SOME SANITY FROM NEW ZEALAND
Police Minister George Hawkins confirmed today that registration will not be in a bill he is preparing to tighten border control of illicit arms trading. The legislation will bring New Zealand into line with international protocols on the control of weapons, parts and ammunition. The registration of all the guns in the country was recommended seven years ago in a government-commissioned review of gun laws carried out by Sir Thomas Thorpe. Neither the previous nor the present government acted on the recommendation, and Mr Hawkins said today it was off the agenda. "Police told the Government it wouldn't make very much difference, and they recommended that we did not register every firearm," he said on National Radio. "Police advice was that most of the times guns are used illegally, they are illegal guns and they don't know about them anyway."
The chairman of the Council of licensed Firearms Owners, John Howat, agreed with the decision. "There's no evidence, anywhere in the world, that registration systems assist police in generally controlling firearms," he said. "It is incredibly costly. We don't want to go down that track, it's a waste of money."
The Progressive Party's justice spokesman, Matt Robson, has advocated registration in the past and he did not agree. "Without a firearms registration authority, without the proper registration of every gun in New Zealand, we leave ourselves very vulnerable," he said.
Mr Hawkins will put his bill into Parliament early next year. He said it would give increased powers to customs officials to search for and seize illicit weapons and ammunition. It would allow New Zealand to sign the United Nations protocol on the control of trans-national organised crime. "Illegal arms getting into the Pacific isn't something we want to see, and we're playing our part as a responsible member of the Pacific group of nations," he said. "We're very conscious that we have a lot of ports, a lot of yachts come to them, and we have to be ever vigilant."
There are four different classes of firearms licence in New Zealand. The A category entitles holders to own and use rifles and shotguns. Other categories enable people to own and use handguns and military-style semi-automatic firearms under strict conditions.
Source
WOMAN WINGS THUGS
A homeowner fought back Thursday morning after her teenage nephew was shot in the arm as two men invaded her Missouri City home looking for a man she did not know, police told Local 2. Missouri City detectives said homeowner Malika Leverette noticed two armed men in their 20s approaching the front door of her home on Reecewood Lane at Mulberry at about 3 a.m. As the woman ran to get a gun, the intruders stormed inside the home and asked where a man named "Snoop" was.
Investigators said when Leverette told them they had the wrong house, the men fired a bullet at her 16-year-old nephew, who was sleeping on the couch. Leverette told police she then opened fire on the men as they escaped. Officials think the woman struck one of the intruders because there was a trail of blood leaving the home.
Leverette's nephew was transported to a hospital with a gunshot wound to the arm. His condition has not been released. Officials said there is a possibility that the intruders invaded the wrong home because Leverette moved into the home two weeks ago.
Source
Sunday, January 02, 2005
Saturday, January 01, 2005
NAS DODGING THE FACTS ON GUN CONTROL
Raising the bar on the evidence required is an old academic trick
This month the National Academy of Sciences issued a 328-page report on gun-control laws. The big news is that the academy's panel couldn't identify any benefits of decades-long effort to reduce crime and injury by restricting gun ownership. The only conclusion it could draw was: Let's study the question some more (presumably, until we find the results we want).
The academy, however, should believe its own findings. Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, a survey that covered 80 different gun-control measures and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun-control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. From the assault-weapons ban to the Brady Act to one-gun-a-month restrictions to gun locks, nothing worked.
The study was not the work of gun-control opponents: The panel was set up during the Clinton administration, and all but one of its members (whose views on guns were publicly known before their appointments) favored gun control.
It's bad enough that the panel backed away from its own survey and empirical work; worse yet is that it didn't really look objectively at all the evidence. If it had, it would have found not just that gun control doesn't help solve the problems of crime, suicide and gun accidents, but that it can actually be counterproductive. The panel simply ignored many studies showing just that. For example, the research on gun locks that the panel considered examined only whether accidental gun deaths and suicides were prevented. There was no mention of research that shows that locking up guns prevents people from using them defensively.
The panel also ignored most of the studies that find a benefit in crime reduction from right-to-carry laws. It did pay attention to some non-peer reviewed papers on the right-to-carry issue, and it also noted one part of a right-to-carry study that indicated little or no benefit from such laws. What the panel didn't point out, however, is that the authors of that particular study had concluded that data in their work did much more to show there were benefits than to debunk it.
James Q. Wilson, professor of public policy at UCLA, was the one dissenting panelist and the only member whose views were known in advance to not be entirely pro-gun control. His dissent focused on the right-to-carry issue, and the fact that emphasizing results that could not withstand peer-reviewed studies called into question the panel's contention that right-to-carry laws had not for sure had a positive effect. Wilson also said that that conclusion was specious given that the panel's own reanalysis confirmed that right-to-carry laws reduced crime. The panel's findings to the contrary he called "quite puzzling."
While more research is always helpful, the notion that we have learned nothing flies in the face of common sense. The NAS panel should have concluded as the existing research has: Gun control doesn't help. Instead, the panel has left us with two choices: Either academia and the government have wasted millions of dollars and countless man-hours on useless research (and the panel would like us to spend more in the same worthless pursuit), or the National Academy is so completely unable to separate politics from its analyses that it simply can't accept the results for what they are. In either case, the academy, and academics in general, have succeeded mostly in shooting themselves in the foot.
From John Lott Jr
Update
John Lott's nemesis has struck again -- as I rather thought he would. Tim Lambert says Lott misrepresented the NAS panel and its findings. I note however that Lambert does not address the issue of the NAS raising the bar to when something is proved. For some people no evidence will ever be enough.
Crime spurs South Africa's inventors to action: "With millions of guns in circulation, South Africa is fighting to contain a culture of criminal violence. Police chief Jackie Selebi says he will use his new post as head of Interpol to wage war on the spread of guns in South Africa and abroad. At his farm northeast of Pretoria, Nic van Zyl is busy inventing a 'smart gun,' as he has been doing for 15 years. With a computer circuit board concealed in the butt and a revolutionary laser firing mechanism instead of the traditional hammer, the 'South African Intelligent Firearm' would not look out of place on the set of a science fiction movie. The really clever bit is in the handle, which reads the user's thumb print so only the rightful owner can fire it. And when it shoots, a camera takes a digital photo of the target, noting the time and the date -- just in case the user ends up in court having to justify opening fire."
Raising the bar on the evidence required is an old academic trick
This month the National Academy of Sciences issued a 328-page report on gun-control laws. The big news is that the academy's panel couldn't identify any benefits of decades-long effort to reduce crime and injury by restricting gun ownership. The only conclusion it could draw was: Let's study the question some more (presumably, until we find the results we want).
The academy, however, should believe its own findings. Based on 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, a survey that covered 80 different gun-control measures and some of its own empirical work, the panel couldn't identify a single gun-control regulation that reduced violent crime, suicide or accidents. From the assault-weapons ban to the Brady Act to one-gun-a-month restrictions to gun locks, nothing worked.
The study was not the work of gun-control opponents: The panel was set up during the Clinton administration, and all but one of its members (whose views on guns were publicly known before their appointments) favored gun control.
It's bad enough that the panel backed away from its own survey and empirical work; worse yet is that it didn't really look objectively at all the evidence. If it had, it would have found not just that gun control doesn't help solve the problems of crime, suicide and gun accidents, but that it can actually be counterproductive. The panel simply ignored many studies showing just that. For example, the research on gun locks that the panel considered examined only whether accidental gun deaths and suicides were prevented. There was no mention of research that shows that locking up guns prevents people from using them defensively.
The panel also ignored most of the studies that find a benefit in crime reduction from right-to-carry laws. It did pay attention to some non-peer reviewed papers on the right-to-carry issue, and it also noted one part of a right-to-carry study that indicated little or no benefit from such laws. What the panel didn't point out, however, is that the authors of that particular study had concluded that data in their work did much more to show there were benefits than to debunk it.
James Q. Wilson, professor of public policy at UCLA, was the one dissenting panelist and the only member whose views were known in advance to not be entirely pro-gun control. His dissent focused on the right-to-carry issue, and the fact that emphasizing results that could not withstand peer-reviewed studies called into question the panel's contention that right-to-carry laws had not for sure had a positive effect. Wilson also said that that conclusion was specious given that the panel's own reanalysis confirmed that right-to-carry laws reduced crime. The panel's findings to the contrary he called "quite puzzling."
While more research is always helpful, the notion that we have learned nothing flies in the face of common sense. The NAS panel should have concluded as the existing research has: Gun control doesn't help. Instead, the panel has left us with two choices: Either academia and the government have wasted millions of dollars and countless man-hours on useless research (and the panel would like us to spend more in the same worthless pursuit), or the National Academy is so completely unable to separate politics from its analyses that it simply can't accept the results for what they are. In either case, the academy, and academics in general, have succeeded mostly in shooting themselves in the foot.
From John Lott Jr
Update
John Lott's nemesis has struck again -- as I rather thought he would. Tim Lambert says Lott misrepresented the NAS panel and its findings. I note however that Lambert does not address the issue of the NAS raising the bar to when something is proved. For some people no evidence will ever be enough.
Crime spurs South Africa's inventors to action: "With millions of guns in circulation, South Africa is fighting to contain a culture of criminal violence. Police chief Jackie Selebi says he will use his new post as head of Interpol to wage war on the spread of guns in South Africa and abroad. At his farm northeast of Pretoria, Nic van Zyl is busy inventing a 'smart gun,' as he has been doing for 15 years. With a computer circuit board concealed in the butt and a revolutionary laser firing mechanism instead of the traditional hammer, the 'South African Intelligent Firearm' would not look out of place on the set of a science fiction movie. The really clever bit is in the handle, which reads the user's thumb print so only the rightful owner can fire it. And when it shoots, a camera takes a digital photo of the target, noting the time and the date -- just in case the user ends up in court having to justify opening fire."
Friday, December 31, 2004
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."
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."
Thursday, December 30, 2004
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."
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."
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
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."
"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."
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
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."
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."
Monday, December 27, 2004
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."
"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."
Sunday, December 26, 2004
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."
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."
Saturday, December 25, 2004
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."
Friday, December 24, 2004
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:
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:
Thursday, December 23, 2004
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."
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."
Wednesday, December 22, 2004
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
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
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
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."
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."
Monday, December 20, 2004
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."
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."
Sunday, December 19, 2004
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
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
Saturday, December 18, 2004
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."
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."
Friday, December 17, 2004
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.''"
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.''"
Thursday, December 16, 2004
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."
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."
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
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?
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?
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
