"THE BLOODSTAINED TRAIL"* [HUNTER GRAY] APRIL 18 2007 [AND GUN RIGHTS NOTES, UPDATED - NEW UPDATE ADDITIONS 2008 TO 2011

HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR] WITH 45/70 BROWNING HIGH GRADE REPLICA OF 1886 WINCHESTER
NORTH DAKOTA MID-1990S
* This title is taken from that of a now very rare I.W.W. - sponsored book, written by Ed. Delaney and M.T. Rice, published by The Industrial Worker, Seattle, 1927. It's 172 pages, with fine photos. I have a copy in my personal collection. See http://www.hunterbear.org/wobblyart3.htm -- or, for a several page sequence of Wobbly art and writing, see:
From the always colorful Redbadbear Discussion:
From Hunter to Ken:
See David Kopel on "The Armed Community Organizers" (John R Salter Jr / Hunter Gray) http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/InTheNews.aspx?ID=13442
UPDATE COMMENT BY HUNTER BEAR [APRIL 26 2009]: EPITAPH FOR GUN CONTROL? WELL, HOPEFULLY.
THE RIGHTS OF GUN OWNERS IN THE UNITED
STATES: THE HISTORIC U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION [HUNTER GRAY/HUNTER BEAR
-- JUNE 26 2008] SPECIAL INSERT -- WE ARE PLEASED THAT
THIS HAS BEEN WIDELY CIRCULATED AND
PUBLISHED BY MY TOWN AND BY THE MASS CIRCULATION PORTSIDE.
Thanks to today's ruling by the United States Supreme
Court in the DC gun
case -- 5-4 -- the Second Amendment's status as a full member of the Bill of
Rights of the U.S. Constitution, and the rights of several million gun
owners in this country, are now relatively assured.
We don't always approve of the current Court's rulings -- but we certainly
do on this one. [And it's good to see the barbaric death penalty take another
judicial hit -- as it did yesterday.]
This specific ruling, widely expected for well over a year, has been a long,
long time coming. What's been surprising is that it's taken the USSC this
long to reach this significant point. It's been inconceivable to many of
us, gun owners and many students of history [and law], that the framers of
the Constitution would install any Right in the Bill of Rights on a
second-class basis.
But for generations, the Court has been ambivalent on this. The Second
contains the one word, "militia," which has served until now as a major
snag, and has been used by many liberals and law enforcement officials to
demean the full individual rights status of the Amendment -- even as these
forces ignored the most critical phrase, "the right of the people to keep
and bear Arms shall not be infringed."
No longer. The Second's real status is now secure. The Court recognizes
that, among other dimensions, "militia" in the early days meant a generally
well armed citizenry. This does not mean that the "slippery slope" problems
will disappear. The First and the Fourth and the Fourteenth Amendments,
among others, have always been recognized as as full individual rights --
but they continue to require "eternal vigilance" with respect to their
protection.
From, among other things, a political perspective, this ruling will
significantly reduce the "earned paranoia" felt by most American gun
owners [including this writer.] We well remember the systematic and
often vicious attacks on gun owners, firearms in general, and the
Second. Much of this occurred, year after year, during the Bill Clinton
administration. Civil liberties groups, such as the ACLU, and many
generally committed civil libertarians, remained "discreetly" silent. The
NRA did yeoman service in protecting the rights of gun owners -- often
incurring denigrating attacks of the worst sort [e.g., accused of supporting
para-militarism -- which NRA has consistently and explicitly opposed.]
In the midst of this, NRA membership grew from about 2.5 million to the
well over 4 million of today.
The Court obviously recognizes that various jurisdictional settings will
wish measures of "gun control" based on respective exceptionalism. But these
will now have to be measured against the formal recognition that the Second
is now rooted in hard-rock, now and forever.
From age seven on, I personally have been an avid gun owner. At 15, I was a
founder of our Junior National Rifle Association club at Flagstaff [Arizona]
High [Northern Arizona junior marksmanship champs] and served as its
president. In those days, we opposed J. Edgar Hoover's "gun registration"
proposals with zeal [and later at least I had many more reasons to oppose
Hoover and his nefarious agency.] I've been an NRA member from that time
onward and a Life member for most of my life, presently holding the highest
grade of NRA Life membership.
The NRA was founded in 1871 by Union Army veterans. Its primary focus
has always been the defense of the rights of gun owners -- and the integrity
of the Second Amendment. And it traditionally sponsors firearms safety
courses and is active in conservation causes. Politically, it's
non-partisan.
From those high school days onward, through the Army and far beyond to this
present moment, I've spoken and written and published widely on the critical
importance of the individual's right to keep and bear firearms. Early on,
my emphasis shifted somewhat from hunting [which I certainly support] to
principled individual self-defense. This has included self-defense against
armed adversaries of social justice [e.g., the Ku Klux Klan and company
goons and comparable elements] as well as criminals. [This position has
certainly engendered flak from openly frightened as well as stealthy
proponents of gun control measures -- but flak, verbal or physical, has
certainly never stopped me from pursuing that which I believe is right.]
Nor has it stopped a great multitude of others. And we all now stand at the
top of a most significant mountain peak.
I have, close at hand here in Idaho, a loaded Marlin 45/70 lever action
rifle and a loaded .22 Magnum Ruger revolver. [I also have the
impressive and rather archaic Family Tomahawk in my possession.]
Since we moved to Idaho eleven years ago, it's clear that at least
a few locals are hostile. There have been a number of disturbing
night-time things.
As I have previously written:
The causes of crime are complex and involved: racism and ethnocentrism,
economic deprivation, urban congestion -- and, in that context,
inter-personal and value alienation. They can't be effectively touched by
diversionary and gimmicky (e.g., "gun control") legislation. But
diversionary and gimmicky legislation can hurt good people and profoundly
damage the foundation stones of any good society.
For much more on this, see this representative essay of mine, "Civil Rights
and Self-Defense" from Against the Current [excellent socialist journal]
http://www.hunterbe
Yours, Hunter [Hunter Bear]
_____________________________________________________
A FOLLOW UP NOTE TO DISCUSSION GROUPS [HUNTER BEAR]:
I'm very pleased that Edward Pickersgill has placed my
piece in my Bear's Lair at My Town -- and that Portside is carrying it tonight
in its packet of posts.
One of my major volunteer involvements in North Dakota and Idaho during the very
difficult Bill Clinton period was providing public relations services for
various Friends of NRA organizations -- and training locals in the effective
handling of news media. At one time, I was even working long-distance with
faraway [from Idaho] groups at Billings and Cheyenne. At Grand Forks, Thomas
[our grandson/son] and I would man the NRA booth at the Dacotah Gun Shows and
handle silent auctions at the Friends of NRA functions. He and I were recalling
those days fondly during a long phone visit the other evening. After those
events, we would go to Arby's for our respective plate-fulls of great roast beef
sandwiches.
Before he left for Med School, I gave him one of my favorite lever action
rifles. Hard to believe that, in less than a year, he'll be a doctor.
Ever, Hunter [Hunter Bear]
_____________________________________________________________
INSERT PIECE: ERIC HOLDER [HUNTER BEAR] FEBRUARY 25 2009
____________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
COMMENT TO ED PICKERSGILL BY HUNTER:
Thanks, Ed, for placing my piece in your quite
good indeed web magazine [My Town].
We also have it now on our Hunterbear website under the name, "The
Bloodstained Trail." That is the title of one of the now rarest IWW-sponsored
books, The Bloodstained Trail: A History of Militant Labor in the United
States, by Ed. Delaney and M.T. Rice, and published by The Industrial Worker
[then the western organ of the IWW] at Seattle, 1927. [I credit it on my
website caption.] I am fortunate to have a copy [right here on my desk, btw]
in my pretty large collection of Wobbly, WFM, and Mine Mill materials.
Anyway, again thanks much. As Ever, H
http://www.mytown.ca/ev.php?URL_ID=119184&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201
_______________________________________________________________________________________________
SPECIAL INSERT [DECEMBER 25 2007]:
ANOTHER CHRISTMAS, ANOTHER TIME [HUNTER BEAR]
NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR:
I'm attaching a short response of mine to an African-American scholar. We consistently practiced tactical non-violence in civil rights demonstrations -- but, more or less quietly, we did support and did indeed sometimes explicitly practice thoughtfully active individual/family self-defense via firearms.
It's been 45 years since Eldri and I and Baby Maria had a long Christmas dinner and family visit with Medgar and Myrlie Evers and children at the Evers home on Guynes Street. The ethos was somber, especially as night came on. James Meredith was in Ole Miss -- protected by legions of Federal troops and U.S. Marshals. Our economic boycott of Jackson was off and going well. And we were already planning its extension into a vastly broader Movement -- which was precisely what happened. Four nights before, our home on the Tougaloo campus had been shot into -- and several of us had since been standing armed guard on the campus borders. Racist hysteria pervaded Mississippi [and the other recalcitrant sections of the South] and violence and murder were in the air, all around us. Our pleasant Christmas dinner, no matter how much we all attempted to "lighten" things, was grim. Medgar and I knew guns, had guns.
Less than six months later, June 11 1963, Medgar was shot in the back and killed by a night-time assassin. And much more in that genre occurred.
From Hunter:
Your question is solid. The short answer is that the National Office of NAACP was not concerned about Medgar's being armed. [It was obviously concerned about other things -- but not that.] It was understood in every civil rights organization that field representatives -- and certainly the grassroots people with whom we worked -- would very likely be armed. [Then and now, of course, most people in what's called the United States do have firearms. This is certainly true of African Americans, South and North -- and universally true with Native Americans.] But although many if not most civil rights field people were armed, we were not -- usually -- too public about that. A major reason was the concern that many liberal/left Northern supporters [not all] would be troubled by that. I was probably more open about my firearms than were many civil rights field persons. The NAACP had felt itself to be "burned" by the Rob Williams self-defense situation in Monroe, NC -- where Williams, NAACP local president, and faced with constant and very substantive Klan violence, secured an NRA charter and organized a broad self-defensive structure in the Black community. [He was also a supporter of the Cuban revolution.] When trouble erupted in the Monroe situation, the NAACP attacked Williams, who was forced from the country and several of his colleagues subjected to "criminal" charges. Medgar, during one of our earliest conversations, expressed to me his strong sympathy for Williams and his self-defensive actions.
There were "ways of warning" the hostile forces we faced. I and my wife, Eldri, recall vividly Medgar's telling us that a young white utility worker came by his house, somewhat nervously, to check on some outside power lines. When the guy was finished, Medgar invited him into his home, ostensibly to show him "a large fish that I caught, stuffed, and put on my wall." The young man came in but, only glancing at the stuffed fish, stared at a couple of Medgar's rifles that were also racked on the wall. "He couldn't take his eyes off my guns," Medgar told us, chuckling.
Hope this has been helpful. All best -- and write again if so inclined. In Solidarity, Hunter [Hunter Bear]
HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER
JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis
Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk
Protected by NaŽshdoŽiŽbaŽiŽ
and Ohkwari'
_____________________________________________________________________________
COMMENT TO MICHAEL MARINO BY HUNTER: 4/19/07
Michael:
Your thoughts are thoughtful. You've mulled these gun issues over in a
fashion that is often absent in liberal and left circles. Handguns are not
my own "gun focus." Of the seven firearms I now have, one is a Ruger
single-action .22 magnum revolver, one is a single-barrel ten gauge 3 1/2
inch magnum shotgun, and the others are all big bore "Western" lever
action rifles whose mechanical origins are pre-1900. On the other
hand, looking at it functionally and realistically, the country is full of
good folks who enjoy handgun shooting and/or who have handguns for
protection [and often protection is needed.] The "assault rifles" that are
often used as media scare stuff are actually semi-automatics, whose actions
are no different than a very conventional.
In the end, I'm against virtually all "gun control." Most of the people who
advocate "gun control" and mass Federal registration of firearms, etc.,
really want confiscation and prohibition of all firearms. "Slippery slope"
[erosion] concerns are very legitimate concerns where gun rights and other
rights are involved. And "outlaw types" will always have guns -- whatever
the degree of so-termed official "gun control." Virtually all of the many
handguns in this country -- a vast number -- are used legitimately by
sensible people.
And, "gun control" is often a diversion -- deliberate and otherwise -- to
avoid dealing with the basic systemic issues that, directly and indirectly,
lead to criminal behavior: e.g., corporate capitalism.
Again, I do very much appreciate the serious thought that you are giving to
all of this. I see very little of that on this issue among many liberal and
left people. But you have always been a commendable Free Thinker, Mike!
Best, H
________________________________________________________________________________
LIST POST BY HUNTER: 4/19/07
NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR:
I've been an organizer all of my life and I always will be one -- and you have to be tough, damn tough, to be a really effective organizer. Here, quoted by Attorney David Kopel [formerly an assistant district attorney in Manhattan and an active civil libertarian] in his essay, "Trust the People," is a part of the critically important legacy given by Frank Dolphin to me.
"In the 1950s and 1960s, a new civil rights movement began in the South. White supremacist tactics were just as violent as they had been during Reconstruction. Blacks and civil rights workers armed for self-defense.
John Salter, a professor at Tougaloo College and chief organizer of the N.A.A.C.P.'s Jackson Movement during the early 1960s, wrote, "No one knows what kind of massive racist retaliation would have been directed against grass-roots black people had the black community not had a healthy measure of firearms within it."
Salter personally had to defend his home and family several times against attacks by night riders. After Salter fired back, the night riders fled.
The unburned Ku Klux Klan cross in the Smithsonian Institution was donated by a civil rights worker whose shotgun blast drove Klansmen away from her driveway.
State or federal assistance sometimes came not when disorder began but when blacks reacted by arming themselves. In North Carolina, Governor Terry Sanford refused to command state police to protect a civil rights march from Klan attacks. When Salter warned Governor Sanford that if there were no police, the marchers would be armed for self-defense, the Governor provided police protection."
Hunter Bear
___________________________________________________________________________________
AND NORLA ANTINORO OBSERVES:
Have any of the mass killers of our times [recorded history] been responsible, well trained gun owners? I think not. All the gun owners are not republican and not all anti gun people are liberals. Most people who are vehemently pro gun control are control freaks who would hide their own guns under the bed and then make a law that says you can't have one.
Norla
________________
HUNTER BEAR COMMENT ON NRA ISSUES:
My stand for the Second Amendment [and the Bill of
Rights in general] is too
well known on RBB to repeat at this point. But there are a couple of points
with respect to this piece that warrant mention: NRA is quite right indeed
to
sharply question the validity of government-designated "suspected
terrorists" on
secret governmental lists -- i.e., bills of attainer. Anyone who knows the
sordid
history and cruel fall-out in periods of fear and hysteria in this country
knows precisely to what that kind of witch-hunting leads. A second point is
that
NRA has never -- never -- sanctioned "militias" and other types of para-military
organizations. Since it has almost four million members, it can hardly be
responsible for any one individual -- but, in 1994 and 1995, aware of
militia growth, NRA took extremely strong positions against all forms of
para-military organization:
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/nra.militia.statement.html
Hunter Bear
_____________________________________________________________
Feel like I'm back in the Billy Clinton days. Fire courses through my veins.
Pope's piece states:
"George H.W. Bush, the current Bush's father, withdrew his membership when
an NRA mail-out described civil servants as "jack-booted government thugs"
wearing "nazi bucket helmets and black storm trooper uniforms,"
etc. but Bush
Junior
remains faithful. In 2004, he allowed the law banning assault weapons to
sunset."
In 1992, the essentially non-partisan NRA declined to endorse either
Clinton or Bush I. [NRA, I should add, remains non-partisan.]
The statement by NRA -- "jack-booted government thugs," etc -- was taken
verbatim from that originally given shortly before by liberal Democratic
Congressman from Michigan, John Dingell -- still in Congress and still a
Life Member of NRA. Dingell was quite rightly alarmed at police state
tactics.
Most of the media were not -- nor was most of the ACLU.
The "assault weapons" in question are, as I have frequently noted,
conventional semi-automatic rifles dressed up in superficially "scary"
militaristic
clothing. In actuality, there is no structural difference, save in caliber,
between
them and semi-automatic .22s . Fully automatic weapons have been banned in
the US
since 1934. All of this was deliberately confused by the Clinton folks and
their media allies.
If Pope is going to get into these things, he should learn, as the lawyers
put it, the factual situation.
Hunter Bear -- Benefactor Life Member of NRA and Life Member of North Dakota
Shooting Sports Association.
_________________________________________________________________
AND EVEN MORE GUN COMMENT! [MAY 16
2007]
ATTORNEY REBER BOULT WRITES FROM NEW MEXICO:
This, from an article
at
http://www.lexisone.com/news/nlibrary/n050707a.html , is interesting;
it's not exactly my view but maybe I'll come around too:
'Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, said he had come to
believe that the Second Amendment protected an individual right.
'"My conclusion came as something of a surprise to me, and an unwelcome
surprise," Professor Tribe said. "I have always supported as a matter of
policy very comprehensive gun control."
'The first two editions of Professor Tribe's influential treatise on
constitutional law, in 1978 and 1988, endorsed the collective rights
view. The latest, published in 2000, sets out his current interpretation.
'Several other leading liberal constitutional scholars, notably Akhil
Reed Amar at Yale and Sanford Levinson at the University of Texas, are
in broad agreement favoring an individual rights interpretation. Their
work has in a remarkably short time upended the conventional
understanding of the Second Amendment, and it set the stage for the
Parker decision.'
Reber Boult
HUNTER BEAR WRITES IN RESPONSE TO SEVERAL RBB LIST COMMENTS:
First, I much appreciate Reber's post on the now fast developing recognition
that the Second Amendment is an individual right -- along with all of the
other individual rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Professor Tribe's
current assessment is a valuable contribution to our [non-violent] arsenal.
And I am delighted that Reber, whose opinions I much respect, is most
thoughtfully "coming over" [with "deliberate speed"] on this one.
The Heavens smile in cordial fashion, Reber, and the Angels sing. All of
this, of course -- Figuratively.
With all due respect to Canada, Ed, within which I have more relatives from
both sides of my family than I do in the 'States, it has made a holy mess of
the gun thing. Its mass gun registration scheme [rightly feared by many as a
prelude to outright confiscation and prohibition] which grew out of Ontario,
has angered the western provinces and virtually all Native people. [BTW, I
have never met an American Indian or Alaskan Native -- or Canadian Native
anywhere in Canada -- who supported even a modicum of "gun control." There
may be some but we have never met.] The Canadian West has largely refused to
comply with the national firearms registration policies levied by the
Federal government. And the Natives, with unique and vital socio-cultural
and legal sovereignty and often with some economic dimensions contingent on
hunting and trapping, most certainly have not.
We all know the sweeping gun bans that have occurred in Great Britain and
Australia et al.
The logical and functional fallacies in, say, taking a gun-related tragedy
and seeking to build restrictive national gun policies out of that, should
be obvious to all -- especially after the debacle of the Clinton years.
I should add that, while I have a respectable firearms collection -- all of
which stem from pre-1900 patents -- and this includes one revolver, I myself
have never been interested in a "concealed / carry" permit [though I
obviously believe the right to have one falls within the context of the
Second.] There have been a number of social justice organizing occasions
where I have carried -- and in very, very rare cases, used -- firearms for
self-defense. I have, when I've felt the need, sometimes carried a rifle in
my vehicle or a revolver in its holster on the front seat -- and, now and
then, I have carried a revolver out-of-sight on my person, though not in
recent times. In our Southern years, I usually had a revolver in my vehicle
and frequently in my attaché case. Presently, I have a loaded .444 Marlin
lever action rifle here in our Idaho home.
I think it's reasonably well known that I have written and spoken widely on
behalf of the Second and gun rights in general. John will recall our 1988
trip to Mississippi and New Orleans where I had several pending
involvements. In New Orleans, I spoke on behalf of firearms and self-defense
at the National Popular Culture conference, drawing heavily from my Southern
movement, Chicago, and other organizing experiences. Most of the
sociologists present, including Bill Tonso who chaired the session, agreed
with me. I did have a somewhat unpleasant clash with Gary ____, a
supercilious Easterner. Sitting in the back of the room, and unseen by all
save me, and smiling broadly, John held up my attaché case and pointed --
very pointedly indeed -- within it. It contained my .357 Ruger revolver. But
I used words to successfully make my points. My presentation, "Civil Rights
and Self-Defense" was widely published: Tonso made it a chapter in his The
Gun Culture and its Enemies, it appeared in the fine socialist journal,
Against the Current, and in various other places. I find it quoted
hither-and-yon even now.
When my son, Peter [Mack] graduated from the UND journalism school, and
immediately joined the Bismarck Tribune -- quite soon becoming its State
Editor -- I gave him that revolver as a graduation gift. He was glad to have
it when he went down into LaMoure Co. [ND] to investigate and write about a
racist coven [the Missouri-based Winrod outfit], a genuinely dangerous gang.
He did a fine series of pieces but did not need to display his reassuring
weapon. I gave John my Derringer a few years later; and to Thomas I recently
gave one of my favorite rifles [a nice little .357 lever action.]
But I still have a very respectable firearms collection and I still have a
loaded Marlin quite nearby.
Happy shooting. HUNTER BEAR
_________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
MY SMALL BUT VERY SELECT FIREARMS COLLECTION
[HUNTER BEAR]

My Browning Super High Grade 1895 30/06 -- One In One Thousand [Serial Number 00314]
A Northern Arizonian, I have been a life-long hunter and gun person. Since the day that I turned seven and a cousin gave me my first rifle -- a .22 Winchester pump with an octagon barrel and a steel curved butt plate -- I have had, via buying and selling and trading, at least 200 different firearms. My present collection includes seven -- five rifles, a shotgun, and a revolver: Browning 1895 30/06 lever action ["One In One Thousand"]; Browning 1886 45/70 lever action ["High Grade"]; Marlin 45/70 lever action; Marlin .444 lever action; a Rossi .44 magnum lever action; a single barrel New England Firearms 3 1/2" magnum shotgun; and a Ruger Single Six revolver in .22 magnum. The Browning rifles are recent top-flight replicas of the respective old Winchesters. [John Browning of Northern Utah created most of the original Winchesters.] The two top-of-the-line that I have feature the highest grade steel -- and polished wood -- and are beautifully and tastefully engraved with gold inlaid big game animals: bear, moose, deer. My two Marlin rifles also stem from pre-1900 patents but are themselves quite new. The Rossi .44 mag is a fine contemporary copy of the old 1892 Winchester lever action. And the shotgun and revolver are both very new. I have been an NRA member since my mid-teens, a Life Member for most of my life, and presently hold the highest grade of Life Membership. I am also a Life Member of the North Dakota Shooting Sports Association.
HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR]
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
THE FINLAND HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTINGS [NOVEMBER 2007]
Hunter, [From Jyri Kokkonen] 11/08/07
I assume you've heard about the high school shooting in Finland
yesterday. Eight people died: the principal of the school, the school nurse,
five students and the perpetrator, from a self-inflicted wound to the head.
The 18-year-old young man had posted videos and a blog text on the Internet
more or less announcing his intentions. a rambling manifesto in which he
declares himself a "natural selector" fit to weed out those unfit to live.
It imitated in many ways the events at Virginia Tech last spring.
Our small country is frankly in a state of shock. We're not used to
things like this, and I, for one, am more than a bit depressed.
Explanations have started to appear. Some idiots blame it on American
influence (cf. Virginia Tech and Columbine), others on the Internet or
heavy-metal music. I think the explanation is far more simple, a mentally
unhinged young man who was dumped by his girlfriend and went on to act out
his fantasy of revenge, albeit a complex one involving declarations of
intent, or calls for help if you like.
This begs the question of why no one noticed his situation or why
didn't he seek help. Basically futile questions and speculation at this
stage, but there is an underlying and not too distant political aspect even
here. Since the early 1990s we have witnessed in many areas the dismantling
of the services of our type of Nordic welfare state. One area that has
suffered is mental health services for children and young people, often
including counsellors in schools. These services still exist but their scope
and extent have been seriously reduced. A great number of young people with
problems of this kind simply do not get the help that they need soon enough,
or they go undetected too long.
Cheap political points could be made by arguing that the events at the
school ultimately resulted from misguided policies pursued by individuals
that can be named. That is pointless, as each case is unique in all its
tragedy, and even the worst bastards in our political arena would hardly
have anticipated anything like this from budget cuts, but if the high school
shooting marks the emergence of a pattern, or worse still the tip of an
iceberg, as some say, we are heading for serious trouble. I think there will
be a political response to these events and one for the better, I hope.
All the best,
Jyri [Kokkonen]
Dear Jyri: [From Hunter Gray]
Thanks very much indeed for your just arrived [and not unexpected] post.
I'm posting it -- a sad but timely commentary -- on a couple of our lists.
It's almost trite to say that we, here, of course, are all too used to these
sorts of tragedies. In general, much of your thoughtful analysis with
respect to the Finnish situational challenges applies here. Interpersonal
and value alienation are two obviously common factors -- and there certainly
have been substantive cuts in much needed social services on these shores.
For us, I'd also add a few others found in our setting which you all
essentially do not have: economic deprivation and general insecurity in that
realm, national legacies of violence and racism, burgeoning
urban/industrialization. I don't know what the negative effects of
year-after-year "war killings" and public cheapening of human life [via
television and other media] are in Finland, but I am certain all of that
plays a significant role in this country. [I'm also chary of making
grandiose cross-cultural judgements when I know nothing first-hand of the
"other" culture -- and thus we are grateful for your timely and reasoned
first-hand assessment.] On a couple of personal notes, Eldri, who
identifies significantly with Finland, was especially shocked; and I add,
again, my own special commercial [with which I suspect you may basically
agree], that sweeping policies of "gun control" are no positive answer at
all to any of these sanguinary events. More from me soon -- including with
respect to the political situation hereabouts.
Our very best to you and your fine family -- and to Finland.
As Ever, Hunter [Hunter Bear]
Hunter, [From Jyri Kokkonen] [Crossed
with Hunter's message]
Brief postscript to my last message. The high school shooting has also
aroused a debate of sorts about access to guns here. According to some
statistic, Finland ranks third in the world in per capita possession of
firearms, after the US and Yemen, they say. The young man in question owned
a .22 caliber self-loading pistol, which he had acquired as the member of a
reputable shooting club, a completely common practice here. Now some people
are calling for strict psychological screening of those wanting to own
handguns in addition to the normal checks for criminal record and the
requirement of storing concealable short-barrel firearms at shooting club
promises for everyone under 30. I think that is pointless. Someone bent on
causing damage can just as well take to an axe, cleaver, machete, knife, or
a variety of household items, and criminals can always lay their hands on
firearms. Besides, we had a case some years ago where a young woman went
berserk and started shooting people at a shooting club firing range in
Helsinki, and she had been a regular member of the club. Guns are not the
issue.
Jyri [Kokkonen]
HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR]
Mi'kmaq /St. Francis
Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk
Protected by NaŽshdoŽiŽbaŽiŽ
and Ohkwari'
___________________________________________________________________________________
AN INTERIM COMMENT: HUNTER BEAR FEBRUARY 25 2008
I keep trying to Stir the Redbadbear Discussion Nest. Let's try this: my slightly expanded and cordial remarks to an un-named family member:
LIFE DOES EXIST IN THE OLE BEAR DEN [REDBADBEAR DISCUSSION] HUNTER BEAR
NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR: FEBRUARY 26 2008
Well, it was certainly pleasant to awake briefly
around midnight and note the copious and worthwhile exchange between Norla
and Edward -- and to see the entrance early this morn of Michael and Sam.
Spring is indeed coming -- pretty obviously here in the Snake River country
-- and the Bear Den is marked by constructive stirrings. [Actually, it's
done right well discussionally all through the winter.]
[On "gun rights issues," I am pleased to note that our major website page on
that is one of those presently visited in consistently heavy fashion. Most
on RBB have at least skimmed it, but I give its Link for reference. I should
add that its title lies in a mostly different context: the name of a very
rare I.W.W. book of martyrs which is mentioned just before I [and Edward and
others] get into gun talk. The book is in my large personal collection.
A few thoughts:
I checked out my very recently arrived March copy of The American Rifleman
-- primary organ of NRA -- and in its sedate and well done editorial
discussions of "gun free zones" and related matters, noted virtually nothing
on the matter of National Parks and firearms. Whatever our good NRA's
involvement in that may be, it's obviously not a top priority. [As I noted
yesterday, I really don't feel firearms belong in National Parks, though
perhaps we could arm the bears.] Locally -- hereabouts -- there has been
some public discussion about a proposal to arm students and faculty at Idaho
State University but I, at least, have heard of no NRA involvement in that.
[The matter seems to be receding.] I should add that I don't feel that
arming classroom participants is conducive to a good teaching/learning
atmosphere in any school, living our lives always entails some risk, and I'm
willing to leave security in the hands of those who, at least and hopefully,
are properly trained to provide those services.
I have always resented, however, the successful move during the Clinton
administration to prevent high school students from having firearms in their
vehicles while such are in school parking lots. In my day, anyway, we often
hunted in the early mornings before heading directly to our educational
penal institution.
In fact, one NRA editorial focuses -- and very appropriately in my opinion
-- primarily on Hillary and her companion Clinton and their very well known
anti-gun sentiments. Those, of course, initiated and carried a full-scale
witch-hunt against gun owners and gun rights organizations for years during
the very anti-civil libertarian Clinton era. The NRA -- and several
comparable but smaller organizations -- not only stood up well but, in the
case of NRA especially, grew very substantially. During that era, in
addition to my other 'rights involvements, I handled, in an official
fashion, much media relations re NRA and Second Amendment issues -- from a
very vigorously pro-gun perspective -- for various Friends of NRA groups in
North Dakota and, later from Idaho, continued the N.D. involvements via mail
and also was most active around here in the Gem State and, again via mail,
in a few Montana and Wyoming settings as well. Kinko Copy may have declared
a dividend via me, and the US Postal Service didn't do badly either during
those frenetic days.
And I'll always fondly remember how our grandson/son, Thomas, and I would
faithfully man the NRA booth at various gun shows and handle the silent
auctions at the big Friends of NRA annual affairs.
If NAFTA quite rightly indeed is an angering term for working people and
their families, the name Clinton stirs the same level of passion among most
American firearms owners. My Jeep Cherokee carries [and I've previously
mentioned this] these stickers: "UAW" and "I'm A Gun-Toting Idaho Democrat."
And there is another one as well, "Organize!"
And, of course, there is my always consistent -- over the decades -- NRA
Life Membership sticker.
A note on Western lands:
Most of the land in the Western states is publicly owned -- via U.S. Forest
Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Park Service. This
also includes much turf in the western parts of the Dakotas. [Firearms are
no issue at all in the first two agency settings.] State parks are minimal.
And there are also, of course, many Native reservations -- many substantial
in land acreage. [BTW, I have never -- never -- met a fellow American Indian
person who supported, say, anything even remotely like the Clinton version
of "gun control." Most of us in the Native world are very knowledgeable gun
owners. And for a variety of very good reasons! ]
And there are, too, a number of significant public and reservation land
holdings back beyond our "Golden West" -- in the rest of what's called the
United States.
All of the public lands [and the reservations as well] have been able, in
recent times, to pretty successfully fight off incursions by land- and
resource-coveting interests: e.g., the privatization-
But, anyway, many thanks again to the Stirring Furries [not furies] in our
Bear Den -- and let's always ride all of the "fence lines" [figuratively]
for the protection of all of our rights and liberties.
An Old Army guard-duty adage has suddenly popped back up into my mind. And,
with a bit of cultural modification, it fits for all of us who struggle in
our various ways for food -- and freedom, too: "I walk my post in a military
manner -- and I don't take ____from the Company Commander."
Always In Solidarity,
Hunter [Hunter Bear]
________________________________________________________________________
COMMENT:
ROBERT GATELY:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR: FEBRUARY 27 2008
The foregoing piece has just been published by Norla Antinoro and Edward Pickersgill in WE! MAGAZINE:
http://www.mytown.ca/ev.php?URL_ID=122277&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A REASONABLY ARTICULATE RANT ON THE MORNING OF APRIL 6 2008, WIDELY POSTED [HUNTER BEAR]