Josie Roberts buys a WASR-10.
She really doesn't like the fact that she can.
"Six days after Watts was murdered, four days after I applied for a driver’s license, one hour after entering the store and five minutes after a criminal record check, I legally owned a semiautomatic AK-47-style rifle," she writes.
Horrors!
Josie, I can buy gasoline, fertilizer and box cutters in a lot less time. [And, yeah, I'm aware of the disputes about OKC and 9-11.]
You can't ban everything that's potentially dangerous, Josie.
Except for balconies. Ban them.
[Thanks to SayUncle for the tip on this story.]
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Mother Sues Cops For Failing to Protect Kids
"[I]t would establish restraining orders as de facto Constitutional entitlements, the enforcement of which are guaranteed by procedural due process; and, second, it would hold state police federally liable for actions they did not take rather than for their bad acts."
As tragic as this story is, the cure is worse than the disease. Innocent victims could be denied fundamental rights without due process--based solely on the say-so of a spiteful accuser. RO's are routinely issued in divorces, even though a spouse may be the most gentle soul in the world.
Society does not have the resources to provide everyone a 24/7 bodyguard, and imagine the totalitarian outcome if it tried. The truth is, we're each of us ultimately responsible for our own defense. That's the way it's always been. To deny that is to deny reality.
This proposal makes about as much sense as balcony control.
As tragic as this story is, the cure is worse than the disease. Innocent victims could be denied fundamental rights without due process--based solely on the say-so of a spiteful accuser. RO's are routinely issued in divorces, even though a spouse may be the most gentle soul in the world.
Society does not have the resources to provide everyone a 24/7 bodyguard, and imagine the totalitarian outcome if it tried. The truth is, we're each of us ultimately responsible for our own defense. That's the way it's always been. To deny that is to deny reality.
This proposal makes about as much sense as balcony control.
NYU Imposes Balcony Control
"In an effort to prevent suicides, New York University will restrict access to balconies in two dormitories, Carlyle Court and Coral Towers, which together house more than 1,000 students."
Let me guess: background checks, one balcony a month, registration and licensing, "smart" balconies...
Gosh, this living in a physical universe with cause and effect certainly poses some dilemmas. And this business of people making wrong choices has got to stop! But we should certainly be thankful the solons of higher education are, at least, addressing the balcony loophole.
[Note: if not registered with the NY Times, try BugMeNot.]
Let me guess: background checks, one balcony a month, registration and licensing, "smart" balconies...
Gosh, this living in a physical universe with cause and effect certainly poses some dilemmas. And this business of people making wrong choices has got to stop! But we should certainly be thankful the solons of higher education are, at least, addressing the balcony loophole.
[Note: if not registered with the NY Times, try BugMeNot.]
Godzilla vs The Bradys
Oh, the humanity!
You can visit assorted disasters on the deserving recipient of your choice thanks to the fine folks at NetDisasters.com.
You can visit assorted disasters on the deserving recipient of your choice thanks to the fine folks at NetDisasters.com.
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
A Smarter Way
I nominate Ronald Brownstein over at The Los Angeles Times for the Nobel Peace Prize. He's single-handedly come up with "A Smarter Way to Control Outbreaks of School Gun Violence."
If only the fed-gov would force us to use "smart guns," the Red Lake Massacre wouldn't have happened.
Well, the technology isn't actually ready yet, Brownstein admits, but if it was, this would sure be a smarter way to control outbreaks of school violence.
Of course he doesn't address what we'll need to do with the estimated 250 million or so "dumb" guns already in circulation. Nor that the Red Lake killer would have still been able to steal guns from his LEO grandfather, since the police will exempt themselves from using them (even though the justification for the original research was to create a smarter way to control incidents where perps shoot cops with their own guns.)
He doesn't say anything about how the new technology will likely raise the cost of basic defense pistols out of the reach of many low-income people, the ones who live in the most crime-prone neighborhoods and presumably in the most routine danger. Nor does he consider how criminals, like the police, will also be exempted from any mandates.
He also doesn't consider the near universal experience of pointing a remote control at a TV or garage door and having absolutely nothing happen. But maybe increasing the likelihood of a firearm failing to perform as intended will turn out to be a smarter way to revive gun industry lawsuits.
And he's dead silent on the certain demands for the police to have a "shutoff switch" like the engine disablers being developed as a smarter way to stop car chases. After all, what excuse could a "law-abiding" citizen have for not supporting this? Like someone who asserts his Fourth Amendment rights during a traffic stop, what have you got to hide?
The sad thing is, I'll bet over 90% of The Times' readers will never hear such arguments, and of the ones who do, the majority will find the outcomes desirable.
Ronald Brownstein is counting on that. After all, we've established that he's a pretty smart fellow.
If only the fed-gov would force us to use "smart guns," the Red Lake Massacre wouldn't have happened.
Well, the technology isn't actually ready yet, Brownstein admits, but if it was, this would sure be a smarter way to control outbreaks of school violence.
Of course he doesn't address what we'll need to do with the estimated 250 million or so "dumb" guns already in circulation. Nor that the Red Lake killer would have still been able to steal guns from his LEO grandfather, since the police will exempt themselves from using them (even though the justification for the original research was to create a smarter way to control incidents where perps shoot cops with their own guns.)
He doesn't say anything about how the new technology will likely raise the cost of basic defense pistols out of the reach of many low-income people, the ones who live in the most crime-prone neighborhoods and presumably in the most routine danger. Nor does he consider how criminals, like the police, will also be exempted from any mandates.
He also doesn't consider the near universal experience of pointing a remote control at a TV or garage door and having absolutely nothing happen. But maybe increasing the likelihood of a firearm failing to perform as intended will turn out to be a smarter way to revive gun industry lawsuits.
And he's dead silent on the certain demands for the police to have a "shutoff switch" like the engine disablers being developed as a smarter way to stop car chases. After all, what excuse could a "law-abiding" citizen have for not supporting this? Like someone who asserts his Fourth Amendment rights during a traffic stop, what have you got to hide?
The sad thing is, I'll bet over 90% of The Times' readers will never hear such arguments, and of the ones who do, the majority will find the outcomes desirable.
Ronald Brownstein is counting on that. After all, we've established that he's a pretty smart fellow.
A Sticky Situation
Jennifer Freeman over at Liberty Belles says some of their "members and supporters have been placing the Liberty Belles bumper stickers on newspaper racks and public telephone booths. Apparently these stickers have been popping up all over the country.
"While we appreciate the enthusiasm and support," Ms. Freeman says, "it has generated some complaints from the owners of the property. As such, we kindly ask that you request and receive permission prior to placing our sticker in a place where it can be easily viewed by the public."
In other words, STOP IT. STOP IT NOW.
"In the meantime," she reminds us, "Liberty Belles bumper stickers still look great on your car. (Please don't put them other people's cars!)."
These stickers are complimentary and can ordered on their website at http://www.libertybelles.org/shop.htm
"While we appreciate the enthusiasm and support," Ms. Freeman says, "it has generated some complaints from the owners of the property. As such, we kindly ask that you request and receive permission prior to placing our sticker in a place where it can be easily viewed by the public."
In other words, STOP IT. STOP IT NOW.
"In the meantime," she reminds us, "Liberty Belles bumper stickers still look great on your car. (Please don't put them other people's cars!)."
These stickers are complimentary and can ordered on their website at http://www.libertybelles.org/shop.htm
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Joy, and Danger, of Witlessness
The family of a bicyclist slain by a cougar at Southern California's Whiting Wilderness Park is suing the state, that would be us private individuals who have taxes extorted from us.
"Because the county installs signs warning about mountain lions — and rattlesnakes — at the entrances to all its wilderness parks," The Los Angeles Times intones, "it's likely Reynolds knew there was some chance of a mountain lion encounter."
The Times actually argues for individual responsibility for one's own safety!
Yep, the Park Rules are posted.
But I wonder why the editorial doesn't mention the one that says "Possession or use of firearms or weapons is prohibited."
Yeah, I wonder.
"Because the county installs signs warning about mountain lions — and rattlesnakes — at the entrances to all its wilderness parks," The Los Angeles Times intones, "it's likely Reynolds knew there was some chance of a mountain lion encounter."
The Times actually argues for individual responsibility for one's own safety!
Yep, the Park Rules are posted.
But I wonder why the editorial doesn't mention the one that says "Possession or use of firearms or weapons is prohibited."
Yeah, I wonder.
Tough on Guns, Weak on Brains
Mark Benjamin of Salon.com thinks frivolous lawsuits should be employed against the gun industry.
Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants BATFU to be able to harrass dealers out of existence.
And perhaps most importantly, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants the government to be able to declare people terrorists and deny them their right to keep and bear arms without due process.
In other words, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com is yet another in a long line of boringly unoriginal anti-gun Establishment propagandists.
Correspondent Brian Naylor shared his letter to Salon.com with WarOn Guns. Among his pithy observations:
"You go on to raise all the VPC/Brady cornerstone spectres - 'TEC-9 submachine guns' and 'street-sweepers.' You use the all-too-familiar VPC tactic of purposefully confusing fully-automatic M-16s with semi-automatics. You fail to mention that the armor-penetrating rounds for the recently fearsome FN 5.7 are not available to the public at all.
"You continue to pretend that there is a gun show 'loophole' when there is no such thing. You even weigh in on the VPC's latest manufactured boogeyman, the .50BMG, with their canonical list of imagined horrors. As far as I can tell, the only VPC bullet points you failed to hit were the use of the phrases, 'spray bullets' and 'blood in the streets.'
"Do they actually send out a list of talking points, or did you go to the trouble to cull them all yourself? I'm not sure which would be worse."
To view "Tough on terror, weak on guns," you'll need to get a "day pass" and watch an ad.
Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants BATFU to be able to harrass dealers out of existence.
And perhaps most importantly, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants the government to be able to declare people terrorists and deny them their right to keep and bear arms without due process.
In other words, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com is yet another in a long line of boringly unoriginal anti-gun Establishment propagandists.
Correspondent Brian Naylor shared his letter to Salon.com with WarOn Guns. Among his pithy observations:
"You go on to raise all the VPC/Brady cornerstone spectres - 'TEC-9 submachine guns' and 'street-sweepers.' You use the all-too-familiar VPC tactic of purposefully confusing fully-automatic M-16s with semi-automatics. You fail to mention that the armor-penetrating rounds for the recently fearsome FN 5.7 are not available to the public at all.
"You continue to pretend that there is a gun show 'loophole' when there is no such thing. You even weigh in on the VPC's latest manufactured boogeyman, the .50BMG, with their canonical list of imagined horrors. As far as I can tell, the only VPC bullet points you failed to hit were the use of the phrases, 'spray bullets' and 'blood in the streets.'
"Do they actually send out a list of talking points, or did you go to the trouble to cull them all yourself? I'm not sure which would be worse."
To view "Tough on terror, weak on guns," you'll need to get a "day pass" and watch an ad.
Monday, March 28, 2005
Brady Campaign: NRA Calls for More Guns in Schools
Hey, if you dry up sources of blood, how is Michael Barnes gonna dance?
I'm sure if he was addressing a school assembly on the benefits of being helpless sheep, and an armed teen psycho rushed in and opened fire, Mike would spring right into action.
I just wonder how many kids he'd trample in his haste to escape?
I'm sure if he was addressing a school assembly on the benefits of being helpless sheep, and an armed teen psycho rushed in and opened fire, Mike would spring right into action.
I just wonder how many kids he'd trample in his haste to escape?
NRA Leader Advocates Guns for Teachers
"All options should be considered to prevent rampages like the Minnesota school shooting that took 10 lives -- including making guns available to teachers, a top National Rifle Association leader said Friday.
"'I'm not saying that that means every teacher should have a gun or not, but what I am saying is we need to look at all the options at what will truly protect the students,' the NRA's first vice president, Sandra S. Froman, told The Associated Press.'"
Why not every teacher? And why limit keeping and bearing arms based on profession? Why not acknowledge Patrick Henry's "great object"?
But there's one obstacle Sandra faces, even with her modest goal: Wayne LaPierre.
"First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period," he told NRA Annual Meeting attendees in 1999, "with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.
"We believe America's schools should be as safe as America's airports. You can't talk about, much less take, bombs and guns onto airplanes.Such behavior in our schools should be prosecuted just as certainly as such behavior in our airports is prosecuted."
Right, Wayne, make 'em as safe as pre-911 airports.
I've heard some laud Ms. Froman's selection as NRA's president-elect because she likes to shoot machineguns. If being a good shooter was the sole criterion, I'd be hard pressed not to vote for Lon Horiuchi.
Call me irresponsible, but I prefer to look at things like past support for gun control.
"To curb gun violence, Froman says that it is important to enforce old laws instead of passing new ones. 'If the Brady law stopped 600,000 illegal gun purchases, where were the 600,000 prosecutions?'
"One measure she [supports] is Project Exile. 'It works...it doesn’t victimize peaceable gun owners.'"
How about REPEALING instead of ENFORCING "old laws," Sandra? Not only are most a violation of the 2nd Amendment, but the recent exhaustive National Academy of Sciences report couldn't find a single instance of these laws reducing violent crime--even the ones suppported by NRA. Besides, wasn't "enforcing existing gun laws" the reason Mr. Horiuchi was deployed in the first place?
As for Exile, no, it does not "work." Look at the results in Richmond and Philadelphia. Besides which, maybe someone from NRA leadership would be kind enought to point us to the clause in the Constitution where We the People delegated gun law prosecutions to the feds.
What, there isn't one?
"'I'm not saying that that means every teacher should have a gun or not, but what I am saying is we need to look at all the options at what will truly protect the students,' the NRA's first vice president, Sandra S. Froman, told The Associated Press.'"
Why not every teacher? And why limit keeping and bearing arms based on profession? Why not acknowledge Patrick Henry's "great object"?
But there's one obstacle Sandra faces, even with her modest goal: Wayne LaPierre.
"First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period," he told NRA Annual Meeting attendees in 1999, "with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.
"We believe America's schools should be as safe as America's airports. You can't talk about, much less take, bombs and guns onto airplanes.Such behavior in our schools should be prosecuted just as certainly as such behavior in our airports is prosecuted."
Right, Wayne, make 'em as safe as pre-911 airports.
I've heard some laud Ms. Froman's selection as NRA's president-elect because she likes to shoot machineguns. If being a good shooter was the sole criterion, I'd be hard pressed not to vote for Lon Horiuchi.
Call me irresponsible, but I prefer to look at things like past support for gun control.
"To curb gun violence, Froman says that it is important to enforce old laws instead of passing new ones. 'If the Brady law stopped 600,000 illegal gun purchases, where were the 600,000 prosecutions?'
"One measure she [supports] is Project Exile. 'It works...it doesn’t victimize peaceable gun owners.'"
How about REPEALING instead of ENFORCING "old laws," Sandra? Not only are most a violation of the 2nd Amendment, but the recent exhaustive National Academy of Sciences report couldn't find a single instance of these laws reducing violent crime--even the ones suppported by NRA. Besides, wasn't "enforcing existing gun laws" the reason Mr. Horiuchi was deployed in the first place?
As for Exile, no, it does not "work." Look at the results in Richmond and Philadelphia. Besides which, maybe someone from NRA leadership would be kind enought to point us to the clause in the Constitution where We the People delegated gun law prosecutions to the feds.
What, there isn't one?
Feelings, Nothing More than Feelings
As the ninnies who bleat for government destruction of our rights have consistently demonstrated, it’s not about results. Commentator Martha Blume, in Chesapeake’s Bay Weekly calls for a Constitutional amendment: “The right of the people to feel safe from gun violence in their homes, neighborhoods, schools, places of worship, employment, on the streets and in any other public places shall not be infringed.”
"Feelings, Nothing More than Feelings" is my submission for the May issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale now at emotionally secure newsstands throughout the Republic.
"Feelings, Nothing More than Feelings" is my submission for the May issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale now at emotionally secure newsstands throughout the Republic.
Friday, March 25, 2005
It's Easter Weekend
So WarOnGuns is taking a break for a few days.
I suggest you get off the damn computer and go be with the people you love.
If there are no people you love, I suggest you get off the damn computer and work on that.
I suggest you get off the damn computer and go be with the people you love.
If there are no people you love, I suggest you get off the damn computer and work on that.
Where There's Smoke
One of the themes I’ve been covering is government interference with the internet—from the FEC trial balloon to judges declaring just who gets to be an “official journalist.” After all, we can’t expect the Establishment lapdogs to give fair coverage to Second Amendment issues.
Here’s another example: Kid catches principal smoking on school grounds, in violation of state law—something the kid would get suspended for. Kid posts pictures on the internet. Principal demands kid remove pictures and suspends him.
In other words, a sovereign citizen exposes a corrupt official violating the law. The official demands that he erase all traces of his expose, and uses her official capacity to punish him.
“The school, says an AP account, “had sent the sophomore a letter telling him he was suspended for harassment and slander via the Internet.”
Yo, public skool administraitors: That would be “libel." Assuming you had a case. Which you don't.
Once exposed, the tyrant wannabe apologized—FOR SMOKING, as opposed to abusing authority to trample a sovereign individual's unalienable rights in order to protect her sorry butt. Here’s what is unclear:
“On Tuesday, the sophomore was offered reinstatement but only if he complied with the removal order.”
WTF? If I were the kid, my response would be “Remove THIS!” followed with a hefty lawsuit.
To his credit, the site still stands.
You can reach Czarina (or is that Fuhrerette?) Elaine Almagno here. Ask her who the OTHER “adult” in the picture with her is, and why HE thinks it’s OK for the law to apply to the ruled but not to the rulers.
Elaine—try suing ME for “slander,” you abusive mandarin.
Here’s another example: Kid catches principal smoking on school grounds, in violation of state law—something the kid would get suspended for. Kid posts pictures on the internet. Principal demands kid remove pictures and suspends him.
In other words, a sovereign citizen exposes a corrupt official violating the law. The official demands that he erase all traces of his expose, and uses her official capacity to punish him.
“The school, says an AP account, “had sent the sophomore a letter telling him he was suspended for harassment and slander via the Internet.”
Yo, public skool administraitors: That would be “libel." Assuming you had a case. Which you don't.
Once exposed, the tyrant wannabe apologized—FOR SMOKING, as opposed to abusing authority to trample a sovereign individual's unalienable rights in order to protect her sorry butt. Here’s what is unclear:
“On Tuesday, the sophomore was offered reinstatement but only if he complied with the removal order.”
WTF? If I were the kid, my response would be “Remove THIS!” followed with a hefty lawsuit.
To his credit, the site still stands.
You can reach Czarina (or is that Fuhrerette?) Elaine Almagno here. Ask her who the OTHER “adult” in the picture with her is, and why HE thinks it’s OK for the law to apply to the ruled but not to the rulers.
Elaine—try suing ME for “slander,” you abusive mandarin.
Download GUNS from 50 Years Ago
GUNS Magazine is doing something cool. Each month you can download a complete copy of their issue from 50 years prior.
The March 1955 issue is now online.
And by all means, buy the current issue, or better yet, subscribe, and tell them to “Pay Codrea lots of money.” There’s no advertising or Tip Jar on WarOnGuns, nor do I plan to change this, but young Uday and Qusay have this nasty habit of expecting regular meals.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
End the War on Freedom on “Vanishing Point”
Mr. St. Clair recommends it.
“Man did I hate the cops by the end of the movie,” he says.
Have you seen it yet?
Also see:
“If you love freedom, get this film. You will not regret it.”
Vanishing Point Reappears Today
Why I Love Guns
Vanishing Point Reappears
“Man did I hate the cops by the end of the movie,” he says.
Have you seen it yet?
Also see:
“If you love freedom, get this film. You will not regret it.”
Vanishing Point Reappears Today
Why I Love Guns
Vanishing Point Reappears
A Bum Rap
"Rising rapper THE GAME is prepared to risk going to jail by keeping a gun at his California home, because he deems the firearm vital to his survival."
What have we here, a 2A champion in The Hood, someone who can demonstrate the virtues of an armed citizenry to his peers through the example he sets?
Not exactly. It appears he's not that wholesome a character:
"A shoot-'em-up at the Hot 97 studios was triggered by a simmering feud between gangster rapper 50 Cent and his turncoat protégé The Game - and cops are bracing for more bullets."
What a disappointment. He seemed like such a nice young man.
What have we here, a 2A champion in The Hood, someone who can demonstrate the virtues of an armed citizenry to his peers through the example he sets?
Not exactly. It appears he's not that wholesome a character:
"A shoot-'em-up at the Hot 97 studios was triggered by a simmering feud between gangster rapper 50 Cent and his turncoat protégé The Game - and cops are bracing for more bullets."
What a disappointment. He seemed like such a nice young man.
NRA's Montana SNAFU Redux
FreedomSight makes some interesting counter-arguments about when property rights conflict with RKBA.
He raises some good points.
If you want to enter my premises, I should have the right to set the terms: only if you give me a million dollars, poke out one eye and paint yourself blue.
Assuming I can't coerce you into doing this, you have the right to either accept my terms or tell me to go to hell, and go someplace where the terms are more to your liking.
My main point is that I don't believe a state rep acts in defiance of Beltway policy.
Words and actions are sometimes very different things.
He raises some good points.
If you want to enter my premises, I should have the right to set the terms: only if you give me a million dollars, poke out one eye and paint yourself blue.
Assuming I can't coerce you into doing this, you have the right to either accept my terms or tell me to go to hell, and go someplace where the terms are more to your liking.
My main point is that I don't believe a state rep acts in defiance of Beltway policy.
Words and actions are sometimes very different things.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
The Blood Dancers Have a Toll-Free Hotline…
...and they’d like to hear from YOU:
866-SPEAK-UP
Go ahead. Speak up.
Just remember, toll-free numbers generally record the originating number, so don't say anything they can turn you in on.
866-SPEAK-UP
Go ahead. Speak up.
Just remember, toll-free numbers generally record the originating number, so don't say anything they can turn you in on.
Red Lake "Security" Guard Unarmed
Why is the Establishment Press Avoiding the Issue?
Say Uncle points us to Joe Huffman, who links to ABC News where this tidbit is buried.
It's not like the lapdogs are straining themselves getting this information out there. A Google search of the terms: "red lake" guard unarmed (leave the quotation marks that way to ensure the most precise results) shows what I'm talking about.
So in other words, the ones highlighting and spreading this information are the blogs--but somehow we've got to validate our journalistic originality and worth to the black robes because we're just not as legitimate as CBS and Al-Jazeera.
Say Uncle points us to Joe Huffman, who links to ABC News where this tidbit is buried.
It's not like the lapdogs are straining themselves getting this information out there. A Google search of the terms: "red lake" guard unarmed (leave the quotation marks that way to ensure the most precise results) shows what I'm talking about.
So in other words, the ones highlighting and spreading this information are the blogs--but somehow we've got to validate our journalistic originality and worth to the black robes because we're just not as legitimate as CBS and Al-Jazeera.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Red Lake High School Rampage: Let the Blood Dance Begin!
Plenty of people are going to sound in on the Minnesota reservation school massacre. New shrill demands for more "gun control" will certainly feature prominently on editorial pages and broadcasts across the land, and some might even grudgingly acknowledge that it looks like the weapons were taken from a cop.
I've pretty much written all I have to say on this and any other school shootings here.
I've pretty much written all I have to say on this and any other school shootings here.
Buckeye State Blackmail
Ted E. Daniels, editor of the Ashland Times-Gazette is threatening to publish the names of CHL holders if the Ohio legislature amends the concealed carry law so that the information is no longer disclosed to “journalists.”
Well, I guess if you’re gonna ask permission to exercise a right, this sort of nonsense should be expected. Still, Daniels is behaving like a cheap extortionist thug, and ought to be treated like one.
What has always struck me about this law is how government takes it on itself to decide who they will and will not recognize as a “legitimate” journalist. I’ve raised this concern several times now.
As I understand the law, I probably wouldn’t qualify to get the list of names (not that I would want it), but this group would.
Well, I guess if you’re gonna ask permission to exercise a right, this sort of nonsense should be expected. Still, Daniels is behaving like a cheap extortionist thug, and ought to be treated like one.
What has always struck me about this law is how government takes it on itself to decide who they will and will not recognize as a “legitimate” journalist. I’ve raised this concern several times now.
As I understand the law, I probably wouldn’t qualify to get the list of names (not that I would want it), but this group would.
Cop Killer
“Ban bill to target cop-killer handguns and rifles,” declares Michael P. Norton of State House News Service, just like he knows what he’s talking about.
Of course, the first line of the story admits that what’s being talked about is potential capability—no real cops killed with the pariah firearms can actually be produced. But the damage is done, and once more, the establishment propaganda machine manages to score a point with the uninformed under the guise of objective journalism.
But perhaps we’re taking the wrong tack on this. Perhaps we ought to up the ante.
Maybe we should insist they’re not cop-killer weapons, but soldier-killer weapons. After all, what they’re alleged to be capable of defeating is paramilitary equipment, as opposed to traditional police gear. It’s only when the police have become militarized that the special capabilities of these firearms are spotlighted.
Then we can invoke Justice James McReynolds’ rationale in US v Miller, when he observed: “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”
The corollary to this, of course, is, if a firearm can be shown to have such a reasonable relationship, the Second Amendment would guarantee the right to keep and bear such an instrument.
Yeah, I know. Keep dreamin'.
Of course, the first line of the story admits that what’s being talked about is potential capability—no real cops killed with the pariah firearms can actually be produced. But the damage is done, and once more, the establishment propaganda machine manages to score a point with the uninformed under the guise of objective journalism.
But perhaps we’re taking the wrong tack on this. Perhaps we ought to up the ante.
Maybe we should insist they’re not cop-killer weapons, but soldier-killer weapons. After all, what they’re alleged to be capable of defeating is paramilitary equipment, as opposed to traditional police gear. It’s only when the police have become militarized that the special capabilities of these firearms are spotlighted.
Then we can invoke Justice James McReynolds’ rationale in US v Miller, when he observed: “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a ‘shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length’ at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.”
The corollary to this, of course, is, if a firearm can be shown to have such a reasonable relationship, the Second Amendment would guarantee the right to keep and bear such an instrument.
Yeah, I know. Keep dreamin'.
How Many Lies Can You Tell in 60 Minutes?
SayUncle has made a good start at deconstructing last Sunday's anti-gun hit piece on 60 Minutes.
He exposes some of the obvious lies, and provides some good dope on Ed Bradley's narco-terrorist source--a John Kerry fundraiser, naturally.
"I TiVoed it and may have more later," he says. I hope he does, because he's doing a good job with this.
Leave it to the Establishment propagandists to spook the Eloi by claiming overseas insurgents need to come here for guns. NRA printed an excellent article on this by Jim Pate.
He exposes some of the obvious lies, and provides some good dope on Ed Bradley's narco-terrorist source--a John Kerry fundraiser, naturally.
"I TiVoed it and may have more later," he says. I hope he does, because he's doing a good job with this.
Leave it to the Establishment propagandists to spook the Eloi by claiming overseas insurgents need to come here for guns. NRA printed an excellent article on this by Jim Pate.
NRA's Montana SNAFU
News Release, Montana Shooting Sports Association
It looks like NRA is sabotaging Montana legislation clarifying "the right to self defense with firearms."
MSSA attributes it to a mid-level staffer thwarting the clear will of NRA management.
Call me cynical, but if NRA doesn't fire the guy, I'd say he's doing exactly what his masters want him to do. I can't help but wonder which legislator(s) they're appeasing?
It's not like we haven't seen a disconnect between what Fairfax says and what it does before.
I'd like to be wrong this time. But the term "SNAFU" speaks volumes.
--------------------
Andy Barniskis passes along this on-topic addendum:
Last year in Pennsylvania, NRA employee John Hohenwarter agreed to not to oppose legislation that was very hostile to gun rights (HB 2403) on condition that it be kept in committee until after the 2004 NRA Convention in Pittsburgh. Perhaps he didn't want betrayed NRA members to make a fuss at the convention. Mr. Hohenwarter and his boss Randy Kozuch did this without consulting any grass roots organizations or NRA legal council [sic] and they never responded to inquiries into the matter. Every major sportsmen's group in Pennsylvania united in the largest coalition in our history to oppose the anti-gun rights legislation that the NRA did not oppose.
We have received recent reports that John Hohenwarter replaced a competent NRA state liaison in New Hampshire and NRA members in New Hampshire are now trying to undo the damage.
Now we see that Montana NRA members have good reason to be angry with Randy Kozuch...
Harry Schneider, PSA Chairman
Pennsylvania Sportsmen's Assn.,
NRA Life Member
It looks like NRA is sabotaging Montana legislation clarifying "the right to self defense with firearms."
MSSA attributes it to a mid-level staffer thwarting the clear will of NRA management.
Call me cynical, but if NRA doesn't fire the guy, I'd say he's doing exactly what his masters want him to do. I can't help but wonder which legislator(s) they're appeasing?
It's not like we haven't seen a disconnect between what Fairfax says and what it does before.
I'd like to be wrong this time. But the term "SNAFU" speaks volumes.
--------------------
Andy Barniskis passes along this on-topic addendum:
Last year in Pennsylvania, NRA employee John Hohenwarter agreed to not to oppose legislation that was very hostile to gun rights (HB 2403) on condition that it be kept in committee until after the 2004 NRA Convention in Pittsburgh. Perhaps he didn't want betrayed NRA members to make a fuss at the convention. Mr. Hohenwarter and his boss Randy Kozuch did this without consulting any grass roots organizations or NRA legal council [sic] and they never responded to inquiries into the matter. Every major sportsmen's group in Pennsylvania united in the largest coalition in our history to oppose the anti-gun rights legislation that the NRA did not oppose.
We have received recent reports that John Hohenwarter replaced a competent NRA state liaison in New Hampshire and NRA members in New Hampshire are now trying to undo the damage.
Now we see that Montana NRA members have good reason to be angry with Randy Kozuch...
Harry Schneider, PSA Chairman
Pennsylvania Sportsmen's Assn.,
NRA Life Member
Monday, March 21, 2005
“Free” Gun Locks
The police department in my wonderful home town, the City of Redondo Beach, is offering “free” gun locks.
“The distribution project to promote firearm safety is supported by a grant from the United States Department of Justice.”
Yep, sounds “free” to me—as long as you consider distribution of plunder a no-cost proposition.
They give us the typical pitchfork murderer-enabling advice: “Unload your guns and lock them away. Lock and store ammunition separately.”
Not that your typical home invader isn’t the patient sort. Many of them actually take the time to bind and rape their victims before killing them.
They also invite you to snoop on your neighbors to see if they have guns, but, hey, isn’t that what America is supposed to be about?
Here’s my favorite part of the deal:
“The Redondo Beach Police Department will provide two free gunlocks to residents who will show valid identification and sign a release of liability form.”
Liability form? You mean there might be some danger to locking up our safety? We might rely on locks instead of knowledge and judgment, and they might not work? We or someone we love could be seriously injured or killed by following their advice and using their locks? Is that why they need us to sign a release?
I guess they realize we can’t sue them for failing to protect us, so they’re just trying to cover all the bases.
“The distribution project to promote firearm safety is supported by a grant from the United States Department of Justice.”
Yep, sounds “free” to me—as long as you consider distribution of plunder a no-cost proposition.
They give us the typical pitchfork murderer-enabling advice: “Unload your guns and lock them away. Lock and store ammunition separately.”
Not that your typical home invader isn’t the patient sort. Many of them actually take the time to bind and rape their victims before killing them.
They also invite you to snoop on your neighbors to see if they have guns, but, hey, isn’t that what America is supposed to be about?
Here’s my favorite part of the deal:
“The Redondo Beach Police Department will provide two free gunlocks to residents who will show valid identification and sign a release of liability form.”
Liability form? You mean there might be some danger to locking up our safety? We might rely on locks instead of knowledge and judgment, and they might not work? We or someone we love could be seriously injured or killed by following their advice and using their locks? Is that why they need us to sign a release?
I guess they realize we can’t sue them for failing to protect us, so they’re just trying to cover all the bases.
What's This World Coming To When You Can't Trust the "Gun Lobby"?
Andy Barniskis warns us that those "gun rights lobbyists" we trust to represent us in the legislatures have their own agenda and priorities.
When Nicki Fisked Matthew
Nicki Fellenzer takes on an ignorant, anti-gun college journalism major.
He's lucky she's just beating him up virtually. My money says if she ever went after him for real, he'd either be crying for a gun, or more likely, for his mommy.
He's lucky she's just beating him up virtually. My money says if she ever went after him for real, he'd either be crying for a gun, or more likely, for his mommy.
Sunday, March 20, 2005
"Thinking of England" Now Online
"Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible ... If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity ... be careful what you say or do and give up valuables without a struggle. This allows the victim to take charge of the situation ... By doing nothing there is no chance of inadvertently initiating violence by saying something such as 'Please don't hurt me.'"
"Thinking of England" appears in the April issue of GUNS Magazine, now online. Click here to read the rest.
"Thinking of England" appears in the April issue of GUNS Magazine, now online. Click here to read the rest.
DEA Buffoon Update
The world-class idiot who shot himself in front of a room full of kids after telling them he's the only one "professional enough" to carry a gun has been suspended.
I have a few questions:
Why does he still have a job?
Why hasn't he been prosecuted for reckless child endangerment and negligent discharge of a firearm, as would you or I be, save for the fact that we're not dumb, incompetent and irresponsible enough to pull such a bone-headed move?
Who's the jihadi in the ski mask? Dont'cha feel safer knowing guys like him are kicking in doors across the land?
And why is there an investigation to determine who "leaked" what is being described as a "home video"?
Maybe the'yre afraid someone has discovered the location of their secret clubhouse.
I have a few questions:
Why does he still have a job?
Why hasn't he been prosecuted for reckless child endangerment and negligent discharge of a firearm, as would you or I be, save for the fact that we're not dumb, incompetent and irresponsible enough to pull such a bone-headed move?
Who's the jihadi in the ski mask? Dont'cha feel safer knowing guys like him are kicking in doors across the land?
And why is there an investigation to determine who "leaked" what is being described as a "home video"?
Maybe the'yre afraid someone has discovered the location of their secret clubhouse.
Saturday, March 19, 2005
Warning: This is NOT Authorized Commentary
Jed at FreedomSight discusses the issue of bloggers protecting confidential sources.
Lauren Gelman is asking for instances where bloggers have broken stories. One that immediately comes to mind is JPFO's exposing how BATFU almost destroyed a man's life through incompetence--in other words, performing a watchdog role in the protection of individuals from abuse by government. If that isn't the role of the press, I don't know what is. Now tell me you would have seen that in the NY Times.
I'm glad to see others raising the flag on this. See "Bloggers: Have You Applied for Your Reporting License?" and "Judge Creates Special Class of Journalist--Just Because He Says So".
I suppose if judges can tell us who a journalist is, it's not a far stretch to imagine they can dictate what qualifies as news.
But I believe our friend Mr. Garrison might have something to say to them about that.
Lauren Gelman is asking for instances where bloggers have broken stories. One that immediately comes to mind is JPFO's exposing how BATFU almost destroyed a man's life through incompetence--in other words, performing a watchdog role in the protection of individuals from abuse by government. If that isn't the role of the press, I don't know what is. Now tell me you would have seen that in the NY Times.
I'm glad to see others raising the flag on this. See "Bloggers: Have You Applied for Your Reporting License?" and "Judge Creates Special Class of Journalist--Just Because He Says So".
I suppose if judges can tell us who a journalist is, it's not a far stretch to imagine they can dictate what qualifies as news.
But I believe our friend Mr. Garrison might have something to say to them about that.
"IIIIII WAAAAAAA!!!"
"An attorney for Terri Schiavo said the severely brain-injured woman cried and yelled out that she wants to live after being told today her life-sustaining feeding tube was about to be removed by court order."
Anyone want to bet Michael orders an immediate cremation?
After all, a body would allow for a later medical examination.
But I’m sure those reports about unexplained bone fractures are just desperate hype from a bunch of religious extremists, right?
I mean, otherwise, the pro-death Establishment media that generates 26,800 Google hits on the term "Terri Schiavo" coma (even though she's not in one) would certainly be investigating Michael as thoroughly as they have OJ, Scott Peterson and Robert Blake. Wouldn’t they?
After all—he’s turned down money to walk away. What possible motive could he have, other than a deep and loving commitment to the woman he abandoned?
The parents have given the "law" every opportunity and it has failed them. There comes a time when sovereign individuals must defy edicts.
If this was my kid being tortured to death, I'd go in and get her.
Anyone want to bet Michael orders an immediate cremation?
After all, a body would allow for a later medical examination.
But I’m sure those reports about unexplained bone fractures are just desperate hype from a bunch of religious extremists, right?
I mean, otherwise, the pro-death Establishment media that generates 26,800 Google hits on the term "Terri Schiavo" coma (even though she's not in one) would certainly be investigating Michael as thoroughly as they have OJ, Scott Peterson and Robert Blake. Wouldn’t they?
After all—he’s turned down money to walk away. What possible motive could he have, other than a deep and loving commitment to the woman he abandoned?
The parents have given the "law" every opportunity and it has failed them. There comes a time when sovereign individuals must defy edicts.
If this was my kid being tortured to death, I'd go in and get her.
Smart Guns Don't Always Make the Grade
There’s an understatement. “Smart guns” never make the grade.
The original National Institute of Justice grant to Sandia Labs to develop them was specifically justified by “takeaway” incidents where cops were killed with their own gun. But the cops don’t want to have anything to do with them—no surprise there.
"If a weapon is taken from an officer, I personally believe it is primarily a training issue. Most folks seem to try and solve most tactical problems through some sort of hardware improvement without looking at the core system. The human operator should be the primary system to be improved upon. Many departments are dangerously low in their delivery of ongoing advanced officer training. If an officer cannot be trusted to deploy and keep his or her weapon, please don't give them one in the first place!”
That was told to me by former Navy SEAL Ken Good, at the time, director of the SureFire Institute. He is an expert’s expert, providing weapons and tactics training to elite military fighting personnel, civilian law enforcement tactical specialists, and security professionals.
Training certainly seems to be the core issue in this “news report”—one cop killed with his own gun, the other closes his eyes and prays. And if the gun did “backfire,” the training deficiencies quite possibly extend to proper maintenance of issued firearms.
The creepiest line in this story: “Grants also have gone to private gun makers looking into…a gun that reads a rice grain-sized computer chip injected into the owner's hand.”
Who but a pathological government-worshipping Nazi dreams up stuff like this? And who are the industry whores turning tricks for them?
Two other questions to consider:
Has anyone not had the experience of pointing a remote control unit at a TV or garage door and having nothing happen?
And does anyone really think that once “smart guns” are mandated, an edict giving “authoritah” a shutoff switch will be far behind?
The original National Institute of Justice grant to Sandia Labs to develop them was specifically justified by “takeaway” incidents where cops were killed with their own gun. But the cops don’t want to have anything to do with them—no surprise there.
"If a weapon is taken from an officer, I personally believe it is primarily a training issue. Most folks seem to try and solve most tactical problems through some sort of hardware improvement without looking at the core system. The human operator should be the primary system to be improved upon. Many departments are dangerously low in their delivery of ongoing advanced officer training. If an officer cannot be trusted to deploy and keep his or her weapon, please don't give them one in the first place!”
That was told to me by former Navy SEAL Ken Good, at the time, director of the SureFire Institute. He is an expert’s expert, providing weapons and tactics training to elite military fighting personnel, civilian law enforcement tactical specialists, and security professionals.
Training certainly seems to be the core issue in this “news report”—one cop killed with his own gun, the other closes his eyes and prays. And if the gun did “backfire,” the training deficiencies quite possibly extend to proper maintenance of issued firearms.
The creepiest line in this story: “Grants also have gone to private gun makers looking into…a gun that reads a rice grain-sized computer chip injected into the owner's hand.”
Who but a pathological government-worshipping Nazi dreams up stuff like this? And who are the industry whores turning tricks for them?
Two other questions to consider:
Has anyone not had the experience of pointing a remote control unit at a TV or garage door and having nothing happen?
And does anyone really think that once “smart guns” are mandated, an edict giving “authoritah” a shutoff switch will be far behind?
Friday, March 18, 2005
Justice Department: Gun Violence Falls 63%
There are definitely some politically incorrect conclusions that could—and should—be drawn from this. We can’t fix thing unless we’re willing to accept the truth. But before jumping on the “Firearms Violence 200% Higher for Blacks Than For Whites" bandwagon, let's not lose sight of our understanding that unalienable rights are attributes of individuals, not of groups.
The most interesting comment I saw in this was also the most predictable: "The government study received minimal if any mainstream media attention."
No, duh.
Conspicuously absent from the study are two other problematic factoids for the antis:
There is no mention of defensive gun use.
There are more guns in circulation now than at the start of the study period. If guns were truly responsible for violent crime, such a reduction would be impossible.
Any thesis suggesting otherwise deserves to be ridiculed as the barbaric superstition that it is.
The most interesting comment I saw in this was also the most predictable: "The government study received minimal if any mainstream media attention."
No, duh.
Conspicuously absent from the study are two other problematic factoids for the antis:
There is no mention of defensive gun use.
There are more guns in circulation now than at the start of the study period. If guns were truly responsible for violent crime, such a reduction would be impossible.
Any thesis suggesting otherwise deserves to be ridiculed as the barbaric superstition that it is.
“If you love freedom, get this film. You will not regret it.”
“How many really, truly anti-government movies are out there? How many of them are told from the perspective of liberty, rather than a leftist dystopian fantasy? Of those that are left, how many are intended to be taken seriously?
“I'll tell you.
“There is at least one.”
TriggerFinger reviews Charles Robert Carner’s film "Vanishing Point".
Claire Wolfe also comments, calling Carner “one of the good guys. A Hollywood insider who's also pro-gun and pro-freedom.”
“I'll tell you.
“There is at least one.”
TriggerFinger reviews Charles Robert Carner’s film "Vanishing Point".
Claire Wolfe also comments, calling Carner “one of the good guys. A Hollywood insider who's also pro-gun and pro-freedom.”
Thursday, March 17, 2005
The Road to Damascus
I've corresponded a few times with a guy who approached me for more information after reading Microstamping for Macroinfringement. He told me he was "tracking this issue for my class at school (USC) for Policy and Management."
Some basic misconceptions on his part made it apparent he was not that steeped in gun rights issues. I generally answer politely when sincere requests are made, but then send such folks on their way with a few helpful links relevant to what they're looking for. After all, who has the time to go one-on-one with everyone who wants information?
In this case, I spent a little more time. In truth, I was expecting to find my correspondent had used our email exchanges to craft an anti-armed citizen thesis. So I was more than a little surprised to open the following email last night (note I have removed all identifying information out of deference to his privacy):
"I need to mention this to you before we go any further. I was an intern for the City of _______________. I mention this because yesterday I was fired. I was researching SB 352 where they were deciding whether to support this bill or not. My last day I made a recommendation to not support this bill. I really don't know whether they were tracking my conversation with you or not. I just came to realize that gun owners, gun store owners and the people involved in guns are people also. As for the criminal element, well that's another story.
"I lived in area called Lincoln Heights where gun shooting was a given. I grew up where drive-bys were like a trip to Disneyland on a weekend. I never used a gun, and never had an inclination to ever use one because I have always associated it to gangs, violence and yes, especially death. When I was in the sixth grade, my friend was shot point blank by his neighbor who hated Asian-Americans. Since then I was reticent to even get close to a gun. I've gone to shooting ranges where all I've done is sit there and watch others shoot. I HAVE NEVER SHOT A GUN. I know that sounds like a anomaly but I've always associated guns with that incident.
"When I was given this issue pertaining to SB 352, I knew that I was totally for this bill and that I would make sure that I would be able to substantiate whatever information there was in relation to this issue. And I thought that all NRA members are racist, KKK members. You proved that to be NOT TRUE at all. There are people just like me. With lives who are interested in being part of the American dream, regardless of what the government might think of them, or the media for that matter. This was truly an experience. I truly don't know whether the City will or will not support SB 352 but I just hope that my recommendation will remind them that there are victims involved here and its not the criminal element (gun owners and stores).
"I do hope you accept my apology for what I've said, this was not to slam you or to criticize what you have done. I just want to say thank you for everything you have done because if it wasn't because of you I would not be here."
Pretty intriguing. Am I being played here? Did he approach this with enough of an open mind to reverse his conception? Did the city he worked at can him for coming up with a politically incorrect conclusion?
I've offered to introduce him to some folks in the pro-2A community here, and to take him shooting. I'll post updates if I think they're warranted.
Some basic misconceptions on his part made it apparent he was not that steeped in gun rights issues. I generally answer politely when sincere requests are made, but then send such folks on their way with a few helpful links relevant to what they're looking for. After all, who has the time to go one-on-one with everyone who wants information?
In this case, I spent a little more time. In truth, I was expecting to find my correspondent had used our email exchanges to craft an anti-armed citizen thesis. So I was more than a little surprised to open the following email last night (note I have removed all identifying information out of deference to his privacy):
"I need to mention this to you before we go any further. I was an intern for the City of _______________. I mention this because yesterday I was fired. I was researching SB 352 where they were deciding whether to support this bill or not. My last day I made a recommendation to not support this bill. I really don't know whether they were tracking my conversation with you or not. I just came to realize that gun owners, gun store owners and the people involved in guns are people also. As for the criminal element, well that's another story.
"I lived in area called Lincoln Heights where gun shooting was a given. I grew up where drive-bys were like a trip to Disneyland on a weekend. I never used a gun, and never had an inclination to ever use one because I have always associated it to gangs, violence and yes, especially death. When I was in the sixth grade, my friend was shot point blank by his neighbor who hated Asian-Americans. Since then I was reticent to even get close to a gun. I've gone to shooting ranges where all I've done is sit there and watch others shoot. I HAVE NEVER SHOT A GUN. I know that sounds like a anomaly but I've always associated guns with that incident.
"When I was given this issue pertaining to SB 352, I knew that I was totally for this bill and that I would make sure that I would be able to substantiate whatever information there was in relation to this issue. And I thought that all NRA members are racist, KKK members. You proved that to be NOT TRUE at all. There are people just like me. With lives who are interested in being part of the American dream, regardless of what the government might think of them, or the media for that matter. This was truly an experience. I truly don't know whether the City will or will not support SB 352 but I just hope that my recommendation will remind them that there are victims involved here and its not the criminal element (gun owners and stores).
"I do hope you accept my apology for what I've said, this was not to slam you or to criticize what you have done. I just want to say thank you for everything you have done because if it wasn't because of you I would not be here."
Pretty intriguing. Am I being played here? Did he approach this with enough of an open mind to reverse his conception? Did the city he worked at can him for coming up with a politically incorrect conclusion?
I've offered to introduce him to some folks in the pro-2A community here, and to take him shooting. I'll post updates if I think they're warranted.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
The World of Yesterday and Today
08/16/17 UPDATE: Since this post is over 12 years old, many of the internal links no longer work. I have replaced what I could with Internet Archive and other links which may load very slowly.
In today's earlier post, I acknowledged the danger of predicting what tomorrow will bring. Here are some prime examples:
Mayor Declares City Violence A Crisis
"PHILADELPHIA (KYW) Police and prosecutors concerned with a spate of killings in the city begged the public Monday for more help identifying murderers...Within the past eight days there have been 21 homicides in Philadelphia, including three in the late-night and early morning hours after the prosecutor made her appeal Monday."
This wasn't supposed to happen. NRA promised us a different scenario.
NRA PRESS RELEASE: HESTON DARES CRIMINALS TO "MAKE MY DAY"
"NRA joins Mayor Rendell, Senators Specter and Santorum, in launching Project Exile to fully enforce existing federal gun laws and remove armed felons from Philadelphia streets...
"'If you're a felon out on the streets of Philadelphia today, I dare you to carry a gun,' Heston warned...
"'I promise you,' Heston told Mayor Rendell, 'If you and your prosecutors stick to the simple, proven model of Richmond, the murder rate in Philadelphia will decline and your citizens will be safer."
And how has following "the simple, proven model" worked out for Richmond, the template for Philadelphia crime-fighting?
Richmond's murder rate climbs again-- national numbers decline
"In the final hours of 2004, Richmond topped its 2003 murder rate by one, securing its distinction as one of the nation's most dangerous cities.
"The city's final homicide of the year _ called in to police around 8 p.m. New Year's Eve was number 95, surpassing the previous year's 94. In 2002, there were 83 and in 2001, 69.
"Murders in the United States dropped by nearly 6 percent in the first half of 2004 after rising for four straight years, the FBI reported. Numbers from the second half of 2004 have not been compiled.
"Richmond had the country's fourth highest murder rate in 2003 and was ranked the nation's ninth most dangerous city overall in 2004 _ beating out Miami and Compton, Calif. Richmond is the sixth most dangerous when compared to other cities with populations of 100,000 to 499,999."
Note to NRA Management:
We tried to tell you that "Exile" was a bad idea. It's time to follow your own professed beliefs and admit that gun control does not reduce violent crime--even those edicts that you endorse.
I'm still waiting for someone at NRA-HQ to cite the Constitutional authority for the feds to be involved in gun control at all. It's past time for the suits at Fairfax to adopt the motto "Repeal existing gun laws," and stop calling for their enforcement.
After all, wasn't enforcing existing gun laws what precipitated Waco and Ruby Ridge?
In today's earlier post, I acknowledged the danger of predicting what tomorrow will bring. Here are some prime examples:
Mayor Declares City Violence A Crisis
"PHILADELPHIA (KYW) Police and prosecutors concerned with a spate of killings in the city begged the public Monday for more help identifying murderers...Within the past eight days there have been 21 homicides in Philadelphia, including three in the late-night and early morning hours after the prosecutor made her appeal Monday."
This wasn't supposed to happen. NRA promised us a different scenario.
NRA PRESS RELEASE: HESTON DARES CRIMINALS TO "MAKE MY DAY"
"NRA joins Mayor Rendell, Senators Specter and Santorum, in launching Project Exile to fully enforce existing federal gun laws and remove armed felons from Philadelphia streets...
"'If you're a felon out on the streets of Philadelphia today, I dare you to carry a gun,' Heston warned...
"'I promise you,' Heston told Mayor Rendell, 'If you and your prosecutors stick to the simple, proven model of Richmond, the murder rate in Philadelphia will decline and your citizens will be safer."
And how has following "the simple, proven model" worked out for Richmond, the template for Philadelphia crime-fighting?
Richmond's murder rate climbs again-- national numbers decline
"In the final hours of 2004, Richmond topped its 2003 murder rate by one, securing its distinction as one of the nation's most dangerous cities.
"The city's final homicide of the year _ called in to police around 8 p.m. New Year's Eve was number 95, surpassing the previous year's 94. In 2002, there were 83 and in 2001, 69.
"Murders in the United States dropped by nearly 6 percent in the first half of 2004 after rising for four straight years, the FBI reported. Numbers from the second half of 2004 have not been compiled.
"Richmond had the country's fourth highest murder rate in 2003 and was ranked the nation's ninth most dangerous city overall in 2004 _ beating out Miami and Compton, Calif. Richmond is the sixth most dangerous when compared to other cities with populations of 100,000 to 499,999."
Note to NRA Management:
We tried to tell you that "Exile" was a bad idea. It's time to follow your own professed beliefs and admit that gun control does not reduce violent crime--even those edicts that you endorse.
I'm still waiting for someone at NRA-HQ to cite the Constitutional authority for the feds to be involved in gun control at all. It's past time for the suits at Fairfax to adopt the motto "Repeal existing gun laws," and stop calling for their enforcement.
After all, wasn't enforcing existing gun laws what precipitated Waco and Ruby Ridge?
The World of Tomorrow
Predicting near-future potentials based on current trends is always a risky business—it’s one of the reasons why “The Wrath of Khan” fails modern audiences—the original Star Trek’s core audience lived to know there was no “Eugenics War” in the 1990s, no race of genetically-engineered “supermen,” no “sleeper ship” technology, and thankfully, no preponderance of chest-baring, aging actors wearing mullets—perhaps Gene Roddenberry should have placed the origin scenario from “Space Seed” a hundred, rather than 30 years into the future.
So this flash presentation, set 9 years from now, is going out on a limb—but it does seem to posit a pretty likely scenario. On the one hand, I am drawn to the potential like a moth to a flame—which means, as attractive and compelling as I find certain generalized “predictions,” it’s dangerous to disregard that invoking the name “Winston Smith” is purposeful.
So this flash presentation, set 9 years from now, is going out on a limb—but it does seem to posit a pretty likely scenario. On the one hand, I am drawn to the potential like a moth to a flame—which means, as attractive and compelling as I find certain generalized “predictions,” it’s dangerous to disregard that invoking the name “Winston Smith” is purposeful.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
Attack from the Underworld
Pocket gophers are ruining my yard.
I’ve tried the gas bombs. I’ve tried flooding them out. Now I’m reduced to digging into tunnels and sprinkling zinc phosphide pellets.
The frustrating thing is, I can sit in my enclosed back patio and see their evil little heads pop up as they clear new holes. If I lived in a civilized community, John and Eli (aka Uday and Qusai) would be able to earn bounties with the Crossman.
I’ve tried the gas bombs. I’ve tried flooding them out. Now I’m reduced to digging into tunnels and sprinkling zinc phosphide pellets.
The frustrating thing is, I can sit in my enclosed back patio and see their evil little heads pop up as they clear new holes. If I lived in a civilized community, John and Eli (aka Uday and Qusai) would be able to earn bounties with the Crossman.
Ignorance and Fear Go Hand in Hand...
TriggerFinger deconstructs [How you say in Bloggese, "fisks," yes?] an ignorant and fearful woman's anti-gun editorial, and does a great job if it.
He's much nicer than I am about these things.
He's much nicer than I am about these things.
Shoot to Live
"A RECENT WAVE of violent attacks with axes and cleavers raises the issue, once again, about the effectiveness of restricting, banning, or simply scaring people away from owning firearms."—Jennifer Freeman
The 3rd Annual Nigerian EMail Conference
"I present to you an urgent and confidential request: I request your attendance at The 3rd Annual Nigerian EMail Conference. This is an excellent opportunity to meet your distinguished colleagues, learn new marketing techniques, and spend your hard-earned money. Attending this conference demands the highest trust, security and confidentiality between us."
Hysterical!
Hysterical!
Monday, March 14, 2005
Technical Difficulties
The site is slow to load and the blogroll has disappeared. The Blogrolling site page can't be accessed, so this is the same as what happened last time--I suspect there are site problems there affecting the page--as Douglas Adams said, "Don't Panic."
Your highly trained WarOnGuns technical support staff (me, who knows virtually nothing about post-Triassic technology) is working 'round the clock to restore the site to peak performance.
UPDATE:
Yep—as Bart Simpson says, “I didn't do it, no one saw me do it, there's no way you can prove anything!”
Blogrolling has been having recurring system problems they can't seem to fix.
This has been a relatively heavy day—wonder how many site visitors gave up and think this is par for the course?
Oh well, I get what I pay for.
Your highly trained WarOnGuns technical support staff (me, who knows virtually nothing about post-Triassic technology) is working 'round the clock to restore the site to peak performance.
UPDATE:
Yep—as Bart Simpson says, “I didn't do it, no one saw me do it, there's no way you can prove anything!”
Blogrolling has been having recurring system problems they can't seem to fix.
This has been a relatively heavy day—wonder how many site visitors gave up and think this is par for the course?
Oh well, I get what I pay for.
Another Fool With an Opinion
"If she was pointing that gun at me I could take it from her in a heart beat."
On March 5, I congratulated friend Deborah Courtney for getting front page ink in The Orange County Register.
One Ian Fitz-Gibbon wrote to the OCR reporter:
After reading your article on Deborah I just had to laugh. She’s another fool with a gun. Does she walk around with a gun in her purse? LOL My guess is that if she had that gun when she was raped she would either be dead or be wondering why she bought it in the first place. A criminal won’t wait for her to reach into her purse or run out to her car to retrieve a gun. It’s also my guess that if she was pointing that gun at me I could take it from her in a heart beat. Being smart……..or not doing something stupid will do more for a person’s protection and security than carrying a gun. The most important thing in self-defense is what’s in your head, not what’s in your hand!
Regards,
Ian Fitz-Gibbon
Mr. Fitz-Gibbon apparently considers himself an authority on defensive tactics.
He’s evidently more educated on the matter than Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, whose surveys indicate up to 2.5 million defensive gun uses each year by Americans.
He’s obviously done more thorough research than economist John Lott [scroll down to bottom of right column to download CV], whose exhaustive analyses of statistics from all 3,054 counties in the United States from 1977 to 1994 confirm the title of his aptly named More Guns, Less Crime.
“Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman's ability to defend herself than it does for a man. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men,” Lott concludes.
But we must assume that Mr. Fitz-Gibbon has amassed and analyzed superior empirical evidence.
He’s clearly reported on more case studies than Robert Waters, whose The Best Defense provides chilling, real life examples of ordinary people repelling brutal criminals with firearms. And “being smart”—just like Ian Fitz-Gibbon—would no doubt assure superior outcomes for those people chronicled in KeepAndBearArms.com’s “Operation Self Defense,” each of whom was, evidently, “just another fool with a gun.”
“My guess is that if she had that gun when she was raped she would either be dead or be wondering why she bought it in the first place. A criminal won’t wait for her to reach into her purse or run out to her car to retrieve a gun,” Fitz-Gibbon smirks.
Unfortunately, your guess is wrong, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon. Without going into the details of her ordeal, her assailant trapped her. She knew he was coming for her before the actual physical assault, and would have had time to retrieve a concealed firearm if she’d had one.
“It’s also my guess that if she was pointing that gun at me I could take it from her in a heart beat,” he claims.
Really?
Do you have any idea how many shots a trained shooter can squeeze off “in a heartbeat” Mr. Fitz-Gibbon?
Here's a concession: Back when I was young and immortal, I was pretty heavily into martial arts. I used to do a demonstration, and, when I established the conditions (that is, having someone point a toy gun at me when I was standing within three feet of them, with instructions to shoot if I made a false move), I could—without fail—disable their gun hand and strike a simulated crippling blow. But it wasn’t real—there was no danger. And importantly, I controlled the situation.
What makes you think you would control the situation and be allowed to get within striking distance? I guess you must be a greater authority on such matters than Col. Jeff Cooper, so a trained shooter who has mastered the mental discipline of applying his Color Code would be no match against your awesome prowess.
Your point is not that you could surprise and ambush a targeted victim—hell, anyone could do that. You claim you can disarm someone who is trained and equipped, and who has you in their sights!
I could arrange a demonstration, if you like, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon. I’m sure I could assemble an audience that would love to see you exhibit how what’s in your head will overcome what’s in a trained shooter’s hand. I can probably even arrange for you to place bets on your ability to prevail against, say, my 10-year-old, someone who is elderly, and maybe even a disabled shooter. We’ll even videotape it, and post it on the Internet. And don't worry, we'll only use props. Care to prove your words?
How did you dismiss Deborah? Oh, yeah, "LOL!"
You should be careful about laughing at people, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon, especially when you're obviously in over your head—it makes you come across as just another fool with an opinion.
AFTERWORD FROM TJ JOHNSTON
Ian: being Deborah's trainer, I want to respond to your comments.
Deborah's rape was typical in that the assailant didn't jump out of the bushes and attack her. That media stereotype is so far from reality. Rapists set up their victims. And when they do, the potential victim has a series of options, which are greatly expanded if they have access to a firearm.
In Deborah's case, the assailant locked her in her personal office and then carefully walked around the rest of the building, closing windows and locking the front door. If she had her Glock in her office, he would have found a nasty confrontation when he returned to attack her.
You sound very courageous, in that you feel you could disarm somebody very easily. Candidly, it is possible. I teach those techniques and it requires much disciplined practice, considerable confidence, speed and precision to do it safely. With the hammer cocked, most handguns will fire with only minimal pressure on the trigger, and the movement that action requires is much less than the movement to reach out and take the gun away. If the person with the firearm maintains his/her distance, the person encroaching WILL BE SHOT.
Most importantly, as the statistics from John Lott, Gary Kleck, and a host of other criminologists show, the mere presence of a firearm deters most criminals, usually without the gun being discharged. No one wants to get shot, and criminals are not brave people. They run away.
The facts are clear and irrefutable. In her situation, if Deborah had been armed, she wouldn't have been raped.
And I would challenge you to take a loaded handgun away from her. Knowing her current attitude and aptitude, I am confident that you would have at least one more hole in you than before the attempt.
Regards,
TJ Johnston
www.allsafedefense.com
On March 5, I congratulated friend Deborah Courtney for getting front page ink in The Orange County Register.
One Ian Fitz-Gibbon wrote to the OCR reporter:
After reading your article on Deborah I just had to laugh. She’s another fool with a gun. Does she walk around with a gun in her purse? LOL My guess is that if she had that gun when she was raped she would either be dead or be wondering why she bought it in the first place. A criminal won’t wait for her to reach into her purse or run out to her car to retrieve a gun. It’s also my guess that if she was pointing that gun at me I could take it from her in a heart beat. Being smart……..or not doing something stupid will do more for a person’s protection and security than carrying a gun. The most important thing in self-defense is what’s in your head, not what’s in your hand!
Regards,
Ian Fitz-Gibbon
Mr. Fitz-Gibbon apparently considers himself an authority on defensive tactics.
He’s evidently more educated on the matter than Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, whose surveys indicate up to 2.5 million defensive gun uses each year by Americans.
He’s obviously done more thorough research than economist John Lott [scroll down to bottom of right column to download CV], whose exhaustive analyses of statistics from all 3,054 counties in the United States from 1977 to 1994 confirm the title of his aptly named More Guns, Less Crime.
“Murder rates decline when either more women or more men carry concealed handguns, but a gun represents a much larger change in a woman's ability to defend herself than it does for a man. An additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women by about 3 to 4 times more than an additional man carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for men,” Lott concludes.
But we must assume that Mr. Fitz-Gibbon has amassed and analyzed superior empirical evidence.
He’s clearly reported on more case studies than Robert Waters, whose The Best Defense provides chilling, real life examples of ordinary people repelling brutal criminals with firearms. And “being smart”—just like Ian Fitz-Gibbon—would no doubt assure superior outcomes for those people chronicled in KeepAndBearArms.com’s “Operation Self Defense,” each of whom was, evidently, “just another fool with a gun.”
“My guess is that if she had that gun when she was raped she would either be dead or be wondering why she bought it in the first place. A criminal won’t wait for her to reach into her purse or run out to her car to retrieve a gun,” Fitz-Gibbon smirks.
Unfortunately, your guess is wrong, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon. Without going into the details of her ordeal, her assailant trapped her. She knew he was coming for her before the actual physical assault, and would have had time to retrieve a concealed firearm if she’d had one.
“It’s also my guess that if she was pointing that gun at me I could take it from her in a heart beat,” he claims.
Really?
Do you have any idea how many shots a trained shooter can squeeze off “in a heartbeat” Mr. Fitz-Gibbon?
Here's a concession: Back when I was young and immortal, I was pretty heavily into martial arts. I used to do a demonstration, and, when I established the conditions (that is, having someone point a toy gun at me when I was standing within three feet of them, with instructions to shoot if I made a false move), I could—without fail—disable their gun hand and strike a simulated crippling blow. But it wasn’t real—there was no danger. And importantly, I controlled the situation.
What makes you think you would control the situation and be allowed to get within striking distance? I guess you must be a greater authority on such matters than Col. Jeff Cooper, so a trained shooter who has mastered the mental discipline of applying his Color Code would be no match against your awesome prowess.
Your point is not that you could surprise and ambush a targeted victim—hell, anyone could do that. You claim you can disarm someone who is trained and equipped, and who has you in their sights!
I could arrange a demonstration, if you like, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon. I’m sure I could assemble an audience that would love to see you exhibit how what’s in your head will overcome what’s in a trained shooter’s hand. I can probably even arrange for you to place bets on your ability to prevail against, say, my 10-year-old, someone who is elderly, and maybe even a disabled shooter. We’ll even videotape it, and post it on the Internet. And don't worry, we'll only use props. Care to prove your words?
How did you dismiss Deborah? Oh, yeah, "LOL!"
You should be careful about laughing at people, Mr. Fitz-Gibbon, especially when you're obviously in over your head—it makes you come across as just another fool with an opinion.
AFTERWORD FROM TJ JOHNSTON
Ian: being Deborah's trainer, I want to respond to your comments.
Deborah's rape was typical in that the assailant didn't jump out of the bushes and attack her. That media stereotype is so far from reality. Rapists set up their victims. And when they do, the potential victim has a series of options, which are greatly expanded if they have access to a firearm.
In Deborah's case, the assailant locked her in her personal office and then carefully walked around the rest of the building, closing windows and locking the front door. If she had her Glock in her office, he would have found a nasty confrontation when he returned to attack her.
You sound very courageous, in that you feel you could disarm somebody very easily. Candidly, it is possible. I teach those techniques and it requires much disciplined practice, considerable confidence, speed and precision to do it safely. With the hammer cocked, most handguns will fire with only minimal pressure on the trigger, and the movement that action requires is much less than the movement to reach out and take the gun away. If the person with the firearm maintains his/her distance, the person encroaching WILL BE SHOT.
Most importantly, as the statistics from John Lott, Gary Kleck, and a host of other criminologists show, the mere presence of a firearm deters most criminals, usually without the gun being discharged. No one wants to get shot, and criminals are not brave people. They run away.
The facts are clear and irrefutable. In her situation, if Deborah had been armed, she wouldn't have been raped.
And I would challenge you to take a loaded handgun away from her. Knowing her current attitude and aptitude, I am confident that you would have at least one more hole in you than before the attempt.
Regards,
TJ Johnston
www.allsafedefense.com
Sunday, March 13, 2005
Bloggers: Have You Applied for Your Reporting License?
One of the more shopworn arguments in the civilian disarmament playbook says the Founders were talking about muskets when they penned the Second Amendment, and they could not possibly have conceived of the terrible firepower of today’s weaponry—to which our side generally replies they couldn’t have conceived of modern communications technology when establishing the First Amendment, yet no one is suggesting limits on free speech.
Right.
While bloggers have rightly bared their teeth at the recent McCain-Feingold trial balloon, there’s another looming threat that hasn’t generated much of a response on 2A sites I frequent: the state assuming it is the sole arbiter of who among us will be recognized as a “journalist.”
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg has again raised this issue, and we need to pay attention to his ruling, especially the part where he writes “Defining what is a 'journalist' has become more complicated as the variety of media has expanded."
Judge, I don’t see that being your call. You have no legitimate authority to issue de facto reporting permits. The only argument in this case should be whether the rights of another, in this case, Apple, via alleged theft and dissemination of their proprietary trade secrets, have been violated.
We all know of the many instances where the internet community covers vital liberty issues that are ignored by the lapdog Establishment press, especially in its coverage of citizens persecuted for taking the Second Amendment at its word. Case in point--don’t expect CBS or The Los Angeles Times to tell us about BATFU incompetence almost destroying a man’s life.
If we independents are muffled, the only thing you’ll hear about such cases is how an antisocial threat to society has been removed by heroic community helpers.
How very Red Chinese.
Right.
While bloggers have rightly bared their teeth at the recent McCain-Feingold trial balloon, there’s another looming threat that hasn’t generated much of a response on 2A sites I frequent: the state assuming it is the sole arbiter of who among us will be recognized as a “journalist.”
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg has again raised this issue, and we need to pay attention to his ruling, especially the part where he writes “Defining what is a 'journalist' has become more complicated as the variety of media has expanded."
Judge, I don’t see that being your call. You have no legitimate authority to issue de facto reporting permits. The only argument in this case should be whether the rights of another, in this case, Apple, via alleged theft and dissemination of their proprietary trade secrets, have been violated.
We all know of the many instances where the internet community covers vital liberty issues that are ignored by the lapdog Establishment press, especially in its coverage of citizens persecuted for taking the Second Amendment at its word. Case in point--don’t expect CBS or The Los Angeles Times to tell us about BATFU incompetence almost destroying a man’s life.
If we independents are muffled, the only thing you’ll hear about such cases is how an antisocial threat to society has been removed by heroic community helpers.
How very Red Chinese.
I’m a Lumberjack and I’m Okay…
Kyle Shelton, who foolishly believes he possesses both wit and insight, scribed a panty-wringing warning against guns in bars for a student rag called The Lumberjack.
“As soon as guns are allowed in bars,” he snipes, “…guns in schools can't be far behind.”
Uh, yeah.
Comments from site visitors were going swimmingly until Kumbaya-soloist “Rachel” chimed in:
"People feeling they need to carry concealed weapons is a sad testimony of the time we live in—it’s not sad because crime rates have escalated, but because people’s thinking has shifted so dramatically, from loving their neighbor to suddenly being afraid of him."
Kids.
“As soon as guns are allowed in bars,” he snipes, “…guns in schools can't be far behind.”
Uh, yeah.
Comments from site visitors were going swimmingly until Kumbaya-soloist “Rachel” chimed in:
"People feeling they need to carry concealed weapons is a sad testimony of the time we live in—it’s not sad because crime rates have escalated, but because people’s thinking has shifted so dramatically, from loving their neighbor to suddenly being afraid of him."
Kids.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
Bravo to women who defend themselves
“Bravo. A standing ovation for Deborah Courtney, the rape victim who has learned how to defend herself with her Glock 9 mm. She redefines the term ‘gun control’ [‘Steady aim, steel will,’ News, March 5].”
Read complete letter.
[Use Bug Me Not to bypass OCR’s site registration.]
The War on Guns is hard at work deconstructing another letter that was not so kind. Stay tuned…
Read complete letter.
[Use Bug Me Not to bypass OCR’s site registration.]
The War on Guns is hard at work deconstructing another letter that was not so kind. Stay tuned…
Friday, March 11, 2005
Some Unambiguous Questions for Gun Industry Lawsuit Advocates
Here is a direct question—I DEFY anyone from the civilian disarmament camp to publicly and unequivocally provide a “yes" or “no” answer.
If someone buys a gun or ammunition, and either malfunction causing injury or property damage, can the victim(s) sue the manufacturer responsible for the product defect?
YES or NO?
The answer, of course, is “Yes,” and they know it. We’ve always been able to do so. There is no exemption or shielding from liability. To suggest otherwise is yet another example of prevarication everyone has come to expect.
Here’s another question: If Sarah Brady’s son accidentally or intentionally shoots someone with the rifle she bought him, should the victims be able to sue the gun manufacturer?
If someone buys a gun or ammunition, and either malfunction causing injury or property damage, can the victim(s) sue the manufacturer responsible for the product defect?
YES or NO?
The answer, of course, is “Yes,” and they know it. We’ve always been able to do so. There is no exemption or shielding from liability. To suggest otherwise is yet another example of prevarication everyone has come to expect.
Here’s another question: If Sarah Brady’s son accidentally or intentionally shoots someone with the rifle she bought him, should the victims be able to sue the gun manufacturer?
Thursday, March 10, 2005
Open Letter to "Rabbi" Eric H. Yoffie, President, Union of American Hebrew Congregations
In response to http://urj.org/yoffie/archive/mmm/
“Rabbi” Yoffie:
(PresUAHC@urj.org)
You are neither a master nor a teacher.
What a traitor to Jews and to all of humanity you are, calling for “gun control.” You are either evil or a fool.
You do not deserve the freedoms of this country, established in powder, steel and blood by armed citizens risking their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, to resist tyranny. In their wisdom, they codified our unalienable claim to the tools of self determination and defense on both a personal and a societal level by recognizing the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and by putting lawful infringement of this right off limits to government.
You are nothing but a genocide enabler. You make a mockery of the phrase “Never again.” The evil policies you endorse guarantee that mass murder of citizens by governments will indeed happen again.
The people of the Warsaw ghetto listened to false leaders like you until it was too late. The lesson taught by a small band with the courage not to listen shook the Third Reich to its core, and should have resounded with Jewish people forever.
I won’t waste my time trying to persuade you. If I had the slightest inkling that you are not an anti-defense fanatic, I would point you to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. If I thought it would make a bit of difference, I would urge you to obtain a copy of Innocents Betrayed. But I don’t believe you are redeemable.
So what I will do instead is warn people against you, that if they listen to you, they will be powerless to prevent this from happening to themselves or their loved ones.
People like me will NEVER disarm as long as we draw breath, so I leave you with one question: How many of us are you willing to have the state persecute, imprison or kill to enforce your will against us?
With disgust and contempt,
David Codrea
“Rabbi” Yoffie:
(PresUAHC@urj.org)
You are neither a master nor a teacher.
What a traitor to Jews and to all of humanity you are, calling for “gun control.” You are either evil or a fool.
You do not deserve the freedoms of this country, established in powder, steel and blood by armed citizens risking their lives, fortunes and sacred honor, to resist tyranny. In their wisdom, they codified our unalienable claim to the tools of self determination and defense on both a personal and a societal level by recognizing the right of the people to keep and bear arms, and by putting lawful infringement of this right off limits to government.
You are nothing but a genocide enabler. You make a mockery of the phrase “Never again.” The evil policies you endorse guarantee that mass murder of citizens by governments will indeed happen again.
The people of the Warsaw ghetto listened to false leaders like you until it was too late. The lesson taught by a small band with the courage not to listen shook the Third Reich to its core, and should have resounded with Jewish people forever.
I won’t waste my time trying to persuade you. If I had the slightest inkling that you are not an anti-defense fanatic, I would point you to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. If I thought it would make a bit of difference, I would urge you to obtain a copy of Innocents Betrayed. But I don’t believe you are redeemable.
So what I will do instead is warn people against you, that if they listen to you, they will be powerless to prevent this from happening to themselves or their loved ones.
People like me will NEVER disarm as long as we draw breath, so I leave you with one question: How many of us are you willing to have the state persecute, imprison or kill to enforce your will against us?
With disgust and contempt,
David Codrea
Wednesday, March 09, 2005
The Eloi Award
I wrote an article for the Jan. 2000 Millenium issue of GUNS AND AMMO Magazine titled "The New Eloi."
Using H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine" as a metaphor, it made the argument that "society has fragmented into three distinct groups, the provide-all/control-all state, the provided-for/controlled general populace, and the increasingly besieged self-determining/self-controlling rationalist individual. Or, in terms of Wells' prescient speculative fantasy, we could identify these as the Morlocks, the Eloi, and the Time Traveller."
Markeeta Gould is a Mansfield, OH, woman who was "jailed for failure to file a 2001 city income tax bill totaling 96 cents…[she]earned $55 that year…on Feb. 19, she was arrested in front of her children."
He reaction? Was she outraged? Has she comprehended the loss of her sovereign individual rights, and has she been galvanized to fight against the blatant tyranny of a system where such outcomes are inevitable?
“Gould said she was embarrassed to be arrested.
"‘I'm a mother and I'm a law-abiding citizen,’ she said. ‘I paid my taxes every year before and I paid my taxes every year after. With me getting arrested, I could lose my job.’"
Ms. Gould, you are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. You get The War on Guns' Eloi Award (I may make this a monthly feature).
And our Morlock of the Month Award goes to Mansfield Finance Director Sandra Converse, who claimed the Nuremberg Defense, saying she is bound by city filing policy.
"We don't know what people owe if they do not file. We wouldn't be doing our jobs if we didn't enforce this,” Converse claims.
So, Sandra, you financial genius—how much of the people’s money would you say you’ve spent in your insane quest to recover 96 cents?
To borrow a metaphor from another work of Classic literature, Victor Hugo's "Les Misérables," at least the fanatically obsessive Javert had the good sense to throw himself off a bridge.
Using H. G. Wells' "The Time Machine" as a metaphor, it made the argument that "society has fragmented into three distinct groups, the provide-all/control-all state, the provided-for/controlled general populace, and the increasingly besieged self-determining/self-controlling rationalist individual. Or, in terms of Wells' prescient speculative fantasy, we could identify these as the Morlocks, the Eloi, and the Time Traveller."
Markeeta Gould is a Mansfield, OH, woman who was "jailed for failure to file a 2001 city income tax bill totaling 96 cents…[she]earned $55 that year…on Feb. 19, she was arrested in front of her children."
He reaction? Was she outraged? Has she comprehended the loss of her sovereign individual rights, and has she been galvanized to fight against the blatant tyranny of a system where such outcomes are inevitable?
“Gould said she was embarrassed to be arrested.
"‘I'm a mother and I'm a law-abiding citizen,’ she said. ‘I paid my taxes every year before and I paid my taxes every year after. With me getting arrested, I could lose my job.’"
Ms. Gould, you are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome. You get The War on Guns' Eloi Award (I may make this a monthly feature).
And our Morlock of the Month Award goes to Mansfield Finance Director Sandra Converse, who claimed the Nuremberg Defense, saying she is bound by city filing policy.
"We don't know what people owe if they do not file. We wouldn't be doing our jobs if we didn't enforce this,” Converse claims.
So, Sandra, you financial genius—how much of the people’s money would you say you’ve spent in your insane quest to recover 96 cents?
To borrow a metaphor from another work of Classic literature, Victor Hugo's "Les Misérables," at least the fanatically obsessive Javert had the good sense to throw himself off a bridge.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Credit Card Fraud Hits New High Despite Chip and PIN
Now substitute the phrase “Crime Using Guns” for “Credit Card Fraud,” and you’ll have some idea of where so-called “smart gun” technology will surely take us.
Here are some observations from a few years back.
Here are some observations from a few years back.
Vanishing Point Reappears Today
“Charles Robert Carner’s action-packed remake of the cult classic 'Vanishing Point' roars onto DVD from Anchor Bay Entertainment, March 8, 2005. Viggo Mortensen (“The Lord of the Rings”) stars as Kowalski, the lone hero in the Dodge Challenger who leads an army of lawmen on a wild car chase across the American West…”
Read my review to see why liberty activists should give a damn.
Read my review to see why liberty activists should give a damn.
Monday, March 07, 2005
Capture the Flag!
My U.S. Representative, Jane Harman, is one of the most anti-gun members of Congress. Holding press conferences with Sarah Brady to promote more gun laws, she campaigned on the slogan "I wear my opposition [to believers in the Second Amendment] like a badge of honor."
So why in the world did I send her a check? And why do I encourage all RKBA supporters to follow suit with their own representative?
One of the constituent services that Congress provides to "We the People" is a program that lets you fly a commemorative flag over the nation's Capitol building. For a nominal fee (I paid about thirteen bucks) you can specify one of a couple different flag sizes and materials, the date you want your flag flown, and why you are flying it.
I asked for the flag to be flown on April 19 with the notation:
"In tribute to the Citizen Patriots of Lexington and Concord who resisted confiscation of their armaments on this date in 1775, and in continued defiance of all who would infringe on the Right of the People to keep and bear arms."
I can think of many other homages, such as "In loving memory of the children of Mount Carmel," or "For Vicki and Sammy Weaver," or numerous other events warranting commemoration. I'm sure you can, too.
Whether your Representative chooses to process the orders or return them, a point will have been made (and I'm still not clear what their options are for refusing to do so). If enough of us follow suit, it can be a powerful point. Their choice will be to fly our flags in defiance of their statist policies or to create a public record of suppressing alternative political sentiments. And it will either cost you nothing, or, for a nominal price you'll get a beautiful flag and a commemorative certificate signed by the Architect of the Capitol. You'll also have the satisfaction of knowing that you sent your Congressthing a strong, no-compromise statement of principle, and maybe even made him or her squirm.
Why not contact your Representative and ask for an order form? Let's all fly a flag for freedom!
Sunday, March 06, 2005
In the Fight Against Terrorism, Some Rights Must Be Repealed
A Muslim thinks we need to get rid of the right to keep and bear arms in order to fight the war on terror.
This same Muslim, who decries stereotyping his co-religionists, has no problem libeling those of us who rightfully embrace the original intent of the Founders:
“Today," he states authoritatively, "only a handful of citizens outside of neo-nazi and white supremacist groups view gun ownership as a means of keeping the government in check.”
In other words, he demands tolerance for people who agree with him, and armed suppression of those who don't. And just to ensure his point is made, he demonizes us and emphasizes what he says is our minority status. What a unique and new philosophy! I'm sure no one's ever tried that before.
“Junaid M. Afeef," his tag line states, "is a Research Associate at the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.”
Great way to promote “understanding,” Mr. Afeef. Do you understand “Molon Labe”?
You can help promote Mr. Afeef's understanding of American social policy by contacting him at junaid.afeef@gmail.com. Just be careful--he seems like the type to start something and then report you if he gets the response he deserves.
This same Muslim, who decries stereotyping his co-religionists, has no problem libeling those of us who rightfully embrace the original intent of the Founders:
“Today," he states authoritatively, "only a handful of citizens outside of neo-nazi and white supremacist groups view gun ownership as a means of keeping the government in check.”
In other words, he demands tolerance for people who agree with him, and armed suppression of those who don't. And just to ensure his point is made, he demonizes us and emphasizes what he says is our minority status. What a unique and new philosophy! I'm sure no one's ever tried that before.
“Junaid M. Afeef," his tag line states, "is a Research Associate at the Institute for Social Policy & Understanding.”
Great way to promote “understanding,” Mr. Afeef. Do you understand “Molon Labe”?
You can help promote Mr. Afeef's understanding of American social policy by contacting him at junaid.afeef@gmail.com. Just be careful--he seems like the type to start something and then report you if he gets the response he deserves.
Saturday, March 05, 2005
"Steady Aim, Steel Will"
Congratulations to Liberty Belle, victims' rights advocate, and genuinely nice person Deborah Courtney for making the front page of the Orange County Register.
(If you want to bypass the OCR site’s registration, try BugMeNot.)
(If you want to bypass the OCR site’s registration, try BugMeNot.)
The Blogger Rebellion
The two graphics posted below have quickly emerged as standards to rally under against the government's latest threat to free speech.
There's also a sound file I highly recommend that provides a succinct motto for the cause, courtesy of Mr. Garrison.
Courtesy Feces Flinging Monkey.
Courtesy GeekWithA.45.
There's also a sound file I highly recommend that provides a succinct motto for the cause, courtesy of Mr. Garrison.
Courtesy Feces Flinging Monkey.
Courtesy GeekWithA.45.
Friday, March 04, 2005
Judge Creates Special Class of Journalist--Just Because He Says So
"A California judge said in a preliminary ruling that bloggers should not have the same protection afforded to journalists under US law."
First we have the federal judicial opinion that bloggers should be subject to McCain-Feingold restrictions on political speech.
Now we have another black-robed traitor applying the pincers from a different angle at the state level.
Not only do these treasonous bastards trash the First Amendment, they're now set to create a special class of super-privileged citizens in violation of equal protection guarantees and the Constitution they swore a sacred oath to uphold.
For the record: If I give a guarantee of confidentiality, I will honor it. I will go to jail before I betray a trust, providing I survive the encounter. But I won't go quietly.
The neo-ayatollahs in charge can go apply their Iranian strong-arm terror tactics on someone who isn't fed up.
If someone wants to start a blogger pledge to this effect, I'll sign it.
First we have the federal judicial opinion that bloggers should be subject to McCain-Feingold restrictions on political speech.
Now we have another black-robed traitor applying the pincers from a different angle at the state level.
Not only do these treasonous bastards trash the First Amendment, they're now set to create a special class of super-privileged citizens in violation of equal protection guarantees and the Constitution they swore a sacred oath to uphold.
For the record: If I give a guarantee of confidentiality, I will honor it. I will go to jail before I betray a trust, providing I survive the encounter. But I won't go quietly.
The neo-ayatollahs in charge can go apply their Iranian strong-arm terror tactics on someone who isn't fed up.
If someone wants to start a blogger pledge to this effect, I'll sign it.
FishOrMan Update
"The Spokane case is done. The plea deal was agreed to, (although the prosecutor in Ellensburg tried to get the prosecutor in Spokane to take the plea off the table!). The Ellensburg case of course is of main concern now, Trial set April 8th.
"If you didn't know the Spokane case was two criminal charges, (reckless driving and loaded gun in a car without permit). With the plea they were both dropped and a plea agreement was enter for two driving infractions, (neg. driving 2nd degree and failure to use turn signal). Finally, the gun was forfeited as part of the plea, (and my guess is the county is broke because they didn't reduce the fine with the forfeiture of a rather expensive Colt 1991A1). Total fine is $953, payable at $25 a month.
"I cannot say I am 'happy' with deal. Although,reading the 4 page letter I received from my lawyer on the possiblities at trial, (and $5000 cost for trial), it was the only 'smart' option." --FishOrMan
"If you didn't know the Spokane case was two criminal charges, (reckless driving and loaded gun in a car without permit). With the plea they were both dropped and a plea agreement was enter for two driving infractions, (neg. driving 2nd degree and failure to use turn signal). Finally, the gun was forfeited as part of the plea, (and my guess is the county is broke because they didn't reduce the fine with the forfeiture of a rather expensive Colt 1991A1). Total fine is $953, payable at $25 a month.
"I cannot say I am 'happy' with deal. Although,reading the 4 page letter I received from my lawyer on the possiblities at trial, (and $5000 cost for trial), it was the only 'smart' option." --FishOrMan
A Line in the Sand
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly opines "the exclusion of Internet communications from the coordinated communications regulation severely undermines" McCain-Feingold. Now the FEC is talking about bringing the hammer down on bloggers who link to political campaign websites.
The links to Ron Paul and Tom McClintock stay in the column on the left. If and when an enforcement effort begins, more links will go up.
"This is an incredible thicket," says Bradley Smith, an FEC Commissioner. "If someone else doesn't take action, for instance in Congress, we're running a real possibility of serious Internet regulation. It's going to be bizarre."
Bradley, are you a Commissioner first and an American second? "An incredible thicket"??? Jesus, man, it's an act of war.
And we should all remember to thank George W. Bush for refusing to honor his oath and veto legislation he knew was unconstitutional.
The hell with these tyrants. Like they can arrest every one of us who defy this act of treachery and despotism. What an opportunity to demonstrate how impotent they are when met with mass resistance.
We need some kind of symbol we can post on our blogs, websites and emails that defines us as resistors to this tyranny.
The links to Ron Paul and Tom McClintock stay in the column on the left. If and when an enforcement effort begins, more links will go up.
"This is an incredible thicket," says Bradley Smith, an FEC Commissioner. "If someone else doesn't take action, for instance in Congress, we're running a real possibility of serious Internet regulation. It's going to be bizarre."
Bradley, are you a Commissioner first and an American second? "An incredible thicket"??? Jesus, man, it's an act of war.
And we should all remember to thank George W. Bush for refusing to honor his oath and veto legislation he knew was unconstitutional.
The hell with these tyrants. Like they can arrest every one of us who defy this act of treachery and despotism. What an opportunity to demonstrate how impotent they are when met with mass resistance.
We need some kind of symbol we can post on our blogs, websites and emails that defines us as resistors to this tyranny.
Hole Blown in Howard Fischer's Credibility
"Hole blown in concealed weapon law
"By HOWARD FISCHER
"Capitol Media Services
"PHOENIX -- The House of Representatives voted Tuesday to let people carry weapons -- including guns, grenades, rockets, mines and sawed-off shotguns -- into schools, polling places and nuclear plants if they claim they're only trying to protect themselves."
Howard--were you born stupid, or is this something you've worked at?
"By HOWARD FISCHER
"Capitol Media Services
"PHOENIX -- The House of Representatives voted Tuesday to let people carry weapons -- including guns, grenades, rockets, mines and sawed-off shotguns -- into schools, polling places and nuclear plants if they claim they're only trying to protect themselves."
Howard--were you born stupid, or is this something you've worked at?
NRA Response to Gun Control Lobby`s Irresponsible Statement
"It is pathetic to see the gun control lobby make hysterical statements to resurrect their failed political agenda. According to the BATFE, this armor-piercing ammunition is only available to the military and police. The Brady Campaign continues to deceive the American people in their effort to ban firearm ownership by all law-abiding Americans."
It's also pathetic that the nation's largest gun group isn't challenging unconstitutional edicts that deny to the militia the same ammunition the state provides to its enforcers.
It's also pathetic that the nation's largest gun group isn't challenging unconstitutional edicts that deny to the militia the same ammunition the state provides to its enforcers.
Victor /Victoria
"As the gaggle of gun enthusiasts with their assorted handguns sitting openly on their hips dined on hamburgers and chicken tenders at the Fuddruckers restaurant in Annandale, Victor Castellon's eyes grew wide with concern.
"'I've got to be careful with these guys because they've got guns,' he said..."
Victor, Victor, Victor.
Not used to seeing free men?
Are the only men you wish to see armed wearing badges?
Yeah, you've got to be careful. That's the point. Did you never read Heinlein?
"'I've got to be careful with these guys because they've got guns,' he said..."
Victor, Victor, Victor.
Not used to seeing free men?
Are the only men you wish to see armed wearing badges?
Yeah, you've got to be careful. That's the point. Did you never read Heinlein?
Another Brady, Bill
"State Sen. Bill Brady, R-Bloomington, announced formation of an exploratory committee Tuesday to run for governor, saying “Illinois must do better” than having the state run by Democrat Rod Blagojevich...He said the state could abandon issuance of firearm owners’ identification cards by denoting on a driver’s license whether the driver can legally own a gun."
Why would you want someone you don't trust with a gun driving a car? Shouldn't such people be in custodial care?
Why would you want someone you don't trust with a gun driving a car? Shouldn't such people be in custodial care?
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Another 48 Hours
Our good friends over at the Maryland General Assembly are enacting "The Police Officers Protection Bill," which will require gun owners to report stolen weapons within 48 hours of discovering the theft. If you don't, say, if you report it in 49 hours, they could technically add to your woes by fining you up to $5,000 AND imprisoning you for up to 3 years.
Among the bill's sponsors--a stooge named "Moe" (Why, you, I oughtta...) and someone named "Bobo," who I can only assume is actually not a sign-talking chimp. (Press the green button, Bobo!)
But remember--this is to guarantee police officer safety. Just to prove it, and to gin up flock sympathy, Annapolis' The Capital presents us with one-sided testimony from two officers horribly wounded in the line of duty by criminals with stolen firearms. The reporterette doesn't think to question exactly how this bill would have prevented these crimes, nor the extreme unlikelihood that filing a report would result in a stolen weapon being recovered. And forget asking the basic question: whose property is it, anyway?
There's one other factor that seems to have been overlooked in their zeal to exploit pity into a stronger police state: What if a defiant Patriot has retained possession of a weapon that Moe and Bobo have ruled verboten? Wouldn't being forced to report it stolen also force him to surrender his right against self-incrimination?
Oh well, there's no longer any Second Amendment in Maryland. What makes us think there should be a Fifth?
And there's yet another interesting dilemma this creates: What if the thugs stealing your firearms work for the government?
Among the bill's sponsors--a stooge named "Moe" (Why, you, I oughtta...) and someone named "Bobo," who I can only assume is actually not a sign-talking chimp. (Press the green button, Bobo!)
But remember--this is to guarantee police officer safety. Just to prove it, and to gin up flock sympathy, Annapolis' The Capital presents us with one-sided testimony from two officers horribly wounded in the line of duty by criminals with stolen firearms. The reporterette doesn't think to question exactly how this bill would have prevented these crimes, nor the extreme unlikelihood that filing a report would result in a stolen weapon being recovered. And forget asking the basic question: whose property is it, anyway?
There's one other factor that seems to have been overlooked in their zeal to exploit pity into a stronger police state: What if a defiant Patriot has retained possession of a weapon that Moe and Bobo have ruled verboten? Wouldn't being forced to report it stolen also force him to surrender his right against self-incrimination?
Oh well, there's no longer any Second Amendment in Maryland. What makes us think there should be a Fifth?
And there's yet another interesting dilemma this creates: What if the thugs stealing your firearms work for the government?
Bug Me Not
This is a cool tool to get you through web pages requiring registration. It's a real time-saver for doing research.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
A Little Bit of “Sunshine”
By now you’ve no doubt heard about the “Million Mom” who was arrested for having an “illegal” gun.
She says it was her son’s, and she just wrapped it up and left it in a drawer because she didn’t know what to do with it.
Claire Wolfe quotes Rich Lucibella: “If she doesn't know what to do with a gun in her own home, HOW ON EARTH can she purport to know what I should do with mine?”
It’s true. The gun grabbers have always made me recall that powerful and defiant promise from folk singer Jonathan Edwards’ 1972 hit “Sunshine”:
He can't even run his own life
I'll be damned if he'll run mine...
I’ll be damned if any of them will.
She says it was her son’s, and she just wrapped it up and left it in a drawer because she didn’t know what to do with it.
Claire Wolfe quotes Rich Lucibella: “If she doesn't know what to do with a gun in her own home, HOW ON EARTH can she purport to know what I should do with mine?”
It’s true. The gun grabbers have always made me recall that powerful and defiant promise from folk singer Jonathan Edwards’ 1972 hit “Sunshine”:
He can't even run his own life
I'll be damned if he'll run mine...
I’ll be damned if any of them will.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Cops Find All Objects in the Physical World Alarming
“The soft-air gun that was fired on a Thunder Bay school bus Wednesday is considered a firearm, Thunder Bay Police said…
“‘I think it’s fair to call it a firearm,’ police spokesman Chris Adams said Friday.
”It could be considered a weapon if it was used in a threatening or criminal manner, he added.”
Me, I find ignorance on the part of “authoritah” alarming. And dangerous to the lives, liberty and property of free people.
Yo, Chris--no, it is certainly not fair:
"Main Entry: fire•arm
"Pronunciation: 'fIr-"ärm
"Function: noun
": a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder -- usually used of small arms"
And for the record, anything “could be considered a weapon if it was used in a threatening or criminal manner.”
Not to alarm you and the rest of Thunder Bay’s finest...
“‘I think it’s fair to call it a firearm,’ police spokesman Chris Adams said Friday.
”It could be considered a weapon if it was used in a threatening or criminal manner, he added.”
Me, I find ignorance on the part of “authoritah” alarming. And dangerous to the lives, liberty and property of free people.
Yo, Chris--no, it is certainly not fair:
"Main Entry: fire•arm
"Pronunciation: 'fIr-"ärm
"Function: noun
": a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder -- usually used of small arms"
And for the record, anything “could be considered a weapon if it was used in a threatening or criminal manner.”
Not to alarm you and the rest of Thunder Bay’s finest...
Shameless Plug: "Thinking of England"
"Can we sneer at the prosecution of Tony Martin and forget about Hale DeMar, the Wilmette, IL, homeowner who shot a burglar and was then charged by officials for violating the village’s handgun ban?"
"Thinking of England" is my Rights Watch commentary for the April issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale starting today at discriminating newsstands across the kingdom...uh...Republic.
"Thinking of England" is my Rights Watch commentary for the April issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale starting today at discriminating newsstands across the kingdom...uh...Republic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)