Pages

Praetorium Honoris

Saturday, May 4, 2024

Meetings

(Source)
At one time the facility had belonged to the Virginia DOT, replaced by a newer facility, paid for largely by the federal government, it now belonged to the Eastern Shore Rod and Gun Club. That group was meeting this very night.

Morgan and Johansen were in attendance, they'd managed to spread enough rumors in the DC area to keep the Feds busy for a week or two. The federal agencies they were most concerned with were intently focused on the District of Columbia, not looking outward, but inward.

"Hey fellas, long time no see." Wilt Thompson was a bear of a man, a veteran of the war on terrorism, now a local farmer and the president of the Eastern Shore Rod and Gun Club.

"Mr. Thompson, good to see you," Johansen looked expectantly at Morgan.

"Wilt, how they hanging? This is a buddy of mine, lives down in Virginia Beach, retired Navy, Al Rossi, Wilt Thompson."

Rossi shook Thompson's hand, "Nice place you got here. Lot of members?"

"About fifty come to the meetings, the others, another fifty or so, just use the facilities. The range, the bar, place to hang out. You on the Atlantic or the Bay?"

"On the Bay, got a nice house, private beach. It's small, one bedroom, cost me an arm and a leg, but hey, I got my own dock and a high hedge around the place. Neighbors are close, but ya can't see or hear 'em, most of the time."

"So you fish the Bay?"

"Yeah, in the fall I hunt, I got used to being outside all the time in the Navy. Love the sea, hated the routine though."

"I hear ya brother, hey the meeting's about to start. Why don't you guys go chill at the bar, this won't take long."


Though Johansen had his doubts, Morgan was convinced that these men would be perfect. They were rural, they loved to hunt and fish, 90% of them were veterans, 100% of them had a deep and abiding distrust of DC.

As one man had put it, "Sonsabitches don't know how to mind their own damned business."

Johansen's backers wanted a big showdown between some militia types and the Feds, these people fit the bill nicely. What Johansen's backers didn't know, is that Johansen planned to screw them, big time. He remembered talking about it with Morgan some months ago.

"So some big shots want a Lexington and Concord moment, only this time the redcoats win?" Morgan had asked.

"Yup, big shootout, they hope, lots of Federal casualties, only this time they kick the militia's ass, just barely. More screams for gun control and they think Congress will act this time. Hell, if they succeed, you'll be lucky to get permission to own a flintlock." Johansen was disgusted with the whole thing.

"What about the Second Amendment ..." Morgan began.

"Do you think those bastards give a shit about the Constitution? Most of Congress are lawyers and most think they know it, but most have never read it. The media is on their side, the big corporations as well."

"So you think it's time to water the tree?" It was Morgan's favorite expression, he was a big fan of Thomas Jefferson, though like most he assumed that everything ever attributed to the third President was gospel.

"Sic semper tyrannis¹ brother." Johansen raised his glass as he said that.

"Give me liberty ..." Rossi began.

"And give them death." Morgan finished.


Rear Admiral (select) Alex Choe was walking with his hands clasped behind his back, Chapman thought he looked a bit Napoleonic walking that way, but said nothing. Choe stopped and turned to her, they were at Arlington, the cemetery provided a good place to talk away from prying eyes and ears.

"So this is about gun control?" Choe asked incredulously.

"More than that, Sir. These people are concerned with Federal overreach in damned near every walk of life. Big money wants the American people calm, quiet, and unarmed." Chapman said.

Choe shook his head, "This is ridiculous, Beth. You wearing a tinfoil hat these days?"

"Negative, Sir. I'm on the inside, I see the memos, I sit in hearings with Congress. Come on, Sir, every time some asshole shoots up a bar the media goes nuts, calling it a 'mass shooting.' Hell, Sir, Chicago has these events all the time, but no one cares. If it happens on the bad side of town, no one cares. But shoot a few white people and bang, it's all over the news. You don't see an agenda here, Sir?"

Choe thought for a moment, then he nodded, "I trust you, Beth, what do you need from me?"

"Nothing, Sir, just keep your eyes and ears open. There are elements in the military who like the idea of a disarmed populace as well, you know that."

"Well most civilians aren't trained to ..."

"Bullshit, pardon my French, Sir. A lot of firearms owners have had some training, heck, Sir, a lot of them learned proper firearms handling in the military. We may have some shitty training we put people through, but firearms training isn't one of them.²"

"Could you have your agency make a formal request?"

Chapman just stared at Choe, "Sure Sir, I'll commit career suicide, no problem." She shook her head.

"Sorry, Beth, you're right, we'd both get put out to pasture."

"Or worse."

"Seriously?"

"Yes Sir. These folks will kill to preserve their rights. The tide's changing. We don't want to be on the wrong side of history. There won't be a chance to write memoirs, people are going to die if we f**k this up. Lots of people."

"I'll do what I can, Beth. But I can't make any promises."

"Just keep an open mind, Cap'n, it's all I ask at this point."

The two found themselves at the Tomb of the Unknowns just as the guard was changing. Both stood at attention, both remembered people lost. Choe made up his mind.

"I'll do what you ask, Beth."

"Thank you, Sir."



¹ Latin for "thus always to tyrants," the motto of the Commonwealth of Virginia. In other words, tyrants must always fall.
² Unless you were in the Air Force, the training I received in Basic was ludicrous. NATO did a better job, where we had to qualify every year.

60 comments:

  1. Oh my. I'll wait for other comments before more thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  2. When a Congressman who believes an island can tip over, who can vote to obstruct an Amendment of the Constitution, well......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, we are not well-served in that regard.

      Delete
    2. I hate to defend Rep Johnson but that was an old Navy joke taken out of context; there are plenty of other legitimate criticisms of the man.
      Boat Guy

      Delete
  3. Our Constitution; though forget who said it, recall someone of prominence offering; "what matters most is not an amendment to the Constitution but that it's the Constitution that's being amended". Reviewing a timeline of Constitutional amendments gives weight to such observation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I'm not sure if the Founders realized just how stupid their descendants could be.

      Delete
    2. Yes they did and they tried to warn their descendants, but nobody listens to old men.

      Delete
    3. They assumed that people would read what they wrote.

      Delete
  4. Is it normalcy bias or willful blindness that the Constitution means anything to the Powers that Be?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They will do whatever they want, until someone stops them. That's our job and we suck at it.

      Delete
    2. To be fair, the eneMedia does an excellent job of slanting news and not reporting news and controlling news so it's hard for some average Joe and Jill to get the message.

      I've had discussions with people who are seemingly intelligent and well read who didn't know that Biden had documents from his terms as Vice President located in 5 different places. Or that Obama's book clearly states he was born in Kenya. Or that the Bill of Rights denotes rights of the individual above the power of the state. And so forth and so on.

      Delete
    3. Operative words- "seemingly intelligent."

      Delete
    4. From V for Vendetta

      “Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. ”
      ― Alan Moore, V for Vendetta

      Because words have power the leftists change the words, events and such

      “But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”
      ― George Orwell, 1984

      “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.”
      ― George Orwell, 1984

      Wrong Gender? We can FIX that:

      “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”
      ― George Orwell, 1984

      We are living in Heinlein’s Crazy Years, I fear.

      Delete
    5. Yes, but I sense (hope) that the pendulum is about to reverse course. The Left overplayed their hand with this Hamas nonsense.

      Delete
    6. I like your optimism AF Sarge. However, I suspect they are pretty damn sure they are on "The right side of history" and will do ever more stupid and destructive (did I repeat myself?) things to our Republic.

      I suspect we will "Save" Palestinians by bringing them to settle over here. Bringing in a shipload of rabid skunks seems safer in my experience. The PARTY wants MORE POWER and think that importing folks will HAVE Gratitude to their "Saviors". Unlike us "disgruntled" clinger Americans.

      I pray I am wrong.

      Delete
    7. There are days when I think I'm just whistling past the graveyard. But I'll put my faith in God and soldier on.

      Delete
  5. So much of the Constitution is ignored these days and no one seems to really care...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some of us do care, but when the majority don't, that's a problem.

      Delete
    2. The majority were either not taught or mistaught about the Constitution. My dad had classes dealing with the Constitution in high school, taught very straight forward. My teachers didn't teach or mistaught and I had arguments about what the Constitution said (they interpreted the work to fit what they wished to say, and I read it straightforward. Even back in the late 70's and early 80's a clear straight reading of the 2nd Amendment was looked at as badthink.)

      Delete
    3. Probably why many high school graduates can't read, that's too dangerous.

      Delete
  6. Looking to the City to save something ... maybe not the best plan.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Constitution? THIS for the Constitution.

    https://youtu.be/Z6Dj8tdSC1A?si=Iv0caG93hW0aK-uz

    Seems to be the modern attitude of that party. Some of them used to understand it.

    "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, and one more safeguard against tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”

    ~ Hubert H. Humphrey
    (1911-1978) US Vice-President, US Senator (D-MN)
    "Know Your Lawmakers," Guns magazine, February 1960, p.6"


    Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be." (Westbrook v. Mihaly 2 C3d 756)

    and

    "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

    : Robert H. Jackson, US Supreme Court Justice West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. (grumble) Every time I hear/read a current or former military type pontificate about why CIVILIANS should have (insert current leftist boogeyman firearm or components) I snarl back, "Because of the way you say "civilian. "

      Delete
    2. It's a mindset problem Joe; cops have it too. The term "civilian" to both groups means "non-combatant". I trained hundred if not thousands in the service and got lots of good training myself. The irony is that the BEST training is from civilian trainers; our SOF units regularly used civilian schools and trainers.
      Boat Guy

      Delete
    3. Joe #2 - If a current or former military person says that, they are in direct violation of their oath. They should be stripped of any veteran's benefits and, if still on active duty, be court-martialed and sent to Leavenworth. Pour encourager les autres.

      Delete
    4. BG - And from what I've seen in a number of shootings recorded on vest cams, many police departments are, at best, poorly trained.

      Delete
    5. Boat Guy....my wife used to work at a gun shop/indoor range. Various departments in Sonoma County used it for training. The only ones who could shoot worth anything were the old timers who started with revolvers and the Petaluma SWAT guys. Everyone else shot patterns rather than groups. And watching them try to clear a malfunction was purely a caution.

      Delete
    6. OAFS #3 - Most departments have less firearms training than what they wish 'civilians' to have in order to own or carry firearms. And, in order to meet DEI and all that, the training for quota candidates is drastically reduced. Like to the point that if they hit the paper anywhere it's good. Funny that.

      Delete
    7. Beans - This is my surprised face.

      Delete
    8. Beans, from my exposure to LEOs it seems to me that most don't want to impose training requirements on honest citizens. Only the political types like city Chiefs of Police and Public Affairs Officers mouth those. Cops on the street tend to be fine with anyone except felons and gangbangers owning firearms.

      Brings to mind a time I was going to a War of 1861 reenactment near Mariposa, CA. I babysat the 3" Ordnance Rifle for our unit, so I was towing it.

      I pulled into the Texaco just before Yaqui Gulch Road to fuel and as I was pulling up to the pumps I saw a gentleman putting on his body armor with Parole Officer stenciled on it. I hailed him and asked what was going on. He said that he was getting ready to go pay an official visit on a malefactor. I asked if he wanted back up. He gave me a puzzled look. I pointed to the gun on the trailer. "Oh, I wish!" was his comment. Heck....I had about 80 each half pound charges, and a couple of solid bolts for display. Would have been fun to see the face of the guy looking down the bore of that 3" rifled gun.

      Delete
    9. In many locations the good cops have been turfed and driven away by the political cops. It's why you end up with LEO standing around for hours during a 'mass shooting.' Uvalde, Parkland and such all had police officers who were more worried about their own selves than following department standards and procedures, and then didn't get punished for violating laws and regulations.

      I worked with a bunch of the 'old school' cops and they were great. Gun nuts, ardent rights supporters. And watched as they got pushed away, written up, fired, forced to retire by the EEOC/Diversity/Muh Feelings people. The old guys wouldn't be the ones doing gun confiscations. The new ones? Oh, heck yeah, anything to keep that pension and make more money.

      Delete
    10. They're the ones we need to worry about.

      Delete
  8. Navy firearms training was a waste of time as well. We each shot 10 rounds of .22LR through a converted 1991, then the best few in each company were chosen to shoot full power .45s. Those old 1911s were rattletrap POS worn out junk and couldn't hit a thing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beg to differ. Those pistols worked fine; it was the training -lack thereof - that was deficient.
      BG

      Delete
    2. Divemedic - At least we used 5.56mm in our M-16s. Just a hundred rounds, one time, just one time. Sure we weren't meant to be riflemen, but to tell you the truth, I like the way the Marines approach it. Everyone is a rifleman first, their individual specialty second.

      Delete
    3. While my data points are now at least a quarter to half century old, the USN attitude toward small arms except among Spec War and SEABEE communities was basically "An annoyance and potential opportunity to get in trouble if someone has a negligent discharge or a gun gets stolen." Solution was to maybe do a "familiarization firing" off the fantail at sea sometime. The Gunners Mates would provide a 1911 pistol and a loaded magazine to a sailor pressed up against the lifeline, facing outboard, with just enough one on one coaching to insert mag, rack slide, pull trigger seven times, drop the mag and hand them back. If you hit the ocean, that was good enough. Actual firing at a target was virtually unheard of. Rifle quals about the same, but limited to a small number of people who might nominally have been on some sort of security detail on the watch, quarter & station bill.

      The requirement for USN ships to maintain a "landing party" was dropped in the 1960s, although for the previous 175 years they had repeatedly been used (effectively) all over the world to advance or protect U.S. interests. No longer were ships required to have a few fire teams able to deploy ashore. Typical WW2 destroyers had the armory carrying about 24 M1911 pistols, 20 M1 Garands, 3 BARs, 1 M1 Carbine, 4 M1A1 Thompson SMGS, a M1919A4 .30 cal machine gun and 3 or 4 trench or riot 12 GA shotguns.

      The thought of PO3 Scroggins standing on the quarterdeck at the midnight to 0400 midwatch with a M1911 in his holster and two loaded magazine in the mag pouch is enough to keep people awake at night. Those are boring watches, nothing to do, and the temptation to kill time (and hopefully nothing else) by playing with their gun was sometimes irresistible. Not so much with the folks who had some prior firearms experience, but urban dwellers who had never seen a gun, but saw a cowboy movie or gangster flick figured they knew all about guns. Those were the days of the draft, not all volunteer forces.

      Officer firearms training at OCS was a ferry ride from Newport to Quonset point where we fired about 10 rounds from a .22 rifle, and then one or two clips of 8 rounds from a M1 Garand. There may have been a .22 or .45 handgun firing of a clip of ammo as well, but I am not sure. So, officers knew about as little as the sailors regarding small arms. A small percentage of O's and E's back then had some firearms exposure from high school, college, youth group or Boy Scout shooting programs, but 90% of those no longer exist- because guns are icky.

      Sadly, I don't think we are much better off today.
      John Blackshoe.

      Delete
    4. Well...JB has unfortunately described the typical Navy attitude. A slight difference was back in the days of " Nuclear Weapons Capabilty" ships. The Nuclear Weapons Security requirements could lead to a compliance-based approach or in our case a true deterrent to any attempt.
      In a bit of slight-of-hand I ordered and expended two years worth of training ammo for our small arms. Every watch stander or member of the Security Force shot 400 rounds of .45 ammo and like amounts of M-14 and 12gauge. At one point we were using a Sheriff's range and leaving our empty brass as payment; you'd go to jail for doing that these days.
      Boat Guy

      Delete
  9. How many must die over illegal and unconstitutional interpretations of the Constitution and the imposition of unconstitutional laws and regulations?

    As to our new group of Rod and Gun people, can't wait for them to start calling those who are preaching 'direct action' Fedbois or other negative terms. Seriously, the only answer to "We need to do this now!" has always been and always will be "You first." Which usually shuts the Fed up.

    Sigh. I just want my Republic. And guns. Lots of guns...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yup, it's all I want. Don't even need the "lots of guns" part (I have enough) but the idea of "you can't have any more," is anathema to me.

      Delete
    2. Spot-on, Beans!
      Gotta slightly disagree with terminology, Sarge; the term is "almost enough"
      BG

      Delete
    3. I want to be able to walk down the street, sword by my side, knucklebusters in my pockets, a brace of pistols, my crossbow and a rifle, and people say to themselves "What a weird combination of weapons" and not "OMG, weesa gonna diesa!" (not really, just illustrating a point, maybe... :)

      I am not the problem. The problem is and always will be criminals.

      Delete
    4. BG - I really do have enough. But if I want more, I also want that opportunity to be there.

      Delete
  10. The fact that there are actual "leaders" that - by their actions, not their words - believe that citizens should be effectively without any meaningful rights, subject to the whims of "the current thing", and whose primary purpose is to work hard to pay for all of it makes all of this hit too close to home.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This beginning to read like John Sandford meets Tom Clancy.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I'm beginning to get a bit of a Matthew Bracken vibe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hhmm, I haven't read him. Yet.

      Delete
    2. John Ross's "Unintended Consequences" depicts civilian (as in non-uniformed) response to Federal overreach in gun control. I pray it does not come to that.

      Guns are sort of like whiskey: Too many is just about right.

      Mike

      Delete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.