Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Priceless
Number 8 on Esquire's list of things "men should never do past 30":
The cop who recovered my stolen car with my gun thankfully still in it (here in California we can't carry our guns on us) asked me in a hostile voice: "What do you have a GUN for????"
What else could I say, as I gave him a "how dumb are you?" look:
Taxi ride to retrieve your stolen car, $40. A chance to rib an anti-gun COP, priceless.
Not that I really advise it.
I did thank him for being so quick to track down my vehicle, and I found out the upside to having to leave your gun in your car.
If you ever get your car stolen in California, don't forget to mention that it has your gun in it. They found mine in an hour. They must have put out an APB! Awesome.
Anti-gun folks: don't try to take advantage of this gun-owner's perk. If you say you have a gun in your car when you do not, you are guilty of filing a false police report.
Ask a policeman, "You ever shoot anybody with that thing?"Wait a minute, I can top that one.
The cop who recovered my stolen car with my gun thankfully still in it (here in California we can't carry our guns on us) asked me in a hostile voice: "What do you have a GUN for????"
What else could I say, as I gave him a "how dumb are you?" look:
In case I need to shoot somebody.I pretty much expect a policeman to understand that the first duty of citizenship is to be prepared to defend oneself and others. After all, this is what they have chosen for their life's work. But surround them with a department that is bent on achieving a monopoly on force and some will succumb to that mindset.
Taxi ride to retrieve your stolen car, $40. A chance to rib an anti-gun COP, priceless.
Not that I really advise it.
I did thank him for being so quick to track down my vehicle, and I found out the upside to having to leave your gun in your car.
If you ever get your car stolen in California, don't forget to mention that it has your gun in it. They found mine in an hour. They must have put out an APB! Awesome.
Anti-gun folks: don't try to take advantage of this gun-owner's perk. If you say you have a gun in your car when you do not, you are guilty of filing a false police report.
Comments:
<< Home
LETSThe Second Amendment means nothing outside of hunting.
Our forefathers gave us that right to fend off a military takeover in the U.S. - by either the left or the right.
Apparently, since most gun owners are far right they didn't see fit to fight the far right takeover so here we are. On the verge of martial law.
You'll imitate your German counterparts of 70 years ago. You'll allow them to take away any weapon that gives you parity with the military. You know you barely made a peep when the Brady Bill took away your assault rifles, which is what you'll need to effectively combat troops.
What a bunch of cowards, and what a sore disgrace you are to our forefathers who gave their blood for the likes of you.
In Jesus' Glorious and Holy name,
Dean Berry -- Real American
http://www.deanberryministries.org
dinoberry@frontiernet.net
Our forefathers gave us that right to fend off a military takeover in the U.S. - by either the left or the right.
Apparently, since most gun owners are far right they didn't see fit to fight the far right takeover so here we are. On the verge of martial law.
You'll imitate your German counterparts of 70 years ago. You'll allow them to take away any weapon that gives you parity with the military. You know you barely made a peep when the Brady Bill took away your assault rifles, which is what you'll need to effectively combat troops.
What a bunch of cowards, and what a sore disgrace you are to our forefathers who gave their blood for the likes of you.
In Jesus' Glorious and Holy name,
Dean Berry -- Real American
http://www.deanberryministries.org
dinoberry@frontiernet.net
"Far right take-over." Do you mean WINNING A COUPLE OF ELECTIONS?
That is how the republic works my friend. You have a better idea?
As for the "verge of martial law," are you speaking perhaps of the right-to-carry laws that have swept the country thanks to Republican activism? Or are you one of those who objects to the government listening in on Al Qaeda's phone calls?
But I agree with you that the right to bear militarily effective arms is the core of the 2nd amendment. Militarily effective SMALL arms is the traditional understanding. I want a full-auto BAR in .30-06! (I'd say .50, but that would just be for fun. .30 is much more practical.)
But "parity"? With OUR military? Are you a comedian?
You really shouldn't be thinking about that anyway. Anyone who can't see that this country is fighting for liberty is blinded by paranoia.
America has always been riven by the fundamental conundrum about liberty: that strong government is required to defend it (the Federalist position), and that strong government is a threat to it (the Jeffersonian Republican position).
Rational people figure out that they have to combine these two sides: that you can't accuse those who understand that the protection of liberty requires strong government of being anti-liberty. Otherwise, in time of war, when the protection of liberty requires the strongest government, you'll end up hampering, instead of aiding, the fight for liberty.
I like your salutation. Let's all do our best to live up to it.
Thanks for dropping by.
That is how the republic works my friend. You have a better idea?
As for the "verge of martial law," are you speaking perhaps of the right-to-carry laws that have swept the country thanks to Republican activism? Or are you one of those who objects to the government listening in on Al Qaeda's phone calls?
But I agree with you that the right to bear militarily effective arms is the core of the 2nd amendment. Militarily effective SMALL arms is the traditional understanding. I want a full-auto BAR in .30-06! (I'd say .50, but that would just be for fun. .30 is much more practical.)
But "parity"? With OUR military? Are you a comedian?
You really shouldn't be thinking about that anyway. Anyone who can't see that this country is fighting for liberty is blinded by paranoia.
America has always been riven by the fundamental conundrum about liberty: that strong government is required to defend it (the Federalist position), and that strong government is a threat to it (the Jeffersonian Republican position).
Rational people figure out that they have to combine these two sides: that you can't accuse those who understand that the protection of liberty requires strong government of being anti-liberty. Otherwise, in time of war, when the protection of liberty requires the strongest government, you'll end up hampering, instead of aiding, the fight for liberty.
I like your salutation. Let's all do our best to live up to it.
Thanks for dropping by.
Correction: The Jeffersonians were not Republicans but were Democrats (not directly antecedent to today's Democrat Party).
Post a Comment
<< Home
