KCUF Media

July 8, 2022

“Gun Debate 2022” ? Nothing of the Sort!

Filed under: media, Politics, Reading, self-defense — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 8:37 am

Photograph by Mike Blessing — Friday, 8 July 2022 at 9:50 PM MST

The op-ed page for for Thursday, July 7, 2022 [A11] titled “Gun Debate 2022” was nothing of the sort, in that there was NOTHING from the side supporting the individual right to own and carry weapons.

Rather, it would be better to label it as a full-page advertisement for the victim disarmament cause, dressed up as an op-ed page.

I call the anti-gun movement “victim disarmament” because it’s mostly the criminals’ victims who are going to be disarmed by their proposals — the five-foot, hundred-pound woman being stalked by the crazed six-foot, two-hundred-pound ex-boyfriend, the disabled little old lady, poor people, etc.

You see, the criminals and terrorists keep finding that massive loophole in the victim disarmers’ schemes called “breaking the law.”

Even the token “conservative,” Eligio Padilla, spouted off with the anti-gun talking points about “weapons of war.”

And you seriously wonder why the modern media is so distrusted nowadays?!

Submitted to the Albuquerque Journal — Friday, 8 July 2022 at 8:37 AM MST

Response from the Albuquerque Journal

From: D’Val Westphal
To: Mike Blessing
Date: Jul 11, 2022, 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Letter to the Editor Submission : “Gun Debate 2022” ? Nothing of the Sort!

the one author in support of gun ownership withdrew their letter after the parade shooting. we can only print what we have. please consider writing in.

-d


June 4, 2022

Happy KILLDOZER DAY!

Filed under: Politics, Principles, Reading, self-defense — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 7:51 am

H/T Тим ВилMonday, September 7, 2020 at 6:56 PM MST

Heemeyer Muffler Repair
Poster’s location not shared ⋅ June 4, 2019

June 4th, 2019 marks the 15th anniversary of the Killdozer’s rampage through Granby, Colorado.

Sit down kids, and let me tell you a tale. A tale about a reasonable man driven to do unreasonable things.

Marvin Heemeyer was a man who owned a muffler shop in Granby, Colorado. The city council ordained to approve the construction of a concrete factory in the lot across from Marvin’s shop. In the process, this blocked the only access road to the muffler shop. Marvin petitioned to stop the construction to no avail. He petitioned to construct a new access road, and even bought the heavy machinery to do so himself. Denied.

The concrete factory went up in disregard to the ramifications on Marvin’s business. To add insult to injury, the factory construction disconnected the muffler shop from the city sewage lines. An indifferent city government then chose to fine Marvin for this.

His business and livelihood were in ruin. Rather than lie down and die, Marvin chose to fight back. Over the course of a year and a half, Marvin secretly outfitted the bulldozer he bought to save his business with 3-foot thick steel and concrete armor, camera systems, and enclosed bulletproof glass.

On June 4th, 2004 Marvin Heemeyer lowered the armored shell over top of himself, entombing himself inside the Killdozer to make his last stand.

He burst forth from the walls of his muffler shop and straight into the concrete factory that ruined his business. Over the course of the next several hours, Marvin drove his Killdozer through 13 buildings owned by those officials that had wronged him, including the city council building itself.

SWAT teams swarmed the dozer, but it proved immune to small arms fire and even explosives. Another piece of heavy machinery was even brought out to fight the Killdozer, but it too fell to the dozers righteous fury.

In the end, Marvin’s Killdozer became trapped in one of the buildings it was built to destroy. Marvin chose to take his life, the only life he took that day.

Today, we celebrate Killdozer Day and Marvin Heemeyer, the last great American folk hero. A man driven to the brink who chose to fight back against an indifferent system.

From notes left behind after his passing:

“I was always willing to be reasonable until I had to be unreasonable. Sometimes reasonable men must do unreasonable things.”

HAPPY KILLDOZER DAY!

NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level — 10.7

Copyright © 2022 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepadqq and Notepad++.

May 27, 2019

Anarchism Without Hyphens, by Karl Hess

Filed under: Politics, Principles, Reading — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 9:27 am

ANARCHISM WITHOUT HYPHENS

by Karl Hess[1]

(Published in The Dandelion, 1980)

There is only one kind of anarchist. Not two. Just one. An anarchist, the only kind, as defined by the long tradition and literature of the position itself, is a person in opposition to authority imposed through the hierarchical power of the state. The only expansion of this that seems to me to be reasonable is to say that an anarchist stands in opposition to any imposed authority.

An anarchist is a voluntarist

Now, beyond that, anarchists also are people and, as such, contain the billion-faceted varieties of human reference.

Some are anarchists who march, voluntarily, to the Cross of Christ. Some are anarchists who flock, voluntarily, to the communities of beloved, inspirational father figures. Some are anarchists who seek to establish the syndics of voluntary industrial production. Some are anarchists who voluntarily seek to establish the rural production of the kibbutzim. Some are anarchists who, voluntarily, seek to disestablish everything including their own association with other people, the hermits. Some are anarchists who deal, voluntarily, only in gold, will never co-operate, and swirl their capes. Some are anarchists who, voluntarily, worship the sun and its energy, build domes, eat only vegetables, and play the dulcimer. Some are anarchists who worship the power of algorithms, play strange games, and infiltrate strange temples. Some are anarchists who only see the stars. Some are anarchists who only see the mud.

They spring from a single seed, no matter the flowering of their ideas. The seed is liberty. And that is all it is. It is not a socialist seed. It is not a capitalist seed. It is not a mystical seed. It is not a determinist seed. It is simply a statement. We can be free. After that it’s all choice and chance.

Anarchism, liberty, does not tell you a thing about how free people will behave or what arrangements they will make. It simply says that people have the capacity to make arrangements.

Anarchism is not normative. It does not say how to be free. It says only that freedom, liberty, can exist.

Recently, in a libertarian journal, I read the statement that libertarianism is an ideological movement. It may well be. In a concept of freedom, it, they, you, or we, anyone has the liberty to engage in any ideology, in anything that does not coerce others, denying their liberty. But anarchism is not an ideological movement. It is an ideological statement. It says that all people have the capacity for liberty. It says that all anarchists want liberty. And then it is silent. After the pause of that silence, anarchists then mount the stages of their own communities and history and proclaim their, not anarchism’s ideologies – they say how they, how they as anarchists, will make arrangements, describe events, celebrate life and work.

Anarchism is the hammer-idea, smashing the chains. Liberty is what results and, in liberty, everything else is up to the people and their ideologies. It is not up to THE ideology. Anarchism says, in effect, there is no such upper case, dominating ideology.

It says that people who live in liberty make their own histories and their own deals with and within it.

A person who describes a world in which everyone must or should behave in a single way, marching to a single drummer, is simply not an anarchist. A person who says that they prefer this way, even wishing all would prefer that way, but who then says all must decide, may certainly be an anarchist. Probably is. Liberty is liberty. Anarchism is anarchism. Neither is Swiss cheese or anything else. They are not property. They are not copyrighted. They are old, available ideas, part of human culture. They may be hyphenated but they are not in fact hyphenated. They exist on their own. People add hyphens, and supplemental ideologies.

I am an anarchist. I need to know that, and you should know it. After that, I am a writer and a welder who lives in a certain place, by certain lights, and with certain people. And that you may know also. But there is no hyphen after the anarchist.

Liberty, finally, is not a box into which people are forced. Liberty is a space in which people may live. It does not tell you how they will live. It says, eternally, only that we can.

H/T Wally Conger — Monday, May 27, 2019 at 9:27 AM MST


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Karl Hess — Infogalactic, Wikipedia

January 3, 2013

2nd Amendment and the Kool-aid Drinkers, by CSM Paul Howe (USA (Ret.))

Filed under: media, Politics, Reading, self-defense — mikewb1971 @ 11:58 pm

2nd Amendment and the Kool-aid Drinkers

by

CSM Paul Howe (U.S. Army (Retired))[1]

I have quietly watched and evaluated the in pouring of e-mails reference the liberal’s intent to seize guns and crush the second amendment. I want to add a few of my own thoughts on this issue as I have worked in and around all the people who could be tasked to seize your guns.

WHO’S COMING TO GET THEM?

United Nations (UN)

We are the UN. Other countries mostly join the U.N. to secure money, funding and training and few have any offensive combat capability. Most serve as guards at static locations and have no will to fight. America is the enforcement arm of the U.N. We have the money, equipment, personnel and lift platforms to get the job done.

If the president ever let the U.N. in this country, it would be a foreign invasion and armed Americans would stand up and crush them in a day. Our government would break down and the president would be ousted for letting foreign militaries invade our country.

Federal Government Military

Having served over 20 years in our military, I know that most soldiers would refuse the order to take part in the confiscation of weapons. First, the president would have to give the order, which is an “Illegal Order” in violation of the constitution. I don’t believe that service members would go back into the communities that raised them and conduct raids on good Americans in violation of the constitution.

Remember, these forces would have to come from a military base that is surrounded and supported by American communities. Civilians would simply cease to support the bases and they would fold in a short time. Cut of the fuel, food, electricity on bases and this would stop the silliness. Also, many, many service members live in the communities and they would have to travel from their houses to base unless they were locked down. In that case, their families would still be in the community and people would not be too friendly to those supporting these actions.

Federal Government DHS or TSA

The Federal government is not large enough or talented enough to seize guns. If they were to do 5-8 raids a day seizing guns, they would be physically and mentally exhausted and need a break. Physically conducting raids is exhausting. After the first few raids, the word would get out and Americans would start to fight back. It would take one good ambush from a house or along a travel route to decimate a tactical force or make it combat ineffective.

Next, most Federal Agencies work out of a fixed location centrally located in a community. Also, their personnel live in those communities along with their families. Once the word got out that they were doing raids in violation to the constitution, they and their families would be at risk. If they were to start raiding houses, kicking in doors and breaking in windows looking for legally owned guns, their homes would be subject to the same treatment by Americans rising up to defend themselves. They would shortly find themselves without a place to live.

State Law Enforcement

The Governor would have to order State and Local Law Enforcement to either:
Seize guns
Ignore the Federal Orders

If they ignore the Federal Orders, things would be tense, but people would be civil. If they started to seize guns, they only have limited people and assets to do this. Much the same consequences would take place as with the Federal Government.

Local Law Enforcement

Local Police and Sheriff’s Departments are the backbone of who protects American Citizens. A Sheriff or Chief of Police would have to give the order for his people to begin to seize weapons. Their people would either comply or see it as an illegal order and refuse.

Remember, Chiefs and Sheriffs also have to live and work in the same communities they serve. As I described with the Federal Government, local Tactical Teams could probably only do 8-10 hits in a day and then need a break. So they hit ten houses and seize their guns, the word would get out and now they are subject to living in the same community as those they are attacking. It would not go well. Also, after one or two determined Americans or combat vets fought back, the team would lose many to death or injury and they would have made a decision whether to continue to push the fight. Remember also, they have to sleep sometime. Their homes and families would be at risk. It is an ugly scenario at best.

Nation of Combat Veterans and Patriots

Having been at war for over 10 years, we have a nation of combat vets and contractors that have seen more action than many of our WWII vets. It has been said that only a small percentage of Americans stood up to the British War machine in the Revolutionary War. Americans are better armed and trained today than at any time in our nation’s history. Think about what would happen if just our nation’s veterans stood up. People have been buying more guns and ammunition in the past five years than any time in my life. The guns and ammunition are out there along with the talent to use them.

Kool-Aid Drinkers

Kool-Aid Drinkers is the term I use to describe the Jonestown voluntarily massacre where the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project, a dedicated community western Guyana by the Peoples Temple led by cult leader Jim Jones intentionally drank poison Kool-Aid. Over 900 people died.

In every law enforcement, government and military agency or branch, there are a small number of Kool-Aid drinkers who would blindly follow orders. They would either be purged internally by their co-workers or people they attacked would stop their gene pool.

Also, at the police tactical team level, all members “volunteer” for the job and they can have the individual integrity to terminate their team service at any time if their profession becomes corrupt or misguided. I know many a good officer that has done that in the past.

Finally, there would be a certain number of American Kool-Aid drinkers that would turn in their weapons if asked. I believe it would be a small percentage as there are always those that do not have the will to resist or fight and they are not needed should thing get tough.

History of “Gun-Free Zones”

Our nation’s history is filled with examples of “gun-free” zones failed.

The Aurora Colorado movie massacre and the recent Connecticut shooting are two that come to mind. Also, remember the Fort Hood massacre where an Islamic extremist Major Nidal Malik Hasan killed 13 soldiers because our military bases are gun free zones. Combat trained soldiers had to be rescued by a security guard. That is embarrassing.

Evil came to all of these places and everyone was disarmed and not ready to fight back because they were gun free zones.

Think what would happen at a national level if the American people were disarmed. Another evil would come along either from inside our country or outside of it and resulting in our downfall.

How about others in recent history:

  • In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
  • China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
  • Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

Solutions

Write your state representatives and let them know how you feel about this issue. I would like to think that most states would refuse the order.

Next, at the local level, talk to your Sheriff or Chief of Police and ask them if they would allow or support the federal government in their confiscation of firearms. Put them on the spot now and hold them accountable. I like to think that most states would refuse the order.

Should firearm confiscation begin, solutions are simple. If they cannot live in a community, they cannot work in a community. If their house goes away while they are at work confiscating guns, so be it. Allow them to leave with their family and what possessions they can pack in their car. Point them to California and let them know all the Hollywood types would be happy to financially support them in the fantasy land they wish to live in and that they are not welcome in Free America.

In the end I believe that guns are the glue that hold our country together. Guns keep the government in check and the individual American safe and free. Remove guns and the government will no longer be controlled by the people. The government will control the people.

Finally, it is claimed that the Battles of Lexington and Concord, in 1775 were started because General Gage attempted to carry out an order by the British government to disarm the population resulting in the “Shot heard round the world.”

About the Author

Paul R. Howe is a 20-year veteran and former Special Operations soldier and instructor. He owns Combat Shooting and Tactics (CSAT), where he consults with, trains and evaluates law enforcement and government agencies in technical and tactical techniques throughout the special operations spectrum. See www.combatshootingandtactics.com for details.


NOTES

  1. Originally published at the Wilson Combat blog. Reposted to Combat Shooting and Tactics [CSAT] (CSM Howe’s site) and Soldier Systems Daily [SSD]