So Sue Me

David Codrea, you're supposed to be a journalist. Aren't you interested in the facts? AHSA has not recieved [sic] any money nor have we requested any money from the Joyce Foundation. Moreover, we have not taken any money from anyone who recieves [sic] money from Joyce. Seems I was wrong back in 1999 when I was quoted in the Washington Post- since then several bad actors within the gun industry have settled. Bushmaster to name one of several. Also, NAACP did not sue for money and I was just a witness in the case and had no stake in the outcome. Get your facts straight next time. Posted by: Bob Ricker at November 2, 2006 12:59 PM [More]

Where to begin...? Bob (assuming it's really you)...may I call you "Judas"? I never said word one about the Joyce Foundation--I merely took advantage of an opportunity on a forum discussing it to publicly tell you what contempt I hold you in. By the way, where does AHSA get its major funding from? And I also never went into what the NAACP was going after in their failed lawsuit, nor your financial relationship with them--It's you and your BATFU buddies at Crime Gun Solutions who say you are "retained in a myriad of litigation cases - for individuals, institutions, and governments." And I love the way you explain switching sides: "Seems I was wrong." Yeah, it seems. We're to believe you had no information on the "bad actors" while you were "acting" in a position of privilege and counsel to them, with access to inside information and records. It's only after you left and stopped getting compensated by them (and switched "allegiances") that it all became clear to you! And just because you cite the Bushmaster settlement doesn't mean they actually did anything "bad." Trying a little sleight of mind on us with your "bad acting" here, Bob? The decision was financial, and damn it, you know it:

In explaining its decision to settle, Bushmaster said half of its policy limits had already been spent on defending the legal case, and the insurance company believed defending the case would exhaust the money available for coverage. "The balance of the insurance policy not spent on legal fees, approximately $550,000, will go to the victims' families for their grief," said the company's chairman, Richard E. Dyke. "Bushmaster strongly believes and vigorously supports the rights of citizens to own and use firearms, and the settlement of this case in no way compromises that stand," the company said in its release. "The Brady Group's . . . attempt to eliminate gun rights of citizens has failed legislatively and will continue to fail with these frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers." But with the decision costing the company's insurer $1 million, insurers could pressure Bushmaster and other gun manufacturers to make changes.

As for getting my "facts straight", Jud...uh...Bob, In addition to the post you're responding to, I've written about you and/or your AHSA or CGS cronies here here here here and here and probably elsewhere if I had the time to look, but you should have a clear picture by now of the contempt and disgust I have for you. So I stipulate malicious feelings. If I combine this with defamatory, intentional lies about you, it would seem a hotshot lawyer like you would have a pretty good libel case against me. Go for it, Bob. Put your money where your mouth is. For you to lecture anyone on "facts" is laughable on its face. Let's dance. [Thanks to SayUncle for the heads up]

We're the Only Ones Calling All Cars Enough

Police say a man is on the run with an official Wyoming car, guns and ammunition...Police departments in Colorado have been told to watch for the unmarked vehicle.

You'll recognize it by its distinct lack of markings.

[More from "The Only Ones" files...]

[Via Cousin G]

Give Me Your Guns--It's the Law!

Students wanting to keep a gun on campus must have it stored and tagged at the OSU police department to avoid a citation.

Yeah, I'll remember that, Lt. Shearer.

And you can guarantee all campus predators will register and store theirs, right?

[Via Cousin G]

"Quote of the Day"

Thank you, Cryptic Subterranean. But in all honesty, this is nowhere near as interesting as the Wonder Woman picture.

We're the Only Ones Under Indictment Enough

The investigation that exposed an allegedly corrupt Virginia sheriff's department began with a package containing vials of a date-rape drug...

The result was a 48-count indictment unsealed Thursday with the arrests of longtime Sheriff Harold Franklin Cassell and 17 others. A dozen of them wore or had worn the uniform of the Henry County Sheriff's Office.

Some of them are accused of stealing cocaine, marijuana and weapons from suspects and the sheriff's evidence property room and selling the contraband to criminals, who put it back on the street.

Others are accused of distributing steroids and weapons, including a machine gun with an obliterated serial number.

"These were drugs and guns that were seized as part of their law enforcement duties that were then stolen from the property room and put back out on the streets," U.S. Attorney John L. Brownlee said.

What can I possibly add to this?

[More from "The Only Ones" files...]

This Day in History: November 3

On this day in 1777, General George Washington is informed that a conspiracy is afoot to discredit him with Congress and have him replaced by General Horatio Gates. Thomas Conway, who would be made inspector general of the United States less than two months later on December 14, led the effort.

Shameless Plug: Blast from the Past

I’ll bet most of you didn’t realize you could get two issues of GUNS Magazine each month instead of one—and it won’t cost you a penny more. That’s twice the issues, twice the articles…

What’s the catch? There are two, actually. First, you’ll need an internet-connected computer. Oh, and the second issue you’ll be reading is 50 years old.

Every month this magazine presents on its website a complete issue from the corresponding month of half a century ago. It’s like opening a time capsule...

I just got done blogging about their newest post earlier this morning. "Blast from the Past" is my Rights Watch article for the December 2006 (Lord, already?) issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale now at heritage-treasuring newsstands throughout the Republic.

BONUS: See page 98 to find out how you can win a Robarized Colt 1911 .45 Super.

Guns in Schools

Ultimately, “a school is no place for a gun,” he concluded.

The author was Columbine killer Eric Harris, who chose “Guns in Schools” for his report topic. It’s not hard to see why he would favor “gun-free school zones”...

Inexplicably, agreeing with the Harris position, was NRA’s Wayne LaPierre, who addressed the 1999 members’ meeting in Denver proclaiming “[W]e believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America’s schools, period ... with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.”

"Guns in Schools," my Rights Watch column for the November 2006 issue of GUNS Magazine is now online. I hope everyone realizes it's not every national gun magazine editor who would allow me to speak so candidly in their publication...

Letters from "Cousin G"

That's the handle from one of WarOnGuns' newest and most prolific gun news link submitters--he's sent me a lot of stuff in the past few days, but my preoccupation with getting out my own projects has kept me from posting them.

In the interest of not having all his fine scouting work go to waste, I'm presenting his links here, along with his comments:

Because all of the other laws targetting illegal guns in New York simply weren't effective enough...

Be careful what you try to give away...

Another potential school shooting thwarted by alert Principal...

New Jersey Professor repeats same tired lies...

Minesota Student Association Casts Vote for Defenselessness...

Mayor Gets Tough On Guns; Subjects Experience Market Forces...

I can already guess who will get permission, and who will be denied...

Thanks to all of you who send me links. Please be understanding if I can't always get to them.

UPDATE: Cousin G--just had time to look at these--I disagree with your assessment about the principal--time was, a boy having a gun at school was no big deal, and the story says there's no indication he meant any harm. Also deleted one non-working link.--DC

GUNS Magazine, November 1956

• How could you not want to read about "Hunting Elephants With a Deer Rifle"?
• 50 years ago, there was the speculation "Is the Bolt Action Obsolete?"
• And my favorite article in this issue is by the legendary Elmer Keith, who shows it was once possible to have fun with a .50 caliber rifle in California in "Biggest Hunting Rifle Ever Made." They didn't even shoot down any airliners.
• Plus, as always, enjoy the classic ads (and classic prices) of the period.
  

The November 1956 issue of GUNS Magazine is now online.

This Day in History: November 2

The History Channel link is down (again), but I did find a link telling us Daniel Boone was born on this day in 1734.

Topinka: "I Don't Support Concealed-Carry. Period."

Yet Another "A"-Rated NRA Endorsed Candidate Betrays Gun Owners

From the NRA Political Victory Fund website:



From the Chicago Tribune:

But Blagojevich's campaign on Tuesday also used claims made in a Downstate gun-rights newsletter to claim Topinka supports allowing citizens to carry concealed firearms.

In a recent issue of the Gun News, a group member reported that Topinka had said in a conversation that she would sign a concealed-carry bill "as soon as the legislature could get it to her desk."

Campaigning in the southwest suburbs, Topinka said she was opposed to so-called concealed-carry laws and was shocked by the governor's allegation. But when asked if she would veto a concealed-carry bill if it passed the legislature, she said she "probably would, yes."

Later, she said, she was adamantly opposed to concealed-carry laws.

"I don't support concealed-carry. Period," she said.

Why does this not surprise me?

[Via HZ]

The Fix is In: Ron Paul Must Go

NRA has given democrat challenger Shane Sklar a higher rating than Rep. Ron Paul in the congressional race for Texas' 14th District.

Why? What are Sklar's convictions on gun rights? From his website:

NRA: "A" RATED
September 29th, 2006
SKLAR IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE IN TX-14 TO RECEIVE THE NRA'S "A" RATING.
PAUL GETS ONLY A "B."

VICTORIA, TX -- The National Rifle Association-Political Victory Fund (NRA-PVF) announced today that Shane Sklar, Democratic candidate for Congress (TX-14), has received an "A" Rating, while Republican Ron Paul received a "B."

"I am honored to receive this designation," said Sklar. "I grew up hunting with my family and intend to pass down those traditions to my children. As a member of the National Rifle Association, I'm proud that the NRA has recognized that I will stand for our values in Congress."

According to the NRA-PVF, an "A" rating indicates a "solidly pro-gun candidate" who "has expressed strong support for NRA positions on second amendment issues."

"I will not support any new gun laws," said Sklar. "We have more than enough laws on the books to pursue criminals who obtain guns for illegitimate purposes. We should enforce the laws we have."

Incumbent Rep. Ron Paul's "B" rating indicates past votes for restrictive legislation.

Great. His pro-Second Amendment platform is “enforce existing gun laws.” That and he’s a “sportsman.” One endorsed by, from among a laundry list of left-leaning political powerhouses, the Teamsters, the AFL-CIO, the National Education Association...

What Sklar is about is revealed in this claim:

Our current congressman’s record is one of rhetoric, not results. Many of his views about government and Texas are dramatically out of the mainstream and fly in the face of what most of us believe.

Translation: Vote for me and I'll bring home the pork.

And here's another translation Sklar probably never intended to have made: He's squeezing that A-rating for all its worth, hoping gun-owning constituents will construe it as an NRA endorsement--but NRA isn't on the above-linked endorsement page, is it? If you look at the PVF Endorsements, you'll see Sklar's name is not highlighted. And if you go to the last page of the brochure, in the bottom of the "What the Ratings Mean" column, you'll find: NAMES IN BOLD ARE CANDIDATES ENDORSED BY THE NRA-PVF.

But Sklar is counting on most gun owners not making that distinction.

So what's going on? After all, Dr. Paul is arguably the best friend Second Amendment supporters have in Congress. Rather than "enforcing existing gun laws," he is one of the exceptional few working to repeal them:

"Ron Paul has introduced bills to wipe out most federal gun-control laws. It is pretty hard to get more pro-gun than Ron Paul," Pratt said, a position Paul made clear in his House statement.

"I rise today as a firm believer in the Second Amendment and an opponent of all federal gun laws," Paul told lawmakers. "In fact, I have introduced legislation, the Second Amendment Restoration Act (H.R. 153), which repeals misguided federal gun-control laws such as the Brady Bill and the assault-weapons ban. I believe the Second Amendment is one of the foundations of our constitutional liberties."

Gun Owners of America has given Dr. Paul an "A+" rating: "A+ Pro-Gun Leader: introduces pro-gun legislation."

So what's the reason NRA considers Shane Sklar a more ratings-worthy candidate than Ron Paul? It's because Paul did not support the bill to exempt gun manufacturers from lawsuits:

As Paul explained in a 2003 speech, he is unambiguously opposed to lawsuits that demand compensation from the firearms industry for the damage caused by gun crimes. But he concluded that federal preemption of such suits cannot be reconciled with the Constitution's limits on congressional power, which leave the writing of tort law to the states.

Paul seems to be the only member of Congress who took this position on the bill, which President Bush signed into law on Wednesday, Oct. 26. In fact, it's so rare for legislators to draw a distinction between their personal policy preferences and their constitutional responsibilities that Paul's stand must seem quaint, if not downright puzzling, to most Americans.

Candidly, I could argue with Rep. Paul on this point, as the lawsuits seem clearly designed to infringe on the Second Amendment. I'd be interested in seeing the point-counterpoint of such a debate, but now is not the time with the election less than a week away.

One thing is certain: Ron Paul has made his stands based on convictions, and a desire to stay true to the intent of the Founders. Paul has worked to roll back oppressive edicts that infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. He is clearly the superior gun rights candidate in the Texas 14th District.

Rep. Paul needs our help. His campaign does not have enough money to finish the race. I don't live in his district, but realize the value of having such an ally in Congress, so I've sent in a contribution. I urge you to do the same, and to get the word out to gun owners in his district, particularly NRA members:

Don't be fooled by yet another misleading NRA rating, or by Shane Sklar's empty rhetoric on guns. Vote for Ron Paul.

This Day in History: November 1

In the face of widespread opposition in the American colonies, Parliament enacts the Stamp Act, a taxation measure designed to raise revenue for British military operations in America.

Time was, Americans rebelled at taxes. In less than a week, millions will be going to the polls demanding they be raised.

CRPA's Line in the Sand

There is none.

Yeah, I know--Phil Angelides will really really ban guns.

And yeah, I know, Arnold did refuse to sign some gun bills.

All of those bills collectively did not have the significance of his signing into law the ban on .50 caliber rifles, or his approving a law that disarms citizens who have not been convicted of any crime--but have merely been accused by someone with a motive to hurt them.



And here's the thing. He warned us.

He told us "Gun control should be stiffer," that he supported the Brady Bill, favored the "assault weapons" ban and "closing the loophole of the gun shows." He endorsed "trigger lock laws," and pledged to sign legislation requiring gun owners to pass a state-defined test in order to purchase a handgun, requiring load indicators or magazine safety disconnects on semiauto handguns manufactured after 2006, and banning .50 caliber rifles.

Some of us (OK, me) watched in frustration as warnings went unheeded and most major gun groups stayed silent during the recall that resulted in Arnold's elevation to power, one even claiming that he was secretly pro-gun and had given some groups money. "Good size chunks" of it.

The truth is, Californians have no candidate who is pro-rkba who has a chance of winning. To suggest otherwise, to endorse a known gungrabber, is an insult to gun owners.

Why not just tell us the truth?

I wouldn't have a problem with CRPA telling its members that Angelides will be more active and hostile against us than Arnold, and to weigh that fact in their decision making. That would be an honest assessment, and if people chose to vote defensively, that would at least be an informed choice.

But to endorse him?

The best we can hope for this election is to put Tom McClintock within a heartbeat of the post, and I wonder how many of you California gun owners reading this have sent a contribution to his campaign. I have. He really needs it. That's the endorsement message we should be hearing from our "leaders."

But it looks like CRPA will end up having it both ways. Their "recommended" candidate can ban the guns, and their lawyer can provide the escort service to turn 'em in.

[Thanks to Dave L for sending me the brochure, and to John S for sending me a picture of the endorsement page.]

Consider it Considered

The Clarke County School District is considering allowing high school security supervisors to carry guns on campus.

How magnanimous of them.

If a school shooter shows up, which member of the Board of Education Policy Committee is prepared to let him know he's not on the "approved" list?

[Via Cousin G]

A Leopard Never Changes Its Spots

Americans will not even talk about the possibility of gun control, despite the high number of killings, writes Michael Gawenda.

Demonstrably false, absurdly so. Michael Gawenda is still a liar.

[Via Cousin G]

A Spooky Halloween Tale

The Spread of small arms creates a serious global problem and requires an equally urgent response because the lives and future of children are at stake. These weapons have extinguished more young lives than they have protected.” Carol Bellamy, Executive Director, UNICEF

Tonight, of course, is Halloween. If any young goblins show up on your doorstep trick or treating for UNICEF, patiently explain that you don't contribute to organizations that endanger children and enable genocide by leading in the demand for global citizen disarmament. Go ahead and give them a piece of candy if you're inclined to observe tonight's tradition, but don't forget that every coin the UN gets is a piece of metal that can be used to forge chains.

This Day in History: October 31

On this day in 1776, in his first speech before British Parliament since the leaders of the American Revolution came together to sign of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, King George III acknowledges that all was not going well for Britain in the war with the United States.

Talking Points

From NRA-ILA Grassroots Alert...ELECTION DAY- WHAT (MORE!) CAN I DO?:

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Please submit at least one letter to the editor of your local newspaper in support of a pro-gun candidate between now and Election Day. Consult your paper's deadlines, as some papers stop accepting political letters to the editor on a certain date prior to the election. You can find media contact information by visiting our homepage--www.NRAILA.org -- and clicking the "Take Action" icon, and then the "Write The Media" link. Your goal in writing should be to ensure that pro-gun candidates are receiving positive media in these final days leading up to November 7.

That's a great idea, ILA--I'd love to write a letter in support of Bill Brown for Sheriff.

I just need some "talking points". What exactly has he done for us again...?