EDITORIAL

The nuance of the law: Better dead than dread

David A. Lombardo

So the court has weighed in on Shepard and said Illinois had to belly up to the bar and do the right thing. Of course they won't; they'll fudge, cheat, be as dishonest as they can then use taxpayer's money to defend against lawsuits in the hope of staying the action at least, if not quashing it altogether.

My frustration, and perhaps somewhat black-and-white comments about civil rights, led someone to tell me that I don't understand the nuance of the law. I'm a dim bulb who doesn't grasp that some restrictions against being allowed to carry a firearm for personal protection, taken in the context of a "greater societal good," is okay even if "an occasional innocent dies because they didn't get to carry their gun at a given event."

I think that's crap but then I'm not a lawyer who understands the nuance of law. I've read and reread the Second Amendment several times but I can't seem to find that part about dying unarmed for the common good. On the other hand, I'm the guy that for 20 years occasioned upon the bleeding and dead who never had a chance to defend themselves. I can't recall any survivor saying it was okay their kid or spouse was dead because of a nuance in the law that justified it for the greater societal good.

For example, I think someone lawfully transporting a firearm in their vehicle should have the right to put a magazine in it and call 911 when someone else threatens their life. It appears the State of Illinois would rather let the scumbag kill him under the concept of some greater societal good.

The problem is the anti-gun crowd philosophically believes it is better that a bad guy gets to kill unarmed people for some twisted concept of a greater societal good. However, once he's committed murder THEN we don't want to possibly risk the common man's life, (the one it was okay to sacrifice a few seconds ago for the common good) so it's better the killer doesn't get the death penalty, or even gets a pass, because we might make a mistake.

Talk about having it both ways - that has to come from some alternate universe where the apes are running the joint. It certainly wasn't dreamt up by anyone who knew the 69 year old woman who had her brains scrambled and laid on the floor waiting for an ambulance. A woman, who was a well-trained, competent shooter, owned an appropriate handgun, even held both Utah and Florida Concealed Carry permits but couldn't carry the gun in Illinois for the greater societal good.

Excuse me for being a fossil but I readily admit I'm mired down in the 18^th century when it comes to the Bill of Rights. Personally, I don't give a fig about the nuance of law. All I care about is the right of law abiding citizens to defend themselves in an environment of growing chaos. If someone dreads the fact that I'm carrying a firearm for personal protection they should get over it. I'm offended by their "better dead than dread" attitude and a plethora of other beliefs I think are crap but no one seems to care about my being offended.

I'm getting an ever increasing line of self-proclaimed liberals who are taking up arms and want discrete, private instruction. I doubt their liberal friends will know they're drinking green tea in a room within a few feet of a loaded gun. But then I suspect their friends aren't fessing up to their host that they too have heat stashed in their nightstand drawer. It is politically incorrect for them to admit they believe they have the right to defend themselves but not so politically incorrect that they're willing to be one of those sacrificed for the common good.

The duplicitous anti-gun liberal politicians tell the common man it's better to sacrifice one or two civilians than it is for anyone to own a firearm for personal protection. Then they get caught attempting to board a flight with a concealed carry firearm of their own. It's hardly an isolated event and its roots go back to the days of prohibition, and farther, with some notable highlights over the years such as Dorothy Tillman.

When a liberal chooses to arm himself the diatribe against others possessing a gun doesn't end. They are notorious for being armed while doing everything in their power to prevent others from doing the same. Conservatives are also notorious for being armed but the difference is we want to teach our friends how to defend themselves too.

When atrocities were primarily limited to gang bangers in ghettos, the common man cowardly turned a blind eye. For 20 years I was willing to go into those areas because I believe the good people who lived there had as much right to be safe from the scum that lived next door as I did in my middle class, safe neighborhood. I can't recall talking with anyone who clearly believes in the nuance of the law theory who has actually put their life on the line for the common good. I'm sure some must exist... somewhere. But those who preach typically do so from a pulpit high above the reality of what exists on the mean streets. There is safety hiding behind books; few bullets will penetrate the length of a shelf of them.

Now violence has begun to export to the safe zones where people understood the nuance of law because it pretty much didn't apply to them. Now the residents of Lincoln Park, the denizens of the Magnificent Mile, the soccer moms of Naperville and the wives of cops and firemen in Bridgeport can read all about it in the paper and mark my word, the times they are a changing.

At some point the nuance of law is going to crumble under the demand of the common man to be allowed to protect himself and his family. All that gun control stuff is fine when you live in a protected enclave but when the Hun is at the gate the nuance of the law gets rather fuzzy.

There are about 200 million firearms in the U.S. and experience tells me precious few of those owners care much about nuance. They're mostly fine with the big chunks of law to keep society moving in the right direction but you point a gun at them, you threaten their life as they walk out of a restaurant on the Magnificent Mile, beat them to near death in a church where they volunteer or, God forbid, you threaten their kids, and nuance is the last thing on their mind. And God help everyone if the government attempts to disarm American citizens; it ain't going to go the way of Australia, I can assure you.

Federal Court strikes down

Illinois' concealed carry ban

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has ruled that Illinois' total ban on carrying firearms for self-defense outside the home or business is unconstitutional. The case, which involved lead plaintiff Mary Shepard, was funded by the NRA with the ISRA a co-plaintiff. "The court recognized that the text and history of the Second Amendment guarantee individuals the right to carry firearms outside the home for self-defense and other lawful purposes. In light of this ruling, Mary Shepard and the people of Illinois will finally be able to exercise their Second Amendment rights," Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of NRA, said. Judge Richard Posner ruled that Illinois' ban on carriage is unconstitutional and wrote, "One doesn't have to be a historian to realize that a right to keep and bear arms for personal self-defense in the eighteenth century could not rationally have been limited to the home. . . . Twenty-first century Illinois has no hostile Indians but a Chicagoan is a good deal more likely to be attacked on a sidewalk than in his apartment on the 35th floor."

Fast and Furious sentence sparks outrage

Alan Korwin, the Uninvited Ombudsman with his Page Nine, reports early morning news that went unchallenged by the mainstream press Jaime Avila Jr., 25, a ring leader caught red-handed in the Fast and Furious government gun-smuggling operation, was allowed on Wednesday to take a plea agreement with just over a month of punishment for each of 52 AK-47-type rifles he is known to have smuggled to drug lords. Two of Avila's smuggled guns were found at the scene of the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Government officials who organized and abetted Avila's smuggling operation, and perpetrated the criminal scheme, have not been brought to justice or even charged in the crimes. Some have been promoted and given raises. Others have been transferred. Some have resigned, taken other high-profile positions in government, or moved into lucrative areas of the private sector. Critics have expressed doubts that officials will suffer any consequences from the criminal operations. If Wednesday's sentencing by Obama's Justice Department is any indication, they may be correct.

Ares offers mission configurable rifle

 

Radians youth eye and ear protection kits

 Young shooters and hunters need to learn early in life that protecting their ears and eyes during a hunt or at the shooting range is paramount to saving their hearing and vision over the long haul. Young sporting enthusiasts can easily and affordably protect both their ears and eyes with the Radians Youth Combo Kit. This premium kit contains a youth-sized ear muff to protect hearing from gunshot blasts. It also contains an interchangeable shooting glass with a lens design that lets you easily switch between three lens colors: clear, silver mirror, and amber. A microfiber carrying bag and microfiber accessory lens storage pouch are also included to easily protect and carry the shooting glass. If you already have hearing protection, the interchangeable shooting glass mentioned above comes as a separate kit called the Radians Youth 3 Lens Kit. Both kits make great Christmas present s for the young sporting enthusiast in your life. The Youth Combo Kit has a MSRP of $36.99; the Youth three Lens Kit is $24.99.