Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gun rights. Show all posts

Saturday, June 15, 2013

The Dick Act Of 1902: Gun Rights


The problem is that congress does not know what bills have been passed.
THE BILL was passed back in 1902 and grants full rights to anyone who wants to own as many guns as they can afford. Any movement to limit guns or magazines will be in direct violation of this law.  Pass it around. The Dick Act of 1902!  (By Charles William Frederick Dick)
 
Are you aware of this law?

DICK ACT of 1902 - CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - Protection Against Tyrannical Government.

It would appear that the administration is counting on the fact that the American Citizens don't know this, their rights and the constitution. Don't prove them right.

The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
                     ** SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE **

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia; the unorganized militia; and the regular army.

The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders. The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
Get this message out to all your email contacts. It's time to learn about your rights. (Thus making all California (Colorado & others) gun & magazine limiting laws illegal !!!)

I'm not so sure the current administration KNOWS what the laws, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Declaration of Independence say. But it doesn't matter to them anyway. He and his minions certainly don't have any respect for them or us and will continue to do whatever they can get away with to further their cause of gaining complete control.

Charles William Frederick Dick (November 3, 1858 – March 13, 1945) was a Republican politician from Ohio. He served in theUnited States House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.

I was curious as to who was the Dick in the .. DICK act of 1909 was. 
 
Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, "the Organized Militia (the National Guard) cannot be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States."

The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.

During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada. The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states. Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.
Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states: "The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States." In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, "that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over  it."
"This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose. Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power."
The Honorable William Gordon
Congressional Record, House, Page 640 - 1917

Saturday, January 12, 2013

Disarming Americans Is Unlawful


OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHT:
THE MILITIA IS THE KEY

Alan Keyes Explains Current Battle Is Not
about Guns, But about Liberty

Any effort to disarm the American people is unlawful. That is clear according to the "laws of nature and of nature's God" and the clear, plain language of the Constitution. Moves to disarm the people are unequivocally the benchmark of a design "to reduce them under absolute despotism."

Despotism is Barack Obama's purpose and the purpose of any and all forces in our society who support his bid to render Americans defenseless. Some of his less astute supporters are already sighing aloud about the need for dictatorship.

Others, less imprudent, slyly promote the notion that to secure ourselves against madmen and terrorists we have no choice but to surrender to government all means of defending ourselves against either. Their policy is "Disarm and trust the government." But when those in government become, or make use of, madmen and terrorists (as did the totalitarian Communists and Nazis of the 20th century), what then?

Because government power, when abused, is precisely the source of the greatest threat to liberty, those in government cannot be trusted as the ultimate guardians of liberty. That task is properly and inevitably left to the people themselves.

As individuals, in their families, and especially through their local institutions of religion and government, the people were and are the proper focus for all the decisions and activities involved in maintaining the "well-regulated militia" that is the key concept of the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment's logic arises from the connection between the people's right to keep and bear arms and the security of their freedom. It aims to make sure that Americans do not easily forget a hard truth: moves to secure a government monopoly on the legal possession and use of arms war against what is, in practice, the sine qua non of the people's right of self-government.

Unlawful bills, (or, as in Obama's plans, the issuance of unlawful "executive orders") that aim to disarm the people, on whatever pretexts, are the open declaration of this war against republican self-government. As such, they signify the onset of what will inevitably become a war against the property, persons and lives of the people.

America's Founders understood this, which is why the Second Amendment sets up a bulwark, in the Supreme Law of the land, to defend the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This bulwark marks the Rubicon that separates lawful government from the abuse of power by lawless forces usurping the name and authority of government. It also signals the moment when the peaceable courses of action envisaged and protected by the Constitution's First Amendment give way to the stern necessity that makes a well-regulated militia necessary to the security of a free state.


But when law is abused to assault the people's right of self-defense, the threat involved is not just physical. Would be tyrants clothe their lawless actions with the outward appearance of legality to demoralize people determined to stand firm in defense of freedom. They seek to impair the people's sense that what they do is an exercise of right fulfilling the responsibility laid upon them by "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

In this respect, the most important purpose and effect of the Second Amendment's recognition of the people's right to keep and bear arms is its contribution to the morale of those inclined to defend their God-endowed liberty.
  • It allows people unmistakably to recognize the unlawful nature of edicts that purport to disarm the people. It encourages and justifies them as they point out this lawlessness, and as they resist it.

  • It highlights the connection between the people's arms and the security of their state or condition of freedom.

  • It invites them to discern and articulate the arguments, based on rational principles and actual experience, which prove the essential truth of this connection.

  • In this way it encourages people to arm themselves with logic, reason and sensible proof against lawless efforts to eviscerate their capacity to defend themselves and their freedom, individually or in association with one another.

But reasoning is not enough.

Though laid out over a decade ago, the proposal the Second Amendment outlines is still a good indication of what is needed. Its goal is not just to respect the Second Amendment right, but to enforce it.

The essential starting point for the discussion is the recognition that, like all unalienable rights, our Second Amendment right ultimately derives from our natural obligation to respect and preserve human life as endowed by our Creator. It is first of all an obligation to ourselves, as individuals. But it is also an obligation to the rest of humanity.

We need to offer Americans, from their youth, an ongoing course of education intended to help them recognize and carry out this responsibility.
This involves more than knowing how to use whatever happens to be the appropriate, contemporary means of self-defense.

It involves understanding and accepting our responsibility for the right use of liberty. It involves developing the character and self-discipline needed to assure a firm commitment to fulfilling that responsibility. In this respect, preparing citizens for the exercise of their Second Amendment right is the practical core of the education they require to fulfill their natural right of self-government. Indeed, it literally leads them to accept the inward inclination of mind and will without which they are apt to become morally unfit to do so.

The most telling indication of the elitist faction's determination to overthrow self-government in the United States is the fact that in this regard they seek by all means to destroy, rather than strengthen, the moral fitness of the American people. In the formal institutions of learning and in the informal education derived from games, movies, television shows and other entertainment media, elitist agents of corruption encourage people to believe that the essence of freedom is self-indulgence. They induce them to reject all discipline except the scourges of fear, sensual desire, greed and the human will to power.

Ignorance and folly may lead susceptible people to accept the poisonous stew of lies that identifies this noxious view of freedom as "progressive."

In effect, however, it is exactly the opposite.

It aims to mute the twin voices of reason and conscience, thereby intentionally promoting human degeneracy. As these twin voices fall silent, people become less and less capable of standing apart from the compulsive stream of merely sensual perception and experience.
Their inner life becomes a montage of preoccupying images and impressions, devoid of logic and the conceptual perceptions it makes possible. Eventually their consciousness becomes barely distinguishable from what appears to be the consciousness of beasts, deprived of all but the most rudimentary capacity for self-conscious thought or action.

It is both correct and inevitable to conclude (as Joseph Farah reports Bill Clinton does) that people in whom distinctly human consciousness is thus virtually extinguished cannot be trusted to make right use of liberty, or the arms required to defend it.

But when people like Bill Clinton voice this conclusion it's imperative that we remember that they are the ones who have been and are most willing to be instruments of the elitist agenda that purposely and systematically seeks to degrade the moral intelligence and self-discipline of the American people.

For decades they encouraged this degradation by promoting selfish gratification, self-indulgence and even self-murder (for individuals, in the form of legal suicide; and for the species, in the form of abortion and gay marriage, the institutional equivalent of abortion.)
They looked forward to the time when, by exploiting the rotten fruits of this degeneracy, they could once and for all deprive people of the freedom that is their birthright when their human nature is preserved, as intended by their Creator.

Now Obama is instigating what could prove to be a decisive battle against the Second Amendment. Americans still capable of doing so should recognize what his action suggests: The elitist forces that fabricated him have concluded that the time they have so long engineered and anticipated has finally come.

If we fight the ensuing battle as if the war they are waging against us is about guns, we will lose the battle and the war with it. But if we insist, instead, that the war is about liberty, we may win the battle and give the forces of liberty a fighting chance to win the war.


To do so we must promote the simple truth: The alternative to gun control is self-control; the key to self-control is moral understanding and self-discipline; and the key to both is citizen education.

That course of education must be implemented at the level of self-government closest to home, and it must have first among its stated objectives the formation of a citizen body armed, educated and morally capable of being the "well-regulated militia" the Second Amendment prudently proclaims to be "necessary to the security of a free state."

Keep Faith,
Alan Keyes Signature
Alan Keyes
www.DeclarationAlliance.org


Monday, December 24, 2012

Gun Bans Do Not Work


Assault-weapons ban no guarantee mass shootings would decrease, data shows



Congress is poised to launch into a contentious debate next year over reinstating the assault-weapons ban. 

In the wake of the Connecticut elementary school massacre, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., already has vowed to introduce such a bill at the start of the session. President Obama is voicing support.

But crime trends over the past few decades offer a mixed verdict on whether renewing the ban would reduce the kinds of mass shootings that have spurred calls for its re-enactment in the first place.

Data published earlier this year showed that while the ban was in place, from 1994 to 2004, the number of mass shootings actually rose slightly during that period. 

Add to that the fact that most gun crimes in America are committed with handguns, and the gun lobby enters this debate with some potent statistics. 

"You had that for 10 years when Dianne Feinstein passed that ban in '94. It was on the books. Columbine occurred right in the middle of it. It didn't make any difference," NRA chief Wayne LaPierre argued in an interview Sunday. "I think that is a phony piece of legislation, and I do not believe it will pass for this reason." 

At the same time, gun control advocates note that modest decreases in assault-weapon crimes were recorded during the ban. A revived version won't stop gun crime in America, but, advocates argue, it could spare some lives from the violence on America's streets, in its schools and in its homes. 

"You see the enormous killing power that's out there on the streets for virtually anybody to buy or obtain," Feinstein said last week. 

A look exclusively at mass shootings -- the acts that typically prompt calls for more gun control -- shows a negligible impact from the Clinton-era ban. 

Crime stats compiled by a Northeastern University professor, the Census Bureau and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel show the number of mass shootings since the 1980s has fluctuated annually, but without any major upward or downward trend. 

From 1985-1994, there were 173 mass shootings and 766 victims. From 1995-2004 (starting with 1995 because it was the first full year the law was in effect), there were 182 mass shootings and 830 victims. 

After the ban expired, the average number of mass shootings every year continued to tick up slightly. The numbers were published over the summer in the Journal Sentinel ,and counted a mass shooting as any murder where four or more people were killed at once. 

The pro-gun-control Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence argues the ban had more of an impact than it's given credit for. The group claims that in the five years before the ban, the affected weapons made up 4.8 percent of crime guns traced by ATF officials. Since the ban, that number dropped to 1.6 percent. 

"This decline is extremely significant to law enforcement and has clearly enhanced public safety, especially since these military-style weapons are among the deadliest ever sold on the civilian market," the group claims. 

Feinstein's office also claims the ban can be traced to a 6.7 percent decline "in total gun murders." 

Even so, as the NRA points out, only a "tiny fraction" of crimes involve assault weapons no matter how it's measured. And a number of factors are at play, covering everything from policing to the state of the economy. According to the Justice Department, gun-related homicides overall have declined since they peaked in 1993. That decline is mostly attributed to a drop in murders involving handguns, which fell from nearly 14,000 in 1993 to close to 9,000 a decade later. 

Both sides of this debate have pointed to several reasons why the assault-weapons ban was limited in its effectiveness. Aside from the fact that handguns are the most prevalent in violent crime, the assault-weapons ban included an array of exemptions. 

To qualify as a semiautomatic assault weapon, a semiautomatic rifle had to have a detachable magazine and two or more of five specific features -- including a grenade launcher and a bayonet mount. Some gun makers simply modified their weapons to avoid qualifying under this definition. 

November report by the Congressional Research Service noted that opponents argued the banned guns "were potentially no more lethal than other semiautomatic firearms." 

In addition, the law allowed people to keep semiautomatic weapons that they had before it took effect. The saturation of firearms in the country limited the impact of the ban. If the same law were passed today, that means more than 300 million firearms -- or one gun for every person in America -- would still be floating around. 

It's possible that drafters of a new bill will try to modify it going forward. But any assault-weapons ban already faces dim prospects in the Republican-controlled House. An even stricter ban has even dimmer prospects. Indeed, Feinstein announced last week that her newest proposal would exempt more than 900 weapons. 

Everything from mental health to school security to the entertainment industry is likely to be examined in the weeks ahead. LaPierre has rejected calls for gun control, and he urged the country to scrutinize the video game industry, while ramping up school security -- LaPierre wants an armed officer in every school. 

Others, though, say gun control in some form has to be part of this discussion. 

"There are countries that have mental illness, that have video games. They don't have the problem with guns the United States has," Democratic strategist Richard Goodstein said. "That's the big variable."

Columbine 12 Years Later



COLUMBINE STUDENT'S FATHER 12 YEARS LATER !!
Guess our national leaders didn't expect this. On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the ColumbineHigh School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful.

They were not prepared for what he was to say, nor was it received well. It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by DarrellScott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness.. The following is a portion of the transcript:
"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers. 

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used.. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart. 

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent 

I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy -- it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best.

Your laws ignore our deepest needs, 
Your words are empty air. 
You've stripped away our heritage, 
You've outlawed simple prayer. 
Now gunshots fill our classrooms, 
And precious children die. 
You seek for answers everywhere, 
And ask the question "Why?" 
You regulate restrictive laws, 
Through legislative creed. 
And yet you fail to understand, 
That God is what we need! 


"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, mind, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact. What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs -- politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws. Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes, he did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America , and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him. To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA -- I give to you a sincere challenge.. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone! 
My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!" 
Darrell Scott

Do what the media did not - - let the nation hear this man's speech. Please send this out to everyone you can.

God Bless

Sunday, December 23, 2012

Jew Without A Gun


Jew Without a Gun

I am republishing my three-part series about the LA Riots of 1992 in which Karen and I and the children were trapped for several frightening hours. We were unarmed, helpless save for our wits. The police were conspicuously absent and the bad guys, frequently armed with heavy weapons, owned the streets. It was a defining moment in my life.
I’m reposting this series as a cautionary tale because the Sandy Hook Elementary School Massacre has sharpened the claws of the statist utopians, whose ultimate aim is to disarm law-abiding American citizens.
Just as Obamacare has nothing to do with health, and cap and trade has nothing to do with so-called global warming, anti-gun laws have nothing to do with saving children’s lives.
It’s just another opportunity for the left to centralize power.
Los Angeles burns, 1992.
Part One
Hollywood is Burning
Hollywood is on fire.
Karen and I lock every door in the house, shut tight the windows. We move through the house switching off all the lights.
Gazing from our bedroom window we watch orange flames lick at the darkness, pillars of black smoke climb into the sky. We can actually smell the acrid odor of burning rubber.
“Look how close they are,” says Karen.
“Just past La Cienega. Maybe eight blocks away.”
Karen gives me a long penetrating gaze:
“What do we do if they come here?”
My mind is racing away. The truth is we are defenseless. Unless I get crazy inventive like Dustin Hoffman in Straw Dogs.
“After this is all over,” I vow, “I’m going to buy a pistol.”
Karen says: “How about a shotgun?”
Dissolve to—
Two Hours Earlier:
The rioters are surging toward the front doors of the theater. They are shouting, but the glass doors are so thick we cannot hear what they’re screaming. The visual is quite enough. Their faces are twisted into expressions of raw hatred. The mob looks intent on some serious violence.
A few kids are laughing, milling about aimlessly and in apparent good cheer. Hey, maybe this is just a community street festival.
We’re at a screening for a new movie. It’s a Hollywood premiere, a charity event for, get this, inner city youth.
I’m friends with the executive producer.
“Bring Karen and the kids,” the producer chirps on the phone. “It’s a kid-friendly movie, there’s gonna be a reception, and really, Robert, it’s gonna be fab-u-lous.”
And so: because this producer is my friend and I want to support her movie, and because I’m a Hollywood screenwriter and personal relationships grease the wheels of the business, and because the producer is a player and admires my work, I schlep Karen, Ariel, 11, and Offspring #2, seven years old, to the screening-slash-charity benefit in the DGA building on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood.
What could possibly go wrong at a swanky premiere?
Inner City Youth Are Outside—But Not For Long
It is a Wednesday evening, April 29, 1992. The Rodney King tape has been running like an eternal loop on every network 24/7.
The film, a real stinker, at long last cuts to its final fade to black. Everyone is now mingling in the reception area. Guests congratulate the producer, director and stars, assuring them that the film is: ”great, just great,” and “the best work you’ve ever done,” all the expected and acceptable lies we tell each other.
Suddenly a chill sweeps through the room.
Something is happening.
It’s happening outside.
I step towards the large plate glass doors of the theater. The security men, two burly rent-a-cops, deeply alarmed, start locking the row of doors.
Snap, click.
Snap, click.
Snap, CRACK!
Dustin Hoffman in “Straw Dogs,” 1971.
Mesmerized, I stare as something hard bounces off the thick glass. There is a tiny white wound.
“Step back from the doors,” the security men say.
I stay put. I want to see what’s happening.
“Please, step away from the doors,” they plead as more guests press forward trying to glimpse the fearful gathering outside.
I see it happening. A classic shot unwinding in slow motion: the mob swarms towards the DGA building, towards us: a thick wave of fury marching with a terrible velocity towards this cocoon of—there’s no way around this—Hollywood liberals.
Sheesh, talk about a target-rich environment.
It’s almost funny.
Here we are, inside, raising funds for inner city youth, and —
— and the inner city youth are outside trying to get in.
Not, mind you, to express their ever-lasting appreciation for our spectacular generosity. Nope, hard as it is to believe, but it looks as if the objects of our charity would like to lynch us.
Or maybe burn us to death.
Almost funny. But not quite.
Hey, This is Just Like the Movies, Only Not Really
Abruptly, we are plunged into darkness.
And as if on cue, a woman screams, just like in the movies.
Offspring #2 leaps into my arms.
Trembling like a frightened rabbit, she stutters:
“D-d-d-daddy, what’s happening?”
Karen grips my arm:
“Robert?”
Ariel squeezes my hand, and asks:
“What happened to the lights?”
I’m thinking: Do I really look like I have the answers?
A rent-a-cop calls out: “We turned off the lights so they can’t see inside. It’s a safety precaution.”
Panic spreads like a virus through the crowd.
During the 1973 Yom Kippur War I had a long and detailed conversation with an Israeli officer, an incredibly brave and highly decorated tank commander who explained why Israel always beat the Arabs in war:
“We maneuver, we remain flexible, creative and liquid. The Arabs have a fatal tendency to fall back into a defensive posture. You cannot win a battle or a war when your position is static. We shoot and scoot. We keep moving, we probe the enemy’s flanks and then move in for the kill.”
Excellent advice.
We are trapped in the lobby and outside a mob of rioters is moving in, surrounding the building.
Time to go Israeli.
Part II
The Getaway
I have to protect my family.
I’m pretty sure the mob outside is dead serious about breaking in and getting down to some serious violence.
Not to mention liberating some pretty major karats. At the reception, I noticed huge diamonds whose glitter could induce seizures; watches: at least a dozen Cartier Tanks; I could not count the Rolex Oysters, and no doubt there’s enough loose cash to make your average L.A. rioter reasonably satisfied. This is, after all, an affluent Hollywood crowd.
Armed & Dangerous With a Swiss Army Knife—Just Kidding
I have to protect my family.
In my pocket, as always, a little Swiss Army knife.
“I’ve never yet seen an eyeball who felt that the Swiss Army knife was not a dangerous weapon.”
This charming and somewhat gruesome comment — advice, really — was given to me by my Israeli buddy, a grizzled tank commander who, one drunken evening, cheerily listed for yours truly all the common, everyday objects that have lethal potential. My friend was a big fan of the ordinary Swiss Army knife and its zillions of nifty attachments.
So: it is pitch black, rioters are gathering outside the DGA building, and to make matters even worse, women and children in the lobby are yelling, sobbing—every moist and yucky sound imaginable—in panic.
I feel like announcing:
“People, shrieking does not help. Really, it doesn’t.”
But why bother? It’s a mob mentality and there is no reasoning with such people. Unless maybe you’re Gregory Peck in To Kill a Mockingbird.
Which I am not.
Anyhoo.
I’m busy formulating a plan, trying to figure out a way to escape this building before the rioters break in, before they figure out a way of crashing through one of the numerous doors.
Interpolation
Karen does not scream or yell.
Unnaturally calm is the love of my life. Even as stones—where do the rioters get rocks?—thwack sharply against the front doors, Karen does not even flinch.
It’s almost eerie. Basically, everyone else is losing their collective minds, but Karen’s expression just builds into this magnificent wall of serene composure. Her posture goes taut, as if a steel rod is welded into her spine and molding her into an incredibly cute Marine.
Ten-shun!
I have this really weird urge to lift her sleeve and seek out the Semper Fi tattoo. And then there’s her lovely face. All the open and generous softness has receded and been replaced by a look of, by a look of — well, the only way to describe her expression is —
Napoleon at Austerlitz.
— have you ever seen those military paintings of seventeenth-century generals? You know those huge canvases where you get to see a full battle, say Austerlitz, or Waterloo, thousands of men are fighting, dying, blood and guts strewn about, rearing horses with eyes wide as saucers, but the general, the reason for the painting in the first place — well, he’s usually sitting on his white horse, on a hill, watching the battle, and his expression conveys determination, resolve, bravery, a self-assurance that says to the viewer: Look, believe me, I know exactly what I’m doing.
Anyway, that’s what Karen looks like tonight.
End Interpolation
“Karen,” I whisper, “I think we should get to the car and get out of here.”
“I was thinking the same thing.”
I’ve been in love with Karen since I was nine years old and have come to the realization that she’s one part Antigone and all Patton.
“Everybody, everybody! Attention, please! We cut the lights. We don’t want them to be able to see inside. Do you understand? We shut down the power. Not them.”
There is a collective buzz as a rent-a-cop repeats this vital announcement.
“What are we supposed to do now?” people shout.
“We’ve called the police,” comes the weak reply.
More nervous buzzing.
“Please, ladies and gentlemen, just wait for the police to arrive.”
I’m thinking: famous last words.
Offspring #2 is still in my arms, still glued to my hip, and though seven years old, she has regressed and jammed her thumb in her mouth; she trembles mightily, as if freezing. I can actually hear her teeth chattering.
Karen and I edge our way to the staircase; we are not going to wait for the police. We are not going to sit here like victims.
We are going to make our way down to the parking garage, jump into the car, and drive home. We are going to take our fate in our own hands.
The cavalry, I’m pretty sure, and with all apologies to John Ford, is not coming to the rescue.
The Police Are Coming—But Not Really
“Where are you going?”
A rent-a-cop is posted at the staircase.
“To our car,” I tell him.
“That’s not a good idea, sir.”
“We think it is.”
“We’ve called the police.”
“Where are they?”
He says nothing.
“How long before they come?”
“Any minute.”
I gesture toward the rioters doing their hostile little dances outside the DGA building:
“What happens when they start throwing Molotov cocktails?”
Rent-a-cop takes a deep breath.
“The police are coming,” he insists.
“Excuse me, we’re going to our car. You can’t stop us.”
The rent-a-cop has about two hundred pounds—all muscle—on yours truly and I’m terrified that he’s going to challenge me.
Thank G-d, he steps aside, murmurs something about not being responsible for our safety.
No kidding.
Poor guy. He’s trying to do his job, but he no longer knows what his job is.
Robert’s Rules for Driving Through a Riot
1. Do not stop for anyone or anything.
2. Not even to help someone. My first responsibility is to my family.
3. If rioters try to blockade the car, drive straight through.
4. If the car stalls, don’t leave the car.
5. Unless the car is on fire.
These rules flash through my mind in a split second.
The Fashionable and Magic Backpack
The stairwell is pitch black. Not good. In fact, it’s bad, very bad.
Suddenly, a golden beam of light slices through the velvety darkness.
“Look,” says Ariel, “Mommy has a flashlight.”
The children are delighted.
Me too.
Karen carries an extremely cool and very feminine leather backpack. It’s something of a joke in the family that the backpack is magic. Whatever you need, whenever you need it, it’s gonna be in the backpack.
Except for a pistol.
Sigh.
Cautiously looking for signs of the rioters hiding in the garage, we make our way to the car. I’ve definitely seen too many movies. I almost declare: The coast is clear.
I snap Offspring #2 into her car seat. Ariel, 11, also sits in the back with his younger sister. He is pale with fear and confusion. I touch his arm and murmur: “Everything is going to be fine.”
Ariel gives a weak smile and nods his head.
Our children trust us to protect them.
The burden of parenthood has never felt more grave.
Starting up the engine, I realize that I am drenched in sweat, my shirt clings to my body.
Karen reaches into the glove compartment, pulls out the Thomas Guide to Los Angeles.
“We may have to find a different route home,” she says.
“Right.”
Using commencement-of-production bonus money from my most recent film, we bought a Lexus outfitted with a massive eight-cylinder engine. It was a good move. The Lexus is a gas guzzler, but who cares? It’s our Centurion.
And as we cruise up the ramp, my breath catches in my throat, for there are a dozen rioters milling about the exit.
Oh, man — am I going to be able to put pedal to metal and smash through a bunch of real live human bodies?
My Israeli friend, the tank officer, had something like sixteen kills in a Sinai tank battle during the 1973 Yom Kippur War. When I complimented him on this huge kill ratio, he waved it off and said:
“It’s no big deal killing an Egyptian tank. They have this habit of hunkering down and using their tanks as artillery platforms. All wrong. Picking them off was a bit too easy. Remember: always fight an offensive battle. Most people are cowards, so if you keep coming at them, chances are they will retreat.”
Okey-dokey.

Part III
The Gauntlet
The torture of Reginald Denny.
“Attack, always attack.”
My friend, the heroic Israeli tank commander, told me that in the first few days of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, both fronts, the Sinai and the Golan Heights, were so weakly defended that had the Egyptian or Syrian high command been strategically bolder, tactically smarter, and their soldiers braver… well, the Arab armies could have achieved massive breakthroughs, and Israel would have found herself facing genocide.
But small — actually, tiny — pockets of brave, determined and very well-trained Israeli troops — in some cases just two or three tanks on the Golan Heights — held their ground and attacked enemy forces sometimes a hundred times their strength.
Screenwriter Escapes DGA Building—Note the Irony
“We had no orders except to hold our ground and whenever possible to attack—always attack.”
All this whips through my mind as I aim our car—I’m already thinking of the Lexus as a tank, a Centurion—towards the exit of the parking garage. A knot of rioters is milling about at the exit. It’s hard to see clearly, but oh, boy — it looks like a few of them are brandishing baseball bats.
I’m gonna make a wild guess and assume that they’re not Little League dads.
I haven’t turned on the car’s headlights. We’re still lurking in the shadows, not yet detected by the barbarians.
Good thing the car is fashionably black.
Karen says: “Maybe there’s another exit.”
“Nope.”
“How do you know?”
“DGA building. I’ve been here like a zillion times.”
“What are we going to do?”
We.
The Talmud teaches that when a husband or wife uses the collective “we,” it means there is love in the relationship.
Is there a finer way to enter battle than with the woman I have been in love with since fourth grade?
Ariel, 11, says: “I have to pee.”
Offspring #2, seven years old, doubles over with an uncontrollable fit of the giggles. She finds this absolutely hysterical.
“You’re going to have to hold it in for a while, Ariel. Do you think you can do that?” Karen says.
“I guess.”
“Good boy.”
Karen and I exchange glances. Karen gives me a pale smile of encouragement.
Robert: “I just have to say it.”
Karen: “What?”
Robert: “Fasten your seat belts. It’s going to be a bumpy night.”
Karen inclines her head, questioning.
Robert: “Bette Davis, All About Eve, 1950, written and directed by the great Joseph L. Mankiewicz.”
Karen sighs, tolerantly but with affection: “Robert, Robert.”
In the back seat, the nervous giggles from Offspring #2 increase tenfold.
My Israeli buddy, the tank commander, was fond of quoting Sun Tzu’s Art of War. One of his favorite maxims was:
Supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting.
Okey-dokey.
I inch the car forward, gain speed, 4 mph, 7 mph…
Now: I switch on the headlights using—surprise, hi-beams!—drenching the criminals in white light. I lean on the horn and —
WHOOOOOOOOO!
— and the rioters are drenched in the powerful lights (those Japanese engineers, G-d bless ’em) — and the shrieking horn is amplified by the concrete garage walls. The knuckleheads are blinded, frozen as I bear down on them at what seems like Formula One speed, and now they fall back like bowling pins and —
Steve McQueen in “Bullitt.”
— and we blow right past them, make a sharp left turn—we’re ordered by a street sign to turn right, but that would deliver us to the front of the DGA building and directly into the eye of the mob, and so, tires screeching—hey, just like Steve McQueen in “Bullitt”—we race away from the theater.
Heaving a great sigh, I realize that I have not taken a breath in, gee willikers, a long, long time.
I zoom down the block, pull over, and gulp oxygen.
“You okay?” Karen asks.
I nod.
But my heart is slamming in my chest like a Ginger Baker solo.
Hey, Los Angeles is Just Like Fatah Land—Only More Fashionable
Karen snaps on her little flashlight, studies the Thomas Guide. Using her index finger, she traces a route home.
“I think we should stick to the main streets. It’ll probably be safer.” Karen says.
“You navigate. I’ll pilot.”
“Let’s get moving,” Karen cautions.
“Check.”
Karen’s like: Huh?
I have seen way too many war movies. Seriously.
Anyhoo.
As we cruise through the chaotic streets, we spot fires burning all over the city. A canopy of red and orange spreads through the velvety darkness. It’s kind of beautiful, like a romantic J.M. W. Turner canvas.
Small businesses are deliberately torched.
Orange streaks of fire inscribe themselves against the velvety sky. It takes me a moment to recognize the distinctive signature of Molotov cocktails.
Los Angeles has turned into Fatah Land.
“Where’s the fire department?” Karen asks.
Looters help themselves to everything from television sets and stereos to diapers and liquor.
Every so often we hear the distinctive flat crack of gun fire.
Nowhere do we see any police.
Trying to avoid a massive traffic jam, I turn down a side-street. Karen leans forward, spots something and cries:
“No!”
Thirty yards separate us from a group of thugs who are chilling in the street. They watch us with flinty eyes. All wicked and street-savvy, they shuffle in our direction.
They’re all: yo, yo, yo.
And I’m all: oy, oy, oy.
Call me crazy, but I have a sneaking suspicion they’re not looking to discuss the cinema of Oscar Micheaux.
“Let’s get out of here,” Karen says.
Who am I to disagree with the love of my life?
I shift into reverse. Back up a few feet, shift into drive, angling for a sharp U turn, but the thugs are coming up awfully fast in my rear-view mirror.
I’m pretty sure one of the locals is toting a Tec 9. Or maybe it’s just a chunk of lumber.
And I’ve got a Swiss Army knife.
Talk about being out-gunned.
Do not mess with Gloria Grahame.
“Robert…” says Karen says through clenched teeth.
No time for a neat, driver’s-ed three-point turn.
I blast forward, squeak through a gap between two parked cars, hurtle right up onto the sidewalk, and then, ca-runch! yet another bone rattling move down the high curb, back into the street and:
Away.
We.
Go.
“Some move,” says Karen.
She touches my shoulder. And to this very day I still feel the cool imprint of her hand.
It’s Karen’s way of saying, “My hero.”
Or at least that’s what I tell myself.
Entry in Robert’s Official Screenwriting Notebook: Write this extremely scary, axle-cracking maneuver into your next script—no matter what the subject matter.
“I really, really, really have to pee,” Ariel reminds us.
I hand him an empty Styrofoam coffee cup.
Twenty Minutes to Get Anywhere in Los Angeles—Except During, Ahem, Civil Unrest
It takes us over an hour and a half to get home. Normally, this drive would take maybetwenty minutes.
But we have to circle round and double back countless times in order to avoid choked arteries, major intersections where madness reigns—traffic lights are ignored—and then there are unknown side streets that cause Karen to observe:
“We’ll never get out of there alive.”
Listening to the radio, we hear about the Rodney King verdict. So that’s the grievance du jour.
The fire department, we learn, is not being deployed because their men have come under intense gunfire.
We hear—and I have trouble believing this report—that the Los Angeles Police Department has been “pulled back for their own safety.”
Huh?
I thought that was part of the job description.
Dopey me.
Casa Avrech: I carry Offspring #2 to bed, where she recites the Sh’ma and then promptly falls asleep. We tell Ariel how proud of him we are. He shrugs. No big deal. Five minutes later, he’s fast asleep.
Karen, crisp and efficient, pins a bed sheet over the large picture window in the living room. We cannot be too careful. I search the house for a weapon, settle on an old ice ax from my mountain-climbing days. It’s an elegant tool with wicked potential in hand-to-hand combat, but obviously useless against firearms or a hail of Molotov cocktails.
Abruptly, I feel a burning pain—a white-hot spike—shooting through both my arms. Did I get hit by a stray bullet?
I examine my hands and gosh, my fingers are curled into claws. It takes me a moment to realize that it’s from gripping the steering wheel so hard. Painful muscle cramps travel from my knuckles into my shoulders. It takes at least an hour for the pain to subside.
On the TV, Karen and I watch as Reginald Denny gets his brains bashed in. We gaze in horror and disbelief as the barbarians dance over his broken body. With tears in our eyes, we see pious citizens, G-d bless them, step in and halt this atrocity, rescuing the tragic truck driver.
There’s a video of Fidel Lopez, a Guatemalan immigrant. He, like Denny, is pulled from his truck and robbed. But theft is almost beside the point. The rioters-slash-torturers smash open his head, then slice off an ear. The mob graffiti his chest, torso and genitals.
Take my word for it, graffiti is not an art form.
Between fifty and fifty-six citizens are murdered in the riots; two thousand are seriously injured.
At last, the LAPD is deployed. Its officers make approximately 10,000 arrests.
Estimates of between 800 million and a billion dollars in property damage have been reported. Approximately 3,600 fires were deliberately set, destroying 1,100 buildings.
Korean shopkeepers were specifically targeted by black rioters. But the Koreans owned guns and heroically defended their property and lives through force of arms, frequently using AR-15s against heavily-armed looters. So anyone who tells you that private citizens don’t need assault weapons are just plain ignorant. Besides, it is the Bill of Rights, not the Bill of Needs.
It was a lesson that should have reverberated nationally, but some commentators labeled the Koreans vigilantes. Just another case of the mainstream media getting it wrong.
Liberal totalitarians demand increased gun control, if not the outright banning of gun sales to citizens.
Second Amendment — what’s that?
And then, of course, the race hustlers — Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Maxine Waters, the usual vulgar demagogues — parade across TV screens informing the good citizens of Los Angeles that the riots were really “an uprising.”
Oh, really?
As in: The Warsaw Ghetto uprising?
Gazing from our bedroom window, we watch orange flames lick at the darkness, pillars of black smoke climbing into the sky. We can actually smell the acrid odor of burning rubber.
“Look how close they are,” says Karen.
“Just past La Cienega. Maybe eight blocks away.”
Karen gives me a long penetrating gaze:
“What do we do if they come here?”
“After this is all over,” I vow, “I’m going to buy a pistol.”
Karen says: “How about a shotgun?”
My Springfield .45 ASP.
If the Los Angeles riots taught us anything, it’s that you’re a fool if you count on the authorities to protect you in times of civil chaos — in fact, at any time. In the end, only I can protect my family.
I’m never, ever going to allow myself to be outgunned by the bad guys. All the gun laws that are on the books—and there are thousands of them—just make it that much easier for the barbarians to amass weapons and for law-abiding people like you and me to be at their mercy.
If you outlaw weapons, as so many squishy liberals yearn to do — well then, only the state and the outlaws will be armed. Which leaves ordinary citizens at the mercy of an all-powerful government and a variety of merciless criminal subcultures.
When Hitler and Stalin snatched power, one of their first moves was to outlaw private gun ownership. They understood that armed citizens are a mortal threat to totalitarian rule.
Imagine: several million Jews owning firearms between 1938 and 1945.
Is the mind capable of such a leap of faith or is it too painful?
One week after the riots I legally purchased a pistol: a 1911 Springfield .45. It’s the pistol I trained with in Israel. Yes, it’s heavy, and yes, the recoil kicks like a Rockette; but this is the weapon I know best and on good days I can shoot the wings off a fly at twenty-five yards. I cordially invite any mugger, rioter, criminal, gun-hating progressive, anarchist, or Jew-hating Islamist to come at me or my family, because now I am a Jew with a gun.
FADE TO BLACK
The End
Note: I’m frequently asked how I’m able to remember incidents in such detail, including dialogue, from so many years ago. It’s simple. I do not rely on my memory. I have been keeping a detailed diary for over 30 years. This post, as so many others, is based on my diaries. If there are gaps in my entries, I check with Karen. She also kept a diary.