Deciding to own a handgun is a deeply personal and private undertaking.  There is not only a lot to think about and consider, but also much to learn and understand before you go out and purchase your first sidearm.  So, before you even consider owning that firearm, let’s talk through the array of possibilities generally regarded as the most likely sets of conclusions one has arrived at that reach the realization that the ownership of a handgun is not only advisable but also desired.

What to consider:

First, you need to know the status of the laws pertaining to firearms as they apply to you.  These wide variety of laws, rules, ordinances, regulations and forbearances affect all firearms owners and begin at the federal level.  Without getting into too much legal detail, suffice it to say that federal laws mostly concern the kinds of firearms available to be sold to the civilian market within the United States.  Federal law also regulates the licensing of dealers, the methods of firearm transfer, shipping, individual background checking, and things of this nature.

What is left to the laws of the individual states is the specific determinations about who can possess and carry sidearms, where they can be carried, and what restrictions can be applied to different classes of owners, etc.  Each of the 50 states vary widely when it comes to handgun regulation.  What is perfectly legal in one state is banned outright in others.

A good example of this is comparing the laws in New York with those of Colorado.  In New York, each county has control over the issuance of handgun permits.  In the New York City area for example, no other counties permits are recognized or are valid.  It is nearly impossible to obtain a concealed permit in New York City, (ironically the place you may feel you need it the most.)  In some NY counties, obtaining a handgun permit is quite simple.  In other counties, it is nearly impossible.  The controlling factor in NY is the county court judge in each county, which is in charge of the process.  If he or she is firearms friendly, then the process tends to be easier in that county.  If the judge has an aversion to guns, then the process becomes painfully slow or practically impossible.

By contrast, in Colorado, it is legal, without a permit, to carry a sidearm in public, as long as it is exposed and not concealed.  It is legal, without a permit, to have a handgun in your home or in your car.  The only situation in which Colorado law requires the acquisition of a permit is in the case that you would like to carry a sidearm concealed.

So, depending on the state in which you reside, the laws are going to be very different from one state to another.  Also important to know is that neighboring state may or may not have reciprocity with your state regarding your rights to possess or carry your handgun in that state.  The good news is that these laws and regulations are readily available via the internet and each state has them published on their websites.

Also note that those folks involved in the business of selling firearms and gun related accessories are generally pretty knowledgeable about the local rules and regulations as well.  I do not suggest that you take what the local sports store employee has to say as gospel, but at least you can get a general idea of what the local rules are as they apply to you.  Always verify with your local law enforcement authorities your understanding of the laws as they apply to you in the state in which you live.

Once you have learned the laws and regulations that apply to you and your circumstances and it is determined that you are legally eligible to own a firearm, then the next question you should be asking yourself is simply; Why?  What is it you wish to accomplish?  Is your desire for personal protection?  If so, is that concern more in terms of your home, in your car, in your office, when you jog, travel?  Maybe you simply want to learn to be a great marksman and shot targets at your local gun club.  Perhaps you’re simply a collector and wish to obtain certain guns because they appeal to you for personal reasons, maybe your dad was a police officer, or he brought a weapon home from the war and this got you interested in collecting.  Answering this question of why will determine what kind of firearm you will buy.

Like shoes, hats and jackets, one firearm cannot and will not fulfill all of the requirements you have for all circumstances.  What works best for target shooting may not be at all suitable for collecting.  What is great for home defense is correspondingly the wrong choice for your car.  Just like hiking shoes work best in the woods, sneakers work best in the gym.  Knowing this, if this is your first firearm purchase, keep in mind that fulfilling the single biggest goal you have first in mind might just be properly tempered against the information you are about to learn from this article.  For example, if cost is a major issue and you can only afford to purchase a single firearm and not more in the foreseeable future, then your consideration in choosing a weapon will be different from those others who look to own several or even many firearms.

The most likely distinction between new shooters to the world of handguns is probably the question of whether or not you have ever fired a firearm of any kind?  Furthermore, have you ever fired a handgun before?  If you have absolutely no experience with firearms at all, that is a big distinction between someone with basic knowledge and understanding of guns and gun safety.  Many folks have fired rifles or other “long guns”, but never handled a handgun.  Understanding your position in this experience matrix will allow you to customize the level and quality of training you will need to become safe, confident and proficient.  There is no component of firearms more important than your level of training.  Safety cannot be over-emphasized.  Remember, you’re dealing with an inherently deadly weapon.  Carelessness and ignorance take lives by mistake, and this can be avoided with proper training and then personal discipline in adhering to the rules.  Seek out the services of a trained, credentialed professional in handgun safety.

So, not only do handguns come in a variety of types, they also are defined by the caliber, or in basic terms, the size of the projectile.  If you simply Google handguns, you’ll see over 14 millions hits, so learning about types of handguns and their calibers is a matter I’ll only slightly touch upon for the sake of clarifying what I anticipate will be your most basic questions.

Your basic decision in handguns come down to two choices, (even though there are many variations on this generalization,), either choosing a revolver or an automatic.  The revolver is sometimes called a “wheel gun”, because it has a round cylinder that revolves each time the trigger is pulled, exposing another bullet for firing.  Most revolvers offer 6 rounds of ammunition, some smaller caliber guns feature 8.  Revolvers were very popular in years past, before the refinement of the automatic types, which did not initially perform flawlessly 30 years ago.  Revolvers also do not have as large a choice of calibers as are found in the offerings for automatics.  With revolvers, spend shell casings remain in the cylinder whereas in automatics, spend shell casings are automatically ejected out of the gun as they are fired.

Criminals and “hit men” prefer revolvers because no evidence is left at the crime scene via spent shell casings which may have fingerprints, and also readily identify the caliber of the gun used in the crime.

The term “automatic” is widely and freely used to describe the other types of handguns that are not revolvers, but the term is actually incorrect.  Technically, a true automatic weapon is capable of firing rapidly and automatically, as long as the trigger is kept depressed.  The handguns herein referred to as “automatics” are actually semi-automatics, it just happens that over time, common usage of the term has slipped into shortening the words to simply automatic.  In semi-automatic firearms, each single pull of the trigger releases a single projectile.  In order to fire rapidly and release multiple projectiles, the user must physically pull the trigger each and every time for each and every bullet, as opposed to the true automatic weapon which requires only a single depressed trigger to release bullets as fast as they are cycled through the weapon.  Guns of this type are generally banned from civilian ownership, which some limited exceptions.  Where you see true automatic weapon use is in military applications.  More often than not, these weapons are referred to as “machine-guns.”  Some fully automatic weapons are capable of firing between 600 and 1200 rounds per minute with the single pull of the trigger!

So the first decision is revolver or automatic.  I think most of you will conclude that the automatics of today are absolutely as reliable as the older style revolver and also offer more versatility in the array of calibers.  Additionally, most automatics allow for a much higher numbers of bullets than the standard 6 in a revolver.  Some automatics have magazines that store as many as 17, so firepower is also dramatically improved, especially important when considering self-defense.  And lastly, concealing a automatic is generally easier than concealing a revolver, simply because the revolver protrudes because of the cylinder, making for lumpy bumps under your clothes, (if you’re interested in carrying your handgun concealed.)  Automatics tend to be flatter because instead of a revolving cylinder holding the bullets, the magazine in the traditional automatic is housed inside the handle of the weapon.

OK, automatic it is, (for most of you.)  Now, What caliber?

Again, I’m keeping this simple and basic, so please those of you with superior knowledge about all the nuanced calibers, exceptions and oddities regarding firearms, I know and understand, but for the purposes of explaining this to neophytes, I’m going to make some generalizations.

The smallest and lightest caliber is the .22.  The numeric designation simply means that the diameter of the shell casing is .22 inches.  Commonly referred to as a “twenty-two”, this is probably the most common caliber in the world.   It is a widely used as an entry level cartridge to teach and introduce young people to hunting and shooting sports.  Available for rifle and handguns, this caliber is very versatile.  Also, the 22 is the least expensive round to purchase and produces almost no recoil, making shooting easier and more effective in teaching and training.  The downside of the 22 is the fact that the round is also the weakest of the calibers in terms of stopping power.  Make no mistake, a 22 can be lethal, (this caliber weapon was responsible for the assassination of Robert Kennedy), but in general terms, it is not considered as a serious choice for self-defense.  It is the perfect caliber for learning and teaching, it is also nicely suitable for target shooting or even squirrel and rabbit hunting, but it lacks any real credible place in the arsenal of anyone seeking a personal- protection weapon.

I could write about every other caliber and detail each, but for the sake of this entry-level informational article, let’s say this about making that choice.  In very general terms, the bigger the projectile, (caliber), the more stopping power.  The flip side of this is the larger and heavier the gun, and the more difficult it is to accurately control the recoil.  As the caliber goes up, so too does the price of ammunition, much to consider.

Many shooter like the 9MM for a nice balance between too light and too heavy.  Another common choice and very popular caliber is the .40.  Both offer good stopping power with manageable recoil.  Generally speaking, and in my opinion only, anything less than 9MM is unacceptable for self-defense.  If you are a target shooter the 22 is perfect.  If you are new to the sport, the smaller calibers are easier to learn and control.  The experts seem to all gravitate eventually to the .45, the granddaddy of all calibers, but I would suggest waiting until you are expert in marksmanship before making that transition.

I want to make one minor exception to my assertion about smaller calibers and stopping power.  In certain very limited situations, a smaller caliber is just the right solution for self-protection in very specific roles.  For example, I enjoy bicycling.  When I cycle, I sometimes carry a small frame, .380 automatic that fits nicely into the hip pocket of my biking shorts.  The gun is super small, and if it ever comes into play, it will be in very close quarters, so the trade-off in stopping power is made up for in how close to my adversary I would likely be in that limited situation.  In addition, the need for a smaller size in a sporting environment with limited ways in which to conceal a larger weapon in the absence of street cloths with many pockets is a consideration.  Also of note, if you have small hands, a smaller frame gun may be better for you in enabling you to best control the weapon.  Regarding the .380 in particular, even though this cartridge is in my opinion too small for my every day carry needs, in close quarters, and with the right hollow-point ammunition, the stopping power of this little cartridge can be dramatically increased with technology.

Again, to not get too far into the technical world of ballistics, each caliber also has multiple choices regarding the specific types of projectiles available for differing applications.  These differences have to do with the amount of power in which the projectile is expelled from the barrel.  Different application call for differing velocities.  Also the shape and type of material the actual bullet is made from can be customized to fit your specific needs.  I referred earlier to a cartridge called a hollow-point.  This is one of the choices that distinguish the nuanced differences that exist within the same caliber cartridge, but addressing differing needs.  Consult with your sporting goods dealer when it comes to deciding what type of ammunition is best for your conditions.  There are many choices and much to learn.

All right, we’ve worked through first, the legal realities for your possession of a handgun and also answered the question of why you want to possess a weapon and for what specific purpose.  This process is meant to help you narrow your choices amongst the myriad of handguns available.  Next comes deciding the make, model and caliber of your first handgun and then finally, your choice of ammunition.  I hope this article has helped you make those decisions in a thoughtful manner.  Best of luck to you.

New York State governor Andrew Cuomo had the temerity to complain to interviewer Mike Lupica when labeled a “politician.”  Cuomo proclaimed that neither he nor his father, Mario Cuomo, former 3-term New York governor were politicians.

Cuomo is apparently even more delusional than I thought.

The father/son Team Cuomo combined resume looks like this:

Eighteen years as Governor of New York.  Four years as  Lieutenant Governor of New York.  Four years as New York State Secretary of State.  Four years as Attorney General of New York.  Five years as the US head of Housing and Urban Development.

Not a single professional moment spent outside of the political world yet a self-proclaimed pair of non-politicians?

This delusional dictator thinks he can sell us anything.

He’s not only a politician, but a corrupt one.  His closest ally, Joseph Percoco is under indictment and his pet project, the Buffalo Billion is fraught with allegations of fraud, bid-rigging and malfeasance.

Cuomo is a fraud, a sneak and a thief, ramming through dubious legislation in the middle of the night to avoid public scrutiny.  He is not only a politician, but a stinking, rotten version of one as well.  Wear it proudly Andy.

Coupled with the latest New York government scandal, the promised panacea of “ethics reform” is the catch phrase most favored to demonstrate the righteous indignation that follows its discovery.  However, words still do mean things, so how do we reform something that never really existed in the first place?  Given the reality of over 40 elected officials either indicted, charged, in jail or thrown out of office in the past 10 years for corruption, and now the latest arrests involving the Governor’s inner circle, it requires a delusional state of mind to pretend that any semblance of ethics exists in Albany today.

Clearly, ethics and morality were of grave concern for the founders.  James Madison, writing as Publius in Federalist #51 reminded us that, .”if men were angels no government would be necessary.”  Madison went on the state that the biggest challenge of self-governance would surly be the task of controlling the governed while also controlling itself.

The angels of Albany flew off long-ago, replaced with the powerless pigeons, left to peck away and compete for those few morsels strewn about by the amoral power brokers who provide just enough to stave off serious scrutiny.  By turning governance into contests and pitting regions of the state into competitive events against each other in order to “win” what should rightly be shared, favors are curried, pockets are lined and votes are secured to make sure it all happens predictably, over and over again and again.  By rigging the system, incumbents enjoy re-election rates of more than 90%.

The problem is, you can’t legislate morality.

Former Speaker of the House, Robert Winthrop said that, ..”men must be controlled either by the Bible or the bayonet.”  Considering the bayonet of Federal Prosecutor Phreet Bharara is apparently the only defense New Yorkers can count on, maybe a re-examination of the power of the Bible is not only in order but long over-due.

George Washington said, “Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.”  John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  And finally, Benjamin Franklin leaves us with this thought.  “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.  As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”  And in the headlines, we see the masters emerge.

Freedom of religion has been misinterpreted to become instead freedom from religion.

Man is not capable of properly defining morality and ethics.  These are gifts from God, defined by God and found in the holy scriptures of God’s inspired word to man.  What we define for ourselves can only have singular authority.  We need the absolutes of God’s instructions to bolster our confidence and create the shared sense of righteousness that we can then depend upon in knowing the certainty of outcomes and the predictability of our performances.  Only a commonly held believe in the words of the Almighty can create that sense of finality and righteousness.

My Grandparents came to Johnson City, NY in the early 1900’s humbled to find a job at the Endicott-Johnson Shoe Corporation.  EJ not only providing them an income, but a home, recreational opportunities, medical care and a close-knit, loving community, built upon around a common bond of hard-work, pride of workmanship and love of family and country.  As founding members of the First Presbyterian Church in Johnson City in 1916, my family’s religious life was just as important and integral to their well-being and the community.  Family baptisms, marriages and funerals all happened in that grey stone sanctuary on the corner of Main Street and Floral Avenue.  Five family generations have occupied the same seats in the same section of the church since then, only today, dozens dwell where hundreds used to worship.

In 1920, the grateful workers of EJ, led by my Grandfather, erected a massive stone arch over Main Street, right along side of our church.  Built to honor George F. Johnson, the founder of EJ and to immortalize a great man, these words are carved in the stone face of the monument, words that captured the sentiment those grateful workers had for their employer:  Home of the Square Deal.

In less than 100 years, the home of the square deal has yielded to the broken deal.

That hard work ethic has been replaced with the entitlement mentality.  Personal responsibility has been traded for self-gratification.  Love of God, patriotism and charity have morphed to love of self, globalism and the massive transfers of wealth from the productive to the useless.  Government throughout New York, from the Governor’s office to the school districts, is completely corrupted and rigged to work only for those on the inside of the deal.  Public sector scandals, arrests, indictments, trials and continued accusations of wrongdoing dominate the news.  Accordingly, New York taxes are the highest in the nation yet the state fails miserably in almost every measurable category of metric as compared with other states.  We spend over $16,000.00 a year to send our kids through schools ranking near the bottom.  Property taxes are the highest in the nation yet our infrastructure is pitiful.

The once glorious Empire State has managed to create in upstate a burgeoning open penal colony simultaneously populated with those walking out of the recently closed mental hospitals, creating zombie-like scenes on the streets as these miscreants wander to and from Wal-Mart in their pajamas and slippers, transfixed on their Obama phones and clutching their EBT cards.

I can’t stand to watch any more.  I drive by my childhood home and see the change and it makes me sick.  The rot and decay is advancing at a pace that I think makes it impossible to reverse.  I’ve tried my damnest to intervene, but no one seems to care.

My daughter lives in Colorado, loves it there and I’m on my way.  I’m sorry to say that after 100 years of trying, this family is giving up on New York.

Class is not a condition of birth in the United States.  The poor and rich can trade places; this is the savory allure of competitive capitalism.  The only true “class” construct in the US is the reality of the political-ruling class.  Once elected, politicians become untethered from accountability, committed to benefiting themselves.  We’re right to be suspicious of “politicians” because the story never changes; ever-higher taxes, over-regulation, intrusion and disruption of our lives.

A common sentiment heard repeated across party lines is the desire to see the country run like a business yet we have never elected such a candidate.  Presidents are hatched from the political class.  Trump offers our first non-political, business background candidate.  Self-financed and with no political experience makes him beholden to no one.  Clinton is owned by her contributors.  Support comes with expectations.  This pay-to-play system uses political power as a blunt instrument, funding winners and thumping all others.

Trump knows from experience that government is best when it is least.  Clinton is a big government liberal.  As former President Reagan said, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”  Mrs. Clinton clearly represents the problem.

Clinton brings a 3rd term of Obama.  Seen by her party as the lady in waiting, Bernie Sanders was sacrificed at her alter.  Inside the party trechery kept the Clinton candidacy alive not her quality as a candidate.

The unknowns of Trump are more encouraging than the givens of Clinton.  Trump sees this quest as his closing chapter, a genuine calling to make America great again.  Clinton has been plotting for this her entire life and that fact makes her motives dubious.

Everything involving Clinton’s public life has been somehow tainted and suspect.  The accumulated storm of accusations can’t all be imagined.  The slickness of Willie has burnished the hubris of Hillary.  In her wake, deception, deceit and doubt have always crept.  Can it be that the best candidate for President is a former Presidents wife?  The Clinton’s are not a dynasty and Hillary’s resume is paper-thin.  We’ve proven that affirmative action does not produce a good President.  Gender can’t invent Clinton’s validity.

It all fails the simply sniff test.

Her messy history leaves too many unanswered questions, too many unbelievable, unimaginable, extraordinary blanks spaces.  Clinton is too glibly slippery to be President.  When her denials end in pleas of ignorance, it demands of us our own stupidity in order to believe.

Trump has completely flummoxed his pundits.  Everyone was wrong about everything they said about him.  He never had a chance, yet Trump is the last man standing amongst 16 others who were all projected to do better.  A survivor under fire.

Think carefully about motives.  Clinton has been plotting and planning this her entire life, yet has no significant accomplishments.  Trump sees this calling as a duty to his country, managing the rehabilitation of our nation’s greatness.  Clinton envisions the presidency as her platform to personal salvation, vain validation at the expense of America. 

The RA training program at BU (Binghamton University) called #StoppingWhitePeople2K16 has quite predictably garnered much attention, locally and nationally, both on and off the campus.  While being titled to be purposefully provocative, the course description is even more outrageous, stating it will teach RA’s how to respond to, ..” good arguments from uneducated people”, and “help others take the next step in understanding diversity, privilege, and the society we function within.”  The course description ends by stating, ” This open discussion will give attendees the tools to do so, and hopefully expand upon what they may already know.”

Let me preface my remarks with the following information.  I am an alumnus from the BU School of Management, own a successful business and have been experiencing life’s dramas for approximately three times as long and the average undergraduate has been on the planet, so if nothing else, I have it over most of you by way of breadth and depth of experience.  Furthermore, I have lived a full and successful life and most of you have yet to prove you can accomplish the same outside the comforts of mommy and daddy’s nest and their generosity in paying your tuition, so perhaps a little humility and respect on your part might be in order.

Let me breakdown this liberal crap that does not even rise to the level of pablum.  Over the years, I’ve developed my bi-lingual ability to interpret the slippery language of liberal-speak.

Hashtags do not make ideas good when they are bad.  There is no power in a hashtag, no imbued credibility, no elixir to a bad idea, undoubtedly spawned by someone under 25 who thinks hashtags have some intrinsic value.  The hastags your mom tried in vane to bleach from your adolescent underwear had approximately the same value.

Any phrase, title or slogan that you believe is offensive to one group but not another when you simply interchange those groups, is patently offensive to all groups and this title fails that test.  If you were to say #StoppingBlackPeople2K16, that too would be offensive, so hiding behind the false premise that white people are somehow not entitled to the same level of respect any other ethnic group would expect is not only hypocritical but simply wrong.

“Good arguments from uneducated people.”  Wow.  So, if the argument is “good”, it can be disqualified simply on the basis that the person making the argument is “uneducated?”  If that is the case and the author of this description is an example of the educated class he/she describes, I would prefer the company of those with the good arguments.  What the author of this description really means when he/she uses the term “educated”, is someone who thinks like him/her.  So much for diversity of thought and what a clear example of the air of superiority so common in the minds of newly minted college students.  An education my young friends, is in no way a guarantee of wisdom.

The sentence about..”helping others take the next step…”, again, dripping with that air of superiority, “others”, you know, those poor saps that don’t have the braintrust we do, we’re here to help you understand the secrets of higher knowledge.  Please, gag me with a spoon.  This sentence goes on to speaks of “privilege.”  What that means of course is WHITE privilege but the author apparently doesn’t quite have the stones to call it what it really is, again the premise that white is wrong, suspect and immune from any and all defenses.

Finally, we get to the last sentence about this being an “open discussion.”  Yea, right, open only if you agree and you’re in lock step with the other bigots who dreamt up this crap.

This level of intolerance mixed with academic superiority and condescension is abhorrent.  I’m ashamed to say I attended such a place and happy to tell you that when I did, I would have been equally outraged as I am now had some misguided student been on the same rant.  My parting words of encouragement, Shut-up, sit down and learn something before you have the temerity to tell anyone anything about which you know nothing.

There are six actors in the 30-second Time Warner Cable ad clip, all black and all apparently related.  The mother, father, their two juvenile kids, “Uncle Pete” and an older woman who appears as an image on a computer tablet.

Uncle Pete is babysitting what appear to be two adolescent brothers; both under ten years old.  The ad opens as the mother and father are leaving their home and as they close the front door, the last words from the mother are, “Behave for Uncle Pete.”  The boys sit in silence on the couch for 2 seconds and then all hell breaks loose as the boys start screaming, yelling and assaulting Uncle Pete with pillows and cushions to the point of feathers flying, running all over the furniture and climbing all over Uncle Pete.  One boy strikes Pete several times with what appears to be a cane or staff, hitting him in the face, head and torso as he straddles the mans neck.  The other boy throws a ball at Pete’s head and later is seen crawling over his shoulder and kicking at his head.

As Pete is scrambling to find something, anything to calm these two kids, the older woman appears on a computer tablet screen image and through a smiling face asks Pete, “Are you having fun?”  This is all happening as Pete is being struck on his head while one of the boys straddles his neck and the other pulls at him from the side.

Finally, Pete timidly approaches each boy with a computer tablet in each hand.  The boys go silent and quickly become absorbed in the tablets video content as they sit quietly on the couch and Uncle Pete bows his head and signs in relief as the onslaught is stopped.

Attached is a YouTube video link.  Take a quick look at this ad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvvGhvfAPrI

This bothers me and on so many levels I don’t know where to begin.

Are mom and dad really that clueless as to not know their out-of-control brat kids would beat up on Uncle Pete?  If they really didn’t know, they’re incompetent parents and if they did know, well, again, incompetent parents.  The older woman on the tablet seems to take delight in the situation, smiling with pride.  Really?  This is OK behavior?  “Are you having fun?”, seriously?  So unless you are armed with tablets and cool video content, it’s apparently alright for brat kids to assault adults in order to get their devices.  Does anyone else see a racial component here?   If all of the actors were white, would the message be relevant?  Would it resonate, be believable, or is it OK in the black community to tolerate assault, chaos and meyhem?

Maybe Time Warner has stumbled onto the solution for the race wars that are coming to our country.  The next time there is a riot with arson and looting in places like Milwaukee, Ferguson and Baltimore, handout tablet computers and then everyone can just get along.

Listening recently to friends talk about religion prompted me to reaffirm my own understanding of the subject, so I’ve done a little research and I hope this helps everyone understand the subject matter better.  What triggered my desire to define this clearly for them, was the statement one of them made that in effect said their good deeds, righteous living and Golden Rule ethics would be enough to insure salvation.  I don’t think so and here is why.

Grace is defined as the unmerited granting of mercy.  In other words “undeserving.”  The following Bible passage explains grace and faith perfectly.  Faith, in Christianity, is the belief that Jesus is the only Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary and was killed for the salvation of mankind’s sins, rising from the dead and ascended to Heaven.
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast.  For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do” (Ephesians 2:8-10).

The first sentence tells us that we have been saved, even though we do not deserve it, simply through our faith.  This salvation cannot be earned through our deeds, the passage says, “this is not from ourselves, it is a gift from God-not by works, so that no one can boast.”  In other words, our salvation has nothing to do with our ability to earn it, deserve it or create it by our actions, even going so far as to negate our ability to boast about it because we didn’t earn it to begin with.

So much for the old standard-bearer argument that says, “I just do good things and try to be a good person and don’t hurt anyone else and that is good enough to get me into heaven.”  That is NOT what I read in the Bible.

The second sentence is even more insightful and tantalizing, stating we are God’s handiwork, created to do good things which God prepared in advance for us to do.  So again, we can’t “earn it”, but God makes it clear that we are put upon this earth to do good things, which he has already prepared in advance for us to do.  I read this as an admonition to not sit back and rest on our laurels, simply because we believe God’s grace has saved us.  God is making it clear that He has a plan for us and it is not that plan that gets us to grace, but it is a plan of God’s design, nevertheless to be understood, obeyed, and pursued.

John 3, New International Version (NIV)

¹⁶ For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷ For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. ¹⁸ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. ¹⁹ This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. ²⁰ Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. ²¹ But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

I read this passage as a clear warning:  If you know about Jesus and reject Him, you are condemned; this is plain language within the biblical text.  It seems clear that in this passage “light” is interchangeable with truth, Godliness and righteousness.

All in all the message in this case and for this subject is clear as crystal; we get to heaven only by God’s grace.  We can do nothing to earn or deserve God’s grace, we simply profess our faith in Him, worship Him and obey Him and our salvation is guaranteed.  If we come to know Him and reject Him, we are condemned to death without salvation.

I hope this helps.

A common question I hear that ultimately leads to debates is the issue of working on a criminal case where I either know or suspect that the client is guilty.  The argument goes like this; How can you sleep at night if you get someone off who is guilty of some terrible crime?  How is that just under a system of justice?

Because we don’t teach civics anymore, I think most people outside of that system misinterpret the job lawyers and investigators do.  We don’t “get them off” when cases go well for our clients.  When that happens, the prosecution has either done something wrong, failed to do their job, or someone involved with the arrest made a mistake sufficiently egregious to fail in proving guilt or otherwise violated constitutional rights, rules and regulations that are a necessary component to our legal systems integrity.  Just because a person is arrested for a crime they definitely committed does not in any way mean that the rules of justice and fairness in adjudicating the matter are somehow less important, relaxed, or to be dispensed with.

We begin with the premise that innocence is a given in the absence of PROOF to the contrary.  In other words, all people accused of crimes are innocent, that is the assumption from the start.  It is the duty of the state to PROVE guilt.  There is no obligation for the defendant to assist the state in making their case.  The defendant can remain silent during the entire process if he or she so chooses.  The burden is entirely on the state to prove guilt.

In doing so, the state has an obligation to act within the parameters of the law and the requirements of our constitution.  Serious deviations from those rules, laws or constitutional guarantees can result in otherwise guilty people being set free.  The reason this is so is to set such a high standard on the state in order to insure strict compliance with the letter of the law and the bounds of the constitution.  If serious breeches of the law were allowed, the system would have no incentives to preserve these rights.  The penalty for violating these provisions needs to be extraordinarily high in order to act as sufficient incentive for the state to use the utmost care in making criminal prosecutions.

When viewed through the lens of distortion that outlines a defendant that the public deems to be obviously guilty, these safeguards seem barriers to justice, simply slowing down an inevitable process.  When applied to others who may well be innocent of wrongdoing, or to you personally, those same safeguards and guarantees may well be your last resort to continued freedom.

Remember the last sentence of the Declaration of Independence which ushered in our Constitution.  “And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.”

That doesn’t sound like a “technicality” to me.