Monday, March 31, 2008

Watch out for the Ohio Food Stamp Police!

It is perfectly legal to open carry a weapon in Ohio, but apparently at least two undercover Officers from the Ohio Investigative Unit (Ohio agency that enforces Ohio's food stamp, alcohol, & tobacco laws), were oblivious to that fact. In spite of their ignorance to Ohio Gun laws, Agent Timothy Gales, and his partner Betty Ford, decided to hold up a law abiding Ohio citizen (Philip Turner) who was minding his own business while walking from his apartment to his vehicle while open carrying, for 30 minutes, before deciding to release him without charges.

An internal investigation decided that the Food Stamp agents had done nothing wrong, although it was determined that they were unaware of Ohio's gun laws. No kidding?! I could have saved them the time & money of an entire internal investigation by telling them that from the get go. As a result of that determination, more than 100 Ohio Investigative Unit agents are now going to attend a mandatory refresher course on Ohio gun laws over the next few months.

One question: Why exactly does Ohio need over 100 agents to enforce Food Stamp, alcohol, & tobacco laws? Can't an Ohio citizen eat a little food, drink a little drink, and smoke a little smoke without an undercover Ohio agent getting involved?

Thursday, March 27, 2008

73% of Americans Agree: 2nd Amendment protects Individual Right

You may already be aware of the results of the February Gallop Poll, but if not, yes it's true. 73% of Americans know the simple truth that yes, the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. For those of you on the 27% side of the issue (20% say no, 7% don't know), please investigate the facts & then come join us.

91% of Gun owners, and 63% of people who don't own guns know that it is an individual right, proving that there is a strong correlation between gun ownership & intelligence. I'm not sure if it's because intelligent people naturally realize that it's smart to own a gun for protection of ones family from thugs (as well as being useful for a lot of fun shooting sports), or if owning guns over a period of time simply causes an increase of intelligence. Either way, go buy a gun (be sure to get some safety training first - there are many excellent NRA certified instructors all over the country) & you'll at least look smarter than you did before you owned one.

Gun Control & Confiscation in Canada

Video about the results of Gun Control laws enacted in Canada, including gun registration, followed by bans & confiscation of specific kinds of handguns & rifles, etc. Punishing law abiding Canadian Citizens without impacting the weapons available to Criminals. The last time (and probably final time since they don't allow me to bring my handgun) I drove across the Canadian boarder the Canadian border agent asked me if I owned any handguns. I said "Of course, but I don't have any of them with me since you don't allow me to bring them here" - she then asked "Why on earth would you want a handgun?" Unbelievable.

England Gun Battle

Video showing the results of the handgun & self defense Bans in England such as a massive jump in crime rates, citizens going to jail longer than the criminals they defended themselves from, etc.

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

The Anti-Gun Gun Owner

An Excellent article is on the Buckeye Firearms website by Gerard Valentino on the topic of the Anti-Gun Gun Owner. It is a mouthful I know, but a type of Gun Owner all too common. They are the folks that say "as long as you don't take my hunting rifle you can take away handguns" or "as long as you don't take my handgun you can take away the AR-15 or the .50 caliber Rifle"

All gun owners must unite with the common goal of defending our right to bear arms or the anti gun folks will divide & conquer. All for one, and One for All must be our motto. "We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." (Ben Franklin after signing the Declaration of Independence).

We also must not leave out the Passive Gun Owner - the gun owner who is pro gun rights but does nothing at all to support them. There are more than 70 Million gun owners in the US yet there are less than 6 Million members of all of the National gun rights groups combined. That means there are at least 64 Million gun owners who are being passive. Pick both a local & a National gun rights group & join both of them. Imagine what we could get done if even half of the US Gun owners stood up as one for our right to bear arms & joined a national gun rights group. 35 Million gun owners standing together as one would indeed be a tough force for the gun grabbers to reckon with.

We can learn a valuable lesson from our neighbors across the ocean in the UK. Many hunters in the UK stood by when the anti-gun folks called for the UK handgun ban in 1997. The hunters were then caught by surprise when the same anti-gun folks introduced and successfully enacted a ban on traditional fox hunting with hounds that went into effect in 2005. They were divided, and then conquered. Let us not make the same mistake.

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Gun Rights Advocates Podcast

The most recent episode of the Gun Rights Advocates Podcast (Episode 79 released Friday March 21st) features a discussion Mark & I Had about last weeks DC vs Heller Supreme Court case. Neither of us are legal experts, but we had a nice discussion nonetheless about the things we found interesting. If you have not yet listened to the audio of the DC vs Heller Case, I highly recommend it. Every time that I listen to it I catch things that I missed the first time. Links to the Real Audio version of the video/audio stream as well as to mp3 versions & transcript are here as well as being available in Episode 78 of the Gun Rights Advocates podcast dated March 18th.

eBay Hypocrisy

You may recall from last year that eBay banned the sale of all firearm related ammunition, gun parts, or accessories. Check out this interesting example of recent eBay Hypocrisy. Although eBay is not willing to allow the sale of perfectly legal firearms accessories, they are willing to allow the sale of switch blades which violates Federal Interstate Commerce Regulations. Not that I have anything against switch blades. Just an interesting case of eBay Hypocrisy worth taking note of.

H/T to Sebastian & David Hardy.

Friday, March 21, 2008

Which is better, a gun in your hand now, or a cell phone?

When seconds count, Police are only minutes away:

A woman was asking a 911 dispatcher for help when her pleas were interrupted by gunshots, then silence . . . She was shot to death.
The victim was identified as Hsiao Hsu. She lived in West Covina in LA, an upscale nice neighborhood, but that did not keep her safe. She dialed 911 to ask Police for help, but that did not keep her safe. Police are really much more of a crime deterrent than a crime preventer based on the prospect that crime can lead to jail time. Even when Police don't arrive at all the Supreme Court has held that the Police are not obligated to keep any specific individual safe, their primary purpose is to deter crime as much as possible by their presence in the community and to capture criminals after the crime is complete. Each person is individually responsible for their own safety as well as for the safety of their own family. The intended victim is the immediate responder, not the Police. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a victim waiting to happen.

California is a "May Issue" State - that means that the Sheriff may or may not issue you a CCW permit, depending on whether or not he feels like giving one to you, how Politically connected you are, how much you contributed to his or her election campaign, etc, even if you meet all of the State requirements. She was in her home so only a place like Washington DC would have prevented her from having a gun available for her own Self Defense in her own home, but not all criminals strike in the Home so I thought it was worth mentioning California's "May Issue" status, one of the last holdouts for the May Issue legacy.

Another of many infringed gun rights issues in California is the fact that they refuse to recognize CCW permits from any other State. A bit like a State refusing to recognize drivers licenses from other States, only much worse since it prevents the basic right of self defense. As a result, I drive Around California through alternate States when I drive to a North West Destination such as Washington State, although I could save a little time by taking a shortcut through California. California's loss, Utah & Idaho's gain.

Don't even get me started on the issue that Adult Students & Teachers in most Universities & Colleges throughout the Country are disarmed on a daily basis by so-called "Gun Free Zones" when they head to classes. Not only do such policies fail to provide the crime & victim free Utopia of safety the "Gun Free Zone" proponents claim, but such policies lead to many tragic events on a yearly basis from mass shootings to rape & murder that take place in such victim disarmament zones. "You can't stop insane people from doing insane things by passing insane laws. That's insane!" (Penn & Teller)

H/T to JK, campus leader for U of A SCCC.

Update 1: More details.

Thursday, March 20, 2008

Project Appleseed - learn or enhance your Rifle Skills

Have any of you heard of Project Appleseed? I only recently found out about their effort to teach Americans how to be a true Rifleman, as well as to teach about the American Rifleman Heritage, while I was listening to Michael Bane's March 11th Downrange Radio podcast (episode 50). I was so impressed by what was said by his guest (Michael Adams) that I decided to experience it for myself. I've signed up my boys & myself for the next Project Appleseed event in my area, scheduled for April 19th & 20th in Tonopah, AZ, just a bit West of Phoenix. I'll report on my experience after I participate, but I encourage everyone to check for an event in your own area, sign up, & check it out for yourself. Let me know what you think. It sounds like a very good project worth supporting.

Here is an excerpt from their home page describing the program:

The Appleseed Program is designed to take you from being a simple rifle owner to being a true rifleman. All throughout American history, the rifleman has been defined as a marksman capable of hitting a man-sized target from 500 yards away — no ifs, ands or buts about it. This 500-yard range is traditionally known as "the rifleman's quarter-mile;" a rifleman can hit just about any target he can see. This skill was particulary evident in the birth of our country, and was the difference in winning the Revolutionary War.
Also be sure to take Fred's IQ test - I got a score of 100%. If you get a score of less than 30% you're what Fred calls a "Doofus Americanus." :)

USA Today GOA 2nd Amendment Opinion Piece

Good USA Today Opinion Piece on the meaning of the Second Amendment written by attorneys who wrote the Brief from Gun Owners of America, Herbert W. Titus and William J. Olson.

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

AZ SB 1214 update

Arizona Senate Bill 1214 which would allow 21 & older adults with CCW permits to walk across our current "gun free zone" boundaries around our Arizona Universities & Colleges with their concealed weapons the same way they walk most everywhere else such as Shopping Malls, Grocery Stores, and crowded movie theaters is being considered in the Arizona Senate.

I've been notified that the following Republican Senators are not currently in support of this legislation (none of the Arizona Democrat Senators are in support of the legislation that I'm aware of, so if your Senator is a Democrat contact them too). If you live in their district please contact them & politely explain why you request their support of this legislation. It will be a close vote & we will need their support to pass this bill. If you don't know who your Senator is, you can look it up here. Although my own Senator is already in full support of this legislation, I have contacted all of the below Senators via Letter, e-mail, and phone call into their office voicing my concerns as well as my request for their support of AZ SB 1214.

The text of my letter is below (no response from any of them as yet):
Honorable Senator:

I'm writing to request your support of AZ SB 1214 which would allow law abiding adults 21 & older who have gone through the required process of a full FBI & AZ State DPS background check, fingerprinting, training, have passed both written & skill tests, who already carry their concealed weapon everywhere else allowed such as crowded movie theaters, shopping malls, parks, in their cars in busy rush hour traffic, etc, (without incident), to continue to be able to carry their concealed weapon even when crossing the current imaginary so-called "gun free zone" boundary that surrounds our Arizona Universities & Colleges.

In a time when the Supreme Court is poised to rule that the 2nd Amendment DOES protect our preexisting and granted by God right to bear arms in our own protection of life & liberty, it is important that we move Arizona back towards the freedoms that we built our wonderful country around, freedoms that became infringed less than 20 years ago when schools started to embrace the idea of "gun free zones" - an idea that has since been well proven to be ineffective at best, and a tragic cause of the death or rape of many innocent adult students & teachers at worst, who once disarmed by this tragic policy have become easy victims of criminals or the insane who will disregard any "gun free zone" boundary.

Please join with me as well as with the majority of the conservative Arizona Republican Senators in support of restoring a lost freedom to our State.

Thank you.
Update 1: I just received the following response from Senator John Huppenthal - I've sent him a response requesting clarification on whether or not this means he is in support of SB 1214 - I will update this post when I find out:

No one, absolutely no one, has a better record of supporting the second amendment than I have in the legislature. I was the 16th and deciding vote to bring concealed carry rights to Arizona.

I always vote to strengthen second amendment rights.

John Huppenthal

State Senator

A Field Guide to American Politics on DC vs Heller Case

Today Duane Lester of did a special edition of his "A field Guide to American Politics" podcast on yesterdays DC vs Heller Second Amendment Supreme Court Case. He interviewed Guy Midkiff of during the first section of his podcast and I joined in for a short interview during the last 5 minutes of the podcast. I was supposed to join in a bit earlier but due to some confusion on my part (I forgot that Daylight savings is now in effect everywhere but here) while I did the time zone conversion from Arizona time to Central time I thought I was calling 7 minutes early when in fact I was calling 53 minutes late.

Arizona is a State that does not participate in Daylight Savings so doing time zone conversions can be a bit confusing at times, especially in the periods immediately after Daylight Savings changes take effect in the fall & spring for all of our neighbors. Now that Daylight savings is in effect everywhere else I have to remember that I'm in the Pacific time zone, but later this fall I'll once again have to jump back into the Mountain time zone. :)

Why doesn't Arizona participate in Daylight Savings during the summer you ask? Well quite simply because Arizonans like to play outside in the DARK using outdoor lighting during the summer. That's right - when it is hot outside we stay cool by the swimming pool during the day, and play in our neighborhood park after dark. It's amazing how much cooler you feel while hanging in the Park in the Dark while the sun is no longer beating down on you. Why would we want the sun to be up later in the evening during the Summer by participating in Daylight Savings when we actually look forward to the Sun going down early in the evening so we can go hang out in the local Park utilizing outdoor lighting? :)

2nd Amendment commentary by newssiftr

I came across this video commentary by youtube user newssiftr of while searching for commentary on the oral arguments from yesterdays Supreme Court 2nd Amendment DC vs Heller case. He did a good job & I think you will enjoy it:

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Today's DC vs Heller case

I've listened to the Oral Arguments (Requires Real Player) & my unprofessional opinion is that DC's argument to keep their handgun & functional firearm ban was incredibly weak. But don't take my word for it, go ahead & listen so that you can judge for yourself. You can also view an official (but subject to review) transcript of the Oral Arguments.

So far today both the NRA & John McCain have come out in favor of the Supreme Court upholding the lower court ruling that struck down the DC gun ban as unconstitutional. The Silence on the case from both Hillary & Obama is deafening. Fox News has released a piece appropriately titled: "In Second Amendment Case, High Court Majority Appears to Support Individual Right to Own Guns"

Update 1: Michael Bane has now released the oral arguments as individual mp3 files broken down by the three individuals who argued the case. Tom Gresham has also released the audio in mp3 format.

Update 2: SAF press release & NRA Heller page.

Update 3: Alan Korwin overview of the Oral Arguments & ABC interview with Wayne LaPierre.

Update 4: The Ruling is IN that YES 2nd Amendment Protects Individual Right to Bear Arms.

Monday, March 17, 2008

2008 AZ Game & Fish Expo

For a ton of free outdoor fun for the entire family be sure not to miss the 2008 Arizona Game & Fish Expo at the Ben Avery Shooting Range (Off of Carefree Hwy just west of I-17) this March 29th & 30th. There were more than 100 exhibitors & 17,000 visitors at last years expo. Find details here. See you there!

Why the gun is civilization

This has been around for a while, so you may have already read it. If not, it definitely is worth a look. It was written by Marko Kloos, and titled "Why the gun is civilization"

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Next Tuesday big day for the 2nd Amendment

Next Tuesday morning (March 18th) at 10AM Eastern time (7AM Pacific) a historic Second Amendment case will be heard in the Supreme Court of the US: Docket #: 07-290 titled: District of Columbia, et al., Petitioners v. Dick Anthony Heller. Heller was the party of the original lawsuit seeking to overturn DC's unconstitutional handgun & functional firearm ban who was found to have standing in the case because he had requested a handgun permit that was denied based on the DC law. Below is the exact wording of the question that the Supreme Court will be considering:


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?
Each side of the case (City of DC asking the Supreme Court to overturn last year's lower court ruling that found its handgun & functional firearm ban to be unconstitutional, and Heller asking the Supreme Court to sustain the lower court ruling), is scheduled to be alloted half an hour to plead their case and answer questions of the Judges. The US Solicitor General will also get 15 minutes to make arguments. If no extension of time is granted than it will all be over sometime around 11:15 AM Eastern Time (8:15 AM Pacific).

C-Span requested that the audio of the arguments be released immediately following the end of the session, which has been granted. You can expect to be able to listen to the audio online at most of the following locations: C-Span America & the Courts, SCOUTUSBLOG,, & Be sure to tune in to next Tuesday evening at 9pm Eastern (6pm Pacific) to listen to excerpts of the arguments as well as interviews of the experts on how the arguments went.

A Supreme Court decision on the case is expected sometime in late June or Early July 2008. I think July the 4th 2008 would be an excellent time to restore the PREEXISTING but 2nd Amendment PROTECTED Freedom to BEAR ARMS to ALL of the American People (even those who live in Washington DC) in celebration of that very special day on July 4th, 1776 when WE THE PEOPLE declared our independence from a freedom squashing tyrannical government across the ocean:
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness . . .

Wayne LaPierre on getting rid of Gun Free Zones

Commentary on the problem with Gun Free Zones from Wayne LaPierre's blog, "What They Didn't Tell You Today," available at

Friday, March 07, 2008
Extending the Right to Carry, Part 1

In Virginia, the state legislature recently voted to extend the Right-to-Carry into restaurants that serve alcohol. Frankly, it wasn't a controversial vote. Both chambers passed the bill easily, with very little opposition. And that's how it should be. Virginians have been exercising their Right to Carry for years now, and fears of "blood in the streets" have, of course, not come true.

So why is there such controversy over extending the Right-to-Carry onto school campuses? The fact of the matter is, we're not changing the requirements of who can exercise their Right to Carry. We're merely expanding where RTC holders can exercise that right.

There are millions of RTC holders in this country. You drive next to them, you shop with them, you see them every day. They're your dentist or your pastor, your boss or your star employee. They're everywhere. And the reason you may not know that is because they're not the problem.

They're already carrying in your church, the grocery store, and the public library. They're with you at your favorite restaurant or your local bookstore. And the reason you never think about it is because they're not the problem.

The problem is that there is evil in this world, people who want to prey on the innocent and defenseless.

The gun-control crowd has also flamed the fears with their embarrassingly weak arguments against extending the Right to Carry. They have played on emotion at the expense of logic and reason. And in my next blog, I'll take their arguments apart one by one. The discussion over extending Right-to-Carry is too important, and knee-jerk calls for more gun control serve no purpose but to avoid the issue.

Monday, March 10, 2008
Extending the Right to Carry, Part 2

In my last blog, I talked about the importance of having a real discussion on the issue of Right-to-Carry on campuses across this country. Instead of having that honest debate, people like Paul Helmke and Peter Hamm of the Brady Campaign seem intent on talking about anything but the real issue.

They accuse groups like Students for Concealed Carry on Campus of being "funded by the gun industry," instead of simply recognizing that this is an issue that is important to tens of thousands of students and faculty. And their arguments against Right-to-Carry on campus are just straw men that collapse with ease.

They say that allowing Right-to-Carry on college campuses would lead to alcohol-fueled bloodshed. But they ignore the fact that there are many young adults who are already gun owners and Right-to-Carry holders across the country. They're serving in our military, they're serving as law enforcement officers, and yes, there are many who are just responsible gun owners. These young men and women are already gun owners of legal drinking age, and they're not causing mayhem. There's simply no reason to believe that extending Right-to-Carry to campuses would cause these responsible adults to act irresponsibly.

The gun-control crowd also likes to say that when a madman is shooting into a crowd of students and faculty, the presence of an armed citizen would actually make things worse, not better. This is a ridiculous argument. At Trolley Square Mall, at New Life Church, at Appalachian Law School, and on and on, the presence of gun owners—whether they were off-duty officers, volunteer security guards, or simply students—didn't lead to more violence, but to less.

That's because these Instant Responders can always do what First Responders can never do: Immediately stop attacks on innocent people.

Finally, the Brady Campaign and others say they don't want our schools to look like prisons. With Right-to-Carry, they wouldn't. They would look just like our restaurants, our grocery stores, our bookstores, and every other place that people lawfully exercise their Right to Carry. And I'd much rather our campuses look like that than continuing to look like slaughterhouses.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

2008 Gun Rights Policy Conference in Phoenix AZ

For anyone not already aware, registration is open for the 2008 GRPC (Gun Rights Policy Conference). I'm already registered & plan to attend. It is scheduled to take place in Phoenix, Arizona on the dates of September 26, 27, & 28, 2008 (Friday evening, Saturday, and Sunday morning). It will take place in the Sheraton Crescent Hotel, located at 2620 W Dunlap Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85021. Remember that the event is completely free, so even if you have never been to such an event I highly encourage you to give it a try. As an extra bonus you'll receive free books & other materials, enjoy a free luncheon on Saturday, free receptions Fri & Sat evening, as well as some free snacks during snack breaks. So if for nothing else, show up for the free food & books. How can you pass up on free materials, education/entertainment, & food?

The 2008 Agenda is not yet ready for publication, but to get an idea of what you can expect you can take a look at the 2007 Agenda. I am very much looking forward to attending, I hope to see you there!

Dave Workman article in favor of removing weapon ban in National Parks

Dave Workman has written a very good article in favor of removing the current weapon ban in National Parks.

". . . In the years between 2002 and 2007, there were 63 homicides in national parks, 240 rapes or attempted rapes, 309 robberies, 37 kidnappings and 1,277 aggravated assaults, according to National Park Service statistics.
Apparently opponents of removing the ban against loaded operable weapons don't feel there is enough probability of attack to warrant allowing people to have the choice to arm themselves for self defense while in National Parks because the risk of attack by man or beast while in National Forests is lower than while visiting the top 50 most dangerous cities of our Nation. I bet that at least some of the nearly 2000 National Park victims mentioned above might have wished they had some means of self defense with them when they were attacked by criminals who ignored the gun ban. It probably mattered to most of them, and it certainly matters to me.

You see, our Bill of Rights were written to protect the preexisting rights (natural or God given, depending on your religious view) of the few against the tyranny of the many. Even if 51% of the population and our congress were to decide that nobody should be allowed to have free speech, to worship as they please, or to BEAR arms in self defense whether that be in their homes, in schools, or in National Parks, the preexisting rights of the few would be protected against the tyranny of the many. The 2nd Amendment may be an inconvenient truth to those against guns, but the protection does exist, so they might as well get used to it.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

People against the Marines being able to recruit?

It is a bit ironic if not absolutely reprehensible that these folks are using the very free speech protected by the Americans who have sacrificed their lives to protect our Country during times of war against the recruiting office of the Marines. Nobody should be prevented from being able to learn about an excellent organization like the Marines simply because they were unfortunate enough to be born & raised in Berkeley California. It's not like anyone gets to choose their birth parents so why should we hold that against them by preventing them from being able to learn about the Marines? Semper Fi. H/T to Say Uncle.

Interesting article profiling individuals both for & against the DC gun ban

An interesting article. It profiles the individuals both for & against the DC ban against handguns & functional rifles in the home, including the plaintiffs of the Heller case fighting the ban scheduled to heard in the Supreme Court next Tuesday March 18th, & those funding the legal costs. It does appear to have at least a slight bent in favor of the Ban, but overall appears to at least be attempting to be fair & balanced. Below is a small section from the article about Gillian St. Lawrence (pictured above), one of the plaintiffs of in the original case against the DC gun ban:

"In 2000 St. Lawrence started the process of registering a shotgun. It took two years before she completed background checks, filled out police-department paperwork, bought the shotgun, and fitted it with the blue plastic device that disables it until it’s unlocked . . . St. Lawrence adds, “People break into houses around here all the time.” She alone is licensed to use the shotgun—one person per firearm under DC law.

“It’s Paul’s job to call the police,” she says. “It’s my job to use it.”

If she can unlock the trigger in time.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Boy given detention for wearing a gun image on his shirt

A 1st Amendment freedom of speech lawsuit is currently pending over Donald Miller III, a High School Freshman, being told he must turn his shirt inside out, and then given a detention for refusing to comply. Yet another school "Zero Tolerance=Zero Thought Policy" related to images of guns. The shirt was a gift to Donald from his Uncle, Brian Souders, who purchased the shirt on his base Post Exchange just before he was deployed to Iraq, and Donald was wearing it in support of his Uncle & the US Military.

All I can say is, where do I get myself one of these shirts? If you know where I can find one please leave a comment or send an e-mail. It has an image of a gun on the front & back. It also has the following wording: "Volunteer Homeland Security" on the front, and "Special issue - Resident - Lifetime License - United States Terrorist Hunting Permit - Permit No. 91101 Gun Owner - No Bag Limit." on the back.

You can read more details at Fox, Lancasteronline, or Worldnetdaily.

Update 1: I'd like to thank member SonOfNorway for letting me know where we can get our own terrorist hunting permit shirt. I think I'll buy some for myself & my children.

Listen to something other than Music on your iPod

Do you ever get tired of listening to music on your mp3 player regardless of whether you use an Apple iPod or any other brand of mp3 player? Well I have the perfect solution for you - join me in listening to gun rights podcasts. Yes music is nice, but I now find myself listening to podcasts more often than music, at least when I have not yet run out of new episodes of gun rights podcasts to listen to.

Look for the link list on the right hand side of this site titled "Gun Rights Podcasts" for links to some of my favorites. If you know of others that I am missing please comment or send me an e-mail & I'll add them to my list. In addition to being able to access the podcasts directly via their linked websites most are also available via iTunes (download & use for free on both the PC & Mac platform). You can subscribe to all of your favorite podcasts & iTunes will auto download the newest episodes as they become available. You can then listen on your PC or off-line via your favorite mp3 player.

Off-line listening makes for a great way to make your morning exercise more interesting or to kill time while waiting to renew your drivers license at the local DMV.

Cam's NRA News nightly radio show is not yet available as a podcast although you can listen live on the internet every weeknight from 9PM to 12AM Eastern Time (6PM to 9PM Pacific) & also 24 hrs a day to an archive of the previous show between the live shows.

CCRKBA press release on Hero Yitzhak Dadon

The CCRKBA issued a press release relating to hero Yitzhak Dadon, an armed student who ended the rampage of an armed murderer who was planning on committing mass murder at his school on Thursday March 6th (The murderer was successful at killing 8 & wounding 9 before the armed student stopped him, no telling exactly how many additional murders were prevented). How did he end it? With two well aimed bullets from his gun. Yes, an armed student in the right place at the right time at a school that does not have a "gun free zone" policy can stop a murder rampage before Police can even arrive on the scene. For some reason the US mainstream press does not want you to know that small tidbit of information since they are mysteriously leaving it out of all of the news reports. Although the armed student did stop the terrorist rampage early by knocking him down, reports indicate that it was additional shots of an Israeli soldier who arrived later on the scene that finished him off.



Citizens Committee for the
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005

For Immediate Release: March 7, 2008

BELLEVUE, WA – An armed student at Jerusalem’s Mercaz Haray seminary played a crucial role in stopping a gun-wielding terrorist Thursday, but the American press is downplaying his heroism because it proves that armed students can stop campus gunmen, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

Yitzhak Dadon, 40, was described as “a private citizen who had a gun license and was able to shoot the gunman with his pistol” by reporter Etgar Lefkovitz with the Jerusalem Post. However, many news agencies in the United States are downplaying Dadon’s decisive role in the incident.

Yitzhak Dadon is a hero,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “and he is living proof that armed students have a place on college campuses. Thankfully, his quick action was reported by the international press, including Mr. Lefkovitz, so unlike incidents here in the United States where the press was able to completely ignore the actions of armed students or teachers, the truth about this incident will not be suppressed.

Mr. Dadon is not going to become a victim of this conspiracy of silence,” Gottlieb continued. “Elitist American college administrators, the national press, nor anti-gun politicians can sweep this incident under their rug.”

Internationally published reports say Dadon studies at the yeshiva, and had his pistol when the shooting erupted. When the gunman emerged from a library, Dadon reportedly shot him twice in the head. The gunman was subsequently shot by the off-duty soldier.

Yitzhak Dadon’s apparently well-placed bullets interrupted a rampage,” Gottlieb said. “What a pity that someone like Mr. Dadon was not in class last April at Virginia Tech. What a tragedy that anti-gun extremism would keep him from attending class at Northern Illinois University. He would never be allowed to teach at Columbine High School, hold a job at Trolley Square in Salt Lake City, or go shopping at Omaha’s Westroads Mall.

America’s acquiescence to anti-gun hysteria has led to one tragedy after another,” Gottlieb stated. “This disastrous policy has given us nothing but broken hearts and body counts, and it’s got to end. The heroism of an armed Israeli seminary student halfway across the world sends a message that we needn’t submit to murder in victim disarmament zones. That’s why his actions are getting such short shrift from America’s press. It’s a story they are loathe to report because it affirms a philosophy of self-reliance that they despise.”

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at or by email to

Monday, March 10, 2008

Handgun saves boy from Rabid Mountain Lion

Paul Schalow, a lucky 10 year old El Mirage AZ boy & other family members were saved from a rabid Mountain Lion attack in an Arizona National Forest near Cave Creek AZ on Saturday March 8th, thanks to the fact that his uncle was carrying a gun. Here are reports from the Arizona Republic, Fox, CNN, & NBC.

In this video interview Paul Schalow describes it as the Mountain Lion just sneaking up on them while they were on a lunch break after spending some time riding ATV's near Bloody Basin Road and Sheep Bridge, everyone yelled "don't move, don't move", the mountain lion took a swipe at the boy, his uncle shot it, the Mountain lion got "wobbly" - started to walk away, then turned to attack again. A 2nd shot then did the trick dropping the Mountain Lion. The family reported the incident to the Arizona Game & Fish Department. Testing confirmed that the Mountain Lion did in fact have Rabies.

As a side note here is a list of other confirmed Cougar attacks I found while looking for this news story.

It is interesting to note that if this had happened in a National Park instead of in a National Forest under current National Park regulations his uncle would not have been allowed to have a fully assembled, loaded, non trigger locked gun. By the time his Uncle would have had time to re-assemble or unlock his gun, load it, & shoot the Mountain lion, who knows how much carnage the Mountain Lion could have unleashed before his Uncle was ready to shoot the rabid Cougar.

I guess these National Park Retirees would have preferred that the boy fight back with his keys. "Place keys in between fingers - scratch at Mountain Lion's face"

Women & Weaponry Story on CNN

Nice news story on Women & Weaponry by CNN. Discusses current trend on increasing number of Women getting gun safety & self defense training as well as getting licenses to carry a concealed handgun for defense of themselves & their family. Excellent news and a very well done article.

Friday, March 7, 2008

Many anti gun folks think 21 year old students are morons!

Pima County Sheriff Dupnik in this opinion piece does not have a high opinion of the intelligence of 21 & older College students who have gone through the process to obtain a CCW permit:

". . . if more than one student has a concealed weapon, how is it possible to determine which individuals are involved in the attack and which ones are trying to stop it?"
Let's see here - one murderer is randomly murdering unarmed students. One or more ccw permit holders are shooting at the murderer. It's just too complicated for the mind of a 21 year old student to comprehend! /End Sarcasm.
"The danger of crossfire and unintentional victims is multiplied exponentially."
That argument assumes that crossfire between a bad guy & a good guy is somehow worse than an armed murderer walking the halls shooting at everyone without opposition. If I were an unarmed student in a room with an armed murderer, I'd much prefer that the murderer be occupied in a gun fight with another armed student than for the murderer to have nothing better to do than continue shooting everyone in the room one by one without opposition.
"Imagine the confusion that will ensue when law enforcement arrives at an active shooter situation, with unconfirmed information about who the suspect is or even how many there are, and these same officers encounter multiple individuals with guns."
Oh I feel so sorry for the poor confused Police Officers. /End Sarcasm. Besides insulting the intelligence level of our fine Police Officers this is not a valid argument as there is not a single example of this made up scenario. Scenarios I describe below do have multiple examples to back them up (1: Pearl Mississippi, 2: Utah Trolley Square Mall).
  1. According to FBI statistics most "gun fights" last less than 10 seconds. Police arrival times average around 15 minutes. You do the math. Even in a fast Police response scenario of say 5 minutes (faster than most), an event where an armed adult already on the scene engages the murderer in a gun fight will likely be over well before the Police arrive. Such an adult would likely either be victorious in ending the carnage before Police arrive or will be among the victim count of the murderer lying on the floor.
  2. If the Police arrive & see two or more people in a "gun fight" they will simply demand that they all drop their weapons. The "good guys/galls" will obey officer orders. The murderer will either a) shoot him or herself, b) run, or c) start shooting at the officers. I think our fine Professional Officers will be able to figure out who they need to shoot at.
"Think back to Oct. 28, 2002, when our own community was rocked by a shooting by University of Arizona College of Nursing student Robert Flores, who shot and killed three nursing professors - Robin Rogers, Barbara Monroe and Cheryl McGaffic - before turning the gun on himself."
Thanks for making my case - simply placing a sign on the wall that says "Gun Free Zone" does not make it so. It is a Utopian pipe dream that has been proven to be a folly. Disarming Americans does not make them more safe, no matter how many made up scenarios you make up without providing any evidence to back them up.

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Goodbye Rebecca Aguilar: Good Riddance.

All I can say is don't let the door hit you on the way out. Actually it's fine with me if it hits you on the way out, I really don't care either way, so long as I never have to see your face doing an interview on Fox again. Thank you Fox, good decision to fire her - what she did was inexcusable. It turns out that Fox had only been keeping her around on paid suspension since the incident so that they could exercise the option in her contract to fire her at the half way point of her 2 year contract on exactly March 6th 2008.

"I just think it's really sad that I gave this company 14 years and I did about 6,000 interviews," Aguilar said. "And now I'm out of a job because of one interview? It's like in one swoop it ruined my reputation. It ruined my name."
No, YOU ruined your name Rebecca. Don't try to blame your ruin on anybody other than yourself or you will fail to learn any lesson from your mistake.

Wednesday, March 5, 2008

AZ SB 1214 made the NY Times

AZ SB 1214 made the NY Times.

Oh how terrible! College & University Staff members with a CCW permit could bring guns on campus! /End Sarcasm

The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, . . . said 15 states were considering legislation that would authorize or make it easier for people to carry guns on school or college campuses under certain conditions. Those states include Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan and Virginia, according to the center, but it considers the Arizona proposal particularly egregious because it would not only allow students and faculty to carry such weapons, but staff members as well.

Saturday, March 1, 2008

Do NOT support AZ Fraternal Order of Police

First of all, let me specify that I have great respect for the majority of Police Officers who put their lives on the line on a daily basis for all of us, and I do have friends who are Police Officers. Not all Police Officers are members of an FOP organization, and not all members of the AZ FOP are against AZ SB 1214. With that out of the way, I'll continue:

Last night I received my annual phone call from the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police requesting my usual annual donation. Due to the fact that I had only recently in ASTONISHMENT listened to the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police President Bryan Soller speak AGAINST Arizona SB 1214 on behalf of the AZ FOP on Feb 18th, in so doing trampling under foot the preexisting but Second Amendment PROTECTED Right to bear arms of all law abiding Arizona Citizens, I respectfully declined their request, and stated my reasoning for their record.

Bryan Soller's testimony against SB 1214 took place at the Feb 18th, 2008 Arizona Senate Judiciary Hearing. His testimony begins at the 0hr:40min:10sec mark of the archived video. Or you can listen to the audio of just his testimony in mp3 format: Bryan_Soller.mp3. During his testimony he also answered questions from members of the AZ Senate Judiciary Committee: Senator Johnson, Senator Gould, and Committee Chairman: Senator Gray.

Until the AZ FOP reverses this stance against the Constitution that its members have all sworn to protect, I can in no way continue to support it. If the organization will reverse its current stance, then I will gladly resume contributions. I urge any of you who are in favor of protecting your right to bear arms to contact your local FOP organization & find out exactly how they stand on the critical issues relating to the 2nd Amendment before you give any further donations.

Below is an E-mail that I sent to AZ FOP President Bryan Soller via the e-mail address listed on their site. If I receive a response I'll post it here as an update:

As a long time supporter of the Arizona FOP & Police Officers in general I was astonished to sit in the Senate Judiciary Hearing on Monday Feb 18th & hear you testify against SB 1214 on behalf of the entire Arizona FOP, joining with the Chiefs of Police in essentially saying that only the Police & Criminals should be allowed to be armed in Arizona school "gun free zones" (yes, I know criminals can only be armed while breaking the law, but surprise - that's what criminals & crazies do), essentially stating that law abiding American Citizens who are not Police Officers do not deserve their 2nd Amendment protected right to bear arms for use in defense of themselves & their families or friends while in so-called "gun free zones". The speeches of yourself & those of the Chiefs of Police reminded me a bit of Gorge Orwell's "Animal Farm" where a certain class of the animals in charge changed the Bill of Rights to read "All animals are equal but some are more equal than others"

One question I have is the following - who was involved in the decision for AZ FOP to be officially against SB 1214? Was it brought to a vote of the entire Arizona FOP membership, or was it simply a vote of the Arizona FOP board members?

Police Officers carry weapons for protection of themselves, their families, and the community, & many choose to have their weapon with them at all times on duty or off, at home or while visiting a school. Why should I be required to rely only on my cell phone & 911 with a response time of 3 to 15 minutes while I'm in a so-called "gun free zone"? When seconds count, the Police are only minutes away, so by the time Police arrive all that may be left to do is make chalk lines & gather evidence. I carry my weapon everywhere but gun free zones because it is easier than carrying a Police Officer. In an emergency I will dial 911 to request assistance, but if the Police are not able to arrive in time I will protect my family myself the best I can with the most effective tools at my disposal. If I happen to be in a "gun free zone" the only tool I'll have is a MOP or a BROOM from the janitorial closet. I've always thought it is unwise to bring a MOP to a gunfight, but that's just my opinion. I'm the true first responder to a situation that happens to me, Police will arrive 2nd.

I'm not expecting to change your mind on this issue, but I did want to share with you the viewpoint of myself and many of my fellow citizens who support the Bill of Rights. I have a high respect for Police Officers, and have multiple friends who are (2 are officers for the City of Peoria, 1 for City of Surprise, and 1 AZ DPS officer). My Police Officer friends are avid supporters of the 2nd Amendment and although I have not yet specifically discussed SB 1214 with them I would be surprised if they are not in full support of SB 1214. I expected the Chiefs of Police to say what they did as they are merely politically appointed employees of the universities they represented & were required say what their employer wanted them to say. All of the Police Officers that I know on the other hand support the Constitution as well as its second amendment, something I don't expect from a University run by elitists or their appointed Chief or Police, but I do expect it from the Police Officers that walk the streets putting their life on the line to protect all of us as well as the Constitution they are sworn to protect, real every day Police Officers which I would expect to be comprising the majority of an organization like the AZ FOP.

Today I received my annual call from the AZ FOP asking for my usual monetary donation. I respectfully declined for the first time & specified the AZ FOP stance against my beloved US constitution, specifically its stance against AZ SB 1214, as my reason why I will no longer be supporting the AZ FOP organization. The caller then actually asked me "What, do you want everyone to be able to be running around with guns at schools?" & My answer was "YES! If they're a law abiding citizen 21 years or older, and have gone through the process to get their CCW permit, why not?"

Thanks for your time & consideration of my viewpoints.

PS: Many who testified against SB 1214 argued that Police would be confused or have too much time wasted when arriving at the scene to find more than one person with a gun. Here are my counter points:

1) Police are already trained on how to engage someone with a weapon & know that they can't assume a person with a gun is the "bad guy" (it could be an armed citizen or an off duty or undercover Police Officer for example). I don't know the specifics, but I imagine rules of engagement are something like this: "Freeze! Drop your weapon!" - the good guys or gals will obey, but the perp will likely do one of three things:
a) Run
b) Start shooting at the Police
c) shoot him or herself

2) Most likely the "gun fight" between one or more civilians & the perp will be over before Police arrive, as most gun fights last less than a minute. Either the perp will be subdued or shot, or the armed civilian or civilians will be among the victim count. But at least they will have had a fighting chance. Even if Police do happen to arrive before the fight is over, see #1 above.

For examples of #1 above look at the Principal in Pearl Mississippi who stopped the perp before he could hit the 2nd school he was driving to next. Look at the law school in Virginia where 2 students got their guns from their cars, challenged the perp to have him drop his weapon, after which a bunch of unarmed students subdued the Perp & held him down while waiting for Police to arrive. Or the CCW permit carrier at the church in CO who stopped the perp with her concealed weapon & the perp then shot himself before Police could arrive.

For an example of #2 above look at the off duty police officer in the Utah Trolley Square Mall who kept the perp busy in a gun fight until Police arrived to take the bad guy out. Think of how many lives these examples of armed people in the right place at the right time saved. So vastly different from VT, Columbine, etc. where all the good guys & gals were disarmed by a foolish "gun free zone" policy and left to fall victim to the perp or perps until the perps decided they had killed enough victims & decided to take themselves out either before Police went in, or when they knew Police were coming in.