1 - 5
Of course in place of our individual ability to protect ourselves, our loved ones and our neighbors, we'd have the chance to see the pretty blue helmets that might be 'deployed' (o-o-o, there's a militaristic word!) to peace keep (or is that 'piece' keep?? Either way- Keep all women and girls inside!). And we could watch them 'run for the ramparts to hide' when the first sign of 'danger' came down the road. [We'll have to remember to keep the kids off the streets, too, if the pretty Blue Helmets come - they're rather fragile and twitchy and kids would scare 'em.] But the question would still remain: who would pay for them to protect us? Perhaps the Blue Moon would visit; but can we Bank on it?.
The incident in Texas took place in Killeen at Luby's Cafeteria in 1991 and law required that weapons be kept locked in vehicles - concealed weapons were not allowed into public places. Hupp was so ticked that the law stood in the way of her doing something helpful that she ran for the Texas legislature and initiated the bill that came into effect in 1995 allowing concealed carry an idea that has since saved a number of lives. "HER choice" was to do something helpful; the lawmakers' choice was to sit on their hands and let somebody else do it - as long as they had police escorts. There IS no better example than T2's example. Read some of her own writings on the incident. She's got more guts than most of today's slugs in 'public office.'
In response to:

In Praise of Discrimination

P.26 Wrote: Jun 27, 2012 11:49 AM
Yes! Just a few important adjustments, please: 1. "You MAY NOT charge more than $X (PLUS TAXES and APPLICABLE FEES!) ....etc. 2. Transfer from UNWILLING ...to ANONYMOUS (i.e. very often ungrateful). 3. Washington's intrusion is an absolute guarantee of abject failure on some (or all) levels! Hot air, hollow ideas, soundbites, and continual preening before the cameras while 'ummm-ing' and 'errr-ing' has never proven successful.
In response to:

In Praise of Discrimination

P.26 Wrote: Jun 27, 2012 11:36 AM
Bad cuf, It’s so good to see somebody is really, really ‘caring’ about ‘societies[sic]’ money. A question arises: how does ‘societies[sic]’ get/make its money? Make something saleable? Worthwhile? ANS: No! ‘Societies’ gets its money at the hands of ‘officials’ who, with the absolute influence of ‘force’ (e.g. police, lawyers, jail, loss of freedom, etc.) come to citizens and relieve them of the burden. I.e. they take it! To the innately tiny minds of politico-bureaucrats, most other persons are not worth expenditures of any size/kind. They only waste the money the bureaucrat could better use. The money (econ 101 or not) is the individual’s to use as he chooses. Sorry, politicians are proven to be too stupid to spend anyone else's money.
In response to:

Stupidity Laws Could Have Stopped Obama

P.26 Wrote: May 22, 2012 3:41 PM
SpaceVeg & MoreFreedom.. What seems to be going around on the sanctified Obamamedia is the implied belief that The ONE could (would) have 'done something to make sure that the people lost none of their hard earned money.' That they haven't lost a penny that they didn't freely invest on their own is lost in most of the arguments. Unlike the USGovt under current management, JPM is likely to survive - and perhaps even to prosper to the benefit of their investors.. again unlike their far less fortunate counterparts in the US government "investments" such as GM, Chrysler, Fanny/Fred, Solyndra, etc, etc. etc. Yes, investing involves risk, and the more gov't regulations forced into the deal, the better the chance the risk will swamp them.
1 - 5