2A Dems to Hold 8/28 Rally

Your humble Webmaster for Amendment II Democrats is planning a Save the Second Amendment Rally to be held on Tuesday, August 28, 2007, 12:00 noon CDT in Dallas, Texas. We will be gathering outside the Warren United Methodist Church at 3028 Malcolm X Boulevard, where the North Texas Brady Campaign and Rainbow PUSH members are scheduled to hold their own anti-gun rally. It's time for Democrats who support the Second Amendment to take a stand against those who seek to undermine our Constitutional rights.

I agree. I support and applaud this effort. But one thing troubles me greatly:

Do you actively oppose Democrats who support sensible gun measures if they run for public office?

We are Democrats, and as such we will support our party's nominees for local, state, and federal office. During the primaries, however, if any Democratic candidate supports gun control measures that Amendment II Democrats oppose (such as reauthorizing the national ban on semi-automatics), that primary candidate is fair game, and we will encourage voters to support Democratic candidates who are in greater harmony with our outlook on Second Amendment rights. But once the primaries are over and the candidates for the general election have been chosen, it is important that all Democrats pull together and support our party's candidates as best as we are able. Under no circumstances will Amendment II Democrats support Republican candidates who run against anti-RKBA Democrats. We are, after all, Democrats.

Nu-uh, guys. It doesn't work that way, and don't think that bit about "sensible gun measures" went unnoticed--what the hell are those?
I like your strategy for the primaries, but the general election is where power over lives is awarded. If you would pick an "F" over an "A" simply because of blind party loyalty, you have made yourselves part of the problem.

What this indicates is, ultimately, the Second Amendment is expendable to you, not as much of a priority as re-electing Carolyn McCarthy or Chuck Schumer, or electing Hillary Clinton. It means you consider other social and economic issues more important than my elemental right to defend my life and freedom, and will aid and abet those trying to strip me of the means to do so.

I take that personally. A friend wouldn't do that to me.
If an authorized representative from your group would like to respond on this blog and entertain questions and comments from WarOnGuns readers, I'll give you the space.

[Via A Keyboard and a .45]

UPDATE: See response here.

Got a Free Moment Today?

It's Sunday. Surely you'll have a free 5 minutes today.

Why not call a gun store where you do business and recruit them to support the August 28 ammo buy?

If not, why not?

We're the Only Ones 5-0* Enough

Speaking of raging "Only Ones," I found this video (click title link) on WikiProtest.

My 12-year-old is a skateboarder. I understand there are places that are off-limits, but there are plenty of effective ways adults can deal with children without resorting to out-of-control, vein-bulging mouth-foaming and name-calling. Losing control is the least effective way to deal with young people. While I stipulate we don't know what preceded the taped encounter, that's still no excuse for the "official" temper tantrum recorded here. And there is nothing from the demeanor of the victims to suggest they were doing anything but attempting to obey.

Imagine this is your kids being treated this way, intimidated, assaulted, extorted, having their property stolen by a loud-mouthed raving bully with a badge. I note this took place in San Francisco, and it may explain why they are so keen on disarming the populace--so the thugs can get away with treating everyone like this.

Time was, men were employed from their communities to act in the capacity of "peace officers." Now that the paradigm has shifted to "law enforcement," we see results that are exactly the opposite of the original intent--indeed, we see them introducing conflict and belligerence, rather than peace, into their encounters with citizens. In reality, the "Only Ones" are now "control officers," albeit out-of-control ones, and we ought to start calling them that.

This is an interesting microcosm of the way government--instituted among men to secure the blessings of liberty--has mutated into the grotesque enslaver it has become.

I would suggest an official investigation of this, but does anyone really believe it would accomplish anything? It's clear this behavior is SOP for the coward in question. That means he and his ilk have been getting away with it for years, and those who resort to coercion as a means of maintaining power are not about to force a change.

That's our job.

* 5-0

While the most common usage of this term is as a grind, the 5-0 grind...it is also used to refer to the police (a play on both the trick of the same name, and Hawaii Five-0).

We're the Only Ones--No, WE'RE the Only Ones...

In what was described by authorities as "a road rage incident," a Jackson County sheriff's reserve deputy was charged Thursday with aggravated assault with a motor vehicle, leaving the scene of a crash and reckless driving, according to Florida Highway Patrol reports...

The driver of the other vehicle was confirmed to be off-duty officer Charles Vance of the Metro Nashville (Tennessee) Police Department.

So which one is the ONLY Only One? Well, this statement says it all:

Samuel Efurd III was not booked into jail Thursday, but was given a notice to appear...

"Professional courtesy," I suppose. Because we know what happens to a mere citizen who "lifts a finger."

Aaron Russo, RIP

Longtime movie producer and 2004 Libertarian presidential candidate Aaron Russo is dead at age 64, having succumbed to cancer yesterday.

I had the pleasure of sharing a dinner table with Mr. Russo a few years back at one of our "ATF Nights."

His "Freedom to Fascism" is a must-see video.

We have lost that rarest of human beings, a good leader.

This Day in History: August 26

The Rhode Island Assembly resolves to have their delegates to the next Continental Congress ask if they may build a fleet of ships at Continental expense "for the protection of these colonies."