To most normal, logical persons such as yourself, my dear reader, it makes sense when people say that having a handgun for personal defense should be an allowable option and, moreover, saves many lives.

The Second Amendment is “under fire” so to speak, as I wrote in my post entitled “It Just Gets Worse” on January 15th, regarding a law banning private gun ownership in the District of Columbia:

Since “unrestricted” private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions, according to the Bush administration.

The argument was delivered by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the ongoing arguments over the legality of a District of Columbia ban on handguns in homes, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.

Clement suggested that gun rights are limited and subject to “reasonable regulation” and said all federal limits on guns should be upheld.

The presence of a handgun helped stop a mass killing in Colorado Springs last year.

I wrote, humorously, about the Rules of a Gunfight.

And now, in re the above court case (involving private gun ownership bans in DC), we read:

When sexual assaults started rising in Orlando, Fla., in 1966, police officers noticed women were arming themselves, so they launched a firearms safety course for them. Over the next 12 months, sexual assaults plummeted by 88 percent, burglaries fell by 25 percent and not one of the 2,500 women who took the course fired a gun in a confrontation.

And that, says a new brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court by police officers and prosecutors in a controversial gun-ban dispute, is why gun ownership is important and should be available to individuals in the United States.

The arguments come in an amicus brief submitted by the Law Enforcement Alliance of America, whose spokesman, Ted Deeds, told WND there now are 92 different law enforcement voices speaking together to the Supreme Court in the Heller case.

That pending decision will decide whether an appeals court ruling striking down a District of Columbia ban on handguns because it violates the Second Amendment will stand or not. The gun ban promoters essentially argue that any gun restriction that is ruled “reasonable” is therefore constitutional, such as the D.C. handgun ban.

This is something that I’ve known, as a law enforcement officer, for many years. That law enforcement is, evidently, finally publicly acknowledging: GUNS CAN SAVE LIVES.

Yes, of course, guns can kill. They are a tool. If we banned all guns, then killings by knife would skyrocket. Killings by crossbow. Killings by rocks. Killings by shovels. Killings by Stiffel lamps.

Further, from the WND article:

Where the rubber meets the road, he (Ted Deeds, spokesman, Law Enforcement Alliance of America,) said, is when a good guy needs to survive an encounter with a bad guy. There are two possible results: Police arrive on the scene later to have the innocent victim hurt or killed, or they arrive on the scene to “find the victim hearty and the offender on the floor.”

“Every cop in American is going to pick the second closing of the story,” Deeds said.

Oh yes we will, all day, every day.

The SCOTUS will hear oral arguments on this case, March 18th.

Please allow me to let you in on a little secret that cops can’t tell:

1. Cops can’t be everywhere;

2. We know that;

3. In the Real World, you’re ON YOUR OWN;

4. No matter what anyone says, cops are reactive;

5. Cops want to think they are proactive, but this is a myth brought about by federally-funded programs (whose grants ran out some years ago) such as C.O.P.S. and other “community service” oriented programs;

6. C.O.P.S. programs did MORE to screw over the public, because it created “boutique” cop teams who DIDN’T have to answer basic “calls for service”;

7. Diminishing, of course, the pool of cops available for standard “calls for service”;

8. Creating, naturally, a divisive nature between the cops who still had to work for a living, and those cops (think melanin, think sex) who got to kick back and attend midnight basketball games, make speeches in high school auditoriums during daytime hours, attend numerous “community meetings” and, essentially, do everything but standard cop work;

The grants ran out, the C.O.P.S. programs died, and we are, once again, back to reality.

Which is:

You have a gun in your house? A burglar intrudes? You have a wife and children?

The gloves are off, baby. If you get the chance, shoot the fucker between the eyes, watch his brains splatter against the textured, taped, finished and painted dry wall.

If he raped your wife, harmed your child, shoot him outside, drag his dead body inside and shoot him again in the brain pan.

At their hearts, cops understand this.

The trouble comes only with the D.A.s office and the “officialdom” levels.

Trust me: at the cop level, every DEAD SCROTE is a GOOD SCROTE.

Oh, yeah, sorry: verbiage.

The word “scrote” harkens back to an original 1975 cop novel by Joseph Wambaugh, “The Choirboys,” wherein Henry “Roscoe” Rules, 29, a five-year veteran of the LAPD, is the one most intent on proving he is the toughest cop on the force and refers to people he dislikes (which is just about everyone) as “scrotes” (short for scrotums).

What applied then applies now.

I finally realized I may as well call things as they are, and explain definitions and phrases to my readership so we’re all on the same proverbial sheet of music.

The secular Left abhors religion (but will “tolerate” most any religion with the exclusive exception of Christianity and Judaism), yet have their own very secretive, inclusive but actually quite obvious religion of their own: the Church of Global Warming.

It’s a wonderful religion because, as they have consistently documented time and again, it’s all about belief. The same facets of which they accuse the so-called “Religious Right” (or most any religion, save Islam) apply equally to the Religious Left, and that is:

It’s a wonderfully convenient religion as well. It can be what you want it to be, when it fits your mood and/or need to slam Western cultures (in particular, the United States):

Moreover, the only entities responsible can be those of evil, anglo, pasty-white Western cultures whose rapacious denizens are several rungs beneath inherently altruistic second- and third-world cultures.

It’s a belief system to which the Left can attach its finest proselytizers.

New BZ phrase, folks: the Religious Left.

BZ

P.S.

A very nice piece recently on Right Think about the myth of Global Warming, with an accompanying excellent video.

“Self-fulfilling prophecy” — you’ve likely read and heard this term before. What it means:

As it is known and taught today in management and education circles, the notion of the self-fulfilling prophecy was conceptualized by Robert Merton a professor of sociology at Columbia University. In a 1957 work called “Social Theory and Social Structure,” Merton said the phenomenon occurs when “a false definition of the situation evokes a new behavior which makes the original false conception come true.”

A little like The Pygmalion Effect which, as applied to students, means that those who are expected to fail will likely fail, and those expected to succeed will succeed.

Applied in a more “global” or, at least, a national fashion could fall our economy.

Samuel Zell, billionaire chairman of Equity Investments Group and owner of the Chicago Cubs, Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times and other companies, says:

Obviously what we have going on is an attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy. We have two Democratic candidates who are vying with each other to describe the economic situation worse.”

Zell believes that the U.S. economy will avoid recession, as the housing market actually begins to recover this spring.

I’ve been around this planet for a few years, shall we say, and have noted that much of what occurs in terms of the U.S. economy has a great deal to do with The Pygmalion Effect.

In an even more global scale, on virtually every level and issue: we pretty much get what we want. So. What do we want?

Some of the major blogs, talk radio programs and other somewhat “standard” conservative bastions are finally realizing what readers of my blog have known for some time — things that I would term “facts in evidence” for many years.

In capsulization:

President Bush is no Conservative.

Money has flowed like water during the Bush Administration.

The GOP once owned the House.

The GOP once owned the Senate.

The GOP, while owning all those places and the White House managed to piss and squabble away their power.

The GOP refused to take any number of stands.

The GOP caved on any number of issues from external (and internal GOP!) pressure.

The Bush Administration could barely manage to communicate its thoughts and ideas.

Rush Limbaugh, one of the greatest all-time carriers of the GOP and Bush Presidential Water has stated clearly that he is not a McCain supporter because he believes McCain is no Conservative.

Now Hugh Hewitt, another carrier-of-water for the GOP, has stated what I consider to be the obvious and — because these once steely bastions of support are falling — clearly indicates what disarray the GOP finds itself. Hewitt writes:

Visit the NRCC.org homepage and you’ll get a sense of the confusion and aimlessness there. It is a total mess. Instead of a front page listing in order of importance of the races where GOP contenders are positioned to take back a seat lost on ’06, you get a mishmash of links. What little traffic the site generates almost certainly never returns as there is no useful information here.

The clear and obvious message is still not being received, GOP and, moreover, it’s my belief that you are purposely doing your best to close your eyes and ears.

Because otherwise you would be stupid. And I’m thinking that’s actually the case.

Conservative talk show radio host (and movie reviewer) Michael Medved recently wrote an article posted on TownHall.com entitled “Is Islam The Enemy?”