Last Updated:November 18 @ 07:54 am

City Official Says Load Your Guns to Battle Crime

By Bobby Eberle

A city attorney in California is taking heat for comments made during a recent city council meeting. Faced with a bankrupt city government and cutbacks to the police force, the official told citizens to "lock their door and load their guns" as a way to fight crime. Was this over the top or simply telling it like it is?

As reported by CBS in Los Angeles, San Bernardino City Attorney Jim Penman spoke before a group of about 150 local residents. They are frustrated and worried about the growing crime rate and falling police response times.

What's interesting in this report is the dismay that the anchor and reporter have that Penman would actually say what he said. This is a city whose murder rate has gone up 50% in just one year. Is it any wonder that people are frustrated and scared?

If the police can't protect the citizens, then the only logical alternative is for people to protect themselves. Not only is it a constitutional right, but, in this case, it's a necessity.

Penman said the city is dealing with bankruptcy, which has forced officials to cut its police force by about 80 officers. Consequently, there's been growing criticism about the police department's response time.

"Let's be honest, we don't have enough police officers. We have too many criminals living in this city. We have had 45 murders this year...that's far too high for a city of this size," Penman said.

Perhaps California and its cities and towns should take a look around the country at governments that are doing things right. California may have low car emissions and less litter, but if you're shot in the head, it really doesn't do you much good, does it?

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.6/10 (150 votes cast)
City Official Says Load Your Guns to Battle Crime, 9.6 out of 10 based on 150 ratings

Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:


  1. bna42Comment by bna42
    December 1, 2012 @ 9:07 am

    “If the police can’t protect the citizens, then the only logical alternative is for people to protect themselves. Not only is it a constitutional right, but, in this case, it’s a necessity.”

    What is interesting about this story is the fact that people need to be told to defend themselves. The local police department has never been able to protect people. When called, they show up after the fact to clean up the mess. As someone said, “when seconds matter, the police are only minutes away”.”

    Government has indoctrinated the people to depend on the “authorities” for everyone including protection, and some cities have made gun ownership extremely difficult if not impossible in order to keep people from defending themselves.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (76 votes cast)
    • Texas GuyComment by Texas Guy
      December 1, 2012 @ 12:06 pm

      Let’s get this straight: self defense is NOT a “constitutional” right. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say you have the right, or the obligation, to protect yourself. It merely says you have the right to keep and bear arms. Defending yourself, and your loved ones, is a God-given right that no government can take from you, just as it is neither necessary nor within its power to give it to you in the first place.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (60 votes cast)
    • David in MAComment by David in MA
      December 1, 2012 @ 4:22 pm

      Good advice, as for the police “protecting” anyone, I believe some time back the supreme court ruled that the police have no responsibility “protect” anyone.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (26 votes cast)
    • Son Of ThunderComment by mcrank
      December 3, 2012 @ 5:36 pm

      If this had been practiced all along—across the land—we would have a MUCH lower crime rate everywhere. Would-be criminals need to understand that they operate at risk—that THEY can be on the wrong end of the gun and be the victim. Criminals have, for far too long, been the benefactors of laws that are supposed to protect the innocent.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  2. mrsgunnut10Comment by mrsgunnut10
    December 1, 2012 @ 9:42 am

    How many times do the people of these United States of America, ALL OF THEM , have to be told that the Supreme Court, of these same United States, have ruled that none of the Law Enforcement Agencies have a responsibility to protect them 24/7. Even if you have a Offices, that are fully manned, City, County, or State, they DO NOT have to protect all individual Citizens. The Court says that these Officers cannot be expected to be by the side, next to, or even close to any individual, when a crime actually happens. Now what does that mean??? It is in plain English that you had better be prepared to protect you and yours by yourself if needed. In other words, as Mr. Jim Penman says, lock your doors, load your weapons, and/or use what ever means you have for your own protection. Depending on somebody else to protect you and yours just might get you seriously hurt – or worse. Thank you for your time. TSgt., USAF Retired.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (58 votes cast)
    • David in MAComment by David in MA
      December 2, 2012 @ 10:35 am

      Seconds count when the police are minutes away.

      Lock & Load!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (12 votes cast)
  3. FrogmanComment by Frogman
    December 1, 2012 @ 10:08 am

    Soon to be coming to a town near you.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (32 votes cast)
  4. elaineComment by elaine
    December 1, 2012 @ 10:15 am

    This list was compiled by a blogger. Do they really think they can take anyone’s guns away?
    “Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when
    everybody stands around reloading”.
    –Thomas Jefferson

    When injustice becomes law
    Resistance becomes duty.
    Thomas Jefferson

    “The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it.” — Thomas Jefferson

    Interesting slant on things
    AMERICA’S HUNTERS — Pretty Amazing!

    The world’s largest army…
    America ‘s hunters!
    I had never thought about this…

    A blogger added up the deer license sales
    in just a handful of states
    and arrived at a striking

    were over 600,000 hunters
    this season in the state of Wisconsin .
    Allow me to restate that number:

    Over the last
    several months,
    Wisconsin’s hunters became the eighth
    largest army in the world.

    More men under arms than in Iran .

    More than France and Germany combined.

    These men deployed to
    the woods of a single American state,
    Wisconsin, to hunt with
    firearms, and no one was killed.

    That number pales in comparison to the
    750,000 who hunted the woods of
    Pennsylvania and Michigan ‘s
    700,000 hunters,
    all of whom
    have now returned home safely.
    Toss in a quarter million hunters
    in West Virginia
    and it literally establishes the fact
    that the hunters of those four
    states alone would comprise the
    largest army in the world.
    And then add in the total number
    of hunters in the other
    46 states.
    It’s millions more.

    The point?

    America will forever be safe
    from foreign invasion
    with that kind of home-grown

    it’s not just
    a way to fill the freezer..
    It’s a matter of
    national security.

    That’s why all enemies,
    foreign and domestic,
    want to see us

    Food for thought,
    when next we
    consider gun control.
    Have A Great Day!
    Overall it’s true,
    so if we disregard some assumptions
    that hunters
    don’t possess the same skills as soldiers,
    the question would still remain…
    what army of

    2 million
    would want to face
    30, 40, 50 million armed citizens.


    For the sake of our freedom,
    don’t ever allow gun control
    or confiscation of guns.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (90 votes cast)
    • mysticComment by mystic
      December 1, 2012 @ 2:19 pm

      For Elaine: Beautifully posted… Brava!

      We live in Nor Cal… the big slumber city (as in all our capital hill politicians went to sleep along time ago)has taken a hard step towards bringing down private gun ownership rights. Its been more and more prevalent these past two years with a huge emphasis on ammo first and small arms going under the ‘political knife’.

      I have no issue with registering my guns. I have no issue waiting 30 days before I can pick up a newly purchased gun. I don’t have an issue with safety training and basic gun ‘how too’s’ as part of being a registered gun owner. Heck, I don’t even mind the thought of a full mental background check to accompany the basic background check for felonies/misdemeanors and the like. Just like a drivers license, the right is available to us if we meet certain criteria and are not criminals/criminal background, violent or mental head cases.

      What does bother me? Having to go under the microscope if said registered gun owner has defended himself/herself, and now becomes a priority to the law enforcement that deems you the criminal instead of the crack head/meth head/violent thug who broke into your home threatening your family and home. This makes me shake my head and wonder why the scum who perpetrated violence against you isn’t held immediately responsible, hauled away (dead or alive) the hand shook of the person who defended themselves against said thug and left to be.

      How many lawsuits in just the last decade have we all read within this very topic. “he was such a nice quiet boy” or “I don’t believe they could do such a thing” has become the mantra of excuses when one of these thugs perpetrates violence against an innocent citizen. Said citizen who protected themselves become equal with the villain if not worse within the media. These thugs have even gone as far as to SUE the private citizen THEY assaulted, asking for hundreds of thousands of dollars to millions for a bullet to the knee, or to the arm…or wherever. It’s enough to make ya wanna scream!

      Best deterrent from a home evasion? *Shuck Shuck* (locked and loaded noise) coming from a darkened hallway ….: } If that isn’t warning enough…they deserve what they get!


      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (37 votes cast)
    • burningmanComment by burningman
      December 1, 2012 @ 3:11 pm

      Mystic, my guess is the reason the law enforcement and the lawyers go nuts if someone does dispatch a home invader or other criminal is that if all of the criminals were similarly dispatched, they would all be out of a job.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (24 votes cast)
    • mysticComment by mystic
      December 1, 2012 @ 3:16 pm

      For Burningman: Good point. As another poster put it… Police/law enforcement aren’t proactive…they are reactive. Meaning they don’t stop crime, they clean up after the crime and begin the doling out process of who is to blame.

      January 2013, California enmasse is putting up some pretty stiff regulations on gun ownership…right down to registering how much ammo you can have in any given 30 day period to a max of how much you can keep on hand within your home. It’s gotten silly.

      For Christmas…everyone is getting the max ammo I can buy for them… with a note telling them to hide it under the floor boards to keep it safe. Friggen Jerry Brown is right up there with the fringe left… ‘guns can’t be dangerous without ammunition’ he recently was quoted as saying. Well gee Mr. Gov…. many of us can and do make our own.


      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (20 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      December 1, 2012 @ 3:29 pm

      “I have no issue with registering my guns. I have no issue waiting 30 days before I can pick up a newly purchased gun. I don’t have an issue with safety training and basic gun ‘how too’s’ as part of being a registered gun owner.”

      mystic, This is exactly how citizens slowly lose all their rights and freedoms. Registering guns, 30-day waiting periods, background checks, etc. are ALL infringements on your right to own a firearm which the Constitution forbids. Escalation from these restrictions leads to cities like Chicago and Washington D.C. which blatantly violate your rights and tell you that you can not own a firearm within the city. Both these cities had cases go all the way to the Supreme Court and were admonished to change their laws, but they arrogantly decided to make it so expensive and so difficult to meet all the “licensing requirements” that citizens still are prohibited from owning firearms. Yet read every week about the number of people gunned down nightly in Chicago, the city where law-abiding citizens are kept from owning firearms. If you will look at the Drudge report, today is an article stating that 16 people were shot in Chicago LAST NIGHT.

      If you “have no issue registering your guns”, talk to many of the nations who were OK with gun registration, and ask them how long it was before government confiscated ALL the private firearms.

      The only thing that has kept us from becoming a tyrannical dictatorship in the U.S. is the fact that there are millions of UNREGISTERED guns in the hands of private citizens, and the government fears us. That is the reason Obama is so adamant about getting the U.S. to approve this new UN small arms treaty. It will prohibit individuals from buying, selling, or trading firearms on their own, and will completely gut our Second Amendment rights.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (27 votes cast)
    • David in MAComment by David in MA
      December 2, 2012 @ 10:43 am

      “so if we disregard some assumptions that hunters don’t possess the same skills as soldiers,”

      Hunters, familure with firearms make better soldiers and I am betting will last longer on the battlefield than some FN whimp from California who never handled a firearm.

      When I went into the U.S. Navy, at bootcamp the instructor was suprised I knew what end of the rifle the bullett came out of.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (9 votes cast)
    • mysticComment by mystic
      December 5, 2012 @ 12:10 pm

      For BNA42: Completely agree with your post. In theory, my gun ownership is protected within the Constitution…period, end of story. However…and here it comes…we are not in the early to mid 1800, stuck within a limited understanding and education of what type of society we would become.

      Example: A hard core angry drunk with a rap sheet a mile long for disorderly/fighting/abuse/assault charges comes up to buy a gun. No way in Gods Green that guy should be able to attain a gun in order to use it in his next drunken rampage. Is this the main of who owns guns in America? The surprising answer is No…no this person is not the norm…and there in lays the issue.

      Mentally ill… something we very carefully label and tip toe around even in these modern days. I certainly don’t want a psychotic to attain a gun legally under a 5150 diagnosis. (harm to self and or others). We have enough information now in these present days to ensure those who rightly attain a gun are indeed not thugs, gangsters, criminals, thieves, druggies, or violent mental health patients. Oddly, I’m ok with making sure rightful gun ownership is applies…so that the ‘cranks’ of this world are one less weapon armed.

      Do these laws actually curb crime/criminals? by your own post… it doesn’t. And I again agree with you that all the laws in the world do not stop crime or criminals using guns upon the innocent. Chicago is a fantastic example of what you are speaking too…and if anyone does not understand what is going on there, I strongly urge them to research it out. With their strict no gun laws, one would think it a perfectly quiet and beautiful city…instead it is the most crime ridden and gun riddled city in the nation (that is as of the last information I had…could be number 2 or 3).

      I may not mind proving out that I am a mentally healthy, pro active home defender that has a gun. In my mind, if we can curb any of the ‘bad’ guys from attaining a gun…while ensuring persons can defend themselves from said thugs…then I’m fine with it…willing to jump the hoops as it were. Just like a drivers license…I have the hoops to jump through in order to operate said vehicle within my home town/city/county.


      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
  5. vesuvius1313Comment by vesuvius1313
    December 1, 2012 @ 10:30 am

    No matter how many police officers there are citizens need to protect themselves especially at home. It shouldn’t take a city with financial problems cutting the police force to get people to understand they need to protect themselves.

    Maybe this situation will teach others why having citizens with guns is a good way to keep crime down. Too many people think taking away guns from law abiding will reduce crime but they are fools that don’t think through the issue and see criminals will be more embolden if citizens don’t have guns.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (35 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      December 1, 2012 @ 10:53 am

      “Too many people think taking away guns from law abiding will reduce crime”

      Not only are these people foolish, but they have allowed themselves to be used by the gun control crowd to help disarm us. No one in their right mind would think that disarming law-abiding citizens would have any affect on criminals who by definition are NOT law-abiding. If anyone will take a look at the mass shootings over the past 10 years, EVERY incident occurred in a “gun-free” zone such as a school, church, government building, restaurant, or any place where signs were posted prohibiting firearms on the premises.

      I CARRY a gun! PEOPLE ASK WHY.

      I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
      I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

      I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
      I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

      I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
      I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

      I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
      I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

      I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
      I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

      I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
      I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

      I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
      I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

      I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
      I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

      I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
      I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

      I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
      I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

      Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take an *** whoopin’…..

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (52 votes cast)
    • truckmanComment by truckman
      December 1, 2012 @ 5:44 pm

      This discussion cannot be repeated often enough! And just to let the pacifists around me know,I hereby promise NOT to inflict myself on their behalf if some armed thug should break into their homes to rob and/or kill them. I DO,however,wish it to be known that if ANYONE enters MY home unannounced or unwanted,they stand a very good chance of leaving via the same route,backwards about a foot off the ground,with a hole in their torso big enough to reach through. I welcome visitors,any day,anytime,but CALL FIRST.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (17 votes cast)
  6. elixirmixerComment by elixirmixer
    December 1, 2012 @ 11:38 am

    Being a lawyer, Jim Penman is probably a democRAT. If he is, he’s part of the problem. However, he’s right about keeping guns loaded to protect yourself. What’s the point of an unloaded gun?

    When faced with any kind of fiscal discipline, democRATs always play the “we have to cut police and fire protection services” mantra. Why?

    Why not cut the frivolous social spending, instead. Why do they always target needed services like police and fire departments?

    This other “social” garbage, like paying “adult parasite losers” to sit on their ***, can wait.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (21 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      December 1, 2012 @ 12:48 pm

      “Why do they always target needed services like police and fire departments?”

      Simple answer: SCARE TACTIC. They know what when they threaten to target police and fire, the people will be scared and stop demanding spending cuts.

      They never address fraud, waste, excessive salaries or benefits, overlapping government agencies, welfare, foreign aid, or any other expenditure because they do NOT intend to cut spending. When it is suggested, they use the scare tactics pointing to fire, police, Social Security, Medicare, and other programs which people depend on for life. These programs are all funded by taxes, and the politicians are taking a larger share of the tax money than they should be entitled to for themselves.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (26 votes cast)
    • truckmanComment by truckman
      December 1, 2012 @ 5:47 pm

      Isn’t it ironic that public officials are near the LAST to face layoffs and pay cuts? That’s where the pay cuts and lay offs should BEGIN.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (14 votes cast)
  7. eagletalComment by eagletal
    December 1, 2012 @ 12:55 pm

    San Bernardino is no worse than Stockton, CA (worst city in CA in 2010 for crime.) All my guns are loaded and ready if needed. Impossible to get a CCW here but carry anyway. First line of defense is a 1.5 million volt stun gun next is a 9mm.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (23 votes cast)
  8. 1951cheComment by 1951che
    December 1, 2012 @ 12:56 pm

    As a native Idahoan [who grew up on a farm, harvesting all sorts of critters for food] I am proud to say that we NEVER lost our common-sense as have many in cities and particularly CA and NY. We had a closet-ful of guns (about 8 or 10 as I recall), and AS KIDS WE ALL GREW UP AROUND THEM AND LEARNED TO USE AND RESPECT THEM AS “TOOLS”.

    Now that I live in UPSTATE New York, I can see clearly that the sensibility of Idahoans also exists in the rural UPSTATERS, but NOT in the ‘Down-Staters’ of the Albany-NYC corridor, which unfortunately control this screwed-up nanny-state, which WELCOMES ever-more welfare-recipients, yet CHASES-OUT legitimate businesses.

    Here in UPSTATE (Watkins Glen area) most are hunters/fishermen, and most also have a CLOSET-FUL of guns. And guess what? — Crime is NOT rampant here, or even a particular problem (except in certain circles of drug users and dealers!). And the last area guy who climbed in the window of an 85 year-old man’s house to rob him — is DEAD and will NEVER rob, mooch-from, nor bother anyone in any way again.

    California could learn a LOT from those ‘backward flyover states’ where WE WANT TO KEEP OUR GUNS, FREEDOM, RELIGION, and MONEY!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (30 votes cast)
  9. docfreemanComment by docfreeman
    December 1, 2012 @ 3:43 pm

    CA is full of liberal, progressives, and socialist, so now they are sowing what they reap. Perhaps some will wake up and realize that there is more in life than green everything and fewer unions to drain their blood.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (13 votes cast)
    • truckmanComment by truckman
      December 1, 2012 @ 5:55 pm

      Eventually,maybe crime will dry up in Ca.,when it starts getting hard for a liberal/progressive/socialist criminal to find a fellow liberal/progressive/socialist victim who they don’t already know. They’ll HAVE to stick with this description or risk a very sudden,painful end to their career in crime.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
  10. greyhairComment by greyhair
    December 1, 2012 @ 6:59 pm

    I live in a small town and because of various incidences I have been seriously considering buying a gun. A few years ago I house sat and looked after the dogs and horses while the owners were gone several week. At night the dogs slept in the house with me, one of them appointed herself the guard dog and slept in near the door. I was also provided a rifle which I kept near where I slept as with all the break ins in rural areas and people knowing the owners were gone it was thought to be a very wise precaution.
    I think it would be an even wiser precaution in big cities.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
    • truckmanComment by truckman
      December 1, 2012 @ 8:09 pm

      In MY opinion,there’s no valid reason NOT to own a gun,or two,or wherever you draw your limit. Even if you choose not to use it for self defense,it should be a part of every law abiding person’s household,because you have the right to use whatever force is needed to defend yourself,and even if you now reject a gun as an option,it may become your ONLY option in just moments. Remember-When you are facing an attacker,it’s NOT about fighting fair,it’s about SURVIVING!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (10 votes cast)
  11. RPComment by RP
    December 1, 2012 @ 7:11 pm

    Guy from Texas: I have to agree and disagree with you on your accessment that to defend yourself is a God given right, but it is not in the Constitution. Yes, I agree that it is a God given right to defend yourself. The Second Amendment does say you have the right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed. That means you have the right to own a firearm and use it to defend yourself against enemeies foreign and domestic, especially the government. You have the choice and right to defend yourself against anyone that means you harm. It is not the duty of local governments to tell you that you can’t own a firearm to defend yourself. It is your right and obligation to you and your family to defend yourself, because a police force only helps you after a crime has been committed. People would be safer if they did know how to properly use a firearm and keep on in their house at all times.

    I disagree with the person that said it is alright to have a waiting period and registration of a firearm. I don’t disagree with having a person having a training class for the proper usage of a firearm. There are a lot of people that have been injured or killed from not knowing how to use a firearm. As far as registration is concerned, if the registration was used as a tool for law enforcement to know if a gun was stolen, I have no problem. But that was not the intention of law enforcement as much as knowing who owns guns and having a list of names to go,in the case of confiscation.

    Having a waiting period to purchase a firearm is like a man going to the doctor and complaining of severe chest pains. In my town, there have been a few people die in the waiting rooms, while being told it’s probably nothing serious. If you have an instant background check and there is nothing wrong with you criminially, why can’t you just walk out with a firearm when you buy it? What is going to change anything by waiting 3 0r 30 days? If a person is wanting to kill someone with a firearm, a waiting period is not going to deter that person for long. He will either wait and plot to kill the person or he will find another means, if he doesn’t feel like waiting. The only thing a waiting period does is hurt the law abiding. This also gives an open door to anti-gunners that want to shut down gun shows. They want to have a 3 day waiting period for gun shows and most of them last only two or three days. A waiting period does nothing to deter crime, rather stand in the way of the innocent.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (10 votes cast)
    • Texas GuyComment by Texas Guy
      December 1, 2012 @ 8:35 pm

      RP, I have but one brief, simple request: kindly undertake to point out to me exactly where in the Constitution it says you have a right to defend yourself or others. I, sir, have the complete Constitution in front of me as I write this, and am unable to find the specific clause, paragraph or amendment to which you refer. The Second Amendment secures for us the right to keep and bear arms. If that implies self-defense, so be it, but an implication is not the same as stating it specifically. Many court battles are fought over the “implications” in the Constitution, but that venerable document is what it is. We should not be reading things into it that are not there. Doing that is part of why America is in the trouble today that it is.

      We have the right to keep and bear arms and that is all it says. It does NOT say we have the right to use those arms to defend ourselves. If it did, it might as well say we have a right to breathe. Both of those rights are endowed by our Creator and need not, indeed should not, be enumerated in the Constitution.

      You make some valid points, some of which are off track from this particular discussion but none of them tell me where in the Constitution I should look for the phrase “people have a right to defend themselves and their loved ones, and others as necessary” or any words to that effect. I stand by my original statement.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (10 votes cast)
  12. dennis012Comment by dennis012
    December 2, 2012 @ 3:57 am

    This is what a second term means for Obama. Thanks to
    all those who voted for him. He will appoint another
    Liberal Judge as in “the Latino woman”. The weak Repub.
    Party will allow it and there go our Guns! Obama just
    doesn’t want us to have guns and the UN gun control
    will play a part in it all. The police are just people
    many have families and most are not looking for taking a
    bullet from some violent criminal having a fight with
    his girlfriend over child custody. The people in
    Washington have set the standards and have no real
    interest in protecting us from the “low life American” or “illegal”.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • truckmanComment by truckman
      December 2, 2012 @ 4:34 am

      I can’t thank you enough for informing us of what’s going to happen next. I’ll bet you’re a lot of fun at movies.
      You’re probably right in all you’ve predicted. I don’t go so far as to say the “weak Repub. Party will ALLOW it,because as you know,just because something is wrong,illegal,unethical or just isn’t fair,doesn’t mean it won’t happen on Oblamo’s watch regardless of what the Repub. Party tries to do to stop it. Granted though,a fair number of ‘em seem to do the “go along to get along” boogie.
      Ironically,what I’ve heard very frequently from LEO’s is that they actually PREFER Citizens (law abiding types) to own and carry guns,because they’re fully aware that they usually can’t STOP crimes,but the intended victims CAN,if they’re armed and even moderately skilled. Not surprisingly,they tend to feel safer knowing there are lawful citizens packing self defense guns too. AN ARMED SOCIETY IS A POLITE SOCIETY. If all people without criminal histories or criminal tendencies carried guns,criminals would be giving up crime foe a living. THAT’S been proven. My personal opinion is that anybody stupid enough to endeavor to commit a crime knowing his victims are armed deserves what he gets.
      So-Everybody go take a gun training course,get your CCW,get a gun and a few boxes of “Hydro Shocks” and make your world safer. (You don’t HAVE to use it,but if it gets down to defend or die,you’ll appreciate having the option to DEFEND.)

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  13. gavinwcaComment by gavinwca
    December 3, 2012 @ 2:26 pm

    The people of San Berdanido should listen to their City Attorney he is correct. Average police response time 15 to 20 minutes. A 9mm response time1400 feet per second. You decide which to use in a socialist deterating city who are fireing their law inforcement rather than cut unnecessary services, in the hope you will not see the ruse, and beg them to raise your taxes, to hire more police afnd fire protection, Buy more ammunition not taxes.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  14. bluevsgrayComment by bluevsgray
    December 4, 2012 @ 3:50 pm

    If this is indeed the City of San Bernardino, the problem is obvious. Hells Angels, Mongols, Vagos, and any other support clubs of what are known as the 1% er’s are killing each other in a war that has been going on for years. The police could not care less if these clubs kill each other off and I am most sure they jump for joy every time a 1% er club member gets killed. So citizens, there is no reason for you to “Lock and Load” and hide in your homes. Just don’t get caught in the cross fire when these clubs run into each other, you could be a victim of a stray bullet.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.5/5 (2 votes cast)
  15. truckmanComment by truckman
    December 4, 2012 @ 6:06 pm

    During Street Vibrations in Reno this year I heard from several attendees that if the Clubs wanted to fight that bad,the County should have roped off several acres of uninhabited land out East of Reno and send ‘em all there to get it over with,Last Man Standing. Of course,they’d NEVER go for that,because-no AUDIENCE. It has to be publicized for it to score “points” for the Club. The local officials enacted some rules barring any Colors and some other stuff that kept things pretty civil.
    I doubt the Cops are pleased at all anytime there’s shooting going on during a public event,because there’s such a huge chance of innocents being hit or killed. Hard to imagine the Club Presidents aren’t considering this. Bad enough for them when a member of a warring Club is killed,but if innocent people were injured or killed,THAT’d start a REAL s**t storm for them.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  16. mysticComment by mystic
    December 5, 2012 @ 12:25 pm

    For Truckman and BluevsGray: No law in this nation ‘stops’ criminals from committing violence with a gun. Those laws are for the punitive/legal process ‘after’ said crime is committed.

    We could, like Canada, take every single gun, rifle, shotgun, semi and full auto out of the hands of private citizens and watch the crime rate skyrocket with only Police/law Enforcement and criminals playing wild west against one another. Not effective in my mind.

    We can try to control populations, like gangs, MC clubs, inner city thugs et al…. which we’ve tried to do with more laws (Like Chicago and NY city) to no avail. Laws within themselves prevent nothing…they are merely there for the clean up and ‘whose to blame’ game after the tragedy has already happened. Again, not effective.

    I did hear an interesting stat…gun crimes is down over 20% since the 70′s. I thought to myself, that can’t be right. So I looked it up..and sure enough, it’s true. What changed? Private gun ownership…it’s gone up over 60% in the last three decades. That seems to have an impact..and perhaps is the bottom line answer to reducing/minimizing gun violence.

    If all the thugs out there know that the majority of the population is armed…do you really think they would shot first and think second? They value their lives as much as we do. I believe with a well armed private populace, much of the violence we are seeing would drastically go down within the nation. Especially gang ridden neighborhoods where private citizens have become hostages within their own homes/cities. Arm them, train them on how to use said fire arm, and allow logic and reason to play themselves out in any given scenario where a home is being defended by a citizen.

    Will this stop crime? No..of course it won’t. Criminals are going to continue to find a way to live their lowly lives. Gun crime? I bet it goes way down… while another use or type of crime goes up due to said well armed/trained private citizenry.

    Just a thought….


    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  17. truckmanComment by truckman
    December 5, 2012 @ 1:27 pm

    I must agree with you on this. As much as I abhor government regulation of our second amendment rights,I agree that there HAS to be some control over keeping weapons from those who are mentally infirm and those with a history of violent behavior. The hard part is finding accountable supervision over this regulation. As in cases of deciding on punishment of mortal crimes,the choice of life or death must be right,EVERY time,or someone’s rights are violated. Over all though,it’s already been proved again and again that an armed public cannot help but to drive crime down. There will always be a possibility of a formerly responsible gun owner “goin’ ’round the bend” and becoming a dangerous element in Society,but as a group,I believe gun owners,like many other groups,will tend to be somewhat “self-policing”,because one person within them going off track hurts the whole group. (Oddly,Motorcycle Clubs exhibit this same characteristic often. I’ve witnessed several occasions of a Prospect crossing a line of conduct and being quietly “reined in” by other Club members,without even involving the Police.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • mysticComment by mystic
      December 5, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

      Well posted Truckman…and enmasse, I agree and understand what you are saying. In no way do I want more regulations/laws restricting hand gun/gun ownership. What I do want is the current laws in each state to fit it’s population and for those laws to be upheld and kept steady so those of us who wish to purchase a gun for hunting (read feed our families/communities) and defense are available to us under the RIGHT our Constitution guarantee’s of. No two states are alike..and therefore each states populace should have the right to suit laws the work for them…not against them.

      Broad base laws meant to cover every single scenario (Especially Federally imposed laws) simply don’t work in preventive process (within any topic, gun laws being only one of them) of avoiding or wiping out crime. No one, NO ONE can prevent a crime…all we can do is be ready for it and defend ourselves from those who wish to harm us or our property.

      The human element seems to been taken off the table within this discussion. As in the latest horrific story of a man killing his girlfriend (and mother of his child) exposed…the liberal progressives will do anything to bend the blatant fact that this man had sever anger and domestic violence issues long before he used a gun to end two lives. He had mandatory counseling, he had a job and education many of us would rightfully covet. He had it all…the American Dream. This example of the American Dream is what the progressives constantly beat their drums over…how much better we would all be , a kinder genteeler nation, if everyone was a millionaire, educated/over educated…then no crime would happen. I believe we are finding this to be far off the beaten path of truth. Colorado being a very close second place reference to the same issue.

      What were we fed instead about this story? In the first 24 hours of the story breaking we heard what a ‘great guy’ this man was. How many different NFL boys club charities he participated in. How he was a college graduate. How everyone was in a true quandary as to why this happened. Next 24 hours exposed punditry that made my hair stand on end. “the NRA is the new KKK” (roll eyes) The ‘white man instituted this culture of violence within the black community mind set”. Oh yea…it’s all there, rational after rational hitting everyone in spitting distance as to whose fault this was….everyone that is except that man who perpetrated the crime of ultimate evil upon another.

      Up until last night, I don’t believe I heard a hint of a whisper that this man was troubled, abusive, had domestic violence misdemeanors against him and had sever anger management issues. Makes me wonder had he been some every day person from anywhere USA if those facts would have been held back for so long? Who is trying to change the basic truth narrative here? Progressives and apologist of course.

      Take away every gun… every bit of ammo…and guess what, this 6’5 300 lb man would have still killed his girlfriend had he wished too. Baseball bat, cast iron skillet, his bare hands…any one of those would have done the trick just as effectively as that gun did. So what are we saving when those of the opposition political view say it’s all the guns fault? This young man and woman would still be dead today…just by other means. Those who can’t or won’t see this base plain fact are deluding themselves and forgetting the human element. Ostriches sticking their head in the sand wishing for the sky to be orange instead of blue.

      What would have happened had this young woman had a gun to defend herself with? I have no doubt in cuffs, awaiting arraignment for shooting her hero NFL boyfriend/father of her child, and charged with murder 2 and endangerment of the child. Which scenario is worse? I submit the healthier human would have survived, which makes self defense stand on it’s own two legs with no rational needed or warranted.

      All the way around the barn doors now… how in the hell did this young man, a NFL pro, attain and register a gun? Have we even heard if the gun was ‘legal’. I’m betting it wasn’t…I’m betting that why we haven’t heard it discussed…because all the gun laws in the nation won’t keep someone from purchasing a gun off the street. Laws don’t stop it from happening…they simply are there to cast blame after the evil is perpetrated.


      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  18. watchman73Comment by watchman73
    December 14, 2012 @ 8:00 pm

    Millions of American hunters. It warms my heart to think of all the potential Alvin Yorks.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  19. truckmanComment by truckman
    December 15, 2012 @ 12:19 am

    To slightly change the subject for a moment-is anyone else upset that,after the killing today of 27 at a school in Connecticut,the news media is already stirring up the idea that Gun Control may have stopped this from happening? The OPPOSITE is true! Had any or ALL the adults in that school been armed and even semi-skilled with their guns,this could very well have been stopped at the opening shot,if it happened at all. Notice that ALL of these mass killings have happened in “GUN FREE” zones? Any guesses why that is? This most recent may have another reason,the shooter’s Mom worked at the school,but all the others-No guns to be fired AGAINST the shooter! We MUST end that advantage that killers have over the decent people of America.
    EVERY day,40 million lawful gun owners don’t kill ANYONE!
    My condolences go out to all the people who were hurt by this killing spree. I hope it serves to make these parents to resist the taking of guns from law abiding people and to themselves own guns,get training to use them accurately and safely,and to rest easier knowing that kind of tragedy can never happen to them,unopposed,ever again. May God hold those killed in His arms and relieve the terror with which they died.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  20. gileyComment by giley
    December 29, 2012 @ 2:47 pm

    Mr. Penman is right on target with his statement about the citizens having to load their weapons in their homes and protecting themselves from intruders and the criminal element. More people need to wake up that they are now the in charge of their survival in view of the reduction in police officers. Along with that comes the responsibility for the homeowner to secure their weapons and out of reach of their children at home.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Leave a Comment

The Loft Archives

  • November 2015
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer