Monday, December 28, 2015

We Are The Militia!

Ever heard of Joseph Michael Arpaio?  No?  

Well, my friends, and you are my friends, he's the Sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. More commonly known as "Sheriff Joe," Arpaio is known as "America's Sheriff" for his unusual, irreverent, politically incorrect and uncommonly successful methods to punish criminals while also reducing recidivism.

Sheriff Joe runs the jail in Maricopa County, Arizona.  This jail features an outdoor tent city with a big neon sign stating "OPEN," 24 hours a day for all to see.  The prisoners are forced to wear demeaning pink underwear, which is probably all they need considering the temperature much of the year hovers around 125 degrees. The prisoners farm their own food and run their own hog farm.  Joe feeds them whatever they grow, along with baloney and mayo sandwiches at a total cost of $0.36 per prisoner per day.  You read that right: Thirty six cents per day!

Yes, Joe is a special sort of guy.  And he's earned the wrath of the ACLU and Liberals everywhere as a result.  As an example, that pack of weenies at the ACLU sued him for refusing to provide TV for his "guests."  So, he set up cable and offers the inmates two channels: the Weather Channel so they can know exactly how hot it is, and The Disney Channel, so they can watch Snow White and Mickey Mouse. I'm a big fan of Arpaio, to put it mildly.  But now more than ever as a result of his most recent suggestion, which I'm now passing along to you.

Your President, one Mr. B. Hussein Obama, blames global warming, which isn't occurring, and our failure as a nation to provide "meaningful gun reforms," which they can't define, for terrorism on our shores.  

Now, the temperature, in my opinion, shouldn't really have much influence on whether a nice Muslim lad decides to shoot up a church or school or community center.  I mean, it gets pretty hot in Singapore, and Costa Rica, and Perth, but they don't take to terrorism as an outlet for their frustration. Perhaps it's because they and their entire family, will get summarily shot if they do.

And legally bought-and-paid-for guns shouldn't have much influence either.  If you buy them legally, passing the firearms safety test, and all required FBI background checks, and then wait the proscribed period before picking them up from the dealer, as the killers did in San Bernardino, enhanced background checks shouldn't have any effect on whether a hell-bent Muslim jihadist terrorist murdering thug decides to commit acts of mayhem, or not.  

Oh, and by the way, those "enhanced background checks" are already in effect here in Taxifornia.  We're already doing what Barry and his Sycophants want us all to do, but it was here, in Taxifornia, that the Muslim jihadist terrorist bastards followed all the laws that Liberals want to impose and still shot up the place.

But our Golfer-in-Chief disagrees.  He thinks that making guns harder and more expensive to buy for good, solid, honest, God-fearing 'Muricans will somehow have an impact on criminals...who by their very definition don't obey the law!  That's Barry's prescription, dumbass as it is.

Mine is quite a bit different.  And it is based upon Sheriff Joe's idea.  Here it is:

America has 12,500,000 people at present with Concealed Carry Weapons permits. That's almost 5% of our population. Now, that's not spread equally between the 57 states (Obama said he'd visited all but a couple of our "57 states" during his 2007 run for POTUS.  If he says there's 57 states, who am I to disagree?).  Some, like Florida, have many. Almost one million, in fact.  Others, like New York, and Connenneccticuttt, and Neu Hersey, and Maryland, have very few.  That's because they have leaders who apparently can't read and understand the 2nd Amendment's plain language regarding the Right to "keep and bear arms."  But Arizona has 250,000 Maricopa County concealed carry permit holders alone among Arizona's 6,741,374 residents. And Sheriff Joe wants to mobilize them.

Arpaio believes, as I do, that trained, experienced and legally-permitted CCW holders can become a very positive and welcome, adjunctive force to the police agencies within their sphere of influence.  Our Founding Fathers, with George Washington as leader, called upon the Minutemen to bring their "assault weapons" (i.e., muskets) and report for duty as a "well-regulated militia" when needed. That's what "well regulated" meant: of fighting age (18), able-bodied, and with weapons they owned at the ready (our nascent Republic didn't have any weapons to issue because it didn't have any money!).

They were shopkeepers, blacksmiths, doctors, lawyers, teachers and butchers.  But first, they were Americans!  And if they were needed to support and defend their young country and its residents, they were ready, willing and able to do so.

And they were needed to repel the British in our Revolutionary War.  We kicked their bangers and mash-loving asses, to put it mildly.  And we did it because we had the backing of our armed citizenry.  And we could do that again.

Oh, and speaking of what - or who - constitutes a militia, the California Code clearly specifies that, "The militia of the State consists of all able-bodied male citizens...between the ages of 18 and 45," and the Governor - even a wimp like Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown - commands it be so, whether he likes it or not.  

Back to the point:  We know that Bad Guys don't want to meet their virgins until they've had a chance to kill lots and lots of innocent people (ever wonder what those virgins must look like after 1,400 years of waiting?).  And they won't get that chance if they attack well-defended locations.  Ask yourself: why don't Islamic jihadist terrorist murderous thugs try to shoot up gun shows and police stations and gun stores? Because they're defended by an armed populace, that's why!  Put another way, if only 5% of the ducks were armed, do you think anyone would go duck hunting?

Might be a good place right here to throw in one of my favorite gun quotes as a palate cleanser.  James Earl Jones, famed actor and octogenarian says, 

"Better to have a gun and not need it, then to need a gun and not have it."

So, if you were wondering why the Bad Guys chose a "gun free zone" training center for the developmentally disabled in the Once-Golden State instead of say, Texas, or Florida, or Utah, or Arizona, or Oklahoma, or any other of the 31 states that "shall issue" concealed carry permits, you now know the answer. And if you have ever wondered why virtually all the mass shootings over the past 20+ years have occurred in "gun free zones," you now know the answer.  And you now have the answer as to how we, the American people, can put these murderous Godless thugs back on their heels: Turn America into a modern-day, armed militia, just waiting anxiously to be called upon and given the opportunity to send these goat-lovers packing.  

Because We are the Militia!

Caveat:  First, I do not advocate untrained, uninitiated and unstable people carrying and/or using guns, nor do I wish them to have access to same.  I believe that anyone, anyone who chooses to buy a gun be required to undergo sufficient training and practice so that they are totally competent and reliable when deciding when - or if - to unload on somebody.

Second, I believe that fielding several hundred thousand armed and trained Americans would literally scare the hummus out of smelly camel herding nere-do-wells.  I believe that they would choose somewhere else - anywhere else - to try and terrorize besides a place where it is known that the people are to be considered armed and dangerous. So, the result would be no terrorist attacks!  And isn't that the desired goal?

Oh, and those who disagree with me should show their distaste and condemnation for us Troglodytes by putting a really big sign on their front yards announcing to all, 

"I hate guns!
I don't own a gun!
I will never own a gun!
Thank you, and have a nice day."

I'm guessing the NARMBT (National Association of Robbers, Muggers, Burglars and Thieves) would really appreciate such a notice.  Don't you agree?

I'm doing my part.  Are you?  


  1. Some very colorful language!

    I am sorry to inform you that far far FAR more children, women, and men are killed by gun mishaps than by smelly camel herding nere-do-wells.

    Chuckmeister, most mass shootings in OUR country are done by white Christian men.

    You seem very good at the kind of speeches that would get some folks to "go over the top" in WW-1 parlance. But America is not fighting WW-1 now.

    America IS suffering from a plague of gun violence AND gun mishaps.

    Most gun owners are OK with expanded background checks. "Taxifornia" just passed a just passed a law which allows the temporary (21 day) removal of guns in domestic cases where a spouse fears violence.

    How about talking just as eloquently about ways agreeable to you and hopefully your friends about ways to reduce TODAY'S vast majority of gun-related deaths instead of harkening back to the days of muskets.

    I did some time in the US military. I was trained in gun handling. I gave up my guns after I was cleaning my pistol and nearly knee-capped my cousin after some target practice.

    You and I, your friends and mine, should agree to lower the heat and find a way to REDUCE gun deaths without unduly burdening any law-abiding American's right to own a gun OR their right to life.

    How about it?

  2. Mr. M-J, I will gladly post your comment, since you so vehemently disagree with my position (so few do!). Let me start at your ending. I, too, spent a bit of time in the military. I was the Range Officer at two Army bases. I am a licensed gunsmith. I shot competitively in the service, and missed qualifying for the 1968 Olympics by a single point. But I never almost "knee-capped" a friend by shooting him, so I stop short of all of your "qualifications. However, let me address a couple of your more, shall we say, questionable assertions. First, gun-owners do not, I repeat DO NOT, agree that we need more laws and background checks and government oversight. With 23,000 anti-gun laws on the books, we believe that there are quite enough, thank you. And since the killers at SanBerdoo passed all the same "commensense background checks" our illustrious leader will now unilaterally impose, I fail to see how such tomfoolery will help. Second, since B. Hussein Obama was elected, gun ownership in America has DOUBLED, and death rates from guns has decreased by almost HALF! Do a little research before you posit such clearly false "facts." Third, you seem pleased that "Taxifornia" just passed a law effectively eliminating the protections guaranteed by the 4th Amendment. So it's just a short step for you to be quite okay, I assume, with eliminating the 2nd as well. What's next? The 1st? The 5th? The 10th? You know, they come as a boxed set of ten, don't you? My posting centered on eliminating gun deaths from TERRORISTS. You seem to have skipped right over that little point. And I still suggest that arming law-abiding folks is a way to do it. Unless and until guns all disappear, which with more than 300 million of them owned by your friends and neighbors, seems rather unlikely, it seems to me that Obama's idea of disarming us to minimize gun deaths is the absolute height of dumbassedness. Just one old guys' opinion. But you're certainly entitled to your own...


The Chuckmeister welcomes comments. After I check them out, of course. Comment away!