Gunfighter: A Modern Warrior's Life

The Stuff That I Get In My Email

You may have already seen this.... this is a letter from someone who is a WW2 veteran... a man who (according to the person to whom he dictated the letter) "Doesn't have a political bone in his body."  It sounds rather political to me, and since it cam through my email, I decided to parse the letter to get a better view of what Mr. Estes is all about.

My remarks will be in bold print.

Preface

This venerable and much honored WW II vet is well known in Hawaii
for his seventy-plus years of service to patriotic organizations and causes
all over the country. A humble man without a political bone in his body,
he has never spoken out before about a government official, until now.
He dictated this letter to a friend, signed it and mailed it to the president.

Dear President Obama,

My name is Harold Estes, approaching 95 on December 13 of this year. People meeting me for the first time don't believe my age because I remain wrinkle free and pretty much mentally alert. (Not really sure about that last point, as you are about to see)

I enlisted in the U.S. Navy in 1934 and served proudly before, during and after WW II retiring as a Master Chief Bos'n Mate. Now I live in a "rest home" located on the western end of Pearl Harbor, allowing me to keep alive the memories of 23 years of service to my country.

One of the benefits of my age, perhaps the only one, is to speak my mind, blunt and direct even to the head man.

(Which means he is about to say stupid things, and that you have to excuse them because he is old)

So here goes.

I am amazed, angry and determined not to see my country die before I do, but you seem hell bent not to grant me that wish.

(Supposition unsupported by facts)

I can't figure out what country you are the president of.

(Because I am old and historically ignorant)

You fly around the world telling our friends and enemies despicable lies like: " We're no longer a Christian nation" (we aren't, and we never were) " America is arrogant"  (we can be)- Your wife even announced to the world,"America is mean-spirited. " (if you don't believe that we can be means-spirited, you haven't been watching the Teabaggers at work, have you?) Please tell her to try preaching that nonsense to 23 generations of our war dead buried all over the globe who died for no other reason than to free a whole lot of strangers from tyranny and hopelessness.

(23 generations?  Mr. Estes needs to do a better job with his math skills.  In any event, suggesting that our nations wars have been about liberation is so much bullshit.  Which ones, sir?  The War of 1812?, The Spanish American war?, the first world war, or the second?  Were those wars about Liberty?  Liberty for whom?  Maybe he meant the Vietnam war.  Iraq?  That was about Liberty?  Again, I ask... for whom?) 

I'd say shame on the both of you, but I don't think you like America, (why? because they aren't you? or is it because they look different than you?) nor do I see an ounce of gratefulness in anything you do, (exactly how should this gratitude be displayed?) for the obvious gifts this country has given you. To be without shame or gratefulness is a dangerous thing for a man sitting in the White House. (Dude, were you senile during the last administration?  Talk about shamelessness)

After 9/11 you said," America hasn't lived up to her ideals."

(Totally out of context.  Everything anyone has said since 9/11 can be considered "after 9/11")

Which ones did you mean? Was it the notion of personal liberty that 11,000 farmers and shopkeepers died for to win independence from the British? (farmers and shopkeepers?  Dude, the War of independence was fought mostly by poor irish and scottish immigrants, transported prisoners, free blacks, and slaves that served so that their masters could go on making money without risking their own skins) Or maybe the ideal that no man should be a slave to another man, that 500,000 men died for in the Civil War?(the civil war had nothing to do with the ideals of liberating slaves.  It was all about smashing the traitorous, seditious rebels back into the Union.  That abolition of slavery was just a weapon) I hope you didn't mean the ideal 470,000 fathers, brothers, husbands, and a lot of fellas I knew personally died for in WWII, because we felt real strongly about not letting any nation push us around, because we stand for freedom.  (OK, this part about WW2 was alright until you got to the "because we stand for freedom" part.  WW2 was a war of national survival.  You probably didn't know that, Mr. Estes, but there it is)

I don't think you mean the ideal that says equality is better than discrimination. You know the one that a whole lot of white people understood when they helped to get you elected. (Right, the majority of the electorate, remember that.  It was YOUR generation, Mr. Estes that fought hardest against the ideal of equality.  You enlisted in the Navy in 1934 and the services were segregated throughout most of your 23 years of service.  You lived a large part of your life in a time where your generation resorted to terrorism to ensure that people who served and fought in the same war that you did, didn't have this "Liberty" "Freedom" and "Equality of which you speak")

Take a little advice from a very old geezer, young man.  Shape up and start acting like an American. (meaning acting like an old, damn near dead white man) If you don't, I'll do what I can to see you get shipped out of that fancy rental on Pennsylvania Avenue. You were elected to lead not to bow, (doing tough, unpopular things like trying to ensure that everyone, not just the wealthy, employed or or old has decent access to medical care IS leading)  apologize and kiss the hands of murderers and corrupt leaders who still treat their people like slaves.(Did this man notice the deep familial ties of the Bush family to the Saudi Kings?  If I remember correctly, 16 of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis)

And just who do you think you are telling the American people not to jump to conclusions and condemn that Muslim major who killed 13 of his fellow soldiers and wounded dozens more. (I suppose Mr. Obama was thinking like a leader, so that mobs wouldn't form and become violent towards Americans who are followers of Islam.  You know those Muslims who seek liberty, equality, and freedom, that you mentioned before.  Oh.  Wait, you don't think Muslims are real Americans, either, do you?)  You mean you don't want us to do what you did when that white cop used force to subdue that black college professor in Massachusetts, who was putting up a fight? (but he wasn't jumping to conclusions, the cop in the incident did act stupidly) You don't mind offending the police calling them stupid (I'm a policeman, I know better than President Obama that cops can be stupid.  I see it every day)  but you don't want us to offend Muslim fanatics (who said anything about fanatics?) by calling them what they are, terrorists.(not all fanatics are terrorists... given the fanatical tone of your letter, one would, using your own logic, have to call YOU a terrorist.)

One more thing. I realize you never served in the military and never had to defend your country with your life (no American has fought to protect this country since 1945.  ALL of our combat deaths since then have been about American "interests".  Those two things are not the same.) , but you're the Commander-in-Chief now, son. (son? really?) Do your job. (he is) When your battle-hardened field General asks you for 40,000 more troops to complete the mission, give them to him. (he is giving him 35,000... if that isn't enough, than McChrystal should be fired for incompetence)  But if you're not in this fight to win, then get out. (define win) The life of one American soldier is not worth the best political strategy you're thinking of. (all wars are about politics... you would think that you would have learned that in all of your years)

You could be our greatest president because you face the greatest challenge ever presented to any president. (True, but the challenges that you fail to refer to may not be the ones that really are the greatest)

You're not going to restore American greatness by bringing back our bloated economy. (really?  what exactly will restore our greatness?  Personally, I believe that this is a great nation, despite our woes... I guess you don't) That's not our greatest threat. (well muslim terrorists sure as hell aren't) Losing the heart and soul of who we are as Americans is our big fight now. (exactly how would you describe the American heart and soul?)

And I sure as hell don't want to think my president is the enemy in this final battle.

(the enemy?  final battle?  WTF are you talking about, old dude?)

Sincerely,

Harold B. Estes

Mr. Estes, bless your heart... you have proved several points with your letter:  Being old, fighting in a war, and having a lifetime of service, doesn't make a man any smarter than the next ignorant dope.

 

Cougar Town Lives? WTF!?!

Several weeks ago, I reviewed NBC's new sitcom "Cougar Town",which stars perennial loser Courtney Cox as a newly divorced, none-too-bright, mother-of-a-teenager, fledgling (and aging) tart.  I told you that I that that the show was boring and stupid, and not terribly funny, remember?  Well if you don't go here and look. 

OK, remember now?

Anyway, as certain as I was that this show wasn't going to make it through the winter, it turns out that, Inc again, I was wrong.  Once again, shows that I think have no business surviving have made it through the winter chopping blocks to be picked up for the full season.

When will it end?  Is there no justice?  Have you no decency, sir?

As if this wasn't bad enough... another one of only three new shows that I have enjoyed this season has gone down in flames.  ABC's Trauma, was not picked up for a full season.  I had planned to review this show this week, but I suppose there is no point now.  This fun show about Paramedics will have to join other shows that were clearly caused by the fact that I enjoy them.

Trauma

South Central

Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles

Boston Legal

Bionic Woman (which wasn't all that great, but shared a cast member with Trauma)

Celebrity Death-match

The Night Detective (BBCA)

Street Legal (CBC)

Black Harbour (CBC)

 

Using the logic matrix, I suppose that Glee and Flash Forward are next.

God save us!

Reflections on Turning 46 (with Addendum)

Simply put, being 46 is pretty cool.

Although I am now closer to 50 than I am to 40, I like to look at this from a particular perspective, and here it is:

Turning 46 today, beats the crap out of stopping the clock at 45, because that would mean that I was taking a dirt-nap, and I am in no great hurry to be finished here.

 

I'm Living (note the capital L) baby!

Thanks to all for the well-wishes!

GF

 

 

****Late Night Addendum!****

 

Many thanks, once again, for the well-wishes! 

 

It was a great day!

 

After church (Lutherans in the house!), we went to lunch, and then we did another one of my favorite things:  We went to the Barnes & Noble bookstore at Tyson's Corner Mall.

 

When we finished at the mall, we made a briefstop at Wegman's for some wine, and then came home for some play-time with Charlie, before our dinner of baked spaghetti (and presents).

 

I spoke to my parents, my Grandmother, & my oldest daughter (away at school), then retired to the man-cave to watch Terminator: Salvation.

 

It was a great day, made that much better by my pals in my congregation, on Twitter, Facebook, and of course, the folks (old and new... Hi Deb!) that read my blog.

 

God Bless you all!

 

Thank you!, and Good Night!

Tasers & The Use of Force

If you have never been to my blog before, welcome!

Let me give you a little relevant background information about myself: I am a Trainer for a law enforcement agency, and have been doing this for thirteen years. My primary focus is combat firearms and the Use of Force.

I live and work in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC.

In the past several months, the use of TASER weapons by law enforcement officers nation-wide, has come under the microscope of many Americans.  The proliferation of websites (none of which I will grace with additional exposure) that spend their time ranting against cops is just one such societal indicator of the concern that is felt by so many citizens.

Today, I am taking part in a day of action... or a blog blast on the issue of TASER use in America.  This say is sponsored by my friend Wayne, from The Electronic Village.

Considering what I do for a living, It probably won't surprise any of you that I fully support the use of TASERs as an effective tool in law enforcement.  A TASER, properly employed, tends to result in less harm to a non-compliant suspect, and in increased protection for law enforcement personnel as well as the general public... but more about that later.

When discussing the use of these weapons, we use the term TASER which has become common even thought the term TASER is an acronym for Thomas A. Swift Electric Rifle (Tom Swift being a fictional hero of the inventor of the device).  Later, the name TASER became the brand name for the manufacturer of the most commonly used version of this class of weapons.   Where I work, the term we use for this sort of product is a bit more usage-specific.  We call them "Electronic Defense Modules".  Well, no matter what you call them, the effect is the same, which brings us to our discussion of where TASERs fall in the so-called force continuum, and it's application.

Before we even get to the heart of all of this, we need to have at least some grounding in when, why, and how police officers are supposed to use force while on duty, and there is no other way to get at that than to have a discussion on the law. 

The law. 

Let me state, right from the beginning.  I am not a lawyer.  I don't claim to be an expert on the subject of the law.  What I am doing here, is giving you an overview of some legal aspects of the use of force by police officers.  Nothing that I say here should be construed as some sort of legal consultation.  Nor am I acting in my official capacity as a lawman... I am merely having a discussion with some friends on a subject that I know something about.

How's that for a disclaimer?

Oh.  Wait, there's more:  Nothing included in this post should suggest that I am speaking on behalf of any U.S. governmental agency or organization, or that my opinions reflect those of any agency, organization, or official.

Are we clear? Ok, let's get down.

It breaks down like this: The use of force by police officers in the U.S. is governed by two particular Supreme Court cases. Those cases are Graham v. Connor (use of force in general), and Tennessee v. Garner (the use of deadly force by police). These decisions are at the heart of all discussions on whether or not a particular instance of the use of force was lawful. Please note that lawful doesn't necessarily coincide with "authorized".

In the case of Graham v. Connor, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the use of force by an officer, upon a "seized, free citizen" will be based on the standard of "objective reasonableness" under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The court stated that "based on a totality of circumstances the reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of the reasonable officer on the scene, rather than the 20/20 vision of hindsight and the calculus of reasonableness must embody allowances for the facts that police officers are often forced to make split second decisions in circumstances which are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving."

The reasonableness of the officer's decision will be based on the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time force was used. What was determined or discovered after force was used cannot be used to justify or condemn the use of force.

Please understand something, right from the start, no law in this country requires that a cop has to be right when he or she uses force on whatever level. That's right, we don't have to be right. We only need to be "Reasonable". That's the law, friends. Was a particular use of force reasonable for the officer given the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time of the incident?  That's it.

Let's talk for a little while about some of the things that will drive an officer's decisions on the use of force. These things include, but are not limited to the severity of the crime; was the suspect an immediate threat; was the suspect actively resisting arrest, or evading arrest by flight? Those are some of the things that might drive the decision of whether or not to use force.

Some factors that may drive an officer's decision on how much force to use are listed here:

Use of alcohol or drugs

Mental or Psychiatric History

Size, weight, age, condition of the officer and/or suspect

Availability to weapons

Officer to suspect ratio

History of violence

Previous use of force resulting in injury

Duration of the action

Presence of bystanders

These things (and more) are what an officer has to make decisions about when deciding what level of force/she may have to apply.  I could talk about each one of these things individually, but that would take more time than I have to type them.  Having said that, if you should need further explanation on any of those factors, please ask me either by comment or email, and I will explain more fully.

OK, now would be a good time to talk about the early application of force.  There are times when an an officer may, and indeed should, use force early on in a confrontation.  The early application of force generally results in less force used by officers, fewer injuries to the officer AND suspect.  The early application of force should happen when a suspect becomes non-compliant, or gives any pre-assault indicators, such as assuming a fighting stance.

Remember... "force" can mean different things, so let's pause for a moment to talk about them.  Where I work, there are five separate levels of force, and the are:

Officer Presence - The ability to effect or change behavior based on presence/appearance alone.

Verbal Commands - Firm, clear, concise directions

Soft Techniques - Minimal chance of injury eg; "come along" holds, Pressure points, electronic defense modules, chemical agents.

Hard Techniques -Greater chance of injury, eg; Strikes, kicks, blows, throws, take-downs, & impact weapons

Deadly Force - Any force which is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury.

As you can see, electronic defense modules, or TASERs, for our purposes, fall under soft techniques, because when properly used, they generally result in minimal (if any) injury.

Now, having discussed the levels of force, let's talk about what so many people refer to as the "Force Continuum".  That term usually refers to some sort of matrix that shows what an officer's reaction should be to certain behaviors by a suspect.  There are many variations of the continuum and I have added an illustration here to give you an example of what they look like:

The diagram that you see above, used to be in common use in federal law enforcement, but is now a relic.  It is a relic because it gave students that notion that each step in the "pyramid" had to be exhausted before an officer could move to the next level of force.  That notion couldn't be further from the truth. 

Now, this is where the discussion frequently gets ugly, and strays from the factual into the realm of perspective and strong opinion.  There are people who believe TASERs to be weapons of torture, used by police officers as punishment... as a "torture" device, based on the fact that it's use causes extreme pain.  I disagree vehemently with this assertion. 

When using TASERs (a soft technique), cops are no more using them as a torture devices than they would use an expandable steel baton (a hard technique) to strike someone.  It's that simple.  Yes, simple.

Let's move a little further and talk a little more about deadly force, since the number of TASER-related deaths are at the heart of the wider discussion on TASERs and their use.  Many of the folks involved in this discussion want TASERs banned.  Many want TASERs to re-classified as "near deadly force" weapons.  I say that these things are unnecessary because TASERs rarely kill.  Yes, I know, any unintended death is a bad thing, but generally speaking, TASERs rarely result in the death of a suspect.

Let's talk a little more about what deadly force is... and ins't

Deadly Force

• The use of any force that is likely to cause death or

serious physical injury.

 

Serious Physical Injury

• A substantial risk of death

• Extreme/protracted physical pain 

Protracted and obvious disfigurement

• Protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily

member, organ, or mental faculty

You see, when force is used and it unexpectedly results in death, the force level hasn't necessarily changed.  For instance, if I were to get in a fistfight with a subject, and a punch in to his face caused a sudden stroke which killed him, I haven't used deadly force... I have used a hard technique that resulted in unexpected death.  An unexpected death isn't deadly force just because someone died.

The point that I am trying to make with all of this is that all sorts of weapons can kill.  All sorts of empty hand techniques can kill, weapons designated as "less lethal" (not NON-lethal) can kill... but it is important to remember what deadly force is:  Force which is LIKELY to cause death or serious physical injury.  TASERs don't fit that description.

TASERs aren't the devil.  Cops that use them aren't the devil, either.  If fewer people entered into public disturbances or violent confrontations, TASERs wouldn't be used as much, subsequently reducing the number of TASER-related deaths, nation-wide.  

TASERs save lives.  Sometimes they take lives, too.  It's sad, but there it is.

I regularly give our officers and agents a presentation on the Use of Force... it is an annual requirement where I work.  The presentation is about ninety minutes... I hope that the shortened version tat you see here helps in some small way.  If you have questions, contact me via comments or email.

 

Dear President Obama (2)

Dear President Obama,

I hardly know where to begin this letter... so I thought I would tell you that I am not writing to you as a committed Democrat.  Nor am I writing to you as an outraged citizen.  I am writing to you as a very troubled veteran of eight years enlisted service in our armed forces.

The young Marine that I once was, is now trapped inside of a man in early middle age, but still thrills to the sound of the trumpet.  By that, sir, I mean that I still want our armed forces to do what they are designed to do:  Go forward into battle and crush our enemies, and drive them before us.  The middle aged man that I have lived long enough to become still wants that, but I want to do it wisely.  I don't think that your proposed new strategy is wise.

As I understand your speech, the idea is to send these thirty thousand Marines and soldiers to Afghanistan in order to stabilize the country and give the Afghan government the time and space it needs to get it's act together and take care of it's own security, right?

In other words, it's the George Bush "surge".  OK, I know you don't want to hear that, but that is what it is:  A surge.  A ramping up of forces to quell violence so we can declare "VICTORY"... and then leave a vacuum for the Taliban to fill from their havens in Pakistan.

I know that you are a smart man, sir.  I know that you have to be aware that a reconstituted Taliban can be the only result, right?  I mean, you can't actually believe that in the face of an additional 30,000 troops, and an as yet undetermined number of allied soldiers that the Taliban will waste time and lives in pitched battles that they can only lose.  Right?  You do know that they will cross the Pakistan border and wait us out, right?  I know that you know this, because I refuse to believe that you think that the Pakistani army is going  to crush them... despite all of the military aid that we give them.

This is my quandary, Mr. President.  We are going to pacify the trouble spots in Afghanistan, temporarily, to allow us to declare honorable victory, and then let that country descend back into chaos.  While I understand it, and while I am ok with departing and leaving the Afghan government to handle their own security, I am terribly concerned about the number of American and allied lives that will be spent in order for us to feel alright about the terrible cost of this war, that in the end will gain us little, if anything in terms of national security.

As I said in an earlier open letter to you, I can't support this.  I can't support it because it ignores the strategic facts.  I can't support it because it flies in the face of military reality.  I can't support it because of the cost (in blood and treasure).  I can't support it because of the lack of honesty.

We need to withdraw from Afghanistan now... not two years from now.

Very Respectfully Yours,

Gunfighter

Presidential Haiku

POTUS says we surge

We ignore long histories

GF calls "BULLSHIT"

A Question About Afghanistan

I was going to try to be eloquent about this, but I don't have it in me... I really don't, so I will simply ask this question, and I would like someone to answer cogently.

Is there a good reason to send more American soldiers and Marines to Afghanistan?

 

Can anyone give me a reason that isn't rhetorical?

(I reserve the right to call bullshit on you if you give me reasons that don't stand up to logic or facts.  It's my blog, dude.)

Happy Birthday, Angel Face

Last Sunday was my youngest daughter's eleventh birthday.

It was a fine day... a fine day in a series of fine days.  We spent the weekend in Williamsburg, Va., browsing through the College of William & Mary bookstore; and the bookstore in the colonial area visitors center.  Before we retired for the evening, we had a visit to the New Town shopping area and while Susan went to the Barnes & Noble store, Olivia and I went to the "More Than Just Beads" shop to get some cool beads.

Once we were all done, we made our way back to the hotel, and ordered pizza while Mrs. GF and Soccer Girl went for a swim.

We drove home on Sunday morning, stopping for lunch (and a quick run through Borders) in Fredricksburg before getting home for presents etc...

We had a nice dinner, but trust me when I tell you, that a certain child that I know was beside herself waiting for her presents, all of which she was very happy about...  especially her new cell phone.  Yes, a cell phone.  I know, I know... there are a thousand and five reasons for her to not have a phone, but there is one reason that trumps all of them:  She can call me, Mrs GF, or a certian list of trusted adults who can help her when she is in need.  That's enough for me.

SoccerGirl is a sweet kid, and she had a good birthday weekend with her family... It doesn't get any better that (at least, not until your dad brings home your NEW DOG!).

It's Saturday, Here's a Meme

Part One – Describe:

Your hair? Very short.  You might even say stubbly.

Your mother? Not well.

Your father? Great with children!

Your favorite food? Chinese

Your dream last night? Talking to my boss about my promotion

Your favorite drink? Stone Imperial Stout

Your dream/goal? My dream?  To go into space.  My Goal?  To be able to be a good father and provider for my familyas long as they need me.

The room are you in?A big room full of cubicles.

Your hobby? Reading

Your fear? Fear?  Ha!

Your TV? Is where the moving pictures are.  They tell me things.

Your Pets? Charlie, a retired Explosive Detection dog.

Friends? Few, but important.

Your life? Pretty darn good.

Your mood? Right now?  Upbeat, although I am doing this meme to avoid getting my fat ass on the elliptical trainer.

If you’re missing someone? I miss Pastor Ken.  He is an awesome guy.

Your best friend? I'm married to her.

Part Two – The Where’s?

Where do you want to be in 6 years? Right where I am now, except not as fat as I am today.  I'll also be 6 years closer to retirement.

Where were you last night? It was Thanksgiving... I was in the freakin' kitchen all day.

Where did you grow up? Vauxhall, New Jersey.  I lived there from age five through seventeen.

One place that I go to over and over? Barnes & Noble bookstores; Williamsburg, Virginia; Orlando, Florida.

Your favorite place to eat out? Mandarin Court

Wish list items? An iPhone; A Barnes & Noble Nook; a larger Sunday School class; a hefty gift card from Gander Mountain.  I won't be getting ANY of that for Christmas... OR my birthday, which is next Sunday... not that I am hinting about anything.

Last time you laughed? Dude.  I laugh all the time.

Last time you cried? Cried?  yeah, right.  Like I'd tell you.

Part Three – The What’s?

Something that you aren’t? An ass-kisser.

Last thing you did? Drove to work and turned on the office computer.

What are you wearing? A kelly-green, sleeveless t-shirt (dig the guns!), gray shorts, white sock, athletic shoes, my watch, my wedding ring, and four boss tattoos.

Something you’re not wearing? Well, that would sort of cover lots of things.  For instance, I'm not wearing a Burqa (sp?), nor am I wearing elf shoes that are turned up at the toes.  See, this is one of those open-ended questions designed to drag you into a meaningless discussion of minutae.  I suppose I caould just hare off into uncharted country and talk about all sorts of things, like the time I went out in public NOT wearing anything... or when I was arrested for.... See what I mean?

I'm just going to stick with the thing about the Burqa.

Your favorite store? Barnes & Noble; Gander Mountain

***NOTE*** Totally kidding about the getting arrested thing.  Never happened.

Blogger Interviews: Gunfighter

No, I didn't interview myself (again).  This time I was interviewed by Aunt Becky, who is super cool, and VERY funny. 

Here is the interview... read it, and then go visit Becky'sblog.  I'm betting that you will become a regular.

 

For Neil’s Great Blog Interview Project, I Interviewed Gunfighter who is pretty full of the Awesome, so you should check him out. And I’m not just saying that so he doesn’t kill me. He rules.

Katie Couric better watch out because I had WAY too much fun with this interview.

1) Sprinkles on ice cream or not? Or do you call them jimmies? Some people call them jimmies and I don’t understand it, but I think it’s a colloquialism like “soda” and “pop.”

Ha!  I was just talking about this a week or so ago.  For me, you only have sprinkles on soft-serve ice cream… and then only when you get it from the “Mr. Softee” ice cream truck that would come through our neighborhood in the summer.  As for what you call them, I always called them jimmies.  I understand that it is a fairly common thing in the northeast (I was raised in northern New Jersey.  Go Yankees!).

2) Are you going to kill me if I mess up this interview? I’m screwed, aren’t I? (don’t shoot me, please, I have delicate skin)

Shoot you?  Naaaah, I probably wouldn’t shoot you… you seem like a nice enough person… and you make me laugh, which goes a long way.  Not that you need to worry, or anything… because you are doing fine… so far.

3) If you could choose one single song for them to do on Glee to die a happy person, what would it be?

You know, my wife and I were listening to the Glee soundtrack when I got your email with these questions… we agreed that it would really be beyond cool (and I mean cool in the sense of Miles Davis, and Lou Rawls) if the cast of Glee performed Mel Torme’s iconic hit “Coming Home Baby”. If they were to do that, I would be a really happy man… that song or the them from “Underdog”

4) What annoys you most about blogging? Everyone has some pet peeve. As for me, I can’t stand it when people abbreviate people into initials because my brain is too small to handle and retain such information for long enough to make it through a post.

You mean bloggers can be annoying?  Never!  Well, ok, since we are new pals and all… I’ll just say this about that:  Sometimes bloggers are just a little too sanctimonious… and that probably means me, too.

5) You’re sent to live on a desert island with an iPod filled with the collective works of only 5 musical artists (let’s assume somehow you have unlimited power for said iPod). Who are they?

Mel Torme  (don’t laugh.  Mel Torme was as cool as they get)

Michael Jackson  (Dude was weird, but name a really talented person who isn’t/wasn’t)

David Phelps  (Look him up, he’s awesome)

Frank Sinatra  (Frank doesn’t need any commentary)

Tuck Andress & Patti Cathcart  (An incredible Jazz duo)

6) What’s the song that plays in your head every time you walk into a room? Like when you make an entrance, I mean. Not just like when you walk unnoticed into a room.

Oh, you mean personal theme songs?  I have several, and they vary depending on what I am walking in the room to do.  When I am walking into a classroom to teach, the song is “The Imperial March” from Star Wars (also known as “Darth Vader’s Theme”), The other, when I am on an operational assignment is the Main Title theme from “Superman“.  Often, in my everyday life, my theme song is that favorite hymn of mine:  “A Mighty Fortress is Our God” … there isn’t a much better song for a warrior.

7) If I came over to your house to eat dinner, what would you make me? Because you seem to be a good cook and I sometimes can’t be bothered to order takeout because I am JUST that kind of lazy and maybe I am kind of hungry right now.

I would probably roast a chicken with vegetables.  Oh, and I do a chicken right, my friend.  Mind you, it’s a rich dish, and ought to be shared with good friends and an ample supply of wine.  To die for, trust me.

Now that I have read your archives, I have realized that my brother would salivate at the bit to be your best friend, (which I will lord over him as punishment for years of torture when we were kids) which means I need to be your best friend. Can I be your best friend?

Interesting… why would he want to be my best friend?  Is it because of my tattoos, or because I have a rockin’ family?, or is it because I spend my day playing with guns?  Maybe it’s because chicks dig me.  Well, whatever it is, I am all about revenge on older brothers for childhood torture, so ok, we can be best friends.  Do you hear that, Becky’s brother?  She and I are BFF’s now, so don’t **** with her ever again!

So you should check him out because seriously, he’s awesome.

———————

And in the interest of full disclosure, I am going to tell you that my brother, Uncle Aunt Becky, would want to be BFF with Gunfighter because he would love Gunfighter’s job. Also, now I am going to visit Gunfighter so he can teach me how to shoot a gun. (but he doesn’t know that yet. He better get that chicken cooking. HA.).

 

OK folks... go visit Becky, there's a good chap.