will point out a decrease in the use of firearms in suicide deaths when firearms are scarce — however they do not show a decrease in the number of deaths by suicide including all other means (CDC and FBI numbers).

I’ll close with this: If you decided to go down this road, you will find lots of people who want to help you choose hardware and go target shooting — but the most important thing you can acquire is good training — learn the FOUR RULES.

LINK: Apply for a New License to Carry (IN.gov)
LINK: Gun Safety (Wikipedia.org)

What does it mean to ‘Take God’s Name In Vain’? And why does God consider it as serious as Murder, Lying, and Thievery?

If you’re old enough, you may have been taught the Ten Commandments, as passed down in the Bible that most Christians aim to follow as their guidebook — or maybe you’re vaguely aware of them, but would find it difficult to pick them out of a hodgepodge of other old-fashion wisdom.

Let’s try a little quiz… pick out, from the following, the advice that comes from the Ten Commandments, and figure out which of the rest aren’t even from the Bible:

The-Ten-Commandments-600x310

  • Don’t kill.
  • Don’t murder.
  • Don’t lust after other people’s things.
  • Don’t take other people’s things.
  • Respect your parents.
  • Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
  • Don’t speak God’s name without reverence.
  • Go to church every Sunday.
  • Celebrate the birth of your Savior.
  • Sinning leads to everlasting torture.

How do you think you did?

Here are the answers:

  • Don’t kill: Nope. This bad translation is often held up by non-believers as a proof that the Bible is crap, what with all the God-commanded killing throughout the Old Testament. Try…
  • Don’t murder: YES… if you can’t understand the difference between killing and murder, you might be a vegetarian — or, if you realize that eating plants is also killing, you might actually have starved to death by now.
  • Don’t lust after other people’s things: YES, this is in the Ten Commandments.
  • Don’t take other people’s things: YES, this too, was one of the things God feels you shouldn’t do.
  • Respect your parents: YES, God wants us to understand that our elders are an important part of our identity, and our structure of behavior — as He has designed.
  • Do unto others as you would have them do unto you: Close, though this one is actually in the Bible (Matthew 7:12), it’s not part of the Ten Commandments.
  • Don’t speak God’s name without reverence: YES, this is just as important to God as not murdering, et al.
  • Go to church every Sunday: Nope. Though the Ten Commandments do say to ‘remember the Sabbath Day’, most scholars (even in the Catholic Church, who created the “Lord’s Day” on Sunday but admit that it’s totally on them) understand this to be Saturday — and further, the Bible records no command to ‘religiously’ attend church services on that day, or any day. We are taught to learn together, pray together, congregate with others of similar beliefs, and the Old Testament traditions record many rules about what is and is not appropriate on the Sabbath — but these two points are clearly not from the Ten Commandments, or anywhere in the Bible.
  • Celebrate the birth of your Savior: This is where things get a little sticky — not only is this not commanded, quite the opposite is true… the only time Christmas is even vaguely mentioned is in Jeremiah 10. The custom of celebrating birthdays itself is from pagan origins… one of the things that the Bible as a whole consistently deems opposite God’s wishes.
  • Sinning leads to everlasting torture: Breaking one or more of the Ten Commandments will … to this day … make our Creator sad, angry, jealous, and justified in toasting your carcass in any manner He sees fit. BUT… the Hell ‘known’ to modern Christianity is from Catholic mythology, not the Bible. The Catholics liked to borrow beliefs from other cultures as a way of assimilating people who they wanted to dominate — the fear inspired by the idea of torture throughout eternity was just too tempting for the Catholic priesthood to leave alone — what better way to scare people into obeying? The Bible, however, describes a fire that is everlasting — not an everlasting torture. God does get angry, but the worst He would do to you is to separate you from Him for all eternity (if you choose not to live His way)… Satan has done a very good job at perverting Christians’ view of the nature of God by twisting this understanding. It’s to the Devil’s advantage that Christians believe God is willing to torture you forever while ‘claiming’ to love you.

Now that you’ve waded through what many of you will deem ‘blasphemy’ (if it’s not what you know to be true, it must not be true), what was that thing about using God’s name improperly? What does it mean to use His name ‘in vain’?

Let’s pretend your name is ‘Bob’. And let’s pretend you have lots of children, whom you love dearly. But as they grow up, and their individual natures develop, you are dismayed to see that most everything that you have taught them they only make a token attempt at following — and take great pride in themselves when they get away with doing things opposite your teaching, without suffering any consequences.

After a while, they (and their friends) begin to get a little giddy that they’re so successful at avoiding your gaze, and your admonishment, and maybe even your punishment. Eventually, they even begin to mock you as young adults — at how you used to be important, but aren’t any more. You might say you’d feel a little upset… maybe even a little jealous of the respect that you should feel from them; but don’t.

Eventually, they take that mocking tone into their everyday language… they use your name as an expletive — like, “Wow, you really Bobbed that one!”. Or when injured, exclaim, “BOB THAT HURTS!”. The only time words leave their mouths that might be confused for respect are when they wish your anger would come down on someone they are upset at, “BOB DAMN YOU!”.

In no way are they actually talking about you, or to you, at this point. They’ve just reduced your name to one of the many dirty words they toss around in an effort to impress their friends that they follow no one’s standards — they obey no one’s rules.

Your name is no better than shit. Interchangeable, in many cases, with shit.

Is that the reverence that God deserves from His children? We can be sure that in the Old Testament, when the Ten Commandments were written in stone, this observed behavior was not new to Him. And no one spoke in surprise or confusion at this command — so the practice of abusing our Creator’s name was already a familiar behavior, thousands of years before we arrived to read it in the Bible.

So, we aren’t being ‘edgy’ when we misuse God’s name. In fact, it’s one of the earliest-recorded ways to hurt God’s feelings. Taking pride in this is a dismal, shameful, disrespectful tragedy of human frailty.

You probably weren’t thinking that you were showing off your frailty when you picked up this habit, were you? Using His name ‘in vain’, or for foolish, shallow reasons — was important enough that when God narrowed down ALL the things He could have chosen for His people to learn down to TEN ITEMS… this was among those few. Do you have a legitimate reason for putting it at a lower priority than He did?

One of these things is … distinctly different. And it caught your eye. And that’s Wonderful…


Attraction, whether by design or evolution, is an integral part of the continuity of life (not just human). To say that we should all evaluate everything around us equally is a notion without intellectual merit. (That’s me trying to say ‘stupid’ without insulting someone for their faulty ideology…)

We also used to praise someone by saying they had ‘discriminating tastes’… that word was not inherently negative. But now it’s more convenient to abuse language to force our will on others. Making everything the same, all the time, is not making anything better — it’s just making everything the same.

There was a Twilight Zone episode (or maybe it was The Outer Limits) where every person had exactly the same face… it was a Hell.

“One Of These Things Is Not Like The Other”

“Number 12 Looks Like You”

“The Eye of the Beholder “

Why does God allow Evil in the world?

Because He created us (Mankind) with Free Will.

Because we chose to live apart from God.

Because we have chosen Evil. For now, He is letting us.

In The Beginning… At first, we (humanity) were with God, and what was GOOD was what was of God. Good WAS God, and God WAS Good. Simple.

CastOutOfTheGardenThen Satan convinced Humanity that we could… even should… define Good on our own… how dare God claim the sole right to define Good vs. Evil? Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and were not given a giftthey were rather SEPARATED from reliance on God for the definition of Good. We are still separate.

We have a dim view into God’s presence through His written word, through preserved stories of His interactions with our ancestors, and in the life lessons left to us by His Son, who visited us just 33 short years. We have help in understanding, in a limited way, through the Holy Spirit which is a gift that leads… but it is not the same as living in a world that is ruled by our Creator. It’s not the same as Adam and Eve experienced in being able to converse with Him in any waking moment. We lost that when Adam and Eve made the decision to define Good and Evil without RELYING on God to do that for us.

Now, we wait for Christ’s return… and it’s a long wait for us; but a short time for God. He is watching us learn how futile it is for us to live in peace and prosperity while being separate from Him.

We are living in Australia — the place that criminals were sent (Satan and a third of the angels who rebelled against God and were cast down), and are still in charge here. At Jesus Christ’s return (Second Coming), those criminals will no longer rule, and our environment will not belong to disrupters and those who thrive on Evil — but we will still have Free Will, as that is how God created us.

The difference will be that Good and God will no longer be separate, either. He will define what He wants for us, and only in communing with Him will we be capable of Peace.

We have had thousands of years to attempt to achieve it on our own… defining Good as anything else but ‘with God and of God‘ is futile. Bad things happen — wars, assaults, lying, pretense, famine, disease, hate, abuse, theft, loneliness and death — because since the time of Adam and Eve, we have been choosing (as a race) to define Good out of our own feeble minds and frail hearts.

This is not God’s doing — it is not His will. It is Satan’s world, and Satan’s will that we live apart from God, and suffer endlessly — as he knows we are to inherit a place with God that he forfeited long ago.

The Left Can’t Get Rid Of Guns, So They’re Whittling Away Wherever They Can Get Mindshare

We’ve pointed it out often here, but legal firearm ownership keeps growing, and violent crime keeps going down. Now, every Leftist faced with those facts is quick to point out that correlation is not necessarily the same as causation… but it’s also true that:


  • When you make firearms more difficult to obtain, in those parts of the world where gun violence actually decreases, violent crime and death actually increasesthe bad guys just use knives, hammers, fists, fire, and strangulation more. And because people can’t defend themselves against larger, stronger, more immoral characters, their deaths are on the heads of those who disarmed them.

  • When there is less of a stigma to firearm ownership, training increases — which decreases accidental injuries and death.

  • When governments subjugate their populace, they begin by ensuring that there is little armed resistance. Saying that only happened hundreds of years ago only makes Leftists appear ignorant (we have the internet now, you know…).

  • Our culture used to be much more open about guns — people of all ages were less afraid of them because it was common to teach children how to behave around them (like any power tool). Though the Left claims that making drugs legal will bring it out of the shadows and decrease risky behavior, they don’t see the irony of their pretended ignorance when they see that they’re doing the opposite with firearms.

Long guns (anything that is bigger than a pistol) are not statistically relevant where mass shootings, violent crime, suicides, or accidental deaths are concerned. But the Left has found over the last 50 years that they can’t slow down Americans’ belief in self-determination, self-defense, and self-analysis.

So they work VERY hard at getting Americans to analyze OTHERS — division is their weapon of choice. And as they have with race-baiting, class warfare, and blame-redirection, they play a long game of half-truths, fear, and personality politics that gains lots of low-information (ignorant) people to their causes.

The latest in the engineered-fear campaign targeting AR-15 rifles:

When you choose #MobRule over #EqualProtectionUnderTheLaw, you get to yank the nation around as easily as you can yank the heartstrings of the most easily swayed majority you can drum up. Minorities are not protected by mobs — they are eaten. That’s why we are a nation of laws… not emotional appeals.

So when a long-standing opinion of an entire nation falls ‘out of fashion’, it cannot easily be destroyed just because an Activist generation of educators, media, politicians, and starlets chooses to ignore history and throw their voices behind ignorant rants and heavy-handed personality politics.

You have been warned for over 200 years that this is the behavior to expect when there isn’t a barrier to such destruction — but if you choose to believe that the Founding Fathers wrote and signed our Documents with no history of their own to draw upon, you MIGHT actually believe that is was them that were ignorant. But you wouldn’t just be wrong — you’d be an ‘enemy domestic’. Choose to support our Constitution, or leave. ‘Conquering’ it makes you an adversary who has no righteous place within our borders.

Answering Evil: Wresting the Conversation Away from Leftist Rage — Stand Your Ground vs. Duty to Flee

[Ed. Note: This was first published on 7/16/13; I’m bringing it forward to join a conversation about the Left’s ability to hijack our culture by perverting our language and distorting the truth…]

Imagine that you are somewhere (not at home) with your kids, and someone decides to do you harm. Maybe they thought you were the person who cut them off in traffic… maybe you WERE the person… and they have a lead pipe/knife/candlestick/rope/etc. and it’s CLEAR that you are in mortal danger.

So, you defend yourself with the firearm (that you are legally carrying) and the judge says sure, you have the right to defend yourself — but you first had a ‘duty to flee’… a choice that courts often considered to be a requirement before lethal force should be allowed.

Since you didn’t run away (leaving your children behind with the raging threat), you didn’t really have a right to defend yourself with lethal force. If you had, and he chased you, well then fine… but since you didn’t, you’re going to jail.

This actually happened… OFTEN… and is the reason most states now have so-called ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws. Eager and ruthless District Attorneys saw victims as potential notches on their belts, and treated them as criminals — until the laws were rewritten to prevent it. The rights of the attacker were seen as more socially relevant than the rights of your family members to be defended from his violent onslaught — fighting back made the victim ‘a bad guy too’.

But if you have EVER been the daily target of a schoolyard bully, and were told by any authority you complained to that it was your responsibility to ‘just stay away from them’ — you understand how ridiculous ‘duty to flee’ was.

China Meat Cleaver Attack

George Zimmerman, who was prosecuted by the Media in the public eye as having ‘abused’ ‘stand your ground’ when he shot the person who was bashing his head repeatedly on the concrete — was not in a position DECIDE whether to flee or fight… but the Media ran with this concept for months.

It would probably be a surprise to most people who know the names of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin to be informed that NEITHER THE DEFENSE, NOR THE PROSECUTION EVER CLAIMED OR CONSIDERED Stand Your Ground in their arguments — it was not offered to the jury as a reason for or against Zimmerman’s actions. Because he never had a choice to flee, beginning at the point where he realized he was in danger. His choices at that point included either to fight back or die. But the media wanted to use the death of Trayvon Martin to kill ‘Stand Your Ground’.

Why? You should be asking Why?

LINK: “Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law and Self-Defense” (BlakeDorstenLaw.com)
LINK: “Self-Defense Shooting and Disparate Force” (USACarry.com)
LINK: “The Three Headed Monster: Defending a Disparity of Force Shooting” [PDF] (OSTTI.com)
LINK: “You can legally defend yourself with a gun if the situation includes these 3 elements” (SecondCallDefense.org)
LINK: “Mayor Bloomberg: End ‘shoot-first’ laws” (Politico.com)
LINK: “Stevie Wonder Boycotting Florida Following Zimmerman Verdict: singer refuses to perform in the state until its Stand Your Ground law is ‘abolished'” (HollywoodReporter.com)
LINK: “What the prosecutors said about Florida’s Stand Your Ground law” (JohnrLott.blogspot.com)
LINK: “Media Matters, ‘Stand Your Ground’ and me” (FoxNews.com)

Saul Alinsky was…

RulesForRadicalsCOVER[I’m posting this here so I can find it later… was just very impressed with myself that I answered someone’s comment on Facebook in such a succinct manner (on my phone, even); those of you who have labored through my writings over the years know that ‘succinct’ is a struggle for me.]

Saul Alinsky was a smart guy who in the ’60s published a book outlining his method for activists to affect change through disruption. Their method usually centers on personality attacks and turning your opponents’ morals into their own liabilities. Mocking isn’t impolite or a character flaw; it’s a skill that should be perfected (according to Alinsky). Hillary wrote her major thesis on how much she admired him, and Obama’s ‘fame’ as a ‘Community Organizer’ came from his mastery of those techniques — his mentor, ‘Frank‘, who he writes about in his book, was an Alinsky prodigy himself, so our President wasn’t just a good reader. https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0679721134/

LINK: Frank Marshall Davis Bio (obamasrealfather.com)
LINK: What Did Obama Do As A Community Organizer? (nationalreview.com)
LINK: “There is Only The Fight” – An Analysis of the Alinsky Model, by Hillary D. Rodham 1969 (PDF 8Mb)
LINK: The Hillary Letters: Hillary Clinton, Saul Alinsky correspondence revealed (freebeacon.com)
LINK: Hillary Rodham Clinton senior thesis (wikipedia.org)

Answering Evil: Wresting the Conversation Away from Leftist Rage — Pence and Funerals

What makes politics so difficult for #TheRestOfUs, and easy for the #Elites that enjoy running everyone else’s lives (Politicians, Media, #ProfessionalActivists, #Elites that enjoy running everyone else’s lives (Politicians, Media, #SocialEngineers, etc.) — is aggressive and amoral ‘messaging’.

I decided that one at a time, I’d grab one of the ‪#‎HorribleThings‬ that are ‘commonly known’ about an issue or politician, and go find out #WhatUsedToBeTrue before the propaganda.

So today, I’m starting with the headlines I’m seeing tweeted OVER AND OVER that Pence made mothers pay for the burial of their miscarried or aborted fetuses.

PenceFuneralsVOX

“State-Mandated Mourning for Aborted Fetuses” (theatlantic.com)

“Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed a law this year that mandated funerals for fetuses” (Vox.com)

“Insulting New Abortion Law Forces Women to Pay for Fetus Funerals” (Vice.com)

“State-Mandated Mourning for Aborted Fetuses” (richarddawkins.net)

“Pence Signed a Law Requiring Burial or Cremation for Aborted Fetuses” (motherjones.com)

Sounds pretty heartless, doesn’t it? Well it only took me two minutes to find an article that wasn’t written by Pence-haters (though I had to wade past about two dozen parroting the same copy-and-pasted propaganda first), and here is #WhatActuallyHappened:

“The aborted fetal remains bill (SEA 329), establishes rules as to how abortion facilities must dispose of aborted babies and allows the pregnant woman to choose a different method at her own expense (i.e. burial). As testimony revealed, the Indianapolis Planned Parenthood facility was disposing of aborted babies down a drain into the sewer system, the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH) implemented emergency disposal rules on July 1.” http://www.lifenews.com/2015/08/10/indiana-gov-mike-pence-signs-bill-mandating-aborted-babies-must-be-buried-or-cremated/

The CHANGE was not that the woman would now be required to pay for the disposal of her infant… it was that she now has the CHOICE to do so — by law. Until then, a murdered or lost child could be treated like leftover fried chicken by the medical ‘professionals’.

Here’s the description from the Indiana General Assembly web site:

“DIGEST
Disposition of aborted remains. Defines “fetus”. Establishes a right, beginning January 1, 2016, for a pregnant woman who has an abortion to determine the final disposition of the aborted fetus. Requires that a pregnant woman be informed orally and in writing before an abortion: (1) that the pregnant woman has a right to determine the final disposition of the remains of the aborted fetus; (2) of available options for disposition of the aborted fetus; and (3) of available counseling services. Requires the state department of health to: (1) adopt rules concerning the disposal methods to be used for aborted fetuses; and (2) develop the forms for certain information that is to be provided to the pregnant woman.” –https://iga.in.gov/legislative/2015/bills/senate/329

Does that sound like a woman was GIVEN A RIGHT TO CHOOSE, or does that sound like a woman is being ‘forced to pay for burial’ (as the news stories portrayed)?

So, now that you’ve heard a version of the story that was not #SculptedByTheLeft, is Pence the #Evil now, or was #PlannedParenthood? Regardless of your opinion on this heart-heavy and contentious subject — would you have preferred to know the facts, and then made your own decisions; or are you happy trusting the Media to drive ‘knowledge’ the way they do?

#KnowAlinsky

Adulting at a Traffic Stop

This is what I was taught before I was even old enough to drive… and today I see people think that think this situation is where they prove their manhood by arguing with the cop that’s pulled them over.

Please, put away the testosterone and do something smart for the 15 minutes that you and the officer are interacting. You can amp it back up and tell your buddies how you told him what-for LATER… but for THIS 15 MINUTES, be the smart guy. Be the polite guy.

Traffic stops are not the time for pissing contests.

Too many accidents can happen; the person in uniform is having to worry about you AND not being hit by a passing car — so go OUT OF YOUR WAY to make it easier than it has to be. That’s being a adult. #NoMoreDeaths

Kevin Jackson speaks on Dallas cop shooting

Kevin is a well-informed, level head. (Disclaimer: I’ve bought at least one of his books, so you could call me a fan…)

The point that people should be arriving at (why does it take so long?) is that the messaging is DESIGNED to ramp up rage and violence… not stem the tide. We should be asking WHY, and we should be turning away from those influences. Will we?

LINK: The Blacksphere (Facebook.com)
LINK: The Blacksphere (theblacksphere.net)
LINK: The Blacksphere (plus.google.com)
LINK: The Blacksphere (twitter.com)
LINK: The Blacksphere (YouTube.com)

You can dislike me. You can hate me. You don’t get to define me.

gopocalypse2016-07-07

Yeah, I saw that video the other day and a little cheer went up. Awesome message. But the post, and it’s title, above, I’ll say I found REALLY offensive (the author even admits he thinks and has written contrary to Cena’s message).

Why? Why is it necessary to completely sidestep what we know in our heads, with the rage that is in our hearts?

I know a lot of people will read this with the prejudices that are common about Conservatives (the real reason I got a little miffed even before clicking through) — why does the Left get to define what a Conservative is? Do Conservatives get to define what their ideological opponents are, or how they are motivated?

No. Not that we don’t try — as humans, it’s difficult not to play the game when so many people benefit from discord. But to lump in the #Conservative label with #Bigoted is an ideological leap… that is going to tear down, not build up, us as a nation.

I would really like to know what a #Liberal chooses to define themselves by — so far, all I have been able to find are arguments about why people on the Left disagree with their *perspective* of people on the Right. “I think [this] because I believe somebody else believes [that].” That is not a self-definition. Anyone?

For clarity, here is my best attempt at explaining what a modern American Conservative really is:

What We Believe – Bill Whittle

We are led, now, by people who have made a science out of discord, hate — even engineered rage. They are our university professors, our politicians, our news media, our Hollywood icons. Their amoral feasting upon the decimation of anything good serves them and them alone… yet we continue to refer to them as our ‘leaders’.

Why? Is it because we simply can’t find anyone else to be inspired by? That would indeed be a famine.

It’ time to stop being inspired by those who disrupt for fun and profit — and start looking to those who can, and do, build.

Paul Harvey – If I Were The Devil (How to Destroy America) (transcripted text)

A Little Humidity

When it rains, I can hear the shape of things around me.
When it rains, I know where I am, and the division between the inside and the outside.
When it rains, I know it’s less likely that someone is breaking into my car again.
When it rains, the world is on ‘pause’ and it’s OK that we have to wait a moment before heading back out.

When it rains, I feel the breath of scrubbed pavement and flowing scraps of grass and gravel.
When it rains, I know the morning will be moist and clean; muddy and growing.
When it rains, I know that there is a calm order to the world, and us.
When it rains, I remember that we’re just living here on this rock, not running it.

When it rains, I feel God shining down on us from just above the clouds.
When it rains, I remember His promise to wash, not drown, all of Creation.
When it rains, I breathe in the scents of all that was buried by the to-and-fro of shoes and feet
When it rains, a blanket covers me and wraps my pain tightly like a hug I know but can’t remember.

I love the rain.

rain

Don’t like to be raped? Just tell them you don’t like it. -Our Leftist Betters

When I was in elementary school (and junior high), I was picked on a lot by other kids (I know, right?). Instead of fighting back (a skill and ideology that I did not adopt until near the end of high school), I dutifully went to my teachers to, well, beg for protection.

I got beat up a lot.

The teachers would just stand out there on the playground, smoke their cigarettes, and chat with each other as if we were a great big television show that they were not in charge of.

Their response? “Well if they’re bothering you then just stay away from them.” It took me a lot of years to process the disillusionment from having been so abandoned by those responsible for my safety. The point is, they actually thought that advice was ‘common sense‘.

The idea that a tormentor would FOLLOW A VICTIM was beyond their comprehension.

The same idiocy was adhered to in United States case law for decades, where if you were in physical danger and had the ability to move your feet, you were expected to ‘leave the area’ rather than defend yourself. Dozens of cases were tried in which victims ended up being prosecuted because they did not properly observe their ‘duty to flee’. In many of these cases, fleeing would have left others — like their own children — behind to be harmed — in most, the attackers would have had no reason not to pursue their victims no matter how much running away occurred. But Prosecutors abused this logic so much for so long that we now have Stand Your Ground laws… that make clear it is not the responsibility of the victim to surrender — but rather to survive.

The idea that a tormentor would FOLLOW A VICTIM was beyond their comprehension.

“What alternative outcome would the opponents of Stand-Your-Ground desire? That the defending victim of the aggressor be the one that was killed? Or perhaps merely maimed? Raped, Beaten down?” – Stand Your Ground: The ‘New’ Self-Defense Doctrine That’s 136 Years Young (legalinsurrection.com)

The Left mocks these Stand Your Ground laws in a (mostly successful) attempt to make the public ignorant of their function.

“You hear that sentiment expressed by the anti-Stand-Your-Ground folks today. Listen to the pro-thug faction talking about the Zimmerman case and you’ll soon hear someone lament that poor George should have exhausted his brains on the sidewalk before being justified to use deadly force to stop Martin’s vicious attack. After all, it was just an “ass-whuppin.'”

Now, we are seeing the same idiocy repeated to rape victims… they should run away, piss themselves, throw up, or announce that they have an STD.

The idea that a tormentor would IGNORE A VICTIM’S PROTESTS is beyond their comprehension.

According to our ‘betters’, no one should be allowed to believe that SHOOTING A RAPIST is a socially acceptable or morally justifiable action. But, it is.

MorallySuperior