|
|
A southerner finds "home" in New Hampshire
-
-
My beloved has mentioned me in her blog, which will bring scores of new readers here, all of whom will no doubt wonder why I haven't posted since April. The answer is simple: my last entry, a reply to our friend Mrs. Chili, was such a thing of beauty that I supposed I should retire while I was ahead. Matter of fact, I re-read it just now, and I wonder if I can submit myself to the Nobel committee. Anyone know? Bueller?
Thank you all for coming. Now that you're all here, please don't forget to support Ron Paul! Speaking of, here is some footage of Mrs. Chili's beautiful, if somewhat snowy, Seacoast region. Courtesy of the very silly Ridley Report: http://youtube.com/watch?v=-nOMmpIviic Thanks for coming by; let's not wait another eight months, y'hear?
|
-
As the father of young adults who are of college age and too-soon-to-be (20, 17, 16, 12 and 4), I watched with horror as events unfolded this week on the campus of Virginia Tech. My solemn prayers are with the families of the dead and wounded, and with those students and parents who will have to deal with the natural fear that comes from confronting evil in an up-close and personal way. As a law enforcement officer, gun collector, and supporter of the U.S. Constitution, I watched the predictable political aftermath. Calls both for and against further restrictions on gun ownership were heard on every news channel and internet forum. Upon calm reflection, my view are unchanged. Well, that's not quite true; my long-held views are strengthened even more.
My friend Mrs. Chili blogged her concerns about gun ownership. She wrote me privately and asked my opinion. With your permission, I'll just use my slightly-edited reply for the rest of this post: On this date 232 years ago, a shot heard 'round the world was fired in a dispute over gun control, so it's an appropriate discussion to be having today. (Note: this was written on April 19.)
I've grown weary of the "Constitutional right" argument, because too many people have adopted the mistaken view that rights somehow come from the U.S. Constitution. That's simply not the case; the rights enumerated there are basic human rights, which exist without regard to the Constitution.
Every person has the right to life, and to defend that life against unwarranted force, whether by criminals, government, or criminal governments, and has the inherent right to acquire, own, and use whatever defensive tools serve that purpose.
Guns are simply the most logical and effect tool for the job. They are an equalizer, giving the elderly and paraplegic the same defensive effectiveness as the young and muscular.
Gun control has created more danger, not less, when it comes to "guns out on the streets". Would you prefer to walk a dark street in the worst neighborhood in New Hampshire, where anyone may legally and openly carry a pistol with no license or registration, or the very best neighborhood in the District of Columbia, where there is a total ban on handguns? I would choose the former, especially if I was unarmed.
Gun control laws do not dissuade criminals; they only affect those who are inclined to follow the law. If a total ban on private gun ownership were to pass, how would it be enforced? Guns cannot be made to disappear. Even if they could, that wouldn't be a good thing: we had a world without guns once, and it was ruled by gangs of the strongest and most vicious men bearing swords and clubs. We called it the Dark Ages.
And to borrow a phrase, "When machine shops are outlawed, only outlaws can make guns." If barefoot and illiterate Khyber Pass natives can turn a truck axle into a functional AK-47 using nothing more complex than a charcoal fire and a file, I predict a booming underground gun manufacturing industry if the U.S. were to ban guns. Prohibition will have no more effect on guns than it did on alcohol, nor than it does today on illegal drugs.
My views on gun control are the same as expressed by L. Neil Smith in his "Atlanta Declaration". It's usually abbreviated to the opening sentence, but you can read the whole speech here: http://www.lneilsmith.org/atlanta.html
"Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission."
There can be no "common sense" restrictions on a basic human right. Rights are not subject to a vote by the majority, nor the mandates of rulers. Rights either are or aren't; they exist whether they are recognized or not. The lowliest slave in the most oppressive kingdom has the same rights as you and I, even if he can't assert and enjoy them.
In a humorous coincidence, prolific blogger --and Texas deputy sheriff-- Law Dog mirrored some of my words almost identically. Note his comment about charcoal fires and AK-47s. As I told him, "Minds of a feather think together."
Prohibition, whether of alcohol, recreational drugs, or guns, always produces side effects far worse than the problem they purport to fix. The problem is not the guns.
|
-
Wasn't I just talking about unintended consequences, and how laws, strictly applied, can result in the furthest thing from justice? North Carolina has law making it a felony to "shoot a missile" into a car, which is written broadly to include throwing things. It covers not only firing bullets, but truly dangerous behavior like throwing bricks off overpasses. Makes sense, right? Well, it makes sense until you read the story of Jessica Hall. Miss Hall, 25, was frustrated by a driver who had cut her off twice in heavy traffic. In a case of two wrongs not making a right, she threw her empty McDonald's drink at the other driver, where it splashed some ice and soda on the passenger. One would think the proper remedy would be a stern dressing down, paying to have the car detailed, and paying the passenger's cleaning bill. Perhaps spend a weekend of "community service" picking up other people's McDonald's cups from the roadside. One would think that would be a good and sufficient remedy. But thinking, it seems, isn't allowed in North Carolina. Miss Hall was prosecuted and convicted of the above-mentioned felony. The mandatory minimum sentence is two years in prison. Two years for throwing a cup. A. Paper. Cup. The judge, finding the sentence unacceptable, sentenced her to five years' probation. That's on top of the seven weeks she had already spent in jail. Seven weeks in jail. Five years on probation. A felony record for life. For a paper cup and ice. But North Carolina has laws, you see, and the laws must be obeyed, and they must be enforced. And in a slavish devotion to The Law worthy of Inspector Javert, North Carolina is at least consistent: two days after Jessica Hall was released from jail, Allen Tat Le was arrested and charged under the same law, for dousing a car with cup of coffee.
The next time you're tempted to say, "There ought to be a law," please don't.
|
-
There is a book that is rather well-known in the pro-gun world, with the title Unintended Consequences. Its theme is the fallout from well-intended gun control laws and their natural conclusion; things go badly, to say the least.
I read today of another law, whose intent is noble, but whose unintended consequences could generate frightening fallout. Did you know that it is illegal for a U.S. resident or citizen to have sexual contact with anyone
under the age of 18, outside U.S. borders? Even if such contact would be perfectly legal at home in the U.S.? The law doesn't even require sex to take place, but merely attempting to have sex.
That sounds like a noble idea: stop U.S. perverts from going to poor countries and taking advantage of local custom by having sex with young children. What could be wrong with that? Unintended consequences, that's what.
For starters, it sets the age of consent at 18, even though many states allow consent at 16, or even younger. If two teenagers made out on the wrong side of the street in Derby Line, they could face a mandatory thirty years in prison.
"Oh, but that's not what the law intends!" you say? Of course it's not. But the danger of law is not what it intends, but what it allows. Income taxes were passed because they would only apply to "those people", not to "us regular people".
Gun control laws were passed because they would only apply to "those people", not to "us regular people".
Immigration restrictions were passed because they would only apply to "those people", not to "our kind of people".
Warrantless wiretaps and surveillance were accepted because they would only apply to "those people", not to "us regular people".
Laws
defining "child pornography" to include toddlers in bathtubs were
accepted because they would only apply to "those people", not to "us
proud parents".
After any law passes, within a few years the
intent of the law is forgotten, yet the letter remains. Eventually we all become
"those people".
This law is accepted because it applies to grown men seeking sex from prepubescent children. How long until some parents are shocked to find that
their 18 year old son has become one of "those people" for something that is perfectly legal both at home and in Canada, or Cancun? Unintended consequences, indeed.
|
-
I feel awful. I've been sick with the flu for three days. I managed to leave the house long enough to order flowers for February 14, but I still haven't made it to the store for a card. Good thing we included that "in sickness and in health" thing in our vows, because this was my lovely bride and I five years ago today. 
Isn't she lovely?
Our family were there, too. Her mother and mine, my sister, her brothers, and the "his-n-hers" kids. There's one kid missing from the family photo, because he came along exactly nine months and one day later. 
Here's to many more happy years, Mrs. Craig. I look forward to growing old with you in the North Country. Happy Valentine's Day, and Happy Anniversary. And... hey. You know?  I love you.
|
-
One of the things I love about the New Hampshire system of government is the ease with which elected officials can be approached. Their responses are generally open and forthright, and almost always polite, even when they disagree with their correspondents. At least one state representative apparently hasn't spent much time polishing his people skills, though. Over at NHfree.com, there has been some discussion on House Bill 92, which is a bill to decriminalize marijuana. Liberty lovers are being urged to contact their representatives, especially those on the Criminal Justice and Public Safety committee, to urge support for the bill. Here is one fellow's very polite letter to his representative: Dear Representative Delmar Burridge
I hope you are in good
health. I understand that you are on the Criminal Justice and Public
Safety committee which is going to hear testimony this Wednesday on
HB92, decriminalizing marijuana. I know you are opposed to this bill,
but I trust you can understand how important of an issue this is to
many people both in Keene and the rest of New Hampshire. I hope you
will consider passing it through committee so that all sides will have
their chance to speak on it. NH has some of the most draconian
legislation on marijuana, and hundreds of our friends and family
members are being arrested for choosing to smoke instead of drink.
Please think about passing this through committee so everyone can
listen to the opposition and have their chance to speak.
Thank you very much,
Toby Iselin
Keene NH Apparently Mr. Burridge isn't much of one for polite conversation. Here is his response: Dear Toby:
My youngest brother Albert who I was very close
to died from head injuries sustained when he wrecked his car in West
Virginia. His wife walked away. He was a triple major in college;
biology, philosophy, and psychology and was smoking a joint before the
crash. It is all very vivid including the anguish my parents went
through. This occurred in the 1970s and I still miss him. I began work
as a juvenile probation officer in the poorest section in Philadelphia
in 1969 and the above described experience pales to my on the job,
eyeball to eyeball observation of family devastation I saw
daily.....and these males were reefer users just like you....saying the
same dumb stuff just like you and they were not smart college smart. I
saw lots of blood and death. Trust me, these campers were not soon
going to be setting the world on fire. Some did suffer severe burns.
Last
night one of your buddies called me twice even asking me to be on his
TV show. He was yelling and screaming and I hung up on him. You have to
chill this guy out. I will say to you what I said to three different
callers; I will vote no on this Bill and have lots of very chilling
stories to relate to the other committee members so it goes my way.
Suggest
you change all your friends, be the designated driver when you are old
enough to drink since you don't drink. I will sign the Bill that keeps
tobacco out of the bars when it come up in the house so you don't get
second hand smoke.
I am copying two members of the Keene Police
Department in case you want to change your ways and act legal and save
your friends.
You are very passionate in your beliefs and would make a great snitch. It is thrilling to dime on your so called friends.
Be healthy and be well.
Delmar D. Burridge
DBurridge @ne.rr.com
Well, it's certainly forthright and honest, and leaves no doubt where he stands on the issue. I wonder if his constituents will leave any doubt how they feel about being spoken to in this way by a state representative. Edit to add: Toby will be following this up at his own blog, at freekeene.com.
|
-
"Who's there?" If you get the chance to ask, then the knock at your door is probably not courtesy of the local drug task force. For the record: I am a law enforcement officer. I despise that terminology, and greatly
prefer "peace officer", both as a job title, and a statement of purpose. But, those who wrote the laws authorizing my position and job title saw differently. When I Am King, I'll fix that. (Well... should I find myself coronated, I'd promptly abolish 99% of the laws, then abolish my own office.)
Anyhoo. Many of us who serve are very troubled by the trend toward militarization of law enforcement. There it is again, that word: "enforcement". Not nearly so palatable as "keeping the peace" or "serving the public", both of which should be the goal.
The recent death of Kathryn Johnston, who lived alone at age 92 (or 88, depending on the source), and who died while shooting back during a raid by an Atlanta narcotics squad, has caused a great deal of discussion amongst my colleagues and peers, both face to face and on various Internet discussion groups. If you've followed this story, you know that the police officers had a warrant; you can read it here. The confidential informant named in the warrant denies that he was anywhere near the house in question, and is in federal protective custody while the FBI investigates. There are writers with greater status than mine, who have devoted much more time to scholarly research on this subject. I'll shut up now, and let you read what they have to say about it. (All links will open in a new window.)
Popular Science The Examiner Christian Science Monitor Please read, and keep this in mind the next time you want police to "just do something!"
|
-
Quick, what's wrong with this headline?
(CBS)
NEW YORK A Burger King restaurant manager is being charged with
shooting a teenage boy dead after the two argued and the boy spit in
the manager's face.
Police
say 16-year-old Shaka Walcott and 45-year-old Ronald Johannes had been
arguing for more than a week. Police say the teenager returned to the
Bronx Burger King Saturday night and was shot several times in the
chest by the manager.
Witnesses say Johannes also was injured
in the fight and he left the scene while the teen-ager writhed on the
ground. Police say Walcott was taken to a hospital, where he was
pronounced dead. They said Johannes was bleeding from gunshot wounds
when he stumbled back to his home, where they arrested him.
Johannes is charged with murder, manslaughter and criminal possession of a weapon.
Customers at the Burger King, however, said Johannes was difficult to deal with and used to kick them out.
Stop. Rewind. What did that say again? From the headline and first paragraph, we assume a murdering thug Burger King manager blew his top and gunned down a teenager for being rowdy. Only in the third paragraph do we find this: Johannes was bleeding from gunshot wounds
when he stumbled back to his home, where they arrested him.
No mention of how the manager came to be perforated and punctured. Even though it's been almost 25 years since I took "Introduction to Journalism", I'm fairly sure that details like that are covered under both the "what" and "why" questions, and possibly "how". New York? No thanks!
|
-
Whew, what an election cycle! I previously wrote about a young man named Tyler Stearns, who has impressed me with his maturity, drive, and political wisdom. While Tyler didn't win, he came darn close. He trailed the winner by only 90 votes, and even beat the incumbent:
Bob Matheson (D) 496
Tyler Stearns (I) 406
Bonnie Ham (R-Inc) 383 While I'm not pleased that so many voters punched a straight ticket, the outgoing majority had fair warning: their core supporters have been telling them since 1996 that a platform of pork and appeasement was the exact opposite of the ideals that brought them to power in 1994. I admit that I'm a GOP-leaning "small-l libertarian", but I've been so displeased with the GOP's fawning and pandering that I'm not sorry to see them go. I'll take pro-life, pro-gun Democrats over wishy-washy Republicans, any time. So, too, will Charles Schumer; he engineered the takeover by putting conservative candidates into key races against "moderate" Republicans. And so the pendulum swings. Meanwhile... LawDog in '08!
|
-
Following NH politics, I've been very impressed with a young man running for state representative from Grafton County, District 4 (Thornton/Woodstock). Not only does he express himself very well, he's obviously thought out the issues and knows which side to take in order to "Keep New Hampshire New Hampshire". Please visit, and lend your support if you're in his district: http://www.votestearns.com/
|
-
There are times when too many words flood one's mind, and there are times when no words come at all. I'm unsure which is the case right now, as I attempt to offer my condolences to the family and friends of Michael Briggs, the Manchester police officer murdered by a lifelong violent thug. Any words I could offer would be inadequate. I hope my prayers for comfort are enough. Requiescat In Pace, Michael Briggs.
|
-
I'm just trying to understand here. I don't pretend to be anything other than someone who would consider it a compliment to be called a "flatlander", "from away", if only I was already living in NH. I've been an outsider all my life, but being "not from around heah" is a title I'm anxious to claim. In all our studies about moving to NH, we've done a fair amount of reading. Including the Constitution of NH, with the not-so-clear "Part First/Part Second" structure. One thing that is clear, is Article 83 from Part the Second, which says: "It shall be
the duty of the legislators and magistrates, in all future periods of
this government, to cherish the interest of literature and the
sciences, and all seminaries and public schools, to encourage private
and public institutions, rewards, and immunities for the promotion of
agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and
natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the
principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private
charity, industry and economy, honesty and punctuality, sincerity,
sobriety, and all social affections, and generous sentiments, among the
people." Cherish. Encourage. Countenance and inculcate. Did I overlook something in the constitution that says Town A, having a higher tax base, should subsidize Town B's schools? Did I miss the part that says "cherish" really means "pay for"? For more than two centuries, no one ever found "richer towns must pay more" anywhere in Article 83, until the infamous series of Claremont decisions by the state supreme court. We're talking New Hampshire, after all, where "local" rules rule, and where a statewide broadbased tax scheme is looked at like a three-horned monster at the ladies' afternoon garden party. I'm still stuck in Texas, but I plead with my future Yankee friends and neighbors: do whatever you can to strike down statewide school funding. We've had "Robin Hood" school funding here in Texas for many years; the increased taxes don't go to classrooms, but they do go to lawyers and bureaucrats who will argue endlessly before judges about "adequacy" and "equality". Please keep New Hampshire what it is, and has been: the first colony to declare independence, the only state whose constitution guarantees the right to revolution, and one of the few states whose constitutions do not explicity require public schools (despite what the supreme court has dreamed up). Save us a spot; we're coming "home" to New Hampshire.
|
-
About two years ago, my beloved and I were chewing over our options if my employer should close the ancient rickety location where I currently work. After finding perfectly good reasons to reject several dozen other locations, I casually tossed out another option: "Well, they're planning a new facility in New Hampshire in a couple of years..." Contrary pounced: "Are you serious? How soon can we go?" "Well, ummmm... I was kinda kidding, baby." "I'm not. I'll move there in a heartbeat!" I had to grin. "Well, then, let me give you the details on something else I've been reading up on... " And so, having never set foot in the state, two happily Southern souls decided to uproot themselves and their children, and all their critters (3-4 dogs at any given moment, 3 cats, two turtles, a tank full of fish, a crotchety African Gray parrot, and various and sundry foster critters), and move to New Hampshire, sight unseen. Mind you, neither of us had ever set foot in New England. Contrary was born in Iowa, and spent her childhood bouncing back and forth between Dubuque and Louisiana. I'm originally from Arkansas and have lived in Texas for 17 years, but I did spend three years in Germany. So, we're both familiar with "real" winters, and we're not worried about that. Our friends and family were aghast. "You're moving where? Why on earth...?" Well, our friends and Contrary's family were aghast. My family doesn't exactly know yet. You see, my sweet, saintly little mother, silver haired and 73, stands five-foot-nothin', and anyone with any sense is scared to tell her that half her grandchildren are moving 1,700 miles away. Being sensible folks, we thought we'd wait until, oh, Vermont or so before breaking the news.
As for the rest of them, we just tell them all about the New Hampshire advantage: no sales tax, no income tax, adults are trusted to act like adults when it comes to choosing safety belts in cars or helmets when riding motorcycles. New Hampshire has real seasons and beautiful mountains. Hunting, fishing, and outdoor recreation. It's a gun-friendly state, where the spirit of independence still stands strong. And contrary to local misconceptions, New Hampshire is most definitely not Massachusetts or Vermont.
Why move to New Hampshire? Why aren't you?
|
-
I've learned over the years that jealousy is a sin, and an an undesirable trait. I don't care. I've got a green streak a mile wide for those of you actually living in New Hampshire.
I've been in love with New Hampshire for quite some time now, and having to leave "home" to return to this place I live wasn't easy.
Our next trip to the North Country will be a foliage tour. Cheesy? Of course. But Fall foliage is one of the most beautiful things about the Granite State, and "real" seasons is one of the reasons we're moving.
When I see the foliage photos at WMUR, I stop caring about the mundane stuff, and I want to move now! You know, mundane stuff like a job, a house and mortgage...
When I shared those photos with Contrary, she expressed amazement that even Berlin looked beautiful. Nothing against those good Berlinites, but it's not the most photogenic city.
Texas doesn't have an appreciable autumn. By the end of summer, everything is already brown; then it cools down a little (a very little), and the brown leaves fall onto the brown grass. We're approaching the middle of October, and my air conditioner is running. I'll gladly trade my air conditioning bill for a heating oil bill. Appreciate what you've got, New Hampshire. And save us a spot, because we'll be there as fast as we can!
|
|
|
|