On our way home from work the other day, Mrs. KintlaLake and I stopped for a traffic light a few miles from our house. Rather than staring mindlessly at the signal I took purposeful note of the surroundings -- vehicles, occupants, pedestrians and businesses.
As I often do, I posed a hypothetical to my wife: "Suppose one of us needed immediate medical attention -- right here, right now. What are our options?"
We discussed the relative merits of calling 911 and waiting for the EMS squad to arrive, versus driving hell-bent to the closest emergency room (4.5 miles away). Our other alternatives included driving to the police station (1 mile), the sheriff's substation (2.5 miles) and two firehouses (1.5 and 2.5 miles).
Determining the "best" option wasn't the goal of our mental exercise. The point of my question was to practice a preparedness mindset -- observing surroundings, identifying potential threats, considering resources and tactics.
That's the way my brain works, the way it's worked for a very long time. For a clue as to why, take another look at pages 40 and 41 of the Boy Scout Handbook that I blogged about yesterday morning:
"The Scout Motto means that a Scout is prepared at any moment to do his duty, and to face danger if necessary, to help others."
"Accidents or emergencies are continually happening and Boy Scouts are prepared to help. Learn what to do in all kinds of emergencies, and how to do it. Wherever you are, whatever you are doing, think through in advance what you ought to do. It will be too late if you wait until the emergency happens."
"As a Scout it is your duty to Be Prepared."
The duty to be capable -- at truly useful things, not life's frivolous pursuits -- was drummed into me as a boy growing up in the Heartland. As an adolescent I adopted Scouting's formal doctrine of preparedness, exemplified by the Scout Motto, which simply reinforced what I was raised to do.
Presented with a cold and rainy Saturday, yesterday Mrs. KintlaLake and I spent a half-dozen hours visiting local garage sales and second-hand shops in search of treasures and odd bargains.
Her prize was a whimsical electric chandelier destined to hang over our patio. I was rewarded with a tattered-but-intact copy of the 1948 Boy Scout Handbook.
The cover price of this edition of Handbook for Boys was 65¢ (equivalent to $5.58 today). I fished it out of a pile of books at the Olde Shoe Factory Antique Mall in Lancaster and paid four bucks for it.
This particular copy is from the 1948 edition's sixth printing in 1953. A handwritten inscription on the first page records that a Scout leader presented it to the young owner in November of 1953 -- that's fifteen years before I earned the rank of Tenderfoot myself. Thumbing through the Handbook's 570 pages transports me back to my own days in Scouting. All the elements of Scoutcraft are there -- it's chock-full of primers on essential skills.
In the back of the Handbook, among pages devoted to "Books to Read" and the Index, are advertisements aimed at boys of Scouting age. To me, these are just as interesting (and perhaps more significant, culturally) as the rest of the book.
There are ads for woodcraft tools, naturally, from Marble's and Plumb, along with a page promoting Eveready flashlights and batteries. Other ads pitch shoes (Keds, Buster Brown), bicycles (Schwinn, Raleigh), photography (Kodak, Sylvania) and sports equipment (Spalding, Louisville Slugger, Bike jockstraps).
A few of the others: Lionel Trains, Evinrude and Johnson outboard motors, Aunt Jemima Pancake Mix, Coca-Cola, Baby Ruth and Tootsie Roll.
During these post-World War II years, mastering marksmanship (with actual firearms, I mean) still was considered Scoutcraft. That's why this printing included ads for Winchester, Marlin and Iver Johnson rifles. Remington went so far as to invest in a two-page spread, the only such ad in this Handbook.
Air guns do make one appearance in the Handbook's advertising section. According to the Crosman ad, a "bolt-action, single shot, gas-powered pellet rifle" -- complete with refillable CO2 cylinder -- could be had for $21.95.
That's $188.58 in today's dollars. At the time, an honest-to-goodness Winchester Model 69 cost just $28.65 (or $244.32 now).
From early childhood, words attributed to Patrick Henry were imprinted both in my head and on my heart:
"Give me Liberty, or Give me Death!"
Such expressions of commitment and courage are anathema to today's youth and, sadly, to the masses that choose entitlements over independence. These citizens dismiss the wisdom of our Founding Fathers, favoring instead the likes of Bill Maher:
"Well, sometimes you do need a nanny state -- that old thing about, 'the Constitution isn't a suicide pact.' I mean, at what point does the environment get so bad that we -- that the government says, 'Yes, we're going to have to infringe on your freedom a little'?
"These people don't want any infringing on freedom. That, to me, is a suicide pact."
Patrick Henry, I think, would have been proud to count himself among "these people" so maligned by the patronizing Maher.
I know I am. Like Henry, I choose Liberty.
I'll wrap with a video released by Free Market America on Earth Day 2012, which was observed last Sunday. The video makes a powerful statement about how our government has squashed economic Liberty and, in the process, sabotaged our future.
"It seems to me that the federal government just doesn't want to know who is here illegally and who's not."
(Chief Justice John G. Roberts of the Supreme Court of the United States, speaking to U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli during today's oral arguments over Arizona's controversial immigration law. The federal government, represented by Verrilli, wants to prevent Arizona from requiring that state law-enforcement officials determine the immigration status of anyone they stop if an officer has reason to suspect that a person may be in the U.S. illegally.)
"These people are not conservatives. They're not Republicans. They're radical libertarians and I'm doggone offended by it."
"I despise these people, and I'm not the guy you come in and dump on without getting punched in the mouth."
(Six-term U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch in an NPR interview earlier this month, characterizing his Republican challengers and reacting to the prospect of breaking a political sweat for the first time in 30 years. At last weekend's Utah GOP convention, Sen. Hatch failed to garner enough votes to win his party's nomination outright, forcing a primary faceoff against former state Sen. Dan Liljenquist -- who, by the way, was born just before the incumbent's first term began -- in June.)
"Levon Helm passed peacefully this afternoon. He was surrounded by family, friends and band mates and will be remembered by all he touched as a brilliant musician and a beautiful soul."
Levon Helm was an American treasure, his talent and energy gifts to us all. I haven't the words to express my respect for the man, my love of his music or my sadness at his passing. Safe travels, brother.
It's part of our duty as citizens, in my opinion, to educate ourselves about the Constitution of the United States -- in fact, we should know it through-and-through. Just today I discovered an excellent tool for the task: The Heritage Guide to the Constitution. The Guide presents the complete text of the Constitution, of course, hot-linked to explanatory notes and illuminating essays. I especially like the Teacher's Companion to the Guide, each section of which can be saved as a pdf.
It's fair to point out that the The Heritage Foundation, which publishes the Guide, is a think tank devoted to formulating and promoting "conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense."
"If Barack Obama becomes the president in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year. If you can't go home and get everybody in your lives to clean house in this vile, evil, America-hated administration, I don't even know what you're made out of."
"We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November...any questions?"
Well, alrighty then. No questions here, Ted.
Honestly, though, that sort of rhetoric is more fertilizer than seed -- that is, it's far more likely to encourage those who already share Nugent's rage than it is to win new believers. It'll draw the attention of the Secret Service -- First Amendment rights notwithstanding, we could've predicted that -- but in terms of unseating the incumbent, it just won't get the job done.
I'm feeling the need to towel-off after Terrible Ted's trademark tirade, so I'll close this post with a few images that represent the "seedier" side of our right to keep and bear arms. The first two are covers from Remington publications aimed at young people's interest in shooting. The third is "Teaching the Young Idea How to Shoot," pulled from the pages of a 1922 issue of Outing.
"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government." (Thomas Jefferson, 1787)
"Our defense is in the preservation of the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere. Destroy this spirit, and you have planted the seeds of despotism around your own doors. Familiarize yourselves with the chains of bondage and you are preparing your own limbs to wear them. Accustomed to trample on the rights of those around you, you have lost the genius of your own independence, and become the fit subjects of the first cunning tyrant who rises." (Abraham Lincoln, 1858)
"The most important thing in this world is liberty. More important than food or clothes -- more important than gold or houses or lands -- more important than art or science -- more important than all religions, is the liberty of man." (Robert Green Ingersoll, 1887)
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." (Thomas Jefferson, 1791)
"The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong." (attributed to Thomas Paine, 1775)
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe." (Noah Webster, 1787)
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing." (Adolf Hitler, 1942)
"The right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." (Hubert Humphrey, 1960)
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." (Benjamin Franklin, 1759)
That iconic poster, produced in 1885, no doubt lured hordes of opportunists to California. A present-day incident, described in the following article, should repel thinking Americans in equal numbers:
(CNSNews.com) -- The government spent at least $205,075 in 2010 to "translocate" a single bush in San Francisco that stood in the path of a $1.045-billion highway-renovation project that was partially funded by the economic stimulus legislation President Barack Obama signed in 2009.
The bush -- a Franciscan manzanita -- was a specimen of a commercially cultivated species of shrub that can be purchased from nurseries for as little as $15.98 per plant. The particular plant in question, however, was discovered in the midst of the City of San Francisco, in the median strip of a highway, and was deemed to be the last example of the species in the "wild."
Prior to the discovery of this "wild" Franciscan manzanita, the plant had been considered extinct for as long as 62 years -- extinct, that is, outside of people's yards and botanical gardens.
Caltrans agreed to transfer $79,470 to the Presidio Trust "to fund the establishment, nurturing, and monitoring of the Mother Plant in its new location for a period not to exceed ten (10) years following relocation and two (2) years for salvaged rooted layers and cuttings according to the activities outlined in the Conservation Plan."
Furthermore, Presidio Parkway Project spokesperson Molly Graham told CNSNews.com that the "hard removal" -- n.b. actually digging up the plant, putting it on a truck, driving it somewhere else and replanting it -- cost $100,000.
Caltrans also agreed to "Transfer $25,605.00 to the Trust to fund the costs of reporting requirements of the initial 10-year period as outlined in the Conservation Plan."
In the midst of our national economic crisis, this is pure madness.
The People's Republic of California is where fiscal responsibility goes to die, interred right next to Liberty. The state faces its own budget shortfall of $10 billion, so it has no problem squandering federal money -- my money, your money, our kids' money.
Although the Left Coast deserves every ounce of outrage we can muster, by no means should it be the sole target of our ire.
Consider that New York, New Jersey, Maryland and the southern New England states, among others, engage in the same assault on their citizens. See how corruption grows, entitlements blossom and individual liberties vanish in large cities, and how quickly these cancers spread to the suburbs and beyond.
Independent citizen-patriots are being pressed into "flyover country." It looks like we're going to have to make our stand -- practically and politically -- right here in the Heartland.
Recently, and more than usual, my thoughts have been returning to a long-ago summer in Montana. My daily Google searches have followed my reminiscing, and this morning I discovered that Ev Lundgren had died on February 26th of this year. He was 95.
The Lundgrens bought West Glacier Mercantile in 1946. This collection of businesses at the west entrance to Glacier National Park serves visitors in search of food and drink, fuel and provisions, lodging and coin-op laundry. The quaint complex remains in the family today.
I worked in the Lundgrens' gas station, then a Chevron, for several months in the late 1970s. The first thing I found out that summer was that no one -- not the local workers and certainly not the seasonal crews -- questioned Ev's standing as The Boss.
What's more, if an employee of West Glacier Mercantile didn't get dressed-down by Ev once a day, we knew he'd written us off. He was demanding as hell but undeniably fair.
I absolutely loved working for the guy.
As a businessman, Ev personified "sweat equity" -- he refused to let anyone outwork him. (Do the math -- he was already in his early 60s when I met him.) Away from the Merc he was an accomplished outdoorsman, especially passionate when it came to Glacier Park.
I recall Ev stopping by the Chevron one particular evening around closing time. I had the next day off and planned to do some exploring in the park, so I asked him to suggest a destination, perhaps someplace uncrowded.
He didn't so much as hesitate before answering. "Get in that fancy truck of yours and drive up the North Fork Road, past Polebridge, far as it goes. Hardly anyone takes the time to make that trip, but there's nowhere better -- nowhere."
Because I followed his advice, the next afternoon I laid eyes on Kintla Lake for the very first time. I haven't been the same since.
I'll close this post with a line from Ev's obituary:
"A celebration of life for Everett Lundgren will be held in early summer 2012 when the bluebirds return."
That sentiment, like my memories of the man, makes me smile.
(The photos of Kintla Lake accompanied the article "Glacier the Unspoiled," published in the June, 1922 issue of Outing magazine. The map of western Glacier National Park appeared in Volume 9 of the Official Automobile Blue Book, 1919 edition.)
"...I also want to clarify something else, that really you should be ashamed of, that you said earlier. You don't believe that a person should be able to stand your ground. And you referenced your homelands of England, where if someone invades your home, an English homeowner, by law, has to retreat.
"...I offer to you that that's anti-human, that that disrespects the gift of life, and it actually encourages recidivist criminal behavior by sending out a message that we're not going to stand our ground; we're going to retreat.
"...You're in America now. And in America, we have a Second Amendment right. And we value life more than sheep do. And we don't back down. So the stand-your-ground law is common sense. It's logical. And it's the right thing to do."
(Ted Nugent to CNN's Piers Morgan on Wednesday, April 4th, 2012)
The Declaration of Arbroath was penned 692 years ago today. This declaration, in the form of a letter to Pope John XXII, affirmed Scotland as independent and sovereign, asserting its right to respond by force-of-arms to unjust attack. Alba gu bràth!
When I posted "My take on Sanford" last month, I spoke too soon. In fact, my speculation about what transpired on the night of February 26th may well have been dead wrong.
I should've known better.
New information about the incident comes to light every day -- some of it's factual, some of it's legal posturing and some of it's reflexive rhetoric from the usual suspects.
The matter is in the hands of investigators. Soon it'll be presented to a grand jury and, potentially, to a trial jury. That's where it will be (and should be) decided.
I did get one thing right -- I don't believe I've ever seen such an intense siege on our constitutional right to keep and bear arms and on our human right to self-defense. Coverage of the shooting has given little time or credence to that side of the story.
All-star status (and not in a good way) goes to CNN's Piers Morgan. Not only has he followed the easy recipe, he's repeatedly spiked the punch with his British slant:
"My view from the start has been, it seems incomprehensible to me under any form of stand-your-ground law -- or any absurd law as I view it -- that somebody could shoot somebody who turned out to be unarmed and not even being arrested on the night. In Britain where I come from, that would cause a sensation the likes of which our justice system has never seen before."
"As far as British law is concerned, if this had happened in Britain, there would be no stand-your-ground defense and he would have been arrested. I'm more comfortable with the way we do things."
Last night, at least, he solicited the perspective of one Ted Nugent. Here's the complete transcript of their exchange:
MORGAN: The rally to bring justice to Trayvon Martin. The tragedy brings out a lot of emotions and everyone has an opinion on the shooting, including my next guest, Ted Nugent. Everyone knows he never holds back. And I thank him for joining me tonight. Ted, welcome back.
Last time, we were having a fairly jocular debate about all this. But this is a bit too serious for that. You've heard the attorneys on both sides there. What do you make of this case in its entirety?
NUGENT: Well, first of all, thanks for going after this very tragic situation, Piers. And thank you for having me on. But let me clarify one thing, very, very important, that you alluded to earlier in your program, that you believe that the vast majority of Americans want Zimmerman arrested.
Let me tell you what the vast majority of Americans want. We're saying prayers for the Martin family and all those other black youths that are slaughtered every week. Those are the people that we constantly cry out for.
So be very careful what you assume. Those of us that love life and respect life, we don't see any color. But we wonder where the outcry is when every week these youths are slaughtered across the streets of America. So that's the most important statement I want to make right here.
MORGAN: But, I mean, look, there are always, with all these cases, innumerable other cases that can be thrown in as why don't you care as much about that? The reality of this case is that, I believe, it's popped in America as a big cause because of the precise nature of what happened after Trayvon Martin was killed.
That is this particularly extreme version of stand-your-ground. You have to use that phrase, because it is in Florida. It's particularly wide-ranging. And it has allowed a situation where somebody can shoot an unarmed teenager and actually be allowed to go home that night without even being arrested.
That's why I understand people feeling exercised about why he wasn't arrested on the night. Shouldn't he have been? Even for someone like you, that believes in right to bear arms and guns and everything else, shouldn't he have been arrested?
NUGENT: You saw the tape. I saw the tape where he was handcuffed, Piers. That's arrested. He was arrested. He was questioned. The stand-your-ground law does have specific ramifications.
But I also want to clarify something else, that really you should be ashamed of, that you said earlier. You don't believe that a person should be able to stand your ground. And you referenced your homelands of England, where if someone invades your home, an English homeowner, by law, has to retreat.
Piers, I offer to you that that's anti-human, that that disrespects the gift of life, and it actually encourages recidivist criminal behavior by sending out a message that we're not going to stand our ground; we're going to retreat.
Piers, you're in America now. And in America, we have a Second Amendment right. And we value life more than sheep do. And we don't back down. So the stand-your-ground law is common sense. It's logical. And it's the right thing to do.
MORGAN: Right. I mean, American has 270 million guns, by common estimation. Britain, I think, has about two million.
NUGENT: I think more than that.
MORGAN: Well, maybe more than that. OK. The last record said 9,484 homicides involving guns in the last year that was recorded. Britain had 68. I suppose my point is this, is that I don't defend all the laws in Britain. Many of them are ridiculous. I don't defend all the laws in America or attack all the laws. Some, to me, seem ridiculous. Others seem perfectly fair and balanced.
It's a great country with a great legal system in many ways. I don't denigrate America with this. But on the stand-your-ground law, in particular, it seems to me unbelievable that a young, unarmed teenager in America today can actually be shot dead for possession of a bag of Skittles, on his way home to his father's girlfriend's house.
My point was, when they were mocking British law, by the way -- they started this. I said back in Britain, that wouldn't have happened. You couldn't do that without being arrested and almost certainly charged. Now I think many Americans -- let's not say the majority. I don't know the statistics. But many Americans feel uncomfortable that this could happen in modern America and that George Zimmerman would simply be allowed to go home that night when Trayvon Martin goes to a coffin.
NUGENT: Piers, you have expressed that you don't want to try this on television. I also do not want to try this on television. I think we both agree that there's a tragedy that it is being tried and that Zimmerman has been convicted across the media in many instances.
So let's not do that here. So let me propose to you a scenario that I think you can grasp and support. You must be aware, and if not I'll inform you now, how many professional law enforcement heroes are killed every year with their own weapon. I'm not juxtaposing this with the Trayvon and the Zimmerman situation.
But it does happen, where an assailant will start beating a person so badly that those of us that are armed, we have a responsibility to keep that new assault from taking our weapon, because if the assault escalates to that degree -- certainly the fist can go into a deadly situation if they get a hold of the gun bearer's gun.
So we have to be cognizant of that. If it wasn't for backup guns in law enforcement and in civilians hands, oftentimes, that the perpetrator and the person getting beat up is killed with his own gun. So let's not dismiss that reality that is documented over and over again across this country.
MORGAN: But do you believe that a neighborhood watch official acting in that capacity should be armed and using that firearm?
NUGENT: Yes.
MORGAN: OK. Well, Ted, we'll agree to disagree over that. I hope we can do that again in an extended way soon, because your opinions are always very interesting to hear. Thank you for joining me.
NUGENT: Thank you, Piers. My family sends their best and our prayers are with the Martin family.
There's some great stuff in there -- thanks, Ted.
About Morgan's final question -- judging by the pause that followed Nugent's unequivocal answer (plus the look on Morgan's face), it was clear that the host wasn't quite prepared for such an affirmation of Liberty. Go figure, eh?
Every time I hear someone accuse the courts of "judicial activism" -- whether this fashionable epithet comes from the Left or the Right -- I can't help remembering what George Carlin said:
"Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?"
Here's one that Carlin surely would've appreciated: When I get a tax break, it's a deduction. When someone undeserving (according to me) gets a tax break, it's a damned loophole.
Likewise, the perception of judicial activism depends on where one stands. For hardcore partisans in search of ideological absolutes, the matter remains inescapably relative, even if they won't admit it.
Take, for example, Pres. Obama's shot across the Supreme Court's bow on Monday -- "that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law." He characterized the "Affordable Care Act" as "a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
That first remark is a breathtaking example of executive arrogance. The second simply doesn't square with the facts.
Clearing away perceptions, exaggerations and outright lies, the only honest place to stand is on principle -- not on party principles, not on ideological principles, but on constitutional principles.
This independent citizen-patriot acknowledges his own subjective nature and yet refuses to bend to influence carried by the latest gust of wind. I stand on the Constitution of the United States.
"I'm referring to statements by the president in the past few days to the effect, I'm sure you’ve heard about them, that it is somehow inappropriate for what he termed unelected judges to strike acts of Congress that have enjoyed, he was referring of course to Obamacare, to what he termed a broad consensus and majorities in both houses of Congress."
"[The president's statement] has troubled a number of people who have read it as somehow a challenge to the federal courts or to their authority to the appropriateness of the concept of judicial review. So I want to be sure that you're telling us the attorney general and the Department of Justice do recognize the authority of the federal courts through unelected judges to strike acts of Congress or portions thereof in appropriate cases."
"The letter [which the Justice Department must submit to the court by noon on Thursday, April 5th] needs to be at least three pages, single spaced, no less and it needs to be specific. It needs to make specific reference to the president's statements."
(U.S. Circuit Court Judge Jerry Smith, addressing U.S. Justice Department lawyer Dana Lydia Kaersvang during oral arguments yesterday in Houston. The appeals court is reviewing a provision of the "Affordable Care Act" that blocks federal medical payments to certain hospitals. Judge Smith was appointed by Pres. Ronald Reagan.)
"I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress."
"And I'd just remind conservative commentators that, for years, what we have heard is, the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism, or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law."
(U.S. President -- and former professor of constitutional law -- Barack Obama, at a press conference on Monday, lobbing threats at the U.S. Supreme Court, which is preparing to rule on the "Affordable Care Act," a.k.a. "Obamacare")
"It's important that people be put in a position where their Second Amendment rights are protected, but that they also don't, as a consequence of the laws, unintendedly [sic] put themselves in harm's way."
"The idea that there's this overwhelming additional security in the ownership and carrying concealed and deadly weapons... I think it's the premise, not the constitutional right, but the premise that it makes people safer is one that I'm not so sure of."
(VP Joe Biden on yesterday's edition of CBS News "Face the Nation")
