Independence

By Kellene Bishop

Field of Flags in Lubbock, TX photo c/o giftideasdirect.com

Independence Day.  Yet another holiday whose true meaning has been drowned out with meaningless commercialization, furniture and auto sales, and oblivious talking heads.  Even the very name of this momentous holiday has been marginalized, watered down, and forgotten.  And yet this day, unlike all others, serves as an all too infrequent reminder that all of the joys and values in our life that we hold dear exist because of this one day in history. 

Grant it, this day was not possible without all of the battles that were fought before and after its day of significance.  But what is critically important in my mind is that this day would have no longevity and substance had it not been for the millions of Americans who have fought to preserve its intent ever since.  To assure its invaluable presence in our lives today, the same proactive measures taken by those who went before us must be reenacted every day of our lives.  We can’t afford to allow the luxuries and conveniences of our generation to blind us to that which made possible such blessings.  Just as we can not profit by killing the goose that lays the golden eggs, we cannot exist without the freedoms that guarantee joy and happiness in our life.  In fact, try as we might, we cannot even willingly give away such freedoms.  They are unalienable indeed.  But sadly, we can ignore them to the point that they are foreign and unthinkable.

Picture this: You’re watching the evening entertainment on television.  A Special Report interrupts your show with this statement.

“A renowned author and scientist, Dr. Geek, has just announced to the world that in spite of all of our previous research, the world is actually flat. In fact, Dr. Geek has evidence to support that the outer edges of the world have still not been completely explored, and that we’re simply sitting on a much larger flat surface that we have previously believed.” 

Ridiculous, right?  But would a mass amount of media reporting for an entire month begin to cause us to doubt the truths we already know?  Would an act of Congress passing a multi-billion dollar budget to explore such “scientific evidence” make us believe that it must be true?  Would we then develop a divisive belief in our nation comprising of the Flats and the Rounds?

Our freedom of independence cannot be altered just because a story is consistently in front of us on the evening news.  Independence cannot be sold, voted against, legislated into oblivion, mortgaged, traded, bought or given away in a treaty.  But we can surrender it in our hearts and thus ignore it.  We can stop believing.  We can stop behaving like independent souls.

Family photo c/o ora.ucr.edu

Our family, our faith, our liberties, and the efforts of ALL of our life’s pursuits are all meaningless in a nation without true independence.  This independence does not restrict itself to one day a year.  Rather this singular event in history has the power to provide us with independent freedoms for as long as this nation shall stand.

In the name of the freedoms we enjoy every day, and even those that we have surrendered already in our hearts, may we all remember this Independence Day for what it is truly about.  May we renew our hearts this weekend in appreciation and passion for how the Declaration of Independence permeates our lives and assures us lasting joy.  May we hold our Independence close to our hearts and never surrender it to any man.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Self-Defense Amidst a National Crisis

By Kellene Bishop

I recently finished reading two GREAT books, back to back, that are fictional scenarios about an EMP (electro magnetic pulse) attack on the U.S. Both books are very well written, extremely realistic, and I had a hard time putting them down. The first one (still my all time favorite) was “Alas, Babylon” by Pat Frank. The second one, as recommended by many readers on this site was “One Second After” by William R. Forstchen. (Warning, occasional language in this book qualifies it as “rated PG-13”.) Both authors are actually so expert in their fields of knowledge on the matters which they write, that I feel the books are more a prediction of things to come, rather than a work of fiction. Out of all of the possible scenarios of a man-made national crisis, the most likely to occur against the U.S. is actually an EMP attack. However, what disturbed me so greatly while reading this books is that the majority of the pain and suffering in either of the books could have been substantially negated with the addition of a very legitimate reality in my world—personal preparedness. So, what does this have to do with you and the use of a firearm? Well, here’s a question for you. Are you prepared to implement self-defense amidst a national crisis?

Unfortunately our nation is actually ripe for a myriad of different crisis situations, not the least realistic of which is an EMP attack. But there could also be a critical financial collapse, a pandemic breakout (we’ve had two more deaths of swine flu in our state today), an earthquake, a nuclear attack, and so on. While I’m associated with many friends who take such threats seriously by storing several months worth of food, water and medical supplies, I find that the majority of them are actually lacking in one critical component of personal preparedness—self-defense.

Photo c/o criminology.fsu.edu

The reality is that we are a nation of overly medicated, out of shape, pampered, spoiled and indulgent citizens. If our normal society of luxurious conveniences, jobs, beautiful sunshiny days, and an abundance of food can still foster crazed rapists, gang murderers, and flocks of druggies, what will a genuine crisis do to compound that problem? So many of us still have the notion that the military or the police department will protect us in the event of a national crisis. *insert “wrong answer” buzzer sound here* What if there is a total breakdown of society as we know it? Will there be drug-crazed marauders about? Yup. Will perfectly sane individuals turn into a Dr. Jekyll because they haven’t suitably planned for a national crisis? Definitely. Come on. If the day after Thanksgiving shopping specials can bring out the worst in people, imagine what a real disaster will do. Criminal violence and looting takes place because of Ohio State University wins or loses a football game. The emotional impact alone in such an instance is sufficient to change the predictable structure of society as you presently know it. How will the generation of the “entitlement mentality” change when food, water, and even a simple aspirin is difficult to obtain? With our reliance on technology, our society has become reliant on a one to three day food and medical delivery system. If such a delivery system is delayed whatsoever you will experience a complete breakdown of “peace” as you know it—guaranteed.

To make matters worse, any such disaster would have a cheaply paid accomplice. Mother Nature and the ugly side of human nature is the ally of any enemy to the U.S. and will successfully work in concert during a national crisis. Yup. This is a whole ‘nother component of self-dense—the mental and physical preparedness to implement self-defense in the midst of a national crisis.

Austin police officer Desireé Small Photo c/o aim4le.com

Bottom line, having food, water, as well as some medical and financial reserves will be useless if you don’t have the means to defend possession of such items in an emergency. My mom once taught me to have one “bullet” on hand for every pound of wheat to ensure I actually get to use the wheat when my family needs it. Even more realistic, if there is an emergency situation, the likelihood of the police, military, and medical resources will be called out to assist elsewhere is highly likely. What will we women be left with to defend ourselves? Even though I’m married to my own “Rambo” character, I know that he’ll most likely be out helping and checking on neighbors in such a situation, and I would want him to out of my own concern for them. But that leaves me with a great deal of responsibility to protect my own “castle” and preparedness supplies. As women, mothers and caregivers, we MUST be able to rely on ourselves to protect our children and our homes in ANY situation, including a national crisis. Such preparation requires mental preparation as well as physical preparation. Although it may seem like a deep dark place you don’t want to allow yourselves to go mentally, doing so is no worse than immersing yourself in a good book or movie-except in this case, it’s a heck of a lot more important.

Guns, ammo, mental strength, skills and determination to survive and thrive. I’m prepared. Are you?

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved. You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Proof Positive that Ninety-Percent of the Guns in Mexico Did NOT Come From the U.S.

By Kellene Bishop

While this site is dedicated primarily to the firearm self-defense education of future or current gun-owners—particularly women—I cannot avoid the genuine need to educate my readers on important matters of gun ownership.  Indeed, your very ability to carry a firearm by which to defend yourself is intrinsically tied to our 2^nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  This Amendment which reinforces your inalienable right to defend your life, your property and your liberty is consistently under fire from those who are threatened by it.  While this may not make sense to a trusting citizen of this nation—that a government would attempt to take away such a security, especially in light of the fact that this same government has ruled time and time again that law enforcement, military, and even your own community members are under no obligation to protect you otherwise in any manner—it is still a matter of verifiable fact.  The threat of the elimination of such rights has been thrust upon us ever since our leaders have been bedazzled with obtaining powers to which they are not entitled. 

With great foresight based on a history of learning, the Founding Fathers specifically tied the right of the citizens to defend their liberty to their right to defend against a tyrannical government.  Is it a coincidence that such a right to “keep and bear arms” was only the Second Amendment?  I think not.  As such it certainly cannot be accused of being a mere afterthought of our forefathers.  Indeed, these wise servants of our nation desired that if the power of the spoken or written word was ineffective in ensuring the freedom and sovereignty our nation, then by all means they were willing to ensure such freedom by the “flint and lock.”

Since the sanctity of this right is consistently under fire, it’s impossible for any citizen to consider a firearm for personal self-defense and not be affected by the political landscape involved in such rights as well.  As such, I feel it appropriate to enlighten my readers on matters which would circumvent or violate the Laws of the Land in this matter.

For a long time now, I’ve heard time and time again the misquote that “90 percent of the guns which are confiscated by criminals in Mexico come from the U.S.” 

First of all, IF that was actually true, can I just say “SO WHAT?!”  If the U.S. had provided guns to Mexico, did we do so with the intent that they be used for nefarious acts?  I don’t think so.  And if you believe that they were provided to Mexico with an ulterior motive, the U.S. doesn’t pull the trigger on such acts.  The criminals do.

Secondly, I have written previous pieces regarding the fictitious state of such claims.  However, while it may be common place for so-called journalists and gossipers to restate this mythical statistic, I believe it an act of ignorance and perhaps even treasonous for our Commander-in-Chief to do so.  Recently, on his trip to Mexico, Obama “admitted” to President Calderon that “90% of the guns which are found in the use of crimes in Mexico have come from the U.S.”   The problem is there was no such fact to “admit” anymore than it was a “fact” when he claimed that America was no longer a “Christian nation” at a recent international summit.  This claim of the 90% weapon stuff is indeed NOT fact.  And if Obama made such a statement knowing that it was in error, then he did so with the intent to put the American culture at odds with the rest of the world once again.  In fact, a knowing mis-statement of this nature clearly shows his anti-gun agenda to the world, most importantly to those who elected him to office believing (however naively that may be) that he had a more favorable stance on the right of American citizens to defend themselves.

Here are the Make-No-Mistake-About-it-Facts on the guns in Mexico.

 

29,000 guns were recovered in Mexico in 2007 and 2008.  18,000 of those guns were clearly NOT from the U.S.  They were instead from Israel, Turkey, Asia and other nations.  So the remaining 11,000 guns were actually given to the ATF in hopes that they could be traced to somewhere, even if it was the U.S.  Of those 11,000 guns which ATF received, only 6,000 were traceable, meaning that they had enough information such as serial numbers, brands, etc. to provide any tracing information.  And finally, out of those 6,000 guns which were traceable, a whopping 5,114 were found to be from U.S. sources.  U.S. sources means that they were purchased at a pawn shop, stolen from a U.S. owner, or obtained some other way within this nation and then delivered to Mexico. 

 

5,114 guns out of 29,000 is nowhere near 90%.  Yes, I realize that the people spouting this fictitious percentage of 90% are the very same people who don’t know how to calculate their taxes, read a bill prior to passing it, counting votes, and properly evaluate assets which they require the tax payers to foot the bill for…but come on!  How in the world could they be so far off the mark?!  It’s NOT 90%.  It’s 17.6 percent.  Gee.  Just a LITTLE bit off there, eh?  (If you must, you can read the ATF report here)

So what’s the motivation to spout such a number then?  Hmm.  Perhaps it gives the Powers That Be the ammunition they need (excuse the pun) to convince legislatures and gun-fearing ignoramus’s that there must be a ban on guns.  After all, if there is a ban on guns then so many guns will not go to Mexico, right?  We all know that the Brady Bill brought crime rates lower—NOT.  And we all know that D. C., New York City, and the State of California which are notoriously anti-gun have very little crime as a result of their anti-gun laws, right?  Yes, of course I’m being sarcastic.  You see, here’s a rule of marketing… when you’re intending to support of falsehoods in your campaign, the only way you can do so is by dispensing more falsehoods!  Statistics don’t lie.  But plenty of folks lie about the statistics.

Folks, if you are really trying to get genuine information on the use of guns and their value to your life AND your freedom, please don’t get your information from the press.  As I’ve said before, I perfectly accept someone’s right NOT to use or own a firearm so long as that person has come to such a conclusion via genuine education.  Not to do so is about as wise as the Spaniards were in believing that the earth was flat… after all, wasn’t that published repeatedly as well? 

(Clarification from the author: Let it be known that I am not a Republican, Democrat, or any other type of “it.”  I do not attack anyone based on their political affiliation.  (What kind of caliber they use for self-defense…yes, admittedly I may become quite riled when someone is stupid in this matter.)  But otherwise I am merely an AMERICAN.  As such I will defend American freedoms by taking to task anyone who would destroy such freedoms.)

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Children and Guns Part 4

What’s Really Responsible for the Deaths of Our Nation’s Children?

 

This is part of a four-part blog series addressing Children and Guns.  Part I – want to ensure your kid never commits a crime?  Give him a gun.  Part II addresses myths of gun safety – what you must know in order to truly protect your children.  Part III  addresses when it is safe to educate your child on firearms.  Part IV explores what’s really responsible for the death of our nation’s children.  If you enjoy what you read, please comment and share on your blog or Twitter.  Thank you. 

 

This is the final part in a series I’ve been writing on Children and Guns. 

 

I’ll start right off with answering the question, “What is Really Responsible for the Deaths of Our Nation’s Children?”  This is specifically posed to the deaths that result from guns being inappropriately used by children, and not all of the other more deadly causes of death discussed in Part II of this series.  The answer is the somewhat naïve position that parents take regarding “toy guns” and the entertainment that we expose our children to.  Allow me to show you why this is indeed the case.  

 

As you well know, the media and overwhelming political powers have successfully positioned in the minds of caring parents that children and guns simply don’t mix–when in fact, children and guns collide whether you like it or not.  In this regard, the only decision you really get to make is if you prepare for it by making this a positive concert or a deadly clash.

 

The other night I was at a family gathering watching 12 raucous boys ranging in age from 3 to 12 in the back yard. There were all kinds of “boy toys” back there such as foam swords, balls, and even a plastic gun.  I was livid however, when one of the boys picked up a toy gun and began “shooting” his cousin with it.  Clearly this child has not been taught anything about the proper use of guns in his environment (Yes, I did intercede and took the moment to educate…not that it will do any good unless it’s reinforced in his home as well). 

 

Let me speak plainly.  While I firmly believe and have even provided you with statistics that guns are not the “bad guy”, and are not the killer that the media and political diatribe would have you believe, they still are—100%—to be fully respected and confined to their proper perspective. 

 

It may sound odd to some parents to know that my husband and I—who are avid shooters and in full support of their use for self-defense—have agreed that we will not have ANY toy guns in the home.  A child’s desire to play with a toy gun is merely a mimicking and acting out of what he has seen on T.V. or at his friend’s home.  However, the creation of toy guns is actually our nation creating a promise for disaster. In actuality it’s downright shocking that more deaths of children combined with guns do not occur.  Think about it.  A perfectly dangerous combination exists with all of the inconsequential violence that your children are subjected to in video games, movies, and other social activities, combined with the fact that there are over 300 million legally held guns in the U.S. and over 73 million children under the age of 18. So if we were to actually believe the picture that the media feeds us, shouldn’t there be MORE deaths involving children and guns?  I mean seriously, if the media painted overeating and refined sugar as the villains that they really are the same way they portray guns in the presence of children, we’d have a very different health status in our American youth.  It’s hard to uncover any other way that children die which receives more focus by the media in America.  Regardless, one life lost unnecessarily is too many in my opinion, especially when it truly is so easily avoidable.  The key aspect of this problem is that our nation has come to accept a dichotomous position, yet the two sides of this position simply cannot coexist and still foster gun safety with children.  

 

There’s NO Such Thing as a “Toy” Gun

It defies logic to think that we can simply teach children that “play” guns are acceptable but “real” guns are not, when “play” guns always instill the physical action of pointing and shooting!  Parents have an even tougher challenge in this regard when we consider that “play” guns are expertly mimicking the appearance of real guns today.  Parents, you simply cannot have it both ways.  You can’t successfully have a world of toy guns and a world of real guns.  Remember, you can’t control what your children will find outside of your home.  The rules for guns need to be consistent, and deliberate whether it’s a “play gun” or a “real gun.”  Teach your children that there’s no such thing as a “toy” gun.  Non-real guns can be used to teach skills, safety awareness, etc.  But every gun your child comes into contact with should be viewed with the same safety rules and respect as a gun which shoots real bullets and can take another’s life, otherwise it’s playing Russian Roulette in it’s truest form.  There’s too much else that your child is exposed to which is relentlessly fighting against your message to your children of gun safety.  As such, you can’t afford for there to be any confusion on the subject.  You are either going to teach your children unequivocal truths about gun safety, with no exceptions, or you are going to fail miserably.  Does this mean that you shouldn’t teach you children how to shoot, how to clean a gun, how to hunt, how to enjoy shooting sports, and how to defend themselves?  Absolutely not.  In fact, quite to the contrary. 

 

When a child is old enough to pick up a toy gun and begin playing with it, this is the perfect time to take him into the education process of teaching him the REAL world of guns.  Start teaching him how to clean them.  Teach him the safety rules, all of them, again and again.  Take him shooting.  Take him to a REAL gun training class (like the kind that Women of Caliber offers to children 5 and up with a parent present).  My husband and I even bought our niece a BB gun when she was 5 (with her mother’s permission, of course) and taught her how to shoot it.  Bottom line, you can’t successfully outlaw all guns, period, because of what they will be exposed to elsewhere.  So you’ve got to educate them with one set of rules which applies to all guns.  

 

From the beginning of the 1800’s and through the 1970’s you rarely heard of accidental shootings with children.  Why?  Because the combination of gun usage and children was a necessary and integral way of life for a significant portion of our youth during that time.  Children had to regularly learn to shoot on their farms, for hunting, in sporting events, and yes, even to defend themselves.  Don’t you recall the abundance of “children” that attempted to enlist during the Revolutionary War, Civil War, and even World War I?  It was also custom at the time that when a boy turned 4 years old, he was taught how to shoot rabbits to put food on the table.  Additionally, children were not exposed to the kind of “entertainment” and pervasive television like they are now either.  Guns weren’t vilified during these years as they are now.  Think about it.  Our nation lasted over a century without this prevalent kind of problem in our midst.  Why is that?  Because guns had their proper, respected place in society.   

 

I wholeheartedly encourage parents to teach their children about guns, consistently, and to be sure that their rules apply to ALL kinds of guns.  This will ensure your safety and that of your children in many more ways than one.

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

 

20/20 Shoots Blanks

Serious flaws were present with the 20/20 show aired last Friday, April 10, 2009.  This episode was focused on showing the error of private citizens owning guns.  It made a case for the fact that individuals don’t shoot effectively when they are under stress, that children and even teenagers aren’t properly trained to avoid guns, and that gun shows are ideal locations for criminals to buy guns.  Let’s go over their fallacies bit by bit. 

1)     “Individuals don’t shoot effectively when they are under stress”: In actuality this is 100% true.  This is why Women of Caliber emphasizes individuals to not only get training, but to get a specialized form of training that enables a person to automatically defend themselves in a moment of emotional climax.  However, the gross error that 20/20 commits is the insinuation that only if you are expertly trained, should you have the right to defend yourself.  This is 100% false!  Even the police and military require special training in order to overcome their body’s natural reactions in the event of a criminal attack.  The fact that 20/20 was able to contrive shooting errors in the scenario they aired does not negate the fact that citizens have the right to protect themselves from criminals (and even defend themselves from a tyrannical government).  Many monumental wars have been fought to defend this nation by every day citizens who were not trained in matters of sharp-shooting, overcoming tunnel vision, and muscle memory.  Yet the wars were won because so many stood up for their rights to freedom, with an effective tool of influence.  Speaking of influence, over 2.5 million criminal acts are prevented EVERY YEAR as a result of the presence of a firearm in the hands of every day citizens, not Rambo-trained individuals (John Lott, Sr., Research Scholar, School of Law at Yale University and former chief economist for the United States Sentencing Commission).  Having the ability to protect yourself is not only your human right, but it is the law.  And no television show can tell you otherwise.

 

In this scenario, 20/20 had a “shooter” enter a classroom full of undercover participants and one “Exhibit A,” an individual “armed” with a derivative of a paintball gun in a holster on their person.  All of the “Exhibit A(s)” had just gone through a gun safety and target training with professional instructors prior to being put in this contrived situation.  While each “Exhibit A” was attending a training class, the appointed shooter enters the room and starts shooting.  The undercover participants start screaming and running in all directions.  In every instance shown by 20/20, the Exhibit A person was unable to draw their firearm effectively, protect themselves from being shot, and/or accurately hit the offending target.  Can I just say, DUH!  For one thing, just how often does such a scenario as the one 20/20 illustrated actually occur?  Sure the news is full of shootings in public places over the last 6 months, but they are far from being commonplace.  In my opinion, using such a scenario was callused and sensationalizing a horrific occurrence.  Very rarely do mass shootings get stopped by regular citizens.  It is difficult to be sure of your shot and thus difficult to avoid collateral damage due to the ensuing chaos of fleeing and frantic persons all around.  The cessation of such a scenario with a firearm would very likely require either a whole lot of armed private citizens focused on the same outcome, or one very well trained shooting expert.

Secondly, the flaw in this scenario is that shooter knows who “Exhibit A” is, so of course they are going to be aiming for “Exhibit A.”  And sure enough, in each instance, the skillfully trained shooter goes into the room, takes out the instructor and then immediately goes for the “Exhibit A” person.  That does not happen in a real scenario.  Criminals do not expect anyone to fight back.  They intend to intimidate and get their prey to cower and comply.  In mass instances, the shooters do not know who’s armed or who isn’t.  In such mass shootings, the shooters are just as susceptible to tunnel vision due to the heightened emotions as any who would defend against them.  Ultimately the only point that this portion of 20/20’s episode conveyed accurately was the need for legally armed citizens to be trained properly and practice regularly if they want to save their own lives or the lives of others.

 

 

2)    “Children and even teenagers do not handle situations with firearms properly”: Again, another DUH!  This point is 100% accurate thanks to the education that most children receive all of their life at the hands of the media and film industry about guns—not for the reasons that 20/20 attempted to demonstrate.  Most parents do not train their children appropriately about guns nor frequently enough.  20/20 would have viewers believe that gun safety training was ineffective in preventing accidents.  Bottom line is the safety your children employ around firearms is up to you.  Obviously it takes more than a simple 20 minute safety class to train them properly—it has to be a lifetime effort.  Just as you attempt to train them all their life to choose right over wrong, you must train them all of their life to handle a firearm appropriately.  That way they don’t turn into stupid teenagers who mishandle firearms.  By the way, you may want to take a look at the real statistics of children dying at the hands of firearm accidents by seeing my previous expose on children and guns:   http://womenofcaliber.wordpress.com/2009/03/31/children-and-guns%e2%80%94part-ii/

 

 

3)     “Because of all of the shootings we’ve had, we must make it harder for people to get guns”: See this is where folks really don’t understand what it means to be a nation of Freedom.  Freedom is in place so that ALL citizens can have the unfettered ability to make decisions for themselves.  And in the event that some citizens use their freedom to take away the freedoms of others, then they need to suffer the consequences.  But taking the freedom away from law abiding citizens because there are many who won’t use their freedom wisely is wrong, plain and simple.  This is like the age-old question that people ask, “Why does God let these bad things happen?”  Because He allows us to make choices and to suffer the consequences that come thereafter.  If He took away the freedoms of one to punish another then He would not be a God of Free Agency, would He?  And if our nation takes away the Freedoms of some in order to MAYBE thwart the evilly used freedoms of others, then we are no longer a nation of Freedom.  Our government does not exist to legislate and squelch freedoms.  It exists to support and protect our freedoms and then to dish out appropriate punishments to those who abuse that freedom, and ONLY to those who abuse that freedom.  Yes, it’s easy for criminals to get guns.  And no matter what laws get put into place, it will always be simple for criminals to get whatever it is that they want.  But we cannot punish the criminals in what may be their evil intent (i.e. prevent them from getting guns through standard processes) without surely punishing a free, law-abiding people from carrying out their rights.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Apparently Rape is a Spectator Sport in New York

Horrific news is coming in today from several sources.  A woman who was repeatedly raped in the presence of MTA employees at a train station in Queens, NY was told by a judge today that those who stood and watched her rape take place had no obligation to help the woman, other than inform their command center that police presence was needed at their location.  (Note: they are only obligated to call the command center, not 9-1-1) 

My thoughts on this issue are frankly all over the place.  I will always fight vehemently that our Constitutional freedoms are upheld.  Unfortunately, that means that I must tolerate the immoral way that others use their freedom.  However, we certainly need to be reminded that the U.S. Constitution was created for a moral and God-fearing people.  Clearly, as in the case of those who watched this heinous act take place in Queens, many have become numb to any thoughts of moral conscience.  While these onlookers will not have to answer to this particular judge, they will certainly have to answer to God and explain to Him why they simply allowed this to happen.  

See full story details at http://www.nypost.com/seven/04012009/news/regionalnews/subway_rapist_victims_shock_162317.htm and http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30105703/?GT1=43001  

But let’s move on.  I think it’s only a matter of fairness that I address the other obvious aspect of this crime.  Whenever an “accidental” (a.k.a. stupid disregard for gun safety) or criminal act with a handgun is committed in this nation, we are bombarded by the media and other anti-gunners telling us how awful guns are.  So isn’t it fair that when a person is attacked by a psychotic rapist and completely ignored by the citizens around her that we also hear the drum beat again and again about the need for us to take responsibility for protecting ourselves?  Clearly this judge didn’t feel that anyone was required to protect this woman.  And clearly the police didn’t have sufficient cause to protect her as they showed up at least 10 minutes after the call was made–the attacker was able to rape the woman twice during this time!   

So I ask you.  When are women going to learn that we simply cannot and should not count on anyone else to protect us?  We MUST take responsibility for this matter ourselves.  And we must make a wise decision as to the most effective way to defend ourselves.  With so much training available, much of it even for free, there’s no reason why a woman needs to endure this type of atrocity.  Fighting back is not a privilege.  It’s a RIGHT.  

I know, I may shock some of you with this statement, but I am 100% convinced that the best way for this woman to have defended herself would be with a handgun.  I don’t know how much the guy weighed, how tall he was, but frankly it doesn’t really matter.  When it comes to a clear need for self-defense, I say don’t mess around asking the guy to stop raping you.  Don’t mess around asking for others to defend you.  Defend yourself.  Two double taps to the chest, and it’s done, and it’s justified.  The horrors that this woman is going to have to live with over and over again, feeling not only betrayed by mankind, but by her own instincts, would not be an issue for her any longer if she had simply and matter-of-factly been able to stop this act by defending herself.  Yes, she would have to deal with the fact that she defended herself and as such took a life.  But psychologically that’s a lot easier to deal with than the unspeakable horrors she suffered while others simply watched.   

Her second best defense would have been an Asp, a telescoping metal baton that will indeed crush or break bones that it contacts with a forceful strike.  The third most effective would have been by leveraging her physical strengths—real physical strategies that help in a street fight such as this.  None of this “crouching tiger” baloney.  When he had her in a bear hug, if she had known how, she could have crushed his nose with her head, or she could have flipped him over into the tracks, the very same way that he threatened her, or she could have crushed his wind pipe with her hand, shoe, or cell phone. 

Here’s the rub though.  This woman is in New York, thus she has to show “cause” as to why she should legally possess a firearm.  An Asp would have been illegal in her state as well.  Adding insult to injury, if this had occurred in New York City, even IF she had a handgun WITH a license to carry, she would have been illegally in possession of it, as New York City does not recognize licenses from the State of New York.  How’s that for ridiculous?   

The sanctimonious positions of many who mistakenly believe the 2^nd Amendment is only for members of militia are clearly wrong in light of this set of circumstances.  Our Founding Fathers fully understood that others could not be compelled to defend us, except in a time of war, and still have our nation be built on freedom. However, they certainly would not have left us defenseless in the face of evil as this woman was either.  Thus every American in this nation was given the right—not privilege—to defend themselves with a gun.  This woman lost her civil lawsuit against the MTA.  Perhaps she should be suing the State of New York for making it difficult for her to defend herself with the most effective means possible!

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Do You Have Enough Ammo to Last You 4 Years?

3/18/09 Update: While we’re ecstatic to hear that the NRA-ILA and a couple of good politicians have rectified this wrong, there’s still merit to this particular blog below in showing just how vulnerable we are to the minds and wills of a select few. 

I would suspect that there are very few readers who do.  And that’s a huge problem with the latest twist in the government soap opera.

As you may know, Obama previously proposed as a Senator that ammunition would receive a 500% tax hike.  He did so as a crafty way to essentially take away our guns.  Obviously, without ammunition, gun owners had better get good at throwing our firearms at an assailant or using them as batons without ammo.  You and I both know that with his penchant for taxing the American people worse than any president ever (even through the liability of his spending packages), he’s not likely to get past a deaf and moot Congress this proposal for a 500% tax hike on ammo.  So what does he do?  Nothing.  He doesn’t have to do anything because his Secretary of State is interpreting a Department of Defense directive to favor this new administration’s distaste for guns.  And it’s done without Congress having any say in it.  As of June 11, 2008, the Department of Defense is to no longer allow the military to sell fired casings to ammunition remanufacturers until they have been “mutilated”, aka shredded into scrap brass.

Let’s break this down a little bit.

In order for you to shoot, you have to have ammo.  Duh, right?  Bear with me here.  When you practice shooting, you will typically use remanufactured ammunition because it’s less expensive.  For example, 1,000 rounds of 9mm ammo (115 grain) which is remanufactured costs $207, while new ammo, 9mm (115 grain) costs $269 at a bargain price.  So the savings can be substantial.  The key to the pricing advantage of remanufactured ammunition is that the remanufacturers are able to buy their once-fired casings primarily from the military.  As you can imagine, the military uses a LOT of ammo and due to their rules they can only use new ammo.  This makes them an ideal source from which to purchase used casings.  However, now that the DOD has determined that they are only permitted to sell their ammo casings AFTER they have been shredded, this means a whole lot to your wallet.

1)     Yes, the “remanufactured” ammo will be more expensive (as if the past year of price increases haven’t been bad enough.)  The reason being is now there is an extra step in the process in order for the remanufacturers to have foundries turn the shredded brass (and other metals) into the casings they need. The reason why I put the “remanufactured” in quotation marks is that it’s doubtful to me that the new product should be called “remanufactured” as opposed to new since this additional process entails what new-ammo manufacturers have to do to produce their ammo.

2)     Your tax dollars now pay for the shredding of the casings which the military will now perform on all of their casings prior to selling it. 

3)     The remanufactured ammo represents approximately 65-75% of the ammunition market among civilians AND law enforcement.  Law enforcement regularly uses remanufactured ammo for their target practices.  Thus, now law enforcement is paying a higher price either for the remanufactured ammo, or a higher price to buy new ammo.  Guess whose tax dollars pay for that?

4)     Due to the interpretation of this DOD directive, there are a great deal of ammunition remanufacturers who will have to lay off a sizeable portion of their employees.  Hello, unemployment.  Hello, extra foreclosures.  Hello, extra bankruptcies. 

5)     This all presumes that since the casings are being shredded they will still be sold to the remanufacturers.  This is doubtful as China is the largest buyer of such metals from us in its shredded condition.  Don’t think for a second that they won’t get first crack at buying this shredded brass.  After all, we owe them for buying up so much of our debt, right?   This means that we may have put out of business ALL of the remanufacturers in the U.S. with this one strategic directive.  If the remanufacturers go out of business, then we have the small number of new-ammo manufacturers to provide all the rest of us with ammo.  And the military gets first shot in front of any buyer to obtain their ammo. 

Now think about this economically.  You have what used to represent about a third of the ammo sales in the U.S. and now they are the primary source to handle nearly all of the ammo manufacturing.  That’s called a serious supply-and-demand problem.  If you talk to anyone who buys ammo, you will undoubtedly hear stories of empty shelves, and hard-to-find ammo.  Are you starting to see why ammo is so hard to obtain now and why prices have increased substantially?  Expect an even greater supply-and-demand imbalance as the dominos continue to fall, folks.

So why do I ask if you have enough ammo for 4 years?  Because if you don’t, that situation is not likely to change unless this administration reigns-in how the directive is being interpreted, or an administration change occurs four years from now.  It won’t matter how much money you have.  You simply won’t be able to buy enough with the military standing in line in front of you.  NOW some of you may know why I predicted that there would come a time when a bucket of ammo would be worth more than a bucket of gold…on so many levels. (see www.preparednesspro.wordpress.com)

Clearly the economists who thought this one through are on the same team as those who are running Wall Street and are devoid of much in the form of patriotism or intellect. 

See the link below the draft of this directive. 

www.dla.mil/j-6/dlmso/Archives/JSACG/meetings/11Jun08/ADC_220_Small%20ArmsDefinition_DRAFT_JSACG_11June2008.doc

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Media Hype or Firearm Facts—You Decide

Fact: 100% of ALL firearm “accidents” occur as a result of someone violating one of the four most critical safety rules in the ownership and use of a firearm.  Firearms don’t kill people as the media would have us believe, any more than pencils are responsible for making spelling mistakes.  Your ability to STOP an firearm accident is strengthened by your knowledge of a firearm.  In contrast, if you are not familiar with the workings of a firearm, you may actually encourage a deadly accident if you encounter one in the hands of an unauthorized person.  That said, why don’t we ever hear a news report that says something like “There are over 80,000,000 gun owners in the nation today, and only 5 accidents were caused as the result of error on the part of the gun owner”?

Fact: Every person in the U.S. has the right to defend themselves, their family, and their property.  Fit or fat.  Blonde or brunette.  When a drug-crazed criminal has a gun point at you, your political affiliations do not lessen the impact on your body or your mind.  A bullet will sufficiently kill you regardless of whether you voted for McCain or Obama.  So how you supposed to fight back under such circumstances?

Fact: According to FBI statistics, over 5,500 violent crimes are PREVENTED EVERY DAY by the mere presence of a firearm.  So why are our newspapers and television screens only reporting the horrific scenes of crime and bloodshed at the hands of “crazed gunmen”?  All we ever hear about are the terrible and criminal uses of firearms – school shootings, gunmen clipping off innocent bystanders one by one in a mall or a neighborhood, or gangs who murder and plunder with guns.  Why aren’t we being given a clear picture of the use and importance of firearms in America?  Why aren’t we hearing the real stories from the media – like the 83-year-old woman who shot a would-be rapist in her home.  Or the woman who was raped, then given a rifle by a friend, and when the rapist RETURNED to her home she was able to defend herself and killed the rapist.  Or about the female convenience store employee that was able to save her fellow co-workers from abominable acts at the hand of a robber by grabbing for the gun, and shot him.  Or when a concealed-carry permit holder was able to thwart a massive shootout between police and a liquor store robber because he was willing to draw his gun and shoot the body-armored gunman squarely in the skull.  Violent crime rates have fallen dramatically in right-to-carry states. 

Fact: Having a firearm and knowing how to use it does not make you a violent person.  In fact, you will find that responsible gun owners are peaceful, law abiding individuals because they are able to function without fear hanging over them.  Yet firearm owners are never portrayed such an image in the national news.  Instead we hear the irresponsible and oppressive mantra of, “Don’t resist.”  “Don’t fight back.”  “Just give them the money, it’s not worth your life.”  What they forget is that while money may not be worth your life, the freedom to be free IS worth your life.  Ironically what Thomas Paine and his associates did to the king of England to protect free speech (particularly the media) is actually being used to give us a false education and thus strip us of other freedoms because of the false and criminalized picture of gun owners that we are confronted with every day. 

Why do we only hear about the terrible encounters with firearms?  Because blood and sex sells.  And it can’t simply be just anybody’s blood.  No, it needs to be the blood of an innocent person, not a violent criminal.  Yes, the so-called education of the facts of gun use for self-defense in America is being steered by money and mindless sheep, plain and simple.  

According to Thomas Jefferson, history has proven time and time again that the option for citizens to arm themselves is what ensures protection against a “tyrannical government.”

 

“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” (Thomas Jefferson Papers p. 334, 1950)

 

 

You see, not only can this type of “preservation of property” give you peace in your ability to defend yourself against violent acts, but it also gives you peace in defending your nation against the loss of freedoms as well. 

“Forty years ago, when the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised… to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia…” (In Virginia’s Ratifying Convention, Elliot p.3:379-380)

  

“The militia may be here destroyed by that method which has been practiced in other parts of the world before; that is, by rendering them useless – by disarming them.” (Elliot, p. 3:379-80)

 

The men and women of America are not only the sole stewards over their own lives and that of their families – they are also the sole guardians of the Constitution.  In the ultimate act of freedom, specifically for the women of our nation, I say that we must take on a more proactive stance in order to fulfill our roles appropriately.  With the increasing numbers of women raising families single-handedly, the extended hours our husbands are forced to work to sustain us, the increasing threat of brazen crimes being committed against women and children in broad daylight, the consistent attacks which are made on our freedom, for all of these reasons, women need to become informed and skilled in the use of a firearm—not just in matters of self-defense use and safety, but also as a Constitutional right.  We cannot relinquish our safety, our lives, or our freedom to the hands of strangers who may or may not be available to defend us when the need arises.  We must take this responsibility for ourselves.  After all, when all of our liberties are gone, there will be nothing left to protect.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Why We Fear Guns

If guns are good for us, then why are they so controversial?  Why are we afraid of them?

Well, the answer is short and sweet—manipulation.

Even in the movies we love, guns are typically portrayed in a negative light.  They are used by “bad guys” to commit unspeakable horror, and they are used by “law enforcement officers” to fight the bad guys, they are used in times of intense war, or they are used by decent people who mistakenly take the law into their own hands.

Additionally, the media in general has cast an ugly skewed shadow on the consequences of having a gun in the home, the stereotype of those who carry guns, and the supposed harm that such items cause to an otherwise civil society.  In fact, even the word “assault weapon” was created by the anti-gun individuals and the media as an accomplice to impose a derogatory and frightening mental picture associated with any firearm resembling a rifle (The phrase “assault weapon” is clearly one of many mischaracterizations of a firearm. The word “assault” denotes an act of aggressive proactive behavior. If that were really the case, perhaps we should call all fishing rods an “assault rod”).

In other words, the first reason why we’ve come to fear guns so badly is because the only education we receive typically is at the hands the media or the movie industry.  Now that I think about it, with the exception of the movie The Patriot, I don’t recall seeing any movie that promoted the right to keep and bear arms and the necessity of such to ensure a free country in an appropriate light.  In a movie we see and hear the big blast of a firearm, see the ensuing (and predictably obligatory) blood splatters, and that’s the picture we have training our mind about guns.  We never get to see and thus to better feel the relief one would have in truly being able to defend themselves from a violent crime on the big screen.  And rarely, if ever, do we hear in the media of all of the crimes that are prevented by the use of a firearm in the hands of a responsible and competent citizen.  Nope.  The only way you can find out about that is to join some kind of 2^nd Amendment activist group or purchase books which look like they were produced with a small budget. 

Do you have any idea of how hard I had to search just to find the FBI statistic which states that the mere presence of a firearm in the hands of our citizens prevents over 5,500 crimes PER DAY?  Nope.  You’ll never see a mainstream newspaper put that in their headlines. 

In other words, all of our firearm education is through the stunning special effects and loud professional voices of manipulation by those who would have us believe that the use of a firearm for self-defense is a barbaric tactic.

Not to say that your parents were wrong in the choices they made in raising you, but they have a great deal of responsibility in your feelings towards gun as well.  In their defense, they were fed the same “state of reality” growing up through the movies, media, etc.  I’m curious how far back in history I’d have to go to find a time when we actually taught about all of the components of the Constitution in elementary or middle school.  Regardless, your parents didn’t have such education.  AND they weren’t raised in a time where thousands of gangs roam our nation committed to wreaking terror and death throughout, periodic invasions from foreign terrorists, a stark imbalance between law enforcement protection and the citizens, record numbers of overcrowding in our jails, rampant substance abuse, the highest level of violent crime in the history of our nation and a laissez faire attitude and naïveté that opens us to even more crimes.  I could point out many more societal changes which may dictate that we have more reasons to take personal responsibility for our own effective self-defense today rather than yesterday, but I don’t really want this to appear too doom and gloom.  I guess I could have summed this part up by simply saying that your folks were raised in a different time of violence and crime and thus the likelihood that you were raised unaware and uneducated in matters of firearm defense is very likely.  They were subjected to the same glitzy, high-budget media and movie education that everyone else is. 

Now I don’t know about you, but when I find that I’m being manipulated, I tend to resist—fiercely.  In fact, when I’m listening to a professional speaker on a stage who is so predictably trying to get the audience to bob their heads in agreement or to contrive a laugh from the audience, I personally rebel and refuse to submit.  So, when I see that I’m being manipulated by one side of the topic, I make it a point to get the whole story…full education.  As a result, I’ve come to believe strongly in the necessity of learning how to use a firearm in self-defense AND ensure that such a right as a citizen of this nation is never threatened. 

The myths are that guns are symbols of violence, whereas I now see them as a symbol of enduring peace in a violent world around me.

The myth is that guns are used by insecure, mentally deranged people.  I find that my ability to competently use a firearm eliminates fear in my life and thus I’m able to replace that fear with confidence and unmask other positive attributes which I possess.

The myth is that guns kill lots of people every year.  The fact is they do, but typically in the hands of criminals.  The biggest killer of our American citizens is medical errors, followed by heart disease, and then cancer.  Seriously, statistically, doctors who cause death by dereliction are 9,000 times more dangerous than guns held by legal gun owners! And yet no one has ever run a news story that paints doctors and hospital staff in the same barbaric light as gun owners.

Additional consideration is the number of violent crimes that are committed by illegal immigrants in our country.  Illegal immigrants kill over 8,000 legal American citizens in our country every year, and are also responsible for sexually assaulting over 2,000 of our children every year and yet we can’t seem to lobby against them. 

Lastly, there’s the myth is that a gun in the house will result in a fatal accident among children or others. The fact is if you don’t know how to use and be safe with a firearm, your chances of an accident happening are sky-high – not just in your home, but in the home of your neighbors whom your children visit.  If you don’t know about firearms and their workings, how do you know you’ll act appropriately if you walk in on a child who has one in their hands?  Education is the key.  Curiosity and ignorance is a deadly combination and is what causes accidents.  Not guns.  Attempting to say as much is like saying that pencils cause spelling errors. 

I’m completely accepting of the fact that someone chooses not to have a firearm so long as that person makes the decision with full knowledge of the facts rather than the myths.  So please, get informed and then make your decision.  If you do choose to get educated on the USE of a firearm, Women of Caliber will be here for you with the most expert training available for women—by women. 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.