Wednesday Miscellany

Spreading the news one blog post at a time!

Spreading the news one blog post at a time!

1. Tennessee Senate votes to allow open carry of guns without a permit : The Tennessee Senate approved a bill Tuesday that would let gun owners carry their weapons openly without a permit. Lawmakers voted 25-2 to pass a measure filed by state Sen. Mae Beavers that would do away with the requirement that gun owners go through a background check, receive training and obtain a permit before carrying a handgun in public. Gun owners would have to get a permit only if they plan to conceal their weapons.”

2. The USA: Worst Government That Money Can Buy : “History tells us that when governments become excessively oppressive and/or descend into saturation corruption (like the rancid regimes of the Western bloc), that such scenarios rarely “end well” – i.e. a peaceful transition back to responsible, legitimate government. Instead, the peasants/serfs/workers are nearly always driven to a state of desperation (generally near-starvation) before they finally pull out their pitchforks and guillotines, and take back their own government.”

3. How long until the american economy collapses : “The American government is digging itself into a hole. Every year it’s flooding more and more money into “stimulus” that doesn’t work. The debt and unfunded liabilities (otherwise known as debt and more debt to the average person) is at a level that can never be practically paid off. Short of a few miracles, the collapse is inevitable.”

4. Preppers, prepare more: 16 major retail chains closing stores across America : “Preppers, prepare more. Here is a report showing the continued decline of the U.S. economy. It is not just small businesses being hit by the increase in over taxation and over regulation. Here are 16 large retail chains either significantly cutting their business locations or on the brink of going out of business all together. All of these businesses are laying off large numbers of workers.”

5. Last Man Standing : “A two-decades-old battle between a Nevada rancher and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has resulted in officials armed with machine guns surrounding the ranch and forcibly removing the owner’s cattle, according to the rancher’s family.”

About M.D. Creekmore

M.D. Creekmore is the owner and editor of He is the author of four prepper related books and is regarded as one of the nations top survival and emergency preparedness experts. Read more about him here.


  1. #5. SCREW THAT JIVE. That’s horse crap. A man’s land should be his own ‘country’.

    In light of things like this, I’ve actually identified ‘low value’ land in my area. Low value as in there likely won’t be any major highways constructed near it, it’s not zoned for any residential development (it’s all happening on the other side of the county near the major highway), it’s got high groundwater and lots of bush. Basically it’s low interest to government and developers but would be good for country land you can grow and raise animals on, and I’m working towards buying some acreage there.

    I hope I’m right.

    • Black Rose says:

      The article was not clear about him owning the land. It appears that he has been using the land for his cows, if that is the case he should pay rent or get evicted. We can’t stay on property we do not own and not pay rent.

      If he does own the land then getting his cows evicted is not right

      • it is an old right in the west to have grazing on ‘gov’t.’ land.
        he is within his rights.
        as far as the turtles are concerned they thrive on cow pucky, so the feds excuse of protecting turtles–which lived on bison pucky in previous generations– is so much hogwash. the feds are just testing to see if the american spine is sufficiently jelly-like yet.
        furthermore my understanding is that the cattle reduce the chance of bad fire by keeping brush grazed down.

        • He even said he offered to pay for grazing rights and they wouldn’t take his money.

          • riverrider says:

            well they wouldn’t take the AMOUNT he offered which was the usual token sum. the “new”( in ’93 i think) fees are astronomical in comparison, some say punitive and certainly unaffordable for ranchers. the govt gobbled up this near useless land way back when. in some states they “own” the majority of acreage. one guy had his land blocked off because the conditions were right for the turtle, even tho no turtles lived their or for hundreds of miles. as c.brown would say, “good grief!”

        • Donna in MN says:

          When I owned land in Pa, there was a certain endangered dung beetle attracted to my dog pen’s mulch pile and they multiplied because of my dogs. I had conservation officer come out one time to check my fence and he noticed the beetles. He told me if the Feds knew this, I would be forced to get rid of my dogs and forfeit my land privacy under the endangered species act.

          I then told him if they do this they will go extinct because it was my dogs who fed them. He said I had a point, and never reported it to the Feds.

      • His family has ranched the land since the 1800’s. The desert tortouis [sp] is why they are removing the cattle.

        • axelsteve says:

          Frank. That it was what I heard yesterday on the radio.He could or also has an easment to use the land from what I understand however it is the lisping pansies from the epa that is behind it all. from what I understand that is I do not know much about it just the feds have there panities in a wad over the tourtis.

  2. Tom Arnold says:

    #5 FWIW the rancher & family never actually owned the land – they just used it. According to the article it’s always been federal land and the grazing rights were revoked in 1999 to “save the desert turtle”. I think that’s ridiculous but it’s pretty clear that the rancher doesn’t really have a leg to stand on. He’s trying to drum up an emotional response. He’s been to court several times and lost. Just because something’s been available before doesn’t mean it always will be.

    The debate that federal land is public land and should be free to the public to use as they wish is another issue. I _think_ that in some cases, at least, I don’t think they should. Should I be able to cut down the redwoods because I want to develop the land, to do the same at Yosemite or the Grand Canyon? I think the land, resources, animals, environment can and should be protected. Am I a Sierra Club member that thinks that every blade of grass should be sacrosanct? Definitely not. The problem is, as always, trying to decide what belongs in the protected category, managed category, or the free use category. I’m not a saint and don’t have fair answers to that question.

    I just know that this issue is more than just that the feds are taking away a rancher’s land.

    • Tom Arnold says:

      Forgot to add that irregardless of everything else, the “first ammendment zones” are ridiculous.

      • first amendment ‘zones’ are just tiny concentration camps.

      • k. fields says:

        Good points Tom. I know a lot of marijuana growers here in Northern CA who would also like to use public lands for their personal gain.
        As for the “First Amendment zones”, yes, thank you George W. Bush.

        • Rider of Rohan says:

          First of all, ranchers are not marijuana growers. Raising cows is legal, at least for now. I doubt it will be much longer considering the commie in the WH, at least if he gets his way. You know, with cow farting and all causing all this global warming.

          And nothing stops anyone in DC from doing away with 1st A zones, though the current occupant of the WH had no problem closing down open air monuments to our veterans. He did however make sure to keep those 1st A zones open for illegal aliens to demonstrate while our veterans were locked out of monuments dedicated to them. Pukeworthy!

          • k. fields says:

            Rider, my point was, in both cases the people involved feel they have a “right” to use public lands for personal profit – I’m sorry but they don’t.
            In the case of the rancher, he was leasing land and his landlord decided not to lease to him any longer. End of story. I’m sorry, but that’s the chance you take if you don’t have ownership.

            As to closing down open air monuments to our veterans – really? That’s the important issue you took away from the whole debacle of the government shutdown?

          • Rider of Rohan says:

            Where in the world did I say that was THE important issue? What I did say is that it was an important issue given the fact that vets had made plans to come to DC for months in advance, and open air monuments were closed for what reason? It was nothing but a petty tyrant exercising his authority. Punishing our vets for no reason other than vindictiveness. My dad and my son are vets, put their very lives on the line for this country, one in Korea, the other in Afghanistan. I don’t put up with any crap where they are concerned. Not from Obama, not from anyone.

            As for the Bundy Ranch controversy, I haven’t made up my mind. But what I saw today on one of the alternate media sites of BLM officers slamming female cancer patients to the ground, and turning dogs lose on pregnant women, I was reminded of Bull Conner in Alabama. You can take want you want from that statement.

          • JeffintheWest says:

            First, MD, I hit Report Comment on Rider’s comment by accident.

            Second: +100 to his comment. I get so tired of the “blame George Bush” movement. He was no angel, but all you’re really doing when you trot that one out is saying; “Look, squirrel!”

          • Encourager says:

            “Squirrel!!!!” lol. +100 to you Jeff.

          • k. fields – read more about the story. I’m not 100% decided on what should actually happen with this case, but this man’s family has been using the land since before the Bureau of Land Management was formed. They suddenly decided that the land can’t be used any more because of a turtle. That’s about as stupid of a reason as the farmers in California not being able to use the water there because of a bait fish.

          • Encourager says:

            I went online and watched the latest video. I think the BLM got in WAY over their head, and now do not know how to back out gracefully.

            The protesters were so upset because they brought in bulldozers. For what? Did the kill the cows they confiscated? And are now burying them on BLM land? They ran into people on purpose with their vehicles, tazered peopled, set a dog on a pregnant woman. Completely out of control.

            Ruby Ridge. I cannot get the image of the mother shot through the head holding her baby out of my head. Please, God, not again.

          • axelsteve says:

            marijuana growers have been known for messing up the enviorment by stealing water and the use of nasty fertilizers that are conidsdered enviormental crimes and the lisping pansies never hassle them.

          • Way too many laws on the books already that aren’t being enforced.

  3. Bctruck says:

    #5, on a fraction of this scale, I’ve been experiencing good government at its finest and most typical. Over the last dozen or so years, the towns main water line that comes across my 5 acres of well manicured and cared for yard, has broken and need to be repaired on several occasions. Typically, they drive their heavy equipment across my property destroying bushes, plants, grass and in some cases my fence, in order to get to the leak. When they fix the leak and leave with Their machinery, I’ve always been left with the effort time labor and cost of replacement dirt and fences. This year, I finally had my fill and took pictures of the destruction they left in their path and at the next city council meeting stood up in front of the entire town and confronted the mayor and council on it. A reasonable person would expect the destruction to be repaired and maybe even an apology for all those times I repaired the Damages myself. That’s not what happened. Instead they started quoting easement laws and countering my desire to have them fix my yard with threats to send out a surveyor to make certain that none of my fences were on city property. Later in the week, my wife and I were commenting home with frozen groceries and we were pulled over by one of our finest and questioned about our speed my registration and insurance papers examined and then he questioned me about my case against the towns water dept. it’s been two months now and I’m still left with holes in my yard you could lose a car in and holes in my fences that I’ve had to do makeshift repairs on in order to keep my animals in. I freekin hate what every bit of our government has become. Doing the right, fair, honorable and reasonable thing is never the first choice anymore. They never miss an opportunity to insert themselves in people’s lives and bring as much destruction and evil into it as possible.

  4. #1 – If there is no law expressly forbidding open carry, then it is not against the law. You’ll get a lot of odd looks if you open carry and you’ll be harassed by the police 99% of the time, but that doesn’t mean it is illegal without a law expressly forbidding it.

    • GA Red,

      It is currently against the law in TN if you don’t have a permit – that is what the law in question is going to change if passed.

      • I hope it passes. I know in several other states, people are intentionally open carrying to prove the point. They are repeatedly harassed. Georgia has a concealed carry law, but there is NOTHING on the books saying you can’t open carry without a permit. The DH was harassed by an officer in our neighborhood for open carrying . The first officer on the scene said he couldn’t do that (there was an incident in the neighborhood). Fortunately, another officer arrived and told the first officer to back off.

        Lawyers go to law school for 2 years then have to pass the bar to practice law. They usually specialize in some particular area, so they don’t know everything but are expected to defend people when accused of breaking the law.

        Police go to the police academy for a very limited time, but they are expected to enforce laws. Why does this not seem logical?

        • k. fields says:

          “I know in several other states, people are intentionally open carrying to prove the point.”
          I wish they wouldn’t do that because it can backfire. That’s what happened here in CA. Throughout history, open carry was legal here except in a couple of large urban areas, but then some yahoos decided to try to make a point and changed everything.
          The first instance was when Reagan was governor and the Black Panthers entered the state capitol carrying rifles and shotguns (which was perfectly legal at the time) as a protest against police brutality. Basically saying, “If you won’t protect our people, we will.” Reagan immediately enacted laws (Mulford Act) to stop such displays and made the public carrying of loaded firearms illegal through out the state.
          The latest was by a different type of group, Bay Area Open Carry. They decided it would be a good idea to openly carry unloaded firearms (it would have been illegal if they were loaded or concealed) in the San Francisco bay area, purposely meeting at outdoor cafes, restaurants, etc. to “show off” their right to do so.
          What resulted was another series of new state laws not only prohibiting open carry of any firearm everywhere, but making extremely tight regulations regarding any transportation of firearms.

          • riverrider says:

            k, again i respectfully disagree. the lack of exercise of open carry rights has gotten us to this point of hysteria at the sight of a gun. it was done, and no one flipped out, by many country folk in my hometown. i carried a rifle/shotgun down the road to hunt at a better spot many times, no law called. heck one fellow kept his gun in the principal’s office so he could hunt on the walk home. the whole parking lot was full of trucks w/ gun racks, no law called. the nervous ninnies have cowed us into giving up our rights by default, so now retaking those rights causes an unfounded canipsion fit. they need to put their big girl panties on and get over it..

          • k. fields says:

            riverrider, open carry in the normal course of use doesn’t bother most people. Even here in CA, having an exposed rifle in the back window of your pickup before the new regulations or carrying a sidearm while out hiking wouldn’t raise many eyebrows.
            But the people who are intentionally open carrying just to prove a point, cause problems for all of us in my opinion.
            You are younger than I, but I certainly can’t remember anyone going to the local diner in the area I grew up in in TN sporting a holstered weapon on their hip. Yes, there were plenty of firearms in the trucks in the parking lot, but you would have been seen as insane if you open carried one to get a cup of coffee. And the folks I grew up with certainly weren’t nervous ninnies nor did they get hysterical at the sight of a gun. Was it different where you lived? In the normal course of the day, did everyone open carry when eating out or shopping at the local market when you were young? Why not?

            Let’s face it, every tool has its proper place and use. If I were to walk through most any city while carrying the scythe I use for harvesting wheat, it would probably create problems. But if I were carrying it down the road here going to a neighbors field, folks wouldn’t bat an eye. In one case, I’m doing it in the normal course of my activities – in the other, I’m doing it just to make a stupid spectacle out of myself.

            The 2 examples I gave here in CA led to severe restrictions not specifically because of the firearms but because of the actions of the people involved.
            In both cases they were completely in-appropriate and did nothing to further any cause other than those of the anti-gun crowd.

          • riverrider says:

            k, yeah, if folks came to town that carried during their normal activities they carried in town too, no place was off limits except the jail. i carried sometimes myself even tho i wasn’t 21 yet, cops never bothered me, except to admire which model i was toting. you exercise free speech, why should i not exercise my rights?

          • Rider of Rohan says:

            Exactly, riverrider. If one doesn’t exercise a right, then one doesn’t have it, that simple. The problem with CA is that it’s been turned into a one-party craphole with gov’t similar to what exists in the 3rd World. That’s why people who can are leaving. My nephew and his family(3 children) have made the decision to pull out as well and have their house up for sale. They’re moving to Oklahoma. The country has gone full circle, as once it was Okies moving to California. Wow is all I can say. Paradise Lost in CA.

          • Donna in MN says:

            Ca has a large gang population, I would feel very intimidated if they were allowed to open carry when I was at Venice Beach at 4 pm, but I left in a hurry at 4:01 pm with or without open carry.

          • Tom Arnold says:

            I don’t know about anywhere else but FWIW when we drive through West Virginia as many as 1 in 5 are open carrying. I mean in the grocery store, the mall, restaurants – even McDonald’s, not just in the tractor store. It’s not a big deal, just a part of life. Of course I’m talking about the panhandle & mountains not the gentrified areas like Charleston 🙂 I guess it doesn’t hurt that WV has the 2nd highest highest per capita gun ownership.

            We’ve seen similar in some areas of Pennsylvania as well.

            I guess it has more to do with the culture of the area more than anything else.

          • k. fields – I understand your point, but one individual walking down the road carrying a gun is much different from a large crowd of people (who have a bad reputation) carrying multiple weapons into a crowded location. Most of the people doing this are also video recording the entire thing so they have evidence that they have done nothing wrong. One such person was confronted by police after receiving a call from a “concerned citizen.” The video showed exactly what the man was doing, but the officer was trying to tell the man that what he was doing was illegal. The officer didn’t know the law and resorted to stating that the caller reported that he was pointing his gun at houses. This kind of thing rarely ends well, but people are fed up with out of control government and out of control “enforcers.”

        • Encourager says:

          GA Red, we have open carry in Michigan. A family friend open carries where ever he goes, and has at times, had the police called by some scared sheeple who told the police ‘there is a man with a gun!!!’ One time, since he saw the woman talking hysterically into her phone and trying to hide behind a display, he just kept reading can labels. The police arrive, call him by name, exchange high 5’s and chit chat. The woman came up and demanded he be arrested and got an ear full from the officers; they threatened to arrest her for false reporting of a crime. I witnessed this and must admit, I was laughing pretty loud.

      • patientmomma says:

        I have a permit but I don’t open carry except on my own land. Showing off your gun is just asking for someone run scared to the police, and get your gun confiscated. You can carry the gun inside your waist covered by a jacket or long sweatshirt, in a ladies purse, or backpack. The general public is afraid of guns and unless you live in a small place where everyone knows you, walking down the street showing off your gun scares the [email protected] out of people. No one knows where the next crazy shooter is going to be.

    • Open carry never was illegal in Wisconsin, but up until a very few years ago if you carried, you would be arrested and successfully prosecuted for ‘disturbing the peace’.

      It wasn’t until a new Attorney General came in and issued a letter to all County Prosecutors that open carry did not disturb the peace and that the state would oppose any such prosecutions that it stopped.

  5. Donna in MN says:

    2. 3. and 4. I wonder if the pitchforks will come out in July.
    I will withdraw my bank money before then, take advantage of the two months I have to be fully prepped, and see where this goes.

  6. The govt really needs to ban ASSAULT KNIVES!

    MURRYSVILLE, Pa. (AP) — A 16-year-old armed with two knives went on a stabbing and slashing spree at a high school near Pittsburgh on Wednesday, leaving as many as 20 people injured, including a school police officer who eventually subdued the boy with the help of an assistant principal, police said.

    This is just proof positive that if someone has malicious intent on their minds… it doesn’t matter if they can get their hands on a gun…. they will carry it out anyway they can…. even if that means just using knives!

    Those in DC need to learn reading comprehension…. The United States Constitution plainly states…. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    If you’d follow the United States Constitution like you’re supposed to… then someone in that school would have been armed because their rights weren’t being violated and they would have shot him and stopped the stabbing and slashing spree before he hurt 20 people.

    • Bctruck says:

      No doubt they were tactical high capacity assalt knives with lazier aiming devices and combat grips.

    • I have heard this argument every time there has been a major weapon-related assault in a public space – “if I/another armed individual had been there we could have saved everyone and shot the bad guy”. Any chance we can drop the Rambo delusions any time soon? I am all for carrying a firearm where appropriate and legal but the idea that the mere presence of an individual bearing arms means the public at large is protected is ludicrous.

      Current and former military and law enforcement personnel might have a shot (no pun intended) at making the life and death decisions needed to protect lives in these situations, because they train constantly for it. I don’t mean going out plinking in the back 40 or unloading a few hundred rounds at the range, they train physically and mentally to intricate themselves into these no-win scenarios.

      One of the major network news magazine shows (Dateline or 20/20 i believe) did an investigation recently testing exactly this myth. They took a large selection of people with varying ranges of familiarity with firearms and put them in an all day firearms safety class. At one point in the morning session they gave a gun loaded with paintballs to a student and told them they would be using it for more training in the afternoon. The guns looked like real guns not paintball markers. Near the end of the morning session they had a “shooter” come in and shoot the lecturer then turn on the crowd. Not one of the test subjects managed to stop, wound or even slow down the attacker. Most hid under the tables pulling frantically at the guns but couldn’t get them out of the holsters and were “executed” like many others in the room. One girl with a family history of shooting guns managed to get the gun drawn and pointed in the general direction of the assailants – but not before getting shot 8 or 9 times herself.

      While in a relatively controlled environment, this hopefully takes a lot of steam out of the Rambo argument. I know it will not convince many of you and that’s fine, but just consider that your body behaves differently in a high adrenaline situation than when you are shooting at paper, wood or steel targets that don’t return fire. Keep in mind to that even if you are able to react in a timely manner to protect those around you, saying you are ready to take a life and being able to live with it after the fact are different as well.

      Finally, as a high school teacher. It will never be alright for there to be armed persons patrolling our schools. The risk of a mass shooting is nothing to scoff at and the damage should one occur is beyond compare, but students will still be traumatized when a shooter is shot down in the halls in front of them – albeit a preferable trade to their deaths. The negative side of the trade off though is for the other students in schools where no mass shootings or stabbings occur and we send the message that this building is not a safe place for you to be. You are telling each and every student that every day you are school you are in danger. Schools need to be safe but safe schools come from safe communities, communities that find these troubled individuals and intervene before an incident occurs. There was a great article in Monday’s Misc. about what Lt. Dan Marcou thought about gun control and he has a 5 phase breakdown for mass shootings. I don’t want to reiterate things on this already absurdly long rant but he’s right. Mass shootings need to be stopped in phases 1-4, by the time they walk into the school it is already too late, a tragedy has occurred.

      Do with this what you will, but please don’t (regardless of any training or past experience) say that “if only an armed individual were present …” The deaths of so many children and innocents on these rampages should not be so cheaply spent as to become pawns in a political debate – for any side to try and score points with.

      • CS,

        I’ve actually had to us a handgun in self-defense and had no problem “getting the gun out of the holster” but then, I’ve had training and over 30 years of shooting under my belt. But still I would rather have someone with a gun (preferably me) when an attack started then a bunch of unarmed people with no way or hope of even attempting to stop the attacker.

        “but students will still be traumatized when a shooter is shot down in the halls in front of them”

        Probably, but they would probably be more traumatized if it were a bunch of their classmates and friends – again, I would rather have an armed person (concealed carry inside the school is an option here) when some crazy person started shooting inside the school than a bunch of people with nothing but their thumb up their butt.

      • Tactical G-Ma says:

        I appreciate and agree with some of your remarks. Many people believe that owning and carrying a firearm means they can do what needs to be done in an efficient manner. I know people who own hammers but don’t know how to drive a nail. Preparedness means practice. One must be able to act in a situation, not react. And I know for a fact that there are schools in the United States where armed guards walk the halls and stand guard in the lunchrooms and gyms. Where metal detectors must be passed thru and lock down is a daily practice. My son was part of an anti-drug acting troup during his undergrad days and performed at many high schools. Some had chain link fence seperating the stage and audience and the actors had armed guards at all times. And most of these schools were in the land of the ubber-left. Of course, anyone having the means, sends their children to private school.
        Your entry does emphasize one thing, that the needs of communities is not one-size-fits-all and power to govern should be returned to each state.
        As for me, the only two places I don’t carry is on a plane and in the courthouse.

      • riverrider says:

        cs, you are dead wrong. many recorded cases of shooters killing themselves or otherwise ending their spree when confronted with another gun, whether by fire or mere presence thereof. no mass shootings at gun ranges are there?

        • cs
          true, training is necessary but just the sight of a gun pointed at him might have stopped the stabber. actual shots may not be necessary. i’ve had a pistol held on me and no defense. leaves you shaking.
          i’d rather shake after being able to disable him than the shakes i got after he was gone.
          there is much to gun training especially avoiding those between you and the attacker. you never know what a panicked person or a small child will do.

      • Tom Arnold says:


        In one of your posts you mention Canada – I assume you live there. That might be the difference – as alike as we are, the US & Canada have vastly different cultures on some issues and firearms seem to be one of those.

        Here, armed citizens can be quite effective. According to the FBI’s own annual report on the crime stats estimates that there are 2 million successful self defense uses of firearms. I think that’s a pretty good argument that “a good guy with a gun” can make a difference. In every case? Obviously not, but enough that it’s an effective and viable option.

        • axelsteve says:

          IN america we speak english and maybe spanish. In Canada they speak english and french and maybe chineese.

      • CS – I look at it like this – the more people that have guns (especially concealed carry), the less likely there are to be bad guys ready to do something. Say a criminal walks into a restaurant and it’s a gun free zone, he’s probably going to rob the place and won’t think twice. On the other hand, he walks into a restaurant where carriers are welcome, he might actually reconsider. I know criminals aren’t generally the smartest group of folks, but don’t you think they’re going to think twice about robbing someone if the chances of that person having a gun are higher?

      • CS,

        I have to weigh in on this. You state, in part “You are telling each and every student that every day you are in school you are in danger.”

        Every student should be told that every day. So should the teachers. School is a compulsory act that puts large groups of individuals from wildly different backgrounds and upbringings together and forces them to interact. Much like prisons do. The only difference is that prisons have guards. Schools only have teachers who are more concerned with their own egos and getting their way because It’s “for the children”. Look up “for the children” on Wikipedia.

        It is my personal experience that most teachers turn a blind eye to assaults, theft, battery and intimidation of other students. If they intervene it is usually to malign the victim because the victim won’t back talk them. They won’t dare confront the perpetrators because even they are afraid of them.

        I am not saying all teachers are this way. There are some damn good ones out there. The perpetrators know this too and wouldn’t dare assault another student in one of their classrooms.

        Having strong (physically and morally), well trained teachers is imperative. Unfourtunately, the reality is just the opposite. If I would have had good teachers like that, I wouldn’t have taken a beating in my ninth grade English class, then been suspended for defending myself. And yes, the circumstances leading up to the beating took place in the teachers presence. Furthermore, if I would have had good teachers ad administrators, I wouldn’t have been jumped by five individuals during lunch, on the quad. Those individuals would have been turned over to the police for arrest and prosecution instead of protecting their sensitive little egos.

        If you truly want a safe learning environment, then get the proper training and make it safe. There have been far too many firearm and other weapon related incidents in schools over the past ten years. So far, the response has been over reactive and completely impotent. My example for that is suspending a little boy for eating a Pop Tart that his teacher decided “looked” like a gun. I have many, many more examples if you need them. You’re welcome to look them up yourself. I got them all out of the Miscellany sections of this blog.

        • I understand your point about telling kids they are in danger constantly, though everyone needs at least one place they can feel completely safe. Unfortunately these days many (especially low income urban) students don’t have that anywhere else outside of school. Unfortunately this growing need has led to ridiculous no-excuse rules regarding violence or potentially violent situations. Like the asinine Pop Tart example you mentioned. I assure you that most teachers are not behind those kind of situations, it is often parents coming in half cocked and forcing the administrations’ hand. Were I a betting man I would bet a parent complaint led that child’s suspension (I say without checking into it…..).

          I do take exception with your comment about “Schools only have teachers who are more concerned with their own egos and getting their way because It’s “for the children”.” You are half right, i suppose, in that any teacher worth their degree is in it for the children. There are some teachers out there admittedly that are absolute embarrassments to the profession, but they are the minority.

          It sounds like you had some of the embarrassments in your school days, and for that I am truly sorry. It’s no wonder you see schools as a prison environment. The real unfortunate issue here is that what Americans pay their teachers should be criminal – you get what you pay for. The brightest and best potential teachers are forced to move away internationally or to live in near poverty conditions (especially in large urban areas).

          To your point about teachers who do not break up fights, there are cases when to do so would be dangerous to the teacher’s well being and we are told in teachers college the best thing to do in this case is go for help. For instance a case where a couple of 6 ft tall, 225 lb 12th graders start going at it in a 125 lb female teacher’s class. That is not a safe thing for her to get in the middle of – I have seen some still get involved in this case but it is a risk. I on the other hand am a 350 lb former national-level wrestler and have been personally assaulted 4 times in the last few years while breaking up fights. It really is a situational issue. If your teacher could have safely intervened or reasonably prevented the altercation they should have their license revoked.

          Finally, about your mentioning the “victim” being suspended as well there are a couple of reasons this could be for:
          1) Often times fights are not one sided assaults, and both combatants share in the guilt.
          2) In cases where an assault is one sided, in the interest of the victim not being assaulted by the assaulter’s friends or “gang”, they might be told to take a day or two to let things cools down
          3) For the same reason a victim might be encouraged to take some time to allow recovery both physical and emotional.

          While it seems unfair – well it is – but it’s the world imposed upon us.

          • CS,

            I really do thank you for replying. Based on your response it’s evident to me, that you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on where the problem in the schools lie. I believe the problem is with the teachers and the administration. You believe that the problem is with the community.

            I’m sure we can both agree that there IS a problem and that identification of that problem is paramount.

            Let me posit this… The teachers have a union that is very strong. The community doesn’t. Unions are well known for taking better care of their interests than the interests of the people for whom they represent.

            I’m not looking for an argument, but it’s clear that you and I are on different sides of the same coin that is the problem going on in schools today.

            Good luck with what you are doing. I wish you well. I’ll leave you with this… If you ever see a student getting harassed, beaten, assaulted, stolen from, in front of another teacher and that teacher does nothing… please stand up and do something about it!

            P.S. My mother was a teacher for 40 years in the same school district I grew up in. She was never my teacher, but I have an intimate familiarity to the politics that go on in a school district because of it.

            My final word to you on this is YES, it’s the teachers fault. Not the communities, not the administration, and not “the world imposed upon us.”

          • Tactical G-Ma says:

            Sirius and CS,
            Two of my children are school teachers. One teaches special education in a school for the severly challenged children. The other teaches jr.hi
            English. I don’t sit in her class room. What I do know is that her job is to teach English. If half her class is not up to that class level, she must bring them up first before continuing to teach the other half. Yes she writes her lesson plan that cannot vary from the outline provided by the school system. The only means of discipline is to send a student to the office. Her hands are tied. And if a student comes to her with a problem, the student is refferd to the office. She is not allowed to teach behavior, ethics, honesty, self-respect, manners, premarital sex, birth control, or the value of self-respect.
            She is not allowed to do anything except teach English.
            And I want to add that head start and pre-k was started so young children with ignorant parents would be academically equal to children with educated parents when starting first grade. Not only has this backfired causing even more households where proper English is not used but is actually discouraged.
            Right now Fox news has teachers speaking out against the curriculum they have to teach by.
            Teachers have to do what they are told to do.
            It leads right back to govt telling people it’s ok to be stupid and the Department of Education perpetuating ignorance. Thd DoED is overseen by the federal administration!
            You bet there’s a problem with public schools but hoe hum, the elitests send their children to private school and if you work harder then you can send your children to a decent school (sarc).

          • Tactical G-MA
            I agree with you 100%, the teacher’s hands are tied. The only punishment that the schools are allowed to do is in school suspension, out of school suspension, or expulsion. Let’s be honest does that really teach a child anything?

            There is a lot wrong with our school system and like our government problems there is no easy fix. Parents are going to have to step up and make sure that their children are getting the education that they deserve, until that happens there is not much hope. As the pack well knows with all of the sheeple out there that are not going to take responsibility for their own children we do not have much of a chance to turn this country around.

          • JeffintheWest says:


            I agree wholeheartedly with you. My father and brother were both teachers after they left the armed forces. My father eventually became a vice-principal back in the 70’s, and my brother taught special ed. Both of them felt like the problem was the administration (which is why my dad went for the VP spot, so he could make a difference for the teachers in the classrooms). My brother also felt the union was a major source of the problems (my dad merely despised the union and treated them with contempt, something he could get away with back then but is impossible to do now).

            I agree with you and Sirius — the problem is in the schools — not necessarily with the bulk of the teachers, though some are obviously a major part of the problem (the vast majority do the best they can in a situation that seems specifically designed to guarantee failure), and the administration which seemingly exists purely to force compliance with stupid policies, many of which are driven by the union in an effort to cement their own power and income. My brother eventually committed suicide a few years ago, and frustrations with how the union and the administration treated him, while not the primary factor in that decision were certainly a contributing factor — almost the last conversation I had with him was about the problems with those two organizations.

            You want to go a long way to solving problems in schools? Do four things; dissolve the unions, fire at least 50% of the administrative overhead and get rid of their positions, eliminate at least half of the policies and rules currently in existence controlling what teachers can and cannot do, and give teachers a real pay raise that goes in their pockets, not the union’s.

        • Sirius – you reminded me of something that happened to a co-worker’s daughter in high school. She was repeatedly sexually harassed by male students on a daily basis (groped and fondled) – in front of the hall monitors (aka teachers). The teachers NEVER did anything to stop it. My co-worker finally moved to a different school district and her daughter ended up finishing high school via online classes.

          • GA Red,

            That is such a complete travesty that your co-worker had to move to a completely different school district. In the adult world, sexual assault is a prosecutable offence. One that brings prison time. Unfortunately, based on my experience, I’m not surprised how it turned out.

            I just wish we had online classes when I was going to school. I didn’t have that option.. How is your co-worker’s daughter doing today?

          • Seems to be a well-adjusted, married mother of two small girls.

  7. Rider of Rohan says:

    “I am all for carrying a firearm where appropriate and legal but the idea that the mere presence of an individual bearing arms means the public at large is protected is ludicrous.”

    No, it’s not. The shooting at the Clackamas Mall in Portland was stopped by a good Samaritan with a firearm. As soon as the shooter saw the armed person, he shot himself. The video of the old gentleman opening up on 2 armed robbers at an internet café in FL is another example. You can watch it here:

    There are numerous examples of armed Americans who are not police handling armed robbers, attempted murderers, etc . I don’t accept your premise at all, and this idea that we have to bow down, or lay down to criminals is…well, frankly, disgusting to me. It makes all the sense in the world to have people who are trained to use firearms in our schools. As a matter of fact, I routinely…yes, routinely carried my rifle to school and put it in my locker every day during deer season, as did many of my classmates, with nary a problem for anyone. And I carried it to college with me and kept it in my room, along with a shotgun for bird and squirrel hunting.

    What we as a society NEED to do is find out what is causing these school violence outbreaks. There is an underlying cause that no one seems interested in finding. The PTB want to use all these incidents to ban guns, which in itself should give one pause.

    • when i see an altercation i call the police. thank God for cell phones. you don’t know which is the assaulter and which the victim, or of they are just two ruffians duking it out. as long as no threat to the rest of us police are the best bet.

    • I am not chipping in my thoughts on this issue to imply that my ideas are the only valid ones or to say that concealed carry is a bad thing. I am really only trying to make 2 points:

      1. While there are people who will react in a violent situation and be able to quickly resolve it, those people are in the minority. I’m not saying that means stop carrying I just want the Rambo arguments to stop. Meeting violence with violence should be a last resort and as Rider of Rohan pointed out we need to find the cause of such violent outbreaks and nip them in the bud. Of course at the time of a violent attack I would rather have someone capable of doing something meaningful on hand as opposed to kissing my butt goodbye. I am certainly not advocating knuckling under to criminals. Those guys in Rohan’s video above deserved worse than they got. The unfortunate thing is that Liberals say the solution is stricter gun control and Conservatives say the solution is more access to firearms. Neither is a valid response to mass episodes of violence.

      And 2. Guns are never acceptable in a school. I recognize that in many urban schools community violence required security measures but every gun in a school today says to children that they are not safe. That significantly, negatively impacts every child at that school, regardless of it’s necessity. As I said before, safe schools come from safe communities but accepting it as inevitable

      Rohan, I recognize that in your area, when you were at school (however many years back) taking a rifle to school may have been seen as alright, but today in Ontario you would be suspended or expelled on the spot.

      • …every gun in a school today says to children that they are not safe…
        I would respectfully say that it is only the guns that are pointed at the students and having their triggers pulled that are telling the children that they are not safe.

        • I tend to agree with Ron on this one. My daughters all went to public school and never particularly felt 100% safe at school. Too many drugs in a drug-free zone, which usually means other things too.

          • The sad difference between expectation and reality. It feels like a fight that can’t be won some days but it’s a fight worth continuing.

      • draq wraith says:

        Funny in the 50s guns were in schools and there were shooting programs a whole lot less shooting and a lot less drugs. God was in the pledge of allegiance. ROTC programs taught respect for guns.
        Now we have teachers deciding on drugging our kids and God has been expelled as well as the pledge of allegiance
        I think the country needs both back in the classroom.

        • Tactical G-Ma says:

          I agree about school, but first you have to get it back into the homes and parenting. Trust me, I believe in equal rights and women are as smart as men. Like Ginger Rogers said”…and in heels, backward.” That being said, when two parents moved into the workforce fulltime in the 60’s and many grandparents are distant at least emotionally, children went on auto. Feral children grow up to be what we have now. They may immulate healthy individuals but deep down they are still feral. I say put one parent back in the home. Do without all the electronics and fancy cars and 3000 sf homes and vacas at Disneyworld. Let’s get back to full-time hands on parenting. Raise a child in the way they should go…

          • TGMa:

            I agree that there needs to be change in the schools and the homes. Here’s the rub for me; which comes first. They both need to happen, and “discussing” which comes first is leading us to do nothing. I see the same argument at church. As we are starting a free tutoring service for elementary school age kids, we are finding that a large portion of the kids issues are at home. Poor attendance because the parent takes any excuse for the kid to stay home. No help with homework (for a variety of reasons) and no emphasis on getting an education. Allowing them to “play” with “friends” (this includes video games, TV, internet) before work and/or chores (if any) are done. Unsupervised use of “social media”.

            We can’t fix it all. But we do what we can. In our sessions we provided encouragement to succeed that they don’t get elsewhere. We are seeing attitude improvement and a desire to show progress. And we have been at it only about 6 weeks. (I am a “monitor”, I don’t teach, just keep things on an “even keel”. I’m there to remind them that there are “rules of conduct” and they will be enforced.)

            We can all work on this problem. When we show the kids that we hold them responsible for their actions, we are teaching self discipline. We teach it with our actions when we do what is right, not just what in convenient. But everybody needs to be less “self possessed” and more “others focused”.

            My grandson’s are servers, because that is the way they were raised. As they grow into self aware teens, this has to be worked upon daily. Their social environment is not one of service to others. “It’s really all about me” is an attitude that is actively fought against here.

          • TGMa – a lot depends on who is caring for the children when both parents are working and how the parents are when they are with the children. When I did have to put my children in daycare, I chose someone I knew would require them to behave as I would have if I had been able to stay home. No, it’s not perfect and if we lived in a perfect world, there wouldn’t be too many of us on this blog. I was also lucky that I had my mom and my MIL close enough that they took care of my oldest until the second one came along.

            I will add this – I saw a statistic yesterday that said that there has been an increase in households where one parent stayed home with the children. I think it is good news but I don’t think it will necessarily translate to better behavior in schools. Another trend I have noticed is that more parents that do stay home are also opting for home schooling because they don’t want their children exposed to what is happening in the schools.

          • Encourager says:

            We reap what we sow.

            Why don’t people understand that when you have a generation of latch-key children who basically are on their own with no supervision for hours a day, that you get children as adults who have been indoctrinated with whatever they have been doing on their own – be it illegal drugs, alcohol, violent TV programs, more violent computer programs, etc. That becomes their influence, not the parent(s) who interact with their children less than an hour a day.

            We are reaping what was sown in those children.

        • Encourager says:

          One of my sons went to a college that allowed guns on campus. He was required to house it at the Safety building but had access to it 24/7. If he was needing it for a class, it was no big deal for him to have it overnight in his dorm. He had a rifle and a handgun while attending there. He was not alone; many of the students went hunting after class; the meat was donated or given to the college to cook up or to nearby family. The college offered classes in shooting, archery, along with other physical ed classes.

    • axelsteve says:

      When I was in hi school in Washington State I knew a kid who kept a shotgun in his ford 4×4. He also had a chainsaw and quite often the bed of the truck was full of firewood.You needed a shotgun to hunt deer on the island. He would park his truck on the road in front of the school and no one bothered him.

      • I know that in today’s environment, there are those that would have a “frothing at the mouth” fit, but we even had “quick draw” western style shooting demonstration outside behind the junior high school building. During school. Shut down classes so that everyone that wanted to could attend. Parents, kids, and the general public were invited! I could just see faces on Nancy, Maxine, Barbara, and Diane if this were to happen now. (It would be ugly, but I’d pay to watch!)

        • Oooohhhhh – that would be fun to see. There are still a few schools around that have shooting teams – some here in Georgia.

          As for quick-drawing, isn’t that what we learned to do playing Cowboys and Indians as kids? My siblings and I even made a silent western movie with our dad’s camera back in the day.

      • In high school (urban one at that) during goose and duck season I’d catch the morning hunt, stick the shotgun in rifle rack in the back window of my truck and head to school. It stayed there all day and no one thought anything of it. Or stole it. During deer season it a was a rifle so I could hit the evening hunt after school

    • patientmomma says:

      One of the men in my office was at a grocery store in the evening, about 6:30ish. He heard a woman crying and screaming. He drew his gun and went over to where 2 nicely dressed, very large black men were “harassing” a white female trying to get into her car. He told the men to leave immediately or he would shoot them. They started stammering and saying “don’t shoot man, we’re leaving now.” They got in their cars and left. My friend called the police and after getting all the facts and descriptions, the police said the 2 men were sex traffickers and if my friend had not stepped forward, the woman probably would have gone “missing”. She called her husband, who came immediately. All this took place in a very wealthy and “safe” area. So you never know…

      • Rider of Rohan says:

        My point exactly. Several thousand women go missing in this country every year and are never found. Some are probably sent overseas, never to be heard of again, while many more are drugged and turned into sex slaves here. I’m sick of it.

      • Encourager says:

        You never hear these stories on the news. If more of the public were aware of these tactics by sex traffickers maybe we could put a dent in their business. Disgusting people with no morals, no compassion, no conscience. To them, if is only a business. They never consider the woman/girl they abduct as anything but fresh meat. Never mind if said woman is a new nursing mother, a mom with a sick child, a wife taking care of her disabled husband; or just a pretty woman living her happy life.

        A bullet between the eyes is too good for sex traffickers, IMHO.

Before commenting, please read my Comments Policy - thanks!