Why I Carry A Gun

The following is something I received in an email tonight. As it says at the end, the author is unknown, but is obviously brilliant. I don't know if the author actually is brilliant all of the time or not, but from the below words I can deduce that he or she loves freedom and liberty, is a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms and knew how to put things into words in a pretty fine manner, in fact in a brilliant way at least this one time. My belief is that the author should write more often:

"People Ask: Why?

Why I Carry A Gun

My old grandpa once said to me, "Son, there comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and usually it's when he becomes too old to take an ass whoopin'.

I don't carry a gun to kill people. I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don't carry a gun to scare people. I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don't carry a gun because I'm paranoid. I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I'm evil. I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don't carry a gun because I hate the government. I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don't carry a gun because I'm angry. I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone. I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don't carry a gun because I'm a cowboy. I carry a gun because, when I die and go to Heaven, I want to be a cowboy.

I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man. I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate. I carry a gun because, unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don't carry a gun because I love it. I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

"Police Protection" is an oxymoron. Free citizens must protect themselves. Police do not protect you from crime; they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take an ass whoopin'. "

..author unknown (but obviously brilliant)

I guess this has probably been around on the Internet and Gun Blog sites before, but I figured why not pass it on again. There are a few things I would add to this, but not many, and since it was the brainchild of someone else I will leave it just as it was sent to me. I would sure like to meet the author.

All the best,
Glenn B

Is It Something In The Water...

...that could make someone ask the question that was recently asked at a Town Hall meeting in Salinas, CA? The meeting had been called concerning recent gang violence in or around Salinas, CA that has already resulted in the deaths of 6 people there this year (yes that would be in less than 2 months). The very first question reportedly was asked by Peter Valdez of Salinas who in essence asked: "why gun locks couldn’t be enforced in the city – forcing gang members to lock their guns in order to transport them". Get that? Read it again if you don't because the implications of what this man believes are there indeed. Does this person actually believe that gang members, who are quite possibly responsible for 6 homicides due to gang violence, are going to obey a law that tells them they must utilize gun locks when transporting firearms that they already own illegally and with which they kill people? Does he actually believe that because the government says to do something that gang members will all immediately obey? Does he think that because Obama was elected all things will now be rosy and we have been saved and gun control will prevent all violent gun related crimes? Did he think that was an intelligent question to have asked? Did he think at all before asking it?

My guess would be he sure thought it a good idea otherwise why ask such a question. Why would he believe that to be a good idea? Well probably because he was edumacated within the pUblik skuel sistem of kaleeforneeah where they taught him that the government has the power to do anything, and the peons must obey the government in all things about gun control, and that gun control is the end all be all to put an end to violent crime. After all, isn't California one of the states with the toughest gun control laws. They have a law or regulation to cover just about all aspects of whatever legal firearms ownership they allow, so does it not stand to reason that criminals should follow those laws and regulations too!!! Well maybe that makes sense to Mr. Valdez and to millions like him who have drunk the Kool-Aid (no offense to Kool-Aid intended, I love the stuff) from the everlasting fountain of ignorance. Maybe someone does not understand what it means to be a gun toting criminal because the government of California tries to make all gun owners appear criminal, and they who legally own firearms do follow the laws - so why wouldn't honest gang members do likewise! Oh it hurts to even think of what was going through this man's mind when he asked that question.

There is no note about any follow-up questions asked by Mr. Valdez in the article (at the Californian.com) from whence I gleaned this information, but the article does say that: "Salinas police Cmdr. Dino Bardoni was the first official placed in the hot seat tonight as a town hall meeting kicked off...". Now tell me what does a line like that tell you about the reporter writing up this event. Hot Seat? Whom is kidding whom here? Was that supposed to have been a tough question to have answered because the question itself was, in the mind of the reporter, such a cunning one; or was it just getting hot for the commander because he had to try to remain polite, civil, and informative in the face of what to me was an absolutely stupid question that probably made him want to burst out with laughter? As for the commander, he handled that question with kid gloves as he explained: "Gang member(s) are not going to adhere to the law". I have to wonder if Mr. Salinas understood how that answered his question.

The short article goes onto state that "he is one of six panelists...". For sanity's sake I hope that meant that the Police Commander is one of the six panelists and not that Mr. Salinas is one of them.

My hat doff to Another Gun Blog which brought this to my attention.

All the best,
Glenn B