Santa Fe, Texas: Resource Officer John Barnes!

The reason for "Resource Officers" (eg: "Guards") in schools is to protect the innocents.

It sounds as if there are still "Resource Officers" who know their duty, and they do it.

Absolute accolades to men who are willing to put their lives on the line.  Hope Officer John Barnes gets a great big BONUS with his next paycheck ... but I suspect that knowing he saved dozens of innocent lives will be sufficient reward to such a stalwart man!

Amid the chaos in Santa Fe, teachers' yells sent students scrambling for safety:

 One of the wounded in Friday’s shooting was Santa Fe school district police officer John Barnes, who was in critical but stable condition late Saturday, officials said. The police chief said two officers "engaged him right away," referring to the suspected shooter. "Our officers went in there and did what they could," Santa Fe ISD Police Chief Walter Braun said. For four hours Saturday, school buses with a police escort shuttled students and staff from the junior high school to the high school to retrieve their belongings.

Step #1: "Have A Plan"

if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.”

During the last part of my tour in Viet Nam, I was "in the Rear Echelons" (assigned to a base camp) where we paid regular visits to orphanages and Childrens' Hospitals.  I met kids as young as 7 or 8 years old who had been "injured".  Land mines (ours, theirs, whatever) took a terrible toll on children who would pick up a toy, only to have it blow up on them.  I met children missing arms, legs ... and parents.

It didn't matter whether the land mine which had taken their limbs were set by our side or the other side ... usually, the children of Viet Nam were delighted to see us because we brought them  food, fruits, candies and other treats.  It was hard to accept that we were sent on these visitation to "win the hearts and minds" of children who were missing body parts,  and who had terrible battle scars much worse than our friends in the company had suffered from similar war wounds

A seven year old girl with burn scars over her chest from Napalm, but still smiled at us, is enough to make a grown man cry.  And we did ... but not until we left their "safe" compoind.

I've been around the world and I've Seen The Elephant, but after all these years I've not seen worse than this.

I was lucky; I never saw children die. And I hope I never will.

Now ... today ... we have American children suffering the same kind of wounds.

But we have met the enemy, and the enemy is us.

Santa Fe school had a shooting plan, armed officers, and practice. And still 10 people died. – The Denver Post:

They thought they were a hardened target, part of what’s expected today of the American public high school in an age when school shootings occur with alarming frequency. And so a death toll of 10 was a tragic sign of failure and needing to do more, but also a sign, to some, that it could have been much worse. “My first indication is that our policies and procedures worked,” J.R. “Rusty” Norman, president of the school district’s board of trustees, said Saturday, standing exhausted at his front door. “Having said that, the way things are, if someone wants to get into a school to create havoc, they can do it.” 

Is This The New "American Angst"?

Have we become a colony of lab-rats who are so insular that we begin to feed upon our own?

Did we sink so far that we have evolved a National Paranoia which inevitably requires us to self-destruct?

I know that any society has its portion of insane people who are so far out of sync with 'normality' that they are not bothered by enjoy wreaking havoc on their neighbors.  Call them Schizophrenic, call them paranoidal, call them crazy ... they exist in any societal group sufficiently large to support  non-productive members.

All I know is that we have an emerging sub-class of people who feel no obligation to support the well-being of Society,  and they are running wild in America.    Their politics don't matter; whether or not they support the Second Amendment doesn't matter.  They will use any weapon, any societal meme, any trick of rhetoric to undermine American society/values/peace.

They have always been here, but today they are given free reign to use our "Acceptance" to attack the  rest of the rats.

We are the rats, and we are under attack.

What are we going to do about it?

At Last, an "Honest" Gun Grabber!.

For those of you who believe Democrats when they protest that they "... don't want to take your guns away ..."


NRA-ILA | Anti-Gun Democrat Proposes Banning Semi-Autos and Going After "Resisters":

The headline of the USA Today op-ed said it all. Anti-gun Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) last week advocated for legislation to ban an as-yet undetermined class of semi-automatic firearms and to “go after resisters” who refuse to relinquish their lawfully-acquired firearms. Lest anyone mistake his intentions, Swalwell followed up with a lengthy NBC News interview this week in which he made clear that his own proposal is a departure from prior gun bans that allowed those who obtained the firearms when they were lawful to keep them. Swalwell said that after thinking “about the different ways to address it … I concluded the only way to do this is to get those weapons out of our communities.”

The Australian Solution (clipped from the above article):

... the government instituted “amnesty” periods, which allowed those who had previously acquired the newly-banned firearms lawfully to surrender them to the government for a fixed and nonnegotiable rate of compensation. Third, and most importantly, anyone who refused to relinquish their formerly lawful property was to be treated as an armed criminal, with all the physical jeopardy and legal consequences that entails. The Australian government also uses a “may-issue” licensing scheme for firearm acquisition, which among other things requires an applicant to show a “genuine reason” for needing the gun. Self-defense – which the U.S. Supreme Court considers the “central component” of America’s right to keep and bear arms – is not recognized under Australian law as a permissible reason for the acquisition, ownership, or use of a firearm.

Chilling thoughts, to citizens of a Constitutional Nation
(oh, did I mention that Australian Constitution doesn't include a right to keep and bear arms??)

How Many Locks Are "Enough"?

Oregon's Initiative Petition 44  demands that all firearms must be kept locked, or locked up.   If your firearms are stolen, you are liable for all injuries (etc).

All of my firearms are locked up.  The locks are on the doors and windows of my home.   I never go farther than the corner mailbox without locking up.   Any more stringent lock-up measures would inhibit my ability to defend myself in my home

Yes, some firearms are locked in safes; others remain available (although not in "plain sight").   Ammunition is typically stored out of plain sight, but not locked up.

Now, the new Oregon Firearms Initiative suggests that if someone breaks into my home and steals my firearm(s), I'm criminally liable for any harm that criminal causes using my stolen firearm.

Where's the justice when the victim becomes the criminal, and the criminal's subsequent crimes are shared by the victim?

SECTION 2. (1) A person who transfers a firearm must transfer the firearm with a trigger or cable lock engaged or in a locked container equipped with a tamper-resistant lock.

Continuing the Bizarre ... a firearms "transferer" can't "transfer" firearm gun without a trigger lock?
How goofy is that?  When you sell a gun, you're not responsible for the actions of the buyer (except that you can't sell a gun to a felon, madman, etc.)   If HE needs a trigger lock, let him buy his own damn trigger lock!

I live alone; I don't need no stinking Trigger Lock!

COULD a minor gain access to a firearm I sell?  (There are no minors in my home; but that doesn't seem to matter.)  Who knows the age of the burglar who breaks into his home during his absence?  There are many flaws in this bill;  there is no allowance for "Reasonable Precautions", because it's purpose is not to provide safety but to intimidate legal firearms owners.

Requiring me to hobble my guns because a minor MIGHT invade my home?   That's madness!


There ought to be a law saying that an intruder is singularly responsible for his own actions.

There use to be; where did it go?

Michael Voigt

I note the recent passing of Michael Voigt, past president of USPSA.

I knew Mr. Voigt  well enough to say hello, in passing.  I saw him in several Major Matches over the years, but rarely had a speaking acquaintance with him.

Perhaps it sounds petty to mention that he never did me a wrong, but he served USPSA well as a President, and I cannot say as much for some other past presidents.  He was an excellent competitive shooter, and I was incidentally squaded with him at a couple of major matches over the years.

Watching him shoot was like watching a butterfly in field of nectar; he floated from one target to the next, and on stages which caused me problems he set the example.  Everyone who ever squaded with Mr. Voigt  wanted to be Just Like Him ... so we shot too fast, and never minded that we didn't get the A-zone hits as regularly as he did;  he Set The Bar higher than we could ever hope to match.




A Gentleman, he would chat with a lowly C-class shooter as readily as the Grand-Masters with whom he was accustomed to meet in his squad.

The competitive shooting world has diminished a bit with his passing.

There's a problem with Gun Control Movements: they don't work!

Honest people with the best of intent have causee more havoc than the most avaricious warlords.

I’ve spent 18 years fighting for gun control. Here’s how we win: 

Eighteen years ago I applied for a permit to march on Washington, called it the “Million Mom March,” and scheduled the protest for Mother’s Day 2000. More than 750,000 protestors turned out on the National Mall. Another 250,000 poured into sister marches across the country. This spring, the March for Our Lives surpassed those numbers. It was a promising sign that the gun control movement is finally regaining momentum after failing miserably to keep Americans safe.

Honest, well-intentioned people have worked for decades to eliminate gun-predation on innocent civilians, and their efforts have proved to be ineffective.  (See Below)

Why don't these heart-felt pleas failed to accomplish their goals?

Because the only tools in their box is to either:

(A) take away guns from EVERYONE, or;
(B) conflate honest, law-abiding gun owners with criminals.

(These attitudes are interchangeable; you can't have one without the other.)

These noble goals are not undermined by the criminals in our society, who are their legitimate target: they are defeated by the law-abiding among us.

And "the solution" as you have suggested is doomed to fail, because just saying "NO" has no effect on either the Criminal Class, or the citizens whose (Second Amendment) constitutional rights are zealously defended by citizens who are as honest and caring as you are.

Here are the only two things you can do to get all guns off the streets of America::

(1) Delete the Second Amendment rights for honest citizens to defend themselves, their property, their homes, their families and their country
(2) Initiate a nation-wide program where police will invade every home in America with the goal of searching out, and confiscating, every firearm they can find.

You will have to perform both miracles simultaneously, of course.
                                One is no good without the other.

The abrogation of a constitutional "RIGHT" will be politically unpopular; any federal lawmaker who voted for such a bill would never spend another day in office, after his current turn ran out.  Of course, if it is "the right thing to do", they would obviously sacrifice their political future to bring about the the measure you favor.
(NOT!)

And how many Americans are willing to go from door to door, merrily confiscating firearms from Second Amendment advocates?    Will YOU?

Criminals will not give up your guns; nor will honest citizens who expect their government to protect their Constitutional Rights.   Have you even read the Second Amendment?

The World is over-endowed with Unicorns who expect to solve complex issues with simplistic solutions; this is just one of many "Dreamer" solutions which are probably not expected to be enacted. but are only proposed as "talking points".

Here's the talk which your proposition generates:

Are you trying to start another Civil War?  Making felons of law-abiding citizens is a great start.

It may have worked in Australia  (with notable exceptions) but Australia was started as a nation penal colony of convicted felons who were sent there as penalty for violating British Law.

America is a nation which started (and won!) a war with Great Britain because they  (the British) tried to confiscate our firearms .. among other grievances.
You may march for any purpose you wish, and nobody will seriously object.  Because America marched for the greatest cause .. the right to Keep and Bear Arms.

We are ANTIFA because we're against people who aren't ANTIFA

The most interesting thing about ANTIFA Liberals is that they are not only rabidly anti-fascist, but they are able to to explain their political opinions so succinctly.

Usually, they define their political stance as either "Uh......"  or "I don't know".

It don't get more "succinct" than that!



(One gets the vague impression that they are against Conservative Thought, which they consider to be Fascist.  One is tempted to define this offshoot of the Liberal as "extremist"  But I wouldn't say that.   THEY might say that, but when they're asked the question they don't always remember the EXACT verbiage which they are being fed from Liberal websites.   Not that they don't BELIEVE it ... they just haven't done their homework.)


It's interesting to compare ANTIFA with the John Birch Society.


See also a less forgiving view of ANTIFA.


(I love my job!)