Should You Apply for a Concealed Carry Permit?

By Kellene Bishop

I am frequently asked how I feel about letting the government know I have a firearm. Folks seem to be a bit concerned for my well-being when they learn that I’ve applied for a concealed firearm permit. They are concerned that doing so somehow puts me on a list and now the government can know where to go to take my firearm. Well, that’s one way to put it, Ladies, but I see it very, very differently than that.

The Win Before the Fight

by Kellene Bishop

I’ve been reading a great book over the last couple of weeks, Molon Labe. In it the author reminds the reader several times that all fights are decided before the battle begins. The point being that it’s the level of preparation which takes place before a battle which determines the victor.  In the case of the self-defense of women, I advocate consistent, challenging practice which will ensure successful self-defense. While the attacker may have life-long experience as a bully or a law breaker, it doesn’t make him/her fully prepared for their battle with you directly. However, through consistent mental and physical rehearsal to apply to multiple “what if” scenarios, you are leagues ahead of any assailant. And thus your battles are already won before they even begin.

Even better, confidence, calm, presence of mind, necessary tools, and a clear conscience are the fruits of such preparation—even if you are ever called upon to defend yourself. There is simply no price of time or money that can be put upon such fruits, in my opinion.

This past Saturday I took a couple of my girlfriend’s children to the dollar theater to see “Shrek 4.” Both children were under 12, with the youngest being only 9 and who also has Asperger Syndrome. Unfortunately, by the time we were able to get into the theater for seating, there were very few options left for 3 people to sit together. Thankfully one of the theater employees escorted us to a side row of 4 seats, with the outside seat being occupied by a hefty man. The movie had just begun and so the employee quietly leaned down and requested the man allow us to scoot by him and be seated.  As if he had just been asked to relinquish control over his own private remote, and give up a years worth of beer, and run a 5K marathon, he responded quite put out.  His only “effort” to allow us to pass was to spread his overstuffed sausage legs further apart. Yes, it was so attractive,–not—and a bit creepy. Because of his size, it was still a bit difficult for the kids to get past him, let alone myself, who is also quite chubby. It would have been so much easier if he had simply got up from his seat, and stepped into the aisle a moment.  I suppose that I’m a bit spoiled nowadays with this expectation, as my husband certainly would have done the same thing for us and any stranger. Needless to say, it was irritating to have an example of such rudeness displayed to the kids.  Well, being the somewhat sassy person that I am, I just couldn’t hold it in and it had to be heard. I just had to say it. And say it I did. “Well, I guess chivalry is dead”, I quietly demurred.

I didn’t have any anger when I made this statement, nor did I shout. I suppose that a kinder person would have just kept quiet and tolerated his rudeness, but I guess I’m not very good at keeping some of my thoughts to myself. Having said my two cents, I realized that such an inconsiderate man would have been compelled to say something in return, but I suppose I had simply expected an apathetic “whatever” from the sweating, heavy breathing mammoth.  Not that I expected an apology in response to my comment, but I was a bit startled with what did come out of his mouth. “Why don’t you just shut your mouth or I’ll punch you in the face!”

Wait a minute.  Did you really just threaten to physically assault a woman with two kids simply because she called you out?  Really? This was your very first instinct, to threaten physical violence in a packed movie theater without a care in the world as to the consequences?  This was your knee jerk, comfortable, standard response?  Folks, that’s saying a whole heck of a lot right there!  Now ladies, understand what I’m about to share with you here.  I’m only 5’2 ½”—yes, you’ve got to count the ½ inch. *grin* And I’m just over 200 pounds. So no, I’m not an imposing person to deal with physically. In fact, I suspect that I’m looked at as an “easy mark” by some fools due to me being out of shape.  This man was approximately 6 feet and weighed probably about 300 pounds.  In spite of these physical factors, combined with his revealing physical threat right off the bat, , I was not frightened. In fact, it’s probably my lack of fear of any repercussions which I thought I could handle, that I uttered my initial sentence within earshot of him. I was calm and confident. In fact, my only concern at the time was that I didn’t want to cause the kids to feel uncomfortable—especially the youngest. So I simply replied, “I’m not trying to fight with you. You could have simply been nice and let us in. It was two kids for crying out loud.” His response, “Shut the hell up or else.” I must say, I was a bit shocked at his angry behavior in response to such a small incident and in spite of there being plenty of people surrounding him, he seemed to posses no shame, no modicum of morality, and certainly no care in the world about anyone else. It was easy to see that he was comfortable with his rage and his attitude against others who inconvenienced him. Since I would be sitting beside him during the course of the movie, I decided that I would make clear to him that I wasn’t quite who he thought I was. While it may seem overly dramatic, given his “first impression” I saw the faces of various women in my minds eye, who may have been the brunt of his societal standards. I’ll be honest. There was a point when I asked myself if the opportunity would present itself for me to use my Asp on this guy. I know. I know, just a titch warped. As such, I looked right at him and said very clearly “Sir. I’m definitely not the woman you want to mess with.” He turned his head to me for a moment as if to size me up.  He then sarcastically replied, “Oh. I’m really scared.”

“Good! That’s just where I like ‘em. Overconfident and unaware,” I said, still looking directly at him.

He then turned his head back to the movie and said “just shut up and watch the movie. That’s what you paid for.”

I decided that I had said enough at this point and ran the risk of upsetting the kids if our voices got any more elevated so that they could hear.

Now, there’s a reason I’m telling you all of this and it’s not for a purpose of self-aggrandizing. It’s because there are two important things for you to learn from this scenario. First of all, I was told by one of my friends that I should have said “Let’s see how scared you are with a forty caliber pointed at you.”  I suspect that my friend was just getting in to the mood of things in this comment, but if I had said something to that effect, I actually could have gotten myself in a whole lot of trouble. I would have easily been accused of inciting a riot, “brandishing a weapon”—even though I wasn’t literally showing my firearm, disturbing the peace, and lastly I’m creating a threat. More importantly, if a person ever truly does feel threatened in such a situation, you certainly would not want to show your cards like that. If you truly feel threatened, then do something about it. Act, not react.  In this case, I felt that for the time being this guy was just full of himself and didn’t like being called out by a girl.  If I had truly felt threatened, then it would have been within my legal right to have physically assaulted him with non-deadly force.  Yes, in such an instance I, being out manned in weight and height, would have been legally within my rights to have “thrown the first punch” so to speak. As women, it’s not necessary for us to get hit, shoved, beaten, etc. by a man first before we respond. I realize for some of you, that may be hard to conceptualize. But after Mr. Sausage made his first physical threat of punching me in the face, I would easily have been in the right with a solid punch to his wind pipes, or whatever other physical maneuver I would have felt necessary—enough to minimize the physical threat of this man. However, that’s only the case if it was me, short and chubby, against him.  Had a 6 year old boy said that to me, then I would not be permitted to proactively defend myself. It all boils down to the level of threat and the weight of advantages, vs. disadvantages. For example, if it had been my husband who was being talked to that way, he would not have gotten away with a first strike because of his training, physique, and the fact that he was armed. In order for a well-trained man to have responded to this threat, Mr. Sausage would have had to make a physical threat imminent.

So, did I just sit there and watch the cute movie and not give this anymore thought? No, that would have been foolish on my part. I was strategizing, actually, in the event that my leg bounced just the wrong way to make him mad, or one of the kids aggravated him if they had to squeeze out to go to the bathroom.  So, I made sure that my Asp was in my grasp, my pepper spray was ready to spray, and I discreetly removed my knife from my purse and put it in my pants pocket. I was ready if I had to defend myself.  But, I also recognized that the two kids were a liability to me if there was an altercation. So, I texted my husband and invited him to join me at the dollar theater. Through a series of texts he was brought up to par on the scenario, and secured a seat right behind Mr. Sausage in the theater.  I casually made it obvious to Mr. Sausage that I knew the man sitting right behind him. When the movie was getting ready to wrap up, Mr. Sausage decided to exit before all of the mushy, happily ever after took place in the film. All he left behind was the stench of his body odor and a lesson learned. No regrets. No fear. No rattled children. All was well.  As the children and I exited the movie theater, all they talked about was how cute the movie was. They were impervious to the problem, didn’t notice that my husband had joined us or that I had additional contents in my various pants pockets. We were able to keep everyone else safe without any stress or concern.

There’s one other thing that I want to share with you. While I was sitting there, enjoying the movie, I thought about you. Yes, you.  You; who may lack the sufficient confidence necessary to handle such a situation. You; who may be lacking in the appropriate tools of leverage necessary to handle such a situation.  While a firearm would not have been appropriate self-defense tool for this particular level of threat, nor was the environment appropriate; would you have been essentially unarmed otherwise? I decided that this man had obviously pushed around, without challenge, too many women in his life thus far. I want to do my best to ensure that you are not one of them in the future. So, I decided to share this little story with you. I hope it provides you with some food for thought and that you will see that occasions for vital mental and physical self-defense capabilities self-defense are not limited to robbery, rape, or a home invasion. And they are not all solved with one particular tool each time.  The great benefit of really internalizing and learning self-defense though, is that you can walk away from such circumstances without any regrets, and with your confidence still in tact.

Become a fan of WOC on Facebook!

Follow us on Twitter!

Visit our website at: www.womenofcaliber.com

Click here to see our upcoming schedule

For any questions or comments on this article, please leave a comment on the blog site so that everyone can benefit!

Copyright Protected 2010, Women of Caliber and Kellene Bishop. All Rights Reserved. No portion of any content on this site may be duplicated, transferred, copied, or published without written permission from the author. However, you are welcome to provide a link to the content on your site or in your written works.

The Death of Expected Peace

I simply cannot allow the news of the three security guards standing by while a 15 year old girl got pummeled go by without comment. http://rawstory.com/2010/02/security-guards-inothingi-15yearold-girl-beaten/ In spite of a very heavy writing schedule, I feel that I have to address this issue on Women of Caliber in order to translate it into a valuable lesson from which we all can—and MUST—learn.

For those of you who may not be familiar with the story, a 15 year old girl was brutally attacked by another teenage girl all while she was in front of three male “security” officers in a Seattle bus tunnel.  The security officers did absolutely nothing in spite of the 15 year old being thrown down to the ground at the feet of the officers and repeatedly kicked in the head. (see the video footage at the link noted above) This story has a very familiar tune to the event in New York in which MTA employees in Queens New York were legally absolved of any wrong doing for acting as nothing more than spectators while a woman was repeatedly raped at the train station. http://www.nypost.com/seven/04012009/news/regionalnews/subway_rapist_victims_shock_162317.htm  

Both of these incidences as well as others like them should teach us all something very real, but most unpleasant—we must take responsibility for our own safety and peace.

Mass evacuation photo c/o http://www.meted.ucar.edu

Given the litigious society in which we live, many otherwise acceptable and expected human responses are delayed or eliminated as the result of legal exposure.  For example, New Orleans Mayor Nagin specifically delayed issuing a mass evacuation order sooner than he did because he had to consult with the city attorneys, and then the state, and then a national attorney to be sure that his butt . He had to be sure that the city would not be exposed to lawsuits for a loss of business revenue as a result of the evacuation order. As reported by the author Amanda Ripley in her book “The Unthinkable” companies have deliberately not held safety drills (such as evacuation, robbery, etc) because they don’t want to be held liable for someone getting hurt in the midst of the exercise.  It’s a very sad world indeed in which our brains are programmed to act as a responsible human being because instead we feed our minds the horrors of legal liabilities. But the fact of the matter is, that’s the way things are and we simply cannot change them fast enough to protect us today, tomorrow, or even a year from now. So we must take responsibility for our own safety. 

I don’t say that with any bitterness.  I say it in possession of expertise on the legal, realistic, logistical, as well as instinctive responses of human beings. I don’t say this with one iota of pessimism towards human nature. Even if half of all the world thought so inappropriately as those who put the security guards under such an asinine contract, or those three men who were “sheep” enough to follow such guidelines, I still believe in the unadulterated makeup of mankind.  I believe that they are inherently good and have to work hard at being changed into something otherwise. But unfortunately, there are many who have chosen to do so.  Thus I will prepare to defend myself appropriately and so should you. We must take responsibility to care for ourselves and those we love.  We must train our minds to respond with 100% ownership of our safety rather than telling ourselves that someone else is responsible for our peace and comfort. I implore you not to train your body or mind under conditions of panic, rage, or fear. Rather do so with a deliberate conscience in light of the matter of fact reality of the world around us. People have the agency to act inappropriately, and along with that comes our ability and choice to defend against the consequences of their criminal choices. Just because a business entity has successfully been sued for serving hot coffee, not clearing ice or snow from a walkway, or for not properly ensuring the safety of food—doesn’t give us license to surrender our own independence in providing ourselves with safety and peace.

Being prepared mentally and physically in self-defense trainging will be a great asset in any situation photo c/o http://www.sportskarate.net

So that being said, what else could the 15 year old girl have done other than standing next to the three security guards?  Well, by looks of the video, she certainly needed to learn to fight back better.  She didn’t get a good shot in at all and barely made contact.  She could have done so much more while she was on the ground too.  But all of that is pretty hard to teach in a written format such as this.  However, at the very least, she could have  pushed one of the security officers towards her attacker or hid directly behind one of them.  I strongly suspect this would have caused the female attacker to have lashed out at the security guard in response or at least it would have changed her thought process due to an unexpected maneuver. (Interrupting the thought process of an attacker is a highly underrated strategy.) Another suggestion would have been for the girl to have firmly yelled for help repeatedly. Whether a person is under orders to do more than make a phone call or not, the brain of most human beings (human being—the key phrase there) will instinctively respond. We’re simply programmed that way and we have to undergo a great deal of UN-programming to react otherwise. (Which makes the whole incident that much more tragic.) As I view this video tape repeatedly, I see a scared little girl and an enraged attacker.  The gal had the presence of mind to stand near the “security” officers. She also had the presence of mind earlier to ask one of the Macy’s security officers to escort her to a safer location. (which was refused-insert angry words of disbelief here) So she had some of her wits about her. However, I’m sure that when her sound strategy of standing next to the security officers crumbled, her brain couldn’t compute a ready response. Had she trained herself previously to breathe sufficiently to provide her brain with the much needed oxygen in a high stress situation, and be deliberate and strategic in her physical counter moves, the situation would have turned out very, very differently.

Seriously ladies. Can we all live and LEARN from this one?

 Copyright Protected 2010, Women of Caliber and Kellene Bishop. All Rights Reserved. No portion of any content on this site may be duplicated, transferred, copied, or published without written permission from the author. However, you are welcome to provide a link to the content on your site or in your written works.

Media Hype or Firearm Facts—You Decide

by Kellene Bishop 

Everyone has the right to defend themselves.

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.  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.  

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.  

The media often fail to portray good examples of self-defense photo c/o abovethelaw.com

Why aren’t we hearing about the real firearm stories from the media?  Follow the same money that goes abundantly to the media and you will see that many members of our government fear the legal possession of guns by its citizens.  Why?  Because the government has committed acts in violation of the U.S. Constitution and thus have reason to fear reprisals from its citizens.  The majority of the media act as mindless minions to our government.  And since the government has trampled mercilessly on the freedoms and liberties guaranteed to us through the U.S. Constitution, left to their own designs with no accountability required from the media, it is clear that the media is a willing accomplice in these acts.  Violation after violation have occurred at the hands of each administration that have stripped many of our Constitutional freedoms in a clandestine manner, and yet the media and entertainment industry have failed to produce any headline which even questions such acts.  Do the media even know what’s it like to actually be courageous Americans anymore?  Or do they merely write about it in hopes that it earns them lauds of glory from their peers? 

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 it 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 of 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. 

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.  

 

  

Firearm training gives you peace of mind

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 2010 Women of Caliber and Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Women of Caliber and Kellene Bishop. 

2nd Amendment Rights for Sale

By Kellene Bishop

Are your 2nd Amendment rights for sale? Photo c/o highdesert

Are your 2^nd Amendment rights for sale? If they were, would you sell them for as little as $10.50, $3.50 or even 99 cents? Well, there are sure a lot of us doing that right now as we give businesses who CLEARLY object to your 2^nd Amendment rights and yet provide you with NO alternative to protecting yourself in their environments. I’m sure that if you thought about it, you would refuse to give your business to those who actively provided criminals with drugs, cash, prostitutes, and other props they need for their crime sprees, right? Then why would you think of supporting these same businesses in providing criminals with pools of defenseless citizens as well? Drugs or defenseless citizenry. It’s all the same. It benefits the criminals and leaves the law-abiding citizens punished for a “crime” of honor and responsibility.

2^nd Amendment Rights for Sale: Case #1 — AMC, Cinemark and Regal Theaters. I noticed yesterday when I went to a matinee that they now post a sign on one of their entrance doors barring any firearms. Needless to say, I don’t care for the scenario of being in a dark, overcrowded room with people I don’t know, whose lack of consideration for others has depleted dramatically in years past. I’ve seen fist fights break out over something as simple as saved seats. In addition, each of these theaters have donated heavily to anti-gun campaigns. PAH=LEEZE. They have pimply faced teenagers in charge of “security” at these places. I don’t trust them to protect me and my family in any way shape, or form. I assure you if push comes to shove, they are the first ones hitting the deck to save their own bacon. And if the Supreme Court has ruled that even your local police department is under no obligation to protect the citizens, what makes you think that a non- living/breathing business entity will do so? (Oh, and if you need any more fodder, read my article on how the movie theaters have little regard for your health as well—flu season be damned.) In this case, your 2^nd Amendment rights are sold for the cost of a movie ticket.

You may want to check with the laws in your state. In some states it’s meaningless for a theater to post such a sign. In other states, such signs have some very strict criteria, i.e.: how big they have to be, where they have to be placed, etc. But I’m telling you. All of this garbage makes the dollar theaters and Netflix look a lot more attractive to me.

2^nd Amendment Rights for Sale: Case #2 — Blockbuster Video. Don’t be surprised if you see a sign posted on a Blockbuster Video also prohibiting you from entering their “private property” with a handgun. Regardless of whether you’re legally carrying it or not, they would prefer to only show violent movies instead of having you prevent violence in your family. Do a search on “Blockbuster Video shooting” and “Blockbuster Video Robbery” and see just how safe you may feel in this unconstitutionally established gun-free zone. Is your life really worth the price of renting a video? Folks, you can pay a buck to Red Box and not surrender your rights of self-defense. Heck, if you do a search for “Red Box Code” you can even get your movie for FREE! Surely your safety is worth more than the price of a 2-hour entertainment escape. Netflix and Red Box keep looking better and better, folks. “Announcing: 2^nd Amendment rights purchased for the cost of renting Cinderalla II.”

2^nd Amendment Rights for Sale: Case #3 — Google is vehemently committed to being anti-gun. (What do you really expect for a couple of guys who never had to pay a real price for success?) Google liberally allows an unbridled range of pornographic ads and also takes no responsibility for the veracity of their postings, but hey, when it comes to posting ads for the sale of guns OR ammunition, they draw the line. Wow. I’m sure their mothers are proud. Use the alternative search engines such as AskJeeves.com, Yahoo.com and Bing.com. Well Google, since you don’t verify the factuality of anything, allow me to point out to all of my readers that you are a BEHEMOTH contender when it comes to funding international anti-guns and anti-self-defense propaganda.

2^nd Amendment Rights for Sale: Case #4 — McDonald’s. Not only does McDonald’s refuse to use meat produced in the U.S. where it has significantly better health guidelines than the “Grade G for Garbage” meat it purchases from South America, McDonald’s is decidedly against you being able to defend yourself in the vicinity of one of their locations. This is quite disturbing to me since so many Americans are drawn to take a break at McDonald’s along their long road travels throughout the U.S. I believe that when traveling long distances, one is especially vulnerable to criminal encounters and thus should indeed have the protection that the 2^nd Amendment ensures them. McDonald’s doesn’t stop at just publishing their anti-gun agenda. They also put their money where their mouths are and have donated over $500 million to anti-gun organizations over the last 15 years!! By the way, they also support many anti-hunting initiatives as well as anti-fishing. So much for thinking there’s REAL fish in the Filet-o-Fish fillets. Wouldn’t you rather support a local fast food place where you know they don’t have the money and power to buy tainted South American meat? I personally have fallen in love with a place near me called Emmett & Ethel’s. Not only is everything fresh, but they don’t even freeze their meats! The fish, the burgers, the fries, the hand-battered onion rings all make my mouth water. When is the last time McDonald’s made YOUR mouth water? Really. Your 2^nd amendment rights are definitely worth more than the price of a Happy Meal. (Oh, and by the way, they have less “meat” in their “meat” than even Taco Bell! See here🙂

There is a litany of many more businesses that I could address for you, but that’s not really the point of my article. My point is that if you care about your ability to defend yourself, check up on the businesses that you give your money to. Otherwise you’re unknowingly sending your money directly to the criminals and anti-gun groups. As for me, I refuse to PAY these kinds of businesses to take away my 2^nd Amendment rights. Let’s stop complaining about the government taxing us when we willingly allow these businesses to rape and pillage away our freedoms voluntarily.

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

Warning to Home Invasion Criminals

By Kellene Bishop

Photo c/o guns-n-stuff.blogspot.com

I’m sure I won’t win any popularity points with the liberal media and its adoring admirers with this comment, but here’s a warning to home invasion criminals: if you come into my home uninvited, you better plan on having a current will drawn up and have repented of everything else in your life. (Sorry, you can’t repent of the breaking and entering just before you do it. It just doesn’t work that way.) I say this because chances are very high that you’re going to meet your Maker relatively soon after you pass through my homestead threshold.

Many would argue that punishing someone who breaks into your home with possible death is un-Christian, archaic, and even “murder.” To be perfectly blunt, such thinking is wrong. It’s not only wrong, but it’s dangerous to the safety and peace of all Americans as it perpetuates an invalid amount of doubt and hesitation which could cost someone their life. Here are some questions I would ask of those who would break into my home. A little something for the “other side” to consider.

1) What part of the U.S. Constitution do you not understand? Did you read the 2^nd or the 4^th Amendment? If not, I assure you that ignorance does not absolve you of a crime.

2) Did you expect me to give you a full interview first to determine whether or not your initial illegal action was intended to lead to other illegal acts?

3) If I did interview you, am I supposed to frisk you as well, or simply take your word for it?

4) A burglary isn’t just about “losing your stuff.” Sure, a lot of stuff can be replaced. But I’m 100% certain that peace of mind, virtue, and life cannot be replaced if it’s taken from me or my family. 

Bottom line, if you walk through my door uninvited, I am not under any obligation to read you your Miranda Rights. I am not under any obligation to read your mind or evaluate your motives. I have every legal right to defend my home and the persons and property therein. So home invasion criminals, consider yourselves warned.

Sign c/o guns-n-stuff.blogspot.com

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

Right-to-Carry Laws and the Thune-Vitter Amendment

Right to Carry vs. Gun Control photo c/o freerepublic.com

From an excellent blog by Scott J. Bach, blogger for www.blog.nj.com on the Right-to-Carry, published July 21, 2009. 

In an era where vicious criminal predators prey upon the weak and vulnerable, the U.S. Supreme Court has surprisingly held that police owe no duty to protect individual citizens and cannot be held accountable when they fail to do so. This means that from the time you dial 911 until the police arrive, you’re on your own. Right-to-Carry helps level the playing field in the gravest extreme, and offers victims a fighting chance while they wait for help to arrive.

Approximately 40 states comprehend this simple truth and recognize the Right-to-Carry. Wherever Right-to-Carry laws have passed, there has been a corresponding and sustained drop in violent crime rates, for one simple reason: criminals go somewhere else when they think their victims may be armed. When the predators can’t tell the difference between the lions and the sheep, the whole flock is safer. Right-to-Carry thus benefits not only the law-abiding citizens who exercise their Constitutional rights, but also those around them who don’t.

Think about it: every mass killing in recent memory has had one thing in common: the victims were unarmed and unable to defend themselves against violent and brutal surprise attacks by predators. Right-to-Carry helps even out the odds, and criminals know it. A study for the Department of Justice found that 40 percent of felons had not committed crimes because they feared the prospective victims were armed.

The Thune-Vitter Amendment expands Right-to-Carry and will enhance public safety, contrary to Governor Corzine’s ill-advised view. It recognizes that competent, responsible, law-abiding Americans still deserve our trust and confidence when they cross state lines.

New Jersey’s policies on gun rights are as backwards as its policies on taxes. It’s time for elected officials who swore to uphold the Constitution to stop trampling on our protected gun rights.

For the whole article from blog.nj.com, click here.

Self-Defense—A Human Right

By Kellene Bishop

Last night I was asked a question by one of my readers on my Emergency Preparedness blog, Preparedness Pro.  Although this question was asked by a citizen of England, in which possession of a firearm and essentially any weapon of any kind is forbidden, I still believe his question has merit for our Women of Caliber readers also.  The question posed to me in the most basic of terms is what would I do if I lived in such a state?

I wonder what a mother would tell me if I told her that she does not have the right to protect her children.  What would your reaction be if there were a “law” passed telling parents that they are required to allow their children to immerse themselves in whatever is on television or their computer or in their video games without ever being permitted to give any parental input to “defend” them from anything negative they are exposed to.

Now, let’s take a citizen of England, for example.  They are forbidden from possessing a firearm, pepper spray, knives that would be obviously used for self-defense, billy clubs, etc.  The penalty is 5 years in prison.  Recently in Australia, a farmer was imprisoned for shooting a burglar—IN HIS HOME—as the result of the views of self-defense there. 

What would you do if for some reason you were forbidden from using valuable tools to protect you and your loved ones and were left solely to the use of your physical abilities for self-defense?

For me, it’s a relatively simple response with two parts.

Human Rights c/o osocio.org

First of all, let’s be perfectly clear that there is a huge difference between a RIGHT and a CIVIL LIBERTY.  Inherent human rights can NOT be given and taken away by man regardless of what title or position the world may give him.   Human rights are only to be protected and preserved by man.  A person can write something down, have “men” vote on it, and then CALL it a “law,” but if it is in opposition to human rights, then it cannot be considered a law.  Just because a man (or group thereof) establishes a procedure and labels it a law, does not make it such.  And it certainly does not make the law right.  No law can undo any of your inherent rights as a human being.  Just because individuals are willing to accept such a “law,” and just because men or women may forcibly be put into prison for breaking such a “law,” does not make it a law.  It just makes it a persuasive argument–even though a seriously flawed one.  It is merely an attempt to squelch a human right and hope that all will submit to such a position. 

In my opinion, no man can take away a right that God has given.  We have a right to breathe.  We have a right to benefit from all that God has given us.  And we “sure as shooting” have a right to defend ourselves, our family, and our property from harm.  No man can take that right away from you.  Any attempt to take away from a person the right for them to appropriately defend themselves is unacceptable.  Only YOU can ignore an inherent human right or refuse to acknowledge it, but that does not surrender it.  Human rights are not even our own to surrender.  They are infinitely a part of us.  To attempt to surrender them only states that one is willing to be a subject or a slave.  In other words, they willfully acquiesce to such a state.  Unfortunately, when too many people surrender their unalienable human rights in this manner, it gives the impression that a governmental opinion is “law” regardless of reality. 

For example, there is a state in our nation (Colorado) that has claimed all rain water for itself.  Citizens (not subjects) are literally BANNED from collecting any rain water.  This is a “law.”  And yet it is unacceptable.  A state government cannot claim that which falls from the sky to the ground to be its property.  Rain is for the benefit of all and is the owner of Him who provides it and none else.  I would definitely defy such a preposterous law were I a citizen there.

To summarize the first part of my response, if a human right is infringed upon, then it is the responsibility of the citizens to correct that wrong.  It may require a heavy price.  But in my opinion, no price is too heavy to pay in order to recognize and embrace all of our human rights.  The ability for every person to defend themselves, regardless of their level of physical fitness, bank account balance, or occupation is indeed a right.

Second part.

If a person elects to subject themselves to such a preposterous position—that they aren’t allowed to possess effective self-defense tools in order to even the playing field against themselves and a criminal—then additional knowledge is required.  You want to be sure to become familiar with how to expertly use alternative items which are not defined as “weapons” such as a kitchen knife, a golf club, etc.  A can of air deodorizer or hair spray and a cigarette lighter can go a long way to defend yourself.  

The success of self-defense doesn’t begin in the moment of an attack.  Successful self-defense has everything to do with the preparation.  Protecting and preserving such a right against unlawful infringement is one of your best defenses.  I come from a long line of revolutionaries.  This particular nation exists with a shred of freedom because of them.  Personally, I’m a wholehearted believer in paying a price for FREEDOM of all mankind and I firmly believe that such can only be ensured if all mankind is openly “permitted” to defend themselves, anywhere, anytime, and in any way most appropriate for the situation. 

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

The Protection Order—A False Sense of Security

By Kellene Bishop

Photo c/o gafamilylawblog.com

Too many times there have been instances in which a person’s life was lost or forever physically altered because they mistakenly thought they were safe by virtue of a Protection Order.  This is a façade.  A fallacy.  A state of dreaming.  In spite of the name of a Protection Order, the only time protection is actually ordered is in the courtroom when the judge utters such words.  It has very little efficacy otherwise.  Just as contracts are only as good as those who sign them, laws are only as effective as those who enforce it.  Whether it’s a matter of priority, culture, or manpower, rarely are Protection Orders enforced with any kind of a police presence or support. 

It’s unfortunate that such a legal process has consistently proven to be ineffective in protecting the life of its intended person.  Stalking, harassment, violent threats, even child kidnapping have all been cause for women to request a Protection Orders.  But very few times do they come with any semblance of enforcement by local “law enforcement” authorities.  I don’t mean to sound too terribly bitter in writing this, but it infuriates me when I see—literally—10 times the number of persons being pulled over for speeding in the last several months, all the while knowing that some woman is living her life with a false sense of security from a Protection Order that will not be enforced by law enforcement.  Too often such protective orders are recognized when it was far too late. The point of this piece is not to trash on law enforcement or the court systems.  It’s to make you realize that a protection order will NOT physically protect you and truly gives a false sense of security.  Chances are a Protection Order will only legally protect you (which becomes very important, but much later than you may anticipate).  The Supreme Court has already passed down a ruling clearly stating that police officers don’t even have the obligation to protect you even when they are witnessing a crime, let alone when you call them up in fear for your life because you just got a threatening phone call.  

So what can you do when Mr. Crazy Man is unfazed by a piece of paper that says he’s not to be anywhere near his object of violent obsession?  I recommend that we not fool ourselves into believing that this Protection Order will physically protect us.  While it’s an excellent legal strategy to have a protective order in place, and it will make an impact on a small percentage of offenders, it certainly is not the same as having Bruno, the bodyguard, follow you around.  Instead, I would recommend that you are regularly accompanied by Mr. Smith & Wesson, or his cousin, Mr. Glock.  While a Protection Order does give you a thin veil of safety, it’s important that you mentally prepare to defend yourself in spite of a protective order.  As you’ve no doubt heard me say time and time again, get a firearm, get a permit (so that you can use the firearm regardless of where you are—with a few exceptions) and get some quality training with that firearm.  It’s the ONLY equalizer that can stand between you and the enemy… and make no mistake about it, if a man is harassing you, stalking you, or threatening you, he’s NOT your husband, boyfriend, acquaintance, the father of your children, the former love of your life.  He IS indeed your enemy and you have every right to protect yourself from such.

For another example of a protective order gone bad, click here.

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

Please Don’t Feed the Criminal

By Kellene Bishop

First, read the article. Then, let’s “talk.” http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/108501.html

While some may read this article and see it as a “peaceful” resolution, I say it’s a horrible example of someone protecting their home.  It is an example of a very incomplete self-defense, and as such it actually proved to be more dangerous that one might see on the surface.

First of all, hooray for the 77 year-old Doris Gatchell who has some sense of freedom and respect.

While I’m grateful that all is now well in the Gatchell home, there are several aspects of this story that disturb me greatly.  I’m interested in hearing your take on it as well. (I’ll be sure to read what you have to say, even if you’re wrong. *grin*)

1. First of all, if a person is staying in my home on a permanent basis, they will indeed know how to defend themselves.  They will know where the proper tools are and how to use them.  The rule in my home is that once I see the gun or the knife, or ask the stranger to leave, it’s no holds barred.  This statement isn’t about killing someone.  It’s about STOPPING someone.  This person wasn’t stopped at all—for hours even.  Instead he was invited in for “tea and crumpets.”  Don’t feed the criminals. 

   Photo c/o edgeplot

2. Ladies—you do NOT converse with a criminal.  Your gift of the gab is simply not superior enough to rationalize with a criminal mind.  I’m very disturbed that a 30-minute conversation occurred between the younger woman and the man.  Hello!  He’s in your home.  He has a knife and a gun.  He even says that he’s NOT afraid of hurting anyone.  How much more proof do you need that he is an unwelcome guest violating your freedoms?  Get the heck out of there, or get the gun yourself.  Bottom line, you’ve got to have the mindset to STOP the criminal—don’t feed the criminal for crying out loud.  Repeat after me, “don’t feed the criminals!”  Defend yourself immediately, not during a commercial break.  Conversing at length as done in this story will NOT get him to leave.  It will only give him more time to strategize, get up the courage to do worse to you, and for you to emotionally compromise your defenses by relating to him as a human.  Remember, the moment a person uses their physical strength or position of power to control you, threaten you, or harm you in any way, they are no longer a human.  They are a sub-human animal.The article makes mention of the fact that the older Mrs. Gatchell had a concealed weapons permit.  Can I just say “SO WHAT?”  A concealed firearms permit is NOT necessary in ANY state in the U.S. in order to defend your home—period.  But of course the media has to mention this fact as if it’s pertinent to this particular story.
3. The story attempts to make something of the fact that the older Mrs. Gatchell hadn’t seen the criminal’s gun until after he dropped it on the front porch.  Again.  So what?!  If he’s in their home, gun or no gun, get him the heck out of there!  She’s also got the testimony of the daughter that she had seen the gun and was afraid of imminent death.  Do we really need to endure another lengthy conversation to put any stock in what the daughter has said?
4. Ironically, in spite of this being a terrible example of self-defense, this story actually reinforces the statistic that over 2.5 million crimes are PREVENTED every year due to the PRESENCE of a firearm in the hands of a law-abiding citizen.  No blood had to be shed to accomplish the safest outcome, but one should still be prepared mentally to pull the trigger to save one’s life, loved ones, and the sanctity of their home.
5. I’m a bit concerned that the woman merely stated to the man that she had a gun.  In my opinion she should have pulled the gun, instructed him to leave immediately, and that would have been the end of that.  If you pull a gun out, you need to be prepared to use it.  You don’t pull a firearm out simply to tell someone you’re going to use it.  There’s a big difference there. 

If you’re confronted, defend yourself, period.  Please don’t invite the criminal in for wine and an episode of Oprah for crying out loud.  Please don’t feed the criminals.

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