Wednesday, May 19, 2010

THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND YOUR CIVIC DUTY - A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Let's begin this by presuming that the drafters of our Constitution wrote the Second Amendment to the Constitution to make sure that the citizenry would have the means to keep the federal government honest and defend our national security. Here's what they said:

"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."

Put another way, our Founding Fathers intended that our citizens be able to defend our freedom by force of arms, if necessary. We can reasonably presume this was their intent by simply looking at the history of the times leading up to that Constitution - they'd just been through a terrible shooting war to overthrow a tyrannical government. That war is called the Revolutionary War, and it resulted in the founding of a new country, the United States of America. Without an armed citizenry at that time, that war could not have been fought. There would be no United States of America. So, extrapolating, it's perfectly logical to conclude that our Founding Fathers meant to preserve that same capability for the citizenry of the new country. They meant to preserve an armed citizenry.

But back to our thought experiment: when does it become a civic duty to pick up that musket?

Our Founding Fathers gave us the legal, Constitutional means to do that if necessary, to preserve our freedoms. Freedoms won with blood, sustained with more blood, and promising to cost yet more blood. Does that imply an ugly duty, if necessary? After all, it is the right to keep and bear - emphasis on 'bear' - arms that makes all other rights possible.

Some would tell us that under no circumstances should anyone pick up a musket and join like-thinkers to protect our freedoms from the enemy, be they from abroad or from within. To them your Ostrich Killer says that a citizenry that under no circumstances will pick up their muskets to protect our national sovereignty or our Constitution is one that has already agreed to be ruled, that is tamed and subdued. They would be right at home in North Korea.

Your Ostrich Killer is not sure we're at that point yet, as a citizenry, but wonders what catalyst - or final straw, if you will - would trigger a little house cleaning? It would have to be something massive, obviously, but the possibility has to exist if our employees in Washington are to be kept honest. So is it a civic duty to actually bear those arms, then? That's the question that this thought experiment raises.

Or is your Ostrich Killer missing something here? If you think so, drop me a note and let me know the error of my thinking.

Now, another cup of coffee . . .

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

A NUCLEAR HOMICIDE BOMBING SCENARIO

We're all far too familiar with the near daily reports of homicide bombings, those murderous attacks on non-military and non-political people and targets. In those attacks the murderer commits his / her heinous crime with the full knowledge that they will be instantly destroyed.

People like that are either captured or killed before they carry out their planned crimes, or they succeed. If the 'civilized' world knows of such an impending event, they arrest or kill the perps. Either is an appropriate action.

But what happens when an entire nation develops that homicide bomber mentality? A nation that so hates another nation or group that they are perfectly willing to be destroyed just so the history of the world will note that they struck a blow for their cause?

You're the leader of the free world. You know of such countries. You, my faithful readers, can all name more than one like that. So what do you do? You can't arrest them. Will you legitimately kill them by striking pre-emptively? Or will you wait for them to strike their blow first, suffer untold millions of deaths, before you do the 'civilized' thing - retaliate?

But wait! Don't call yet! There is a complication! Our current poser, Barack Hussein Obama, has all but announced to the world that he will not use nukes. I guess, should we be attacked, our retaliation will be his superior intellect, good intentions and vast hordes of briefcase-wielding lawyers - assuming he survives. But what message do you think those homicidal nations will take from his 'no nukes' position? Remember, these are nations whose leadership cares nothing for who might be in charge of 'civilized' nations. It is enough that 'civilized' nations exist, for them to be the targets of their hatred.

Your ostrich killer has the answer, as do many millions like myself. It isn't a pretty one, since deterrence of the classical sort (big stick) won't work. But sometimes survival depends on beheading the snake before it bites.

National security, then, would seem to have at least two distinct components: deterrence of rational nations via 'big stick,' and neutralization of nations that can't be deterred by any way other than depriving them of means to carry out such an attack. Neutralization means simply making them harmless. There are obviously many ways to do that, all of them difficult and distasteful. But make no mistake - failure to do so will result in millions of American deaths, because we are the Great Satan, or whatever odious name other irrational countries call us.

I don't see any tangible proof that 'civilized' attempts at neutralization anywhere in the world are paying off. Do you? Doesn't that beg the question 'Okay, so what else can we do?'

Wednesday, May 05, 2010

PROFILING IS A TOOL - USE IT!

Okay, so your ostrich killer is becoming famous for saying what everyone already knows anyway. So be it. Here's the latest: profiling works. Duh.

Looking for a rapist? Maybe one should focus on males . . .
Looking for homicide bombers? Maybe one should focus on followers of islam . . .
Looking for high-priced call girls? Maybe one should pay particular attention to attractive younger females . . .
Looking for illegal immigrants? Maybe one should look more carefully at Mexicans . . .

All the above are examples of how applying demographic, ethnological, gender, and and religious 'filters' to a person of interest pool will shorten searches and produce quicker results. You can think of many, many more examples.

But we live in a society where, for some reason, 'profiling' is considered somehow discriminatory.

Guess what? It is. That's why it works. We all discriminate. Discrimination is a tool that helps us all make our choices in life. All our choices, if you think about it. Every one. Yet, when it comes to immigration law enforcement, or national security, or any number of other arenas, somehow it's gaspingly offensive.

Spare me. Did you know that at least one 9-11 bomber was allowed on an airplane because the ticket agent was afraid of being accused of profiling if she / he raised an alarm? PC has a price, usually paid in blood.

Accusations of profiling is a PC-enforcement tool. Thoughtful people ignore PC. Thoughtful people know profiling works.

Where are the thoughtful people in government?

Monday, May 03, 2010

BOYCOTTS OF LAWBREAKER BUSINESSES

This column is a call to boycott two types of products and businesses: those sold, owned or operated by, or staffed by, followers of islam, and those sold, owned, operated or staffed by mexicans, whether legal or not.

Why? you ask. Isn't that a little broad-brushed of you?

Your Ostrich Killer has an explanation. How often do you hear any major leadership in the islamic community of this country, or any other, taking any significant action to reduce or thwart terrorism? Along the same lines, when do you hear of any major leadership in the mexican community standing up to encourage strong action against illegal immigration?

So your Ostrich Killer, who already knows the answers to those questions just as you do, has decided to let his dollars do the talking. Hurt them where it hurts: in their bank accounts until they take the lead on demanding the right sort of action on these matters, because otherwise they'll starve.

Nothing like a little starvation to help clarify right from wrong. In this case, bottom lines will improve when those two communities start standing up and doing what's right.

How do you start?

. Patronize no arab restaurants, gift shops, markets, etc. Buy no arabic goods, patronize no businesses whose employees seem to be arabic. Do the same with mexican products and businesses. Remember, you don't have to prove in a court of law that those businesses are arabic or mexican, or that employees are. It's enough to suspect it. It's your money, after all. You get to decide where to spend it.

. Insist on being spoken with in English in this country. Anyplace that brags about being multilingual (code for Spanish-speaking) ought not get your dollars.

. Let your friends and family know what you are doing, and why.

At some point in the future, when you are satisfied that those ethnic groups are doing what's right, you can adjust your spending habits.

One last note: your ostrich killer has exempted the Persian / Iranian community from this boycott, because there is a very strong ex-pat community in this country. They are vocal and noisy and carry signs and pass out leaflets condemning what is happening in Iran, their home country. They want to change it, but fear living in it for obvious reasons. So if you see a Persian business with revolutionary literature or posters in the windows, go out of your way to help them succeed. A successful Iranian revolution will benefit the entire world, and you want to be a part of that.