-------------------- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 11:45:40 -0400 Reply-to: ferriscc@Mainstream.net From: Chris Ferris To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: About "The Moral Imperative" The next time you hear some black-robed legal poobah such as Justice Ruth Bader (cousin of "Woo Woo"?) Ginsberg or one of her urbanite cousins from the Rodeo Drive Circuit Court of Banana (Ap)peels pontificating that the 2nd Amendment does not apply to individuals, just remember these three words: "the moral imperative." In my humble opinion, the moral imperative super- sedes all federal, state and local statutes contrived to prevent me from doing what is right if true evil ever threatens those whom I love dearly. I felt the moral imperative keenly when I married my beautiful wife many years ago, as I watched our two young daughters grow from girls into young women, as I reflected on my obligation to safeguard my loved ones, neighbors, friends and innocent persons from harm at the hands of violent criminals in the absence of police presence. The thin blue line of local law enforcement cannot be everywhere at once. That being the case, each of us must make a conscious decision about whether or not the moral imperative mandates that we take a conscious, pro-active role in protecting ourselves, our loved ones, our neighbors, our friends and other innocents from the unpredictable violence practiced with such ruthlessness and arrogance by swaggering, sociopathic criminal predators, the smirking Philistines who count on "disarmed victims" and who have no fear of a broken, dysfunctional criminal justice system. Am I advocating breaking the law? In a word, no. But I am asking you to join me in "sending a message" to all violent criminals out there that their next victim could very well be a firm believer in the moral imperative, a resolute, stalwart soul who, when looking into the very face of the devil, will decide that taking swift and decisive action to shut down the threat permanently, by whatever means necessary, will be the truly moral course of action which will be easily explicable in a court of law. Oh sure, some P.C. district attorneys and Slick-50 style civil litigators will scream and shriek in outrage as they protest that the "poor dead criminal" who finally ran into the "wrong victim" was himself a "victim of society" or "sang in a church choir as a boy" ... yeah, right. Spare us, please. We have heard such drivel repeated ad nauseam before in courtrooms all across this land. Enough. No more. Let's return to common sense and the moral imperative. Mind you, I am not talking of Charles Bronson or Bernie Goetz "snapping" on a bad hair day. I am talking about millions of responsible, law abiding Americans making rational, conscious decisions that, henceforth, they will be driven solely by the moral imperative to defend themselves, loved ones and innocents around them when evil looms. Let black-robed double-speak take a back seat to moral correctness, as opposed to political correctness. In plain English, I will obey the law, but if ever placed "in extremis" by violent criminals, I will do whatever it takes to defend my wife, my children, myself, my neighbors, my friends or any innocent bystanders, and I will be confident, when the dust settles, in explaining with candor the necessity of my actions to a jury of my peers. (Sarah Brady, your doctor may be saying "Mylanta", girl. Keep the Tums and Rolaids handy, too.) I have shamed control freak advocates of draconian gun control into admitting that their failure to understand the awesome power of the moral imperative will doom their flawed cause over the long term. For the moral imperative outlined in this brief essay is, in fact, one of the greatest weapons in the arsenal of those of us who treasure our loved ones and friends and who revere freedom. Let the criminals out there in society begin to wonder, "Is this next victim I am sizing up a believer in `the moral imperative'? If so, might this be the last violent crime I will ever commit?" A little bit of fear can be good for the soul, especially if such fear spreads among criminals who come to realize that law abiding Americans are beginning to believe in this `moral imperative' which may, if violence threatens them or their loved ones, supersede federal, state and local statutes which serve only to disarm them and send them to early graves with not a peep heard from the likes of Bill Clinton, Sarah Brady and Charles Schumer. The moral imperative. Think about it. Talk about it. It is a winner, all the way. Watch the freedom-haters cringe, wince and mumble nonsense when you calmly discuss how the moral imperative will guide you if violent crime ever crosses the boundary into your families' lives. Ask the freedom-haters if Massachusetts', New York's or New Jersey's "disarming" statutes are going to keep their families alive if packs of two-legged hyenas, daggers shining in the sun, ever begin to move in on their broken down motor vehicles. Even William Shatner will concede that "Rescue 911" shows only nice "happy endings." Believe in the moral imperative, do the right thing, make America safer for one and all. Bill Clinton will surely not approve. I can think of no better reason for you to join the growing, moral imperative crew today. A change in mindset is the only requirement asked of new members. Annual dues are ... well, just work hard to protect freedom, each and every day, and you will be granted life membership status. Christopher C. Ferris Litchfield NH ferriscc@mainstream.net =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= leroy.pyle@prn-bbs.org The Paul Revere Network, 1201 N. Dearborn #139, Chicago, IL 60610 (312) 482-9910 voice, (312) 482-9940 BBS Fido: 1:115/223 CIS: 72316,1711 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400231 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: JEFF TAPKE (Read 2 times) Subj: kevlar vests JT> The powers that be, in some larger depts, see shooting/practicing as a JT> somewhat waste of time. IE, odds are the officer will NEVER use his JT> gun on the job. So they focus more on issues that are likely to get JT> them sued. Of course it could be pointed out that if an officer screws up and shoots a bystander that'll sure get the city and department and chief and officer and the damn janitor all sued. One thing I don't understand, and perhpas you can shed some light on this, is that it's obviously in an officer's best interest to be proficient with the tools of his trade. Why is it that many officers will neglect firearms proficiency? --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400232 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: JOHN PERZ (Read 2 times) Subj: kevlar vests JP> BEGIN QUOTE JP> ************************************************************ JP> TOP TEN TARGETS FIRED AT BY NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICERS Yeahbut...can anything from New York City be considered representative? --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400233 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: LYLE KNOX (Read 2 times) Subj: CATS PN> That would get me into the ccr's. Horses _only_ are PN> legal, other than household pets. I don't want to open LK> Hmmm, I wonder if the lack of enforcement might create an "eminent LK> domain" type of situation. By this I mean that because others have LK> been raising these animals and you can prove that the association's LK> been legally notified and they chose not to enforce the rules you can LK> then raise animals not specifically covered in the cc&rs. CC&Rs are LK> one thing we specifically did =not= want when we moved last year. :-/ To find someplace with absolutely no ccr's is rare...but in our case they're not overly obnoxious, and mainly ignored anyway. There is no association, so anybody wanting to bring an action would have to do it on his own hook or gather enough support to make it worthwhile. Such is not likely to happen. The last individual who went around and tried to get folks to conform to the "rules" decided that it was easier to move. There's some griping. But mainly the neighbors I have all tend to ignore each other's violations. To do otherwise would open them up to reprisal in kind. My next door neighbor isn't likely to grouse about my extra cars and trailers: cause then I'd get after him about his welding shop. LK>> This works very well for the few sheepers who winter their stock in our LK>> urban alfalfa fields and have problems with dogs. I know one guy who PN> Oh. I thought those sheep were for target practice... LK> Say that to your nicest wool suit. :-) While it's certainly okay to purchase the results of sheep raising, one would never willingly associate with a person who engaged in such pursuit... LK> This guy's an old world Basque. He's over 60 and can walk any 3 LK> people I know into the ground and I won't mention how they castrate the LK> ram lambs. Takes a =real= man to do that... :-) While I'm familiar with the technique I'll leave it to those that can get that close to a woolie to practice it . --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400234 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: LYLE KNOX (Read 2 times) Subj: 10MM .40 & THE FBI PN>> That gives me fantasy visions of a citabria outfitted with PN>> quad fifties LK>> Only problem is that you'd only have capacity for about 10 rounds per LK>> gun. Those suckers are =heavy=. :-) Now my little brother knows where PN> Well, I did say it was a "fantasy" . (It's one of the PN> milder ones...) LK> Or at least one you could talk about in public anyway. };-) ...yeah, mostly I have to be careful about public utterances. LK>> there's about 2 dozen T-28 D models (they have hard points) that are LK>> available for sale... :-) PN> Hmmm. What kinda shape are they in, and how hard would it PN> be to get ahold of 'em? LK> As of about 5 years ago they were still flying down in New Zealand. LK> They were part of a deal that my bro' was trying to put together to get LK> about 3 dozen war birds into the country. The deal included about 8-10 LK> Mustangs with the real gem being a P-61 Black Widow of which there are LK> none flying and only 2 or 3 known to exist. The deal was to import and LK> refit the 'Stangs one at a time to finance the deal. Boyohboy I'd sure love to get in on a taste of that. LK> Lyle --INTERNET: lyle.knox@iotp.com OR Does iotp give you netmail access? In consideration of others we might should move anything in the future elsewhere when we wander off topic. Dave has been more than tolerant. --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400235 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: LYLE KNOX (Read 2 times) Subj: KEVLAR VESTS LK> I remember reading an article in Guns & Ammo a few years back that LK> said that the Law School of St. Louis University did a study that LK> showed that cops were about 10% less effective than civilians in LK> stopping a crime or bad guy (whether they shoot or not) and were about LK> 10% MORE LIKELY than civilians to shoot a bystander. (The actual LK> numbers were 9% and 11% but I can never remember which number goes with LK> which stat. :-) ) That sounds about right. I'm going to suggest that we be a tad careful of drawing a conclusion just from that raw data: while it would be ideal for every LEO to be a dead-eye shooter, it just isn't ever going to happen. And the average civilian intervention I'm suspecting is involving a person somewhat more motivated than the average to maintain proficiency. --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400236 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: ALL (Read 2 times) Subj: Parkerizing Much thanks to all who've taken the time to answer and comment on my questions about "parkerizing" and finishes in general. Mucho informative, thanks. --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400237 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: JOHN PERZ (Read 2 times) Subj: kevlar vests -> There are stats floating around that would _seem_ to indicate that -> as a percentage cops hit bystanders more often than armed -> civilians...but let us beware: correlation is _not_ causation. JP> I would hypothesize that the majority of armed civilians are firearms JP> enthusiasts, whereas a large percentage of LEO's are not and probably JP> only go to the range to practice when their captain makes them go. Those are probably reasonably accurate conclusions. So what we end up with when we make the comparison is apples to oranges. I'm not sure that there is any kind of valid comparison. --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400238 Date: 06/29/96 From: PAUL NIXON Time: 06:54am \/To: JOHN PERZ (Read 2 times) Subj: Dusters? -> All the other kids thought I had a pretty neat cap gun for playing -> cowboys and indians. -> -> The police chief, however, thought it would be a better idea if I -> were to take that thing home and put it up. JP> So that was one vote against and a bunch of votes for? JP> Congratulations on your first experience with democracy! Yeah. Interesting to compare then with now: today a ten-year-old walking main street suburbia usa carrying a double 12 is gonna have SWAT on stand-by, OV-10's in orbit, multiple units to set a perimeter and the whole neighborhood evacuated... The above is the short version. The conversation was more like him asking what I had, examining it, then asking did my parents know what I was using for a cap gun? And since the answer was "no," then the suggestion that I take it home probably showed restraint on his part. And, I think, appropriate. He knew I wasn't out to rob convenience stores or create mayhem...but did question if it was appropriate behavior. And believed that if anything needed attending to my parents would be the ones to do so. And about 14 years later, he foned the chief of the town I was living in to send a patrol guy out to tell me to go see him to get arrested. Things were less formal in those days . --- FMail 1.02 * Origin: CyberSupport Hq/Co.A PRN/SURV/FIDO+ (602)231-9377 (1:114/428) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 275 GUNS Ref: DB400239 Date: 06/29/96 From: MAX LAKE Time: 10:35am \/To: GRANT CUNNINGHAM (Read 2 times) Subj: kevlar vests JP> TARGET NUMBER OF NUMBER SHOTS FIRED OF HITS 10: Attempted Suicide 3 2 GC> ...he missed?!?! Must have been the ex-Cowboy kicker. Tried to shoot himself and missed wide right. --- * OFFLINE 1.56 * * It takes a lot of balls to play golf the way I do! --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0530 * Origin: Collector's Edition * Dallas, TX * 214-351-6548 (1:124/2143)