Rest day in Galveston...

Muscle and fitness mag. article was a great read!

M/22/5'8"/190

I GUESS IM DOIN CHEST TOMORROW!

M/36/5'11"/175

I just finished the Mesa Certification today. It was awesome. The best instruction at any kind of seminar or certification I have ever been to. Listening to Coach Glassman speak was truly enlightening.

I just want to thank all of the instructors and Mesa Fire for making it possible. There was a great group of people there.

I will definitely continue with more certifications. Next up level II.

Charlton Heston, what a legend. I'm going on a Heston spree this week.

Good job Dave!

Great block over the last three days, including my first CFT. Thanks coach and Lauren! I'm looking forward to the Kaysville Cert in two weeks! Hope I'll be ready.

Mesa Cert was great. I thought I was sold on CrossFit before I went, but now I am a true convert. I would recomend the Cert's to anyone.

Ken C.

Here is the video of Donny Shankle doing Grace in 1:47

http://media.crossfit.com/cf-video/CrossFitRogue_DonnyShankleGrace.mov

Brute grace.

Loved Mesa Cert!! I plan on attending more Certs when I get the chance. If you haven't gone, I would make it a priority.

Thanks to all of the instructors, Mesa Fire, and Coach Glassman for a Great Atmosphere, and a Great Program.

Jolleyfire

GREAT ARTICLE!!!

Patty your looking pretty rough are you trying to copy my beard??

Right on Chuck.

Heston was amazing. What to say about such a legend? Treasure Island was such an awesome movie.

Excellent address from Charlton Heston and that was almost nine years ago! A gentleman who risked his name for a cause worth fighting for - this country.

This is gonna suck! Cant wait, it will be awesome!! Oh crap, wrong day

No matter which side of the aisle your political leanings tend to fall, or your views of Mr. Heston, no one should argue with a call to know your values and defend them... whatever those values may be.

On a personal note, or maybe a California perspective, I would propose that the root of the issue Heston was trying to address goes deeper. How many of us were brought up w/ the values our grandparents would find acceptable? How many of us know exactly what our values are?

The world is very rapidly becoming smaller, more connected (CF is a prime example). Adapting to all the social stimuli that this world can bring is challenging. It was not too far in the past where a person in any town in the world had a very high probability of knowing the person he passed by name. Today you can walk through the town you grew up in and not know the name of anyone that doesn't wear a name tag.

Anonymity is the issue that distorts ones sense of values most. Historically it was the community that set the barometer for values. Today its the media and personal experiences that set the barometer. The days of a local community are past or fleeting, there remains only a larger more global community and the smaller interest based micro-community. The actions that would make one a pariah in the communities of old, are washed out and muted in today's digital tumult.

A section that I liked: "It scares me to death, and should scare you too, that the superstition of political correctness rules the halls of reason".

The Freedom of speech is absolute in the constitution, yet it is often restricted by our federal government.

"Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . ."

There is no cnostitutional right for individuals to bear arms. We can, however, be part of a well regulated militia and bear arms. That militia is the National Guard.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

If Heston is going to argue for freedoms, he probably shouldn't be using Antioch as an example. It's a private college where students choose to attend voluntarily. They have a constitutional right to enter into any contract with that school they wish.

His address was confusing. He argues that thoughts and speech is being mandated, but uses examples of people are voluntarily entering into i.e. Antioch college, San Fransisco, U Penn, and William and Mary examples of expanded freedom of speech and thought - not restrictions.

The other examples supported his case.

I was never much of a Charlton Heston fan, but I am now. I feel nothing but admiration for a man with such a willingness to stand up for what is right and such a strong conviction to protect the moral fabric of his country, irregardless of his own personal detriment. I have bookmarked the article for future reference. Now the part about the transexuals getting their own bathrooms and the transvestites having the right to cross dress at work,... well, that was just funny.

M/48/5'11'/185

First CFT
BS 295#
SP 115#
DL 315#

Been doing CF now for about 6 weeks. I like many of the results I've seen as far as running speed, endurance and my pull up strength improving, but, I've noticed my strength has gone down considerably in squats, deadlift and bench.

Has anyone else experienced the same after switching to CF? Perhaps it will take a while for my body to adapt to the CF style of strength training.

My shoulder press and flexibility has always been pathetic, but, I am looking forward to a marked improvement in those areas in the next 6 months.

Any advice on improving flexibility, especially in the shoulders?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Mr. Chuck Heston was right on the money with this speech. If anyone thinks he is over stating the issue in our colleges today I have a story for you. I was flunked out of a class my freshman year because I spoke my mind in a class. My papers were sound and points concise and very much on point, they just were not what I was supposed to be "learning" and therefore expressing in my papers. The Prof. and I argued openly in class after I questioned his sources when I had found opposing facts. The result was a failing grade forcing me to drop the class so I wouldn't be knocked off the deans list.
I was told filing a complaint would not do any good. I just wanted to learn the truth or as close to the truth as we can get with our collective resources and discourse. Granted this was an extreme case but the subtle bias is much more dangerous and more prevalent.
side note my father said this once and I'm not sure if it was his own thought or not, "If you're not a Democrat when you're young you have not heart. If you're not a Republican when you're old you have no brain."

Did the Decatur Cert and learned a ton. Nicole was awesome with her nutrition lecture; all the instructors were extremely knowledgeable. Andrew from Quantico helped me out immensely. Thanks for a great cert and hope to see some of the other students/instructors at other certs.

RIP C. HESTON

Great man and supporter of our individual freedoms.

#19

You are off base.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,"

This is a justification for why we are allowed to be armed. Not a definition of who is allowed.

"the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

This is the part where we are told who can keep arms. Not the militia but the 'people'. And it is the people who form the militia. And not only do we get to 'keep' arms we are allowed to 'bear' arms in an un-infringed manner.

It is a constitutional right.

In Britain, apathy rules in a land dulled by TV, cheap food, an appalling press and the twin celebratory cults of mediocrity and freakishness. If we don't become more politically active, we will have an increasingly cynical, disdainful and manipulative regime making our choices for us based on their vested interests. The British are treated like frightened sheep - and quite frankly this may be what they deserve. Is it any better on the otherside of the Atlantic?

I just wanted to say thanks to all the trainers at the Crossfit Certification Seminar in Decatur, GA this weekend. The cert. was absolutely awesome.
I thought I had good form and intensity, and then I went to the cert.

M/33/5'9"/185
I'm hungry.

OH YEAH!! this means ICE CREAM TOMORROW! every second rest day is a cheat day.. i just might go into a sugar coma tomorrow... I cant wait!!

Yeah Jakers is right.
Did anyone know that a majority of violent crimes in Japan are committed with friggin swords!
Guns and people like Charleton Heston are what help keep us free. I wonder what Michael Moore would think if he knew Charleton marched with M.L.K.?
I am going to go buy some more guns now and exercise my butt off so I am even more capable of protecting my family.

Great speech by Heston!

Angie

16:12

New PR

Well said Mr. Heston.

Great cert in Decatur. Learned a few things about myself and about CrossFit. Thanks to all the instructors, Sonz Decatur, and to Andrew for letting me get a few things off my chest. Ultimately, well worth the time, money, energy and sweat!

Sorry to repost from yesterday - but this seemed more relevant based on the Cert image above.

---

Open Letter and class review for Crossfit Certification Seminar in Atlanta on April 5-6:

Thank you for teaching me real intensity.

We can read about intensity, talk about intensity, and hell, even watch various flavors of intensity on video - but - nothing can match the actual experience of ass-in-the-fire intensity.

I got exactly what I wanted out of this class.

I'm no trainer, nor do I want to be a trainer; instead, I came to certification class to find the holes in my training.

I found them.

and, in fact, discovered that perhaps, I haven't ever been *really* training.

More than ever I believe Crossfit is the real deal. It struck me during some of the lectures, that Crossfit is nothing new --- it's really just a packaging of all the training types that are proven to work because they are required "in real work", be that the real work of fire fighters, law enforcement, military, or as instructor Pat liked to say, "carrying your kids and groceries from the car"

This no ass-kiss post. There were periods where I got bored, but that's mostly during the discussions more geared towards training and training business - which I just don't care about - so there, I am being a little selfish.

Also, while I can subscribe to some of Nicole's Zone preaching concepts, much of the trainers seem to be single, without kids, which makes writing down everything you eat, measuring everything and being super intense about diet just a little more difficult. If you don't want to alienate the rest of your family and friends, it's a real challenege to find that fine line between doing what's 100% best for yourself, and participating in real life with your family.

The technique training was incredibly helpful --- knowing how to deadlift, clean, squat and snatch correctly are strong reasons for my attendance and most of the training attention focused on these, and relative, movements.

nice...

Shout outs to Pat, Nicole, Tony the Media Guy, Mike G, the Marine from Florida, Jelli, and all the other trainers who spent the necessary time with this sweaty, stinky dude who thought he knew something, but came away finding out he has a lot more to learn and work on to improve.

...a lot more Crossfit training to do.

But isn't that why we're here?

Thanks and Cheers!

Christian
http://run50miles.org

No rest for the wicked. "nasty girls" as rx'd this morning (12:10). Followed by 2 mile pt run. I'll rest when I die:)

if you need some humbling...

We learned that while at Atlanta Cert class, Nicole, one of Crossfit's exceptional trainers and particpant in many of the training videos, demonstrated a new max life for the overhead, front-squat at185lbs.

think about that for a second... if that sounds easy to you ...go to cert class.

Thanks Coach and Laura for another article that leaves me inspired to educate myself more in many areas~

Get your stinkin’ paws off me, you d@mned dirty ape!

MR. Heston rocks...

Decatur this weekend was great. Thanks to Nicole, Tony, Pat, and Andrew for putting together an awesome cert. All the Level 1's were fast learners and put out a lot of intensity. Thank you to Eric W. and the Sonz staff. I really had a great time.

I walked through the doors at Sonz,Decatur to see the friendly faces of Jill and Jenny. Then like rock stars Nicole and Tony come walking up. I thought this is going to be amazing! No words can describe...
Andrew and Pat were aslo instructing. They all kick ass. I loved it!! Pat is hysterical, thanks for all the laughs. This was an awesome group of instructors. Thanks for exceeding my expectations. I know it's cliche but truly my life is changed.
Want to thank all the girls who rocked Sat. work out w/me. The Crossfit community is a beautiful thing. Thanks to Eric at Sonz, Decatur for the use of his facility.

RIP Mr. Heston. Thanks for posting his speech.

An interesting segue for me is General Douglas McArthur's 1962 Farewell address to the Corps of Cadets. An exerpt:

"Let civilian voices argue the merits or demerits of our processes of government. Whether our strength is being sapped by deficit financing indulged in too long, by federal paternalism grown too mighty, by power groups grown too arrogant, by politics grown too corrupt, by crime grown too rampant, by morals grown too low, by taxes grown too high, by extremists grown too violent; whether our personal liberties are as firm and complete as they should be.

These great national problems are not for your professional participation or military solution. Your guidepost stands out like a tenfold beacon in the night: Duty, Honor, Country."

Peace out & Hooah !

Had a great time at the Decatur cert! Everyone will talk about the great instruction from Nicole (inspiring-thanks for the zone number), Tony (informative), Pat (hilarious), Andrew (motivating- Semper Fi) and the other trainers. All true and deserved.

I'd also give a round of virtual applause to Jenni who probably in a two day span did somewhere in the gazillionish number of bottom position movements of squat, deadlift, clean, and about an hour straight of the snatch. She had a nametag that said Jelli the first day that had to be foreshadowing of her current leg condition. You are a great example Jelli of great form.

I'm pretty religious to the site and thought I was putting together a decent foundation of fitness with reading, but there is really something to dedicating two days with the best instructors that can explain how to do it and then hold you to that example until it is beaten into your head....and legs...and shoulders...you get the picture.

Good luck to all moving forward! 321, Go!
Taylor

#19

I think it would help for you to familiarize yourself with history. Fortunately the interpretation of the amendments is not up to you. You can read the notes and arguments surrounding their adoption at the Library of Congress. Wouldn't hurt to visit the Archives either.

Thank God for the Bill of Rights. Though they fall under attack daily by intolerant people. Does anybody else find it interesting that the those who argue that we must be inclusive and tolerant are the most intolerant and exclusive if you do not agree with their view? Mr. Heston was on the mark.

#43

Hooah!

Just started CF on 4/01. Missed Sunday's workout so tried it today. I got to 7. 7! I was aiming for 10 :(. I guess I should be ok with 7 since it's been years since I've even done pullups, but man, I got get my butt in gear! My arms are still shaking...

m/33/70"/170

Saturday-ruck march 7 miles 1:26 w/65# rucksack and LBE.
Sunday-off
Today-Crossfit Total
Press 115
BS 260
DL 300
Total 675

Followed by yesterday's 1 pull-up/min etc.
11 rnds + 12

I've never deadlifted more than 225. Well, I started with 225 today. I'm amazed at how easy that was for me to lift. I'm pretty psyched that I nailed 300. Very surprised. I love this Crossfit stuff.

Just want to say thanks to all of the staff and participants at the Sonz Decatur cert,, I had a great time and learned a lot about myself and CrossFit.

--DS

Well I know it's a rest day but I had to make up yesterday's pull-ups today. Second time doing this WOD and I made a great improvement.

first 14 min kipping
15 - 26 min jumping

that makes 105 kipping and 246 jumping

Total 351

I don't believe the right to bear arms should give citizens the right to have assault weapons.

Shoulder rehab is progressing nicely--finally!

Thank you Sonz Decatur for another awesome Cert. It is always a pleasure to see my fellow Sonz coaches.
Thank you to Nicole, Pat, Tony, and Andrew for all your encouragement, humor, and knowledge. Special thanks to Tony for making me learn how to walk FORWARD on my hands. The workout was great!
MikeG, Jilly and Mikey (Yeah Mikey we represented FLA)I had a great time working out with you all. I can't wait til the East Coast Challenge.
To all the level 1's congratulations. Each cert I am always impressed with the athleticism everyone brings. I hope to see some of you at another cert in the future. Carrie and Taylor thank you, it was my pleasure. I enjoy everything about CrossFit and the CrossFit community.
THANK YOU!!

Awesome weekend! Once again CrossFit HQ raised the bar. Nicole, Andrew, Tony, Pat, Mike G, Jenny, Jill, you guys delivered a First Class Cert, and to all who attended this weekend you guys were also great all weekend, "thick skin" and great effort. Super Impressive Job!

RIP, Mr. Heston - a hero of liberty, a life well lived. Paul

That is one awesome speech, whether you agree with Heston's politics or not.

Thanks for posting that, Glassmans. You've really made me think about some fundamental ideas in a different way today.

I missed yesterday's workout, so I plan on hitting it today. I had a few questions for those of you more experienced CF'ers:
1. I've been doing some home/yard projects recently and my hands are really beat up from tile, lumber, etc. I know CF "rules" say no wrist straps, supports, etc., but would gloves be acceptable? Don't know how far I'll get on my pull-ups today without some protection.
2. Question on the Zone diet: I read in one place that, for any food you eat, you only count the blocks for the main category (protein, fat, carb) and any calories derived from secondary categories are essentially free. But then I also read that if you are eating a food that has two or three categories in it, you count the biggest one but also have to subtract the secondary calories from their respective categories for the block. For example, if you eat ham, you count the blocks of protein for your block count, but you also have to count the fat calories and subtract that from the fat allowance for the same blocks. Can someone clarify for me? Diet has always been the weak part of my fitness, so I would like to get it right this time.
3. On the topic of food, the block chart listed under the FAQs section lists cheese as a protein. However, I recently got some brie that had more fat than protein, so shouldn't I count it as a fat instead? Going back to question 2, if I count it as a fat instead of a protein do I still count the protein in it as part of the block nutrition, or is that protein "free" and I still add a block of protein from another source?

I hope my questions aren't too confusing, and I appreciate any feedback you can give.

Thank you for the tribute to Mr. Heston. He was a great actor who portrayed great characters and did it very well.

What I get out of his speech is his call to THINK! It bothers me that in today's political agenda if you take one side on one issue then people expect you to have the same party line on all issues.

Whatever you beliefs are- if we take the time to think about our positions, and put our money where our mouth is, there can be more discussions between people with differences instead of the polar divide we have today.

jakers - you're right, that's how it is currently interpreted. but looking at the two amendments, the langauge is clearer in the first than the second. The second must be read by splitting the sentence up, as you did, to mean the "people" as individuals have a right to bear arms. But the people are who? Maybe not all people. But only those in the militia. We don't allow felons to have weapons. Would you want us to change that? My point is that the first amendment is more clear than the second, and yet comes under attack more often.

FYI. I support the right for responsible individuals to have guns. I grew up with guns in the house, etc. etc.

gmack - your argument was confused. You said "thankfully I am not the one interpretting the constitution." who should be? the 9 members of the supreme court? congress? so does that mean whatever they say is correct? does that mean you think Roe v Wade is correct?

as far as taking an historical perspective, you are correct, the 2nd amendment has been interpreted to include a constitutional right for individuals to bear arms. For Now.

But looking at History, as you have, is only used when convenient.

For instance, some would say the founding fathers desired the ninth amendment to mean something - a right to privacy among other things. But it currently means nothing. Why would they include this in the Bill of Rights if it didn't mean anything?

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. "

On the mark #19.

The Supreme Court will not find the right to bear arms to be an individual, constitutional, FUNDAMENTAL right.

This would mean that any restrictions (perfectly legitimate even for you gun nuts)in the form of state and federal gun laws would be subject to strict scrutiny and thus none would stand in court.

I am happy with this.

Charlton Heston: a fine American and the original "Angry White Male" now being slung around. RIP, Sir. I'm going to forward that speech to a few friends.

He and Ronald Reagan are sorely missed.

Oh yes, and interpretations change, as they should, to fit an evolving social, technological, and moral context.

And no the supreme court has never ruled specifically on the nature of the right to bear arms prior to this court session.

Hmmm, someone mentioned that the Japanese have a violent crime issue by using swords? You know, America would be better off if citizens had to use a sword instead of a pistol or rifle. Considering the muzzle velocity of today's firearm, it's very easy to kill the innocent, but it'd be very hard to kill an innocent bystander with a sword unless they hopped right into the middle of a fight. Plus the survival rate would be a deterent considering that you might survive such a fight but wind up being very maimed. Maybe the Japanese are onto something?

I think there's also a 'problem' with swords in Britian too.

The Supreme Court is close to ruling on the 2nd Amendment in relation to the Washington D.C. gun ban. I think it is pretty clear that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0319/p25s07-usju.html

God bless Charlton Heston!

Congrats to all the new Level 1's from this weekend's cert at Sonz in Decatur, GA!

You all were an awesome crowd, full of energy and lots of fun. Thank you!

Thanks to the entire Sonz staff and Eric for making us feel so welcome and being a great host.

Thanks to all the trainers. Everybody gave 100% to put on a fun, informative seminar. I can't wait for the next one!

**and to Pat Barber.....I'm trying to look like you with the beard in the hope that some of your strength overhead will magically enter my system!**

#19-20 The Gift-

While you did cite the text of the 1st amendment, it's not such an opened and closed case. You still have to define what exactly speech is. Also, there is considerable debate as to whether the text from 2nd amendment refers totally to the right of people to bear arms in militias or whether the right to bear arms was supposed to be an individual right.

I have never really listened to Heston speak (although I did see the famous quote about pulling a gun from his dead hand in that Michael Moore movie, nice editing by the way Michael), but I thought this was a great speech. I think he was more talking about people taking action and not being herded into a certain way of thinking or acting based on being too PC. I don't think the purpose of the speech was to advocate for or against current specific application of Constitutional amendments.

M/22/6'1"/185

Did the April Painstorm today:
34:49
Added a box jump (20") to the Burpees to make sure I didn't cheat and went high enough on the jump.
I'm going to see if I can find a chair or something that I can bring into the shower because standing is not really an option

#62 Before we go too far with this argument, lets suppose you had to defend yourself against a street assault or home invasion with your sword. You opponent pulls out his .40 cal. and blows you away.

In liberal land, everyone follows the rules. In the real world, someone who would rob you on the street or in your home could care less about the rules.

The only thing restrictive gun laws do is let the bad guys know it is reasonably safe to go about their business. I suppose we should leave our protection up to law enforcement professionals. They will be the first to tell you that by the time they get to a 911 call, the violence is over and the damage is done. I live 20 miles from town, in my case, police response could take from 20-45 minutes, depending upon the weather. Think I'll keep my firearms.

I am grateful to Charlton Heston for his inspirational message.

He prompts me to speak up. America, we need to get out of Iraq NOW.

America’s actions in Iraq, are not liberating. America is dominating and controlling. We are taking from the Iraqi’s their own right to self-determination. We are trying to plant our values and extract their natural resources. Our celebration of freedom should not be a celebration of the freedom to go to those parts of the world that we pick and choose for exploitation. The world is filled with tyrants and oppression that America often chooses to support and perpetuate. It is bewildering ironic that the African-American soldier is willing to go to Iraq by the thousands and defend Big Oil’s needs, but there is no clamoring to go to their own ancestral homeland to save the lives of starving and butchered children, their own cousins, across many parts of the African continent. America spends millions on bombs, weaponry, and warriors that could be spent to educate, heal, and feed. America chooses to drink from the fossil fuel faucet and ignore the greatest gift of energy that burns brightly overhead day after day after day. America chooses to be led by dollars, instead of by sense. America has bound itself up with convoluted debates about spiritual leaders and faiths, joining the world in confusion about mysticism and God. Now is what is true - not the stories and tales and fables of thousands or hundreds of years ago. America chooses to continue magical spiritual thinking that is not dissimilar to fantasies about marriage to forty virgins, a fantasy that seems to successfully lead some culture’s members to suicide. The military exists in this country to defend America, not to extend America’s selfish hands around the globe to embrace bullies, snatch the goodies, and intimidate the weak. America’s military needs to reflect on its mission of defense. America can protect itself. America will protect itself. America does not need to continue to be pulled on the leash of the corporate war machine. The America citizen has become over identified with the hero propaganda fed to him/her by the President, by the Man, by the history lessons of teachers who have taught about wars and America’s roles in wars like they were comic book stories. America was once a hero. The President needs to learn that Hero is not a role you choose. That role happens, and America can fill it when needed. Iraq has its own heroes, and America should let Iraqis figure out who those persons are going to be.

I would like to thank Mesa Fire, and the Crossfit staff for an awesome certification this weekend. I can't wait for my next one. Thanks again Todd for helping me get that first Muscle-up! Great weekend all around.

#51

When our Bill of Rights was created the only "arms" the "people" had were muskets, pistols whatever. It wasn't until 1944 that the term "assault rifle" was brought into existence. Originally it was the Sturmgewehr in Germany, the MP 44 to be exact. Translated, that means assault rifle. Since then, the semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine has been branded "Assault Rifle". When Mr. James Madison introduced the Bill of Rights the "Assault Rifle" was unheard or undreamed of. I'm sure that if they were in existence in 1791 they would have written "the right of the people to keep and bear assault rifles, pistols and any other means to protect themselves, their family and our society as a whole". Yes, I'm a freedom loving, gun loving veteren of combat in two separate regions on this lovely planet and I still continue to serve. Not everyone has to partake in the freedoms and rights that we are so privelaged to have in this wonderful country but they are secured there in our Bill of Rights should the opposition have a change of heart when they feel they need to. Good day and God bless.

It is important to think of the definition of militia as it was used in 1776. The militia back then was not the national guard we have today. It was just family men organizing to fight when the need arose. Thomas Jefferson said that governments should fear the people, not the other way around. Would that be possible if only a government instituition possessed arms? Addtionally there is an argument that the 2nd Amendment should not apply to modern weapons, however if that were the case then wouldn't the 1st amendment extend no further than the movable type printing press and not to TV, internet etc? It is funny how we pick and chose which Amendments give us unalienable, unflinching, uncompromised rights and which ones are open to interpretation.

Theresa #51: Assault weapon is a term invented by the Brady Campaign that doesn't really mean what you probably think it means. There are automatic weapons (which is what most people think of when they hear the term assault weapon) and there are assault rifles (which usually refers to military type weapons with selective rates of fire). "Assault weapon" just refers to a bunch of superficial features that make a weapon look scary and high-tech, but don't effect lethality or rate of fire or anything worth noting.

Mark,

Why do you think the Iraqi government keeps voting to ask us to stay? Is that in any respect relevant to your rant?

Point to ponder: Political Correctness needs to be called what it is, Leninism. I will say more later.

#66, davidorr
Never bring a knife to a gunfight, right? I've always thought it was 'funny' when someone brings up banning firearms. The sword example is prime in proving that if someone wants to hurt someone else, they'll find the tool necessary to get the job done. Firearms are like a hammer; they need a hand in order to be used for their function. In other words, people are the root of the problem and not the firearm.

My sister, who used to work in the Cinci ER, told me about a redneck fight that started between one drunk family versus another drunk family. They wound up whacking each other with shovels and picks and the damage was horrific, and she used to work in the children's burn unit in Indi before the Cinci ER. Apparently ER nurses like bullet wounds over back gouges with a pick, or shovel whacks to the face...

On a side note, I can't wait until CERT this weekend in Ann Arbor.

Heston on one hand going to the wall on 2nd amendment rights and then speaking out agianst 1st amedment rights when he doesn't agree (Time/Warner) is quite telling. It must have been hard to be a "cafeteria" patriot.

This is getting good. And to think that people assume athletes, etc. have little intelligence. This is a good discussion. Also, if you comment on something that you have never done or experienced, does your comment really hold much value? To the people who are against Iraq, whatever, have you been there? Have you talked to the people? I wonder why re-enlistment numbers are so high? Ponder that one.

I had a blast at the Sonz Decatur cert this past weekend! Andrew was particularly helpful and encouraging, but I was extremely impressed with all of the trainers' knowledge, instruction, and enthusiasm about CrossFit. You are all inspirational - thank you!!!

Nicole, Andrew, Tony, Pat, Mike G, Jelli, Jilly, and Mike M thanks for sharing so much knowledge and experience. It's always first class, fun, informative, and hard as hell when you guys are in town.
Tony thanks for letting me be one of your test subjects. Still feeling a little un-even!

The Decatur certification was excellent and it exceeded my expectations. I could write paragraphs about how impressed I was with the staff and their knowledge, enthusiasm, intensity, and joy at which they went about their work. The attendees were a joy to be around as well and boy did they put out. The certification was a display of virtuosity. I realized it isn't just part of the foundation of Crossfit, but it should be and is part of everything that we do with fitness everyday. Thank You All.

The well regulated militia is formed by armed citizens that show up with their personal weapons from home to form said militia. No one was showing up expecting for the government to give them a rifle. You can't expect to protect yourself from a tyrannical government with a militia that gets their weapons from said government. The logical interpretation is the people have their own weapons so they can defend themselves against tyranny.

Hmmmm, just like we did against the British. I don't recall the Brits issuing the colonial rebels weapons in history class.

From my cold dead hands shall they pry my gun if they want to "control" it.

Any help on my questions from #56?

While I would love to enter the fray on the Amendment interpretation discussion, time and space do not allow. Just need some clarification on the workout/nutrition.

Right on, Mr. Heston.

What I get out of this; think for yourself! You have a brain and a heart! Stop listening to those external forces trying to manipulate and control you! Be your own person and do your own thing. Stand up for what you know to be true and right in your heart, and do it in the face of fear. The elusive "they" will try to use your fear to control you.

Heston didn't even have to say anything about guns. He's talking about freedom, but not the kind of freedom the government can "give" you. It's the kind that comes from inside you.

Response to #73 Hoodlm
Why are troops re-enlisting? More than 16,000 Army captains are eligible for a $25,000 bonus if they re-enlist. Officers commissioned in critical skills such as the use of armor or ordnance may receive up to $30,000 in bonus money, and certain types of intelligence officers qualify for a re-enlistment bonus of up to $50,000. The House Armed Services Committee has asked the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office to find out how well the money is being used and how long the Pentagon can afford to keep up the sweeteners. The accountability office looked at the issue three years ago and found that, while retention numbers overall were holding up, the Army was having trouble retaining many of the special skills needed for counterinsurgency and counterterrorism missions that have become the bread and butter of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why are people re-enlisting? The WAR MACHINE will pay them to re-enlist, and America lost 80,000 jobs last month. Bush and Company are working both ends it seems to keep Corporate profits for the WAR MACHINE growing, while you and I write the check.

CHARLTON HESTON WAS MADE OUT OF PEOPLE! HE WAS MADE OUT OF PEOPLE!!!!

What a great speech by Heston! That's what makes this site so great! Crossfit promotes intelligent thought and conversation. If anyone really wants to challenge their thoughts, they should watch the movie ZEITGEIST. The great thing about the movie is that on their website they tell you not to take their word, but go find out the facts for your self. Our personal freedoms our beeing attacked from all angles in this contry from the controlled media, to our bought out government( since the federal researve is privately owned!)if people in this country don't unite against the forces that be, then you might as well go volunteer to have that computer chip tracking devices put in your arm and sell your soul! Yes they have already had people volunteer for it in florida! That way when someone "abducts you or your child" they can track you down with a push of a button!

Great certification in Decatur this weekend. I will definitely return to do this again when I can.

I think you'd get more constructive and useful feedback if you had a better process of surveying attendees than a blog posting.

No rest today, let my twins give me a workout to celebrate their b-day:

"Zac & Zandra turn 15 today"
10 rounds for time of:

15 Back extensions
15 squats
15 sit-ups
15 walking lunges
05 jumping pull-ups (nope, knew I couldn't do 150 of those:)

29.11 Labor was worse, but not by much. HB Twins!

Excellent Speech, of which the point was to clearly establish critical thinking. To not become part of the mindless masses who bend freely to the collectives whims of what is correct or just. Basing his argument on his life he showed not only his own resolve but more importantly the risks he was willing to take. His examples,to the point, showed some of the overzealous ridiculous claptrap that is pervasive in our every day world.

Those of you on here who are arguing for or against guns, or whether his examples were 'confusing' only post to have yourselves be heard or to prove your own intellectual prowess. Prove your might on field, but leave this post session to discuss the real issues at hand. Critical thinking in the American mind....one that values what real freedom is...what it stands for and how to fight for it.

What then do we have to discuss? Well, maybe blindly following the social morays of a culture manufactured by 24 hour news networks and over reaching government institutions that tell the citizens that give it power what they can and cannot say... because it might not be "politically correct"

"When I hear the words Politically Correct, I reach for my gun"

Regards,

I love turtles

Well said Charlton Heston.

I'm so tired of our cowardly culture. You can't have a discussion about anything without some Ninny getting their underwear all knotted up. This generation doesn't have the stomach to stand up for what is right. We should stand up to the tyranny of political correctness like our colonial rebel forefathers stood up to the British. Sheep, a country full of sheep being led to the slaughter of mindless obedience to the jack booted thugs of political correctness.

Additionally, you can have all of my legally purchased, never used in a crime weapons when you pull them out of my cold dead hand. I'm sure our forefathers expected the government to give them weapons for their well regulated militia, not! The local militia was to show up with their personally owned weapon. You can't do that unless the individual has the right to keep and bear arms. That is how the populace protects themselves from a tyrannical government.

Now, "get your hands off of me (and my weapons) you damned dirty (politically correct) ape!"

I want to be a WAR MACHINE.

Quick Question - thinking of doing crossfit, but tend to run long distances (half marathons mostly). Can I do Crossfit and continue to run long distances?

Congratulations to Decatur Level 1 certification graduates! What a hugely rewarding experience it is to be surrounded by such positive energy. It is true, CrossFit self selects for great character and great "characters! Thank you all for your encouragement and support. As a new level II trainer, I learned more from you folks than can be imagined and I will endeavor to "pay it forward". Nicole, Pat, Tony, Andrew, MikeG and the "Jilly-Jelli" sandwich, thanks again for your expert instruction, patience and good will. It was great seeing you all again...until next time!

#19,

GET A CLUE!

I won't say who I am with, but I worked very closely on the recent DC gun ban case (D.C. v. Heller), and it is so obvious that gun ownership is an individual right. If you would like to get a little knowledge, read any of the briefs on Heller's behalf. A collective gun right, like the one you are advocating is based on a cherry picking of American history- plain and simple. Also, if you have heard the oral arguments from the case, it is pretty obvious it will be a 5-4 decision, on the side of the gun owners. 4 misinformed liberal souls, trying to structure society!!

Thanks to all the Decatur Cert attendees - you made it a pleasure to Train this weekend! We had so much fun coaching you all through the movements as well as the hellish workouts. Feel free to tap into any of us for advice on training, opening an affiliate or how to get your own workout in while spending all day training others!

Jason & the others who have been doing this on their own - what you learned this weekend will open your eyes to a whole new level of CF in terms of speed, intensity and even max weight PR's. You all did awesome despite what you were thinking in your heads! Good luck & 3-2-1-Go!

Nicole, Tony, Pat & Andrew - thank you for all the support, great lectures and fabulous feedback. Mike G, Jelli, Mike & Chuck - thanks for the "Uneven" and "Roaming" workouts during lunch. Jelli - you're going down on the running & gymnastic workouts. You can have the weights. See you all at the SE Challenge.

My favorite quote of the weekend: "If it grows, feed it".

#86/Mike, yes, but it will be a lot more fun and you will be more fit. Also, you won't have to burn up as much of your life doing LSD. Plenty of good info in the Journal and with various affiliates who are doing this.

Better fitness, more bang for the buck, boatloads of new skills to master - you have a great ride in front of you.

Paul

#86,
I don't personally run long distances, rather I do alot of sprint drills, but I do have a friend that runs around 8 - 10 miles a day and he throws in a 20 mile Sunday run once a month. He usually does his running around lunch time or early afternoon and then comes back into the gym around 6 to do the WOD's with me. I must say, he doesn't resemble your average long distance runner. Although he is very lean, he also has an incredible amount of strength and muscle mass. I'd say you have everything to look forward to by incorporating crossfit into your daily routine. Good Luck bro!

For the record, I'm active duty military also, but I'm thankful that my call is to take take of the sick and injured. When you've seen what weapons do from that perspective, you may look at the need for the public to have assault weapons, or any other weapon for that matter, differently.

I wonder if Mr. Heston and Moses have discussed Heston's role in the ten commandments film yet? Can you imagine?

In reverse order.
#88
LOL! I almost got myself worked up in high dudgeon & then realized I wasn’t 19. I was 26. My bad. & Thanks for representing Heller.

#83 If you are reaching for your gun in DC you should thank Alex84.

Comment #58
“The second must be read by splitting the sentence up, as you did, to mean the "people" as individuals have a right to bear arms. But the people are who? Maybe not all people. But only those in the militia.”

I split the sentence up because there is a comma that makes it a dependent clause with a change of subject. It’s been a while since I have diagramed a sentence so I could be wrong. I welcome correction if I am.

Good question about who are the people? At one time women and blacks were not full people. We amended the constitution to address a change in society. Law’s are defined using the ‘reasonable’ person. A ‘reasonable’ person interpretation of ‘people’ will probably create the broadest category of ‘people’.

#31
Switzerland on the other hand is one of the most armed nations on the earth. Very low gun crime rate. Shooting someone loses it’s appeal when you think they can shoot back.

Mark #86

Crossfit works wonderfully with endurance training and you should consider attending a Running and Endurance Certification to clarify the relationship.

MikeG- What's up bro, how's the ATL?

CCTJoey- LMAO!!! It was good talking to you the other day brother.

Jakers - laws are defined using a "reasonable person" standard only if the law specifies to use a "reasonable person" standard or there is a common law tradition that used a "reasonable person" standard.

There are many laws that use the "subjective person" standard, i.e. relative to a particular person.

In addition, given tthere is a lot of debate about how to interpret the second amendment, I would challenge your notion that a "reasonable person" would interpret people to mean the broadest category of "people."

As far as diagraming the sentence: I think your interpretation is fair, but I still think it may be incorrect. With a semicolon insead of a comma, you would have a better argument.

A subordinate (what you call a dependent) clause generally relates back to the dominant clause (that's why one is dependent/subordinate to the other). Since the object of the dominant clause is a "militia," the subordinate clause "the right of the people to bear arms" should also be refering to the "militia." You really want to argue that the two phrases are independent clauses, not dependent. Then, at least, your argument would be clearer.

#78 (Mark) -- I'm just curious so I have to ask this question: have you ever served?

Saying that military members sign up (or re-enlist) because of the money is like saying that women become nuns for the free room and board: it's nice to have but you're really kind of missing the bigger picture.

Just my opinion . . .

Couldn't do the WOD when it was Gwen last week, so subbed it in today.
135
8-7 (dang it), 7-5 (argh), 9 (finally).
Woof, that's tough.

Kevin,

It is funny how we (and I mean you) pick and choose how we (you) are going to interpret the amendments based on your desired outcome.

For instance, you insist that we remember that historically "militia" meant "family men" (debatable, but I'll leave that aside). Yet, you say that we can't apply history when interpreting the word "arms" because that would limit the First Amendment. You are doing what you say we shouldn't. So which is it: the historical perspective or the modern perspective?

Or are you saying that you think we should be able to mix our interpretive strategies as long as it suits our argument? If that's what you are saying, then the argument that the first extends to all modern media, but the second limits "arms" to those arms possessed by "family men" would be just as correct as any other.

Curious.

MidWest CrossFit Challenge was GREAT!
Thanks Ricky and Joe! You've got a great group.

Did CFT Today

BS - 195# SP - 81# DL - 245#

F/29/155

Crap.

Now I really have to think. (That was the point of Heston's speech, yes?)

How about a 'broader' group of people?

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Are you saying this is an adverbial dependent clause?
If not it wouldn’t be a subordinate clause. It would be dependent.

It might help my argument marginally to claim they are independent but I can’t place a period intelligently to make the case.

What I really want to argue is that a militia consists of a well armed citizenry. The National Guard is not the militia.

In addition to defining the ‘people’ how about we define “the security of a free state”? What is a state? What makes it free? And what are we securing it from? Invasion or encroachment by the state?

#67 and #78 (Mark) - I will not attempt to sway you with my opinions because you write with the style of someone who thinks they already know everything. But I will fill you in on a little secret: I live and work with people who have left their high-paying jobs and their families in order to serve in the U.S. Military. They do so out of a sense of duty - a concept you are obviously unfamiliar with. You will probably sneer at this and call them “fools” but that's OK because all of those fools who understand duty, honor and commitment will defend you in spite of it.

A lot of people state that owning a gun is a right. Well, what if we made that right a privilege much like voting. I read somewhere that there are approximately 600 million fireamrs in America (enough for everyone to own two). that's alot of guns. Has anyone ever been to a gun show? It is not hard in America for someone to get a gun, and unfortunately that means that both good and bad people are armed. Which is a major argument that responsible gun owners use, i.e. the need to protect themselves from armed criminals. What if there were laws governing the amont of weapons produced/sold and who could buy them. I know there are laws like that now (in regards to who can have a conceled weapon), but with the amount of weapons produced each year, it is still easy for the wrong people to get guns. If we tied repsonsible gun ownership laws to production quotas, we might see less gun deaths each year. And to reply to those who state that criminals will find a way to assualt people even if they do not have a gun, I would say that I like my chances against almost any weapon other than a gun. Someone armed with anything other than a gun would have to catch me to kill me...

The Gift: I am saying that the historical facts highlight the intent of the amendment. In order that the government remains subordinate to the people, the government must not possess the whole of the power in the country. Ask yourself if we would be better off if there was no private firearms ownership.

Comment #100 - The Gift

Actually, if you take an all-encompassing historical view, the musket was the standard infantry weapon when the Constitution was ratified. It seems obvious that the "arms" the second amendment is talking about should be viewed in an abstract sense and necessarily encompasses whatever the modern equivalent may be.

Incidentally, since you brought up common law in a previous post, I think it is worthwhile to consider the English historical precedent for the second amendment. It's also illuminating to consider the obvious motivations whenever the English government chose to limit the people's access to weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

admittedly, wikipedia isn't always the most reliable and non-biased of sources. I'm not historian enough to dispute the facts laid out in this article but based on what's here I have to side with Mr Heston on the gun issue.

The Founding Fathers, in their wisdom, provided a means to change the constitution if and when its provisions proved to be outdated or otherwise undesirable. This would be the only legal way to curb the public's access to firearms and would seem far preferable to chipping away at the Second Amendment by successive reinterpretation in opposition to what the Founding Fathers intended. Why, do you suppose, that hasn't happened?

Incidentaly, there is also an internal link describing the "ablative absolute" which hopefully settles the grammar question. Not that it really adds anything to the argument, other than giving us another obscure piece of jargon to throw around and further confuse the discussion.

I highly recommend reading "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross. It's one h&ll of a 2nd amendment cookbook.

I also highly recommend disobedience.

I think this rest day conversation may be an appropriate time to voice a thought I had a couple weeks ago while visiting the local Cabela's. On that particular Saturday they happened to be hosting a gun show, where folks could "buy, sell, trade" various firearms. After perusing the collection they had there for a couple hours, my buddies and I decided to head home. On our way out the door we passed several individuals who were entering the store with their firearms to sell or trade. Just then a thought crossed my mind: I've never heard of a shooting (like those in recent history at college campuses) at a gun show. I mean, several hundred people, just as many guns... isn't this a disaster just waiting to happen? Or maybe it's the fact that many of those shopping there that day probably have concealed weapons licenses and were packing their favorite hand gun.

The element of deterrence is often left out of the argument when discussing the right of the civilian population to keep and bear arms; guns don't necessarily need to be fired to be effective, their mere presence (real or perceived) can cause a nut job to think twice.

Good point, LisBeth. I'm not in it for the money and really don't know anyone who is.

Comment #104 Dave

Production quotas!?!? Did you pull that straight out of Marx or is it from a derivative text? Yikes dude.

I was at the Bill Goodman's Gun and Knife show a few weeks back and a couple gang-stars came strolling in to buy ammo. They needed help 'identifying' 7.62x39. I was like, "you're kidding me." They had NO idea what it looked like, but they wanted to buy bulk. When they pulled out that wad of cash, the seller was tripping all over himself to help them out.

Can anyone opposed to an expansive reading of the Second Amendment approvingly site an example in which the Supreme Court used a strictly literal and/or grammatical reading of the Constitution to limit a right; or, in the alternative, disapprovingly site an example in which the Supreme Court used an expansive reading of the Constitution to create or expand a right?

To put the question more clearly, other than the right to bear arms, is there any other right constitutional right that liberals would like to see reduced in scope.

Why is it that coach only points out articles on misinformed liberals, does he believe that all liberals don't think, don't research in-depth enough, and or are all weak minded. If so then what does he think of George W. Bush or a Donald Rumsfeld.

If modern day liberals are more like socialists and socialism is a natural progression to an Oligarchy than aren't modern day conservatives are more like fascists and fascism is a natural progression to a Monarchy. I call modern day conservatives, fascist on the basis of that we are in a war brought on us by reckless nationalism.

I don't mean to attack coach, but I find it poignant to freely speak my mind after reading Mr. Heston's speech.

Also, for those wanting to rid the world of handguns, shotguns, rifles, and military ordinance, just how would something on this grand scale be operated? Seriously, that would be one heckuva line reaching around the block...

I'm not volunteering my personal possessions to be destroyed by the government, and I am 1) a liberal, and 2) a law abiding citizen of our country (no, that's not an oxymoron- HA ahead of time). It's real easy to think altruistic thoughts of happiness and kindness, but dastards aren't going to give up their weapons. So, me not being a dastard, and yes, that's my opinion of myself, I'm not giving up my personal protection for some government piece of paper stating "We'll protect you".

Now if it were ammo that were made illegal... but crap, there you'd have a nice black market, and since the government CAN'T keep crack or heroine or Mary Jane off the streets (well, ixnay that last one), who the crap is going to be dolt enough to believe that argument? And no, ha-ha-ha, not us commonsense libtards would believe that one either.

Guns are here to stay, and I for one certainly don't want to rely on our respond-and-not-prevent orientated police force for my protection. It’s not their fault; they can be sued just like anyone else, so I'll rely on them for EMT services and such. It's my responsibility and no one else's to defend and protect my interests, personal property, and the personal safety of myself, loved ones, and livestock (dang Clayton coyotes!).

K, I am climbing down off my petty soap box. Hope I elicited at least one laugh. : )

#111 Hari

I've got one the other way around. The decision in Roe vs. Wade was the result of an expansive interpretation of the Fourth Amendment which resulted in an increased scope.

I don't want to delve into THAT argument when there is plenty to argue about with Amendment 2 so I'm not going to proffer an opinion on the ruling. Still you've made an interesting point. Liberals are perfectly happy with an extremely broad interpretation when it comes to the abortion question. Why not with guns?

Attended the Mesa Level 1 cert. this weekend. Absolutely awesome. How inspiring and motivational it was to see and listen to the founding father of CrossFit, Coach Glassman, in person. The line-up of coaches was top-notch. Jolee, Speal, Todd, Lisa, Steve, and the rest were patient, strict, and great to be around. Thanks to MFD and the CrossFit staff for a great weekend and an opportunity to network with other CrossFit junkies.

James #113,

Nah, stay on your soapbox dude. I love it when liberals start talking sense; it doesn't happen often but when it does... poetry!

To "The Gift" and the other gentleman who referred to gun owners as, "you gun nuts".

I don't need to be eloquent or a scholar on this point. Right now, I can own a gun. Right now, I do own a gun. If that bothers you, tough.

If you don't want to own a gun, that's fine. Don't. You have the right not to, if you so choose. I have the right to do so if I choose, and I am exercising that right.

You and your liberal buddies may one day succeed in making it illegal for me to do so. If you do, I will do EXACTLY as Mr. Heston suggested...I will disobey. I'm confident many of my fellow "gun nuts" will do the same.

And so, much as the Persians experienced while attempting to face down the Spartans at Thermopylae, you will have to "come and get them." And you will discover that all your liberal grandstanding and alleged moral superiority provides very little in the way of cover.

Good luck with that.

Thanks to everyone at the Decatur cert! I learned tons more than I expected and met some of the most amazing people of my life. I can't wait to up the intensity of my own workouts and start planning when to attend another cert!

Also, looking forward to seeing Mike's pole skills up on the blog.

Here is the transcript from DC vs. Heller
(wfs)
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/07-290.pdf

Also here is a portion of the findings from the Foundation of Moral Law in response to the question of the 2nd Amendnment being an individual right.

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
1. Whether the following provisions—D.C. Code §§
7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02—violated
the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are
not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who
wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private
use in their homes?

from page 17...
Tench Coxe, “Remarks on the First Part of the
Amendments to the Federal Constitution,”
Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, at 2,
quoted in Halbrook, at 126 (emphasis added). Coxe
noted the familiar fear of tyrannical government and
cited the amendment’s “confirmation” of an individual
right to bear “private arms” as the remedy to the
possible perversion of power. Coxe’s “Remarks” were
reprinted in other papers5 and no contemporary took
up a pen to refute his interpretation.
III. THE TEXT OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT
RECOGNIZES AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO KEEP
AND BEAR ARMS.
While the final wording of the amendment differed
from Madison’s proposal, the meaning Coxe gleaned
from Madison’s version remained unchanged through
the drafting process. The focus remained squarely on
checking government power via a personal right to
keep and bear arms.
In its final form, the Second Amendment would be
listed separate from the Constitution in the collection
of amendments known as “the Bill of Rights.” The
Second Amendment provides:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the
security of a free State, the right of the people to
keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
U.S. Const. amend. II. The Statutes at Large version
of the amendment leaves out the first and last
commas, see 1 The Public Statutes at Large of the
5 New York Packet, June 23, 1789, at 2; Boston
Massachusetts Centinel, July 4, 1789, at 1.
18
United States of America 97 (R. Peters ed., 1848), as
reprinted in CBR at 181, indicating that the second
comma was grammatically necessary to set off the two
major parts of the amendment, while the other
commas represented grammatical quirks of the time.
Reading the amendment sans its superfluous
commas—“[a] well regulated Militia being necessary to
the security of a free State, the right of the people to
keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed”—more
cleanly illustrates a second, weightier point of
grammar. The clause containing the militia language
is a dependent clause, while the arms-bearing
language is located in the independent clause—as it
was in Madison’s proposed, but differently ordered,
version. This means that the arms-bearing language
can stand on its own as a sentence, but the “well
regulated militia” language only forms a complete
thought if coupled with the main focus of the
compound sentence—the “right to keep and bear
arms.”
The sentence structure confirms what the history
behind the amendment indicates:
The plain language of the amendment, without
attenuate inferences therefrom, shows that the
function of the subordinate clause was not to
qualify the right, but instead to show why it must
be protected. The right exists independent of the
existence of the militia. If this right were not
protected, the existence of the militia, and
consequently the security of the state, would be
jeopardized.

Sorry so long. You can read it all at...
http://www.nraila.org/heller/proamicusbriefs/07-290_amicus_foundationformorallaw.pdf

(wfs)

I don't understand what he's saying. He wants free speech and doesn't want someone telling him what to think, but he forced Time/Warner to not sell Ice-T's album because he didn't like what Ice-T had to say?

He wants free expression, so long as it's not cross dressers dressing up in public?

"Chuck, how dare you speak your mind. You are using language not authorized for public consumption!" becomes "Ice-T/transvestite, how dare you speak your mind. You are using language not authorized for public consumption!"

This is one problem with the strong version of the anti-political correctness argument is that it can be just as stifling as the strong version of the policital correctness argument itself.

#67 Mark...

And for anyone else who wants to see some controversial media...

Watch "No end on sight" and "Zeitgeist"

I felt that there was a lot of truth in those two movies, and I'm sure many will feel that there is a lot of false info too. Watch and be the judge.

I must admit that I respect Heston a little bit more after reading that but it doesn't change what he stands for. As a Canadian I really have a hard time understanding the facination that so many Americans have with owning guns and why there is even a conversation on being able to so easily attain them. Who says you have a right to have a gun in your house that your 16 year kid can pick up and put to use when he gets bullied at school?

Regardless I did enjoy reading his speach.

The Pie, Crossfit Vancouver.

#78 Mark,

Not wanting to launch into a irrational tirade such as you so kindly provided, a little piece of personal info. I got commissioned in the Army Reserves after grad school. I didn't receive any sign-on bonus or compensation other than the honor of serving my country and putting on the uniform. I will be deploying again to Iraq in July, a venture which I welcome openly and by the way, take a substantial paycut to do so. You are for certain entitled to your opinions as they are a right that so many great individuals have provided for you. However, while you may not agree with the war, all you need to say is "thank you" to those that serve in your place.

I have very conservative values yet I find myself more and more drawn to libertarianism. I've already informed my wife that if either of the Democratic candidates gets elected then she will have to wait to get a new car since that money will be going towards my 2nd Amendment defense fund.

78 & 98

A note on military service: I left a higher-paying contractor to serve and I know many more who've done the same. There aren't any bonuses for intel officers or cryptos that I know of, though there are some for those with very technical specialties, such as engineering. Of course, there is a very generous raise at O-3, when most individuals' active duty service commitment ends. For the enlisted folk in specific specialties, there are significant bonuses. As I understand it, they are intended to prevent members from leaving the service for contractors and other agencies where they can make much higher wages for their experience and clearances. In either case, these individuals are still serving their country.

#112 It must have hurt really bad when you fell off the turnip truck when you say things like. . .

"Why is it that coach only points out articles on misinformed liberals, does he believe that all liberals don't think, don't research in-depth enough, and or are all weak minded. If so then what does he think of George W. Bush or a Donald Rumsfeld.

If modern day liberals are more like socialists and socialism is a natural progression to an Oligarchy than aren't modern day conservatives are more like fascists and fascism is a natural progression to a Monarchy. I call modern day conservatives, fascist on the basis of that we are in a war brought on us by reckless nationalism"

I am not neccesarily for the war, but to say that it is a fascist war based on reckless nationalism is just plain wrong. If you believe otherwise, I would like to hear your definitions of nationalism and fascism if you are going to prove me otherwise. Furthermore, I hate to sound like the radical libertarian of the group, but the left would squander our personal freedoms all in the name of society long before those on the right would. (although unfortunately, those on the right would do it in the name of "security"). But what I am saying is that the real threat to freedom that would be akin to "fascism" may come from the left in the form of rampant big government, stealing from peter to pay paul policies, and the whole abundance of generally ridiculous ideas that come from the left in America.

Response to #98 Lisbeth Darsh

Excellent response, and absolutely right on! It would be idiotic to think that soldiers re-enlist for money. “Hoodlm” asked the question, and I just felt like he needed some kind of answer. I can only guess that there are hundreds of different reasons that soldiers re-enlist. It seems likely that they re-enlist for some of the same reasons that they joined in the first place. It also seems likely that those who do not re-enlist have hundreds of reasons for making a different choice.

I am encouraging you to THINK, just as Mr. Heston was trying to get the Harvard grads to think.

Why is Hoodlm asking that question? Why do you wonder if I have served? Wonder if I talked to the people? Wonder if I have been there?

Would that make it all true? Would that make my propaganda real for you? Don’t be a sucker. That is exactly the game that BUSH is playing.

“Hey, everybody. I know some guys who went there, and they say we need to stay and WIN.”

Why? Because it’s a football game? We have to get more touchdowns than the other guy, then we can come home?

Why? We need to WIN against the bad guys, who want to hurt us?

Five years have gone by, and I am supposed to believe that those bad guys have not hurt us because we have kept them so pre-occupied with Iraq that they could not find Austin or San Francisco or Knoxville. I am supposed to believe that if we do not stay there and WIN, then the bad guys will hop on their boats and planes and start landing in my backyard.

That kind of thinking is the thinking of a child, and that is how the government likes you to behave.

No, I have not been in the military. I am the son of a 20-year military officer, a decorated war veteran. What difference does it make what I have done or not done?

I am responsible for THINKING for myself and examining the information that is in front of me. Think about the facts that you know. Look at what is in front of you. Before the war in Iraq, was Iraq anything more than a boogie man that might get you if you fell asleep. We were not asleep. We were duped.

I have not spoken to the Iraqi people, and I have not visited Iraq.

However, I did hear on television that they were shooting at Americans and blowing Americans up with bombs. Seems like maybe the Iraqis are trying to tell the occupying Americans something by those acts.

You did not ask me if I have been to Africa, where America ignores genocide, where America ignores massive health and nutrition needs. Why isn’t that question asked? I think it is not asked because the government propaganda says don’t ask that question, and if you hear it asked, then don’t listen to the answer.

Just as the government/big oil/war machine cronies/BUSH does not want you to think about the SUN!, and how it shines and is full of energy and heats the planet, and heats and heats and heats and radiates and is full of so much more energy than the fossil muck that we keep relying on.

The SUN is not going anywhere. If America wants to be a leader, solve the solar energy dilemma. Give everyone access to the sun. Let the sun power us. When Kennedy said we are going to put a man on the moon, look at how quickly it was done, and look at how much less technology and wisdom existed at that time. The SUN is not going anywhere. It will be hot tomorrow. Wake up to the SUN.

Yep...let there be light!

Reply to #122 Brian
I absolutely honor your service in DEFENSE of America and my family and myself. I would be naive to think that the American military is being used in a DEFENSIVE action in Iraq. American is an occupier there. If the world were threatened in the way that BUSH wants us to believe, I think the leaders and people of many other countries in the world would rally around the cause. BUSH wants America to believe that he is LEADING, and to believe that is the reason why there are thousands and thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq, while other nations stand idly by. In truth, others recognize the sovereignty of the Iraqi people and their lands and their oil.

I honor the service of every soldier willing to die for this country, but I grieve for the soldier who cannot recognize when the leader that he is sworn to obey has led him him to offend the sovereignty and rights of another nation under the guise of defense.

#121

The debate exists because of the historical roots of America. The right to protect yourself from others and the government is a common law tenet that goes back to Blackstone's laws in England. Furthermore, if you look at the general decline of other states throughout history, disarmament has been a consistent feature. Think about it, how hard is it to coerce people in a state who are not armed. If there were ever an oppressive government, or a attack from abroad on our soil, I would say America would have a pretty good chance with our 600 Million guns.

Also, it goes back to what I said about self defense. Private property is a major tenet of American Law. (if liberals had there way this wouldn't be true, society would be centrally planned out the wazoo- just had to throw that in) . Therefore, the right to protect you property and the things in is crucial.

I have the same thoughts you do about gun-nuts, and unreasonable demagogues on the issue, BUT, if you truly look into the background of the debate, why it takes place, and what it means in the broader scope of history, it becomes much more than just a bunch of "gun-nuts" arguing about their cherished right.

However, I would say that it bothers me that the gun faction fights so hard for the 2nd amendment while our others are constantly trampled on. They put speech, religion, and press as #1 for a reason, and gun nuts just blab about only the second. I honestly do believe there are some loonies out there on the issue, but I do agree with most of what they say.

What exactly is a "gun nut"? As the term is thrown about alot, I would appreciate a definition from someone who uses the term. Sincere question, curious as to what the boundaries are from a "normal" gun owner and a "gun nut."

#119, Mike, writes,

"I don't understand what [Charlton Heston is] saying. He wants free speech and doesn't want someone telling him what to think, but he forced Time/Warner to not sell Ice-T's album because he didn't like what Ice-T had to say?"

He did not force Time Warner to do anything. He simply repeated what Ice-T had to say. ("The proper response to bad speech is more speech.") The government did not force Time Warner to act; the marketplace did.

or is a gun nut just someone who believes the 2nd Amend. allows them the right to bear arms?

36/m/193

clean/press
95lbs 15-12-9
10min rest
pullup wod 12 rounds
rest 5min
tabata situps
17-16-14-13-12-13-13-14

CCTJoey, #85
That made me laugh out loud.

Gift, Kevin

At the time the 2nd amendment was written an individual’s right to bear arms was of secondary importance, behind citizens’ rights not to be oppressed by a tyranny maintained by a centralized authority maintained by a standing army, and not to be over-burdened financially by having to support a standing army (these concerns go back through Harrington and Machiavelli all the way to Cicero). This was also tied to a fear that if a professional army were created and citizens no longer contributed to military service, they would have less at stake in civil society, as the ‘burden’ of military service lifted off them they would focus more on wealth creation through commerce and this in turn would corrupt their martial and publicly oriented values. Standing armies required commercial societies able to finance them and commercial societies (so the thinking went) were beholden to luxury, petty appetites, and incapable of maintaining the public virtue that had sustained the great civilization of Rome. The ‘Country Party’ in England, and Jeffersonians in America supported the militia and the classical republican view of society, and through compromise the second amendment was enacted.

But after Louis XIV in France, the Glorious Revolution and then a century (18th) long military contest for empire, and for the US, its civil war, standing armies were necessary. There was no going back.

But, now the US has a standing Army the likes of which Jefferson could never have imagined. Now the US is a commercial society beyond comparison with any the world has seen. It runs the danger of taking the worst of both scenarios: 1) a commercial society corrupted by the thirst for luxury and lacking in public virtue, 2) a militarized society imposing order from and taxing the resources of the citizenry, making the state (and its citizens) addicted to credit to support its costs (this happened to France in the 18thC, and it was this tendency that Rousseau wanted to turn back with his ‘virtue’ and his “general will” that got him into so much trouble with post WWII American historians).

People have guns in the United States not for patriotic reasons, not to make them fully participating, citizens capable of bearing arms to keep America free from foreign invaders – if they want to do that Big Brother will give them a gun.

Barry,
Will wait for the equation of PC with Leninism…I don’t think avoiding ‘niggardly’ where ‘stingy’ will do just fine is the same as being shipped off to Siberia in a box-car. Perhaps being black-listed from a profession for being accused of being communist is on the same spectrum, but then we’re talking about PC’s nasty nasty brother, McCarthyism.

Re: Charlton,

It seems to me he speaks only of snails and tails and puppy-dogs’ tails, and that a little sugar and spice would have made him feel nice. I’m not much of an Ice-T fan myself, but then I don’t like Sports Illustrated for the same reasons (swim-suite issue and now I’m PC).

CCTJoey, #85
That made me laugh out loud.

Gift, Kevin

At the time the 2nd amendment was written an individual’s right to bear arms was of secondary importance, behind citizens’ rights not to be oppressed by a tyranny maintained by a centralized authority maintained by a standing army, and not to be over-burdened financially by having to support a standing army (these concerns go back through Harrington and Machiavelli all the way to Cicero). This was also tied to a fear that if a professional army were created and citizens no longer contributed to military service, they would have less at stake in civil society, as the ‘burden’ of military service lifted off them they would focus more on wealth creation through commerce and this in turn would corrupt their martial and publicly oriented values. Standing armies required commercial societies able to finance them and commercial societies (so the thinking went) were beholden to luxury, petty appetites, and incapable of maintaining the public virtue that had sustained the great civilization of Rome. The ‘Country Party’ in England, and Jeffersonians in America supported the militia and the classical republican view of society, and through compromise the second amendment was enacted.

But after Louis XIV in France, the Glorious Revolution and then a century (18th) long military contest for empire, and for the US, its civil war, standing armies were necessary. There was no going back.

But, now the US has a standing Army the likes of which Jefferson could never have imagined. Now the US is a commercial society beyond comparison with any the world has seen. It runs the danger of taking the worst of both scenarios: 1) a commercial society corrupted by the thirst for luxury and lacking in public virtue, 2) a militarized society imposing order from and taxing the resources of the citizenry, making the state (and its citizens) addicted to credit to support its costs (this happened to France in the 18thC, and it was this tendency that Rousseau wanted to turn back with his ‘virtue’ and his “general will” that got him into so much trouble with post WWII American historians).

People have guns in the United States not for patriotic reasons, not to make them fully participating, citizens capable of bearing arms to keep America free from foreign invaders – if they want to do that Big Brother will give them a gun.

Barry,
Will wait for the equation of PC with Leninism…I don’t think avoiding ‘niggardly’ where ‘stingy’ will do just fine is the same as being shipped off to Siberia in a box-car. Perhaps being black-listed from a profession for being accused of being communist is on the same spectrum, but then we’re talking about PC’s nasty nasty brother, McCarthyism.

Re: Charlton,

It seems to me he speaks only of snails and tails and puppy-dogs’ tails, and that a little sugar and spice would have made him feel nice. I’m not much of an Ice-T fan myself, but then I don’t like Sports Illustrated for the same reasons (swim-suite issue and now I’m PC).

CCT Joey, #85
That made me laugh out loud.

Gift, Kevin

At the time the 2nd amendment written an individual’s right to bear arms was of secondary importance, behind citizens’ rights not to be oppressed by a tyranny maintained by a centralized authority maintained by a standing army, and not to be over-burdened financially by having to support a standing army (these concerns go back through Harrington and Machiavelli all the way to Cicero). This was also tied to a fear that if a professional army were created and citizens no longer contributed to military service, they would have less at stake in civil society, as the ‘burden’ of military service lifted off them they would focus more on wealth creation through commerce and this in turn would corrupt their martial and publicly oriented values. Standing armies required commercial societies able to finance them and commercial societies (so the thinking went) were beholden to luxury, petty appetites, and incapable of maintaining the public virtue that had sustained the great civilization of Rome. The ‘Country Party’ in England, and Jeffersonians in America supported the militia and the classical republican view of society, and through compromise the second amendment was enacted.

But after Louis XIV in France, the Glorious Revolution and then a century (18th) long military contest for empire, and for the US, its civil war, standing armies were necessary. There was no going back.

But, now the US has a standing Army the likes of which Jefferson could never have imagined. Now the US is a commercial society beyond comparison with any the world has seen. It runs the danger of taking the worst of both scenarios: 1) a commercial society corrupted by the thirst for luxury and lacking in public virtue, 2) a militarized society imposing order from and taxing the resources of the citizenry, making the state (and its citizens) addicted to credit to support its costs (this happened to France in the 18thC, and it was this tendency that Rousseau wanted to turn back with his ‘virtue’ and his “general will” that got him into so much trouble with post WWII American historians).

People have guns in the United States not for patriotic reasons, not to make them fully participating, citizens capable of bearing arms to keep America free from foreign invaders – if they want to do that Big Brother will give them a gun.

Barry,
Will wait for the equation of PC with Leninism…I don’t think avoiding ‘niggardly’ where ‘stingy’ will do just fine is the same as being shipped off to Siberia in a box-car. Perhaps being black-listed from a profession for being accused of being communist is on the same spectrum, but then we’re talking about PC’s nasty nasty brother, McCarthyism.

Re: Charlton,

It seems to me he speaks only of snails and tails and puppy-dogs’ tails. I’m not much of an Ice-T fan myself, but then I don’t like Sports Illustrated for the same reasons (swim-suite issue and now I’m PC).

Mark,

I missed your response to my question. Why does the government of Iraq keep voting for us to stay? You say "Iraqis" are shooting at us. Are you one of those benighted racists who think all "darkies" think the same, and are utterly unable to distinguish between cultural patterns and motives? Do you simply think they are inferior, and not worth the support of an enlightened power?

The soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines who keep going back seem to think otherwise. Having rubbed elbows and drank chai with them, they believe the cause of peace in Iraq worth fighting for, and even dying for.

You, on the other hand, likely believe nothing. Like all leftists, you are a crypto-nihilist. This is the very point of leftist assaults on reason: to destroy all meaning patterns except those which support the subordination of the individual to the State. You want to conform, because you lack the courage to use the freedom braver men than you died to create and protect.

I'll wait for your answer to my question. It is a valid and relevant question. I expect you to sidestep it, and launch into some sort of irrelevant diatribe whose sole purpose is distraction, and not rational debate.

#78

Mark, very well put. I suppose I'll keep contracting a bit so I can continue to serve and get back some of my money I pay in taxes to fund the war machine. There is profit in chaos.

#124 Please don't throw anymore Johnny Carson references my way

Nationalism- is a term referring to a doctrine[1] or political movement[2] that holds that a nation, usually defined in terms of ethnicity or culture, has the right to constitute an independent or autonomous political community based on a shared history and common destiny

Fascism- is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers the individual subordinate to the interests of the state, party or society as a whole. Fascists seek to forge a type of national unity, usually based on (but not limited to) ethnic, cultural, racial, and/or religious attributes.

After 9/11 the country became united. If you recall there were a lot of people who threw away differences and people all thorugh out the media expressed how much they loved America (with the exception of Bill Maher....before anyone says anything I don't like Bill Maher but he did speak out). This resulted in an increase of people enlisting in the military. Then with 85% approval rating George Bush takes the country into Iraq.
Now looking back at it many people regret their decision to support the war. 9/11 created an unbelievable amount of nationalism that are conservative power holding government took advantage of in a fascist way.

All that being said I know that the war was started over various reasons. My point that modern day conservatives are more like fascists and fascism is a natural progression to a Monarchy was actually a response to a post I saw a while ago from coach. It pissed me off that he only picks out idiots on the left and leaves out idiots on the right.

#135, Prole, writes,

"People have guns in the United States not for patriotic reasons, not to make them fully participating, citizens capable of bearing arms to keep America free from foreign invaders – if they want to do that Big Brother will give them a gun."

Since when does exercising a constitutional right require a patriotic motive?

#125 (Mark):

The word "no" would have sufficed.

I would offer that your need to explain this choice in your life in 16 paragraphs, however, was very revealing, whether you intended it to be or not.

Hari 139

Exercising a constitutional right does not require a patriotic motive. But when people attack the fact that American's have that (expansive) right, the Americans who like that right sometimes support it by pointing to it's role in keeping them free and America strong. They don't usually say that the second amendment is good because it's the second amendment.

I don't think the rate of gun-ownership (and gun homicide) has anything to do with American's liberty or the strength of their nation. I those things are supported by Americans' love of material wealth, their ability to produce it, and their tremendous standing army.

As a candidate for a right that some liberals do interpret expansively we could look to property rights?

What is the difference between a liberal and a sack of manure?

The sack of course!