RON SCHALOW: Who Is The Loneliest Patriot?

This one has been in crisper for weeks and it still feels fresh to me.

So the great patriot whips the bag of snacks to the ground, stomps the delicious Doritos into dust, then pours a can of motor oil on the mess. Because a kooky bill didn’t pass.

“Is there any patriots in the North Dakota House? This pro-gun House Bill 1317 is in sync with the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights, the state Constitution and the North Dakota GOP.

HB 1317 died on the house floor Thursday.

Sometimes I wonder, if we were to declare our independence from Great Britain today, would there be more loyalist in the state capital then patriots?”

This an another Bastiat Boys production. They will shoot down any pesky drones you have for free, so why shoot them down yourself.

Anyway, I won’t say his name, but his Facebook moment of despair might provide a clue, so don’t blame me for you, (Insert lawmaker’s name here) for being so darnadilly famous with the words. Or maybe they are not the most dabbawalla famous words. I have no idea. All of my chips are on margarine, though.

Here’s what HP 1317 called for.:

“Subject to the liability limitations provided in chapters 32 – 12.1 and 32 – 12.2, an owner, lessee, tenant, or occupant of property prohibiting the possession of a firearm or dangerous weapon may be found liable for injury or death caused by a firearm or dangerous weapon on the property.”

This is what I see.

You want to rent an apartment with no pets or pistols rule. It says so on the door. No big deal the normal person would chirp. The other type says, “What’s deal with no pistols anyway, Gramps? It’s infringement.” The owner of apartment building manager returns fire with, “It says no pistols right on the door. Now get the hell out of here. It’s fondue night and I’m out of Velveeta.”


Because the apartment owner forbade Renter 3C from having a gun on the property, he gets murdered. Isn’t that always the way. You can’t get the cable guy before next week, but a masked gunman has next day service. The owner is now liable for the death of Rentor 3C in 3C because he wouldn’t allow Renter 3C to defend himself with a gun. Treycee doesn’t even own a gun.

Is that what it says?

If you don’t let someone on your property such as your 8-year-old son have a gun, you get the blame if he’s not prepared for a firefight with a burglar?

The liability would always be the owner’s responsibility for a deadly encounter if he or she doesn’t allow guns on their property. Period. A school. A school swimming pool. Malls, houses, bowling alleys, movie theaters, and you name it. I hope the gunman will bear some culpability.

This seems to be the attitude that roughly makes sense if you ditch the last eight letters or so.

“He should have armed himself if he’s gonna decorate his saloon with my friend,” said William Munny to Little Bill.

If you kill yourself with your own gun, you’re liable. I think.

Your wife won’t allow guns in the house. So, she’s liable if an intruder hurts one of her family.

If Renter 3C sneaks a gun into the apartment building and kills Renter 4D, the owner is on the hook. There was something fishy about both of them.

What if my German shepherd would have ripped an intruders throat out long before the sneak got to me? Wouldn’t that put the owner at fault for not allowing a dog to protect me? Or an alligator?

What if the owner won’t let me use the ‘Home Alone” technique?

Every legislative session, the “gun advocates” are going to pound another round of gun bills into every crevice until they wear the rest of their colleagues down.

They’ll win some and lose some and demagogue anything resembling safety. Guns equal patriotism to these characters, but these libertarians are confused by many things that aren’t true.

Leave a Reply