Burma Shave X

This week's billboard campaign alongside the information superhighway focuses on an outrageously disturbing trend we've been following--government officials equating fidelity to the Constitution with terrorism.

Previous "Burma Shave" Signs:
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX

[For those not familiar with the Burma Shave roadside billboard campaign or the CCRA RKBA campaign]

What Do YOU Think?

During Thanksgiving week, the Judiciary Committee of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives held a dramatic session to vote on whether to let the whole House vote on several gun-control measures...

What do you think? Let us know by Tuesday, in 200 words or less, by e-mailing to chesterletters@phillynews.com.

Well, since they asked...

Go ahead and let them know--especially if you live in PA.

Making Sense of Ron

NOTE TO VISITORS FROM "THE HIGH ROAD": Despite what you have been led to believe, this post has nothing to do with Ron Paul--it is a response to an anti-gun editorial linked to in the title and written by columnist Ron DZWONKOWSKI. Since the thread appears to be closed, I trust the record on THR will be corrected?

It makes sense to me that police should have access to a national database of gun owners. If I'm rolling up to a house where there's a reported burglary in progress or some kind of assault going on, I'd want to know if guns are registered for the premises. Wouldn't that advance warning protect gun owners, too, from police reacting badly to the presence of a firearm? Seems as if it'd be safer for both.

Yeah, Ron, trust the guys who can't even get their search warrant addresses right. That's some real "safety first" you're giving us there, guaranteed to get more innocent people raided and killed. As we all know, nothing calms a cop down more than a report of a gun. And we need registration to better protect ourselves from dangerous gun criminals who don't register their guns--and as a point of law can't be required to. That's some logic there, Ron.

But perhaps you're right. Maybe if we can stop just one gun criminal, it will be worth it. Does that make sense?

We're the Only Ones Bordering on Useless Enough

Ottawa is facing a multimillion-dollar bill to find work for border guards who can't - or won't - carry guns, newly released documents show...an internal analysis indicates that between 25% and 30% of those guards will be unable or unwilling to carry sidearms - as many as 1,440 employees.

What do you mean you want us to physically guard the border in exchange for our salaries and benefits? You mean just showing up in uniform and squealing for help and letting somebody else assume the risks isn't enough?

[More from "The Only Ones" Files]

Glen Johnson: AP's Hillary Campaign Operative

When the hostages had been released and their alleged captor arrested, a regal-looking Hillary Rodham Clinton strolled out of her Washington home, the picture of calm in the face of crisis...

Her Serene Highness. Jeeze, Glen, do you think you could have stuck your nose up any further?

Another thing, since you've made your role as official campaign propagandist abundantly clear: After you help get her elected, will you and the rest of the "Authorized Journalists" at the AP refer to her as "Dear Leader" or "Our Beloved Führer"?

The Bourne Ultimatum

A man carrying a semiautomatic handgun approached a group of San Francisco police officers Saturday afternoon and, with a smile, handed over the pistol in exchange for $150 in gift cards.

"I used to fire it at bottles or do some plinking in the woods," said the gun's owner, 48-year-old Bruce Bourne. "But I have a 6-year-old daughter now and my wife was uncomfortable with it being in the house."

So your wife is going to protect the family Bruce? Evidently, because this guy didn't have a gun, and look what happened. Ditto this guy. And you've just announced to the world that:

A. You're defenseless; and

B. You're so henpecked you can't even make a case for home defense with your own wife. How much stronger of a case do you think you'd be able to make with these guys? Or with these?

But you'd just give them what they want, right, Bruce, and hope you could reason with them, or convince them not to hurt you? What if what they want involves doing terrible things to you and to the people you profess to love?

If I were you, I'd strap 'em on and tell my wife--not "ask"--that I was going to acquire the means and the knowledge to safely keep a gun in the home to defend my family with. If she's "uncomfortable" with that, I'd want to find out if she'd really rather have a $150 gift certificate than a man.

[Via SameNoKami]

The Liberal Case for Gun Ownership

What were our Founding Fathers thinking when they wrote the Second Amendment?

Well, they were not engaged in narrow partisan politics. They were not posturing for Fox News or trying to “make nice to soccer moms.”

These were serious men who came fresh from the white-hot forge of revolution. A war had just been fought to overthrow the yoke of an oppressive and unresponsive Government that invaded homes without warrant and which exposed the populace to "dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within."

This is as fine and concise a read as I have ever come across. While I don't quite get how someone who would give a constructionist interpretation to the Second Amendment could embrace (non-Jeffersonian) "liberal" ideology when it comes to other things we expect, demand or allow government to do to us, I think you'll enjoy it from a pure 2A perspective. If you do, share it with your friends.

This Day in History: December 2

On 02 December 1775, John Mayfield of Browns Creek, a Ninety-Six District militia captain serving under Colonel Thomas Fletchall, was captured along with several other officers at McLaurins Store in the Upper Saluda region. The commander of the Whig forces that captured Mayfield was Colonel Richard Richardson, who, shortly after the capture, wrote a letter to the ad hoc Whig Council or Committee of Public Safety in Charles Town (Charleston).