Reinke Faces Life

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1198918,00.html

From the Magazine | Interview
10 Questions for Bill Maher
By REBECCA WINTERS KEEGAN

***Begin Quote***

Sometimes people say to me, "You're not a real Libertarian because Libertarians believe there should be no gun control." I'm not a radical Libertarian, O.K.? Every party has something of a big tent.

***End Quote***

Maher is no Libertarian.

There is no big tent in the Libertarian party. We've seen the RINOs (Republicans in name only), the DINOs (Democrats in name only), the CINOs (Catholics in name only), but there are no LINOs (Libertarians in name only). That's because there is only one core Libertarian belief among Libertarians. Freedom, liberty, on every issue, every time, no exceptions.

Lot's of people claim to be Libertarians. Mostly it's talk show hosts. I guess it's the new "undecided" without being labeled as unable to make up ones mind. But, claiming something doesn't make it so. I can claim to be thin, handsome, and young. But that doesn't make it so!

So when Maher claims the "Libertarian" label except for guns, he fails. Guns are what can be as close to a Libertarian litmus test as can exist.

Some background to get to that.

Libertarians — both the big L Libertarians who define it as being a member of the party and the little L Libertarians who subscribe to a philosophy of life — are all defined by the ZAP Zero Aggression Principle. Libertarians, regardless of petty squabbles on individual issues, unify behind the idea that no one is allowed to initiate force. And, certainly not to accomplish political or social goals.

Libertarians trust others with freedom and liberty. It's really axiomatic. One can only have as much freedom as one is prepared to give others. I don't want you telling me what drugs I have access to; so, I have to let you be free to be a drug addict. I don't want my earnings and savings to be stolen (i.e., taxes) by an armed gang (i.e., government); so, I can't make you pay them either. I don't want to pay for the government reeducation camps (i.e., the gummamint publik skoolz) where your children are taught things antithetical to your beliefs; so, I won't make you pay either. To be free, I have let you be free as well.

Guns, and the freedom concerning them, are intimately involved in freedom.

First, the armed citizen is the ultimate check on a despotic government. The dead old white guys knew that having just fought a war against an oppressive government. There are some great a bumper stickers that summarize the reasons. "Politicians prefer unarmed peasants!"  "A man with a Gun is a citizen. A man without a Gun is a subject." "Only Crooked Politicians Fear Armed Citizens." "Genocide what happens when people are disarmed."

Second, the armed citizens are the police. They back up the thin blue line. Think of the Old West's posse. Look what happened in NOLA when the good people left, the police were helpless. Again some bumper sticker philosophy says it quicker. "When the laws outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns."  "The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals." "A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet."

Third, the armed citizen is emblematic of participate in the body politic. A civil society depends upon the support of its members. If we are not prepared to defend society from those who would harm it, then we don't deserve its protection. One can tell the sheep from the sheepdogs by who rushes to the defense of the flock. If you're unarmed or disarmed, then you're not a very effective defender.

So when someone tells you that they don't trust you with a gun, you better start asking yourself why you should trust them to have one when you don't. There is no single issue that will expose whether a person's beliefs about "gun control" are meant as "victim disarmament" or "hitting what you aim at". When people like politicians and celebrities talk about "gun control", they mean "the unopposed ability to impose their will".

So when Maher say "no guns for you kiddies", he definitely NOT a Libertarian.

In a private email, I was asked why I refer to the 380 as a "girlie gun".

From my personal experience, women chose the 380 over a 9mm because of its feel. Having fired both at the range, I can feel a difference in the kick. Having said that, it is generally known around the range, based on the testimony of the old hands, that the 9mm at 20 feet is 40% better. So imho the choice between a .380 or a 9mm is still a no-brainer. Get a 9mm.

So if I was buying a personal defense handgun for a woman that I loved, because the chance existed that it might someday have to save her life, my choice would be a small Tragus 9mm PT111.

But, if she had an abusive male bothering her, I'd violate the law in the People's Republic of New Jersey and loan her one of my 1911s. No matter how deranged a man might be, that gun can be recognized at a distance. And in the hands of an scared or angry woman, one would have to believe in one's luck to threaten her futher. That pt111 does not LOOK that impressive; the 45 is! It would but one of the values of a pistol is the situations it avoids or cuts short.

Besides who wants to be around even if she misses with the 45? And, if she follows my advice — "if threatened, draw. if you draw, don't talk. shoot! if you shoot, empty it!" — then it really dangerous for that fellow to be in the area. 

So that's why the 380 is a "girlie gun".

http://tampabays10.com/news/local/article.aspx?storyid=30878

A 10 foot gator kills Miami woman 

***Begin Quote***

Miami, Florida  – Florida Fish and Wildlife Officials say a woman who took an evening jog along a canal in Miami was attacked and killed by a gator.

***End Quote***

Yup, dangerous. Dangerous for the women, the weak, the old, and all of us in general.

Now, I can't say for certainty that the previous "girlie gun" suggested that all woman carry (i.e., a 380) would have saved this woman's life. But she would have at least had a chance. I can't imagine her terror in her last minute.

I do know that the gator might have gone to a handbag factory if she was able to use it. Assuming it was close enough to bite her, she would have been close enough not to miss.

It certainly might have registered in the gator's pea brain as a threat and it might have forgone this lady as it's dinner.

As I always say, I trust women and their innate good sense to know when they need to save themselves by the use of deadly force. It's a shame the rest of our society doesn't!

It also ignores, that under different circumstances, if carry was allowed, perhaps there would be a packing Good Samaritan, who could have used their tool to save her. I'd loan her a couple of rounds from my 1911. I KNOW that would the gator on someone's dinner table! And we'd still have a fellow human around. It's unreasonable to help her UNLESS you have a tool. No one is a match for a 10 foot hunger gator.

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060509/NEWS01/605090343

***Begin Quote***

Police are still investigating the circumstances surrounding her death, but they believe she was attacked on the front porch of her neighbor's Knights Church Road home, near the town of Decherd. A chocolate Labrador and a second dog of unidentified mixed breeds are being held pending the outcome of DNA testing to confirm they were involved in the attack, Franklin County Sheriff's Maj. Bruce Elliott said Monday.

***End Quote***

Now I don't know about you, but I would have trusted the lady to have a firearm. Imagine the results if she had a "girlie gun", like a 380, in her pocket. Like her keys. Dog threatens. She whips out her "dog discouragement device" and pop, pop, bang! One or more threatening dogs are off to doggie heaven. She could even reload and make sure as far as I'm concerned.

Now her neighbor or the dog's owners, assuming they are different, may have a gripe. Heck they could even sue claiming it was excessive. But she'd be around to have that discussion.

Note that the gun has to be quickly available.

It's a dangerous world out there and it does NOT warn you very far in advance. So that's why the "threat abatement tool" or the "(pick one: dog, bear, cougar, other wild animal, criminal, psycotic spouse) discouragement device" has to be always at hand.

Concealed or open carry should be allowed.

In this specifc case, I would trust the now dead Librarian not to blow away things at random like the cute family dauxhund, fluffy the cat, or herman the kid, the post man, the gas meter reader, or a library patron. Wouldn't you?

Regardless of her eyeglass perscription, I think she would know that when in fear for her life, it's time to call on Saint Sam Colt.

I know that if I inadvertantly scared her enough for her to "present". Then I'd back away real careful like.

It's really a shame that we have allowed ourselves to be deluded into thinking we are safe if our make beleive world where nothing bad can happen to us.

Whenever the Father Gummamint allows me, I keep my device "handy". I'd like to be able do that ANY TIME without restriction. Just like it says in the Second Ammendment!

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/local/states/new_jersey/14532465.htm

Posted on Tue, May. 09, 2006
Trenton bear killing rekindles debate
When the male was found in Trenton, state policy required his death. A game official's objection will lead to a review.
By Toni Callas
Inquirer Staff Writer

***Begin Quote***

New Jersey environmental officials will review a zero-tolerance policy that allows the killing of bears in cities after authorities killed a 3-year-old bruin in Trenton on Saturday.

State Fish and Game Council Chairman Ernest Hahn said he was stunned that fellow Councilman Len Wolgast had condemned the killing in a residential neighborhood. The bear, a 225-pound male, was the first killed under the state's 2004 Bear Exclusion Zone policy, Hahn said.

***End Quote***

I think that I recently opined on the world being a dangerous place despite what victim disarmament advocates would like us to beleive. There was a child killed in Tennessee, a bear wandering around midstate Jersey, and now a bear in Trenton.

If a NJ child is killed, then everyone will feel sorry for the bear!

http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/breaking_news/14519667.htm

Posted on Sat, May. 06, 2006
Jacksonville man fatally shoots robber; son injured in shooting
Associated Press

***Begin Quote***

"The father, sensing something was wrong, decided to defend his family … pulled out a gun and he shot and killed the suspect on the scene," Jefferson said.

***End Quote***

Yup, like I was saying, the criminals have to guess correctly. Guess wrong and it's self-elimination form the gene pool.

I'm sure the Victim Disarmament crowd will cry tears and tell us what a nice fellow this criminal was. But, he threatened someone with a gun. That's a crime in any reasonable person's mind. It didn't happen by accident. He wasn't collecting for charity and all he had to knock on the window was his gun!

I regret the loss of life. The dead criminal might have been the one to cure cancer. I don't like to see any life wasted. But, in the land of hard choices and scarce resource, reality world, I'd rather have one dead criminal than five dead family members.

Pop did good. IMHO!

http://allafrica.com/stories/200605030248.html

Kenya: Take the Guns Too, Like Everything Else

The Nation (Nairobi)
OPINION
May 3, 2006
Posted to the web May 3, 2006

Gabriel Dolan
Nairobi

***Begin Quote*** 

The news that Internal Security minister John Michuki is launching a security operation to collect weapons in the North Rift may shock the rest of the nation, but it will hardly come as a surprise to the pastoralist communities affected.

{extraneous deleted}

So, in desperation, community leaders may well exclaim: "Go ahead, take our guns, too, since you have grabbed everything else."

They might even add that they would be better off left to their own devices anyhow, since all they have ever received from either "Crown" has been harassment, neglect and exploitation.

That is no exaggeration. Colonial governments forcibly evicted Pokots, Sengwers, Sabaots and others from the fertile highlands and confined them to the desert regions of the North Rift.

Together with the Turkana, the Samburu and the Marakwet, they were restricted to the Northern Frontier District and forced to pay "hut tax" – though living as nomads – and denied any access to development.

{extraneous deleted}

That is until the Government discovered that these regions could be exploited for the benefit of others.

***End Quote***

What a surprise a government abusing it citizens. And, now it wants to disarm them. The land that they were pushed to now has "new" value. You just have to shake your head.

Are humans for all their intelligence really really dumb?

We know from JPFO http://www.jpfo.org/jp-ques.htm that "gun control" aka "victim disarmament" is a necessary pre-condition to genocide. So anytime some one decided to take away guns, the Nazi death camps should leap to your mind.

It takes a government to pull of a genocide. Government is a terrible master.

If the US Government was really worried about "genocide prevention", it would list this as a key event in any governments progression from servant to killer. As a modest response, I'd mark that government, its officials, and diplomats as "persona non grata". Nope, we won't entertain you, keep your assets safe, or object if anyone assassinates you. Sorry, a government's only job is to protect people. You ain't so we ain't. Unless you have oil?

If I was in this situation, I'd have to be thinking when do I fight. Now when I have weapons or later when they are killing me and my loved ones. It's just that simple.

That's the hard question. When do you fight? I think it's when they take away your tools to defend yourself. They have no other reason to do that except to kill or enslave you. When they render you defenseless, you are a victim!