This little tantrum occurred earlier this week, Jan. 15 at an Oak Harbor City Council meeting.
Kudo’s to the majority of this City Council that stood up for a trained citizens & Disabled Veterans right to legally carry a concealed weapon.
Raspberries to Councilman Rick Almberg for insulting a Disabled Veteran, showing his immaturity and spitting on his oath of office to uphold the constitution.
The year 2012 is drawing to a close with an unthinkable tragedy fresh in our memories, 28 people, including 20 small children shot dead at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut, their lives cut short by a maniac who first murdered his own Mother, stole her weapons and broke into the school, any motive still unknown.
That it happened 11 days before Christmas makes it all the more tragic and painful for all of the families affected.
Even though school shootings are statistically rare, they are nonetheless tragic and we can no longer feel confident our children are safe in their seats in school.
As expected, the reactions are strong and equally divisive, ranging from calls for more gun control, better treatment for the mentally disturbed, curtailing violent movies and video games and an increasing call for armed security be placed in schools in the way of hired security guards, Police or arming properly trained qualified teachers and school personnel.
A little reminder as we see the inevitable cry of the gun-grabbers to ban guns again. The emotional testimony of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp who witnessed her parents being gunned down in the 1991 Luby’s Restaurant shooting in Killeen, Texas. She owned a gun, but left it locked in the glove box of her car to be in compliance with the law banning guns in restaurants then.
35-year-old George Pierre Hennard did not care about complying with the law and slaughtered 23 people while wounding another 20 before committing suicide.
Watching the video, I initially thought, “big deal, the guy has a concealed carry permit and carries a gun.” I admit that reading about the kids’ theater incident sounds a bit contrived and although I strongly support the Second Amendment and concealed carry with the proper permit, and that I wouldn’t carry a firearm into a kid’s movie, he does have a legal concealed carry permit.
Unless the theater bars guns, it is legal to carry, even if not the smartest thing a parent would do with his kids.
But, something didn’t set well with me. Something just didn’t sound right to me.
Admittedly, I do not support Hedrick in his congressional run, even though I supported him in standing up to Brian Baird last August. I even have questions that remain unanswered concerning his service in the US Marine Corps and disability claimed. But none of that entered my mind as I watched the video over and over trying to figure out what did not set well with me.
After a few viewings, it dawned on me what it was. If you didn’t pick up on it, watch again and pay attention towards the end of the video, after Hedrick tells the interviewer that they have a legal right to bar guns on their private property.
He states that he would not be there doing the interview in person, but it would be by phone, had they barred his carrying a gun into the interview.
The second amendment is a very serious right that carries with it grave responsibility. Concealed Carry, under current laws, is a privilege not to be taken lightly. I strongly support both, but also feel such a responsibility must be tempered with some good old fashioned common sense.
Much like holding a security clearance in the Military, having the clearance isn’t enough; you must also have “the need to know.”
As Hedrick even shows in the story about the incident at the children’s movie, it is extremely rare to need to pull a gun if you are carrying. However, the likelihood of actually needing your gun, although slim, can be real at any given moment.
But, to indicate that if you may not carry on someone’s private property, their legal right, you, a candidate for federal office, would not do an in person interview? It would be only by telephone?
Such a comment comes across to me as paranoia, or a young man still trying to prove to himself that he is a man, with little clue what manhood is really about.
I have to believe that he received adequate training in the safe and proper handling of rifles while in Basic Training and AIT, since he did serve a short while in the US Marine Corps, even if he is tight lipped about that service other than making his rank held central to his campaign, but I also wonder if that attitude of “no gun, no in person interview” extends to other venues, such as political forums or school functions with his children?
I wonder because RCW 9.41.280 prohibits firearms “in a public or private school building,” except under some strict exemptions.
To me, given his comment in the video, it would only seem logical that he would not attend school plays or PTA Meetings concerning his own children unless he was armed either.
I can only hope that this is not the case and that he obeys the law concerning concealed carry on school grounds and buildings, leaves it home or properly locked in his car and is there for his children.
There are those that see no problem with his carrying a concealed weapon to an interview. If not for the comment of “no gun, no in person interview,” neither would I.
But, that one little comment, giving us a glimpse into the mind of a candidate for office, leaves me feeling like he might just be too immature or too paranoid to be elected to office.
Republican Representative from the 18th District, Jaimie Herrera, has introduced House Bill 1832, protecting the right to the lawful possession of firearms during an emergency.
The legislation would “repeal the prerogative of the Governor, upon declaring a state of emergency, to prohibit private citizens from carrying firearms on their person, away from their home of residence, during the declared state of emergency.”
If, like me, you did not know the governor had the power to usurp the Federal Constitution and you support legal firearms ownership, this is a very important piece of legislation.
After Hurricane Katrina, we saw the outcome of the New Orleans Gun Grab and how it left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of thugs, gangs and criminals.
Congress outlawed gun confiscation in 2006 due to that fiasco and outright usurpation of citizens Second Amendment Rights.
Ms. Herrera’s Legislation would further protect us in the event of a major disaster from protecting ourselves outside of our homes and retaining the rights we were granted when we obtained a concealed carry permit.
This is exactly what we need in Washington State and I applaud Ms. Herrera and co-sponsors of the legislation. In case of emergency or disaster, we cannot expect protection from the authorities that will undoubtedly be heavily overtaxed in responding to emergencies.
The last thing we would need is to be faced with threats on our and our family’s lives by thugs and criminals who prey on the unprotected.
I urge you to contact your Representative and demand they support this very important piece of legislation.
Republican Representative from the 18th District, Jaimie Herrera, has introduced House Bill 1832, protecting the right to the lawful possession of firearms during an emergency.
