I feel sorrow for the families of both victims, and shooters family. It is a hard thing to accept on both sides. That a friend or family member uselessly had their life terminated, or suffered injury. Some of which could prove to be a life altering thing. I am certain the memory will always be life changing. The shooter’s family, because it has to be hard to accept the fact that someone you knew,cared for, and LOVED, could possibly be involved in such a cowardly act. By the way ISIS has reportedly admitted they were behind the attack. CAN YOU SAY “TERRORIST”? Apparently Barack nor Hillary can’t. Hillary and her gun hating lemmings will have a field day with this one as they always do. It seems they look forward to unfortunate events, (I don’t particular like to use “event” here but, I think it adequately fits, the way Hillary/Barack look at this); It gives them a exvuse to strut their DIS-ARMING AMERICA agenda. I can’t help but wonder how they would feel if the people they have guarding them were to suddenly lose the guns. Then the agents would not be there. I can’t afford to hire people to be my personal guards. That would put them on equal ground with me. Walking around in a city or country side with no means to protect me from harm. Many times I read of people in perfectly NICE neighborhoods being injured or killed. Not just guns,…. But Knives, Arrows, Strangulation, Arson. Beaten to death, just to name a few. Many times when I go to major sporting events, or Conventions, I must make my way on dark streets, or by alleyways, or even recessed doorways. AND don’t give me that old “police presence” will protect me. I could be attacked and my assailant far away before the nearest police officer could come to my aid. BUT, if I get to my destination I most likely not be allowed to have any means of protection on me. Thus I am open to attack. Excuse me for straying a little, however I believe it is important in relating my feeling on these MASS KILLINGS. 1. Have these anti gun people realized. MOST ALL, of these mass killings have been in “gun free” zones. Schools, Churches, even Government buildings, or annexes. Cowards will take a path of least resistance. FIFTY people killed. I just can’t help but wonder why so many killed and injured before police arrived. After all according to the anti gun people this is why we have them to protect and prevent something like this from happening. Always in the right place at the right time. (Apparently even after they arrived). Perhaps if one or two of the patrons, or employees had a a legally permited GUN; MAYBE, JUST, one of them could have stopped the perpetrator, before all of the death and injury. HOW, many people might still be alive? Uninjured? If only HALF of them, heck even one would have been saved. Isn’t that worth something? Apparently not according to those who want to be like Hitler, and those others whose first steps were to disarm the citizenry). GEE! Just think if the British had of thought of this we COULD all still be British subjects, OR overrun by some other country. 2. While, as a CHRISTIAN, I can’t condone homosexuality. But neither do I wish to give up my rights to them either. I, in fact, still can’t stop wondering if a boy in a neighboring school, of mine, who everyone knew was a homosexual, but no one I know of treated him any differently, BUT the fact that when he “hit the beach” of Viet Nam, It was reported he was the first one killed. Enemy coincidence, or was he killed by “friendly fire” I have always wondered about that. I am affronted by their constant public displays (as a group), (“LGBT”). It would appear to me, this group of people were not hurting anyone, they were not blatantly displaying their sexuality in anyone’s face, The assassin may have been known to some of the club attendees, as it was stated he was a “REGULAR” at the club. BUT it is not my place to judge them. That is up to GOD. I am not qualified to say what his Judgement will be. I guess I am more offended by what appears to me a CALL to put my religious beliefs on the back burner while demanding I accept their lifestyle. I treat all people equally, unless they give me reason not to. Being Homosexual is not one of them. But I would surely like to be able to use the word “GAY” properly, and not have it confused with homosexual . As it is now used, apparently everyone in the 1890’s were homosexual. “GAY NINETIES” We even had a little eating place “very small, really good food. The name was GAY DAN’S. ( meaning a fun place to eat, apparently owned by someone named DAN). When homosexuals became associated with the word “GAY” the small eating chain had to close it’s doors. 3. Need for more extensive background checks? EXCUSE ME! I believe the FBI investigated Omar Marteen at least 3 times, before he purchased his weapons. Why this didn’t trigger a flag on the background check is beyond me. That seems pretty EXTENSIVE to me. In the state where I live we have the NICS background check, even when purchasing a squirrel rifle. I also know IF there is a flag of something unverified, or whatevere reason, the inquiry comes back with a hold, ( I think of 5 or 7 days), so a more extensive background check can be made. 4. A woman I recall being interviewed about gun laws, stated, “All anyone has to do is go online and buy a gun and have it shipped to his door.” Ignorance of the law is no excuse. In my state, YES! I… Continue reading ORLANDO PULSE CLUB SHOOTING, MY THOUGHTS.
Tag: Gay Nineties
Chink In The Armor
Chink In The Armor. This is just another example how our language has changed. I remember a time when GAY was a good thing. It meant we were having a real fun time. The GAY Nineties. Did that mean everyone in the 1890s were homosexuals. Our dictionaries gave this definition: having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music. We at one time had an eatery called GAY DAN’s. It was a good place to eat, and fun place to visit friends. But alas due to the new connotation of GAY. They were forced to change their name to Mr.Dan’s. I assume they are out of business now, as I have not see one in many years. When we played Cowboys, and Indians, it was not that the INDIANS, were being mean evil or savage. It was just the same as if we were playing CIVIL WAR. The INDIANS were a group whose homeland was being invaded by outsiders. They were defending their land. Then all of a sudden the NCAA (National Collegiate Athletic Association), tells the colleges whose names include reference to our NATIVE Americans, they cannot host or display their names, or mascots.during an NCAA sponsored event. or even use their names while participating in NCAA sponsored events. They cite Native American’s concerns of the nicknames as casting dispersions upon the Native American. But like it or not, Sports is a battle, (not on a life or death scale) but it is the same thing, protecting their LAND; School grounds, their honor, if you will on an athletic or academic playing field. Just as the NATIVE American protected his land. Is it a shame to a group of people for others to want to be like them or their ancestors? Seems to me I would be proud if people wanted to take my name as a symbol of HEROICS. Now on the CHINK statement of the ESPN corespondent. As anyone who has ever been in the public spotlight, whether it be a reporter, politician, or a public speaker, YOU can only say what you mean, How others respond to what you say is in their understanding. Their UNDERSTANDING, is limited to their vocabulary. In some parts of our country we order a COKE. Some parts of the country we order a COLA, while in others we order a SODA. Get my drift? Dictionary meaning for CHINK is: A crack, cleft, or fissure: a chink in a wall. Or as we have all heard a chink in the armor. meaning Not perfect. The fired ESPN employee statement was… “Chink in the Armor” — after the Knicks lost to the New Orleans Hornets Friday night. Now considering the Knicks had not lost a game with Jeremy Lin. When they did lose, (although Lin still played an outstanding game, it proved they (Knicks were not perfect, even with Lin). Therefore a “chink”, a flaw in their game. Enough said. I think the people who think this is a slur, will find the only slur is in their mind. For it is in their minds “chink” is a slur. I know many people who are like this. In this usage it was not a slur. I don’t know all the terms of the English language. Just let me put it this way. Had the reporter stated “Jeremy Lin is a chink” (No disrespect here Mr. Lin. Merely making a point ). That would be a slur. But to say there is a.. “Chink in the Armor” while referring to the Knicks…can hardly be considered a slur. Perhaps indeed, Dan Fastenberg (AOL writer) during his report on the TV Show Undercover Boss (which I personally do not waste my time watching) stated the CEO of Checkers, and Rallys fast burger chain “… Silva’s time on “Undercover Boss” was a true chance to see the chinks in the armor of the fast food empire…” Using the same standards, should not Mr. Fastenberg be fired? Ah, how our language changes day to day. What will be next word that is to become a slur? That Is How I See It. Views: 125
