Doctors Kill More People Per Year Than Guns

By Nathan Tabor

Back before the November election, many mainstream media pundits -- trying desperately to get John Kerry elected -- began to harp on President Bush1s unwillingness to stop certain federal gun control laws from expiring as scheduled. But their propaganda efforts came to naught because this issue was a non-starter with the American people. The fact is, in this day of post-911 increased security consciousness, most average Americans simply don1t want more gun control. They want more guns on hand to defend themselves and their loved ones in the face of possible life-threatening danger. Soccer moms are now taking handgun proficiency courses down at the local firing range.

Liberals are always complaining about getting to the root of the problem -- unless it deals with gun rights. Then they abandon all logical analysis and resort to hysteria, distortion and downright lies. Today I want to set the record straight and dispel a few of the more common myths with some hard facts.

First, according to statistics provided by the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, there is an interesting correlation between accidental deaths caused by guns and by doctors.

Doctors:
(A) There are 700,000 physicians in the U.S.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by physicians total 120,000 per year.
(C) Accidental death percentage per physician is 0.171.

Guns:
(A) There are 80 million gun owners in the U.S.
(B) There are 1,500 accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups.
(C) The percentage of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.0000188.

Statistically, then, doctors are 9,000 times more dangerous to the public health than gun owners. Fact: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR. Following the logic of liberals, we should all be warned: "Guns don't kill people. Doctors do."

More seriously, Dr. Glen Otero of the Claremont Institute has published an enlightening article entitled "Ten Myths About Gun Control" (This entire article can be found at the website of Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws) Here are just a few of his well-documented findings.

* Approximately 80 percent of all adult American citizens own firearms, and a gun can be found in nearly half of American households.
* Between 1974 and 1995, the total number of privately owned firearms in America increased by 75 percent, to 236 million. During the same period, national homicide and robbery rates did NOT significantly increase.
* Less than 1 percent of all guns are involved in any type of crime, which means that 99 percent of all guns are NOT used to commit any crime.
* In 1987, the National Crime Victimization Survey estimated that about 83 percent of Americans would become the victims of violent crime during the course of their lifetime.
* The National Self-Defense Survey found that between 1988 and 1993, American civilians used firearms in self-defense almost 2.5 million times per year, saving up to 400,000 lives per year in the process.
* Guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens deter crime. Where U.S. counties have enacted concealed-carry laws, murder rates fell by 8 percent, rape by 5 percent, and aggravated assault by 7 percent. Urban counties recorded the largest decreases demographically. You get the picture: Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

But sometimes law-abiding citizens with guns can save the lives of other innocent people. It1s time to restore some common sense to the hysterical debate over gun control. When Cain killed Abel with a rock, God didn't ban all rocks. He dealt with Cain personally. We need to enforce our criminal laws against murder, robbery, and assault. I will cite the testimony of just one more expert witness. No, it's not another politician or media pundit. Here's what former Mafia underboss, self-confessed hit man, and government informant Sammy "The Bull" Gravano had to say: "Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins."

It's time for Liberals to go out and buy a gun. And maybe get a life or at least protect one.

(Copyright c 2004 by Nathan Tabor Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville, North Carolina. He has his BA in Psychology and his Master1s Degree in Public Policy. He is a contributing editor at www.theconservativevoice.com. Contact him at Nathan@nathantabor.com)




Calling all criminals: "San Francisco City Supervisors sent out a beacon this week alerting criminals all over the world that by January 2006 the people of San Francisco will, undoubtedly, have voluntarily disarmed themselves making the city an easy target for violent crime. A measure to ban the sale, ownership, and possession of handguns and ammunition will be placed on the San Francisco ballot in November 2005, thanks to the efforts of City Supervisors Chris Daly, Michela Alioto-Pier, Tom Ammiano, Bevan Dufty and Matt Gonzalez."

Pennsylvania: Court classifies paintball guns as weapons: "A student who kept six paintball guns in the trunk of his car violated a state law against possession of a weapon on school property, in part because he used one of the guns to commit vandalism, the state Superior Court has ruled. The youth, unnamed in court documents, was charged with possessing a weapon on school property; improper use of paintball guns, air rifles and paintball markers; and criminal mischief. He admitted to the acts of vandalism, authorities said. ... In a decision released Thursday, Superior Court Judge Richard B. Klein wrote that the mere possession of the guns would not have been criminal if one had not been used illegally."




BB or not BB: "In popular culture, the Red Ryder BB gun is 'the Holy Grail of Christmas gifts,' but the maker of the present so desperately desired by Ralphie Parker in the movie 'A Christmas Story' is gun-shy when it comes to publicity. 'They are a classic American brand, but anytime you talk about selling guns to kids in today's society, they are pariah,' said New York-based toy consultant Chris Byrne, who isn't surprised that Daisy Outdoor Products doesn't boast about the gun. ... Wilson sees irony in the situation, noting that violent video games continue to grow in popularity but BB guns have come under fire. '... A lot of folks don't like [the video] games either, but the First Amendment is more powerful than the Second Amendment and generally more agreed-upon."

Gun Control: True Lies in San Francisco

"The homicide rate in Washington, D.C., in 2002 was 9.4 incidents per 100,000 people. In San Francisco that year, the rate was 5.2."

A key gambit of gun banners is the judicious use of misapplied statistical data. In the above quote, the writer referenced FBI crime data that covers metropolitan areas. The mythical "9.4 incidents per 100,000 people" for "Washington, D.C." includes residents of five Maryland counties, 17 in Virginia, and two from West Virginia. This report is also the source of the stated rate for the SF metropolitan area, which includes only two additional counties: Marin and San Mateo. The "D.C." homicide rate is understated because Virginia and West Virginia, which allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms for personal protection, had homicide rates of 5.3 and 3.2, respectively. Maryland, with gun control policies similar to California, had a rate of 9.4, two to three times higher than the pro-gun rights states, but still about 20% of the D.C. rate.

Since these three states' counties had a combined population of 14,553,552, over 25 times D.C.'s population of 570,898, the D.C. homicide rate was significantly diluted. Also, the author compares "apples to oranges," since the San Francisco metropolitan area is completely covered by similar gun control laws, while the D.C area is not. In reality, while the SF metropolitan area experienced the 5.2 rate, Washington D.C. had a homicide rate of 46.2, nearly five times the article's assertion: "Although gun sales in California must be recorded, residents are not required to have a permit for handguns kept in a private home or business, so it's unclear how many San Francisco residents would be affected by the law."

California law requires a permit in the form of either a Handgun or Hunter Safety Certificate prior to purchasing a firearm. The state issues these certificates upon successful completion of proper coursework taught by a state-certified instructor. (4) When purchasing a firearm, the contact information on the Safety Certificate is linked to the serial number on the firearm, and these records are stored. Law enforcement contacts confirm that when called to a residence for situations like domestic violence or an arrest warrant, to avoid additional risk, they check the California Department of Justice database to see if residents own firearms. Thus, the process involved to purchase a firearm in CA creates a de facto registration database which could be employed in a confiscation scheme.

"I think banning handguns is the central issue for gun violence prevention, and it's been somewhat of a third rail -- people haven't wanted to talk about it."--Eric Gorovitz, West Coast director of the Alliance for Justice

Mr. Gorovitz knows better than to be disingenuous, as the article states he has "spent a decade working for gun control policy statewide and nationally." A quick visit to any gun control web site proves that banning guns as "the central issue for gun violence prevention" has long been discussed at local, national, and international levels.

"How many more Michael Moore films does it take to tell us that the Second Amendment is absolutely archaic, and other nations do it better than we do? We should absolutely go forward with it despite the constitutional challenges." - Supervisor-elect Ross Mirkarimi

Two points here. First, we have an important admission from the gun control movement that the Second Amendment guarantees each citizen's right to keep and bear arms, and that it must be done away with to accomplish the goal of civilian disarmament. It is interesting to note that they cite someone who uses innuendo and misdirection for great financial gain as a supporting information source. Secondly, they desire fertile ground for dictatorship. This elected official thinks in absolutes. He believes part of the Constitution, the source of our civil rights, is "absolutely" wrong. He considers himself the "absolute" authority in deciding exactly which rights we deserve. Theoretically, the only way to create "absolute" reliability in human behavior is to eliminate personal liberty. Absolute authority would then enable absolute certainty of outcome for those in control.

Why trust people who lie to justify their stated goals, especially when gun control is consistently shown not to result in the stated goals of increased security and reduced crime? Gun control advocates in San Francisco have finally exposed the truth: it's not about "safety" or "violence prevention," but about banning guns and controlling you.

Source





Taking potshots at Santa: "Being Santa can be a dangerous job. Scott Slodysko of Shamokin, PA, knows that all too well. He was riding atop a fire engine Monday evening, all dressed up as St. Nick, when someone shot him in the leg with a pellet gun. 'We were at the intersection when I heard a popping sound,' Slodysko, a 23-year-old volunteer fireman, told The News-Item of Shamokin. 'It felt like a bee stung me -- like a very bad bee sting.' The projectile didn't penetrate the skin, but did cause 'a black-and-blue mark about the size of a silver dollar,' according to Slodysko. Quick work by police in the town, about 30 miles northeast of the state capital of Harrisburg, turned up a 17-year-old suspect. The unnamed assailant confessed to firing out of a second-story window as the Kringle motorcade slowly passed below."




The gift of firearms safety training: "Of all the gifts I always looked for under the Christmas tree, it was the slender, long, heavy packages I adored the most. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that those easily-identified boxes most likely held a hunting firearm. But unlike any other gift that can be given, a firearm requires work after the gift opening. With this new gift there are several important issues that the gift giver has to address. Regardless if the new gun is an air gun or a firearm, teaching the proper safety handling of the weapon is of utmost importance."

JEWS SHOULD HAVE GUNS

Before my son Ariel passed away a year and a half ago, he and I spent a great deal of time discussing the Second Amendment, the right to bear arms. Ariel was always amazed at how many Jews - shomer Shabbos Jews - aligned themselves with the advocates of gun control, in reality a movement to banish the private ownership of guns by lawful citizens.

During the Los Angeles riots of 1992, my wife Karen and I, along with Ariel and our daughter Leda, were inside a film theater. Abruptly, an angry mob congregated outside; soon they were trying to break down the doors. Trapped inside, we were all terrified. I held Leda in my arms; she shivered like a frightened rabbit. Karen held Ariel`s hand. "Don`t worry," I said with false confidence, "the police will be here soon." But the police did not arrive that night, nor did they protect the city from arson and widespread looting. In fact, we watched in disbelief as news cameras captured images of police officers standing idly by while looters gleefully committed their crimes.

A few days later, I bought a gun. I bought a gun because I realized that the day might come again when the people who were sworn to protect us would once again choose not to.....

One of the hallmarks of modern liberalism, Ariel suggested, is an astonishing inability to recognize, much less confront, evil. Therefore it becomes psychologically necessary for the liberal to place the blame on an inanimate object - the gun - rather than on the person who pulls the trigger. It is easier to fault the gun manufacturer for the horror at Columbine, rather than admit that two 16-year-old boys are capable of such evil.....

Ariel concluded that Jews in America should be at the forefront of the right to bear arms. Jews should join the National Rifle Association. For Jews to rely on the power of the state for protection is sheer foolishness. Time and again, Jewish history reveals governments cruelly betraying their Jewish citizens. And though Ariel felt that America was different, he still maintained that allowing the state to make the ownership of weapons illegal is an unwise policy.

More here





Hiding their heads in SF: "With no conclusive relationship between civilian disarmament and murder rates, the onus of proving that law-abiding gun owners represent a threat to public health and safety rests firmly with the SF supervisors. Unless, of course, they intend to force a legal system upon residents that presumes guilt. ... Internationally, the US compares even more favorably, rated 24th overall in murder rate. All countries with higher rates have far more gun control; they have no Constitutional right to own guns, and self-defense is not a valid reason for ownership."




San Francisco: Bid for handgun ban faces hurdles: "San Francisco supervisors want to make the city the second in the nation to ban the ownership of handguns, but whether such a law would prove to be more than symbolic remains to be seen. First, legal challenges are being readied by those who see the proposed law -- set to go to voters next fall -- as bucking state law, which says law-abiding citizens do not need permits or licenses to keep handguns in their homes. Then there are practical hurdles: How do you enforce a ban in the absence of a public registry of gun owners in California? And of what value is such a measure for police, who already have the authority to take guns from criminal suspects? Supporters of a ban say it would curb gun violence in the city by reducing the number of weapons available. Bill Barnes, spokesman for the campaign, said many guns used in crimes were purchased legally -- and later stolen."

RESTRICTIONS ON MACHINE GUNS BASED ON MYTHS

"During the campaign season, James Brady, former press secretary to President Ronald Reagan, criticized Illinois Republican senatorial candidate Alan Keyes for defending the right of Americans to keep and bear arms, including machine guns. Brady called Keyes�s stand an �insane� call for a return to �the Al Capone days.� Brady was partially paralyzed in the assassination attempt on President Reagan in 1981, and has been a gun-control advocate ever since. Mr. Brady, though justifiably bitter over his fate, has allowed it to color his judgment by blaming an inanimate object for the horrible damage done him. He should be reminded that guns are but a tool, and that the actual weapon is the person behind the gun. He should also keep in mind certain facts that contradict his misguided position.

Americans can and do buy all sorts of automatic weapons, including machine guns. True, the government has made it difficult to do so since the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, which levied a $200 tax per gun on the purchase and transfer of such weapons, requires a background check for prospective buyers, and registers owners. The Firearms Owners� Protection Act of 1986 then went on to forbid the manufacture of automatic weapons for civilian use, raising the cost of automatic weapons dramatically and placing them out of the reach of most Americans.

Despite these and other impediments, roughly half the machine guns in the United States are owned by civilians; the other half are in the hands of police departments and the military. Texas leads the nation in the number of automatic weapons in civilian hands. The true number is undeniably higher, since official statistics don�t account for those unknown to authorities. Yet there is no mayhem in Texas or elsewhere in the nation by civilians wielding automatic weapons. There is no return to the days of Al Capone. In fact, until recently, when development put the firing range out of business, there was an annual machine-gun shoot in Helotes, Texas, a bedroom community to San Antonio. People from all over the world would bring or rent automatic weapons to shoot at this event.

Gun-control advocates are at least partially to blame for proliferation of automatic weapons among the citizenry. By pushing for restrictive legislation, they panicked individuals who would not otherwise have done so into purchasing such firearms. Prior to the passage of the National Firearms Act of 1934, there was no widespread ownership of automatic weapons by law-abiding citizens, despite the fact that in those days Thompson submachine guns could be purchased at hardware stores. Only the military, police, and criminals used them. Even criminal use has been exaggerated by gun-control advocates and Hollywood movie producers. For example, Al Capone�s gang owned only two Thompsons. Bonnie and Clyde never used one; they preferred the Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR) which was not then sold to civilians but was restricted to police and military use. Criminals such as Bonnie and Clyde obtained them by bribery or theft. proving that restrictive laws are no barrier to such people. In fact, since 1934, there has been only one legally owned machine gun used in a crime, and that by a law-enforcement officer!

Other than as a response to restrictive legislation, one can only speculate why so many civilians feel the need to own automatic weapons. Perhaps they share Theodore Roosevelt�s view that though he didn�t know how to shoot well, he knew how to shoot often.


Source






Texas: Elderly homeowner kills intruder: "A 79-year-old homeowner shot and killed a man who broke into his Aldine-area home early Tuesday and refused to leave, Houston police said. The intruder, Robert Hinojosa, 19, of the 200 block of Gulf Bank, was shot once in the abdomen about 1:30 a.m., investigators said. He died later at Ben Taub General Hospital. Police said Hinojosa was burglarizing a residence in the 500 block of Turney when the homeowner woke up and repeatedly told him to leave before shooting
him."





Missouri: State Fair pols pass victim disarmament rule: "The State Fair Commission Thursday approved a ban on concealed firearms on the fairgrounds during the fair. Commissioners met in a conference call to discuss and vote on the issue again. At a meeting Dec. 9, commissioners approved the ban during a closed session. On Dec. 10, Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon advised the commission that its vote was void because it was done in closed session, in violation of the Sunshine Law. ... Commission members discussed extending the ban beyond the State Fair."

OLDSTER DEFENDS HIMSELF

After being shot in the leg and scared that he and his wife would would be killed by the two men who had held them hostage for two hours as they ransacked their home, Clyde Colley decided to defend his life and home, investigators say. Now, one Kentucky man is dead and another is in jail on a long list of charges. Colley, 84, is in Dickenson Community Hospital recovering from the gunshot wound.

At about 8:40 p.m. on Dec. 14, a caller reported to 911 dispatch that a man had been shot at the Colley residence. Dickenson County sheriff's deputies were sent to the home on Route 80 between Haysi High School and Birchleaf. When officers Scottie Owens and Brett Stallard arrived at the Colley home, they found Hubert Howard Jr., 39, of Letcher County, Ky., dead from a gunshot wound to the head. Police say the shot was fired from a .38-caliber special that belongs to Colley.

Colley was also wounded, suffering a shot to his calf from a .25 caliber gun allegedly fired by one of the intruders. The man accused of shooting Colley, 24-year-old Mazel Sexton, also of Letcher County, had fled the home but was later arrested by local authorities in Kentucky, according to sheriff's investigator John Hall.

Sexton is charged with two counts of robbery, two counts of abduction, two counts of burglary, maliciously shooting with intent to kill, use of a firearm while committing a felony and unlawfully shooting Colley in the commission of a felony. No charges were filed against Colley.

More here






California: Robbery suspect slain during home invasion: "One robbery suspect was fatally shot and another ran away as a home-invasion robbery turned into a three-way shoot-out Tuesday morning, Salinas police said. ... The robbers forced their way into the home at 9:05 a.m. Tuesday and held the owner at gunpoint, police said. After a discussion with the man, details of which police did not disclose, Strain and the teen took some money and jewelry, which were later recovered, police said. Though police are not saying how he got it, the homeowner fired his own gun at Strain and the teen, both of whom were armed with handguns, police said."






Bureaucrats still stalling efforts to arm pilots: "Members of Congress are becoming frustrated with bureaucrats who have put roadblocks in the way of a program to arm airline pilots that Congress first authorized months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Three years later, only an estimated 4,000 of the more than 95,000 commercial pilots have participated in the Federal Flight Deck Officer (FFDO) program. But this lack of participation does not indicate a lack of pilot interest, proponents say. They claim the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has intentionally stymied the program."

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

To all those who come by here on this great day

And may all those who recognize Jesus as Lord always walk in his wisdom

NAZI PARALLELS

Gun control continues to be a divisive issue in our country. It is beyond my ability to understand this. Our Founding Fathers spoke very clearly of their intent behind the Second Amendment. Allow me to give an example of what can happen when we do not listen to great men like Patrick Henry, who gave us this country at huge personal sacrifice.

Sen. Thomas Dodd of Connecticutt was the vice chairman of the Review Board and later Executive Trial Counsel at the Nuremberg Trials. He had an inside look at how the Nazi government came to power. I guess it impressed him. He returned home with a copy of the Nazi Weapons Law, signed by Adolf Hitler, March 18, 1938. This law was found in the German "Reichsgesetzblatt." Dodd presented the Nazi Weapons Law to the Library of Congress for translation. A memo from law librarian Lewis C. Coffin, dated July 12, 1968, states: . . . "(W)e are enclosing herewith a translation of the Law on Weapons of March 18, 1938, prepared by Dr. William Solyom-Fekete . . . as well as the Xerox of the original German text which you supplied." Several months later, spearheaded by Dodd, the 1968 PL 90-351 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act became law.

The law sounded very familiar to some in America; namely, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Inc. Upon investigation they found that our 1968 law was almost identical to the 1938 Nazi law. This is documented in the most detail in "Gun Control, Gateway to Tyranny" by Jay Simkin and Aaron Zelman. They have not been sued for libel. Furthermore the Dodd family will not allow the JPFO to view Dodd's papers.

It must be remembered what happened to the Jews shortly after Hitler disarmed the population. How many humans were slaughtered? Do they teach this in school anymore? Hitler sold the law to the people as such: "This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future." Thanks to Sen. Dodd, it is still being sold in America the same way.

More here





Gun control claims just don't add up: "Chicago has some of the toughest gun control laws in the nation. It also has some of the highest crime rates. Second Amendment-crushing gun control ordinances have done nothing but give criminals carte blanche to rape, rob and murder unsuspecting, law-abiding Chicago citizens."

IF LOONIES KILL THEMSELVES IT'S SOMEONE ELSE'S FAULT

Near the end of her short life, Shayla Stewart, a diagnosed manic-depressive and schizophrenic, assaulted police officers and was arrested for attacking a fellow customer at a Denton Wal-Mart where she had a prescription for anti-psychotic medication. Given all those signs, her parents say, another Wal-Mart just seven miles away should have never sold her the shotgun she used to kill herself at age 24 in 2003. Her mother, Lavern Bracy, is suing the world's biggest store chain for $25 million, saying clerks should have known about her daughter's illness or done more to find out....

The Bracys said Wal-Mart's gun department could have checked Wal-Mart's own security files or the pharmacy department's prescription records before selling her the weapon. Wal-Mart spokeswoman Christi Gallagher declined to comment on the lawsuit. But pharmacy prescription records are confidential under a 1996 federal law, so stores cannot use them when deciding whether to sell a gun. Also, Wal-Mart did a background check on Stewart, as required under federal law, but through no fault of its own, her name did not show up in the FBI database. The reason: The database contains no mental health records from Texas and 37 other states. Texas does not submit mental health records because state law deems them confidential, said Paul Mascot, an attorney with the Texas Department of State Health Services. Other states have not computerized their record-keeping systems or do not store them in a central location for use by the FBI.

Federal law prohibits stores from selling guns to people who, like Stewart, have a history of serious mental illness. Would-be buyers must fill out a form that asks about mental health. Stewart, who had been involuntarily committed to an institution and declared dangerously mentally ill by a judge, lied on that form, according to her mother's attorney's office. Wal-Mart ran a background check anyway, as required by federal law.

More here. (Via Right Thinking)






A BIT OF HISTORY

"One useful fact all Americans should keep in mind is that they have no "right" to be protected by the police. American police are reactive, not proactive. They don't usually "prevent" crime. They catch lawbreakers after they have committed a crime. This was by design of the Founding Fathers. Because, as we see today with the anti-terrorism laws, in order to "prevent" crime, police would need all sorts of obnoxious powers that would trample all over our rights of life, liberty and property.

Instead, Americans were intended to have the means of self defense. Put another way, the Constitution does not grant the federal government the authority to restrict American citizens from keeping and bearing arms. Rather, the Second Amendment clearly instructs those in government that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

James Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers #46: "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed -- unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Thomas Jefferson also recognized the need for citizens to be armed: "A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise, and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks." (Encyclopedia of T. Jefferson, 318 [Foley, Ed., reissued 1967])

As late as the 1960s, members of Congress agreed that the American people have an inherent right to keep and bear arms. Even the most liberal Democrats recognized that right: "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government and one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible." That was Senator Hubert H. Humphrey, later to become Vice President under L.B. Johnson.

More here:

Amazon.com Joins Forces with Gun Control Group

Amazon.com, the online superstore, has united with the anti-gun movement this holiday season. Amazon.com is promoting the Million Mom March, a group known for its support of strict gun control laws and regulations. It will give five percent of every sale to the organization when visitors access Amazon's website through the Million Mom March site. In 2001, the Million Mom March joined the Brady Campaign and the Brady Center to become the largest grassroots, non-partisan, anti-gun organization.

Since then, the group has supported many anti-gun proposals, such as New Jersey Assembly Bill 3942, which was proposed to outlaw the sale of .50 caliber or larger firearms including muzzleloaders. Fortunately for sportsmen, the bill was withdrawn in January. Similar legislation has been introduced in California, Illinois, New York and Virginia.

The Million Mom March also strongly opposed Senate Bill 1805, a congressional bill that would have protected firearm and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers from frivolous lawsuits brought by victims of gun abusers.

Take Action! Sportsmen across the nation should contact Amazon.com and educate them about the Million Mom March's goals to impose unnecessary gun control laws that threaten the rights of law abiding sportsmen and shooters. Contact President Jeff Bezos, Amazon.com, Inc. 1200 12th Ave. South Suite, 1200, Seattle, Washington 98144. Phone (206) 266-1000.

And don't buy from Amazon anyway. Regnery publishes all the best conservative books

Source




The false hope of gun free zones: "Past instances of mass shootings, and common sense, teach us that when a victim resists with a firearm the violence ends quickly. Arguments claiming armed intervention by citizens leads to higher death tolls do not stand up to scrutiny. Death tolls are demonstrably higher when victims are unable to fight back as compared to cases where an armed victim resists. It's time to ask how many more people must needlessly die before gun control activists and legislators realize that disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them easy prey to criminals. The recent massacre at a Columbus, Ohio nightclub proves yet again that so-called gun free zones only benefit criminals."

REVIVED GUN BAN IN THE WORKS

It has started !! The threat by the Brady Campaign/Million Mom Marchers to reenact the Clinton Gun Ban state by state has started with Florida. The first Gun Ban bill has been filed for the 2005 Florida Legislative Session which begins in March 2005. The bill has not been referred to committees yet. We will notify members when it has been referenced and will provide email addresses to legislators you need to contact to help fight this bill.

SB 500 - Assault Weapons/Detachable Magazine Ban by Gwen Margolis (D-Miami Beach); Would ban the manufacture, importation, possession, purchase, sale, or transfer of any semi-automatic firearm defined as "assault weapons" and any detachable magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds. It would require forfeiture and confiscation of any such firearm or magazine. Further, it would require the state to destroy any such firearm within 60 days after confiscation or forfeiture. It provides immunity from prosecution if firearm is voluntarily surrendered. Otherwise, it makes a violation of the provisions of this bill a felony of the second degree (15 years in prison and $10,000 fine).

Source

Pennsylvania: Grandsons thwart attempted break-in: "Brian Reihner discounts any notion that he and his brother, Bob, are heroes. But North Franklin Township police Chief Mark Kavakich credits them for possibly saving their grandfather's life during a home invasion early Thursday. ... The brothers were armed with rifles. Wallace pulled out a .38-cal. handgun that police later learned had been stolen in Pittsburgh. 'He grabbed my brother's rifle and pulled him down,' Reihner said. 'I stepped back but kept my rifle on him. I told him to just leave.' Wallace left, telling the brothers that they did not know him. He was caught a short time later by Washington police after security officers at Washington Crown Center saw him running across the parking lot. He had the gun in his pocket."



Gun rights group aims to revive lawsuit limit bill: "The Republican gain of four Senate seats and several new conservative House members breathes new life into legislation supported by gun rights advocates to protect the firearms industry. The National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF), in a report detailing their 2004 electoral gains at all levels, showed stronger support for a bill to protect gun makers and dealers from lawsuits stemming from the criminal actions of a third party."

NO FREE SPEECH ABOUT GUNS AT UNIVERSITY

The issues of gun control and free speech dominate a lawsuit filed by an Oklahoma University geology professor who used a blunt sexual comparison to criticize a pro-gun control newspaper column and later was demoted for that and other perceived transgressions. The letter that geology professor David Deming wrote to the editor of the Oklahoma Daily newspaper in February 2000 argued that the owner of an unregistered gun was no more likely to become a murderer than a woman who had not registered her sex organ was to becoming a prostitute.

The letter prompted 25 charges of sexual harassment against Deming, filed "by people I had never met," he stated in a subsequent column. And while those charges were eventually dropped, Deming believes the letter remained a sore spot for university officials, contributing to their decision to oust him from the Oklahoma University (OU) School of Geology and Geophysics, strip Deming of most of his classes and relocate his office to a basement lab.

Deming's federal lawsuit, filed in July of this year, argues that he was denied academic freedom and it seeks to restore his university position and privileges. The university is seeking to dismiss Deming's complaint and a ruling on that motion is expected soon, according to a press release from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), the non-profit group assisting Deming.

FIRE states that when Deming originally threatened a First Amendment lawsuit against Oklahoma University, the sexual harassment charges were dropped, but that Deming's letters to the campus newspaper were used against him anyway, in the form of several negative job evaluations.

More here




Texas: Armed homeowner, neighbor fend off intruders: News "Shots fired inside a home in The Heights during a violent home invasion. Moments later, the victim's neighbor tried to help and he started shooting, too. ... Police say it all began with a home invasion. Three people were home when two suspects broke through a glass window to gain entry into the house. Once inside, that's when police say the gun battle began. 'Inside the house they exchanged gunfire with the owner,' explained Officer Lovelace. The tenant fought off the intruders for several minutes. That's when police say others got involved. Shortly after the break in, a neighbor who lives just one door away came running over to this house. That's when he exchanged fire with the suspects."

Cleveland grocer, 71, returns fire, kills robber

Shooting is second in a week on West Side; 2 suspects arrested

A West Side grocer shot and killed a robber who came into his store Thursday night. It was the second robbery in a West Side store this week that erupted in gunfire. Monday night at Tony's Delicatessen on Scranton Road, a clerk and a customer were killed. Store owners have been on edge since that double killing. The latest shooting occurred about 7:30 p.m. at George's Market at 10117 Detroit Ave. A man police believe was Jesse Buchanan, 19, of Lakewood, walked in with a gun, demanding money and threatening the five people inside. Nadim Shalamy, 71, of Lakewood, shot the robber in the head. The robber had himself fired at least one shot, witnesses said. "He shot a shot, and he missed, and my father didn't miss," said Jeff Shalamy. "If my father didn't shoot him, he would've killed all of them."

Police arrested two men they think were outside the store in a getaway car. The names of the two men were not released. Bridget Halgen, Jeff Shalamy's fianc�e, said the robber had been in the store several times before the shooting. "The guy came into the store seven or eight times," she said. "He kept coming in and leaving. The last time he came in [before the shooting], he bought a 99-cent bottle of malt liquor."

Jenny Napier of Lakewood, who shops at the store, said she was upset that Nadim Shalamy was forced to defend his shop. She said he is known as "Pops" in the neighborhood and often extends credit to shoppers who need it. The Shalamys have owned the store for 14 years. "They're good people," she said.

Homicide detectives immediately began investigating. Facts in the shooting will go to prosecutors, who will rule on whether the shooting was justifiable. Police Lt. Linda Kaspar said that investigators will look closely at whether the two men arrested at George's Market could be among the three suspects still being sought in the two killings at Tony's Deli.

Gunmen killed Tony's clerk Jorge Santiago, 36, and customer Rebecca Cordoves, 21, who was buying formula for her newborn.

Jenny Shalamy said the family has been worried since the shooting on Scranton Road. They kept two guns - a shotgun and a handgun - in the store. She said it seems stores get robbed more in December, around Christmas. "After what happened on Scranton, [my father] has been concerned," she said. "December is the worst month to have a store."

Source




BAN PROTECTIVE VESTS!

A man has been charged with involuntary manslaughter for fatally shooting his friend through a protective vest on an apparent dare, police said. Alexander Joseph Swandic, 20, died of a gunshot wound to the heart Monday after donning a protective vest and asking David John Hueth, 30, to shoot him, police said. Hueth initially told police that Swandic's wound was self-inflicted, but later admitted to the shooting. The two had apparently tested the vest by propping it against a dirt bank and shooting it twice, police said.

Police said the vest was designed to protect against grenade fragments, not bullets. Swandic was pronounced dead at a local hospital following the shooting. Hueth faces a preliminary hearing on Dec. 27. If convicted, he faces up to 10 years in prison.

Source

SAN FRANCISCO IN FAIRYLAND, AS USUAL

City residents will vote next year on a proposed weapons ban that would deny handguns to everyone except law enforcement officers, members of the military and security guards. If passed next November, residents would have 90 days to give up firearms they keep in their homes or businesses. The proposal was immediately dismissed as illegal by a gun owners group. The measure - submitted Tuesday to the Department of Elections by some city supervisors - would also prohibit the sale, manufacturing or distribution of handguns, and the transfer of gun licenses, according to Bill Barnes, an aide to Supervisor Chris Daly. Firearms would be allowed only for police officers, security guards, members of the military, and anyone else "actually employed and engaged in protecting and preserving property or life within the scope of his or her employment," according to the measure. Barnes said Wednesday the initiative is a response to the rising homicide rate and other social ills, noting: "We think there is a wide benefit to limiting the number of guns in the city."

Gun Owners of California, a Sacramento-based lobbying group, quickly called the ban illegal. Sam Paredes, the group's executive director, said state law bars local governments from usurping the state's authority to regulate firearms. "The amazing thing is they are going to turn San Francisco into ground zero for every criminal who wants to profit at their chosen profession," Paredes said.

How many residents would be affected by the ban is unclear, since California does not require residents to register handguns that are kept in a private residence of business. Washington, D.C., is the only major American city that currently bans handgun possession by private citizens. Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the National Rifle Association, said San Francisco would be remiss to use that city as a model. "If gun control worked, Washington, D.C., would be the beacon. However, it's the murder capital of the United States," he said.

More here





Washington: City to consider Taser ban (for "civilians"): "Tasers, an incapacitating electro-shock weapon popular among law enforcement agencies around the country, would become illegal for Bellingham residents to own under a proposed ordinance before the City Council. The ordinance would make it illegal to possess Tasers, stun guns and other energy weapons within the city limits, though police would still be allowed to carry them. Bellingham City Council will discuss and possibly vote on the ordinance tonight. Police Chief Randy Carroll, who brought the ordinance forward to City Council, said Tasers were developed for law enforcement and should stay only in its hands."

NORMAL PROPERTY RIGHTS APPLY TO GUNS TOO

A man who has been fighting for the return of guns seized by Baltimore County police after his 1999 conviction and sentencing for auto manslaughter may be entitled to compensation for them, the state's highest court ruled yesterday. As a convicted felon, Robert L. Serio is not allowed to own firearms, but the county cannot keep his gun collection because he has not been convicted of illegally possessing the weapons, the Court of Appeals ruled. As a result, Serio may be eligible for "just compensation," the unanimous court said. The court's opinion effectively sends the case, which has traveled through the legal system for nearly five years, back to Baltimore County Circuit Court for new hearings "to determine what to do with the guns," which have been stored in a police property room, said Baltimore County Attorney Jay L. Liner.

Serio's lawyer, William N. Butler, said at the time the lawsuit was filed that Serio intended to sell the collection of more than a dozen weapons and had lined up a buyer. Yesterday, Butler estimated that one of the guns is worth at least $30,000. The guns were seized from Serio's Hunt Valley home June 2, 1999 - the day he was sentenced to six months in jail and a year of home detention in the death of 27-year-old Stacy L. Corbin. Serio had pleaded guilty to auto manslaughter, a felony, and to drunken driving. Corbin was thrown from Serio's Porsche convertible when it crashed on York Road near Sparks on Oct. 8, 1998. Serio, who was then executive vice president of a baking goods company, lives in Reno, Nev., Butler said.

Source




Connecticut: Gun collector visited by Waterbury police: "It never dawned on William Bechard that the two old Smith & Wesson revolvers he found for sale earlier this year in the Bargain News would get him arrested. The classified advertisement newspaper led Bechard, 52, to a man in Hartford who was selling a .32-caliber revolver and a .38-caliber revolver. Bechard, of Waterbury, is an avid gun collector and trader who owns nearly 100 rifles and handguns, nearly all of them more than 50 years old. ... Guns made before the late 1890s are considered antiques and don't have to be registered. Believing the guns were antiques, Bechard said he didn't give the matter a second thought until Thursday morning. Two State Police detectives knocked on his door Thursday around 7:30 a.m., Bechard said. They were there to arrest him for illegal transfer of a handgun. 'I said, 'I'm a law-abiding citizen,'' Bechard said. 'They said, Well, now you're not.''"

The ageless message of Chanukah: "As Jews, we are not permitted to sit back and rely on miracles to insure our survival. There are times when relentless oppression must be answered with force. This is not trusting to our martial cunning in lieu of trust in G-d. But, just as we must plant if we expect to harvest, we are obligated to make the efforts necessary to prevent our annihilation either as individuals or as a people. If a situation warrants force of arms, we have a mandate from our Torah to do just that. When we fight, we are under the same mandate to fight to win. And what constitutes a reason to rise and take up arms against oppression within the parameters of the Torah? The reply to this question is the story of Chanukah."



Gun owners claim right to take their rifles to work : "Gun-toting, tough-talking, and anti-establishment to his muddy boot straps, Larry Mullens is an Oklahoman 'good ole boy' personified. He is also fast becoming a classic American folk hero as he takes centre stage in a revolt of gun owners that is reverberating in boardrooms across the United States. ... So it was perhaps not surprising that he was enraged when his previous employer fired him for breaking company security rules that banned guns from the company car park after they found a .38 pistol stashed behind the seat of his pick-up. No one could have predicted that two years later he and his backers would claim an extraordinary revenge -- a law allowing employees to keep guns in locked cars on company property."

CAN COMPANIES BE A LAW UNTO THEMSELVES?

Ronald Honeycutt didn't hesitate. The Pizza Hut driver had just finished dropping off a delivery when a man holding a gun approached him. Honeycutt wasn't about to become another robbery statistic. He grabbed the 9 mm handgun he always carries in his belt and shot the man more than 10 times, killing him. Honeycutt faced no criminal charges, because prosecutors decided that he acted in self-defense.

But the 39-year-old did lose his job: Carrying a gun violated Pizza Hut's no-weapons rule. "It's not fair," says Honeycutt of Carmel, Ind., who has found another pizza-delivery job and continues to carry a gun. "There is a constitutional right to bear arms. If I'm going to die, I'd rather be killed defending myself."

Employers have long banned guns from the workplace as part of a violence-prevention strategy, but those policies are being tested as states pass laws making it easier for residents to carry concealed guns - in some cases, crafting legislation that strikes down employers' attempts to keep guns off company property. That means employers, who have traditionally shied away from such politically charged issues as gun control, are filing lawsuits to preserve their no-guns-allowed rules. Gun owners are also fighting back, boycotting companies that ban guns or fire workers for having them.

"Are we promoting open firefights in the parking lot?" says Paul Viollis, president of Risk Control Strategies in New York. "For legislation to permit employees and contractors to bring loaded firearms to work in vehicles is blatantly irresponsible."

In 35 states, practically any non-felon can obtain a license to carry a concealed weapon, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Those states require law enforcement officials to issue a license to carry a concealed weapon unless the person is in a prohibited category (generally, a convicted felon). Employers can still generally ban guns inside the workplace as long as they post signs or take other clear steps stating that no weapons are allowed, legal experts say, but some legislators are calling for new laws that would take that ability away.

The ability of companies to ban guns in their parking lots is coming under strong attack. In Oklahoma, a number of employers, including ConocoPhillips, are trying to overturn a law that allows employees to keep guns in locked vehicles on company property. The law was supposed to go into effect Nov. 1, but enforcement has been blocked as legal wrangling over the bill continues. Gun-owner groups say employers who ban guns are stripping away workers' right to defend themselves on the job. Roughly 76% of all workplace homicides are robbery related, compared with 7% in the general population, according to an unpublished 2003 report by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

Having a gun is what Terry Pickle believes saved his life. In 2001, the owner of Pickle's Pawn Shop in Salt Lake City, was at work when two intruders broke in. They didn't ask questions or demand money. They simply walked in and opened fire. But Pickle and his son, David, grabbed the loaded guns they carry and fired back, injuring one. The intruders fled, firing at a customer as they left. Pickle says he now knows firsthand that guns on the job can deter crime and keep employees safe. The two men were later caught and sentenced to prison, with one serving 10 years and the other serving 71/2 years. "It saved our lives," Pickle says. "We would have been shot, probably dead, had we not had the ability to protect ourselves. They came in shooting. No words, nothing."

But others say laws that now allow guns in parking lots infringe on employers' property rights - endangering all employees and creating a situation in which a potentially violent worker who gets upset could have easy access to a firearm. In 2003, Doug Williams, an employee at a Lockheed Martin plant in Meridian, Miss., left the building, retrieved a shotgun and a semiautomatic rifle from his truck and returned, shooting 14 workers and killing six. The company bans guns on company property, but acquaintances said in news reports that Williams carried guns in his truck for target practice......

Even as employers wage legal battles to ban guns, some state legislators say companies should have less control. They support legislation that would allow employees with proper gun permits to carry concealed weapons on the job, not just into the parking lot. "Companies are prohibiting the rights of employees to protect themselves," Democratic Oklahoma state Sen. Frank Shurden says. "I am in favor of letting a licensed permit holder carry the gun in the workplace. There's no reason to fear law-abiding citizens." Gun-owner groups say the real risk is that workers unable to have guns could be attacked and have no means of self-defense....

More here

Comment from a reader:

That article raises some interesting issues from a libertarian point of view. My guess is that historically libertarians and conservatives would support the right of contract, so that if a voluntarily negotiated employment contract stipulated that an employee leave his firearms at home, that would be the end of the story. However in recent decades governments have increasingly intervened in this relationship. In this they have often been driven by "liberals" postulating all kinds of new fangled rights, usually contrived as superior to contract and property rights. It looks like this interventionism may be starting to backfire on the anti-gun liberals, will we see them now embracing the property rights of employers?

KNIVES BANNED FOR YOUNG PEOPLE BUT OK FOR ADULTS?

The Unhinged Kingdom at work again

Public fears over young people carrying knives in school and on the street could prompt new government restrictions, the Home Office says. Home Secretary David Blunkett and Education Secretary Charles Clarke are considering moves to combat the proliferation of knives. They include raising the age at which teenagers can buy a knife to 18 and introducing searches in schools. The age limit would bring knives into line with fireworks and alcohol.

The Home Office said there were 272 homicides involving a sharp instrument in 2002/3 out of a total of 1,007 - up 4% on 2001/2. In November 2003, 14-year-old Luke Walmsley was stabbed to death at the Birkbeck School in North Somercotes, Lincolnshire, by a fellow student. The government is working police to find out the extent of knife crime and strengthen the law.

Mr Blunkett said there was a "strong argument" for having to be 18 to buy a knife. The education secretary is looking at giving head teachers new powers to search pupils, rather than waiting for police to do so. He is also considering setting up agreements between heads and police to let them request unannounced police searches in schools to detect and deter knives.

Source

Where does a company's right to prohibit guns stop? "The fight over whether employees should have access to firearms at work seems destined for a tortuous journey through the courts. Meanwhile, many companies have banned, even in parking lots, weapons owned by employees who have concealed weapons permits. As one might expect, tempers can get hot over this issue."



Gun funster: "Days after the arrest of a local teenager following the discovery of a cache of guns and armament in his apartment, police are still trying to determine if his weapons were a hobby or supplies for a deadly plan. Police seized nine rifles, a handgun, silencers, ammunition, a homemade bulletproof vest and other items from Michael Steward�s apartment at 306 Plaza Drive on Dec. 1. "The challenge we have is trying determine whether we have a person experimenting or if he had some sort of plot to harm people," police Capt. Anthony Colarusso said. Steward is being held at the Strafford County jail on $100,000 bail on three felony reckless conduct charges. The charges stem from Steward allegedly firing his guns inside his apartment with a 16-year-old juvenile inside."

Society has lost its respect for firearms: "It's about respect and responsibility. It's too easy for people today to blame someone or something for their personal failures. Access to firearms, for instance, is universally blamed for gun accidents and violence. It's too easy to get guns say the naysayers; they are too readily available.

Why is it, then, that 30-40 years ago -- when firearms were virtually never kept under lock and key -- the statistics weren't nearly so dire? Because in those days youngsters were taught to respect firearms. Back then we knew that a gun was something that you would be able to use when you reached a certain age and level of responsibility. Handling a firearm was an earned privilege. We were fully aware of what a firearm was capable of, respected that power and aspired to a level where we would be allowed to handle it.

In those days guns hung over the fireplace, were stored behind doors or in the corner of mud rooms, under beds, behind truck seats, etc. I remember kids on the rifle team riding to school with their rifles on the bus. Access was far easier than it is today, yet society didn't have the problems with gun violence that it has today. There simply is no respect anymore. Not for human life, morality, courtesy or firearms.




Defending the home in Britain: (Scroll down to post of Dec. 7th) "Thanks to strict criminal laws, working conditions in Great Britain are the safest in the Western world -- that is, if your profession is burglary. On the other hand, if you're a law-abiding citizen quietly staying at home, you're at much greater risk in the nearly gun-free United Kingdom, than in the gun-happy United States of America. ... One reason that British burglars are so much bolder than their American cousins is that only about 4% of British homes legally possess a gun, whereas about half of American homes do. British police administrators require guns at home to be stored unloaded in a safe, and that ammunition be in a separate safe. No American jurisdiction has such extreme 'safe storage' requirements. As a result, an American burglar who breaks into an occupied home faces a significant risk of getting shot."

Clerk shoots robbery suspect: "A gas station clerk fought back when a suspect tried to rob her store. The Franklin County sheriff's department says Desmond Thompson walked into a Sunoco station on Cleveland Avenue around 7:30 Sunday morning, and told the clerk he had a gun while demanding cash. The cashier gave him the money, but pulled a gun and shot Thompson when he told her to step out from behind the counter."



Mother tells of shooting son in self defense: "Dixie Shunk says she can't even remember picking up the shotgun that January night two winters ago. One second, her hands were empty. The next, the gun was there, the stock wedged under her arm and her finger reaching for the trigger. He was coming directly at her, she says, and she jerked the barrel up to meet him. She said her son was screaming: 'I'm killing you! I'm killing you right now! And I'm killing the rest of them, too!' ... The Rev. Joe 'Bud' Lawson, who has known Dixie for 40 years, says that the decision to prosecute her for her son's death was wrong. ... 'Dixie had a choice,' he said. 'She could do what she did or she could lose her whole family. It was just that simple.'"

California: Officials urged to stop gun shows: "Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier is urging his colleagues to take a stand against gun shows at the Contra Costa County fairgrounds. The supervisors have no direct authority over Contra Costa's fairgrounds, which are owned by the state. However, DeSaulnier hopes to send a message to the 23rd District Agricultural Association, which oversees the events on that property. 'I have always felt that doing gun shows on public property is very much the wrong message to send,' DeSaulnier said. ... Attorney Chuck Michel, who represents a number of gun groups including the California Rifle and Pistol Association, [on] efforts to ban gun shows, [said] ... 'Gun shows are now some of the safest places on the planet because of the police presence and regulation. This is another part of the cultural war that Contra Costa is engaged in against people who own guns.'"


Illinois: "Old soldier" captures intruder; sheriff steals his guns : "Leonard Gamage is sore today, which is understandable since he spent more than 45 minutes fighting off an intruder late Friday. Gamage, 87, suffered some bumps and bruises in a pair of fights with the intruder, who is an unidentified 20-year man. Leonard told the Journal he does feel good about still having the ability to defend his home. 'I'm an old soldier,' Gamage said. 'I was in quite a few scuffles in the Army. I feel like I can still go if I have to.' ... Ironically, Gamage lost the very rifle that may have saved his life. 'I do not have a gun permit so they had to take my rifles,' Gamage said. 'The sheriff told me if I get my permit, he would see what he could do to help me get them back.'"

SOME REFLECTIONS

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.

2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.

3. Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface.

4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.

5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?

6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.

7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.

8. If you don't know your rights you don't have any.

9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.

10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.

11. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

12. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.

13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.

14. Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians.

15. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.

16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.

17. 911 - government sponsored Dial a Prayer.

18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.

19. Criminals love gun control - it makes their jobs safer.

20. If Guns cause Crime, then Matches cause Arson.

21. Only a government that is afraid of it's citizens try to control them.

22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.

23. Enforce the "gun control laws" in place, don't make more.

24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.

25. The American Revolution would never have happened with Gun Control.

(Via Texafornian)

Nasty politically correct police hit at kids: "Police have been accused of heavy handedness after arresting two young boys who were playing with toy guns. One of the boys was held in a cell for five hours. Liam Spencer, 11, and his friend, Luke Johnson, 13, were singing the James Bond theme tune as they rolled around on the floor at a youth club 'shooting' at each other in a mock fight. Liam, who is 4ft 8in, was dressed as Santa Claus and Luke was wearing a Frankenstein's Monster mask. But as the pair walked home, a motorist who saw them carrying their silver-coloured plastic guns called the police. ... Both sets of parents accepted that their children should not have been waving the 99p toy guns in the street and thought that that was the end of the matter. But later that evening police called both sets of parents again and told them to take the boys to the police station where they would be formally arrested."



Useless law: "The Anson County Sheriff's Office will not press charges against a woman who killed her husband Wednesday after weeks of domestic violence against her. Joy Burgess had a protective order against estranged husband Brian Gathings. Gathings had been convicted of threatening Burgess before, and jailed several times for charges of violence against her. But as with other recent domestic violence killings, none of it was enough to keep her safe. When Gathings broke down his wife's back door with a shovel Wednesday, Burgess had reason to fear him, said Anson County Sheriff Tommy Allen. Burgess shot Gathings once in the chest, killing him."

GUN BLAMING ON WAY OUT?

Remember S. 1805, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? It blocked most gun liability suits in federal and state courts. Back in March, the Senate rejected the bill, 90-8. Even its Republican sponsors turned against it, as did the National Rifle Association. That's because wily opponents had added two "poison pill" amendments -- the most important of which extended the ban on so-called assault weapons. To the pro-gun crowd, killing the assault weapons ban mattered more than killing the lawsuits, so the Senate killed S. 1805.

Now the weapons ban is history, and that means S. 1805 is a sure bet to be reintroduced in the 109th Congress -- especially with increased Republican majorities in both chambers. Indeed, the National Shooting Sports Foundation calls the bill "our number one priority." Never mind that the industry's Republican allies are professed champions of federalism, supposedly dedicated to reining in the bloated powers of the national government. Apparently, that principle is expendable when hardboiled, practical politics -- that is, payback for the NRA's electioneering -- take precedence.

To be sure, the gun lawsuits are rubbish. Whether the claims are based on "design defect," or "negligent marketing," or a trendy legal theory known as "public nuisance," courts across the country have done the right thing: They've concluded that gun makers are not responsible for the criminal misconduct of their customers. Of 33 lawsuits filed by various states, counties, and cities, 29 have been dismissed.

A Florida appeals court warned that Miami's "frustration at its inability to regulate firearms ? cannot be alleviated through litigation." A federal judge characterized Philadelphia's public nuisance claim as "a theory in search of a case." New York state's demands were denied because they would prevent gun makers from "engaging in activities ? strongly controlled [and permitted] by various federal and state statutes." The District of Columbia's case was tossed with the pointed comment that it was "not a close question"; the case was fundamentally flawed, unpersuasive and "burdened with many layers of legal deficiencies." And this year, on November 18, the Illinois Supreme Court unanimously dismissed Chicago's claims, writing that the mere sale of guns is not a public nuisance.

Private claimants haven't fared much better. In Hamilton v. Accu-Tek, which involved a shooting by Mideast terrorists using stolen assault weapons, New York's highest court unanimously held that gun manufacturers were not "realistically in a position to prevent the wrongs." In San Francisco's Navegar case, in which eight persons died, the California Supreme Court ruled that victims of gun violence cannot sue gun makers when criminals use their products illegally. And in the Ceriale case in Illinois, the state Supreme Court found that "the claimed harm is the aggregate result of numerous unforeseeable intervening criminal acts."

More here

Massachusetts: First electronic fingerprinting for gun licensing: "With a quick electronic scan of a fingerprint, gun shop owners in Massachusetts will know immediately if a customer is eligible to buy a weapon, using a system that officials say is the first of its kind in the nation. The Massachusetts Instant Record Check System, developed over the past six years with nearly $7 million in information technology grant money, will be in place in all police departments and gun shops across the state by next summer."



Oklahoma: Ban on gun pits state against big firms: "In late summer of 2002, Steve Bastible put three bullets into a dying cow at his ranch, threw the emptied rifle behind the seat of his pickup and forgot about it. A few weeks later, the rifle cost him his job of 23 years. That Oct. 1, in a surprise search, Weyerhaeuser Co. sent gun-sniffing dogs into the parking lot of its paper mill here. Mr. Bastible and 11 other workers were fired after guns were found in their vehicles. The timber company said the weapons violated a new company policy that extended a longtime workplace gun ban to the parking area. The fired workers said they knew nothing of the new rule. The firings outraged many in this wooded community in the foothills of the Ouachita Mountains. In rural Oklahoma, carrying a firearm in one's car is commonplace. 'In Oklahoma, gun control is when you hit what you shoot at,' says Jerry Ellis, a member of the state legislature."

Concerns over stun guns grow: "In a report being released Tuesday, Amnesty International says stun guns are being abused by police and wants more scientific study done to determine whether the devices are safe. Amnesty says at least 74 people have died in the United States and Canada in the past four years after being shocked with Tasers. The group also says officers have turned stun guns on the mentally disturbed, children and the elderly."




Gun grabbers say the damnedest things! "In the wake of a deadly shooting in Wisconsin that claimed the lives of six hunters, the gun grabbers have begun their ritual dance in the blood of innocents and 'Ban Assault Weapons' chant. Like a band of savage troglodytes, they worship at the altar of tragedy as a means of pushing their odious agenda, while the gun rights advocates scurry to defend what's left of the Second Amendment."




AFTER THE BAN

President Bill Clinton's 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which expired in September, placed a ban on 19 guns classified as "assault weapons." Historically, restrictions on firearms are by no means limited to liberal politicians; both the Reagan and Bush (the elder) administrations oversaw the implementation of limits on importation of certain foreign weapons. The lingering question about the 1994 ban is, "What, if anything, did it accomplish?" Gun enthusiasts say its effects were petty, aside from simply being a morale-boosting coup for the anti-gun lobby.

People on both sides of the debate are so biased that it's nearly impossible to pick through the jumble of truths, rationalizations, opinions and flat-out fabrications. One overwhelmingly unanimous opinion among gun enthusiasts is that Clinton's ban really didn't have a clear target. Most gun retailers despise the use of the term "assault weapon," often ridiculing it as a misnomer fabricated by politicians ignorant on the subject of firearms. Tamara Keel, a long-time salesperson at Randy's Guns and Knives, says, "The real inanity of the ban is that several legal shotguns were more powerful [than banned weapons] but had wooden stocks, so they didn't look as scary."

Admittedly, the once-banned AR15, all black metal and plastic, does look a lot more sinister than the M1A, which has a wooden stock and would look homey on the mantle of a hunter's cabin. That said, there are differences that, though gun enthusiasts beg to differ, are more than just cosmetic.

For example, under the ban, guns could not be sold or manufactured with collapsible stocks, which allow the shooter to shorten the length of the gun. This could presumably make the firearm easier to conceal, which is unnecessary in hunting or hobby shooting.

Flash suppressers, attached to the tip of the barrel to diminish the visible flash, were also forbidden under the ban. "They would be useful at night, for the military, for example. It would keep the enemy from knowing where the fire came from," says Guy.

Again, this feature doesn't seem necessary for sporting use, but Guy explains that many sportsmen value the "historical look of [flash suppressers]. They look more like military arms."

Another restriction under the ban was placed on bayonet attachments, prompting most gun enthusiasts to scoff, "When was the last time you heard of someone getting murdered by bayonet?" Fair enough, but I couldn't get a straight answer as to what, exactly, would be the purpose of the bayonet attachment as far as hobby, sport, or even self-defense. (After all, if you are holding a semi-automatic weapon whose bullets could bust through several layers of drywall, why would you need a bayonet?)

The most significant difference in the gun market since the ban expired is the increased capacity space of the magazine (the cartridge which holds the bullets). Before the ban, no magazine could be sold or manufactured (for long guns or handguns) that held more than 10 rounds. Though most shooters at the range still use 10-round magazines, there is now a variety available. The highest I saw was a 90-round coil for an AR15 on sale at a recent RK Gun Show, which would make it possible to shoot 90 bullets rapidly without reloading.

The question of whether the banned weapons were rightfully termed "assault weapons" or whether they are any more dangerous than legal guns is a never-ending debate. Regardless, the looming problem with all of these regulations is that, ultimately, many people still owned what the government classified as "assault weapons" while the ban was in effect because of a grandfather clause. "We haven't seen much of a change in the weapons people use here [since the ban expired] because so many people had licenses to shoot these guns during the ban," says Guy of the significant loophole in the legislation.

Area gun retailers confirm Guy's assertion that the gun world hasn't seen a significant change since the ban was lifted. Larry Greenlee, of Craig's Firearms, says that immediately after the ban expired, "sales picked up a little, but it calmed back down again." He chalks the small boost up to a forbidden fruit phenomenon; people automatically wanted what they couldn't have before.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, which provides background checks for all guns purchased in Tennessee, gives statistics that would tend to further the notion that the ban's expiration was a mere blip on the radar of the gun world. Records from October 2004 show that TBI processed 20,484 total firearms-only a handful more guns than the 19,499 they processed in October of 2003, when the ban was still in effect. Not exactly a sales boom.

So, while folks on either side of the gun control debate have staunch opinions on the ban, its practical applications seem to have been pretty meager. Of course, other avenues of gun control are either possible or already in effect. Many states have their own restrictive gun laws. Massachusetts has a mandatory one-year jail sentence for anyone illegally possessing a firearm; a measure that takes on the gun lobby's argument that criminals don't abide by gun laws.

The Brady Law of 1994 provides for more in-depth background checks as well as mandatory five-day waiting periods, but Tennessee is among 27 states exempt from these provisions. Presently, the background check usually only takes a few moments, allowing customers to make a purchase almost instantly. Jennifer Johnson of the TBI says, "The TN Instant Check system simply tells the retailer whether the person has a felony in their criminal history."

More here

Aussies amongst most heavily armed

Australians rank among the world's most heavily armed citizens despite the Federal Government's efforts to tighten gun laws. There are an estimated 2.1 million private firearms in Australia, according to the Small Arms Survey 2003 by the Graduate Institute for International Studies in Geneva. Gun ownership in Australia surpasses the global ratio by more than 50 per cent with roughly one gun for every nine people, according to the study released overnight at a UN conference. In comparison, there is one privately held gun for every 16 people in the world with one gun per person in the US.

Australia's gun legislation was the most up-to-date in the Pacific region, the survey said, with average annual firearm imports dropping 66 per cent since gun laws were tightened in 1996/97 after the Port Arthur killings. However in the 2001/02 financial year Australian customs officials seized 812 illegally imported firearms with hundreds of thousands believed to have made it onto the market. And from 1999 to 2002 the number of robberies involving firearms in Sydney's most populated areas rose by 34 per cent, while handgun homicide has grown from 13 to 50 per cent since Martin Bryant killed 35 people at the Port Arthur tourist site in Tasmania in April 1996.

As the most dominant economic powers in the Pacific, Australia and New Zealand accounted for 98.99 per cent of legal imports into the region, the survey said. Of the two countries, New Zealand has more permissive gun laws but there is little difference in Australia's rate of gun crime and injury. While all states and territories permit gun ownership, Australia has in the past lacked uniform national gun laws. After the Port Arthur massacre police ministers agreed to enact new legislation for tighter regulation of gun ownership. And earlier this month the federal government launched a buyback scheme for small firearms prompted by last year's Monash University shootings in which two students were killed and five injured. The Federal Government predicts 65,000 guns will be handed in under the $118 million scheme, which will run until December 31.

Under the legislation, high calibre handguns above 9mm and short-barrelled handguns under 12cm for semi-automatics, will be banned. People found in possession of 10 or more firearms, where at least half are military style fully automatic weapons, face up to 13 years in prison. The buyback and a six-month amnesty on illegal weapons is actively in force in all states except Victoria, where it starts in less than a month, and NSW and South Australia, where it starts on October 1.

Source



79 percent of criminals obtained guns from illegal sources: "Ninety-five percent of US police commanders and sheriffs believe most criminals obtain their firearms from illegal sources, according to a survey released by the National Association of Chiefs of Police. Coincidentally, data released by the US Department of Justice appears to confirm this claim by our nation's police executives. The DOJ study refutes the conventional wisdom that guns used in criminal acts are purchased at retail stores or gun shows. About 18 percent of state prisoners and 15 percent of federal prisoners reported that they were armed when they committed the offense for which they were imprisoned, according to the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics."



Pennsylvania: Gun suspect uses "tight jeans" defense: "Sean Eldon Duvall, 36, was arrested Tuesday on charges including aggravated assault and reckless endangerment for the June 18 incident. Southwest Regional Police Detective Sgt. James Rega said in court papers that Duvall left his car with the .38-caliber revolver hidden under papers and aimed it at him when he stopped to see if Duvall needed help. Duvall told The Associated Press that he didn't need help; he said he was just stepping out of his car to go to a friend's house to play chess. Duvall acknowledged he had his gun with him, but said he has a permit to carry it, which he tried to show Rega. By law, the gun must be concealed, but Duvall said he couldn't conceal it under his pants while sitting in his car because his jeans were too tight." [Could be true]

SAFEST TO RESIST CRIME

According to University of California, Berkeley criminologist Franklin Zimring, the best way to survive a robbery is through "active compliance." In other words, do exactly what the criminal says, as quickly as possible. However, the statistics suggest otherwise. After examining data from the Department of Justice National Crime Victimization Survey from 1979 through 1987, Gary Kleck found that the best way to survive a criminal attack was to resist � with a gun.

Women were 2.5 times more likely to suffer serious injury if they offered no resistance than if they resisted with a gun. Having a gun made the crucial difference. Women who resisted without a gun were four times more likely to be seriously hurt than those who resisted with a gun. "In other words," writes John Lott in More Guns, Less Crime, "the best advice is to resist with a gun, but if no gun is available, it is better to offer no resistance than to fight."

In the case of men � no doubt, because of their greater physical strength � having a gun made considerably less difference in the success rate of their resistance and in the likelihood of their being injured. But it still proved advantageous. Men who offered no resistance turned out to be 1.4 times more likely to be seriously hurt than those who resisted with a gun. Men who resisted without a gun were 1.5 times more likely to be injured than those resisting with a gun.

Much more here

Update

It has been pointed out to me that although the figure "2.5 times more likely" mentioned above is accurate, the research from which it is derived used a relatively small sample size so an explanation of the result as a purely chance occurence cannot be ruled out.





Taser ad blitz touts consumer stun gun: "Just in time for the holiday season, Scottsdale-based Taser International is marketing a consumer version of the electric stun gun carried by police officers nationwide. A newspaper and billboard advertising campaign began this month in Phoenix, the only city where the advertisements are running. Tasers fire a pair of darts that deliver a debilitating electrical charge. The stun guns are used by about 1,150 law enforcement departments and have been credited with reducing police shootings. 'Given the violence out there and the overall success with law enforcement, this is the operative tool for self-defense,' company spokesman Steve Tuttle said. 'It can stop the most dangerous individuals, which most non-lethal weapons cannot. This is the answer to stop those people safely.' But while the company insists Tasers are non-lethal, some evidence links them to deaths."

Pistol-packing hairdresser kills robber: "A pistol-packing hairdresser killed a robber and wounded two others in a shootout outside a butchery in the Pretoria CBD on Friday afternoon, police said. Seeing people being pushed around behind the closed doors of Capital Meat, next door to his shop, at 5:30 p.m., the hairdresser went to investigate, police spokesperson Inspector Percy Morokane said on Saturday. He caught one of the robbers walking out of the butchery pretending the be a customer, and forced him to the ground at gunpoint. ... The robber managed to flee with a bag of stolen cash when his three accomplices emerged, guns blazing, from a side door, leaving the slightly injured butcher inside. In the ensuing shootout, the hairdresser fatally wounded one of the robbers below his collarbone. ... The hairdresser would not face any charges 'for now,' but an inquest docket would be opened into the deaths of the robbers."


Illinois: Morton Grove to continue enforcing gun ban: "Morton Grove Police will continue to enforce the village's historic handgun ban despite a bill approved this week over a governor's veto aimed at curtailing local gun laws. Senate Bill 2165, which bars local prosecutions in self-defense cases, was drafted last year in response to an incident involving Wilmette resident Hale DeMar, who shot and wounded a burglar in his home. DeMar was cleared of any wrongdoing in the shooting, but faces a fine and loss of two handguns under a local law banning handgun possession."


What happened in Illinois reflected what happened around the U.S. "Ruling unanimously Nov. 18 on two lawsuits that had been filed against the firearms industry -- one by the City of Chicago and Cook County, the other by five individual plaintiffs -- the Illinois Supreme Court not only tossed out both cases, but dealt a serious blow to the gun control crowd. It cannot have been a worse month for hard-core disciples of gun control extremism, in Illinois and elsewhere. Their definition of sensible firearms law, short of repealing the Second Amendment, is to regulate gun ownership out of existence. Gun owners turned out in record numbers to keep George W. Bush in the White House, and then the Illinois high court rendered two painful opinions."

Fired up over a gun law: "Homicides in U.S. workplaces have fallen nearly 40% in the past decade. Even so, Oklahoma passed a law forbidding employers to ban guns from company parking lots. State legislator Jerry Ellis says law-abiding hunters should be allowed to stow firearms in their cars at work. Employees with violent intent, Ellis says, 'are not going to be stopped no matter how many laws you have.' The Whirlpool appliance company, backed by other Oklahoma businesses, is suing to keep from complying with the law, which was supposed to take effect Nov. 1. Whirlpool, which employs 1,500 workers at its Tulsa, Okla., plant, says protecting them means banning guns completely from company premises, including the parking lot."