On July 23, North Carolina lawmakers approved a bill that allows those with concealed-carry weapons permits:
- To bring firearms into bars and restaurants serving alcohol–so long as the owner doesn’t object.
- To store weapons in locked cars on the campus of any public school or university.
- To bring guns onto greenways, playgrounds and other public recreation areas.
The Republican-supported bill was approved by both the House and Senate. It now heads to Republican Governor Pat McCrory, who is expected to sign it into law.
Now think:
- You’re mixing high-octane alcohol with high-powered firearms.
- You’re allowing weapons to be legally stored in parked cars–which can easily be broken into.
- You’re allowing firearms to be brought onto playgrounds filled with children.
What could possibly go wrong?
The National Rifle Association (NRA)–which backed the measure–will celebrate a return to an era “when men were men” and every argument threatened to become a shootout.
But not everyone in the Old West welcomed the indiscriminate right to carry and use firearms within town. One of those was the legendary lawman, James Butler “Wild Bill” Hickok.
Contrary to popular belief, Hickok actualy didn’t spend most of his life as a town marshal. His gunslinging days as a lawman lasted just two years–1869 to 1871.
His first stint as a lawman came at Hays City, Kansas. As sheriff, he shot and killed at least two men. One of these shootings occurred when Hickok, looking in a bar mirror, saw a ruffian named Strawhan pull a pistol to shoot him in the back.
Hickok, looking into the mirror, threw a “trick shot” over his shoulder–and nailed Strawhan dead.
Then Hickok’s luck ran out. On July 17, 1870, several members of the 7th U.S. Cavalry attacked him in Drum’s Saloon. Drawing his pistols, he killed one private and wounded another.
Although he had acted in self-defense and the shootings were entirely justifiable, Hickok now faced danger from other, enraged members of the same regiment. He decided to leave Hays before they could take their revenge.
His next posting as town marshal came in Abilene, Kansas. This stint lasted from April to December, 1871. And, like his last one as a “town-tamer,” it ended with a deadly shootout.
A major portion of his duties lay in enforcing the “no firearms worn or used in town” edict.
Abilene was a cattle town, the end of the line for many outfits seeking a major railhead where their hundreds of beeves could be dropped off and shipped eastward.
When cowboys–most of them in their teens or early 20s–reached Abilene, they wanted to celebrate. Their long drive was over, and now they could finally get paid. And there were plenty of bars and whores waiting to pick up their newly-issued monies.
This combination of randy men and ready supplies of alcohol and women often led to trouble. One cowboy might make a pass at another’s “lady” for the night. Or an argument might erupt over a card game.
It was Hickok’s duty to make sure that such arguments were settled only with fists. And that meant demanding that all cowboys’ guns be checked at the marshal’s office until the “boys” were ready to leave Abilene.
This, of course, contradicts the “open carry” demands of the NRA. And most of its members–if transported to the Old West–would find themselves on the wrong side of Hickok.
And that wasn’t a good place to be–as Texas gambler Phil Coe learned to his dismay.
Coe and Hickok had clashed before. As co-owner of the Bull’s head Saloon, Coe had advertised its wares with a sign depicting a bull with oversized sexual organs. A number of citizens raged that this was obscene and demanded that the animal’s sexuality be greatly reduced. The city fathers agreed.
Hickok stood nearby with a shotgun while a painter made the necessary deletions.
On October 5, 1871, cowboys were flooding into Abilene, looking for a good time. Coe, feeling in high spirits, decided to celebrate by firing his pistol into the air several times.
The shots quickly brought Hickok to the scene.
“Did you fire that shot?” Hickok demanded.
Coe supposedly replied: “I shot at a dog–and I’ll shoot at another.”
Coe threw a shot at Hickok, which missed.
Hickok whipped out his two revolvers and put two bullets into Coe’s stomach, mortally wounding the Texan, who died three days later.
James Butler “Wild Bill” Hickok
With Coe’s Texas buddies surrounding him, Hickok suddenly heard someone rushing at him from behind.
Hickok whirled and fired twice more–into the chest of his own deputy, Mike Williams, who had been running to his aid.
Hickok, aghast at his mistake, gently carried Williams into a saloon and placed his body onto a billiard table. Then he raged through Abilene, ordering an end to the festivities and knocking down any cowboys foolish enough to resist.
Owing to this latest explosion in violence, the city fathers quickly reached two decision:
First, they put an end to Abilene’s years as a major cattle shipping point. From now on, cattlemen were no longer welcome there.
And then they fired Hickok as city marshal in December, 1871.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
ABC NEWS, ABORTION, AFGHANISTAN, CBS NEWS, CNN, FACEBOOK, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, MALALA YOUSAFZAI, MEDICAL SERVICES, MUHAMMED, NBC NEWS, NEWS MEDIA, NORTH CAROLINA, PAKISTAN, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, TALIBAN, TERRORISM, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, WISCONSIN, WOMEN
TWO TALIBANS: THEIRS AND OURS
In History, Politics, Social commentary on January 16, 2015 at 12:03 amMalala Yousafzai is the 17-year-old Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head and neck by a Pakistani Taliban gunman.
Her “crime”? Campaigning for the right of girls and women to pursue an education in Pakistan.
Malala Yousafzai
The attack came on October 9, 2012, when a Taliban gunman forced his way into a van full of schoolgirls, asked for her by name, and opened fire.
The assault provoked unprecedented levels of public outrage, both in Pakistan and Afghanistan—even among people who have in the past sympathized with the militants.
But the Taliban had a different outlook on it.
“For days and days, coverage of the Malala case has shown clearly that the Pakistani and international media are biased,” said a Pakistani Taliban commander in South Waziristan. “The Taliban cannot tolerate biased media.”
The commander, who called himself Jihad Yar, argued that death threats against the press are justified. “Ninety-nine percent” of the reporters on the story, he claimed, were only using the shooting as an excuse to attack the Taliban.
Leaders of the Islamic Taliban
Yar did not apologize for the attempt to assassinate the girl, who passionately opposed the Taliban’s efforts to close girls’ schools.
“We have no regrets about what happened to Malala,” he said. “She was going to become a symbol of Western ideas, and the decision to eliminate her was correct. If she was not important for the West’s agenda, why would a U.S. ambassador meet her?”
According to unnamed sources, the Taliban dispatched 12 suicide bombers against the news media. And it is particularly eager to target female journalists. Said Yar:
“They were at the U.S. Embassy party with wine glasses in their hands and wearing un-Islamic dress with Americans.”
But the Pakistani Taliban have no monopoly on hatred of women’s rights.
On February 4, 2013, two North Carolina state representatives introduced a bill to “clarify” state law to specifically prohibit the baring of women’s breasts.
The proposed legislation, House Bill 34, would make it a Class H felony to expose “external organs of sex and of excretion, including the nipple, or any portion of the areola, of the human female breast.”
North Carolina law already forbids “indecent exposure,” but doesn’t specifically define breasts as “private parts.”
Accused violators could face one to six months in prison.
Rep. Rayne Brown, a Republican who co-sponsored the bill, said, to some people, the issue might seem frivolous. But “there are communities across this state, there’s local governments across this state, and also local law enforcement for whom this issue is really not a laughing matter.”
Rep. Rayne Brown
Brown said that she was prompted, in part, by the second annual topless protest and women’s rally in Asheville in August, 2012. Asheville is about 130 miles from Brown’s own district.
Rep. Annie Mobley, D-Ahoskie, voiced concerns that the bill could affect people wearing “questionable fashions.”
“All we are doing is codifying the Supreme Court definition of ‘private parts,’” said House Judiciary Committee Chairwoman Rep. Sarah Stevens, R-Surry. “That’s it. “
Stevens said using pasties or other nipple coverings would protect women against prosecution. “They’d be good to go.”
For Rep. Tim Moore, R-Cleaveland, the issue was a laughing matter: “You know what they say–duct tape fixes everything.”
So far, the bill seems to be stalled in the legislature.
And, not to be outdone, the Wisconsin state legislature enacted a budget for 2011-2013 that eliminated funding to family planning clinics that provide abortions or refer women to a clinic that performs the procedure.
In a press conference, Nicole Safar, director of public policy for Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, said that some 2,000 low-income women who rely on the clinics for cancer screening, breast exams, pregnancy testing, and other services would now be left out in the cold.
“They are small centers in small communities and they needed the state funding to make them financially viable,” said Planned Parenthood spokesperson Teri Huyck.
“It’s terribly unfortunate for the women who live in these areas. Without the state support, we didn’t have a choice.
“None of these centers provided abortion services. There is nowhere else for low-income women to get these services. These centers focused on preventing unplanned pregnancies and reducing the need for abortions,” said Safar.
Due to the loss of $1.1 million in state funding, Planned Parenthood closed facilities in Beaver Dam, Johnson Creek, Chippewa Falls and Shawano between April and July.
For those who believe women should control their own lives, the message should be clear: This will never be possible in some parts of the world.
And these include Islamic countries and those states controlled by Rightist Republicans.
It is pointless to expect those who believe they are God’s anointed to renounce their absolutist beliefs. Or to cease trying to gain absolute power over others–especially women.
In Afghanistan, the United States is waging a losing battle to eliminate the freedom-hating Islamic Taliban.
It would do better to start waging war against the freedom-hating Rightist Taliban within its own borders.
Share this: