Sunday, February 1, 2009

Pittsburg Super Bowl 43 Champs - and Me I Am The Big Money Winner

Yes folks, this evening I put my money on the Pittsburgh Steelers is for no other reason than they have been in Pittsburgh for as long as I can remember, and that goes as far back as when I used to be a football fan. Those Arizona Cardinals, on the other hand, just seem to flit around way to much from one home to another. Then of course there was that other reason, both Brendan and Julia told me they were rooting for the cardinals, and so was Onkel Hans at whose home we were about to watch at least the first half of the game (we'd have to leave at half time so Brendan could drive Julia back to her college, but I got to watch the rest of the game at home). With them deciding to go for the other team, I decided to make a big money wager on my team and that is just what I did to show my faith was in them all the way.

From the early score by Pittsburgh, to the absolutely awesome all time Super Bowl record touchdown/interception return run (or whatever you call it), to the touchdown with less than a minute to go, to the fumble caused by the Pittsburgh defense with seconds remaining - Pittsburgh did not let me down. Now I have got to point out, those Cardinals sure helped make it one heck on an exciting game. No matter which way it turned out that was one amazing 60 minutes of football; and it just so happened that it turned out in my favor! Thanks to the play of Pittsburgh, the nonstop full 60 minutes of play, I am so much the richer tonight.

Well, at least I will be so much the richer when my son pays me the single dollar I won from him. Now that I think of it, I just gave him eight bucks in singles I had in my pocket for a bit of extra pocket change, and all I'll be getting is one of my own dollars back. Oh well it was an exciting game anyway. I may have that dollar framed, but my bet is Brendan would like to burn it.

All the best,
Glenn B

HR 197 - National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 - Just So Much Window Dressing

I just read about HR 197 over at Cap'n Bob & the Damsel. Then I checked it out a bit further. Here is a link to a site that gives information about it: and I have copied and pasted the full text of the bill below. Before you read it, let me tell you what I think of it. It is a great bill, it is about time that someone introduced such legislation but whom is this Representative trying to kid by introducing this bill under the current regime administration. It it would have been well worth contacting our Representatives and Senators to show our support of it if it had been introduced during an administration that was in any even tiny way friendly toward the right to keep and bear arms. The fact is that it has been submitted to committee under what seems to be the most anti-gun administration within my lifetime, and probably within the lifetime of our nation. Does the Honorable Representative Clifford Stearns of Florida, who introduced this bill, actually think it even has a chance of passing through and surviving committee? Does the Honorable Rick Boucher believe that his co-sponsorship of this bill will matter? I just find it all to be wishful thinking.

Having said all of that, will I support the bill. You bet I will. I will be making calls, sending emails, writing and mailing letters to my elected representative Carolyn McCarthy all the while knowing it will do absolutely no good in swaying her mind on the issue of gun control. She is the most rabidly anti-gun person I can think of in the United States. Yeah, I know, her hubby was killed by a lunatic gunman on the Long Island Railroad, and she rode that fact all the way into a seat in Congress. She still hangs her hat on it too. I can feel for her, but I sure would never vote for her, not with her anti-gun agenda; but I will try to sway her over to our side regardless. It is too bad she did not strike out against the real culprit in the case of her husband's murder - she should have called for the death penalty against the dirtbag who killed him. Then she should have tried to make it so that every citizen could be armed for self defense and defense of the Constitution. Had her husband, son and others on the train been armed, maybe they would have killed the criminal instead of being shot themselves.

The thing is that is my way of thinking and not hers. The thing is that the HR 197 bill is Representative Clifford Stearns' way of thinking not hers, and not the rest of Congress' either. It is a real shame that this bill was not introduced at a better time, when it at least stood a chance of becoming law. It is, by my guess, just so much window dressing for something else that Jones has up his sleeve. Of course, I have been wrong before on matters of great importance like this one and that is why you can bet your bottom dollar that I will support it just as I said I will do. If enough people support it, well maybe it will pass, or at least make us feel good that we tried getting it passed. Wasn't it our current president who said his administration will be one of change? What a change this would be indeed!

Without further babble from me, here is the text of the bill:

HR 197 IH


1st Session

H. R. 197

To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.


January 6, 2009

Mr. STEARNS (for himself and Mr. BOUCHER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


To amend title 18, United States Code, to provide a national standard in accordance with which nonresidents of a State may carry concealed firearms in the State.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the ‘National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009’.


(a) In General- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the following:

‘Sec. 926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents

‘(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm and is carrying a valid license or permit which is issued by a State and which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) may carry in another State a concealed firearm (other than a machinegun or destructive device) that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, subject to subsection (b).

‘(b)(1) If such other State issues licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, the person may carry a concealed firearm in the State under the same restrictions which apply to the carrying of a concealed firearm by a person to whom the State has issued such a license or permit.

‘(2) If such other State does not issue licenses or permits to carry concealed firearms, the person may not, in the State, carry a concealed firearm in a police station, in a public detention facility, in a courthouse, in a public polling place, at a meeting of a State, county, or municipal governing body, in a school, at a professional or school athletic event not related to firearms, in a portion of an establishment licensed by the State to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises, or inside the sterile or passenger area of an airport, except to the extent expressly permitted by State law.’.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for such chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 926C the following:

‘926D. National standard for the carrying of certain concealed firearms by nonresidents.’.

Well there it is. I recommend supporting it, but just not getting your hopes up too high.

All the best,
Glenn B