RebelFire 1.0

Out of the Gray Zone


I just ordered the new novel by Claire Wolfe and Aaron Zelman.

The first 100 people to order get an autographed copy. I hope mine made it in under the wire. If not, I'll have to mail it to them with return postage--either way, I intend to get those autographs.

Obviously, I can't review something I haven't yet read--but I have tremendous faith--earned based on past performance--in their exceptional ability to lead, educate and inspire us.

I ask everyone reading this to acknowledge that these people deserve material rewards for their first-rate labors. If you're like me, and have gratitude toward those who bring us ideas, perpective and insights, you'll want to keep those efforts coming.

What better way is there to do that than by giving yourself a gift?

Everybody wins!

That's the way it's supposed to work.

Finger-Lickin’ Foolishness

Many thanks to FreedomSight for bringing another solemn day of reverence to my attention. International Respect for Chickens Day sounds like the type of holiday worthy of a paid day off for government workers.

I usually respect mine Original Recipe, but get Extra Crunchy when I feel like living dangerously.

But in all the hooplah, let’s not forget an often-overlooked minority. Please set aside a moment of silence during the festivities to Respect Headless Chickens, too.

Mike will thank you for it.

Oh, never mind. He has his own festival the third weekend in May.

Dear Judge Baylson,

Bill St. Clair writes an interesting letter...

Victim Empowerment Media Project

If you or someone you know has been a victim of violent crime Deborah Courtney would like to hear from you:

"I am actively searching to cast 26 victims of crime to be interviewed for a TV show, both male and female, who may have been accosted, assaulted, mugged, car jacked, or had any other crime perpetrated upon them, that would like to take control back in their life and be empowered through personal safety and awareness training, and a firearms class, as well. The person must be willing to share what happened to him or her on camera, and then we will all go and receive a $1200 training course for FREE at Front Sight, in Nevada, and then we are to be interviewed as to whether the personal safety and firearms training has made us feel more safe and empowered, or not."

If you're interested and would like more information, contact her at DACourtney@earthlink.net.

Read more about Deborah:
"Steady Aim, Steel Will"
Another Fool With an Opinion

What, Guns Aren't the Only Thing They Lie About?

Who'da thunk?

Night of the Evil Tortilla

[BugMeNot userid and password: Erasmus.]

“More than 600 students sat through a lockdown and building search after a passerby reported a "suspicious object" being carried into the school.

“The 2-foot-long cylinder wrapped in white fabric later was revealed to be a giant burrito...”

[Thanks to KABA Newslinks.]

Don’t be too hard on them. The most powerful man in the world just hid from a cloud.

Out of the Gray Zone

Now THIS looks interesting...

Shameless Plug: "Weapons of Choice"

"Their inability to reach a consensus notwithstanding, it’s evident that those who would eliminate private ownership of firearms all agree on one thing: they mean to leave us no choice."

"Weapons of Choice" is my Rights Watch column for the June issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale now at preferred newsstands throughout the Republic.

Fool Me Once...

This was a hoax.

Triggerfinger is Learning...

...something we in Southern California's South Bay have known for some time--that columnist John Bogert of The Daily Breeze is an anti-defense zealot.

Matthew Hunter writes:

"The problem, as far as I can tell, is that he wasn't serious. He wanted to make some cheap points to readers who may not realize that gun rights organizations generally support all our Constitutional freedoms (while primarily focused on firearms issues, of course). He didn't want to actually support gun rights, but if he could dredge up some support for his own favored freedom, no problem. Sorry; alliances go both ways."

That about pegs the guy's MO.

He holds out some hopes that Bogert will correct himself, and that emails can help persuade him.

Sorry, Matthew. It just ain't gonna happen. But you made a valiant effort, and you got some great points across to an audience that has never heard them before, so your efforts were worth it.

An Expert's Advice on the Militia

"Whoever looks upon them as an irregular mob will find himself much mistaken. They have men amongst them who know very well what they are about."

Lord Hugh Percy, 1775

Lockyer 's Latest "In Your Face!" to Gun Owners

"A proposal to put a serial number on every handgun bullet passed a Senate committee Tuesday and law enforcement officials said they hoped the novel effort would spread to other states...

"'We'll solve a lot of crimes if this becomes law,' said Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who supported the bill...

"He acknowledged criminals could find ways around the law, but said milk, medicine, soda cans and most other things sold in stores have identification numbers.

"'Why not bullets?' he said."

Because, Bill. Those products have lot numbers on their containers.

But he's not stupid--he knows that. He also knows the average cud-chewer hearing that sound bite is so easily manipulated they will intuitively accept the proposal as "sensible," "reasonable," and "a good first step."

Back in 2002, I wrote to Randy Rossi of the California Department of Justice Firearms Division, asking him to square the state's position with then-US Attorney General John Ashcroft's statement that the Second Amendment is an individual right (and that's a story in manipulation itself).

After a series of emails and a month-and-a-half later, Rossi told me "The Attorney General felt that your request warranted a response directly from him."

That response is posted here. He says we have no individual right to keep and bear arms.

That means he and his fellow tyrants can just about do whatever they think they can get away with, and we can't do anything about it.

Naturally, "Lockyer...plans to seek the Democratic nomination for governor next year..."

And naturally, the Republicans will be able to offer us flawed goods, and gun owners will once again cave to the perceived "lesser of two evils."
----------------

UPDATE: Publicola has some good observations on this.

Des Moines Implements Chance Control

Jed points us to Gunner who ushers us to a Des Moines theft report.

But that must be OK, because the property was a gun and the thieves were cops who “don’t want to take any chances.”

Can't take any of those chances in a free society, can we? Why that might upset order, and then where would we be?

SCROTUS "Conservatives" Screw Us Again

“[T]he five most liberal justices voided the conviction of a Pennsylvania gun owner who was charged with a federal crime for buying a handgun after he had served prison time in Japan for gun crimes there. The three conservative judges dissented.

"Federal law makes it illegal for Americans to own firearms once they have been convicted 'in any court' for a serious gun crime. Bush administration lawyers strongly defended the law and said it covered convictions in foreign courts.”--The Los Angeles Times

In other words, our "pro-gun" president and the "strict constructionists" on the High Court think it's consistent with the vision of The Founders to strip a human being of unalienable rights because they were caught bringing Bibles to China.

It’s curious that justices who have previously endorsed considering international law in domestic decisions, notably Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O’Connor, sided with the majority, which correctly observed “[Fo]reign convictions may include convictions for conduct that domestic laws would permit" and acknowledged the potential for "convictions from a legal system that are inconsistent with American understanding of fairness."

It was the “conservatives,” particularly Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, who insisted that the term “any court” means just that.

Hell, Clarence and Tony, you neocon frauds, the Taliban held court all the time.

In the arcane world of the black robes, citations and incantations trump the reason We the People ceded limited authority to them in the first place, mainly to "secure the Blessings of Liberty." No actions by any branch of government may legitimately result in any other end.

To me, the key words in The Times' piece are: "Bush administration lawyers strongly defended the law..."

This isn't the first case where the Bush Justice Department has argued that foreign convictions should stand.

Gun owners put Bush in office. NRA reportedly spent $20 Million convincing them to "vote freedom first." Now this guy wants to change Senate rules to smooth the way for more "conservative" judges so that next time this issue comes up, they'll have the votes to uphold Sharia convictions?

No thanks. This latest outrage has convinced me to defer to Larry Pratt's judgment.

REFERENCES:

18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1: “It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person…is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.”

The Majority Opinion

The Dissenting Opinion

Microstamping Advances in Assembly

Per the Liberty Belles:

"CALIFORNIA - MICROSTAMPING BILL AB352 PASSED ASSEMBLY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ON 4/14/05. NEXT STOP, ASSEMBLY FLOOR. CLICK HERE TO CONTACT YOUR ASSEMBLY MEMBER."

See also:

Microstamping for Macroinfringement

Microstamping--An Alternative View

“AB352 is pro-forensic, not anti-gun.”

Microstamping...What is it?

McClintock for Lieutenant Governor

The man who should have been governor, and who is infinitely more qualified than the gun-banning dual citizen who currently occupies the post, is running for the second slot.

Except for GOA, the other major gun groups sat on their hands in the gubernatorial race. Arnhole paid them back by banning .50 BMG's.

I met Sen. McClintock at a political function, and chatted with him for about 5 minutes. We happened to leave at the same time, and we talked for another 10 minutes in the parking lot.

I'm not easily impressed. This guy is the real deal--knowledgeable, ethical and sound, a rarity in any political environment, let alone the toxic dump in Sacramento.

Why should California gun owners support him?

Here's why.

One for the Road

Fish Or Man shows us how DUI tests are designed and manipulated.

This is not necessarily gun-related, unless the resulting search finds one on you or in your car, but it dovetails with a disturbing proclivity of government agents to lie under oath or submit false evidence.

No, I'm not "for" drunk driving, but I do believe there are ways to produce more desirable outcomes than the state's approach, which is essentially "Do what we say or we'll kill you."

And I think this story is pretty funny.

BATFU Honcho: We Lie in Court

Hear it straight from the horse's mouth in this video. They not only commit perjury, they submit certifications where they know they are lying.

Via David Hardy at Arms & the Law.

Eric Larson is credited with obtaining the tape via a Freedom of Information action.

I just can't believe the agency would destroy people's lives with false information!

Viagra Falls

or Falling On Hard Times

Bob and Liddy Dole, former GOP presidential tag team contenders and proponents of the federal War on Drugs, have endorsed and admitted to regularly using a chemical substance for excitement, recreation and pleasure. The drug is Viagra, and its use is being championed by the same generation and socioeconomic clique that demands criminal penalties for those who express different preferences in pharmaceutical stimulation.

To claim that Viagra is a legally prescribed treatment for a medical condition is to miss the point, for the impaired ability to get it up is neither crippling nor life-threatening. And, because this hardship (or lack thereof) is more prevalent among seniors than among those of breeding age, it's fair to conclude that most men taking Viagra engage in sex for recreation rather than procreation.

As with many street drugs, Viagra delivers a physiological response that wears off after each use, requiring habitual dependency and chronic reapplication to restore its effects. But it does not carry the stigma associated with other recreational drugs, in no small part because Viagra junkies are high-end, "respectable" customers. Still, unlike marijuana, but similar to some of the more hard core prohibited substances, Viagra has been associated with a statistically significant increase in heart attacks and deaths among its users-many who are willing to risk the odds for just one more high.

Yet it is from this pool of artificially turgid and privileged notables that the hue and cry against unsanctioned drug use is the loudest. These, more often than not, are the same folks who would throw a cancer patient like Todd McCormick or Steve Kubby in jail for smoking pot to alleviate the ravages of their illnesses and the side effects of treatment. Or put an inner-city addict away for daring to obtain his release from an officially unapproved chemical compound.

Does the word "hypocrisy" begin to suggest itself here?

Maybe we're going the wrong way with this. Perhaps instead of pushing drug dependency in nationally televised commercials, Bob Dole should swear off the stuff, admit that he and Liddy pulled a boner in ever allowing themselves to get hooked in the first place, and encourage Americans to "just say 'no.'"

Perhaps it's time to ban Viagra. Then let's see if its users defy the law and create an underground market. Let's watch the street price soar. Let's find out if the quality of an illegal fix meets dosage and purity standards, or if seniors will be having seizures or dropping dead from black market pills cut with God-knows-what. Let's demand that something be done about the violent crime endemic to the illegal Viagra trade (maybe another gun control law?).

Let's declare a War on Viagra and appoint a federal "czar" (perhaps a reformed Mr. Dole?) to mastermind the assault against this insidious threat! Let's thrill to Ninja-clad government shock troops breaking down some WWII vet's door and, if he's lucky, only dragging the old boy off in shackles. And perhaps, once he sees his house and life savings seized without benefit of due process, and the realization sinks in that he's probably going to die in prison and leave his wife destitute and broken, the thought might dawn on him:

"How did this happen? This is supposed to be America."
------------------------------------------------------
[I wrote this a few years back. I felt it appropriate to resurrect it here. --DC]

NRA President Sandra Froman: ABC's "Person of the Week"

"'I certainly never advocated arming teachers as a national policy, and I don't advocate that now,' said Froman."

I guess that explains why the Establishment media has taken a shine to her.

Basic question for President Froman: What part of "shall not be infringed" do you and NRA management not understand?

Guess Who's Not Allowed to Own a Gun?

Hint: It's not the guy with the whip.



Did you know that the first gun control laws passed in this country were designed to keep slaves from protecting themselves? After all, you don't chain, lash or sell a person who has the power to prevent it.

After the Civil War, more laws were enacted to keep the newly- "emancipated" from owning guns. And with the wave of non-Anglo immigrations which took place thereafter, a host of additional gun control laws were passed.

Have things really changed in modern multi-cultural America? Why is it that the strictest laws preventing people from having the means to defend themselves are targeted at those communities where minority populations are greatest?

The shameful history of gun control is one of institutionalized subjugation and exploitation of the powerless by the elites. If we are truly a free nation, shouldn't we end such barbaric and racist
practices once and for all?

Image from: “The Atlantic Slave Trade and Life in the Americas”
Source: Edmund Ollier, “Cassell's History of the United States” (London, 1874-77), Vol. 2, p. 493

[Adapted from my poster that originally appeared on GunTruths.com]

French Fried Guns

Youngstown, Ohio, that bastion of official propriety with a crime rate dwarfing the national average, has decided a great way to keep weapons "off the street" is to melt them.

They took "about 2,600 guns" to V&M Tubes and loaded them into a blast furnace. Not included in the meltdown, understandably, are "2,000 still being held as evidence," but what's up with the "1000 confiscated in DRUG cases"?

I've always believed that you couldn't find a better definition of "fascism" than the catchy gov-speak phrase "public/private partnership," and am always curious about the type of capitalist eager to sell ropes to the collectivists--you know, the guys developing engine shut-off switches and "smart guns," or the ones who make their furnaces available for gun meltdowns.

So what's with V&M Tubes?

Well, for starters, they're French...

Crime Up, Down, All Around Across the Pond

It All Depends on Who's Doing the Talking

Recorded crime fell 5%

Violent crime is up 9%.

Tony Blair pledges a 15% violent crime decrease in 3 years.

Firearms crimes rose 10%.

Reported residential burglaries fell 17%. Reported vehicle thefts fell 16%.

Except the Labour Party uses a survey instead of reports, and it says crime is down 11%, and violent crime has dropped by 10%.

“The survey suggested the risk of being a victim of crime was 24%, the lowest since 1981.”

That must be why Labour has also “suggested” a “Violent Crime Reduction Bill”—and because there are no more real guns to ban, they’re going after replicas. And knives.

That ought to reduce all that crime that they say is at its lowest point in 24 years.

Except the Conservative party is saying crime has risen 15% since 1998. Isn't that the same period when many of the sweeping gun bans occurred? Let's see, Dunblane was in '96...

But Labour counters that "crime has fallen by 30% since they came to power in 1997." That must be why he wants to increase "the number of community support officers from 4,000 to 24,000 by 2008."

Enter the Liberal Democrats who "criticised the Labour pledge, saying the 15% reduction was to be measured against out of date figures, from which crime had already fallen 5% - and thus was only a pledge to cut crime by 10%."

Then there's the charge that for every officer Blair puts on the streets, he puts another 4 in offices.

Just to keep things legitimate and scientific, BBC presents us with a graph.

The red line is what people say. They don't say who the people are, where they live, how old they are, how big the survey sample is, how many were asked, what they were asked, if there were different interviews, etc. But it's clear people are saying there's more crime than the black line indicates, which are incidents actually reported to police.

But then you have to factor in the dotted vertical lines: "Change in Home Office counting rules in 1998/9" and "New crime recording standard imposed in 2002."

There's one more factor not reported in any of this. From Howard Nemerov's interview of Professor Joyce Lee Malcolm:

"The police actually under-report murder rates, because if the court reduces the sentence, the police subtract that case from murder totals. Even so, murder has risen dramatically since the gun ban went into effect."

Does anybody besides me feel like they're watching a Monty Python skit about "Accountancy" unfold?

Armed Robber Picks Wrong Victim-UPDATED

Doubts have been raised about whether this video is real. Until such time as I can verify it, I have removed it from this site.

Since When Do “Animals” Have Rights?

“In Haig's presence, Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as ‘dumb, stupid animals to be used’ as pawns for foreign policy.”
--Woodward and Bernstein The Final Days in chapter 14

While not Second Amendment-related, I’ve been asked by Leigh Wise to pass along information about how current law “denies military members and their families equal protection and justice…to seek final redress for wrongful actions taken upon them while serving.

“The shameful law is called the Feres Doctrine, named after the young Lt. Rudolph Feres, who died in a barracks fire caused by the negligence of the Army. This doctrine bars constitutional redress of wrongful acts or omissions resulting in injury or death arising from non-legitimate military necessity, purpose, or decisions,” Wise says.

As I understand it, regular courts wash their hands of such matters "in the absence of express congressional command." In other words, Catch-22.

Wise is asking people to help get this information into the public consciousness, and also to contact their senators, as well as Arlen Specter, who chairs the Judiciary Committee.

You can get more information from Veterans Equal Rights Protection Advocacy, Inc. (VERPA) .

At Least He's Consistent

"No wonder the high court has avoided a Second Amendment case...[they] have enough critics these days without taking on the gun nuts."
―James J. Kilpatrick

"The courts exist to decide cases and controversies, not to avoid them."
―James J. Kilpatrick

Stacking the Deck

David Hardy gives us an overview of the machinations behind selecting a law review panel to give you the results you want.

April 19: “Enforce Existing Gun Laws” Commemoration Day

“For years NRA has said that the best way to fight illegal gun use is to enforce the laws already on the books.” To their delight, even the Progressive Policy Institute agrees, and they apparently view that as a source of bragging rights.

In commemoration of April 19, WarOnGuns presents two historical examples of the government enforcing existing gun laws.


The government "enforcing existing gun laws."--April 19, 1775


The government "enforcing existing gun laws."--April 19, 1993

A question for Wayne LaPierre: Would you please point out the section(s) in this document delegating authority to the government to comply with your urgings?

Fellenzer Stirs Up "Controversy" at Virginia Tech

Nicki?

Controversy?

Naaaah!

In a rational world, the controversy would be that there is any controversy.

Air Liberty

The Liberty Belles have a new radio spot that will air on The Terry Anderson Show, Sunday at 9:00 PM PST. Click here for details.

Los Angeles County Lincoln Club: The New Judenrat

I just got done taking a supposedly “pro-gun” Republican to task for supporting Jim Hahn for Mayor of Los Angeles.

Enter Linda Boyd, Chairman of the Los Angeles County Republican Party, who says in an email:

“While the Republican Party of Los Angeles County is taking no official position on this race, we as leaders are very concerned about the prospect of militant left-winger Antonio Villaraigosa becoming Mayor of Los Angeles.

“This newsletter from the Los Angeles County Lincoln Clubs provides some information on the race.”

The newsletter states in part:

“In an unprecedented and historic action, the Los Angeles County Lincoln Clubs Board of Governors endorsed Democrat Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn on April 5, 2005 for reelection. The Lincoln Clubs had never previously endorsed a Democrat in their twenty-six year history.”

What, they want us to believe Hahn isn’t a “militant left-winger”? And Linda Boyd thinks denying her specific endorsement, while passing along that of a group she has close ties to, gives her plausible deniability?

As long as we continue to accept evil-based choice making, we will continue to be manipulated into surrender. Linda Boyd and the Democrat wing of the Republican party can go lead themselves. If they truly represent the leadership of the Republican party, they deserve their pathetic minority status in LA. That it’s courtesy of their “leaders’” lack of fundamental line-in-the-sand principles escapes them, I’m sure.

Hahn is an anti-gun socialist. Yeah, I know Villaraigosa is, too. But it makes no difference as far as I’m concerned. The proper response to a tyrant is defiance. We’ll never see that point reached by Linda Boyd and the cowardly house slaves of the Lincoln Club. We have NO choice in this election—Tyrant A or Tyrant B. Broken arm or broken leg. Good Lord, how could any moral person impose either one of these criminals on another human being?

Perhaps the Lincoln Club ought to change their “Board of Governors” banner header to read “Judenrat”—willing to appease at any cost, instead of leading their people in resistance.

Point to one instance in history where people have gained their freedom through base compromise and abandonment of principles. Follow this crop of capitulating losers at your peril.

Hey, Everybody! Let's Point and Laugh at Deborah Mathis!

“I belong in a special category because the gun control I propose would be total and absolute. Under my plan, the number of Americans with legal possession of guns would be reduced to a few thousand, if that.

“The truth is, I despise the guns and, increasingly, the people who defend their accessibility."

Start off your morning with a hate-filled and moronic rant. Naturally, Deborah Mathis throws the race card into the mix (if she didn't, she just wouldn't be Debbie!), blaming everyone and every thing but the responsible individuals.

Continue being a slave, you wretched woman. Oh, and molon labe. What I said to Sallie goes double for you.

Sunday Sermon

Unalienable Rights are just that.

Sons Uday and Qusay had the time of their lives creating messages at each others' expense last night.

The Church Sign Generator provides hours of mindless fun!

Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night...

Follow-up to "The Last Gun Shop"

Per Dave Polaschek:

"Stopped by KGS yesterday. They have filed an appeal with the Zoning Board of Adjustment in Minneapolis, and have an extension of their deadline until May 19, 2005, when a hearing will be held downtown. The public hearing will be at 2pm on May 19, 2005 in City Hall. Room 220CH. This buys them another month, and in that month, they’re planning to file in state court, as well."

Good for them. They're fighting for their life and won't give up or go down easy. That's essentially a microcosm of the struggle to salvage the Bill of Rights.

I do note times are tough for them financially, and they're selling mugs (hey, those ought to become collector's items). I also note their plea to get the major gun groups involved.

What, they're not? Not even with statements of support?

NRA Maintains the Tradition

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. [More]

More status quo from National Rifle Control, Inc., aka the LaPierre Center to Prevent Gun Violence:

"Shortly after the Minnesota school shootings, [NRA president-elect Sandra Froman] said, '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.'

"NRA Chief Executive Officer Wayne LaPierre clarified the following week that the NRA is not advocating arming teachers and supports the federal law that bars most guns from schools.

"On Tuesday, Froman seemed to retreat from her initial comments.

"'The only people that ought to have firearms in the schools are law enforcement and trained security personnel,' she said."

Well, we knew that was coming.

Coincidence? We Don't Think So.

On Wednesday, I posted "Hysteria on the Homefront."

Within two days, and to their credit, Science & Spirit deleted the sentence about "child" gun deaths.

Special thanks to my buddy and specialized headgear joint venture partner (sorry, it's an inside joke and I ain't sharing it) Uncle Tom for engineering that outcome by forwarding the War On Guns link along with some relevant CDC stats to the S&S editor.

Hardyville Taxes the Taxman

Claire Wolfe treats us to another masterpiece. As with all consummate pros, her style makes the painstaking labor, skill and training needed to produce such compositions seem effortless.

In a rational world, genius would be rewarded with widespread patronage.

Tribune Co. to Show Circ Losses; 'L.A. Times' Down More than 5.5%

The civilian disarmament propagandists at The Los Angeles Times are losing readers.

Awwwww.

To The Men Of England

Percy Bysse Shelley had the timeless nature of government and governed pegged:

The seed ye sow another reaps;
The wealth ye find another keeps;
The robes ye weave another wears;
The arms ye forge another bears.

Sow seed, -- but let no tyrant reap;
Find wealth, -- let no imposter heap;
Weave robes, -- let not the idle wear;
Forge arms, in your defence to bear.

It may be too late for the men of England. Is it too late for us?

Read the complete poem here.

"O, what a tangled web we weave...

...when first we practise to deceive!" (Walter Scott)

From Frederick P. Blume, Jr.:

"Follow this link, let the applet load, and see the connections. This is an incredible job of connecting - with neural netware - the various groups that are working in concert to undo the United States of America. The folks at DISCOVERTHENETWORK.ORG have done a spectacular job and you should see what they've done."

The Fruits of "Pragmatism"

Self-Proclaimed "Pro-Gun" Candidate Endorses Gun Grabber

Walter Moore ran for mayor of Los Angeles. Among his claims in an email to me: “I fully support our Second Amendment rights.”

He even addressed the Westside NRA Members’ Council to recruit gun owner support. I’ve spoken to some members who gave it.

I didn’t involve myself with his campaign because Moore refused to go on record answering specific questions about how he would support the right to keep and bear arms.

“Publicizing my stand on the Second Amendment to people who hate guns before the election would be counter-productive,” he told me. “It's fine for people WITHIN the Second Amendment community to know my stand, but if we start trumpeting it to the world, well, we risk losing a lot of votes unnecessarily.”

I pressed him on that, and his reply was “I've stated my position. Anyone who disagrees with my position can instead vote for one of the liberal Democrats against whom I'm running.”

Mr. Moore’s strategy of hiding from his claimed principles in order to glean votes resulted in a sixth-place finish, with 2.8 % of the vote.

And now, Mr. Moore, who had a problem “publicizing [his] stand on the Second Amendment” has no problem publicizing his support for a gun-grabbing rival.

The Los Angeles Times reports “Walter Moore, a Republican lawyer from Westchester…endorsed [incumbent mayor James] Hahn.”

That’s the same James Hahn who, according to The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence joined other big city mayors and “called on the Senate not to support legislation to give gunmakers, distributors and vendors immunity from civil liability.”

“As the city’s chief prosecutor,” Hahn’s website advertises, “he used innovative approaches to curbing gang violence, sued gun manufacturers to stop the illegal distribution of guns…”

In his Candidate Statement, Hahn brags that he “Joined members of the Million Mom March and other local organizations in calling for the renewal of the federal assault weapons ban. As City Attorney, Hahn wrote the law banning assault weapons in Los Angeles, the first major city in California to do so,” and “Signed into law an ordinance that prohibits the sale or transfer of large caliber handguns and rifles in the city."

I'm sure Mr. Moore will have plenty of justifications for voting "for one of the liberal Democrats against whom [he was] running." And we can all see how well his political "pragmatism" works to advance and secure freedom.

"Jim Hahn is straight with you," Moore told The Times, "and he follows through on what he says he's going to do."

Yeah, we know.

If you’re a gun owner who supported Walter Moore, this is what you got for your time, money and efforts. This is what you'll always get when a candidate won't proudly champion all of the Bill of Rights and makes excuses to avoid doing so.

At Least They're Consistent

Sarah Brady complained about state preemption legislation in Kansas, calling it the “No Local Rights bill.”

“[W]e should all agree that in a democracy,” she commands, “the people of a local community should be able to take the appropriate steps to ensure their safety locally. That's what democracy is all about. To pass this wrong headed language into law is contrary to democracy.”

Meanwhile, fellow gun grabber California Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg is backing state legislation to ban public school sports teams from using the name “Redskins.” Why the need for action from Sacramento?

“If local control were to govern civil rights," Goldberg said, "there would be none.”

What Do You Call a Cop Who Points a Gun at His Own Head?

Reinstated.

I'm sure glad the bill was passed so guys like this can legally carry a concealed firearm in 50 states and us ordinary citizens can't. I mean, we all know LEOs are more "professional" than you and me.

Hysteria on the Homefront

[Scroll to “Hatred on the Homefront,” toward bottom of page.]

“Each day in the United States,” Heather Cunnigham states authoritatively, “10 children are murdered, 16 die from guns, and 8,042 are reported abused or neglected.”

“16,” Heather? The gungrabbers used to say “13.” I guess they’ve updated their stats since the FBI released their Uniform Crime Statistics in 1997.

Have they also updated their statistics so they don’t—depending on the source—include “children” from 19 to 24 engaging in criminal gang activities?

(See Guy Smith’s excellent online resource, Gun Facts, “Myth 13”.)

Shot Grouping

The Liberty Belles tell us “How to Start a Shooting Group.”

The Last Gun Shop

Coming Soon to a City Near You

Per Dave Polaschek, "The last gun shop in Minneapolis is about to be shut down (deadline April 18th)."

So much for being "paranoid" about the "slippery slope."

Lynch Mob, Anyone?

Statement of Sarah Brady on Kansas Legislation
(Translated from the original German)

Sarah thinks local communities should be able to violate unalienable rights because the majority rules, and “that’s what democracy is all about.”

"The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope"

In re "Slip Slidin' Away," correspondent Randy Hudson calls my attention to an authoritative paper by Eugene Volokh, available as a .pdf file or in html.

Dear NRA: Not With My Money

[To avoid site registration use BugMeNot Userid: bob@jonessmith.com and BugMeNot password: Bug2not]

“The ‘survey’ consisted of one question: Do you think that the nation needs additional gun control laws, or should we just enforce the laws already on the books?”

Typical. It hasn’t seemed to dawn on most NRA contributors that enforcing existing gun laws is what the government was doing at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I won’t help Fairfax perpetuate NRA Management-endorsed gun control with my money, either.

"Guns Aren't an Issue"

Howard Dean, on crafting a national Democrat party platform:

“I was a governor who was endorsed every year by the National Rifle Association."

“Guns, Dean predicted, would never come up - either pro or con - in his 50-state survey of what the Democratic message should be.

“‘Guns aren't an issue,’ he said. ‘If Philadelphia wants gun control, fine. If Alabama doesn't, also fine.’"

So I guess rights aren’t unalienable. I guess the right of the people to keep and bear arms can be infringed, and the Constitution is not the “supreme law of the land.”

How about this, Howard?

“Slavery isn’t an issue,” he said. “If Philadelphia wants slavery, fine. If Alabama doesn’t, also fine.”

But in a way, you’re right, Howard. Guns aren’t an issue. It’s not about guns. It never really has been.

Stated more accurately, freedom isn’t an issue.

Slip Slidin' Away

Leaders in the civilian disarmament movement ridicule the notion that gun control laws are intended to result in, uh, civilian disarmament. There is no "slippery slope," they say, and suggestions to the contrary are unfounded.

"THE FEDERAL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN IS JUST THE FIRST STEP ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO BAN ALL GUNS IN AMERICA

"Response: Wrong. There is no hidden agenda behind saving the Federal Assault Weapons Act."--The Brady Campaign

"Fearful of becoming enmeshed in the gun lobby's 'slippery slope' argument (that any gun control, no matter how limited, is the first step toward total gun confiscation), many actively voiced their opposition to a handgun ban, warning that ban proponents would marginalize the entire movement. They could offer no proof of this claim—yet the argument took hold."--Ban Handguns Now

"In this debate, it is the National Rifle Assn. that is the true purveyor of fiction. In its paranoid world, any measure to make you safer is the first step on the slippery slope to taking away its members' rights."--Richard North Patterson at Common Dreams

In other words, the "slippery slope" argument is a myth. There is no hidden agenda. There is no proof that success in some gun control measures leads to other attempts at restrictions. The whole argument is a fiction. If you believe in it, you're living in a paranoid world where you think people are trying to take away your rights.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Just ignore the quotes Gun Scholar has compiled, or a similar collection posted by my favorite gun control organization.

Very seldom is a debate won by calling names, and if I just called the gun banners liars, I wouldn't expect it to be persuasive. So I won't.

I'll call them demonstrable liars.

But don't take my word for it. Take theirs. Follow the links and prove it yourself.

Microstamping...What is it?

Sam Parades of Gun Owners of California weighs in.

Also see:

Microstamping for Macroinfringement

Microstamping-An Alternative View

AB352 is pro-forensic, not anti-gun.

I Got Them Black Robe Blues

"Worried after recent attacks, federal judges on Wednesday urged Congress to provide more protection, including $12 million for security systems in most of their homes.

"'Unfortunately, at the present time federal judges across the country are feeling particularly vulnerable, not only for themselves, but also for their families,' said a letter from the Judicial Conference of the United States..."

Federal Judges feeling insecure?

Gee, I wonder why.

Seegars v Gonzalez: Petition for Rehearing

You need to stop what you're doing and go read Matthew's report.

To those who fear a Supreme Court Second Amendment ruling against an individual right, I say it's past time for the courts to tell us exactly where we stand--no more of this pretending we have some sort of "legal" chance, which only allows politicians and lobbyists to manipulate us.

If the bastards are going to say we have no right, I want to know so I can expend my energies on strategies that have a better chance of working.

SCOTUS, of course, has been ducking this issue for a long time. They'll probably take the path of least resistance again, and refuse to hear such cases. However, if they accept either Seegars or Parker, I believe the court will not dare say there is no individual rkba. But if they find there is one, it will be so heavily burdened with "reasonable restrictions" as to ensure the status quo. They'll never admit the truth unless someone, that would be us, has enough power to compel them.

Security Counter Measures Needed?

As I've explained before, my grasp of post-Jurassic technology is weak at best, so forgive me if the following is a non-issue.

A month ago, I added a site meter to this blog. I've recently noticed when a referring link comes from another blog's site meter, it allows me into their stats--and then lets me move around within, to see things like their daily averages, where people come to their sites from, etc.

Is this normal? I would have thought this would be considered intrusive.

If it's a glitch, I'd think the respective site meter providers would want to know. If it's just normal, and all of you who have progressed beyond the Stone Age know all about it, in the words of Rosanna Rosanadanna, "Never mind."

Is there some setting I (and apparently others, and some of the blogs I'm getting into seem to be pretty sophisticated) should know about to prevent this from happening?

I guess what I don't understand is why do I need a front-end userid and password if just anyone with a stat counter can saunter in through the back door?

Educational feedback would be appreciated.

WTF?

Acronym Finder can help you define all those pesky acronyms.

Well, almost all:

"Sorry, BATFU was not found in the database."

Would You Like a Regular Burger or a Whopper?

I found this old quote on the website of my favorite gun control organization. It's a good reminder for those of us who remember it, and a good illustration for those who haven't seen it before, of the mindset we face with many in the judiciary, including the Supreme Court:

"If I were writing the Bill of Rights now there wouldn't be any such thing as the Second Amendment... This has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word 'fraud', on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies - the militia - would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires."
- Warren Burger, former U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice, Parade Magazine, 1/14/90

"Guns That Killed Presidents"

Now there’s a headline that’s sure to interest Homeland Security’s electronic surveillance spooks.

GUNS Magazine is celebrating its 50th anniversary by making its first issues available as free .pdf downloads. They post each mag for the month it corresponds with. The April 1955 issue is now online.

Ginsburg's Judicial Jihad

It’s scary enough that “Justice [Darth Vader] Ginsburg of the Supreme Court embraced the practice of consulting foreign legal decisions on Friday, rejecting the argument from conservatives that United States law should not take international thinking into account.”

A lot of people are jumping on that, and rightfully so.

But the most disturbing statement she made seems to have been overshadowed in all the “international law” hoopla”: "The notion that it is improper to look beyond the borders of the United States in grappling with hard questions has a certain kinship to the view that the U.S. Constitution is a document essentially frozen in time as of the date of its ratification."

In other words, she is of the mind that we have a “living Constitution,” with all that that implies.

As Walter Williams instructs us, “Many law professors, and others who hold contempt for our Constitution, preach that the Constitution is a living document. Saying that the Constitution is a living document is the same as saying we don't have a Constitution. For rules to mean anything, they must be fixed. How many people would like to play me poker and have the rules be ‘living’? Depending on ‘evolving standards,’ maybe my two pair could beat your flush.”

Another disturbing factoid: "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ...described Justice Ginsberg as 'a great and good friend.'"

Ear of the Beholder: Episode Two

My kid sister reminds me of another mondegreen from days gone by:

Sly and the Family Stone’s “It’s a Family of Hair.”

In the Ear of the Beholder

FreedomSight points us to a website for mis-heard lyrics.

I haven't thought about this in years, but back when Evita came out, the TV commercial had her on the balcony singing "Don't cry for me Argentina," with Che responding "You were supposed to have been immortal..."

A woman at work was singing "You were supposed to have been in Baltimore."

Close Your Books, Please, We're Going to Have a Pop Quiz

Dan Baron of The Northwest Indiana Times has created a multiple choice quiz designed to further spook the flock into fearing an armed citizenry.

I wonder how Dan would do on this quiz?
_______________________________________

TEST YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF GUN CONTROL:

"No One But the Authorities Should Have Assault Weapons"

If these people had assault weapons, they would probably (check all that apply):

___ rob liquor stores
___ engage in drive-by shootings
___ leave them lying around where their kids could find them
___ blow away motorists during traffic disputes
___ go on schoolyard rampages
___ accidentally kill friends and family members
___ none of the above

Might there be a moral, historically justified need for "non-sporting" arms in the hands of "average citizens?" The next time someone tells you we need to ban "assault weapons," ask them to take this test. Why not send a copy of it to the politicians who represent you and see how they answer?

[Adapted from my poster that originally appeared on GunTruths.com]

Find-A-Human

QuickBase lets us speak to a real hooded minion of the soulless machine with their IVR Phone System Shortcuts.

"He's coming to the closet! He's coming to the closet! He's coming to the closet!"

The Smallest Minority presents a chilling real-life account of how dialing 911 and not being equipped and prepared to defend yourself results in tragedy.

He Walks the Night...

...He hungers. And he's coming for you!

So what's the solution? The typical politician might try making it illegal to carry a crucifix without a permit. We could also force everyone to wait 5 days and go through a background check before allowing them to buy a wooden stake. Or how about passing a law restricting people to one vial of holy water a month? If that doesn't work, we can come up with an arbitrary list of mallet features and ban those which don't comply. And just for good measure, let's require everyone buying garlic to register their purchase and leave a thumbprint. If this seems unreal to you, if you can think of no good reason to give the creatures of the night an advantage over their victims, then congratulations! You've just exposed the dark myth of gun control to the light of reason. Isn't it time we drove a stake through the heart of the gun control argument--for good?

[Adapted from my poster that originally appeared on GunTruths.com]

"Is the Joyce Foundation at it again?"

"Just saw a note that the Fordham Univ. Law Review is coming out with a symposium issue on the Second Amendment -- strangely, without a single recognizable pro-individual rights author (and almost without recognizable authors at all).

"Aha, thought I -- is the Joyce Foundation at it again? Sure enough, a Google quickly turned this up: 'The papers and commentaries presented at the conference will be published in the Fordham Law Review in Fall 2004. The conference was funded by a generous grant from The Joyce Foundation.'"

David Hardy's new weblog "Of Arms & the Law" offers some of the most intelligent and insightful commentary to be found--it should become a "must read" for serious 2A activists.

The site also lists Dave Kopel as a "Major Contributor," but so far, it seems pure Hardy.

“AB352 is pro-forensic, not anti-gun.”

Our anonymous comment poster in “Microstamping-An Alternative View” does not believe Assemblyman Paul Koretz’s AB352, requiring semiautomatic handguns to emply microstamp identifiers is a “gun control” measure.

Remember, according to the bill’s language, “This bill would…expand the definition of unsafe handgun to include semiautomatic pistols that are not [so] designed and equipped…”

Gun owners have particular reason to concern themselves with any firearm-related bills proposed by Mr. Koretz. From his biography:

“While on the [West Hollywood] City Council, Koretz played a key role on many high profile issues, foremost among them gun control issues. In 1988, Paul sponsored a ban on military-style assault weapons, which built momentum for a subsequent statewide ban. In 1996, Koretz co-sponsored the City's ban on ‘Saturday Night Specials.’ West Hollywood was the first city to enact such a ban, which survived various legal assaults by the NRA. Koretz also sponsored an ordinance limiting handgun purchases to one gun per month, to cut the resale of guns on the black market.”

Let’s examine his “Saturday Night Special” ban. Here was his reasoning behind it:

“Because the inferior quality of the alloys these parts are made of, the gun cannot reliably contain its own ballistic power. This means they are chambered to fire high pressure ammunition without the reliable ability to contain the pressures generated by the force of a bullet leaving the gun's chamber and barrel.”

Furthermore, that bill deemed that “as a result of inferior craftsmanship, Saturday Night Specials are not sufficiently accurate or reliable...as a...means of personal protection...they are not well suited for this purpose."

I took exception to that claim a few years back, but the bottom line is, Mr. Koretz has a history of banning guns he deems “unsafe.”

Now he wants to codify into state law the claim that semiauto handguns that don’t employ microstamping are “unsafe.”

And we’re supposed to give credence to the anonymous comment that “AB352 [which will ban the sale of all semiauto handguns in the state of California that Mr. Koretz & Co. claim are 'unsafe'] is pro-forensic, not anti-gun.”

Microstamping-An Alternative View

Here's somebody who thinks microstamping is a good idea:

Anonymous said...
Microstamping technology gave the forensic community something to counter the disasterous ballistic RBID idea. Dr. Tuelleners of CA DOJ was the catalyst on killing ballistic imaging. He also countered with the idea that ballistic id tagging, the technology called microstamping as an alternative. This wedge issue saved 100's thousands of legal firearms owners from being logged into a criminal database. The reason it did this, was that the anti-gun movement who wanted an RBID system, ie firearm registration, had to defend ballistic imaging. In essence Dr. Tuellenes got the anti-gun industry to shine a light on the technology, which led to testing of the ballistic imaging technology and reviews of its effectiveness.

As for the effectiveness of microstamping, it will provide the forensic community a good tool to plot and track illegal trafficing of firearms. Since the technology creates a code, it makes it easier to share between state and federal law enforcement. There is no need for chain of custody issues, since they are sharing codes, not physical evidence.

By identifying the firearms make, model and date of manufacture, the forensic experts can determine hot spots for trafficing and identify those sources. Straw purchases are a big issue and the forensic community needs new tools. As for impact to the industry, insignificant in comparison to ballistic imaging which costs as follows:(Maryland Gun Owner $20.00/gun, State cost:~$30.00/gun to input into IBIS (tax payer cost). NY is more expensive.

The cost of Ballistic ID Tagging is between $8.00 and $0.50, for custom firearms manufacturers and high volume manufacturers respectively, this range is due to access to the equipment and volume of firearms produced. There are 8 shops in the country that can provide the service.

AB352 is pro-forensic, not anti-gun.

Zero Tolerance Insanity and Corruption

A young man gets thrown in the slammer and booted out of the government indoctrination kamp for a drawing he made two years earlier. His kid brother found the sketchbook in the closet, and another kid on the schoolbus reported the "offending" picture.

As outrageous and ludicrous as that is, another story involves the black robe who agreed with this madness every step of the way.

This is not the first time that U.S. District Judge Frank J. Polozola , who determined the drawing constituted a threat, has been noted to exhibit paranoia.

A year ago, he "took control of an accident case involving his car and issued an order transferring evidence about his medical condition to a sealed federal court file."

Another case he ruled on was challenged "because the judge admitted in his accident suit to being impaired and to using Oxy-Contin, a pain medication, in that period.

"In the accident case, filed in 1998, Judge Polozola, 62, sought compensation for a 'serious physical injury' that caused him mental anguish and "impairment of function." In the trial in 2000, [lawyers] wrote in filings, the judge engaged in 'erratic, even paranoid' behavior. The accident case was settled in 2001, and testimony from the judge, his psychiatrist and his psychologist was sealed."

When it looked like those records might be unsealed, "Judge Polozola ordered the evidence in his accident case transferred to federal court and sealed," and get this, it was done at the request of federal prosecutors "to avoid 'irreparable injury to a national interest.'"

These are the people who impose "Zero Tolerance" on a supposedly free people--and expect us to tolerate it.

I'd Like to Thank the Academy...

WarOnGuns wins an award of sorts from FishOrMan.

Gun Control's Best Friend

"The slaughter, rape and torment of the citizens of Darfur would end if humanitarian aid included guns."--Dimitri Vassilaros

Read and share this compelling article.

As the good folks at JPFO have been trying to tell everyone, "gun control" enables genocide.

I learned about the Vassilaros piece from Alphecca.

Sarah, Jane ‘n Me

Or How I Almost Got Arrested For Trying to Ask a Question

[This originally appeared in a newsletter I was producing for the Westside Los Angeles NRA Members Council, 2nd Amendment West, Vol. 5, No.4, September/October 1996. I'm dusting it off because it's never appeared on the internet, the example of imperial arrogance it illustrates still holds true, and because the question of just who has the authority to declare someone a "journalist" is still being usurped.]

HARMAN AND BRADY STIFLE FREE SPEECH AT "PRESS CONFERENCE"

Shamelessly exploiting the memorial site of slain Manhattan Beach police officer Martin Ganz, Congresswoman Jane Harman and Handgun Control, Inc.'s Sarah Brady staged a "rally" on Sept. 5 to malign gun owners and to spread further distortions about your right to keep and bear arms.

Ostensibly held to announce Ms. Brady's support of Ms. Harman, the event quickly degenerated into a blatant propaganda festival, replete with a mock check from the NRA to Harman's opponent, Susan Brooks, and a display table full of "assault weapons." Both Jane and Sarah then went on to speak out against gun rights by decrying the need for hunters to use "weapons of war" (!), by somehow holding us responsible for the criminal actions of, er, criminals, and by trumpeting the absurd claim that the Brady Act has stopped over 100,000 felons from purchasing guns.

Fortunately, pro-gunners from the South Bay and Westside got wind of the event, and showed up in substantial numbers to protest both the anti-gun rights lies being promulgated, as well as Rep. Harman's abysmal attendance record (she has the worst in the California delegation, being "AWOL" from her duties about one day out of ten- imagine what your boss would do if you had an absenteeism rate of 10%).

Not content to repeal the Second Amendment, Ms. Harman and Ms. Brady also tried to squelch that pesky First, by not allowing questions from the crowd. That's right, public figures holding a public forum on public property would not entertain the concerns of the public! They would only take questions from the "media," and if we had any private concerns, they would have to be asked afterwards, one-on-one (i.e., out of earshot of the crowd, to avoid public exposure of their falsehoods). And knowing the media's antagonism to our rights, we're supposed to trust their objectivity?

I attempted to ask a question anyway, challenging Ms. Brady to disclose the author of the study resulting in the claim that 100,000 felons have been denied guns due to the Brady Law, to reveal the source of her data, the statistical methods used to collect and tabulate the data, and to publish the study and its conclusions in their entirety for peer scrutiny.

An unidentified man in a suit approached me from a group of Jane-and-Sarah-loving law enforcement honchos, and opined that what I was doing was "not free speech."(!!) He told me that questions were reserved for the press.

I responded that I was editor of this modest journal. He told me I did not have "legitimate credentials."

I countered (loudly, so that I would have witnesses) that I was not aware that I needed a permit to exercise my First Amendment rights under the Constitution, and challenged him to cite the law requiring a citizen to get permission to ask a question at a public event.

Seeing that his attempt at intimidation had failed, he turned around and walked back to the cadre of police officials he had emerged from. Still, I could not help feeling that his tactics were worthy of the KGB, and probably portend the shape of things to come if those who love control more than liberty prevail.

Refreshingly, challenger Susan Brooks held a press conference of her own following the Harman/Brady travesty, but one with two distinctive differences; anyone there was welcome to ask any question they wanted to, and (surprise!) the tv cameras somehow didn't make it to the Brooks event. It would seem the "credentialed" media, like my unidentified friend, aren't really very interested in presenting both sides of the issues. Surprise, indeed.

BREAKING NEWS: Feinstein Arrested After Gun Mishap

Senator Injures Multiple Constituents in Accidental Discharge--Reportedly Challenges Marshals: "Do You Know Who I Am?"

"WASHINGTON (DC)- Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) has been charged with negligent discharge of a firearm after wounding 3 constituents in a town hall meeting Thursday evening. The Senator was displaying an assault weapon to argue for a renewed federal ban when the weapon suddenly went off.

"Agents of the US Marshal's Service forcibly rushed a distraught and screaming Senator from the auditorium.

"'If this can happen to an experienced gun handler like Senator Feinstein,' an unidentified aide told the crowd, 'it shows the need for heightened legislation.'"

Read complete story.