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. Continue reading

A Time to Squelch an “Opposing View”

By Kellene Bishop

stop-asking-questionsToday I briefly endured a ridiculous article talking about how some people were un-American for rattling off their opposing views about the proposed health care changes, and other critical issues. (Click here for the article) Pelosi and others have whined that they aren’t even given a chance to share their views on these topics, as they have repeatedly been shut down by folks who don’t want to listen to what they have to say. Why is that, one may ask?

Well, I believe it falls in line with the same reasons why I don’t rationalize and have a conversation with a criminal. There are times when it’s plainly obvious that your life and livelihood are in danger, at which point you don’t offer tea and crumpets to the perpetrator. You take action to defend yourself and your values immediately, lest you act too late. In my opinion, this is a serious problem occuring in America both politically and physically. In the name of “decency” we are trying to rationalize with imminent threats all around us. Lives have literally been lost in this process. And certainly freedoms have been sacrificed.

Let’s put it this way. A would-be rapist definitely has an opposing view from mine. This would definitely be a view that I should have no hesitation in squelching. No, I shouldn’t converse with him. No, I shouldn’t let him get his point across. I should indeed stand up for everything good, free, and virtuous within me and stop the threat, period. I believe that fighting for one’s freedom is the most American thing one can do, even if it means not permitting the would-be perpetrator to have their say. When it comes to this kind of danger, both physically and politically, I’d say political correctness has lost its purpose.

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

U.S. Senate Rejects Thune-Vitter Gun Proposal

Senators Reject Gun Proposal: July 22, 2009 from ABCNews.com

  • The U.S. Senate voted against a proposal to allow certain gun owners to bring concealed weapons across state lines.
  • The Senate’s 58 to 39 vote fell just short of the 60 votes needed to add the amendment to a defense policy bill.
  • The gun debate was not an issue that cut down party lines.
  • Many new Democrats from conservative states are supportive of gun rights, like Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who voted in favor of the amendment.
  • Author Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said, “The visitor must comply with the restrictions of the state they are in.”
  • For example in S. Dakota, he explained, concealed weapons are prohibited at schools or anywhere that sells alcohol.
  • “It is not, as some have suggested, a preemption of state laws,” Thune said.
  • Only two states not slated to be part of the plan: Illinois and Wisconsin, who do not issue any conceal and carry permits so wouldn’t have been affected.
  • The amendment also did not apply to the District of Columbia.
  • “Law-abiding South Dakotans should be able to exercise the right to bear arms in states with similar regulations on concealed firearms,” Thune said in a Monday statement. “My legislation enables citizens to protect themselves while respecting individual state firearms laws.”
  • Those backing the measure argued that it’s not the people holding permits that Americans need to worry about.
  • “Few criminals are going to go down to the county courthouse and file a permit,” said Virginia Democratic Sen. Jim Webb, who said he has a concealed carry permit himself.
  • Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., agreed, saying those who take the time to go through the steps required of gun permit holders before carrying a concealed weapon are likely the ones who “understand the responsibility that goes with owning it.”

What is the Thune-Vitter Bill? February 5, 2009 kalb.com

  • U.S. Senators John Thune and David Vitter introduced the Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act in February 2009
  • The bill would allow individuals the right to carry lawfully concealed firearms across state lines, while respecting laws of the host state
  • “This bill simply clarifies the rights of gun owners and affords citizens a right that they are already entitled to under U.S. law,” said Vitter.
  • “By elevating concealed handgun permits to the same status as driver’s licenses, we can ensure that an individual possessing a legal permit to carry a concealed weapon from his or her home state is afforded the same privilege in another state that already has concealed carry laws.”
  • The Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act allows an individual to carry a concealed firearm across state lines if they have a valid permit or if, under the state of their residence, they’re entitled to do so.
  • Traveling individuals must follow the laws of the host state, including laws concerning areas where firearms may or may not be carried.

For a full copy of the Amendment, click here.

What are your thoughts on the rejected Amendment?

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?

mother-childrenI 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

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. 

waterFor 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.

self-defense-kitchen-knifeIf 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.

What It Really Means to be “Anti-Gun”

By Kellene Bishop

Photo c/o katrinabrownelondon.com

Photo c/o katrinabrownelondon.com

A few days ago I sent an e-mail to a list of my family and friends who subscribe to my emergency preparedness blog, Preparedness Pro.  The most recent blog posted was on the necessity of firearms and ammo (along with necessary skill and practice) for a properly prepared state.  Unfortunately, my message was not well received by one of my friends.  He sent me back a message that simply stated “I’m anti-gun.  Please take me off of your list.”  While I can perfectly understand why a person is not comfortable with the subject of firearms for self-defense, I was certain that my friend was not fully aware of the ramifications that invoking such a vow as being “anti-gun” truly entailed.  In my work I find that the majority of individuals who are “anti-gun” are women.  And thus I felt that addressing this topic was appropriate for our Women of Caliber audience today.

What does it really mean to be “Anti-Gun?” I’m convinced that a person who makes such claims does so based on the following misinformed or incomplete reasons.

1-     Fear of the power behind the tool.  Yes, a firearm is deadly.  Thank goodness.  Because I do not know of any other tool I can reasonably employ to defend myself against a alcohol and drug-crazed, 6’4”, 280 pound man who’s intent on harming me.  I can’t run fast enough.  The police can’t respond fast enough.  I can’t talk my way out of an encounter.  And I can’t rely on my physical strength and skill to properly combat them.   Self-defense is an equal opportunity freedom.  We all should be entitled to defending ourselves regardless of our medical history, weight, physical fitness, etc.  That’s why I often refer to my firearm as the ultimate equalizer.  What I do know is that I can have easy access to my firearm, pull, point, and shoot to effectively stop a would-be attacker. 

Photo c/o bebo.com

Photo c/o bebo.com

There are plenty of other valuable tools in our world that are dangerous if used incorrectly.  Medicine, exercise, transportation, food and farming equipment to name a few.  All are very powerful for good.  Yet all of these can be misused to even cause death to ourselves and others.  Fortunately for us though, the media, Hollywood, and our government don’t typically have agendas to vilify these types of tools.  And yet there are many others who occasionally promote misinformation on these tools as well.  Nothing is without some controversy or a difference of opinion.  But differences of opinion never alter the truth.  Only statisticians do that.  

2-    Belief that only criminals (thugs, drug dealers, bad guys, etc.) have guns.  Just because criminals have guns does not mean that those who have guns are criminals, anymore than the fact that a plane has crashed means that all planes will crash, or that 500 high school students killed per year playing football means that football should be banned.  For every thug out there who carries a firearm, there are hundreds of thousands of guns owned by law-abiding citizens.  Out of over 4.7 million crimes committed in the U.S. in 2005, less than 10% of them involved the use of a firearm.  Even among homicides, where one would assume a firearm was always used, less than 67% of them involve the use of a gun.  (http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/guns.htm)  Consider the opposite side of things.  Over 2.5 million crimes per year are STOPPED by the use of a firearm in the hands of citizen.  (John Lott, More Guns, Less Crime)  You’ve got less than 6% of 4.7 million crimes involved a gun, and yet you have over 50% more of those same kinds of crimes being prevented BY a gun.  Sounds like there’s a skewed perception there, folks.  Don’t you think?

Photo c/o zimbio.com

Photo c/o zimbio.com

3-    Fear of the safety for our children.  This is a very strategic propaganda put out by the anti-gun supporters, knowing full well that no parent in their right mind would put their children in danger.  And then of course, on those rare circumstances when a child is tragically killed by a gun, the media runs the story over and over again as if it was an announcement of Armageddon.  It’s a highly emotional, and unfortunately successful angle used by our national manipulators.  But the real facts don’t lie.  Children are less likely to be killed by one of over 300,000,000 million guns held by 94 million gun owners than they are to be killed by an automobile, drowned (in a bathtub or a pool), burned in a fire, or suffocate on plastic!  In fact they are at least 6 times more likely to die from any of these causes, and in some cases as much as 40 times more likely.  (Kids and Guns, 2000, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention)  Now think about this.  Out of all of the crimes that were stopped as the result of a firearm, how many children’s lives were saved as a result, or better yet, allowed to remain normal with a loving parent still alive as the result of the use of a firearm.  If someone is “anti-gun” do they really realize that they may just as well be stating that they are against protecting their children, loved ones, friends or communities at all costs?  Do they realize that they might as well be saying that they are “Pro-Crime?”  While you may think this is an audacious leap of logic, the statistics are there to support such a claim.  Unfortunately, those who truly are “anti-gun and to heck with the consequences” really don’t care about the truth.

For more on children and guns, click here

4-    The absence of a passion and understanding of freedom.  During the monumental Revolutionary War, there were plenty of individuals who took up arms who were unskilled and uncomfortable in their use.  After the war, they recovered thousands of rifles in which multiple wads were found stuffed down the barrel, but never fired.  Why?  Because although these men believed in fighting for their freedom, they found it very difficult to actually aim and fire upon another human being.  They would go through the motions of loading the firearm, lifting it to point, but never pull the trigger. And then in their confused and panicked state they would go through the motions again and again until their lack of firing caused their death.  Harming another human being purposefully goes against our peaceful grain, of course.  And I thank God for that “sensitivity chip.”  It’s a mental fight that has been prevalent through the ages.  But going through the motions is also what gets people killed and no longer able to live their fulfilling life and provide for their family.  Even police officers struggle with firing on a human being.  They practice with silhouettes, not live targets, of course.  So the mental preparation to completely defend themselves is oft times missing.  (As a result, many police departments have begun using more realistic looking targets in order to help law enforcement with this vital mental preparation.) 

Photo c/o conservapedia.com

Photo c/o conservapedia.com

What does this have to do with freedom?  When I hear someone is “anti-gun” I cringe to think that they are the very persons who would have permitted the British, the Romans, the Japanese, the Germans, and any other enemy Freedom has experienced through the ages, to take everything—and I do mean everything—that they hold dear.  It nearly brings me to tears to hear that “anti-gunners” would hold the defenders of our freedom in the same light as criminals in our day.  Freedom is not fought just on a battle field.  It is fought every single day, even in the sanctity of our homes, restaurants, our parks, our streets.  The only reason why our Freedom has not been utterly destroyed is thanks to the 94 million gun owners who are still willing to lay claim to its merits.  Somehow it just doesn’t seem fair that those same 94 million gun owners are the very reason why anti-gunners have the freedom to attempt to lay neutral on this issue and still have some semblance of safety.  To put it plainly, “anti-gun” is clearly a member of the “anti-freedom” camp.  

5-    Naïveté.  I agree that life would be a whole lot better if I didn’t even have to consider the horrific “what-if’s” that exist out there.  I would much rather live in a community where I could leave my door unlocked, trust that my children and family members would never be violently harmed, and that the world was one solely of peace and happiness.  Unfortunately, the stark reality of the presence of sheer evil interrupts that fantasy.  It’s also naïve of me to believe that my husband will always be there to protect me.  Or that simply by owning a firearm, I will instinctively know what to do with it under threat of violence or death without any concerted practice.  It’s naïve of me to believe that in an earthquake all of the criminals will stay securely in their jail cells, or that the most well organized and violent gang in the U.S., MS-13, will never invade my peaceful neighborhood.  It’s naïve of me to believe that a 9-1-1 call will result in my immediate safety.  I could go on and on with the naïve thoughts I have entertained in my younger years.  Instead I choose to face reality.  And the reality isn’t so much the horrors that are out there as it is that I’m STRONG, CAPABLE, AND COMPETENT.  As such I can ensure my own safety and the safety of those who are important to me.  I need not be fearful.  I need not be paranoid.  I simply need to be armed with the proper tools and skills necessary.  I don’t walk around with a gun because I’m paranoid.  I walk around accompanied by real peace and practical awareness because I carry a firearm.  I’m friendly to those around me because I do not fear their violence.  I’m happy because I do not fear becoming a victim with no justice to balance.  I’m more confident because I know I am an active and beneficial participant in the safety of my community.   

To all you self-proclaimed anti-gunners, I implore you to forsake your fear, rekindle your patriotism, get knowledgeable in the facts, and eliminate naïveté from your life.  There are countless benefits in doing so that will last a lifetime.  In the meantime, you only make yourself more vulnerable to the harmful realities that inevitably await you as you leisurely bask in your ignorance.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

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

Letter to the President

By Kellene Bishop

Dear President Obama,

Photo c/o nymag.com

Photo c/o nymag.com

As you know, the Taliban has been successful in infiltrating Pakistan.  Your teleprompter may have also informed you that the Pakistani people are a nuclear society, well armed with an abundance of nuclear weapons.  As you may also know, the Taliban have every intention of overthrowing the Pakistani government.  As such, the nuclear weapons held in that country would be at their disposal and they would then be able to use such horrific weapons on the United States.  It is based on this concern that I address you today.

Since you and Geppetto feel that a gun ban in the United States will be effective in ensuring that even the criminals don’t have guns, I would like to persuade you to write the governing powers of Pakistan and request that they issue a weapons band edict.  Surely you can convince them that such an edict does not need to be met with any resistance.  It won’t have to be approved by any additional governing consensus of the Pakistani people.  Perhaps it can just be dictated to the people in something akin to an Executive Order or Presidential Directive like you do here in the U.S.  I’m sure that if you are able to influence their government leader to firmly issue a weapons ban, then all of the firearms, grenade launchers, machine guns, and the nuclear weapons will immediately disappear and we will no longer be under any threat of a violent attack.  Surely crime will decrease significantly in their war-torn nation.  In addition, I’m sure that such a weapons ban would even eliminate the Taliban from within the ranks of the Pakistani people.  After all, surely they will have to give up all of their weapons as well if they are dwelling in a country which imposes such restrictions.  Then the Taliban will only be left with words to fight their battle.  But then again, if you’re really smart, you can educate the Pakistani president on the power of the “Fairness Doctrine” and then ensure that the Taliban cannot even share their message without having an alternative view thrust upon the people as well.  Surely these actions will bring our nation and even the world under a much greater security and peace.

Sincerely,

The Tooth Fairy

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

High School Football—A Terrorist Threat

By Kellene Bishop, Women of Caliber

beware the football, lying in wait to attack!

beware the football, lying in wait to attack!

Between the fall of 1997 and the spring of 2002, FIFTY-THREE high school students were KILLED playing high school football.  (National Center for Catastrophic Sport Injury Research, Feb. 2001)  The lives of the spectators and the fellow students of these players will never be the same.  And I want something done to make sure that such needless deaths never happen again. Fifty-three deaths!  Where is the outrage?!  Where’s 20/20 or 60 Minutes when you really need them to shed light on a problem?  Why can’t we have Football Free Zones?!  Something must be done to STOP these needless football playing deaths.  In fact, I think that the schools should all adopt a strict “no play zone” policy.  Someone could poke an eye out with one of those footballs, or choke on it.  A teacher could be emotionally and physically harmed for life if a student hit them with a football!  If you see someone drawing a picture of a football, I don’t care if it’s a fifth grader in St. Petersburg, FL, that person should be arrested.  If a drawing of a football is used at school, even if it’s two eight-year olds, they should be have criminal charges filed against them and be considered a terrorist threat.  If a child is caught pretending to throw a football, they should be charged with felonious assault.  Take down those pictures of football players and coaches!  Stop glorifying them.  These types of activities KILL KIDS!  And if they get caught with a Nerf ball on school property—that’s just unacceptable.  Such a criminal should be jailed in Fort Meyers, FL—I don’t care if they ARE a National Merit Scholar.  There should be an aggressive and zero tolerance policy to this kind of extreme in order to ensure that no such football players are ever killed playing football again.  In fact, this problem is so pervasive, I demand that the National Education Association offer a FREE $150,000 insurance policy to be paid in the event that a teacher ever dies from a football incident. 

 

No.  I haven’t lost my mind.  “They” have lost theirs.  And the previous paragraph will point out to you just how extremely off-base they are.

Between the fall of 1997 and the spring of 2002, 32 students were killed by an incident involving a gun at an elementary or secondary school.  (National School Safety Center)  This total includes gang-related activities, crimes committed on school properties (even after hours), shooting accidents, as well as the highly publicized school shooting incidences.  During this same period of time there were over 128 million children enrolled in such schools.  This equates to 1 death per 4 million students.

During this same research period, four teachers were shot and killed at these same types of schools.  (National School Safety Center)  That equivocates to 1 teacher shot and killed per 3.3 million teachers. 

It’s interesting to note that in 2001, that yes, The National Education Association did indeed offer all of its members a FREE $150,000 death policy, payable only under such circumstances.  (San Diego Union-Tribune, July 28, 2001)  Hmmm…  Of course it was free.  The likelihood of it happening is 1 in 3.3 million!  But you can bet that the press didn’t give you those statistics, did they?

Why have they done so much to attempt to curb the deaths of children from school shootings, but have done nothing to alert them to a situation which takes the lives of more children than “school shootings” do?  We have gun free zones to avoid school shootings, why don’t we have “football free zones” as well?  The sickening aspect is just how extreme the schools have gone to punish the very non-infractions that I used to illustrate my point in the first paragraph.

  • A fifth-grade in St. Petersburg, FL was indeed arrested for drawing a picture of “weapons.”
  • A National Merit Scholar student was jailed in Ft. Meyers, FL because a dull kitchen knife was found under her car seat—it was dropped while her family was moving from one apartment to another.
  • Two eight-year olds had criminal charges filed against them and were identified as “terrorist threats” in Irvington, New Jersey for playing cops and robbers with a paper gun.
  • A seven-year old was charged with three counts of felonious assault for pointing a toy gun at three other children during recess in Ann Arbor, Michigan. (Ann Arbor News 2)
  • Elementary students throughout Texas and Louisiana have been suspended for pointing pencils and saying “pow” and have forbidden the children from drawing pictures of soldiers.
  • School libraries throughout the U.S. have even removed references to the military.

See: http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id-95000486, and Chicago Sun-Times, June 20, 2001, and NBC Saturday Today, NBC News Transcripts, May 26, 2002

Instead of criminalizing children for being children, schools should participate in sound measures of gun safety education and the U.S. Constitutional Amendments.  No wait.  Sorry.  I must have left the earth for a moment there to even make such a suggestion.  I forgot that education in schools is reserved for gay marriages, abortion, and the use of contraceptives. 

Any death of a child, young or teen, is tragic.  For those who have lost a child to ANY death is unacceptable, of course.  Emotionally speaking, I feel that homicide is an even more difficult death to accept in these cases.  Any death or harm of a child that can logically be prevented, should indeed be prevented.  I’m a huge advocate of seat belts, car seats, and adults not exposing their children to second-hand smoke.  To me, these methods pass the “stupid test” in my book.  Meaning, they are just plain stupid NOT to employ.  And while seat belts and car seats may have been known to even cause the occasional death of a child, but they are logical. However, the media harping on school shootings as if they are the ultimate killer of the children in our world is mal-practice in its truest sense.  It’s fear-mongering.  It’s a dissemination of false information and it prevents responsible parents from focusing on the true dangers in our midst. 

Conservatively speaking 2,000 of our nations children are sexually assaulted by illegal immigrants—EVERY year, and yet we can’t seem to instill an “illegal immigrant free zone” in our nation. (http://www.newswithviews.com/Kouri/jim94.htm)  

On average, over 1,700 children die every year as the result of a drunk driver, and yet mandatory accountability for such actions is minimalistic and seriously flawed. (http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html)  

Four percent of all pregnant women use illicit drugs and extreme amounts of alcohol, and yet there is absolutely no accountability for such actions.   (http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1169.asp)

These are just a few examples of genuine threats to our children. Fight the real enemy, folks, not a fictitious enemy that the media and some government officials perpetuate in order to accomplish other horrible agendas.  

May you be victorious in your REAL battles.

Kellene

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

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