The Wandering Minstrel

I spent a little time looking at pictures of Cadillacs on the internet and couldn’t identify the year and model of this cool classic. This was photographed in globally-warmed Northern Arizona late last year. Does anybody recognize this model? I think it’s a Caddy, but there’s always a little doubt. Clickable image.

UPDATE: Thanks to drjim, who pointed out this is actually a 1975 Ford LTD. The hood ornament confused me since it is similar to the Cadillac wreath and shield.

This car was parked in a KOA on the east outskirts of Flagstaff, AZ. The better half and I were on our way to the Grand Canyon and stayed in the KOA in a couple of feet of snow.

They don’t acquire their guns through legitimate firearms dealers. They don’t obey any of the ‘common sense’ gun laws that governments put in place to ‘protect’ the public. They live outside the system and they defy anyone to stop them. Shockingly, the Obama Administration has no intention of ever addressing the actual problem - gangs - both foreign and domestic.

Update: Welcome Roundup readers . . .

From Wayne LaPierre:

Did you know that 80 percent of the crime in this country is committed by less than 1 percent of the population?

The FBI says the one million gang members in this country are responsible for four out of five crimes, yet the Obama administration seems to ignore this fact to focus on gun control that has nothing to do with breaking the back of criminal gang violence.

For example: The Obama administration only mentions gangs in the “Urban Policy” portion of its agenda, not in crime and law enforcement. Yet the FBI tells us “Gang migration from urban communities to suburban and rural locations, which began more than two decades ago, is a significant and growing problem in most areas of the country.”

It’s shocking that this White House limits violent gangs to “Urban Policy” solutions. Its agenda focuses on support for gun control that would do nothing to reduce gang activity, but would erode the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding American -including history’s most sweeping ban on semi-automatic firearms.

The Obama plan seems to ignore the one million gang members who commit 80 percent of the crime in this country, while targeting the 80 million lawful gun owners in the United States. That’s not a solution to gang violence, and it’s not “Change.”

In fact, it’s just relying on the same failed policies that have made Chicago one of the most crime-ridden cities in the country.

Clickable Image: Mini Pooper and a ‘Vette

While out for a stroll today, I passed these two vehicles in a parking lot near the office. I thought “Man, these two are diametrically opposed in more ways than just their compass headings.”

This is a (partial) list of antonyms:

• underpowered vs. powerhouse
• homely vs. handsome
• sluggish vs. responsive
• boxey vs. sleek
• mini vs. max
• green vs red (green vs. carbon footprint maybe?)

Any more?

Anyone, anyone . . . ?

After a shift to the left in a previous November, President Ronald Reagan made these remarks:

“Bitter as it is to accept the results of the November election, we should have reason for some optimism. For many years now we have preached ‘the gospel,’ in opposition to the philosophy of so-called liberalism, which was, in truth, a call to collectivism. Now, it is possible we have been persuasive to a greater degree than we had ever realized. Few, if any, Democratic Party candidates in the last election ran as liberals. Listening to them I had the eerie feeling we were hearing reruns of Goldwater speeches. I even thought I heard a few of my own. Bureaucracy was assailed and fiscal responsibility hailed. … But let’s not be so naive as to think we are witnessing a mass conversion to the principles of conservatism. Once sworn into office, the victors reverted to type. In their view, apparently, the ends justified the means.” — Ronald Reagan

These words are as appropriate today in the wake of the 2008 election, as they were when they were originally made. You might even say Reagan’s words were prophetic were it not for the fact that the Democrats are so completely predictable.

This insight is only one reason that President Reagan was the best president of the 20th century.

About a year ago, we posted an article about U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX). Hutchison led the charge in the U.S. Congress to get members of both houses to support the Second Amendment. She, and 54 other Senators, along with 250 U. S. Representatives and Vice President Dick Cheney signed on to one of the many amici filed in support of the Heller position in the landmark D.C. vs. Heller case.

I recently happened to look at the amicus prepared on behalf of Hutchison and the Members of Congress by Constitutional Expert and Attorney Stephen P. Halbrook. Halbrook’s amicus recalls that the Congress has a long history of protecting the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Like the rest of the Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment was proposed to the States by the Congress in 1789. On several occasions, in different epochs of American history, the Congress enacted statutory texts which explicitly declared its understanding of the Second Amendment as guaranteeing fundamental, individual rights.

The Second Amendment text is as follows:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

That’s good - the Founders boiled it down to specific, unambiguous language. In it, there are five key nouns - ‘militia,’ ‘state,’ ‘right,’ ‘people‘ and ‘arms.’ There are two key verbs - ‘keep‘ and ‘bear.’ Keep these keywords in mind as you continue to read.

The phrase “the right of the people” also appears in the First Amendment – “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The Fourth Amendment guarantees: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . .”

Opponents of Second Amendment rights want you to think that this identical wording means something different in the First and Fourth Amendments. You can’t have it one way with freedom of dissent and freedom from search and seizure, and a completely different meaning when it comes to the ‘right of the people‘ to keep and bear arms.

The constitutional text distinguishes between “the people,” “the militia,” and the “States.” The Second Amendment refers to “a well regulated militia,” but the right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed to “the people.”

That’s quite clear: militia does not equal people. The ability of the militia to provide security on behalf of the state depends on the right of the people to own and bear arms. The ability of individuals to provide for their own security, likewise, depends on this right.

The Second Amendment refers to the right to “keep” arms (such as at home) as well as to “bear” arms (meaning to carry them). Protected arms include commonly-kept firearms that one can keep and carry for lawful purposes, such as ordinary rifles, handguns, and shotguns, and not crew-served or heavy weapons.

Despite laws to the contrary, every law-abiding citizen who has reached majority should have the right to own and carry his/her gun at all times.

And now, the meaning of “state” . . .

The Amendment declares a well regulated militia to be necessary to the security of a “free State,” which means a free country, and is not restricted to a State government.

Halbrook, in the Congressional Amicus for Heller, decomposes the language of the Second Amendment into its component parts to reveal the true meaning of the Founders. If you read the Complete Brief (PDF) prepared by Halbrook, you can discover some of the history about how the Second Amendment evolved into its present form.

Don’t forget to check out Stephen Halbrook’s Second Amendment Book Bomb.

UPDATE: Welcome to readers of The Liberty Sphere and thanks to the Welshman for posting us.

After we left the range today, the Better Half noticed a column of smoke in our direction of travel. Sure enough, when we got a mile down the road, we saw this vehicle still glowing from the fire. The onlooking occupants (not seen in this view) were not having a good day. Neither were the northbound people south of the scene; they were backed up four or five blocks and being forced to turn left or right. Inconvenienced - yes - but not as much as the poor bastard whose POS car just went up in smoke.

Have a very Winchester Ranger Plus P Valentine’s Day!

This is the USS Brooklyn, CL-40 with Palisades Park in the background, as she cruises along the Hudson River near New York City. My Dad was an Electricians Mate, First Class, on this vessel.

The Brooklyn departed from Norfolk for the Mediterranean on 24 October 1942. My 18 month old brother, Billy, and Mom were in Norfolk to give Dad a send-off. Mom and Billy then took the train back to California, where I was born about 9 months, or so, afterward. Dad never met me until I was 18 months old, since he and the Brooklyn were engaging the Axis in the Med. Rommel was there, Montgomery was there, Patton was there and the USS Brooklyn’s 5 and 6 inch guns were there helping the Allies to victory.