We're the Only Ones Dog Day Afternoon Enough

A Teton County, Idaho family is outraged after they say a sheriff's deputy tried to murder their dog in their own front yard.

I really hate to go into the Thanksgiving holiday with a story like this, but for God's sake, what the hell is wrong with these damned sheep meekly complying and leading their pet out for slaughter? And what the hell is the name of the thug "Only One" who did this?

Literally, he would have had to get through me first. Barring a completely undisclosed set of facts, if this story as told even loosely approximates the truth, lethal force to defend the pet would be morally, if not legally, justifiable.

Damn it, why do people put up with this Nazi crap in America?

RELATED: Vicious Dog Protocol

We're the Only Ones Not Licensing Enough

Mark P. Ragsdale, who shot and wounded a Shrewsbury police officer last year, has filed a civil suit seeking a new license to carry a firearm...

According to Shrewsbury police reports, Officers Rice and R. Ryan Chartrand were let into the home by a neighbor around 2:30 a.m. to investigate a burglar alarm. The officers were not aware Mr. Ragsdale was home when they entered. Mr. Ragsdale had told the alarm company he set off the alarm. The officers did not announce themselves when they entered the home.

A report by Detective Lt. Daniel G. Sklut said Mr. Ragsdale armed himself with a .380-caliber handgun when the alarm went off. “Mark Ragsdale stated that he could hear someone coming up the stairs toward his bedroom,” Lt. Sklut’s report said. “He stated that the hallway was in complete darkness and he saw a dark figure and discharged his firearm. He then heard someone yell “police.” Mark Ragsdale stated that he never said anything or challenged the figure, he just fired. When he heard someone yell “police” he immediately dropped the gun and went into a prone position.

So the chief won't give permission to carry a firearm now out of what, revenge? What's the problem here, aside from negligent private residence entry procedures on the part of law enforcement? It sounds like a training issue that points its finger back at his department more than anything else.

The fact that Ragsdale had been in a bar until the wee hours--reported here to make it sound like he's a morning drinker (and the report even stated he was only "moderately under the influence")--could apply to any number of Citizens, and even to "Only Ones," certainly known to congregate at "cop bars" when off duty (and sometimes when on).

There's so much innuendo and so little substance in this "report." There's no mistaking where the sympathies of the "Authorized Journalists" lie in this hit piece. And as for the former chief claiming there was enough evidence to bring charges, sorry, pal. The grand jury thought not, and the prosecutor declined to resubmit the case. That means Ragsdale's presumed innocent in the eyes of the law--you know, all those words that gave you an excuse to draw a salary for all those years.

It also sounds like everybody's going after Ragsdale due to chemical imbalance symptoms of diabetes that can be managed with insulin--it's easy for a disgruntled ex-employee to make charges of "violent mood swings," but one must ask: where's the actual violence? Were reports made? Were charges filed? If this stands, can it be used to deny self defense rights to all diabetics? Perhaps he can add an Americans With Disabilities complaint to his lawsuit...

And no, I'm not suddenly advocating licensing of rights. I just don't think the "authorities" ought to be able to abuse the law to reward or punish based on personal agendas, which is what I'm reading here, in spite of the best efforts of Scott J. Croteau and the "TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF" to mask it.

Technical Difficulties

A technical glitch delayed a mass e-mail to alert the University of New Hampshire to a reported gun incident on the Durham campus Sunday night, the university said Tuesday.

The alert should have gone out Monday evening, when campus police say they learned how serious the incident was, but wasn't transmitted until 8:22 a.m. Tuesday, the university and university police said.

Thank goodness there's a backup system in place, and one can always consult the UNH "Shooting Protocol." Let's see, stay calm, maintain eye contact, try to stall...consult a bunch of pastors and a rabbi, try to run...nope, nothing about returning fire.

Oh, here it is, section 26.1 on page 69. They say you can't.

Emulating Success

The Home Office is preparing to launch a nationwide communications strategy on gun crime, in what will be seen as the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s first attempt to demonstrate to the public how the Government is tackling the issue...

Insiders say the communications brief is still being discussed with advertising agencies, as the Home Office would like to emulate the success Metropolitan Police advertising campaigns have had as part of the Trident campaign.

Because as we've seen time and again, nothing stops a reptile in his tracks quite like a "communications strategy." And when predators are aprowl, nothing calms the cud-chewers down more than soothing noises from the herdsman .

We're the Only Ones All Fired Up Enough

A Capitol Police officer has been suspended in connection with the series of restroom fires that broke out in Senate office buildings over the past three months.

Maybe she was trying to flush out Larry Craig...?

[Via Mack]
[More from "The Only Ones" Files]

TV Does Heller

The Today Show, actually--they were reporting on yesterday's Supreme Court decision to hear Heller, and the anchorbabe presented the opposition's case to the effect that the Second Amendment is based on 18th Century conditions, as if that makes it no longer relevant, and as if that is sufficient grounds to pass disarmament edicts. I thought it significant, though, that the "Authorized Journalists" are already starting the spin to reframe the debate away from "collective rights," so if they lose, they'll have fixed the "no longer relevant" alternative in the consciousness of their viewers.

I also caught a few seconds of Wayne on CNN. I wish they would've asked him why NRA tried to "foul the waters" and, in light of that, if they think it's right that now they're getting so much of the media's attention.

Authorized Journalists Cheer "Gun Violence"

It's hard to talk over all the shooting, but Timothy Olyphant gives enough reasons to cheer on his Agent 47...

I guess maybe I'm being inconsistent. I just got done complaining about Brits wetting themselves over movie posters with guns, and now I'm upset about the Chicago Tribune/LA Times applauding a violent "gun movie."

It's just the hypocrisy of these damned chic socialists--they're all for glorifying assassins who slay without remorse, but the first to use their influence to demand the disarmament of Citizens who merely wish the means to defend themselves against sociopaths. Plus, speaking of posters, in every one I've seen so far, the idiot has his fingers on the triggers. But he's intended to look way cool doing it.

GRendell Vanquished!

Mad Troll Sent Howling Into Darkness Without (our) Arms [More]


But put down that cup of mead, brave Geats--there is no time to celebrate. For soon, we must face the monster's demon hag mother...


[Via Mindful Musings]

Our Eyes--They BURN!!!

Complaints about a set of film posters featuring actors brandishing guns have been upheld by advertising watchdogs...

[T]he ASA said the actor's expression was aggressive, and the posters could be seen to condone violence. It ordered that the two posters should not be displayed again.

Good grief--do these degenerate heirs of what was once a land of greatness have no shred of pride or dignity left?

This Day in History: November 21

Resolved, That a Declaration of Rights, asserting and securing from encroachment the great Principles of civil and religious Liberty, and the unalienable Rights of the People, together with Amendments to the most ambiguous and exceptional Parts of the said Constitution of Government, ought to be laid before Congress, and the Convention of the States that shall or may be called for the Purpose of Amending the said Constitution, for their consideration, previous to the Ratification of the Constitution aforesaid, on the part of the State of North Carolina.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS...

That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free state. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to Liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by the civil power.

It seems pretty clear what the North Carolinians thought they were signing into, and they seemed to have no problem whatsoever reconciling the separately declared individual nature of the right alongside the cooperative rationale for a militia.

Anyone who maintains this is not what the Founders understood the Second Amendment to mean is quite simply a damned liar. Let us hope that no more than four damned liars are currently seated on the Supreme Court.