Two Portland area Screen Actors Guild and American Federation for Television and Radio Artists union members are on the national board. Mary McDonald-Lewis and Chrisse Roccaro have combined with Occupy Portland to save the local office.
McDonald-Lewis said that losing the office would result in loss of political clout for the local. Without events and the “galvanizing force” of an office, she said members will disperse and be less supportive of the union.
“Without an office, there’s no there there,” she said. “There’s no unity.” She called having an office an essential part of maintaining unity during strikes, and added that losing the Local’s staff, including the executive director, political veteran Nathaniel Applefield, would reduce the union’s clout with state government — an especially touchy matter since a bill is currently pending in the state legislature to increase Oregon’s tax incentives.
And who better to know about than than Occupy Portland which, since it was ousted from the downtown Portland parks in November of 2012 have struggled to keep their identity beyond rabble rousers and who were recently trying to raise money to keep an office open.
After the Boston Marathon bombing gun control should be swept from the table and replaced with a serious national conversation on the duty of Americans to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and their communities.
The irony of a terrorist in Boston, the cradle of American liberty and the original home of the Minutemen, shouldn’t be lost on anyone. Our country was founded in response to shouts of “To arms, to arms,” and not much has changed from that day to this.
Like their colonial ancestors and for themselves and their communities, citizens must be armed and ready to act at a moment’s notice, not hunkered down in fear in their basements wishing they hadn’t voted for politicians who stripped them of the means to defend themselves.
Until now, the gun debate has centered on the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. But with every right comes a duty, and in “the new normal,” the post-Boston cliché de jour, that duty is to take up arms where local authorities can’t or won’t get the job done. No mere words – you fight fire with fire, not with anti-fire rhetoric.
We’ve just seen the first successful terrorist attack – a low-tech and seemingly unpreventable effort by two disaffected Muslim-inspired brothers — on American soil since 9/11 (Nidal Hasan’s mass slaughter at Fort Hood, TX is still stupidly classified as “workplace violence”). Daily we hear of expected riots in the streets of America from pundits on the left and the right that bring to mind the Korean shop owners during the 1992 Rodney King riots in Los Angeles who took to their rooftops with military-style rifles to defend their property and their lives.
Local police are hammered by budget cuts that cripple their ability to protect citizens. In many cities, people pay taxes for police protection they don’t get so they’re forced to pay for private security, a fact not unique to one town – see here, here and here. The stress on cops in Chicago is so great that one recently was driven to commit suicide.
The police repeatedly tell us that they can’t protect us against predators and home invaders — between the time you call 911 and they arrive, you’re on your own.
There’s even an argument that can be made that local police – beat cops on the street, not political cops who do and say what they’re told – would welcome the help since they’re not crazy about current efforts to disarm the citizenry.
On the federal level, The Department of Homeland Security is buying up every bullet and armored vehicle in sight for reasons known only to them – they won’t let Congress know why – but it must be in anticipation of large-scale civil unrest. Heck, DHS has more ammo than the army!
With the declining ability or willingness of government to put public safety and protection first on the list of spending priorities citizens must organize their own self-protection. We have the ability to do it, history is in our favor and the legal mechanism exists, so why not?
Here’s how: Expand the existing unorganized militia of the United States to include all otherwise qualified (no felons, illegal aliens, legitimate conscientious objectors, etc.) men and women between the ages of 16 and 70 and provide that they shall be armed with handguns and rifles and trained in the use of them at their own expense. Unless you’re specifically out, you’re in with no exemption because you don’t like guns or find minimal regimentation distasteful — we’re talking duty here.
It’s not like this is new – I floated a similar idea over a year ago on the theory that if the government can tell you to buy health insurance it can tell you to buy a firearm. And a number of American communities already mandate gun ownership, admittedly mostly small ones in the South.
I’ll bet most folks didn’t know that federal law says that all men between 17 and 45 who are U.S. citizens or who have declared their intent to become one are automatically members of the militia. So why not expand it in terms of age and gender? We’re not talking about sending people into combat, so age isn’t a consideration. If an armed 70-year-old can defend two teenage girls from a robbery, then he can be in the militia.
Objections that mandatory inclusion in the militia is unconstitutional are trumped by court rulings upholding the constitutionality of the draft. And of course, the concept of a citizen militia predates the founding of the republic.
It was an armed citizenry – a self-appointed posse — that confronted Jesse James and his gang when they tried to rob a bank in Northfield, MN in 1876.
The Constitution authorizes it. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of individual Americans to keep and bear arms irrespective of membership in a militia. In what are called the “enumerated powers” of Congress raising, arming, training and setting the rules for a militia is specifically mentioned. If you mandate militia membership, then the legs are cut right out from under those who argue that gun rights are contingent upon being in a militia.
In fact, the original Second Amendment notion of a “well-regulated militia” writ large is what I’m talking about. There’s more plain-language constitutional authority for this proposal than there is for the whole lot of specious gun-control measures getting kicked around at the state and federal levels.
It’s inconvenient or you don’t have time or you have plans or what about work or whatever are details you can work around. On December 8, 1941, hundreds of thousands of American men reordered their priorities and made their way to enlist to defend their country.
As in colonial times, each member of the militia will provide her own hand gun and rifle from a list developed by experts in the field drawn from law enforcement and the military. I favor the H&K P30 semi-automatic handgun because it’s fully operational for both right and left-handed (me) shooters. That I already own one factors in too. Figure to spend $800 – 900 for a P30.
Other models at other price points may prove more suitable for other shooters – there’s a near infinite variety of them.
As for a rifle, just as early American colonists and pioneers kept “Old Betsy” above the fireplace, militia members will have today’s version—something on the order of a Bushmaster Carbon 15 Carbine, with a MSRP of under $950 – locked securely in the gun safe.
Training is readily available all throughout the country. Expect to pay $1,000 on up for a week-long session each for hand guns and rifles, and anticipate three or four additional weeks, part how-to and safety and part tactical in nature. You’ll learn not only how to fire your guns, but how to safely fire them in tandem with others when called upon to serve.
Standardizing types and calibers of allowable firearms will lead to volume cost savings, and maybe a tax credit for weapons and training will cushion the blow. Whatever the tab, it pales in comparison to what we’re learning will be the real cost of Obamacare.
The diligent and conscientious citizen will independently practice and study to show herself approved. The Internet is chock full of information about guns – learn the truth about so-called “assault rifles” – and ammunition. That will give them a leg up on some in Congress who want to legislate counter-productive restrictions on gun rights while remaining ignorant about their basic nature.
Speaking of ignorance, because knowledge is power and the more we know of something the less we’re afraid of it, look for the opposition to guns and gun control generally to drop like a rock even more than it has after heretofore non gun owners become accustomed to and comfortable with their weapons.
Aside from being mugged by reality, nothing like practice and experience turns a gun-hating liberal into a gun-loving liberal. And wouldn’t it be amusing to see Jim Carrey on YouTube at the range taking target practice with his rifle preparing him to serve the community in which he lives rather than slime a gun-rights supporter who is dead and can’t respond?
When Thomas Jefferson was president, he said in an 1808 message to Congress, “For a people who are free and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.”
The more there are threats to our peace and liberty, the more citizens must be fight back against them. Boston showed how at risk we are since the police can’t be everywhere at once and who knows when someone will burst into your home with mayhem in mind?
It’s a two-pronged threat since equally threatening are politicians who are always on the prowl for new ways to control the people and make them more subservient and docile. They can be held at bay for a time, but they’re always lurking about. The Second Amendment was also meant to give them pause, so an armed nation ought to do the trick.
As James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 46, when the people are armed, there’s a barrier against an encroaching government, a freedom unique to Americans that no other people on earth at the time had. One freedom the Constitution secured to them was “the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
Your right to defend self, family and property AND the increasingly obvious duty we all have to participate in the defense of community call for strong action. Misguided and counter-productive efforts to disarm the populace no longer make sense. They must stop now and be replaced by an armed and trained citizen militia – “well regulated” in the true sense – ready to answer the call and determined to get the job done.
This means you.
H/T National Review
Here’s a man who is the highest law enforcement authority in the country who thinks that the civil right of citizenship should be given to anyone who wants it or can sneak into the country and steal it.
“The way we treat our friends and neighbors who are undocumented by creating a mechanism for them to earn citizenship and move out of the shadows transcends the issue of immigration status. This is an issue of civil and human rights.”
Holder made this incoherent (but politically correct sounding) proclamation in a key note address to MALDEF (a special interest lawfare group) last night.
As the National Review says here:
So, the chief law-enforcement officer of the United States of America asserts that receiving amnesty for breaking the nation’s laws is a civil right. This is at once astonishing and surreal: the rule of law in subordination to political imperative. What other violations of law are excusable as a civil right? If the rule of law is as malleable as Holder’s statement suggests, should Dzhokar Tsarnaev be amnestied for his violations? If not, where does Holder draw the line and why?
According to the not-dead terrorist, the Boston Marathon bombers were headed to New York’s Times Square to set off the rest of their bombs and kill and maim a few hundred other people. The narrative of the story you’ve heard is that it was a spontaneous move.
This is a valuable piece of information, but for the life of me, I can’t figure out why no one is talking much about the real import of the statement.
The bombers wanted to go to Times Square because that was the scene of an unsuccessful, thwarted bombing attempt by another jihadi and Anwar Al Awlaki acolyte.
They wanted to go and finish the job.
It was a success.
Like a convention is a huge, organic success.
Thousands of people showed up last weekend to the event called cicLAvia (an LA twist on the word ciclovia, as a similar event is called in Colombia) . Bike enthusiasts sent the word: Come! People drove, flew, bused and choo choo’d their way to the eventso they could bike along the streets of LA. Of course they can do this everyday, but this time the city would close the streets to cars.
Which is the point.
The bike lobby–yes, the bike lobby– likes to say they took the idea of the car free event from Colombia. They want to sell it as a party! A carnival! What they’re really doing is jacking up the numbers for PR purposes so they can go to the City of Los Angeles and others cities and close streets to cars. Period. That’s the end game. They hate cars. The “party” is the blind behind which the car haters hide.
Here’s the real inspiration for the bike cultists,
The World Carfree Network is an international network that coordinates the actions of car-free advocates from around the world. It is the main hub of the global car-free movement. …Working to reduce the human impact on the natural environment while improving the quality of life for all are major goals. Car Free Days are official events with the common goal of taking a fair number of cars off the streets of a city or some target area or neighborhood for all or part of a day, in order to give the people who live and work there a chance to consider how their city might look and work with significantly fewer cars. The first events were organised in Reykjavík (Iceland), Bath (UK) and La Rochelle (France) in 1995. [emph mine]
Hey, what happened to the party?!
In fact the car haters use parties to sell their message. The bike cultists have spawned naked bike rides (go here for pictures, if you dare); critical mass, an anarchist bike group which started in San Francisco and whose sole aim is to “kill cars” (see photo nearby); ‘kidical mass,’ teaching kids how to take over the streets from cars and other ‘fun’ bike rides. They point to those events to attest to massive bike usage and use those jacked up numbers to claim more political power at city hall. The bike groups count usage during September, the warmest month of the year, to puff up numbers. Most of the people using bikes are government employees and students.
Bike cult capital, Portland, started blocking areas off for bikes only on Sundays in the mid 2000’s. City officials called them what they were: Car Free Zones. But that made car owners realize the city hated them. So, the City of Portland changed the name. The Mayor began calling the car free zones “Portland Parkways.” And, like LA’s cicLAvia, people drove, bused, choo choo’d in to enjoy the free party paid for by taxpayers in the middle of the streets. Eventually the name became Sunday Parkways.
And this political and social movement has the media as its main cheerleaders. The alt media, is on board and, in Portland, one of the main newspaper’s chief political reporters, Jeff Mapes, has written a book on bicycling and is part of the newspapers BICYCLING beat reporters.
Mapes traveled down to LA to check out the new and improved cicLAvia, and found it enchanting,
I met my cousin, … his wife … and son at MacArthur Park and rode with them to Culver City, where we had a picnic lunch in a nicely shady park. With time running out to return my bike and get back to the airport, I turned back toward downtown and started to hustle, letting the L.A. kaleidoscope turn impressionistic.
L.A. often feels like a city of disconnected neighborhoods, said Andrea Denike Martinez, a landscaper riding with her friends — the Bodacious Bike Babes.
But on a day like this, she explained, “it feels like we’re one community.”
Nice huh? Betcha that’ll get you lots of grant money from the cities for more of these political events.