Death Visits a Child

  This coming November 20^th marks the 50^th anniversary of the assignation of President Kennedy.  The television is playing stories around the clock informing us of all the details of who, what, when, where and why of that fateful day.  I am not watching any of these.  It’s not that I know all about that day.  Nor that I don’t care.  The fall of 1963 had another meaning for me and the killing of JFK was only a part.  That year was the year “Death visits a Child”.

 

   When I was 8 years old, almost 9, in late September 1963 I remember sitting in our car in a parking lot at a Missouri hospital.  Mom and I, and my 2 year old little brother, were waiting for my dad who had gone into the hospital where his mom was.  I don’t remember much about the drive down from Illinois but for some reason I remember eating candy waiting for dad.  When he came out of the hospital I saw my father cry for the first time in my life.  Grandma Watts had died.  This is very big for a little boy who is starting to be taught the life lessons needed to grow into a man.  My father cried, my grandma Watts had died.  This is the first death I had experienced in my short life.  Since I was so young my mom and dad had Grandpa and Grandma Pannebecker (mom’s parents) take care of me during the visitation and funeral.  Later we returned to Illinois and life returned to normal for a little boy.

 

On November 8^th I turned 9 years old.  Five days later my mom’s mom died.  Mom, my brother and I rode down to Missouri with mom’s sister and family.  Dad followed soon after when he could get off of work.  For some reason I don’t remember much at all about this trip except that Grandma Pannebecker had died.  I do remember saying to my mom “two down and one to go”.   She looked at me shocked and said “don’t say that”.  I was making reference to the fact that both grandmas had now passed away in six weeks’ time and one great-grandma remained alive.  As a 9 year old losing both grandmas in such a short time had changed me.  I was not thinking any great thoughts, just all that was normal in my life was changing.  For a little boy change like this makes you begin to think that all things in your life may change.  You begin to wonder what else is going to change, who else is going to die.  Death was changing my world and he was not through with me.

 

November 20^th, 1963.  I am sitting in class when one of my fellow students, a girl named Leslie Maquet, came back from the principal’s office and starting whispering in the class that the President had been shot.  Not long after the principal came over the school speakers telling us the President had died.  Back then there was only three channels on TV and all three were playing nothing but this story.  I saw Ruby shoot Oswald.  I watch as the new President was sworn in on Air Force One with Kennedy’s widow looking on still in her blood stained dress.  I watch President Kennedy’s flag draped casket lay in state in the Capital Rotunda.  I watched John salute his father’s casket as it rolled by on an Army caisson.  The rider less horse with the empty boots turned backwards in the stirrups.  All the flags were at half-staff.  Then “Little Grandma” died five days after Kennedy.

 

I didn’t go with mom to Missouri to her grandma’s funeral because I had already missed too much school.  I didn’t need to for death to tell me my life had changed once again.  I have referred to 1963 as my year of death.  But it was only the beginning.  Latter in the 60’s Bobby Kennedy died.  Martin Luther King Jr. died.  I watched the Watts riots.  I watched Detroit burn.  I watched the Vietnam War on TV every night.  The limp bloody bodies of our GI’s carried across the TV screen day after day.

 

About this time I started doodling dead trees.  Leafless branches attached to dead stumps graced my pages.  Latter I was told by a girl I used to work with that my doodling showed my preoccupation with death.  Perhaps.  However I know death has taught me the rule of change.  The rule simply is “All changes”.  We die.  Life changes.  We move on.  We flow through this river of time, going from one scene to the next in this play of life.  Yet I struggle with this change every day.  I want my life to be the same today as yesterday.  I want the people who were in my life yesterday here today.  I know I cannot get what I want.  I know I must accept the change and the sorrow.  I know this because in 1963 death visited a child.

Presidential Malpractice

Welcome to the era of Presidential malpractice.  Obama sits in the White House and continues to espouse he had no idea that you would lose you health care.  He had no idea the web site was so poorly put together.  He didn't even know about the IRS scandal until he read it in the papers the same as the American people.  Nether he nor his Attorney General knew about the Fast and Furious gun running program.  The President didn't know about potential problems in Benghazi.  He didn't know about tapping the phones and emails of our European Allies.

So either he is incompetent or a liar.  A recently released memo suggests the President knew about you losing your health care back in 2010.  Yet he continued to tell the people you could keep your health care if you like it.  All to win an election and remain in power. When asked about untruthful statements during the 2012 campaign it was explained that these little untruths are just part of the campaign process.

I hope he is just a liar.  If not then this is all part of the master plan or incompetency.  An incompetent President begs the question "Who is running the show"?  Is there a puppet master behind the scene or is our faceless, unelected bureaucracy the real movers and shakers of government. Who is the puller of the strings?  Who is reining in the outlaw bureaucrats?

Promise after promise has been made by this President to "get to the bottom of this". 

Well Mr. President we're waiting!!!!!!!!

An honorable man would admit his mistakes and correct the problems.  If he could not then again an honorable man would resign.  The problems are not being fixed!  He has not resigned!  Ergo I conclude this President is not an honorable man and we deserve better.

But wait!  I contend we deserve exactly this President because "We the People" elected him.  Then re-elected him.  We will not get better unless we elect better!  We must elect those men and women who believe in the same America as the people.  We must elect men and women who are from among us.  Not Washington insiders!  Not media sweethearts!  Not Ivy League prima donnas!

Until then welcome to the decline.

The Drowning

I awake to a mighty struggle.  A battle requiring all my strength.  I'm in a pool fighting with a man, I know not who, holding him under the water.  His strength is equal to mine if not superior.  As the struggle continues I grow weaker as his strength increases until his face breaks the surface of the water.  I revolt in horror as I gaze upon my diseased self.  This revelation weakens my resolve.  As I begin losing the battle two arms wrap around me, nail stained hands grasps my wrists.  This helper's strength takes over where mine fails me.  He drives the diseased Adam of myself under the surface of the water and holds me there until all struggle ceases.  He is drowned, the victory won until I awake once again to the daily struggle....

Luther's Small Catechism

Question:  What does such baptizing with water indicate?
Answer:  It indicates that the Old Adam in us should by daily contrition and repentance be drowned and die with all sins and evil desires, and that a new man should daily emerge and arise to live before God in righteousness and purity forever.

Romans 6:4  "We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live in a new life."

M.A.D. and the small arms race

 

Mutually Assured Destruction

Those who are in my generation will remember the threat of nuclear war with the Soviet Union. The fallout shelters. The duck and cover drills. At the time a phrase was used called Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD. What this ment was each side had the equal ability to completely destroy the other. While the leaders on both sides were willing to sacrifice millions of their citizens in a war they knew there wouldn’t be anything left to govern if a war broke out. So we had a stale mate. And an Arms Race. Each side built bigger and better nuclear bombs trying to get an edge. Either to win a war or to bully the other side. Remember this for now we are going to talk about…..

The Small Arms Race

　

My readers know I like history. So lets have a history lesson. Europeans started coming to North America in 1492. With them came their weapons. Metal armor, steel swords, steel spears and oh yeah firearms. The first firearms they brought were matchlocks. They used the coal on the end of a glowing rope to ignite the powder in the barrel. These were crude, prone to misfires, slow to load and affected by bad weather. But they could fire a .75 caliber lead ball further that any Indian could shoot an arrow. The Europeans conquered much of North and South America.

Fast forward to the 1700’s. Flintlocks were now being used. You know; Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett. Still muzzle loaders were slow to load. Armies would train to load and fire 3 un-aimed shots per minute. That was using a smooth bore musket. A rifle was slower. Maybe one shot per minute or a minute and a half. The difference? The musket had no rifling and used a loose ball in the barrel making it easer to load. This also made it inaccurate. The rifle had spiral groves cut inside the barrel. This would impart spin on the ball which was loaded with a cloth patch to make the ball fit tighter so the rifling would work. This was much more accurate. Which was better? Depended what you needed the firearm for. The military used muskets because they loaded fast. Their tactics was to stand in ranks shoulder to shoulder and fire as fast as they could at the other army standing shoulder to shoulder firing as fast as they could. The distance between the two armies was usually about 50 yards. On the other hand a good rifleman could hit a man sized target at 300 yards. But the rifle was slow to load. It could not take a bayonet. And was expensive to make compared to a musket.

The small arms race had already begun even then. During the Revolutionary War a British officer named Ferguson invented a breach loading rifle that could be loaded and fired 3 times per minute. Moreover these were aimed shots and this rifle was effective to 300 yards. The British Army did not choose to arm more than one unit with this gun which was later disbanded after Ferguson was wounded. Lucky for us. An interesting side story. Ferguson had General George Washington in his sights with one of his rifles but choose not to shoot. Gentlemen did not target officers after all. Ferguson died some months later in battle.

Firearms advanced a lot in the next hundred years. The Indians were out gunned when they went up against rifles with their bow and arrows. So they acquired rifles. The battle of Little Big Horn in 1876 now enters our discussion. General Custer and his men were armed with single shot rifles and 1873 Colt revolvers. The Indians had repeating rifles. They were using Henrys and the Winchester 1866 both of which held 10 or more rounds. While Custer’s rifles had a more powerful cartage and could shoot much further the Indians had superior numbers shooting repeating rifles. We know how that ended.

So now we jump ahead to the 1970’s. Mary and I are staying in a motel on Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. We were a minority. But there was a police presence at the motel so I didn‘t feel too unsafe. Something didn’t look right about the police. They were all carrying two pistols! Actually each officer had his issued revolver PLUS a 9mm semi-auto handgun. Why? I asked one of the officers. He told me they needed the fire power. More bullets between reloads with faster reloads. A six shot revolver just wasn’t cutting it for the cops. They were out gunned by the criminals. This was the beginning of a trend across the country of police departments switching from revolvers to semi-auto pistols. Criminals had more firepower than the cops! There was a small arms race between the cops and the robbers. Civilians started on the semi-auto trend too. Now we have millions of semi-auto hand guns in this country. The genii was out of the bottle.

Then came 1994 and the Assault Weapons Ban. Among other things it limited new guns sold from having a magazine with more than a 10 round capacity. It didn’t really matter because of all the higher capacity magazines that were “grandfathered” in. Those were the ones manufactured before 1994. The law of unintended consequences became involved during this time. The Colt 1911 style semi-auto pistol in .45 ACP was fading away before 1994. It was a bigger, heaver pistol and usually only held 7 rounds. Everyone wanted the newest and best 9mm higher capacity pistol. But after 1994 you were only allowed 10 rounds. So shooters were weighing their options. Ten rounds of 9mm or 7 of .45 ACP? The great 9mm vs. .45 debate raged. Which is better you ask? There is good and bad points that can be argued for each. The end result though was the Colt 1911 style has made a come back to the point it is not going to fade away anytime soon. Though the debate rages on and the Assault Weapons Ban ended 2004.

Now it’s 2013 and there is a new push for anti-gun laws. New York State has just passed an anti-gun law that restricts magazine capacity to 7 rounds. Most semi-auto pistols use a magazine which carry twice that. In fact there are NO 7 round magazines made for most of the pistols in this country. The exceptions are the 1911 style mentioned above and some of the new small semi’s used in conceal carry. The law of unintended consequences has reared it’s ugly head again. New York forgot to put in an exemption for police as to the 7 round restriction. When pointed out one New York legislator stated they would amend the bill. After all “we couldn’t have the criminals having more bullets than the police”. I know, I know, you have already leapt past saying “that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard” to “but it’s alright if the criminals have more bullets than me!”

Remember way back at the beginning of this article? Remember what I said about Mutually Assured Destruction? We live in a dangerous world. Always has been always will be. We are safe only through luck, divine protection or preparedness. One way to prepare is to make you and your family strong enough that criminals don’t want to take you on. To be equal to the bad guy kicking in your front door.

Remember:

Rifles replaced muskets because they could shoot further and more accurate.

Indians gave up their bow and arrows for rifles so they could hunt better and defend themselves from the white man.

The Indians wiped out Custer partly because they had superior firepower over Custer’s single shot rifles.

The police in the 70’s started switching to semi-auto pistols from their 6 shot revolvers because the criminals had superior firepower over them.

The anti-gun bill in New York will be amended so cops can have more than 7 round magazines so the criminals won’t have superior firepower.

The civilians in New York are assured to have inferior firepower to the criminals.

One legislator in New England said no one need a gun that held more than one bullet. Tell that to Custer.

Tell that to the mother who defended herself and her two children in Georgia. She emptied her revolver (6 shots) hitting the criminal 5 times. He managed to get out of the house into his car and drive a block or two before collapsing. If he had a gun. If he had accomplices. If she only had one shot this would be a different story.

There’s a reason dogs have fangs and lions have claws. There’s a reason deer have antlers too. There is a natural right to self protection. Our Constitution recognizes this right in the 2^nd Amendment. If given the choice, when investigating that bump in the night, do you want to be armed like Custer or a policeman.

Beware of "Need"

Beware the “need” argument.

The recent gun debate has featured the question “why do you need an Ar15 or a 30 round magazine?” Beware of the use of the word - need. I’ve addressed this “need” as to magazine capacity before. I will broaden our examination further.

To repeat, who or what determines what I need. We the People or the Government? Who has the power? We the People or the Government? The correct answer is We the People as outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States.

In 2011 the President, while talking about high gas prices, told a man complaining about high gas prices to buy a new car. When told the man had 10 kids and needed a bigger vehicle to hold them all, Obama ridiculed him then told him he needed a hybrid van.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/07/obamateurism-of-the-day-487/

In other words if this man hadn’t been so selfish. If he would have thought of the greater good. He would not “need” so many kids. If he had not needed those kids he would not have needed the SUV. It doesn’t take much reasoning to see where this is going. You only “need” a small electric or hybrid car. You “need” to walk or bike more. We the Government will tell you what you “need” and will make laws and regulations to move you in the right direction. The car you “need”. The number of children you “need”.

For example: China has a one child policy. Why? Because they had too many people using too many resources. The result? Millions of baby girls have been aborted in the quest for boy children. Many baby girls born were murdered by their own parents so they could try for a boy. This because the government defined it’s citizen’s needs.

Are you an empty nester with that 3 bedroom, 3 bathroom house? You only need one bedroom and one bathroom. What if you still have kids living at home. Do you need a bedroom for each person? The Government could say you only need three tops. One for mom and dad. One for the daughters. One for the sons. You only need one or one and a half bathrooms too. Do you really need a house with a big yard? It would be much more efficient to live in a one bedroom apartment. You know the Earth cannot sustain it’s growing population if we continue to demand more resources for our own selfish reasons. We are the Government, we know what you need better that you.

Do you need all those calories you consume each day? Why we have an obesity problem in this country. Our heath care costs are skyrocketing! Our government scientists have determined you only need 2500 calories a day. That’s all you really need to live. Think of the greater good. Problem with compliance? Not with that RFID chip in your Government issued ID. Do you think the Government can’t control something like this? When was the last time you tried to buy antihistamine at Wal-Mart? You had to show ID and your purchase was recorded so you could not go to another pharmacy to purchase more antihistamine in the next few days. A data base just to restrict cold medicine! It wouldn’t be that hard for food too.

You don’t think this will this happen? The mayor of New York City has determined his citizens don’t need to buy a soda bigger than 16 oz. Touting women’s “need” to breast feed more Mayor Bloomberg now has baby formula locked up in hospitals. He has just come out saying his citizens don’t need more that a three day supply of pain medication when they leave an ER. “You may have to suffer little” he says. Suck it up Buttercup! He is also preventing the prescribing of some pain medications out of the ER.

 
 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/11/nyregion/new-york-city-to-restrict-powerful-prescription-drugs-in-public-hospitals-emergency-rooms.html?_r=0

　

The First Lady persuaded schools in America to limit the calories in students meals. Her plan denied growing teenagers the nutrients to keep them going for the 8, 9 or 10 hours they were in school. Athletes and non-athletes alike received the same amount of food. Students were leaving campus during lunch to buy food to keep going. They weren’t buying health food either. Chips, power bars, candy bars. High salt, high calories, high fat. Again, Government determined “need” in action. The outcry of the student meal plan has now caused it to be modified.

A Government that defines so many “needs” destroys wants and desires. Did man need to fly? No but his wants and desires has him soaring like Eagles and walking in space.

Did man need to go faster than one horse power? No but his wants and desires have him driving in cars now. More mobile that ever. Along with the airplane traveling to the far reaches of the Earth. Shrinking the globe making all our next door neighbors.

Did man need a phone? No but desire has given us I-phones that access the internet. A TV? Didn’t need that too but man’s desire has brought the world to our living rooms.

The point is a Government that defines our “needs” is a Government that restricts our freedoms. Restricts our innovation. Keeps us from remaining the great nation that saved the world several times in the last century. A “needs” centered government restricts our freedom to move around as we please. To learn as we please. To raise our families as we please. To speak, worship, defend ourselves as we see fit. A “need” defining Government is a people controlling Government. A Government Of the People, By the People and For the People keeps us safe and free to be the great nation we use to be.

Beware of the use of the term “NEED”. It is a freedom killer.

Dasvidaniya

The end is near.  No not the end of the world.  Just the end of America.  Our Traitor in Chief Obama and his comrades in crime the Democrats and Republicans have ran this nation into the ground.  Now their assault upon the 2nd Amendment has begun.  Also this state I live in, Illinois, may pass a sweeping anti gun law in the next few days disarming the citizens of this state.  All semi-auto pistols, rifles and shotguns will be baned.  All pump action rifles and shotguns will be baned.  No grandfather clause.  We will have a short time to turn them all into the State Police to be destroyed.

The choices we face are; comply and become serfs, become felons, move out of the state, or revolt.  I like to think that I am strong enough not to comply so that leaves one of the other three.  If the gun owners leave the state still wins.  But most cannot up and leave on short notice.  Especially if they have family, jobs, homes they would have to abandon.  Become a felon?  With a stroke of a pen tens of thousands of citizens could became felons.  If caught what are the fines.  What would be the jail time.  What would be the consequences of a felony gun charge on your record.  Couldn't move to another state then and be a free man, a free gun owner.  To revolt would mean someone would be hurt or killed.  Am I willing to kill or be killed for my constitutional rights?  I imagine these same thoughts went through the minds of Americans in 1776.

How about the State Police?  The local police?  Will they comply with this unconstitutional order to disarm?  Will I?  Will you?

Dasvidaniya Comrades