My Blog List

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

A New American Creed

I ran across this and wanted to share it:
An American's Creed
I do not choose to be a common man.  It is my right to be uncommon - if I can.
I seek opportunity - not security.  I do not wish to be a kept citizen, humbled and dulled by having the state look after me.
I want to take the calculated risk; to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed.
I refuse to barter incentive for a dole.
I prefer the challenges of life to the guaranteed existence;  the thrill of fulfillment to the stale calm of Utopia.
I will not trade my freedom for beneficence nor my dignity for a handout.
I will never cower before any master nor bend to any threat.
It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid; to think and act for myself, enjoy the benefit of my creations, and to face the world boldly and say, "This I have done."
All this is what it means to be an American.
Ready for the kicker?  This was written by a liberal in the 1950's, Dean Alfange.  He ran for Governor of New York, splitting the liberal vote, which got Thomas Dewey elected.

Think times have changed a bit?  Here's my take on the rally cry of the current crop of liberals and socialists.

A New American Creed
I choose to submit.  I do as I'm told.
I choose to obey my Keepers unquestioned;  I will capitulate on demand.
I seek gray acquiescence over vibrant originality; consensus over principle.  I want only for the grace of my Keepers.
I tremble at conflict unless directed by my Keepers.  I neither seek nor encourage individuality.   I long for the warm embrace of conformity.
I lower my head, lower my gaze, lower my voice lest I incur the wrath of my Keepers.
I gladly cast aside my dignity and know not the meaning of shame.  I will comply, and I will be fed - this is all I know.
I gladly trade my freedom for the asylum of my Keeper's cage.  I offer my soul for my safety.
It is my place to submit; to surrender myself as demanded; to vilify and denigrate the creations of others, and to meekly ask, "How may I serve you now, My Keeper?"
This I teach my children.  All this is what it now means to be an American.

Maybe a bit harsh.

Maybe not.  We're well along this road as a nation.

Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Accept The Challenge.

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Selective Civil Rights

Imagine, if you will, this horrific scene in 2008, where terrifying right-wing activists blocked the roadway - stopping people from hearing the words and ideas of then Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Instantaneously, the following self-described Civil Rights organizations would spring into action, calling for the arrest and conviction of the haters that were taking away the civil rights of their fellow Americans.
NAACP:  The mission of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate race-based discrimination.
ACLU:  For nearly 100 years, the ACLU has been our nation’s guardian of liberty, working in courts, legislatures, and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties that the Constitution and the laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country.
LCCR:  The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights is a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 200 national organizations to promote and protect the civil and human rights of all persons in the United States. 
Rainbow PUSH Coalition:  Our mission is to protect, defend, and gain civil rights by leveling the economic and educational playing fields, and to promote peace and justice around the world
As anyone who has even glanced at a TV, the Internet or picked up a newspaper knows, these abusers of American Civil Rights pictured above are not right-wing fanatics stopping supporters of Barry.  They're left-wing fanatics stopping supporters of Trump.

Apparently, these civil right organizations - who purport to defend the civil rights of all Americans - have one teeny-weeny exception to their laudable missions statements:  Conservatives and libertarians need not apply.

But it begs the question:  Why HAVEN'T these bastards been arrested en mass?  I see that 3 of them have been arrested, 
Enriquez later told CNN that three protesters were arrested and two cars were towed from the boulevard. The deputy emphasized that the arrests were due to protesters blocking the roadway, not because of the protest itself.
Wrap your head around that last sentence.  They were arrested for traffic violations, and the PC Police made sure it was clear that it wasn't because of their protest?

THEIR protest!?  No mention of them infringing on the civil rights of the people going to a political meeting.  Are you fucking kidding me?

Where is the Justice Department with their "At-the-drop-of-a-hat Civil Rights Investigation"?  I guess they've got the "conservatives and libertarian exclusion clause" as well.

In my mind, this is no different than Klansmen keeping blacks out of the voter booth.  Or Black Panthers doing the same to whites in Philly in 2008 [youtube].

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Your right to protest - to speak freely - doesn't supersede my right to get to work, freely walk down the street or run my business without being vandalized.  Or to attend a political rally, regardless of how much you hate what's being said at that rally.

Constructing a blockade is NOT peaceably assembling.

If you don't like what's being said, DON'T GO AND LISTEN.  You weak, whiny, pussified snowflakes are so concerned with "hate speech" and "safe spaces" that you don't even recognize you're becoming the very definition of fascism.

Or maybe you do.

Serious as a heart attack, cupcake, read up on fascism in Italy during World War II, and elsewhere throughout history.  Spoiler Alert:  It doesn't end well for the fascists.

Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates.

Monday, March 14, 2016

Gimme Another Feel Good Law To Follow. I Will Follow. I Promise.

I was recently at a gathering, and had an interesting conversation with one of the other attendees.  This person is former law enforcement, and is now involved in politics.

We were talking about guns.  He was discussing an interaction he had with a congressman that is pushing a piece of gun control legislation.  This person was discussing how this congressman has a number of "procedural loop holes" he can use to get this legislation through congress, but he chooses not to due to the political baggage that gets attached to such a move.

The person I was speaking with has been asked to rubber stamp his support for this legislation as a show of local support for a federal law.  He won't do it.


BUT, during our discussion, we got into the arena of my most hated phrase, "reasonable gun control".  My stance is that unless a law can GUARANTEE that a gun won't be used in some sort of crime, it is nothing more than window dressing.

Intelligent people understand that some people will break any law that is written.  So, with regards to gun laws, any law written will only be followed by the good people who are not inclined to break just laws in the first place.  Laws like theft, murder, rape, assault - you know, little things like that.

Writing another gun law won't do a damned thing about reducing crime.  It will only make it more difficult for good people to protect themselves from people inclined to break laws in the first place.

Our conversation broke down when he stated he could support a gun law concerning the sale or gifting of guns.  His stance was that if you knew or believed that the person you were selling or giving the gun to had an "unstable" personality, and then that person committed a crime with the gun, YOU, the seller/giver should be held at least partially responsible for what happened.

Apparently, my face turned red, and/or my eyes narrowed, as the subject was quickly changed.  Not wanting to ruin this gathering, I shut my pie hole.

Before I tear this apart, let me give you my 30,000 foot view on judgement:  I ALWAYS trust the judgement of "the people" before I trust the judgement of government.  Are there idiotic, unstable and evil individuals in "the people" camp?  Oh hell yes!  But in a comparison of the citizens versus government employees, the government has a stupendously higher percentage of people I judge as idiots, unstable or evil than is present among "the people".

The collective judgement of "the people" exceeds the judgement of government - at any level of government.

So, back to our "reasonable gun law".  Paraphrasing, I'd envision this law would state, "If you sell or give a gun to someone you know or should have known was mentally unstable, you are liable for the acts of that person if they use the gun in a crime".

Really?!  For how long am I on the hook?  For a year?  Forever?  What percentage of the crime committed by this person is attributed to me?  If they commit a robbery that carries a 5 year prison sentence, do I go away for half that time?  20 percent?

If they commit pre-meditated murder and get the death penalty, then what?  Am I executed too, or do I just get the shit kicked out of me?

Maybe the law adds that you are absolved of all liability if you require that the person receiving your gun first submit to a state or federal background check.  Hey, that sounds reasonable!  It's a proven fact that every person who has a background check will never commit a crime with that gun, right?

But what if the person still commits a crime after a background check?  Who is then held criminally liable for the actions of the crazy individual?

Queue the "crickets chirping" sound track.

We all know the answer is, "No one will be held responsible".  You see, government is allowed to lie, cheat and generally FUBAR things with no consequences.  They pass laws giving immunity to themselves and their ilk - individual government employees, and whole cities, states and the federal governments - who failed miserably in the execution of their duties.

Hell, if there are no consequences, why do the job correctly?

How many government employees went to prison after the mass murderer at Virginia Tech passed his gun background check?

How many government employees went to prison after OK-ing the San Bernardino terrorist entry into this country?

How many government employees went to prison after failing to deport the 9/11 student, tourist and business visa offenders?

How many government employees went to prison after a death at a government certified restaurant?

The answer is:  None, none, none, and uh, none.

Government sets standards of conduct and consequences for "the people", then exempts themselves from both.

The samples above show examples of one death, to thousands of deaths, all because government did not do its job.  In every example, they had "the law on their side", yet they did not enforce the very laws they wrote, and people died.

Not even a slap on the wrist.  I doubt anyone even lost a job or had to endure the humiliation of a "job reassignment".

So I don't put a lot of credibility in the proclamation that another law on the books is going to stop people intent on doing harm, from doing so.  Real life has proven otherwise.


In real life, here's how I think this would play out:  I've got a gun available.  The person interested in it looks nuts, is acting nutty or I know to be nuts.  I use my judgement and don't sell or give them the gun.

Well lookee there - no law needed!


You see, no law on the books is able to guarantee compliance with the law.  Their only benefit is in meting out punishment after the fact.

Laws written now are nothing more than attempts to control you and eliminate your free will.  A crime used to be when you acted, and that act infringed on the rights of another citizen.  Now it means you disobeyed an arbitrary act or standard meant to control your actions, regardless of how that action may affect those around you.

Their judgement is better than yours, so obey the law.  Or else.

Share this post! Click the Twitter, Facebook or Google+ icon below, and let your friends know!
Copyright 2016 Bison Risk Management Associates. All rights reserved. Please note that in addition to owning Bison Risk Management, Chief Instructor is also a partner in a precious metals business. You are encouraged to repost this information so long as it is credited to Bison Risk Management Associates.