Second Amendment Right? Or Paranoia?

by lewwaters

On Monday, July 19, 2010 the Columbian posted an interesting blog post on their Political Beat blog, Hedrick brings ‘heat’ to Stranger interview, referencing a video and interview from Seattle’s alternative media, the Stranger, Which Congressional Candidate Brought a Gun to The Stranger Yesterday?

Watching the video, I initially thought, “big deal, the guy has a concealed carry permit and carries a gun.” I admit that reading about the kids’ theater incident sounds a bit contrived and although I strongly support the Second Amendment and concealed carry with the proper permit, and that I wouldn’t carry a firearm into a kid’s movie, he does have a legal concealed carry permit.

Unless the theater bars guns, it is legal to carry, even if not the smartest thing a parent would do with his kids.

But, something didn’t set well with me. Something just didn’t sound right to me.

Admittedly, I do not support Hedrick in his congressional run, even though I supported him in standing up to Brian Baird last August. I even have questions that remain unanswered concerning his service in the US Marine Corps and disability claimed. But none of that entered my mind as I watched the video over and over trying to figure out what did not set well with me.

After a few viewings, it dawned on me what it was. If you didn’t pick up on it, watch again and pay attention towards the end of the video, after Hedrick tells the interviewer that they have a legal right to bar guns on their private property.

He states that he would not be there doing the interview in person, but it would be by phone, had they barred his carrying a gun into the interview.

The second amendment is a very serious right that carries with it grave responsibility. Concealed Carry, under current laws, is a privilege not to be taken lightly. I strongly support both, but also feel such a responsibility must be tempered with some good old fashioned common sense.

Much like holding a security clearance in the Military, having the clearance isn’t enough; you must also have “the need to know.”

As Hedrick even shows in the story about the incident at the children’s movie, it is extremely rare to need to pull a gun if you are carrying. However, the likelihood of actually needing your gun, although slim, can be real at any given moment.

But, to indicate that if you may not carry on someone’s private property, their legal right, you, a candidate for federal office, would not do an in person interview? It would be only by telephone?

Such a comment comes across to me as paranoia, or a young man still trying to prove to himself that he is a man, with little clue what manhood is really about.

I have to believe that he received adequate training in the safe and proper handling of rifles while in Basic Training and AIT, since he did serve a short while in the US Marine Corps, even if he is tight lipped about that service other than making his rank held central to his campaign, but I also wonder if that attitude of “no gun, no in person interview” extends to other venues, such as political forums or school functions with his children?

I wonder because RCW 9.41.280 prohibits firearms “in a public or private school building,” except under some strict exemptions.

To me, given his comment in the video, it would only seem logical that he would not attend school plays or PTA Meetings concerning his own children unless he was armed either.

I can only hope that this is not the case and that he obeys the law concerning concealed carry on school grounds and buildings, leaves it home or properly locked in his car and is there for his children.

There are those that see no problem with his carrying a concealed weapon to an interview. If not for the comment of “no gun, no in person interview,” neither would I.

But, that one little comment, giving us a glimpse into the mind of a candidate for office, leaves me feeling like he might just be too immature or too paranoid to be elected to office.

7 Comments to “Second Amendment Right? Or Paranoia?”

  1. Disclaimer: I *do* support Hedrick for US Congress.

    I can’t speak for Hedrick, but I didn’t get the impression that he was “paranoid” but rather would rather not support an establishment that wouldn’t respect the second amendment. At least, I know that is how I feel. If you can’t carry legally someplace, that is one thing, but it is a right to choose not to go some place that is anti-gun.

    As for not carrying to a “kid’s movie”, realize that those (thank God) rare times where a firearm would be necessary cannot be predicted and it may be on the way, on the way out, or, and God forbid, during… but you better be a good shot and know your surroundings in any case. Something I am sure a trained marine would know and be able to do.


  2. Gabe, that’s the great thing bout our country, you may support anyone you wish, regardless of lack of qualifications.

    That you support him is of no consequence, your privilege.

    As for not “not supporting an establishment that does not respect the second amendment,” I’d be careful with that. You could end up with a very narrow group to shop.

    But, his comment said nothing about not supporting an establishment, but indicated he would not have come to an in person interview if they prohibited guns on their premises, a legal right of theirs he acknowledges.

    As for movies and elsewhere, even in Viet Nam, we had to clear and secure our weapons. We did not walk around every where armed nor did we have the luxury of telling the CO that we do not support the Armies policies that we felt violated the second amendment.

    While I am confident he was trained in the proper and safe use of a rifle, he has said nothing about any hand gun training in the Marines. In fact, he continues to say nothing at all about his Marine service, other than we are to accept he was a Marine Corporal and disabled on a “classified mission.”

    I was an Army Sergeant, acting, until I received the actual pay grade promotion to E-5. I actually had to carry a hand gun at times (S&W 38) after Viet Nam, issued to me by the Army.

    Since he remains coy about his service and training, it can only be assumed as to exactly what training he has.

    But, to state you would decline an in person interview unless permitted to be armed, I wonder ow a Teacher/Parent conference would go, since guns are prohibited in schools by state law. (except under some stringent exceptions, none of which I see relating to either him or me)

    As far as those unexpected times go, yes they do happen, rarely. I have been presented with circumstances in my life I’d rather not have, with and without a gun nearby.

    Not once did I actually need to pull the gun out so far.

    But, I have never declined an interview or any in person dealings with someone who exercises their legal right to prohibit a firearm on their premises.

    I am not so paranoid to think I must be armed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.


  3. I missed that comment towards the end of the interview. I’d agree that sounds a weird, but sometimes we all say dumb things. Alternatively, maybe he is privy to things the rest of us aren’t with the local political scene? One tends to expect others to do the same as we do…


  4. Pat, dumb things said on the campaign trail is what keeps some out of office. However, dumb things said concerning a gun concerns me.

    It’s nice if people do and think as I do, but it sure would be a boring world, wouldn’t it?

    I cannot fathom what he could be privy to that the other candidates aren’t, and I haven’t heard of any of them stating they wouldn’t have come for an in person interview if not permitted to bring a gun.


  5. Lew,
    Here is a comment from “Artimus” on today’s Laird opinion:

    “Perhaps the coming Revolution will tear down this corrupted government and get rid of the people that are corrupting it.”

    Another comment I have heard is using the “Second Amendment Solution.”

    To me these comments advocate using force rather than the ballot box to change matters.

    There is a religious tenor to some in this group. Maybe you noticed some of the “code language” used at the meeting of the Council with the citizens at Fort Vancouver High School last Tuesday evening.

    My insight is that some of the local “religious” are providing some impetus/justification to harm others in the name of God. Old Testament stuff. Certainly “graceless” as the New Testament has a different tenor. It is not the usual partisan politics this year.

    (I was involved in the beginning local efforts of the Christian Coalition, several church bodies, Promise Keepers, and Elija House Prayer Counseling so certain language and use and misuse of scripture is very familiar to me. It can be VERY dangerous or VERY helpful.)

    I am not real optimistic we can avoid the 60’s.


  6. Pat, I don’t know who ‘Artimus’ is and although I support the second amendment, I also disagree with such idle talk.

    At one time, I was thinking about it too, but realized it was folly as if it came to that, I would be firing on the very guys and girls I support, our Military Troops.

    It would also be a total failure just due to logistics.

    It also points to why Hedrick’s comment concerns me as it does. I’m sure you will agree, guns are not toys and must be treated with a great deal of respect. People agreeing to carry them should be above all, trustworthy.

    Hedrick’s comment about not doing the interview unless he were armed is only part of what concerns me. To a lesser degree, towards the beginning, he says basically that he moved up here due to our less restrictive gun laws and lower taxes.

    I worry about someone who chooses where to live based upon the ability to carry a gun in an urban environment. This is not Jerkwater, Texas out in the sticks.

    To even lesser degree, I question his choice in guns, the Kahr PM9, which is actually a nice small gun, but in the review, states it is susceptible to jamming until well broken in (over 200 rounds fired).

    I would prefer something I can place more trust in. But, that is my personal preference.

    Enough on Hedrick and his gun.

    I seriously doubt you have anything to worry about from Christian Groups rising up in revolution.

    People talk when they shouldn’t and make others nervous. As I’m sure you realize, it is one thing to say you will shoot, but it is entirely a different matter for most when it comes to actually pulling the trigger.

    I know of your concern with and with U.S. Digital and I don’t think you need to be worried. Religious groups have always been involved in politics to one degree or another. Democrats openly campaign from the pulpit and people like Rev, Jeremiah Wright openly preaches hate against Whites.

    There has been no uprising and none really seen on the horizon.

    Lots of angry rhetoric from individuals and pockets of extremism, but no large scale like we had back in the 1960’s.

    I agree, though. Scripture can be used in various ways, as we see with the extremist Muslim Jihadists. It was also seen in supremacist groups and lately, even politicians like Nancy Pelosi has spoken with scripture to entice people to her agenda.

    People are upset and get mouthy since our voices are not being listened to. As I told you in the email on Fort Vancouver High Forum, it has not even approached the level we saw from the left-winged radicals in the 1960’s or where college students stormed the stage to silence conservative speakers invited to speak at the college.

    This is also why I advocate Jenkins to replace Hansen, to at least have one conservative voice. I’d prefer it was Harris be defeated, but she isn’t up for election this year.


  7. Good comments Lew.

    I hope you are right, but their is a lot of emotion building up in some folks and a tendency to be very simplistic. Our society and technology has gotten very complex and after having been duped by the financial sector several times in the last decade all of us are on edge.

    (If you get the chance read “Amber Waves of Pain” in this week’s Bloomberg Business Week.)


Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: