If you've been following the news recently, you know there's been a spate of traveler arrests in New Bloomberg, er, New York, for gun possession. Before I go further let me state categorically that gun owners have a responsibility to know the law. Just as when gun owners fail to act responsibly in safe handling of their weapons, I find it hard to feel sympathy for those who make themselves victims. However, that doesn't change my view of anti-gun laws and those who support them.

I've already mused over the natural right to self-defense. A gun happens to be part of the tool set. Why do so many people and states try to restrict our right to be armed? In my opinion it's a matter of trust. Not the prohibitionists' trust of me, but my ability to trust them.

Take the misnamed Mayors Against Illegal Guns, headed up by the aforementioned Mayor Bloomberg. These politicians do not want citizens to be armed. Why? Could it have anything to do with the fact that so many of the group's members are convicted criminals? Criminals inherently, and rightfully, fear armed victims. Gun control laws are not about guns; gun control laws are about power and control over people. In the United States, gun control laws have their roots in racism. Today, we see that the self-proclaimed "enforcers" still are lacking moral or legal ethics. When Meredith Graves was arrested, the Mayor chose to falsely claim that she was in possession of cocaine in order to destract from the ridiculous gun arrest. In the now dropped case against Mark Meckler, officials refuse to return his firearm, despite having no legal right to keep it. The state in this case is committing a criminal act in the name of control.

The anti-freedom folks try to make gun owners out to be dangerous and untrusted. Deep down that reaction is not a reflection on the gun owner, it's a reflection of the person's own mistrust of themselves to behave civilly under stress. Their own bigotry causes them to link criminals using guns with law-abiding citizens. And it's not just with guns that the false association occurs. In Illinois a disturbed person attacked people with drain cleaner. Suddenly anyone who needs drain cleaner to fix a plumbing problem needs to show a photo ID and they will have their personal information logged by the state. It's not a coincidence that Illinois is also the only state in the U.S. that refuses to trust law-abiding citizens with guns for self-defense.

If someone doesn't support my right to be armed, I know that I must be wary of their true motives. While it's not an infallible character clue, it does warrant suspicion. After all, what does an honest person have to fear from a law-abiding armed citizen? Absolutely nothing. In my view it is perfectly legitimate to judge a person's integrity by their view on the 2nd Amendment.

It's a matter of trust.

Humans have a God-given right, actually it's a command, to protect themselves and those in their care. In fact this responsibility has been described as a "grave duty." Contrary to popular thought, the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is not the grantor of this right, the Amendment exists as an affirmation of what man naturally possesses. For those of us fortunate enough to live in Virginia, we also have the Virginia Constitution as yet another written reminder. Specifically we can turn to Section 13. Militia; standing armies; military subordinate to civil power:

That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

There you have it. God, the U.S. Constitution, and the Virginia Constitution all standing united to reiterate the right to be armed for self defense. That's a pretty strong triad giving us words to live by. Literally, words to live by.

Bravo Sir. Jimmy Carter is no longer the worse president ever.

With all the partisan rancor proceeding any election, perhaps we need to look the candidates' views on issues that are more germane to everyday life. In an interesting coincidence, this week I came across two articles, both mentioning Republican presidential hopeful, Rick Santorum, and his views on two subjects we muse over frequently.

First, on beer:

"It's the stouts, the bocks and then the white ales and the wheats,” said Santorum during a stop at the Millstream Brewery in Iowa on Sunday. He also said that he’s a fan of Guinness and will “drink a light beer if it’s really hot."

Not the former senator’s cup of tea: IPAs, which he called “a little too bitter."

Watching Eric Holder squirm and try to cover his incompetence brings a smile to my face.

Bosch Fawstin has written an honest and enlightening essay on what Islam means to its true followers. I've excerpted a couple of paragraphs here.

"Non-Muslim Muslims and the Jihad Against the West"

Last month we read that Jack Daniel's was being attacked by entitlement-loving socialists. Now comes the news the distiller is doing something sure to raise the ire of the left even more — supporting our troops.

Tennessee whiskey maker Jack Daniel's is donating more than $100,000 to pay for plane tickets and travel funds for soldiers at Fort Campbell, Ky., to spend the December holiday season with their families all over the country. 

The distiller is also asking the public to make additional contributions that could help hundreds of cash-strapped soldiers who otherwise would be stuck at the post on the Tennessee-Kentucky state line. Donations can be made to the Operation Ride Home campaign online at www.jdoperationridehome.com.

 See Jack Daniel's Funds Travel Expenses for Soldiers for more.

H/T to Jay over at MArooned.

When I hear folks say they don't vote it because their vote doesn't count it makes me want to slap my head in frustration, and then theirs too. Take a look at how government changes take place in other parts of the world, through violence, and tell me voting doesn't matter. At least for now, despite the protestations of some useful idiots, we enjoy peaceful change in the United States.

17th District Senate

Spotsylvania County Supervisor

That's how the editors of the local rag, The Free Lance-Star, describe the opponents of Senator Edd Houck. It was no surprise that the left-leaning paper would throw its endorsement to liberal Senator's reelection campaign. What was a surprise was the vitriol they used in doing so.

Certainly, social conservatives have good reason to want him gone. As chairman of the Senate Education and Health Committee he has buried anti-abortion legislation, earning 100 percent ratings from NARAL and Planned Parenthood. But it is hard to see how many others share that sentiment, apart from government-hating nutzies.

All across the country we are witnessing the leftist "Occupy" crowd burn buildings, defecate on police cars, cover up incidents of rape, and call for our government to be overthrown and replaced with socialism. Yet the local paper considers those on the right who oppose Houck's reelection to be "government-hating nutzies." All the while touting Houck's "ability to work with the other side."