I took my Sister-in-law & a couple of her boys to the local gun range yesterday to shoot my AR-15 while we're up in Washington for Christmas. None of them had ever shot one before, and in fact, my Sister-in-law had never shot anything before. We all had a lot of fun, and she even commented that she is thinking of saving up to get one herself sometime. Her boys can't wait.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Friday, December 21, 2007
I just realized I had not posted this link. For anyone interested, you can view the archived videos from the Sep 21-22nd 2007 NRA Celebration of American Values, which took place in Washington DC.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Say Uncle, Sebastian, Of Arms and the Law, The NSSF, and the NRA have all covered quite nicely the NICS improvement bill which fixes a lot of problems in the existing NICS legislation. The VPC folks are now calling it a pro-gun Trojan Horse because it improves gun rights which is a direction the VPC does not want to go (The VPC would be more aptly named "Center for the Banning of all weapons"). What better endorsement could we ask for than the Violence Policy Center Folks saying it is bad?
. . . if you start looking at the details of the bill--especially after NRA-backed changes made by Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn--it becomes clear that the measure is nothing less than a pro-gun Trojan Horse. That's why my organization, the Violence Policy Center, and other national gun control groups, have voiced their strong concerns about the version of the bill that was passed by Congress . . .
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
. . . Honestly, and as God [is] my witness, when I saw him shooting and as [I] watched for a few seconds trying to figure out what he was going to do and what I should do, the thought that [went] through my mind was, “If I had a gun, I have a perfect shot.”
Yes, a perfect shot. I had a full side profile, I was close, and no one was visible behind him execept a wall. I had a clear shot during the second round of fire. I told this to every cop I came in contact with. The interviewer agreed.
When I realized that I had no gun, fear instantly struck me, along with anger, and severe panic.
I ran hard. . . .
I am very angry at the city of
and the mall for their stupid laws that nearly cost me my life. The laws protected no one, and in my opinion, caused people to die. Omaha
. . .
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Spoof on gun control & those who wish to take our guns away. Personally I believe I can handle my own gun control without any government involvement. It requires only adherence to the fundamental gun safety rules, and a steady aim at the target.
If someone misuses any tool (regardless of whether that tool be an automobile, a baseball bat, or a gun) for illegal purposes such as robbery, murder, or rape, that person should go to jail. For that matter even if a criminal uses nothing other than his or her own bare fists to commit a crime he or she should still go to jail. However, our government should adhere to the 2nd Amendment of our Bill of Rights, & leave the rest of us alone. Our government should not infringe on our rights for the false promise of offering a mystical safety net that is nothing more than a worthless mirage that does not even exist anywhere in the real world. As the famous quote by either Benjamin Franklin or Richard Jackson says: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Monday, December 17, 2007
Friday, December 14, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Omaha shooting another failure of ‘gun free zones’
Shopping malls should be as safe as public schools and university campuses, and the outrage that unfolded at the Westroads mall in Omaha, Nebraska proves they are, thanks to the monumentally stupid proliferation of so-called “gun free zones.”
These victim disarmament zones are the handiwork of extremist gun control fanatics and their soulmates in state legislatures who created these loopholes in right-to-carry statutes across the country. Instead of providing areas of presumed safety where nobody is supposed to have a firearm, gun free zones are nothing more than risk-free environments where every criminal and lunatic with an axe to grind or a desire to become famous can stack up a quick body count with little concern about resistance from an armed citizen.
Nineteen-year-old gunman Robert A. Hawkins had no intention of surviving his bloody rampage. Despite what the gun control camp will argue, there is no way to prevent a person from committing a violent act when he is willing to die in the process. Hawkins, who had a criminal record, could not legally possess a firearm but he evidently stole the murder weapon, a semi-automatic rifle, from his stepfather.
If there is a true outrage in this incident, it is the prohibition of legally concealed firearms at Westroads Mall. One hell of a lot of good that prohibition did for Hawkins’ eight victims. Undoubtedly such bans make anti-gunners – who fought bitterly and hysterically against passage of a concealed carry law in Nebraska – feel good about themselves, but the reality is that such prohibitions cost lives.
In our new book, America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age, we detail the failures of gun-free zones, and how their only “contribution” has been to raise homicide statistics that gun control proponents can use in their ceaseless campaign to deprive law-abiding citizens of their gun rights.
Recall the Trolley Square shooting in Salt Lake City earlier this year, or the 2005 shooting at the mall in Tacoma, Washington. The shooters in both of those incidents were stopped by people with guns. In Salt Lake City, an off-duty policeman from another jurisdiction happened to be in the mall with his wife, essentially as a private citizen. Fortunately, officer Kenneth Hammond ignored the “no guns” signs at Trolley Square and had his pistol. He traded shots with Sulejman Talovic, sending the gunman running for cover until uniformed officers arrived and killed Talovic.
In Tacoma, gunman Dominick Maldonado was confronted by a courageous armed citizen named Brendon McKown. Although Maldonado seriously wounded McKown, he quickly stopped shooting and ultimately surrendered to police. The Tacoma Mall also prohibits firearms.
Remember Luke Woodham, who shot up Mississippi’s Pearl High School in 1997? His rampage was stopped by Assistant Principal Joel Myrick, who had rushed to his car to retrieve a .45-caliber pistol. Myrick aimed the gun at Woodham’s head and held him until police arrived.
In January 2002, gunman Peter Odighizuwa, who had just murdered three people on the campus of the Appalachian School of Law in Grundy, Virginia was confronted by two armed students who had rushed to their cars to retrieve handguns. He dropped his gun and was wrestled to the ground.
Unfortunately, at Virginia Tech this year, there were no armed students or teachers to interrupt Seung-Hui Cho before he killed 32 defenseless people. Sadly, nobody ignored the ridiculous prohibition at Westroads Mall in Omaha.
The strategy of gun control extremists is to rob people of their right of self-defense by stripping them of the tools to defend themselves. They alone are responsible for the gun free zone loophole that leaves us all vulnerable to this kind of senseless attack, and it is time that America tell these fools that we’ve had enough.
Alan Gottlieb is founder of the Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) and Dave Workman is senior editor of Gun Week (www.gunweek.com). They are authors of America Fights Back: Armed Self-defense in a Violent Age, published by Merril Press.
The Second Amendment Foundation has honored hero Jeanne Assam with the Eleanor Roosevelt Award. Well deserved too. She truly is a hero who saved hundreds of lives this past Sunday. May God's blessings continue to rest upon her.
SAF HONORS COLORADO’S JEANNE ASSAM WITH ELEANOR ROOSEVELT AWARD
For Immediate Release: 12/12/2007
BELLEVUE, WA – For her remarkable display of heroism and courage under fire, the Second Amendment Foundation announced today that it will recognize Jeanne Assam, who confronted a gunman on Dec. 9 at the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, with the Eleanor Roosevelt Award.
The Roosevelt award was created by SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, co-author of America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age. The award honors exceptional women who use firearms in self-defense and the defense of others. The award is named in memory of former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, who frequently carried a revolver for personal protection, even while she lived in the White House, and during the times that she campaigned in the South for civil rights.
“Jeanne Assam, an armed private citizen who volunteered to provide security at the New Life Church, was suddenly faced with a deadly emergency and without hesitation, disregarding her own safety, she rose to that challenge,” Gottlieb said. “By confronting a killer, Assam undoubtedly saved many lives.
“The news media, perhaps to try diminishing Ms. Assam’s bravery and the significance of her intervention, have revealed her dismissal as a Minneapolis police officer several years ago,” he added. “We concur with church Senior Pastor Brady Boyd, who observed that all of us have past experiences we may regret, and that she should not be ‘convicted or crucified for being a heroine.’ Today, the entire nation should be proud of Jeanne Assam, and grateful that her life’s path led from Minneapolis to Colorado Springs.
“Jeanne Assam did an incredibly brave thing under circumstances that could easily be described as above and beyond the call,” Gottlieb stated. “Every day in this country, armed private citizens defend themselves or others, frequently preventing or stopping crimes. Their actions go largely unrecognized and more frequently ignored by the press and public officials who would rather suppress the notion that Americans can fight back.
“We created the Eleanor Roosevelt Award to recognize the efforts of armed women who practice personal safety,” Gottlieb concluded. “In Jeanne Assam’s case, we are honoring a truly remarkable woman who placed herself in harm’s way for the safety of others. We are humbled by her good and noble deed.”
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nations oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The opposite of a "gun free zone" is a location that does not ban weapons. An attempt at yet another mass shooting this past Sunday at New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado was stopped short by Jeanne Assam, a CCW licensed armed member of the congregation that was legally carrying a concealed weapon when she pulled out her gun & shot the deranged maniac who had one thing on his mind - killing as many innocent victims as possible. He was armed with 2 handguns, a rifle, over 1,000 rounds of ammunition, and was working his way towards a large congregation in the church when she brought his shooting rampage to an early end.
He had made one fatal mistake (besides the obvious mistake of going off the deep end with plans to murder as many people as he could) - he forgot to go to a gun free zone. Instead he went to a freedom of choice zone where citizens were free to choose for themselves to be armed or not to be armed. Lucky for the hundreds of potential victims in the building, it was not a gun free zone, and at least three members of the congregation had exercised their choice to be armed.
See further details & links from Say Uncle, Call me Ahab, Of Arms & the Law, Instapundit, Front Sight, Press, massbackwards, The War on Guns, Ted Nugent, John R. Lott, Xavier Thoughts, Good for the Country, Jerry Ahern, and Snowflakes.
Above image used with permission of John M. Snyder. Details are in the following press release:
Snyder sent copies of the post card to the President, Supreme Court justices, members of Congress and other public officials.
"See Santa who just in time defends," proclaims an accompanying verse, "classmates, teachers and their friends, gun-right carry laws should extend into our classrooms, we contend!"
Snyder distributed the Christmas message "to highlight the importance of maintaining an armed citizenry as a deterrent to violent crime and to underscore the insanity of so-called 'gun free zones.' The only freedom provided by these gun free zones is freedom for criminals to prey upon innocent people who can't legally defend themselves.
"That's what was behind the murder of eight innocent people last week at the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Nebraska. At the mall, posted signs inform people, including those with state-issued permits to carry concealed firearms (CCW), that they cannot carry guns legally on the property. That leaves them defenseless in the face of these violent criminals."
Snyder said that's also what was behind the massacre at Virginia Tech last April. "The university allowed the killing spree to occur when it prohibited those with CCW permits from carrying firearms on campus for self-defense," he stated. "State and federal legislators should slash public funding of schools and other entities that prohibit CCW permit holders from carrying firearms. After all, when law-abiding armed individuals are able to act, as happened at Appalachian Law School five years ago, they can prevent murderous activity from escalating into a massacre."
The Christmas card urges recipients to "allow individuals who have state- issued concealed firearm carry permits to bring their handguns onto school grounds. Prevent massacres. For the sake of self-defense, abolish gun free zones! Best wishes for a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!"
A former NRA magazine editor, Snyder is Public Affairs Director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
CONTACT: John Snyder of Telum Associates, LL.C., 703-212-9863
Telum Associates, LL.C.
I bet the citizens of Florida slept easier this past Sunday night knowing that a 63 year old senior citizen was safely behind bars. Mary Ann Richardson, a US Citizen & a resident of Pennsylvania, was thrown in Jail in Florida while she was visiting there as a tourist. What was her crime? Bearing concealed weapons (a small handgun, a pocket knife, and a pair of scissors) without a CCW permit. She is currently out on $2,000 bail while she awaits her trial.
Wait, what about the 2nd Amendment. Does it not include "the right of the people to keep & bear arms shall not be infringed?"
I guess that particular constitutionally protected right doesn't apply to 63 year old senior citizens who bear arms to protect themselves from actual dangerous criminals but neglect to apply for a CCW permit.
To be fair to Florida, it is not the only State that requires a permit to bear a concealed weapon, and at least Florida does recognize CCW permits from other states, in addition to allowing residents from other States to apply for one if they wish. In that sense Florida is far ahead of States like California & Oregon which do not recognize CCW permits from US citizens visiting from any other state. Florida is light years ahead of States like Wisconsin & Illionios that not only don't recognize CCW permits from other states nor the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, but those States are the only two that don't even issue CCW permits to their very own residents, not even to "well connected" residents like the "May Issue" States often do.
There are only 2 States that recognize the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms in its full glory - Alaska & Vermont - both of which fully recognize the right of individual US Citizens to keep & bear arms without any special State issued government permission in the form of a CCW permit. Now that is true freedom. Truly a good model for all States to follow. The only requirement in Alaska & Vermont is that you may not have a weapon while committing a felony which seems fair enough to me. I mean, it's already illegal to commit a felony, so it does not concern me at all that they also decided that it is illegal to commit a felony while bearing a weapon whether that weapon be a gun or a baseball bat. I would even go one step further and say that it should also be considered a crime to commit a felony while wearing a baseball cap. Felons should get an extra 10 years for that. Anything to keep the felons off the streets & guns in the hands of citizens who wish to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights makes me happy.
Update: There are some excellent comments relating to this story on keepandbeararms.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Below are a few excerpts from an excellent gun free zone article by Duane Lester:
The shooting last week at Westroads Mall in Omaha joins a list of shootings with a common denominator. . . .
The common denominator is all these shootings took place in a gun free zone. The shooters made the safe assumption that their evil plans had a probability of succeeding because the majority, if not all of the citizens there, would be unarmed. They were sitting ducks. . . .
Instead of limiting people’s ability to protect themselves from heavily armed psycho mass murderer, or posting signs that say “Sitting Ducks Here,” we should be telling those criminals that we are armed, dangerous and we are not going to be hung out to dry by some gun grabbing liberal nit wit. Remember the words of Thomas Jefferson, who understood the importance of an armed citizen:
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”
Friday, December 7, 2007
John Lott's Website: Follow up coverage on the Gun Free Zone Multiple Victim Public Shootings
Links to additional info on the Gun Free Zone issue. Although the mainstream media is still ignoring this very important point, the bloggers have definitely picked up on it.
Red's Trading Post: Idaho Attorney General joins other AG's to defend the Second Amendment
Excellent news - Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden has signed on in support of the individual rights view of the 2nd Amendment.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
My heart goes out to the families of the disarmed victims of the Westroads Omaha Nebraska Mall that were shot on December 5th by a madman. The experiment called a "Gun Free Zone" is well past due to come to an end. It is a terrible experiment that continues to use human beings as the mice & the body count continues to mount as the experiment proves over & over again that "Gun Free Zones" simply do not work.
What does a Gun Free Zone really accomplish? Simply to disarm the law abiding citizens who choose to go into them. It is already illegal to shoot people, having a rule that criminals can't bring their guns into a gun free zone does not add any deterrent for them.
It is also interesting to note that with all of the reporters surrounding that Mall to cover the story, not one single reporter bothered to mention the no guns allowed sign posted at all of the Mall entrances. John R. Lott Jr has written a very nice opinion piece with the below observation.
A Google news search using the phrase "Omaha Mall Shooting" finds an incredible 2,794 news stories worldwide for the last day. From India and Taiwan to Britain and Austria, there are probably few people in the world who haven’t heard about this tragedy.
But despite the massive news coverage, none of the media coverage, at least by 10 a.m. Thursday, mentioned this central fact: Yet another attack occurred in a gun-free zone.
CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb released a press release today with his viewpoint:
“What happened at the Westroads Mall can happen anywhere that political hysteria results in victim disarmament,” Gottlieb stated. “Blaming firearms for this crime is like blaming cars for drunk driving. The argument doesn’t wash
Who's to say whether any of the victims or even any of the other shoppers within earshot of the shooting were forced to leave their gun in their vehicle to obey the Gun Free Zone rule. We'll probably never know. But you can't argue with the fact that if any of the victims or citizens nearby normally carried a gun & had not been disarmed at the door, they would have had a much better chance of defending themselves and ending the shooting much earlier than the shooter had planned.
Since it was a Gun Free Zone the shooter had all the time in the world to continue his rampage while waiting for Police to arrive. Only because he decided to go ahead & take his own life did it end as quickly as it did.
The anti gun folks are already using this tragedy to call for additional gun bans. Can someone please tell me how a criminal willing to steal a gun he is legally not even allowed to touch due to his criminal history, and willing to shoot people when it's already against the law to murder, would really care about breaking one more gun law?
Even if we ignore that obvious fact, how exactly would he have been less effective using any of a multitude of popular & far more powerful semi-automatic hunting rifles than the semi-automatic weapon that the criminal used in this tragedy? It's the criminals that need to be banned, not the guns. Who was it anyway that decided it is a good idea to let criminals back out on the streets as an experiment to see if they will behave or fall back into crime?
Private businesses that disarm their visitors should be held responsible for their safety. Even the Mall security were unarmed. It is highly likely that the most they had at their disposal was a can of pepper spray. Knowing that they would not have a very good chance of stopping an armed criminal with a can of pepper spray they wisely waited for the Police to arrive.
It's time to take our heads out of the sand. As Robert A. Heinlein said: "An armed society is a polite society" which is why we never had any of these mass shootings before gun free zones were invented. A disarmed society is a barrel full of helpless fish that criminals simply can't resist shooting into.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Excelent article written by Charley Reese on The Ideal Self-Defense Weapon. Very well written. Below are a selection of my favorite quotes from his article:
A friend of mine, a South Korean tae kwon do master and a former member of South Korean intelligence, was laughing one day about kung fu schools, which teach students the use of the broadsword and the halberd.
"Who is going to walk around carrying a broadsword?" he said. "Besides, if your life is in danger, use a gun."The gun is the ideal self-defense weapon. It can be wielded by a woman, a child, an elderly person or even an invalid. There was an old saying in the American West: "God created men, but Sam Colt made them equal."
As you'll recall from my last gun buyback posting, gun buybacks are a complete waste of Police manpower & city tax revenue.
Jason Rantz posted an excellent editorial about the recent San Francisco gun buyback event:
Peter Buxtun, a 70-year-old gun advocate, turned in two pistols Saturday that he said were worthless. He collected $300 in gift cards.
"You can buy junk guns for $10 and then use the gift cards to buy new guns," he said. "I saw a half-dozen uniformed SF police officers taken off the street to sit for hours in a City Hall photo-op, instead of patrolling certain drug-ridden and gang-infested neighborhoods."
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
What a LOAD of baloney (My apologies in advance to all the fine makers of the meat product called Baloney for associating their good name with such poor reporting). I could hardly believe my own ears when I watched the news last night & heard the Monday night Dec 3rd 9pm Fox 10 Phoenix newscast make the following statement while reporting a story on a group of semi-automatic rifles confiscated in 5 ATF seizures that occurred in Arizona during the past week:
"Many of these guns including the dozens of semi automatic rifles are the same guns used by soldiers serving in Iraq"
I think it is safe to say that most everyone other than perhaps Fox 10 Phoenix knows that Soldiers use fully automatic machine guns, NOT semi-automatic rifles. Shame on Fox 10 Phoenix for stating such a misleading lie. I've contacted Fox 10 Phoenix myself & have called on them to correct their story in a future newscast in addition to issuing an apology to the citizens of Arizona for the confusion they have caused. With as much confusion as there already is in the general public about what a fully automatic assault rifle is as used by the military (such as an M16) & what a semi-automatic rifle is such as an AR15, we don't need the local news media to be adding to the confusion by broadcasting lies. I would expect such lies from the likes of CBS or CNN, but normally I expect just a little bit more honesty from Fox.
I do have to commend Fox for getting one thing in particular correct - they did correctly call the seized guns semi-automatic rifles which is one thing that the majority of the mainstream news media usually messes up.
Update: My Fox Phoenix responded to my e-mail & they say that although they may not have time to actually respond to my e-mail, they will eventually read it with care! Probably just before they hit the delete key. :)
Thank you for your e-mail to Myfoxphoenix.com. Due to the high number of e-mails we receive, we may not be able to personally respond to your questions. However, be assured we have read your e-mail carefully, and we appreciate your time.
Have you checked out our message boards? Your question or concern may have already been answered in the Frequently Asked Questions section.
Go to http://community.myfoxphoenix.com/boards for more information.
Yesterday my boys & I went to a local gun range to do some shooting. Along with shooting our own guns we also used our yearly free rental of an MP5 submachine gun and all took turns shooting it which as always was a lot of fun. On our way home from the gun range we discussed politics as well as the differences between a true fully automatic assault rifle like an M16 used by military forces and the fake definition of a so-called "assault weapon" used in the now expired Clinton gun ban which is a term that continues to be misused by the media.
We also talked about how Bill Clinton had scaled back the military & closed quite a few military bases while he was President. One of my boys was so disgusted that he suggested that because Bill Clinton took away some of our freedoms & cut back our military he should go over to Iraq to fight some terrorists all by himself, and another went on to suggest that the only weapon he should be allowed to use would be a semi-automatic rifle with 2 or more of the defined "evil looking" features like a pistol grip as defined in his own expired assault weapons ban. We got quite a chuckle with the visualization of him being armed with a semi-automatic rifle trying to fight off a small group of terrorists armed with true fully automatic assault rifles. Perhaps if nothing else he would finally realize that there really is a difference between a semi-automatic rifle with a couple of "evil looking" features & a true fully automatic assault rifle.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Red's Trading Post & Arms & the Law have a great idea - everyone should join in contacting your own State Attorney General to ask them to join in support of the the Texas AG brief that will be filed with the Supreme Court in support of the individual rights view of the 2nd Amendment. I've contacted the Arizona AG Terry Goddard to ask him to join the list of AG's who are in support of the individual rights view of the Second Amendment. We should all contact our State Attorney General to ask them to join the list.
Update: Idaho AG has joined the list of State AG's in support of the Texas AG brief.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Just a reminder that this weekend (Fri Nov 30th through Sun Dec 2nd) is the Crossroads Gun Show at the Arizona State Fair Grounds on the corner of 19th Ave & McDowell in Phoenix Arizona. I plan to go this Saturday with my boys & drool over all the cool hardware there. I'll do my best not to drool on the actual guns so as not to cause any rust issues.
While you're there be sure to stop by the table of the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL) to learn about the club & possibly even sign up if you are not already a member. It's a great organization that does a lot every year to influence the Arizona State Legislature to protect our freedom to bear arms at the State level. One of their many recent accomplishments was working with the Arizona Legislature to remove the requirement to submit fingerprints on the CCW renewal process starting Jan 1st 2008. What a silly thing to include in the first place - what, was I going to change my fingerprints after I first applied? That revision alone will save a lot of time & money for both the Arizona CCW permit holders & Arizona tax payers in general.
Posted by Dustin at 7:47 PM
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
I don't carry a gun . . .
… to kill people. I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don’t carry a gun to scare people. I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid. I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil. I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.
I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government. I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry. I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.
I don’t carry a gun because my sex organs are too small. I carry a gun because I want to continue to use those sex organs for the purpose for which they were intended for a good long time to come.
I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone. I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.
I don’t carry a gun because I’m a cowboy. I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.
I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man. I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.
I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate. I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.
I don’t carry a gun because I love it. I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Last Tuesday Nov 20th the Supreme Court decided to take up the 07-290 District of Columbia, ET AL. V. Heller, Dick A. gun rights case. Be sure to support your favorite gun rights organizations so that they can file an Amici Curiae Brief in support of the right of the people to keep & bear arms. You can find links to some of my favorite gun rights organizations on the right side of this web page under the title of "Gun Rights Sites"
07-290 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ET AL. V. HELLER, DICK A.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to
the following question: Whether the following provisions, D.C.
Code §§ 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02, violate the
Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated
with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns
and other firearms for private use in their homes?
I know that both the NRA & the SAF have already announced plans to participate via briefs in this most important gun rights case, I'm sure there are other gun rights groups who plan to participate as well. The below was an e-mail alert I received from the SAF:
Don't Let Anti-Gun Extremists Steal Our Victory
It is an important day for American gun owners! The Supreme Court of the United States has just agreed to hear the most important Gun Rights case in American history! In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court will decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right.
We have anti-gun extremists like the Brady gun grabbers on the run, but they are far from defeated. In fact, just minutes after the Supreme Court agreed to decide a case that could begin to dismantle the gun ban laws the Brady extremists support, they have asked anti-gunners for $50,000.00 to try and stop us from winning this important battle. I know you won’t let them win!
The Second Amendment Foundation is on the front lines of the effort to defend and restore your firearms rights, and we need your help to stop the anti-freedom extremists now!
This case is a cornerstone of our work to dismantle extremist gun laws across the nation. While winning this case won’t restore all the rights the extremists have seized from us, it provides a rock-solid foundation for us to build on. And we need you to help us build this foundation, by contributing now to our “friend of the court” brief!
As I write this, the anti-freedom extremists are raising tens of thousands of dollars to us at the Supreme Court …maybe even more! We need your financial support today to ensure we have the resources to beat back anti-gunners who will stop at nothing to take away our right and ability to defend ourselves and our families.
Please give your most generous contribution today. Help me defend your individual right to bear arms in this important Supreme Court case, today!
Alan M. Gottlieb
Founder, Second Amendment Foundation
P.S. Remember, the anti-gunners are raising tens of thousands of dollars to steal this victory from us--we need your support now to help stop them dead in their tracks!
Click Here to Contribute Now!
Below is an NRA-ILA alert:
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear First Second Amendment Case Since 1939
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Fairfax, Va. - The United States Supreme Court today announced its decision to take up District of Columbia v. Heller-a case in which plaintiffs challenge the unconstitutional gun ban in the nation’s capital. The District of Columbia appealed a lower court’s ruling earlier this year affirming that the Second Amendment of the Constitution protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, and that the District’s bans on handguns, carrying firearms within the home, and possession of loaded or operable firearms for self-defense violate that right.
The NRA will participate in this case through briefs as a friend of the court. Oral arguments are likely to take place in early 2008.
In March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that “[T]he phrase ‘the right of the people,’ when read intratextually and in light of Supreme Court precedent, leads us to conclude that the right in question is individual.” The D.C. Circuit also rejected the claim that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because D.C. is not a state.
The decision marks the first time a Second Amendment challenge to a firearm law has reached the Supreme Court since 1939.
Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is America’s oldest civil rights and sportsmen's group. Four million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and advocates enforcement of existing laws against violent offenders to reduce crime. The Association remains the nation's leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the armed services.
Copyright 2007, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
I've often heard people say that they don't need to worry about personal protection because they live in a "good neighborhood" with no crime that they're aware of. I lived in such a neighborhood until this past Friday night when the first attempted burglary that I'm aware of in my own "good neighborhood" happened in my own home.
Lucky for the burglar we were out of town for the Thanksgiving Holiday. At 11:49 PM Friday night my alarm was triggered by my garage side door being opened that is in our side yard behind our gate. At 12:14 AM Saturday morning the Police finished their search & found nobody was in our home, so they locked & closed the garage side door & left a note to let us know that when they arrived they had found the door open but did not locate any intruders during their search.
When we returned Saturday afternoon we did not find anything missing. My theory is that the attempted burglar decided to leave soon after he or she heard our alarm go off, but you certainly can't always count on that type of a reaction. I had already felt that being prepared for the unexpected is extremely important no matter where you live, but this event definitely drove home the point that there really is no such thing as a neighborhood that is "safe" from crime. Being prepared to defend yourself & your family is just as if not more important than having other safety devices such as a fire extinguisher. I don't expect to ever need my fire extinguisher in my home or in my car, but I have one in both locations just in case I ever do need one. If I ever run into a situation where I need a fire extinguisher, I will have a great need for it & I'll need it right there & then. There will not be time to go purchase one at the time of the need.
The same thing is true for self protection. Nobody is responsible for the protection of my family other than myself, which is why I have secured the best tools for the job & regularly train to hone my skills. If not for my guns & my training I would probably find it much more difficult to sleep at night after this event that happened in my own home in my own "good neighborhood." I still slept soundly the last couple of nights so I know that my guns & training are paying for themselves in a good nights sleep alone, not to mention the personal & family protection benefits.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Remember the Tacoma Mall shooting of two years ago? How about Salt Lake City's Trolley Square shooting in February? Certainly nobody can claim ignorance of April's Virginia Tech massacre, or a string of public and private school shootings that dates back more than a dozen years. The common denominator in every one of these deplorable crimes is that all of them happened in gun-free zones . . . The misguided misanthropes who foster gun-free zones have a paranoid distrust of their fellow citizens that can only be a severe manifestation of social bigotry . . . all data to the contrary, these gun control fanatics hold fast to the perpetuation of gun-free zones as a symbol, when it is clear that such places are nothing more than risk-free environments for criminals and lunatics . . . The time to abolish gun-free zones is long overdue. Their only measurable result has been a body count of innocent victims; bloody statistics on the altar of political correctness.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
A recent Idaho Press Tribune article complained about "open gun laws" in Idaho & a well deserved F+ Brady rating. I say well deserved because when it comes to Brady ratings, the lower the grade, the better. It's like Golf - you actually WANT a low score. More on that later.
Fewer restrictions mean the Gem State earned an “F-plus” grade two years ago from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence regarding state laws shielding families from gun violence. The national grassroots watchdog group noted Idaho has no child access prevention law, no requirements for gun safety locks and safer design standards and a lack of background checks on secondary private sales.Since when is the Brady campaign to prevent gun ownership a "grass roots" organization (a more appropriate name borrowed from Say Uncle -thanks)? Grass roots to me means that it gets its funding & support primarily from small donations by MANY US citizens. The Brady campaign to prevent gun ownership doesn't even boast thousands of supporters, much less millions. Where does it get its money? Primarily from wealthy anti-gun individuals such as Billionaire George Soros who has donated Millions to anti-gun causes in the US & the World. George Soros & Rosie O'Donnel are fine with taking guns away from common citizens because they'll still have their teams of armed body guards to keep them safe.
It is interesting to note that the press is willing to call the Brady campaign to prevent gun ownership a "grass roots" organization, yet the same press almost always calls the NRA, GOA, SAF, & other gun rights organizations as a conglomerate "the gun lobby." This ignores the fact that the so-called "gun lobby" is run & supported by millions of common individual citizens who are voting members of the groups they've joined in order to contribute to the cause of protecting the 2nd Amendment & the freedoms that our Constitution protects in general. The NRA alone has more than 4 Million members, the Brady campaign to prevent gun ownership doesn't even have thousands of members.
Technically the Brady campaign won't even allow you to "join" their group or to have voting rights in their organization. But they will gladly accept your money - they even tell you on their Brady Center donations page that your contribution will be "tax deductible" since they don't provide you any goods or services. I couldn't agree more, accept that they forgot to mention that they do provide one service - they will do their best to infringe upon your 2nd Amendment rights.
The Brady campaign lists Idaho with an F+ because Idaho does not infringe on the 2nd Amendment as much as the Brady campaign would like it to. You'd think that would mean there was blood on every street corner in Idaho from gun slinging cowboys shooting each other if you believe the hoopla that Brady puts out. It turns out once again that the facts say otherwise.
According to the FBI crime data for 2006, Boise had a population of 198,212 people & only had 6 murders & non-negligent manslaughters. That is a murder rate of 3.03 per 100,000 people. Compare that with Washington DC where handguns are completely banned, and long guns must be kept disassembled or trigger locked making them useless for self defense. The Brady campaign rates DC with a B - they would get an A but they give one area an F because they believe Congress has the ability to repeal the very restrictive DC gun laws. Even with such stellar ratings from the Brady Campaign, in 2006 Washington DC had a population of 581,530 & had 169 murders & non-negligent manslaughters. That is a murder rate of 29.06 per 100,000 people. That is 9.6 TIMES the murder rate in Boise! Nearly 10 times the murder rate!
To sum up, an A or a B from the Brady Campaign to prevent gun ownership is equal to a State with highly infringed or zero gun rights which results in only the criminals having guns. When they give your state an F then you can be sure your state is protecting your 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. In such Free States criminals know that there are armed citizens in their midst which makes them feel less safe to work their evil deeds. Why would criminals want to live in a Free State like Idaho when Washington DC has created such a target rich environment of defenseless victims for them to choose from? Makes it as easy for criminals as shooting fish in a barrel. I'm sure glad that I don't live in that barrel.
Next Monday Nov 19th is National Ammo Day. If another day of the week works better for you Saturday Nov 17th through Sunday Nov 25th is National Ammo Week. Support those who supply our ammunition - replenish your emergency stock & get some extra to shoot next week. What is more fun than taking the family out to shoot before &/or after eating a nice Thanksgiving meal? It's a nice way of giving thanks to the entire gun & ammo industry for putting up with all of the "stuff" that they have to put up with in an effort to stay in business.
The goal is for all participants to buy at least 100 rounds of ammo but why stop there? I can easily go through hundreds of rounds in a single day of fun for the whole family. It's a great cause in support of the industry that supplies our needs, and leads to lots of fun as an extra bonus.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
An interesting bit of trivia is that the Arizona State Flag was created at the request of the Arizona Rifle Team (representing the Arizona National Guard) when they noticed that they were the only team at the Camp Perry National Rifle Matches in 1910 that did not have a flag.
The captain of the Arizona Rifle Team, Arizona National Guard Colonel Charles Wilfred Harris, designed the flag with assistance from Carl Hayden. Carl Hayden's wife Nan D. Hayden, sewed the first flag together which was carried to the 1911 National Rifle Matches at Camp Perry by the Arizona Rifle Team.
The Liberty Blue bottom is the same Liberty Blue used in the US flag. The red rays of the sun are the same red used in the US flag. The 13 yellow & red sun rays represent the original 13 colonies as well as the spectacular sunsets that Arizona is famous for. The large rising Copper Star represents the fact that Arizona produced more copper than any other State in the Nation.
Arizona became a State in the Union on Feb 14th, 1912, and the official version of the Arizona State Flag was adopted by the Arizona State Legislature on Feb 17th, 1917. The Yellow & Blue in the flag became the official state colors.
Posted by Dustin at 11:24 PM
Today was the earliest date we could have found out whether or not the Supreme Court would take up the gun case. They left it off their orders list that they released today which means the next time we might find out what they decide to do will be in about 2 weeks on Monday Nov 26th.
The Orders List contained no mention of either the District of Columbia’s appeal (07-290) or a cross-petition by challengers to the city’s flat ban on private possession of handguns (07-335). The next date for possible action on these cases is likely to be Nov. 26, following a pre-Thanksgiving Conference of the Justices set for Tuesday, Nov. 20.
Friday, November 9, 2007
I often hear hoplophobe's state that they have the right to restrict or ban gun ownership because they have a "right" to "feel safe," & they don't feel safe knowing that other people around them might have guns.
Here is my answer to that over-used assertion. First & foremost, which constitutional amendment says "the right of the people to always feel safe & secure, shall not be infringed"? Secondly, how would they ever KNOW that nobody around them has guns even if they did ban them? So even after an all out ban they still would not achieve their desired dream of "feeling safe".
The wife of a friend of mine is deathly afraid of flying in planes because she doesn't feel safe while in the air. As a result, ALL of their travel takes place via automobile. She FEELS more safe in an automobile. Feelings & emotions do not always correlate with fact. The fact that she is more than 60 times more likely to die on any given trip in an automobile than on any given trip on an airplane will not make her FEEL safe while on an airplane.
She does not have a right to feel safe on an airplane, but she does have the freedom to choose whether or not she wants to fly in one. She just doesn't have the right to force me not to fly in an airplane just because she doesn't feel safe while my plane is in the air.
That is why I would never attempt to force anyone to own a gun as that would violate the freedom of citizens to choose for themselves whether or not to own a gun. Just don't try to take my guns away from me as long as I continue to be a law abiding citizen as that WOULD violate my 2nd Amendment PROTECTED but preexisting rights in addition to my freedom. Punish criminals who commit crime with any tool, it does not matter if the tool they choose is a baseball bat, knife, handgun, long gun, their own fists, or poison added to someone's drink. Don't punish either the gun or myself because some fool used a tool similar to the tool I use for personal defense as their weapon of aggression.
Guns were not created "for killing" as many hoplophobe's assert. I would never shoot anyone with intent "to kill" - I only would "shoot to stop" - stop their attack, stop their advance on my family. That is why a gun can be used as a tool of self defense - 98% of the time when guns are used to stop a criminal attack, no shot even needs to be fired. Even in the 2% of the time that I would be forced to shoot to stop the attack, 80% of gunshot victims will still survive with treatment at a hospital. After their trip to the hospital they can go straight to jail which makes all citizens more safe.
The above self defense scenario makes things much easer for Police too. If instead I dial 911 & Police arrive "only minutes" after I called to find my dead body, they would then have to waste a lot of resources trying to figure out who the bad guy was. They would then have to track him down so that they can place him on trial in hopes that he can be placed in jail for a few years before they let him back out on parole, that is of course only if he doesn't plea bargain his way out of jail time in the first place. How else is he going to find his next victim if we don't let him out early on parole or even earlier via plea bargain? It wasn't his fault he became a criminal after all, it was all the violence he saw on the cartoon networks while he was growing up. That Coyote was one evil dude. Or perhaps it was all that evil dihydrogen monoxide that he consumed while growing up.
Petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide (H2O):
Thursday, November 8, 2007
This is an oldie but goody - definitely very funny. I died laughing when I first saw it. Democrat Carolyn McCarthy doesn't know what a barrel shroud is even though guns with barrel shroud's would have been banned in legislation she sponsored this past Feb of 2007 called the "weapons ban & law enforcement protection act of 2007." When she was questioned about what a barrel shroud was or why it should be banned on an interview on NBC news she said:
I actually don't know what a barrel shroud is, I believe it's a shoulder thing that goes up.Check it out for a good laugh:
What exactly does she have against a device that protects us from being burned? Does she own stock in some company that sells a burn relief cream or something?
One of my favorite gun rights quotes was coined by Dr. Suzanna Hupp - one of the great hero's of gun rights advocacy. Her efforts were a major force in getting the Texas legislature to pass their shall issue CCW law in 1995 that finally "allowed" it's citizens to keep & bear arms - prior to that Texas did not allow either concealed or open carry of handguns in public at all, unless you were part of a government agency. So in essence, Texas had previously quashed the right to bear arms. Currently it is only partially quashed, since you still can't openly carry a handgun in public there with or without a permit, and you can only conceal carry there with permission from the state in the form of a permit. But at least Texas is now a "shall issue" CCW state, so if you apply, take the required training course, pay the expensive fees, pass the required background checks, & meet the stated requirements, they have to issue you a permit.
You can watch Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp discuss the gun rights issue via the below video links:
On to my favorite Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp quote:
How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.Gun control is not about guns - it's about control. Are we as law abiding US citizens to be "allowed" to have the right to keep & bear arms as protected by the 2nd Amendment, or are our Second Amendment rights to be infringed so that the government can lord over, control, supervise, and "take care" of us.
I believe we should all fight to keep our constitutional rights, and I will heavily oppose any politician who wishes to "lord over" me as evidenced by a record of voting in favor of adding new gun control laws. The last thing in the world I want is to wake up one morning to find Bill Clinton is the newest 1st Lady in the White House. Hillary Clinton has voted anti gun & anti 2nd Amendment in every single gun related vote that she has ever cast. No matter what, do NOT vote for Hillary Clinton or any of the other anti-gun candidates if you care one iota about our Bill of Rights & our freedoms that it protects.
No matter which candidate in which party you are planning to vote for, make sure to find out where he or she stands on the gun rights issue, and don't just take their word for it. Look at their voting record to confirm what they say. Do they want to leave guns in our own control where it belongs, or do they wish to take the control away from law abiding citizens & hand it over to the government in an effort to lord over, control, supervise, and "take care" of us.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
I really wish I could just believe that CNN is full of incompetent reporters & editors. Unfortunately it is equally as likely that they are just a bunch of liars who wish to mislead their audience in order to support their own liberal dream of re-enacting the Clinton gun ban (commonly called the "assault weapon" ban by the gun grabbers) that already expired without renewal.
This is a repeat of the same lies & propaganda spewed by CBS news last month as reported in blog entries such as Days of our Trailers & Say Uncle, with new lies added in by CNN for extra putrid flavoring. Just one of the misleading statements CNN included:
What in the world does the rate of killings of Police Officers have to do with the expired Clinton gun ban? They make that statement as if they're saying all or even most of those officers were killed with weapons named on the banned list, which is an outright lie. Officers are killed by all kinds of criminals who use all kinds of weapons - handguns, shotguns, knives, cars, baseball bats, explosives, & normal semi-automatic rifles. Full auto assault rifles are not very common on the streets, and even if they were, it would not be caused by the lack of the so-called assault weapon ban which does NOT include a SINGLE ASSAULT RIFLE. Not one. Surprised? It's all part of the deception - the folks in favor of the Clinton gun ban want people to be confused so that they will support it.
"We're having more than one officer shot and killed a week. It's just outrageous that officers are being targeted," he said. "It's something I think all Americans should be outraged about."
He lays the blame squarely on lawmakers who allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004.
In the CNN news story they keep going back & forth between the phrase "assault rifle" & "assault weapon" as if they both mean the same thing. They did at one time, because assault weapons officially only included assault rifles and weapons used by military forces for armed assaults on enemy forces, until the Brady folks & Clinton decided to cause mass confusion by defining normal semi automatic rifles that have 2 or more "evil looking" features such an "evil" pistol grip as being an "assault weapon" even if it was not an assault rifle. One example of the normal semi automatic guns that had been banned by the Clinton gun ban is the popular "Sport Utility" gun - the AR-15. Jack of all trades - works great for target practice, home defense, target matches, etc. Below is yet another example of the lies from CNN - first they said the Police Department is being armed with Assault rifle's:
Miami's police department also is in the process of arming every officer with an assault rifle.Then later they said:
Palm Beach Sheriff's deputy Carl Martin bought his own AR-15 and passed the required training.So apparently they want us to think an AR-15 is an assault rifle which is a big fat lie.
There are far more powerful rifles out there than the semi-automatic rifles that had been banned by the Clinton Gun ban. A .30-06 rifle comes to mind as a popular hunting rifle that is far more powerful than either the popular semi-auto AR-15 or the popular semi-auto version of the AK-47. Yet the article continued to blubber on & on about "high powered assault weapons"
"It's not nice we have to arm ourselves like the soldiers in Iraq," said Sgt. Laurie Pfeil, who supervises a sheriff's road patrol in Palm Beach County and is now certified to carry a semiautomatic AR-15 rifle on the job. It's the civilian version of the military's M-16 used by U.S. soldiers in Iraq.Believe me when I tell you that our soldiers are not using AR-15 semi-automatic rifles - they NEVER have. They use "select fire" full automatic or burst mode assault rifles commonly known as the M-16. It has little to do with an AR-15 other than that they have a few common features such as a pistol grip & an accessory rail where you can attach utilities like a flashlight which works nicely for home defense purposes against criminal invaders.
So enough with the lies & propaganda. Let's call an AR-15 what it really is - a Sport Utility Rifle or SUR for short. It is not an "assault rifle" even if the media wishes us to believe that it is. The Clinton gun ban was not renewed because it was dumb legislation that did not do anything other than ban perfectly normal semi-automatic rifles in a blatant attempt to keep them out of the hands of law abiding citizens. The truth came out, and the legislation died a well deserved long overdue death, which is exactly where it should stay. Let the dead horse lie in its grave - a zombie horse is not a pretty picture, lets not attempt to raise this dead horse from the grave as the Brady folks are demanding.
CNN & CBS news should start out every story with the following advisory: "Warning - you are about to be assaulted by left wing liberal bias, propaganda, and outright lies carefully crafted to confuse & mislead. Viewer discretion is advised. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile."
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
A criminal attacked a woman in a Home Depot parking lot in an apparent attempt to steal her purse. Luckily her husband was nearby who retrieved a loaded shotgun from their vehicle. He fired one shot & the criminal let her go to run away - he managed to find a police car which leads to the funny part:
"The suspect runs up to the police car saying, 'Let me in. They are shooting at me'."Yet another criminal foiled by law abiding gun owning Americans who refuse to be willing victims. Keep up the great work my fellow Americans - when we fight back we increase the risk to benefit ratio of crime. As the risk to benefit ratio climbs for criminals, more & more of them will either seek a safer career, or move to New York or Washington DC where they know all of their victims have been disarmed by their local government.
Police took the suspect into custody.
The only thing criminals in New York or Washington DC fear is their armed competition - fellow thugs fighting over who gets the majority of the spoils from their disarmed victims.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Gun buybacks are purported by their sponsors to reduce crime, yet all studies on past gun buybacks have indicated that there was ZERO effect on crime. Zip, zilch, nada. So you'd think that politicians would learn their lesson & would stop wasting taxpayer money on such a ridiculous effort.
No such luck for the unfortunate citizens of Springfield, IL, which city is now on the hook for $52,600 from the $100 debit cards they owe or already gave out for the guns that they took in during their latest gun buyback event (526 guns taken in). That does not even take into account all of the wasted man hours of the Police who had to waste their time coordinating the gun buyback effort rather than watching the streets for criminals. Springfield Mayor Tim Davlin admitted that he had only expected the event to take in 100 guns, so they had to issue IOU cards to most of those who turned their guns in. He plans to submit an emergency ordinance to pay for the additional debit cards that they owe using funds currently earmarked for community development along with drug forfeiture money.
It is interesting to note that since US citizens own approximately 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the 2007 Small Arms Survey by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies, the wasted time & money had a HUGE impact on the number of guns in the US: a whopping 00.0000019% reduction in guns owned in the US primarily by law abiding citizens. Of course that small "gain" for Springfield was negated in just over an hour of the end of the event since the same Small Arms Survey also showed that US Citizens are currently purchasing an average of approximately 4.5 Million newly manufactured guns each year which translates to roughly 513 newly manufactured guns per hour. I bet the citizens of Springfield IL feel very good about this wise investment of their hard earned tax dollars to support yet another failed gun buyback program (strong sarcasm oozing here folks).
Clinton had established a Federal gun buyback program that wasted millions of tax dollars on failed gun buyback experiments. The program was later terminated because of the failure to produce any effect based on study results. Here are some quotes from the above mentioned termination notice listing the reasons why gun buyback programs don't have any effect on crime:
Studies show that lawbreakers rarely surrender their weapons to buyback programs and many people who sell their guns have other firearms at home, or soon purchase new ones . . . In general, the age and type of guns turned in as a part of buyback programs are older guns. For example, in 1999, more than half the 2,912 weapons bought by the District of Columbia police for $100 apiece were 15 (or more) years old.Gun control does not work. Gun buybacks don't work. Lets spend our tax dollars on things that do work, like building more prisons so that we have enough room to place criminals in jail for the maximum time allowed rather than the minimum (due to overcrowded prisons), followed by less early release programs which are in effect experiments to see if the known criminals are going to return to crime or not. If they do return to crime, that experiment often ends in tragedy for one or more innocent victims, yet nobody seems to be demanding changes to the early release/probation system in our Country.
Let's make some changes that actually give results in reducing crime, not more of the same wasted effort in trying to think of new laws or efforts that do not even work to keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals, much less to reduce crime. As Albert Einstein said - "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Let us NOT act like the insane.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Yet another wacky school district in our Nation. A High School student at Willow Canyon High School in Arizona named Kim Peters was suspended from school for having 2 cases of shotgun shells in her own vehicle while parked in a High School parking lot. The school administrators said that the shotgun shells could be classified as a "dangerous instrument"
If it were not for the students who have been suspended for drawing pictures of guns or for having 1 inch plastic GI Joe guns in their pockets due to the so-called "zero tolerance" policy our schools currently have than I would say I'm surprised. Unfortunately, many school officials have already proven that they are not bright enough to tell the difference between a drawing of a gun and a real gun, so I'm not surprised that the school administrators of Willow Canyon High School can't tell the difference between a shotgun shell & a shotgun.
Get real folks, a shotgun shell is not a "dangerous instrument" - if it were, boxes of them would not be sold on the bottom shelf of the local Walmart & local sporting goods stores where kids could easily reach them. The difference is, the people who run Walmart & sporting goods stores are smart enough to tie their own shoes. These school officials should not be hired for anything more complicated than being the greeter at a local Walmart Supercenter. Why in the world are we trusting them with the education of our children?
You'll find contact info for the Willow Canyon High School administrators on their website. Please send them a FRIENDLY email & kindly explain to them what the difference is between a shotgun shell and an actual firearm. Willow Canyon High School is part of the Dysart Unified School District. Here is the Dysart Unified School District Board Member contact info.
1st Update: The exact wording of the definition of a dangerous instrument which was what they used to unfairly punish her don't even apply to the events. Exact wording of the definition from their own Student & Parent Handbook is:
Dangerous Instruments/Explosive Devices means anything that under the circumstances in which it is used, attempted to be used, or threatened to be used, is readily capable of causing physical injury.Even if you were to ignore the fact that shotgun shells without a gun are not capable of causing physical injury, she did not use, attempt to use, or threaten to use her shotgun shells in any way. They were sitting in an unopened box in her own personal vehicle, an extension of her own home space. Additionally there is not a single mention of the word ammunition or shotgun shells in the entire handbook because it is NOT banned.
The High School officials were 100% wrong on this & they need to admit their mistake as well as delete this gross injustice from Kim's record. If they refuse to do it, than Kim will need to appeal to the school board & they had better recognize the facts or face upset voters at the next board election. In addition to setting her record straight they need to render disciplinary action against those who signed off on this gross injustice. Perhaps suspension without pay or even better - termination - due to lack of education.
I understand one of the board members is going to request an agenda item to discuss the misinterpretation of the dangerous instrument policy at the next Dysart Board Meeting on Nov 14th. If anyone would like to speak either during the initial "call to the audience" or during the specific agenda item, be sure to show up BEFORE the meeting begins to fill out a "request to speak" form - only those who are on the audience speaker list will be granted an opportunity to speak during the board meeting.
The meeting will begin @ 6PM & is located in the board room in the Nathaniel Dysart Education Center located at 15802 N. Parkview Place, Surprise, AZ 85374
3rd Update: Also check out this story of a boy who was told he could not wear an NRA shirt. The NRA sued on basis of 1st Amendment freedom of speech infringement & won.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
As many of you already know, the latest polls show that more and more of our fellow citizens are finding the truth - that gun control laws do absolutely nothing whatsoever to curb crime. The evidence is so overwhelming that even the CDC (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention) reviewed many independent studies to see which if any gun control measures work, & found that there is zero evidence of a single gun law being able to reduce violent crime.
The Task Force review of the effects of various laws showed insufficient evidence to conclude whether firearms laws impact rates of violence.
Among the areas under task force review were: bans on specific firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearm laws.
As our fellow Americans find the truth, support for additional gun laws continues to fall. A new Gallup Poll was released just this month that shows only 51% of Americans believe we need more strict gun control laws. 47% believe that they should stay the same or be less strict. This matches the lowest number of people in support of more gun control since 2002, and is much lower than 1990 when this poll was first taken at which time the result was 78% of Americans felt we needed stricter gun control laws. That is a 27% drop in support of more gun control laws over the last 17 years. See results below:
So take heart my fellow Americans and continue spreading the truth. Gun control does not work. It's a waste of time & government effort, not to mention the wasted taxes that fund it. Gun control only affects law abiding citizens by making it more difficult or even impossible in some cities for them to arm themselves in protection of self & family. Criminals laugh at gun control laws, why do they care about a gun law when they're willing to commit armed robbery, assault, rape, or murder? It is impossible to keep guns out of the hands of criminals just like it is impossible to keep drugs or even alcohol in the case of the great prohibition, off of the streets. Criminals prefer unarmed victims so they love gun control. They don't buy their guns at gun shops, they buy them from fellow thugs on the black market or they steal them via robbery.
Don't disarm your fellow law abiding Americans by pushing for additional useless gun control laws. Believe it or not there really ARE evil people in the world who will always have guns so don't force any of your law abiding fellow Americans to be unarmed. If you don't want to own arms that is your decision, we still live in a Free country. This really isn't about guns, it's about FREEDOM. Don't erode our bill of rights by saying the 2nd Amendment is not as important as the rest of the bill of rights. "The right of the PEOPLE to keep & BEAR arms shall NOT be INFRINGED" - what part of infringed don't those on the 51% side understand?
Open your mouth and continue spreading the truth. We need to get that number down from 51% to at least 49% so that those in support of additional gun control laws will not have enough votes to place people into power who wish to take more of our gun rights away. Wear t-shirts announcing your position on gun control to stimulate conversations - I'm amazed at how many people ask me about my shirt when I wear one of my anti gun control shirts.
Ask everyone you meet what they think about gun control & gently share the news if they're one of the remaining 51%. We can't force anyone to join our side, but through education many will come to see the light. Remember that those on the gun control side are often victims of a primarily liberal media that seems to enjoy spreading misinformation via outright lies or biased reporting. Don't hold it against those who have been fooled by the media, all they need in order to join us is to be educated with the truth. In the end, truth overpowers lies, especially due to the power of grass-roots movements over the Internet.
Also be sure to invite your friends to the range - it's amazing at how much more important the Second Amendment becomes to those who realize how much FUN it is to enjoy the shooting sports.
Friday, October 19, 2007
The National Shooting Sports Foundation has issued a press release letting the world know exactly what they think of Arnold's recent decision to sign into law the California microstamping & lead amo bills. I love the way they worded their response, I could not have said it better myself:
"Governor Schwarzenegger has now effectively banned more firearms than Senators Kennedy, Feinstein and Schumer combined," said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF senior vice president and general counsel. "The governor has proven to gun owners and sportsmen that he is just another liberal anti-gun Hollywood actor -- he just plays a moderate Republican on TV. Mr. Schwarzenegger has now exposed himself for what he really is, the most anti-gun and anti-sportsmen governor in America."
In my opinion this new law won't do much if anything to fight crime. The criminals just steal guns or buy them on the black market. If by some miracle they were to end up with a microstamping gun, they'll simply disable it as was shown to be very easy via independent research that proved the technology is easily defeated. Even if they were to not defeat it, how exactly would knowing who the gun was stolen from help to find the criminal?
Independent research also demonstrated that criminals will be able to remove the laser engraving in mere seconds using common household tools.I also believe this new law increases the risk level for innocent Californians who can have their spent cases stolen from the floor of the local gun range & used by criminals to mislead investigators. An investigator finding your spent case with your fingerprints at the crime scene will easily track the cases back to you due to the serial # & your fingerprints will confirm that the spent cases were yours. Now you will suddenly find yourself in jail & it will be up to you to get an expensive lawyer to try to prove you are innocent.
There are many other details in their press release such as estimates of lost jobs & revenue due to reduced hunting when hunters go out of state to escape the lead ammo ban:
A ban on lead ammunition could cost 2,230 jobs, $15 million in state and federal income tax, $3.9 million per year in hunting license costs, $131 million a year in retail sales and $624,000 in federal excise tax money normally returned to California.See full press release below for details: http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=common/PR/&PR=101507.cfm
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
I personally believe that the NRA has done more to protect our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms than any other single organization out there. The NRA has more than 4 Million current members and the polls show that at least 25 Million fellow Americans believe that they are NRA members even though their membership status may not be fully up to date. It is largely thanks to the efforts of the NRA along with other local gun rights organizations in many states that we now have a majority of the states with "shall issue" concealed carry laws (which previously had "might issue" or "shall NOT issue" laws). There is of course still much work to be done but we are making good progress.
Stand up & help in the fight by Joining the NRA. It only costs $25/yr with the current discounted rate (normally $35/yr). I spend more than that on ammo with a single trip to the gun range where I regularly go to exercise my right to own, carry, & shoot my guns which has been defended for many years by the NRA. The more of us who join in supporting the NRA, the more clout they will have with Politicians when they ask them to support our gun rights. Join as many gun rights organizations as you are able, the more the better. I have many other great gun rights organizations linked to on the right under the heading of "Gun Rights Sites." Most of them cost very little to join. But at least join with me in support of the NRA by becoming a fellow NRA member.
If you're already a member than NRA memberships also make a great gift for those not already familiar with what they are missing out on. I bet after a one year gift membership many will decide to continue the membership on their own. You can finish your Christmas or Birthday shopping in seconds online just by filling out the on-line form & spending $25 per gift membership. It sure beats shopping in packed shopping malls fighting with other shoppers over the last available pet rock or whatever the hot item ends up being this year. You'll save time & will feel good that you have taken an extra step to support our gun rights. What better gift can we give ourselves than that?