Goodbye Mr. Heston
Posted Fri Apr 11, 2008 in
Ruminations
Charlton Heston died this week. He was a good man and a spokesman for freedom.
For many years, I thought his “from my cold dead hands” sound bite was a little extreme. However, in retrospect, any cry, no any insistence of freedom must sound a little extreme. We are a nation born of extremists who chose rebellion and combat, at great personal cost, in exchange for the right to make decisions for themselves. We need a few more extremists to carry the cry of freedom at any cost.
Freedom of speech and freedom of arms are the foundations of a free nation. Without these two basics, oppression occurs. They are worth fighting for to keep.
Goodbye, Mr. Heston. Thank you for reminding me of the importance of basic freedoms.
To support your thesis I submit the Thomas Jefferson was quite an extremist in the fight for liberty. Consider this famous quote: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the Blood of Patriots and tyrants it is it’s natural manure.”
— Jim 11 April 2008, 15:24 #Because I’m making admissions, I should also admit that I used to think the use of weapons, particularly firearms, for personal defense was somehow wrong. When I purchased my very first handgun over thirty years ago, it was in part of provide a weapon should I have to defend house and family. It was also a sporting arm and could be (and was) used for hunting. But when I applied for the background check to make the purchase, I was perplexed about listing all of the reasons for my purchase. So, I simply listed “sporting” on the application.
My application was approved and three days later I had my very first handgun — a Ruger Blackhawk in .357 Magnum. It wasn’t a pretty weapon but it was an excellent shooter.
My point is that we need individuals to take an extreme position on personal freedom. That is the foundation of this country. Those basic freedoms are eroding in the face of “safety” or “security.” Neither of those things belong to the government to give — we earn them by being citizens of this country and by exerting and protecting those rights.
I was wrong to think that personal defense is not a valid use of weapons. Defense of country is simply an extension of personal defense and no one denies that we, as a county, have a right to self defense. What was I thinking?
It can be no other way. We, each of us, must be willing to fight to preserve those rights.
— ruminator 11 April 2008, 20:54 #I agree wholeheartedly on the subject of personal protection- but to me the reason for the existence of Article II of the bill of rights has less to do with that than it has to do with the ability of the populace to rest control of their lives back from despotism. Government should rightfully always live in fear of the governed- not vice versa. Consequently, the relationship between agents of bureaucracy and advocates of freedom is always adversarial. Even the smallest infringment should be fought tooth and nail.
I’ve been an NRA member simce I was 14. I haven’t always agreed with the tenor of the campaigns- I’m very cautious of appearing to be hysterical. My monetery support has waned as Wayne LaPierre has made it his personal political phayground, but without it we would be unarmed and at the mercy of despots even more than we are.
— Dazed n Confused 13 April 2008, 05:40 #I’m in total agreement. My focus was on personal defense because that’s something that’s been on my mind a lot over the last few years. However, it isn’t a big stretch beyond personal defense to preservation of the nation from both internal and external enemies, and vice versa.
My opinion is that the two, personal freedom and personal defense, are so intertwined with restriction of government as to be inextricable. Without personal freedom, there are no means for personal defense (beyond improvised weapons) and hence no means to keep the government accountable. Without a credible threat of physical check on overextension of government authority, the constitution becomes nothing but a piece of paper. I think the founding fathers’ intent was to retain the mechanics for rebellion should the federal government become oppressive in the way they had just experienced with England. They came here to escape that oppression and found that it followed them. So, when that yoke was removed they did their best to create a document to recognize those fundamental rights.
Now after 200 years, we (the people) have little idea what they did and what they tried to do for us, their children. So here we are, throwing away those freedoms so hard fought in the name of security.
Crap, this turned into an article of its own! I found myself thinking, just yesterday, that we are doomed. No nation holds its prime more than a couple hundred years. They are either conquered or collapse into narcissism. Because of our relative isolation, it will be difficult for an external party to conquer us, therefore we continue our slide into self-absorption to the point that the sense of community is lost, self rules, and we will lose any sense of personal freedom.
I might not see that, nor might my children. But, I’m afraid my grandkids might.
I read an interview with Louis Awerbuck last night. He’s completely disillusioned with humans. Maybe that’s a hazard of duty for men in his line of work. But I’ve been thinking about the law of entropy, as well as my personal beliefs, and have to agree that I think you’re right — the system will wind down, probably sooner rather than later. Maybe the environmentalists are right — humans are a pestilence on this planet that should be eliminated sooner rather than later.
I have a feeling we’ll take care of that just fine without any external intervention.
— ruminator 13 April 2008, 07:50 #I clicked in to say that I am probably the only one who remembers Mr. Heston for his role in Soylent Green than as Moses or an Ape’s hostage. However, I admired him for his stance on guns and freedom as well.
I take exception to the environmentalist comment because my dear hubby considers himself such because his backgound, profession and passion is to save the land so to speak…but he is NOT a tree hugger! Pestilence indeed is in the form of humans who’ve twisted and infected the minds of many we’ve failed to educate on said matters, whether it be environment of nature or simply how one protects themselves within their own domain. I won’t go further as to the road kill we allow within our country for destructive reasons to be allowed more rights than those of us who proclaim this our HOME.
I have to disagree. I think we Americans were reared to be “too nice”—but I also think when we get our back up, will kick butt and take names.
Then the natural manure will begin to restore the land and the forests as it should be.
This is a time we cannot sit back and expect it to get better. We will have to get “extreme.”
Wow. Did I mention I didn’t think much of Heston as an actor but he was a great man. :-)
— alisa 17 April 2008, 09:10 #I remember Soylent Green — it’s one of my favorite stories and the movie wasn’t bad either. I believe he co-starred with Edgar G. Robinson, who played an excellent role.
I’m glad my devil’s advocate tack caused someone to take exception to my words. Thanks for dropping by! ;)
— ruminator 17 April 2008, 11:13 #