Guest Post by Paladin – a short commentary on HB135 (the NH “Run Away!” bill) sponsored by Stephen Shurtleff

by Skip

From time to time, we accept and post up guest posts from either folks that we consider to be “notables” or from someone who has something to say.  I have also had the policy that I accept anonymous submissions as well and have put some up in the past – people who have something to say but cannot afford to reveal their identity for fear of retribution.  This post has both attributes:

“DEPUTY DAWG” as quoted by the Union Leader. Wednesday, January 23, 2013.

 ”I was in the Army. We used to say the best defense is a good offense,” Shurtleff said. “But I do not believe that should be true on the streets of New Hampshire.’ The Deputy is implying that, if left to our own devices, we the people will become proponents what he called “the best defense is a good offence”; i.e. we would shoot first?

 If his HB 135 is passed, the streets of New Hampshire will offer every criminal armed with a weapon, bats, knives and even toy guns to harm anyone at will, without fear for their lives.

 The Deputy is retired from the U.S. Marshals Service and has immunity from his HB 135, under “The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act (LEOSA). Will he leave his home without his “piece” so he can defend himself?

 Paladin’

I will add this: with his utterance, that Paladin correctly identifies,  of “I was in the Army. We used to say the best defense is a good offense” shows a radical and perverse view of armed lawfully abiding citizens (common among Socialists and Democrats in law making positions, it seems). It also shows a weak example of Obama-lite: a strawman argument that ascribes a combat mentality to a civilian population that is accepted by no one (except by Shurtleff himself).

We are not “an Army” and none of us go out of the doors of our houses thinking “Dang, I should’ve brought more ammo – so many of the enemy out here!”.  It is obvious that Shurtleff does NOT trust his fellow citizens to act responsibly.  Once again, we see Democrats taking away a freedom away from “those over whom he rules” simply because he thinks ill of their decision making capabilities and in the smugness that the State will and can protect everyone everywhere (even as the US Supreme Court has decided this is not true nor a legal responsibility).

Whether he believes it or not, this type of action is contributing to the general unease of many that they no longer control their lives, that such control is being abducted by their Government in the fashion of a 1,000 cuts against Liberty.  After all, NH House Majority Leader Shurtleff (Democrat), adults resent being told “We will no longer allow you to do that for your own good – and we don’t trust you to keep the good of others uppermost in your behavior” – that’s what happens when you treat adults as children.  Especially since you would be exempt from your own law (and yes, most adults hate self-serving hypocrisy as well in the form of “Fine for me but not for thee”).

Any you wonder why the word “Tyranny” is being quietly said more and more often?  Long ago, American-citizens-in-the-making rose up against their Government, too.

Like it? Share it!

Leave a Comment

  • Shoeless One

    One thing I admire about Stephen Shurtless is that he defended his bill to the very end…without regard to his Quixotic quest in the arena of public opinion…

    • C. dog e. doG

      Actually, the reports are that he left the scene of his crime once the rebuttals started coming in. Defending? Not so much. More like a Retreat Française.
      – C. dog

  • Susan

    And let’s not forget he would be exempt from his own law….typical Democrat hyprocrite. ‘Guns for me but not for thee!”

  • Pingback: Guest post by “Paladin” — GraniteGrok

Previous post:

Next post: