Coming Soon to the California Hit List: BB and Pellet Guns

From "California Dreamin'," my Rights Watch column in the Sept. 2005 issue of GUNS Magazine, on newsstands now:

"Pellet Guns and BB Guns: Dangerous Playthings on the Open Market," by the Senate Office of Research, calls for regulating air guns with the same restrictions as firearms.

Its author is a former Los Angeles Times hack, the SOR Director is a former aide to termed out (anti-gun) Senate President Pro-Tem John Burton, and the report was prepared at the “request” of Jack Scott, another notorious gun banner.

To prove how dangerous air guns are, the report cites an instance where “[a] 16-year-old boy sustained a severe midbrain injury from a self-inflicted combination BB/pellet gun wound through the roof of his mouth.”

The “study” states “anyone can get a pellet gun with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 feet per second—more powerful than some .45 automatics.”

To back the claim that a pellet gun has “more striking power than many classes of handgun firearms,” it provides an endnote—but one that references back to the original claim, in a nice bit of circuitous deception.

You can read this bit of taxpayer-funded subversive nonsense here.

All you need to know about "study" author Max Vanzi: "Max has a bachelor’s degree in journalism from UC Berkeley."

Ditto for SOR Director Donald Moulds: "...Don was a Visiting Scholar and Teaching Fellow at Harvard University, a Ford Foundation Scholar, and a Fellow at the Center for the Study of Cultural Values and Ethics and at the Program for the Study of Arms Control, Disarmament and International Security..."

Fatal Blindness?

JPFO addresses criticisms of it’s previous alert on S.397.

Some Choice

Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro is challenging Hillary Clinton for her New York Senate seat.

"'My support in the Republican Party is broad and deep,’ Pirro told the AP when asked about a possible primary. She also said she would seek the Conservative Party's endorsement and noted that she had it for her races in Westchester County.”

“In 2006, New Yorkers will have a choice,” says the 1997 People magazine's "most beautiful people" listee.

So what kind of “choice” will a Conservative Party-endorsed candidate with “broad and deep” Republican Party support offer gun owners?

Oh, let’s just see.

She joined the New Yorkers Against Gun Violence anti-defense zealots in a Columbine High School Memorial Blood Dance to call “for renewal and strengthening of the federal assault weapons ban.”

She launched a “gun amnesty/buyback” program—“no questions asked,” naturally, “to get illegal and unwanted weapons off the streets.”

I guess gun rights aren’t important when your Republican fundraiser husband is a federal prison alumnus—as a felon, he can’t legally own a gun. Besides, when you have a taxpayer-funded bodyguard, one who made more than $87,000 in overtime in addition to his $101,000-plus salary, who need a personal gun?

The New York Republican establishment evidently believes gun owners are so cowed by the prospect of Hillary that they’ll vote for anyone.

The pathetic thing is, they’re probably right.

And don't even get me started on Rudy Giuliani.

Unwanted

Heartless Libertarian tells us about "the worst TV show gun-related writing ever."

In all fairness, I have not seen TNT's "Wanted," but I know from this promo blurb that I have no desire to:

"Jimmy McGloin (Hurst) is an ATF (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) officer and a bona fide card-carrying conservative."

Couldn't be any Hollywood liberal bias in that assumption, could there?

As if a true conservative, i.e., original intent Constitutionalist, would have anything to do with BATFU.

Front Sight:True Crimes--Casting Final Episodes

I'm passing this along at the request of Deborah Courtney:

Victim Rights Advocate and Second Amendment Activist, Deborah Courtney, is actively seeking those who have been brutally victimized by crime from across the country to tell their story in an upcoming TV reality documentary. She will help those who participate in taking control back into their lives through personal safety awareness and personal defense as part of the show.

She believes in total empowerment of those victimized!

Contact her at the following email before August 25
Deborah Ann Courtney
www.NOVICTIMS.org

Just Do It

I just sent my review of Matthew Bracken's "Enemies Foreign and Domestic" in to GUNS Magazine. As it will be a few months before that issue hits the stands, let me give a brief teaser/spoiler here:

Buy this book. Stop what you're doing, go the the website I've linked to and just do it.

The Courtesy of a Reply Would be Appreciated

Dear Mr. DiMare,

I hope all is well with you. I haven’t received a reply to my open letter yet, and under normal circumstances, you’ve certainly had plenty of time to give me one.

Has anything changed? Are you still the staff contact for the California Chamber of Commerce for “job killer” bills? Should I be writing someone else?

Please let me know. I don’t want people to think the Chamber would duck this important issue out of political correctness or fear of taking a stand related to guns, but without any feedback from you it’s tough not to speculate.

Are SB352 and AB357 not “job killers” too?

Is the Chamber intentionally ignoring my letter?

Are firearm and ammunition makers not part of the California economy, producing legal products enjoyed by millions of consumers? Are the thousands of direct and ancillary support jobs these industries create not worthy of the Chamber’s concern and support?

Will the Chamber issue a statement on these "job killer" bills or intentionally remain silent?

Sincerely,
David Codrea
The War on Guns

Gun Law News Disagrees With JPFO

Looks like we're gonna have us a debate.

Nice to be a spectator for a change.

JPFO ALERT: Is S. 397 a Trojan Horse?

When JPFO talks, gun owners should listen.

In this case their fears, that S. 397 could result in giving the AG power to ban all rifle ammo capable of penetrating BODY ARMOR, should be looked at very carefully--particularly since this opinion is being given serious credence by Len Savage.

I haven't had time to look into this, so am posting this in the hopes of soliciting informed opinions. Is there an alternative explanation? If JPFO's analysis is accurate, why haven't we heard about this from NRA?

QUICK! TAKE THIS POLL!!!

Do you support the National Rifle Association's boycott of ConocoPhillips?

So far, "No" is leading. Click on the link and vote to help change that, and pass this on to your gun owner friends.

On AHSA

Bloggers are all over the American Hunters and Shooters Association. Aside from posting a few comments on other blogs and pointing out their connections with Crime Gun Solutions, I haven't said much, because I already said it this weekend--in my latest submission to GUNS Magazine.

I owe it to the publisher not to offer essentially the same commentary on my blog that I'm asking them to send me a check for. But it's frustrating to know that by the time my article comes out, much of the same ground will have been covered on the internet for months.

A lot of great research has been independently conducted on this--I don't want to slight anybody else who's commented, but Triggerfinger and Gun Law News offer some of the best analyses.

The source I need to credit for making me aware of AHSA is NRA's Dawson at "Digger's Corner." That's what prompted me to start "digging," which included much of the same methodology used by others--the Whois lookup, finding the DCS connection, etc.

I would like to offer one insight about a front group inserting themselves into the shooting community as if they're on our side, something I like to think of as The AHSA Motto.

No Apologies

Drudge titled his link to this story: "EDITOR: NO APOLOGIES FOR HELEN THOMAS 'KILL SELF' REPORT..."

I think the guy does owe us an apology...for getting our hopes up.

Wrong John Silver's

[Use BugMeNot UserID: none@homee.com / Password: 66666 to bypass site registration]

Rick Stanley reminds me of this story from Oct. 2004. I think it merits being brought up again.

Robbers come into a Long John Silver's restaurant. They order three employees on the floor. They order the supervisor to the back of the store. He thinks he's a dead man and hits one of the robbers with a hammer, thwarting the robbery and causing them to flee.

Long John Silver's fires him for not following company policy. The company flack, an idiot and a weasel, claims their policy outlines the steps he should have taken.

I've written company policies--2 years in pharmaceutical production, 16 years in defense electronics and 3 years in medical practice management--three more heavily regulated and audited industries you will not find--and I helped get my companies through audits conducted by the best (worst) the feds and state could throw at us. There are very few areas where I would have the gall to claim to be qualified to be considered an expert in. This is one of those areas.

Any claim that Long John Silver's has a policy that can effectively deal with an armed robbery is bullshit. It is a lie. Anyone claiming otherwise is either incompetent or a lying corporate whore who will say anything to please his masters.

Sue me, Rick Maynard.

My one and only experience with this pathetic chain went down like this: The kids saw a commercial for popcorn shrimp or some such and wanted to try it. We have one not too far from home and had never been to it, so I took the family there for lunch.

The place was empty as far as customers were concerned, but the counter help was busy chatting with the kitchen help, and decided continuing the conversation was a biggger priority than attending to patrons with money to spend. After about 3 minutes, she finally noticed us and acknowledged our presence. She also wiped her eye with her index finger and looked at the results this yielded.

Sue me, Long John Silver's. I'd swear to that in court and have 3 witnesses who would back me up.

Needless to say, I shepherded the wife and kids out of that disgusting place pronto, and we have never been back.

Long story short: Boycott these creeps.

"Security Guards in California Are Going to be Trained to Help Fight Terrorists."

The reporterette on KFI radio actually said that as the lead-in to a news story.

I laughed so hard and so long my ribs hurt. Other drivers on the 91 Freeway must have thought I was nuts.

Our tax dollars at work.

Good Lord, we are so doomed.

Shameless Plug: California Dreamin'

It’s not about public safety—it’s about harassing gun owners and political opponents. That’s why we see endless proposals designed to infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms—something Attorney General Bill Lockyer denies exists.

California Dreamin’ is my “Rights Watch” column for the September issue of GUNS Magazine, available now at visionary newsstands throughout the Republic.

The issue also features my review of Vin Suprynowicz’s futurist liberty novel “The Black Arrow.”

Look Who’s Demanding Gun Control

Guess who thinks YOU can't be trusted to own and use firearms responsibly.

My August "Rights Watch" column for GUNS Magazine is now online.

"What's Wrong With Gun Laws?"

The August 1955 issue of GUNS Magazine is now online. A Chicago cop, of all people, makes a statement against gun control--and you'll recognize many of the same arguments used today. The photos of New York and Chicago cops dumping confiscated firearms into the water should interest gun control historians.

Also in this issue:
"Why Cops Get Killed"
"How Dick Tracy Gets His Man"
"The 20,000 Guns of Jesse James"
and more.

And There Was War in the Heavens...

Some folks are taking me to task for yesterday's post.

In a nutshell: No, I am not "for" private employers banning guns, searching cars for them or firing employees who have them in their car trunks. I'd like to see company policies welcoming employees to carry on premises.

What concerns me is the method for achieving this--and whether the chair we pick up in this particular barfight is also used to smash rights to property and freedom of association. I see grave danger in ceding more power to government in these areas.

Under my argument, if you don't bend to my will, the worst that can happen is that our association is terminated. By entering government into the mix, the element of coercion is also introduced. Now, if I don't bend to your will, you can call in the JBTs to seize me and my property, and to destroy me if I resist.

That does not seem to me to be a formula for freedom.

But that doesn't mean we're powerless to retaliate against private parties that have anti-gun policies. Companies generally have a comparatively small profit margin--the difference of a percentage point or two can make a difference between thriving or succumbing, especially when they face a lot of competition.

That's why, while I fully support NRA's call to boycott ConocoPhillips. And while there are other companies that also deserve this response, I think it's smart strategy to focus on only one to make an example out of for the rest.

I challenge you who feel strongly about this to contact ConocoPhillips management. I'm not going to give an email address, because that's too easy to do--it will make more of an impression to contact them directly, either by mail or phone:

600 North Dairy Ashford (77079-1175)
P.O. Box 2197
Houston, TX 77252-2197
Phone 281.293.1000

Contact them today. And do it once a week until this is over. If you have one of their gas cards, cut it up and return it with a note telling them why. Make good on the boycott--refuse to buy their products. And spread the word--get your gun owner friends involved.

DeWine Whines

"In a lengthy speech on the Senate floor, the former Greene County prosecutor lashed out at the bill, which would require gun victims to prove that a crime had been committed before they could bring a civil lawsuit against the firearms industry." [More]

We can't have that, can we? No, we want to sue people who have complied with all the state and federal laws.

I'm originally from Ohio. If I still lived there, I'd be doing my best to put this fascist out to pasture--even if it meant letting a Sara Brady democrat win for a cycle. There is no other way to teach Ohio republicans the lesson that a choice unacceptable to gun owners will always lose.

I wish there was a way to convince all republicans of the same. Some of us do what we can, but fear of democrats seems to cow most people into settling for a perceived lesser evil.

Until we change that, nothing else will change. It doesn't have to.

Just What We Need:

NRA stumping for edicts to tell people what they can and cannot do with their private property. [More]

As loathsome as it might be, if I own a piece of property and you want to access it, and as long as I'm not forcing you to do so, I have a right to set the rules. You then have the right to tell me where to stick those rules, bypass me and mine in your commercial dealings, and rally people of like mind to do the same.

You do NOT have the right to impose your rules on my property under force of government arms.

The proper response to corporate anti-gun policies is exposure and consumer activism. I fear the use of state-enforced coercion over private property decisions provides too much potential to blow up in our faces, what with precedent and legal penumbras and all.

Vendetta

Angry Engineer joins other bloggers in expressing anticipation for the upcoming "V for Vendetta" (based on the graphic novels by Alan Moore).

What's not to like? The slogan: "People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people;" the trailer ending with a line from the Guy Fawkes poem...

I want to see it, too. Let's just not forget that the Chairman and President of Time Warner, and the conglomerate itself (of which the film's production company, Warner Bros. is a division) all made the gungrabber list.

Rule of thumb: rich and powerful Establishment types have no incentive to change the status quo.

As for Natalie Portman, the film's star, let's hope she's grown up some since I wrote "The Fandom Menace" for the Nov. 1999 issue of GUNS AND AMMO Magazine:

So there is no apparent disconnect when anti-gun Rosie O'Donnell displays armed "Star Wars" figurines while praising this newest release. There is no incredulity when "Phantom Menace" co-star Natalie Portman (the lightpistol-packing Queen Amidala of Theed) tells Rosie "I'm proud of you, your power, and talking about what you believe in."

As someone who has played the title role in Broadway's "The Diary of Anne Frank," you'd think Ms. Portman would know only too well the evil real life consequences of population disarmament. Instead, she vacuously asserts, "I'm in high school too, and I know what you're talking about...this stuff is hitting my school now too. Somebody's got to say something about it and not be afraid to do so."

And the audience cheers. After all, she's beautiful, successful, self-assured– what more do you need to be considered an authority in this era of image over substance? Yet they can't wait to see this privileged dilettante lead a make-believe armed retinue against the forces of darkness (as opposed to hiding in an attic with her unarmed family before being dragged off to a death camp).

We'll see how close the film "gets it," and I'll suspend judgment 'til then. But I am concerned that the guy in the comedy mask is bringing throwing daggers to what should be a gunfight...yeah, I heard the story takes place in a futuristic UK, but if the yobs in "Gunchester" can get 'em, why shouldn't revolutionaries?

If You Can't Stand the Heat...

Jed points us to a "spirited discussion" as well as a related thread at The Claire Files about Claire Wolfe's August "Enemy at the Gate" column in SWAT Magazine.

Conservatives, Guns, and Drugs

Sheldon Richman treats us to a great exercise in logic and truth.

People-Tracking RFIDs

Claire Wolfe tells us it's begun.

At least now we'll be able to keep track of Tommy Thompson.

The High and the Mighty

[WARNING--CONTAINS MOVIE ENDING SPOILER--PROCEED WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE]

Turner Classic Movies has been playing a resurrected John Wayne film, just recently released to DVD and apparently seen on TV for the first time: "The High and the Mighty."

I enjoyed it--from the soapy melodramas among the passengers, to scenes that were obvious sources* for the "Airplane" parodies, right down to Robert Stack thanking John Wayne for slapping him when he lost his cool: "I needed that."

I half expected to see Lloyd Bridges declaring it a bad week to give up sniffing glue, or Stack warning "That's just what they'll be expecting!" when the control tower ordered the runway lights turned on.

But what really struck me were the assumptions of the time: A stewardess (before the pc days of "flight attendant") lighting a passenger's cigarette--indeed, the pilots smoking in the cockpit. Not that I miss that, but you know what?--that choice ought to be determined by the market rather than dictated by the fedgov.

And then there was the handgun--carried by a passenger who was stalking a man he believed to be his wife's lover. He carried it right in his coat pocket.

He got on a plane without going through metal detectors. TSA didn't grope him or wand him down or make him take off his shoes. The other passengers took it away from him. One kept it in his pocket for safekeeping, and gave it back when the guy promised to be good! And because there was no harm/no foul, no SWAT team was waiting to take the guy out when he got off the plane--he disembarked down the stairs and walked across the tarmac to the terminal. In San Francisco!

I was two years old when this movie came out. I see the changes in assumptions that have happened in my lifetime, and wonder what assumptions will change when my sons are my age.

I guess that all depends on what we as a culture will tolerate and allow, doesn't it?

And the sad thing--a real letdown for me--is knowing guys like John Wayne and Charlton Heston paved the way for this to happen by supporting GCA '68.

* The main plot and inspiration for many scenes was from "Zero Hour!" which is now a hoot to watch.

UPDATE: To my knowledge, Wayne did not come out and publicly support the bill. But Heston, Jimmy Stewart, Gregory Peck, Hugh O'Brien and Kirk Douglas did.  High and mighty, indeed.

S.397 Passes Senate With Bike Lock Amendment

I'm sure there are a hundred-and-one uses for the damned thing as long as it never touches a gun.

Plenty on "our side" have already begun minimizing the impact on blogs and in forums, the apologetics centering around how most manufacturers already include locks with their products anyway.

Ain't that a shame? And why do they do this?

Oh, yeah, to keep from being sued.

How very circular.

The thing is, most gun owners feel this is no big deal, and the general public has been conditioned to respond that gun locks are only common sense. The mandate is acceptable to more people than it's not.

Let's see what else is tacked on in the House. I think the real question here is, do the powers pushing for this want it bad enough, and do they think they can sustain the fallout if they make a few other tiny concessions that are acceptable to more people than they're not?

Things like closing "the so-called gun show loophole" and regulating those icky .50 BMG rifles.

"Bring the Heat"

[Use BugMeNot to bypass site registration.]

The breaking poop on Berserkeley's latest "gun death":

"Moments before she was shot to death, 19-year-old Meleia Willis-Starbuck was heard by witnesses telling a friend on a cellular telephone to "bring the heat," which Berkeley police say was an apparent reference to a gun."

Just remember:

"No one blames anyone in this. We are all caught in this matrix created by too many handguns."

If you don't believe me, just ask Richard Hourula.

Take This USA Today Poll

Should gun makers be protected against lawsuit damages resulting from the illegal use of a firearm?

Don't let the fact that it's currently 92% to 7% in favor of "yes" deter you. Pile it on.

Yeah, it's "nonscientific," but it sure shows which side can mobilize the most people.

Analogy of the Week Award

Sent by an editor I know:

A new category, Analogy of the Week Award, has been added to the Sentence of the Week Award in honor of the following quote:

"The trigger stop on the 87 Target sent to me for testing reminded me of the description of JFK's adrenal glands at autopsy: atrophied to the point of disappearance."

"Black Arrow" Review in GUNS

I guess the September issue of GUNS Magazine must be out. I haven't received my comp copy yet (I think somebody at the Post Office is reading it first), but Vin Suprynowicz writes me about my review of "The Black Arrow":

By the way, I thought the write-up in "Guns" looked great. Thanks for the "how to buy" info.

Though I'm not sure how to deal with one $24 check that arrived here in the handwriting of an apparently very old fellow from Tennessee, made payable to "David Codrea" and itemized "for the Black Book."

For the record, I told him to send me the check so I could sign and return it to him.

"They're Always After Me Lucky Charms"

"THE IRA will destroy its vast arsenal within eight weeks after yesterday’s historic pledge to surrender all its guns.

"Provo godfathers have agreed to get rid of every last weapon, bullet and ounce of explosive by October — bringing to a close 36 years of bloody war with Britain." [More]

Right.

And I believe in these:

"Purpose will be available..."

"Purpose will be available..."
"Purpose will be available..."
"Purpose will be available..."
"Purpose will be available..."

The usual suspects do their best to throw procedural spoilers in the path of S.397.

If this was any other activity, such behavior would properly be labeled obsessive-compulsive.

I just figured out what it reminds me of--that scene from this movie:

ALL WORK AND NO PLAY MAKES JACK A DULL BOY
ALL WORK AND NO PLAY MAKES JACK A DULL BOY
ALL WORK AND NO PLAY MAKES JACK A DULL BOY
ALL WORK AND NO PLAY MAKES JACK A DULL BOY...

JUMP!

Helen Thomas is threatening to kill herself if Dick Cheney runs for president.

I don't know why the White House continues to allow this harridan a seat at press conferences--especially since she is no longer a reporter, as everyone else is required to be, but an editorialist. I know they made an exception out of some sort of respect for her status and tenure and all, but seriously, why does this old cow deserve it?

I don't even particularly like Cheney, but I'd love to see him declare his candidacy if for no other reason than to either call her bluff, or so she would go ahead and put herself--and the rest of us--out of her misery.

In any case, and seriously, her statement ought to be sufficient proof of mental instability to get her banned from being in the physical presence of our heads of state.

Helen, if you decide to do us all a favor, here's a little background music for ya.

A Dilemma in Amber

There was an Amber Alert when I was driving home today.

I wanted to keep my eyes peeled for a crime being committed, so I could report it to the authorities.

But I was afraid if I did, I might be branded a "vigilante"

I Don’t NEED to Know What I’m Talking About

Another Berserkeley intellect weighs in on the woman who got killed by friendly fire after she called in for ground support. Like his Daily Planet (which one?) colleague, he too recommends stabbing—and adds clubbing—as preferred methods of assault.

"No One Blames Anyone in This"

"We are all caught in this matrix created by too many handguns."

Sheesh.

Fish Or Man is right. I need to get out to the woods.

Another Idiot Jury

As a "whole people," we certainly seem to have the government we deserve.

I guess not one in 12 knows or cares anything about this.

Are These Not “Job Killers,” Too?

An Open Letter to the California Chamber of Commerce

The California Chamber of Commerce lists 20 bills it identifies as “job killers,” and recommends they be opposed.

Why is there no mention of Senate Bill 357, requiring serial numbers on handgun ammunition, and Assembly Bill 352, requiring handguns to micro-imprint firearm-identifying data to shell casings?

The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, which establishes industry technical standards for the nation's leading manufacturers of sporting firearms, ammunition and components, has issued position papers opposing both of these bills, citing among other concerns:

SB357:

“Even if it took just a fraction of a second to laser engrave a bullet with a serial number, ammunition production would be slowed down dramatically. SAAMI estimates that it would take as much as three weeks to make what is now manufactured in a single day! No manufacturer can withstand such a massive slow-done in production. They would cease to be profitable. Instead manufacturers would have no alternative but to abandon the California market. This is because the tens of millions of dollars needed to comply with SB 357 far exceeds the reasonable profit a manufacturer could ever hope to make selling ammunition in the California market. The cost to comply would bankrupt any manufacturer that tried. Even abandoning the California market comes at a cost. Manufacturers will suffer lost sales and profits; but the lesser of two evils remains to abandon the market.”

AB352:

“Dramatic Price Increases and Reduction in Supply. Compelling the use of this unproven and untested technology will dramatically reduce the product selection available to law abiding consumers in California, because some manufacturers will choose to abandon the California market rather than incur the massive costs associated with complying, which include purchasing very expensive equipment and patented technology...and completely redesigning their manufacturing processes, plant and equipment...Clearly, any attempt to comply with the requirements of this bill would force a radical and complete redesign of time-tested, finely tuned and efficient manufacturing processes. It would cost millions of dollars to do this.”

Will you add these bills to your list of “job killers” and publicly oppose them, encouraging your members to do the same?

If “yes,” what will you do to inform your members, the media and those in government whom you lobby?

If “no,” why not?

Sincerely,
David Codrea
The War on Guns

A Meaningless Poll

I received the following email from KeepAndBearArms.com:

"Cast Your Vote In New Poll; Should gun owners and gun rights organizations support Senate Confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts to the US Supreme Court? If you have not already done so, go to KeepAndBearArms.com and cast your vote in the poll on confirmation of Judge John G. Roberts to the US Supreme Court. The poll appears in the left hand column of the web page. A number of national radio talk show hosts and leaders of gun rights organizations are monitoring this poll closely."

Poll results at this writing:

Yes 79.7% 534 votes
No 5.8% 39 votes
Undecided 14.5% 97 votes
Total Votes: 670

On what basis can gun owners make any kind of informed judgment on the Roberts nomination?

Can KABA point to any meaningful indicators on Judge Roberts' sentiments on the Second Amendment? Unless something new has been disclosed that I'm out of the loop on, even NRA, with all its Washington connections and insider information has been mum on the subject of Roberts and guns.

Here's what we do know:

Hillary is reported to be ready to confirm him. Feinstein is "impressed" with him. Schumer's only 2A-related concern is whether or not he agrees with a prior high court decision to overturn the "Gun Free School Zones Act."

Nearly all of the debate concerning the Roberts nomination revolves around Roe v Wade. On the gun issue, all we really have is that he voted in favor of the petition to rehear the Seegars case, and for some reason, that information has disappeared from the blog that reported it.

Perhaps gun owner support comes from some sort of innate trust for George Bush's judicial picks?

I know--Bush saying he was for the "assault weapons" ban was some sort of ploy to get elected. Bush AG Alberto Gonzales saying he also was for the "assault weapons" ban was some sort of ploy to get confirmed. And BATFU Gauleiter Lewis P. Raden, who works for Gonzales, who works for Bush, unilaterally, and without warning or prior communication issuing an edict to halt the importation of frames, receivers and barrels must be some kind of ploy to prove what, exactly?

How can any gun owner vote "Yes" in this poll and claim to have an informed opinion? How can they even claim to have a rational basis for wishful thinking?

Quick, Everyone, Stop Enjoying Yourselves: Rosie's Disgruntled Again

"Rapper Sean 'P. Diddy' Combs has angered celebrity neighbor Rosie O'Donnell after throwing an extravagant fireworks show that left her children in tears.

"O'Donnell is upset after spending all night calming her frightened puppy and consoling her four sobbing kids who were left terrified by the loud display."

Rosie, what are you doing to those children to where their reaction is one of terror instead of wonderment? How do those poor kids stand a chance with a self-admitted headcase like you as their primary adult role model? How have you described yourself? Oh yeah, “one of the haunted…with an absurd ability to deny the obvious.”

I don't suppose it's possible they were reacting to your reaction? Do they cry often in situations where other children do not? Do you?

It's also telling how something that leaves you inconvenienced and disgruntled also leaves you feeling entitled to trivialize true disasters like "a war zone -- downtown Baghdad -- a subway in London -- a hotel in Egypt and on and on and on," which in turn trivializes sacrifice and tragedy and horror. You hearing fireworks from your mansion equates with human carnage?

But then, it's all about you, isn't it, Rosie, and getting attention by letting everyone know how miserable you are? And making them miserable in the process?

A Snap of it's Fingers?

The Washington Post at its hysterical worst. The implication is clear: by bringing the frivolous gun lawsuit bill to the Senate floor, NRA sidelined a "critical Defense Department appropriations bill," endangering us all.

Suddenly, these subversives are for defense.

There can be no peace with these creatures. We cannot coexist. They won't let us.

This really illustrates the foolishness of those companies that cave in the face of legal pressure. They have bought themselves temporary respite at the cost of giving the enemy a beachhead from where it can fortify its position and threaten everyone.

Whose Side Are YOU On?

I designed this graphic over 10 years ago, back when I was active in the Westside Firearms Association, which became the NRA Members Council of Westside Los Angeles. It was originally produced on a t-shirt which we sold as a fundraiser. I also posted it on the old GunTruths.com website.

The only copy I had to date was pretty grainy--I discovered this cleaner version on an old floppy disk I found while going through some old stuff, and figured I'd better save it elsewhere before it was lost forever.

Consider it saved. Although maybe the best course of action would be to just redo it from scratch to produce something really clear...

I still have my shirt, but it's getting kind of worn. Maybe I'll make some more up.

Don't Mess With This Mom

From an anonymous correspondent:

Your piece on "Girls Just Wanna Have Fun" got me thinking. I have a few images sitting around and I thought you might make use of them at some time or another.

The female in the images is my wife. She's not acting for these images. She was ambivalent towards firearms until a few years ago. She finally agreed to go to the range with me and the rest is history. She almost broke the bank last year with the number of handguns she purchased in addition to buying our 9 year old son his first .22 rifle. She's a wife and a mother of three. Unlike the "million moms," she has told me that our sons and daughter will not leave home until they have become thoroughly proficient in their defensive shooting skills.

My correspondent is quite an accomplished photographer. I'd like to see him start a website to post his portfolio on. He's also pretty fortunate to have such a rational life partner.

Second Amendment--Down But Not Out?

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership posted "The Second Amendment is Alive and Well" , in response to writer David Brownlow's opinion piece, "The Second Amendment is Already Dead."

Skip in Texas adds his thoughts in an open letter to Mr. Brownlow, posted here with permission:

JPFO's comments are correct in that your article is worth reading and discussing. Both you and JPFO had some very valid points in your arguments. As a retired military officer I believe that you far underestimate the capabilities of our Nation's civilians, especially those with previous military experience, to act in support of our rights should that need ever arise.

There are millions of us with a vast amount of military experience who remain capable of neutralizing or commandeering and using the superior weapons currently in the possession of the presumed opposition. Also, there are many currently in uniform, military and law enforcement, who still abide by their oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Just as our founders fought and prevailed against superior forces, so is possible for us to do again, if needed. While the gov't can concentrate a vast amount of combat power into a small, specific area, it would be outgunned by a large margin should widespread revolution break out across the land, or even within an area the size of several states. I suspect that many more, in uniform at the time, would sympathize with those defending the Constitution and our Founders' ideals than one might imagine. This could happen in any of a number of ways, but make no mistake, happen it could.

Regarding your comment: "Sure, we might still have the ability to wage a little one-man revolution - for about five minutes!", I can assure you that anyone with any smarts what-so-ever could make things happen in their favor for much longer than that. An area that you completely ignore in your thesis is that of "leaderless resistance". Probably one of the best books on the topic is titled "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross. If you have not read it, you should consider it. I'm sure there are other models out there too. In many of these scenarios, at least at the beginning, it would be necessary for a few dedicated individuals, acting individually or in concert, to get the ball rolling and then convince others to join in the action; or others would join in because of the ongoing actions. Our Nation is becoming more and more of a tinder box in this regard and I suspect that at some point a spark in the right place could ignite a wildfire throughout many parts of the country.

JPFO's comment: "History everywhere shows that a fire in the belly -- the will to be free -- triumphs over superior weaponry," is very valid, especially when that superior weaponry can be turned against those attempting to usurp the freedoms of another. Consider too that such an action by "the people" would only be required until those necessary factions of the gov't could be neutralized or disempowered, which would allow the freedoms to be returned to the people, perhaps without a complete cleansing of those in power. That would allow a Constitutional gov't to continue without the need to start up an entirely new gov't. There are a number of ways that this could happen but some of "the people" using the meager resources currently available to them could certainly start the ball rolling, should that become necessary.

Still, your article is worthwhile, if perhaps naive, in several respects. Keep up the good work.

Birds Do It

My sister sent me this after I posted the piece on how "charity" is destroying Africa:

I have to share one, and it's even true. On a goofy whim I bought a hummingbird feeder a few weeks ago. It is a complete hoot, but I may have to rethink the moral implications of this ornithological entertainment. I got birdie visits within 10 minutes of putting the damn thing up on my back porch, which is pretty interesting. But it took less than a day for the birds to completely stop foraging the hibiscus - too much work apparently when the Federal auto dispenser is so close by. Then the altercations started - alpha birdie [actually I think its a she] plops her butt on the perch, hogs and chases the others off. And just a couple of days ago the drive by peckings started up. So now I have fat, lazy, hostile birdies dependent on subsidies.

Of course, its pretty funny to watch, too...

Thompson In the Chips--Or Vice Versa

"Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson has volunteered to get an RFID electronic chip implant to show the world just how safe the new technology is. "

Tommy Thompson

"I wanted to get numbers tattooed on my forearm, but was concerned about the connotations," Thompson admits.

"And being from Wisconsin with all those dairy cows," he adds, "well, I did learn having my hindquarters branded smells something awful and hurts even worse."

Not to be daunted, the former Health and Human Services Director was determined to find a more efficient way to permanently install the mark of the beast.

"I was thinking about getting a barcode laser-etched on my lower lip, but then I heard about VeriChip," he recalls.

"They're not quite ready with Phase Two, where they surgically implant it in your forehead. But I've gone ahead with their interim Phase One Suppository and it works just fine," he says.

"Long as I stay away from that Wisconsin cheese," he adds ruefully.

Judge Roberts Needs MY Help?

I got a piece of spam on my Hotmail account from one "Robert R. Eberle, Ph.D.President and CEO, GOPUSA," telling me "Judge Roberts Needs Your Help!" and invoking the names Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin to convince me of my need to sign a Newsmax Petition.

I replied:

He may need my help, but does he deserve it?

What has he ever said or done to demonstrate he understands what the Second Amendment is about, and that he will rule properly on right to keep and bear arms cases that come before him--or that he will even support allowing them to come before the high court?

Not that I expect an answer. But I do find it curious that the only people scrambling to find out more about this--and there (intentionally?) seems precious little to be found-- are those of us in the hard core RKBA activist blogging community--the emphasis everywhere else appears to be focused exclusively on Roberts' potential to impact Roe v Wade.

At this writing, there is no news release from NRA--the folks with the beltway connections and ears to the ground in DC. They do link to two Wall Street Journal columns, "Introducing John Roberts" and "Roberts Rules," but neither piece says word one about guns.

Speaking of Links...

...which I do in the post below, I've been adding some as I discover folks have linked to WarOnGuns. If you have and I haven't returned the favor, it's because I haven't noticed it yet.

Drop me a line to let me know I owe you one, or if you'd like to establish reciprocal links with your site.

Button, Button, Who's Got the Button?

Kirk at Fun Turns to Tragedy has designed some more link buttons for top referrers to his site.

The guy is really good with graphics. I wish I could return the favor, but my artistic sensibility is pretty much limited to "I think red is purdy."

Still, I did find a graphic I believe expresses the essence of fun turning to tragedy--but I don't think it would lend itself to the rectangular format he uses and still retain its legibility:

I'm joking. Sheesh! Scary picture, though, huh?

"They Hate Us Because We're Free"

No doubt.

"We Suspect the Lawsuit is Largely a Political Move"

[Use BugMeNot to bypass site registration.]

From Philadelphia, home of the Independence Hall Un World Heritage Site, comes these latest bleatings by the heirs of liberty about yet another gun lawsuit.

Note how "the gun...took a tangled route." I wonder if it consulted PriceLine or Travelocity to get the best deals.

A pawn shop "allegedly" sold it to a gun trafficker, one who passed all government-required checks before he could take possession of it. It certainly seems cause to trace that "tangled route" back to the original manufacturer so they can be included in the lawsuit.

"We're not going to argue the merits of this particular case right now," the editorialist lies. Or maybe he doesn't. He doesn't care about the merits--and neither do the subversives backing this legalized shakedown racket. They just want gun makers and sellers sued out of existence so that you and I can be disarmed.

Here's my favorite deliberate understatement: "So even though we suspect the lawsuit is largely a political move..."

Egad, Holmes! How could you possibly deduce that?

They do make one point I agree with:

"Arlen Specter and Rick Santorum support the Senate bill. Maybe they want to explain that to the Oliver and Durham families."

I wish they would. I wish they'd explain it to all of their constituents.

I wish these politicians who come to gun owners for support and get NRA endorsements would stop hiding from the gun issue except when they're in front of a friendly audience, and start aggressively using their bully pulpits for Second Amendment outreach and education. I wish they would explain the importance of the right of the people to keep and bear arms every chance they get, in front of every media outlet that pays them notice.

Ludicrous, Indeed

"The people who brought you the oil-for-food scandal now want to get their hands on the Internet. On Tuesday, a U.N. organization called the Working Group on Internet Governance proposed that the United Nations take control of regulating the Internet's inner workings. Apparently, U.N. leaders think their failures in global security and humanitarianism qualify them to regulate the engine of the high-tech industry."

Well, that's one way to guarantee that I get more offers to transfer funds from Nigeria.

Rush Limbaugh cracked me up when he referred to the UN as "a Star Wars bar scene."

I haven't been able to give a damn one way or another about the John Bolton nomination, because the true solution is to quit the UN and melt this ugly thing down to make guns to defend a free America:


[Thanks to John Schaefer.]

DON'T SHOOT!

Anti-Gunner Recommends STABBING People Instead

Alphecca steers us to an opinion piece by Berserkeley Loony Tune Becky O'Malley, who thinks that guns are icky and you shouldn't have one.

He does a good job of dismantling what she thinks passes for reason, but to me, the most outrageous part of her theorem was in her opening paragraph:

"An old reprobate, a heavy-drinking veteran of many barroom brawls, once told me why he favored knives over guns when he needed to get out of a tight spot. Anyone who knows how to use knives, he said, knows that you can always put your thumb half-way up the blade, so you can just stick the guy, not kill him by accident."

Becky--do you hear yourself? The guy's a violent drunk, he knifes people in situations not requiring lethal force whenever his alcohol-impaired reptilian hindbrain deems he is in "a tight spot" (no doubt one of his own creation), and you believe this loser has the martial arts skills to safely wield a blade so he will only leave some sort of scratch because he puts his thumb halfway up the blade?

Becky, I have no words--I somehow just can't bring myself to believe that people as stupid as you exist.

Some day, your friend is going to find he's brought a knife to a gunfight.

50-50

CNN has a poll asking if NRA made the right move by pulling their convention out of Columbus:

How would you describe the NRA's decision to move its convention because of the host city's assault weapons ban?

A bullseye

A shot in the foot

At this writing, the results are 50-50.

Let's see if we can change that.

Go vote, and pass this info on.

Roberts on Guns

I'm sure I joined a lot of gun activists scrambling to find out where Supreme Court Justice nominee John Roberts stands on guns. I also felt pretty confident that the first insights into his record would come from Triggerfinger.

Ask the Expert

Richard A. Clarke, the guy who advised Madeline Albright on Rwanda and who later made sure the Bin Laden family got ushered out of the US within days of 9/11, is now being touted by the Violence Policy Center as an expert on the dangers of "50 caliber anti-armor sniper rifles."

I should think so.

But what about .50 caliber rifles?

What About The Rest Of Us?

"With judges handing restraining orders out like popcorn, a federal law that disarms soldiers and police who have such orders against them is playing major havoc with their careers and lives."

Glenn Sacks has a point.

It's not fair that someone's career should be ruined over mere accusations and legal kneejerk boilerplate.

Sacks goes on to tell us:

"[A]ccording to Elaine Epstein, former president of the Massachusetts Women's Bar Association, restraining orders are doled out 'like candy' to 'virtually all who apply,' and that 'in virtually all cases, no notice, meaningful hearing or impartial weighing of evidence is to be had.'

"A study conducted by Massachusetts courts revealed that the majority of restraining orders did not even involve an allegation of violence."

That being the case, Mr. Sacks, why should someone's career be of more value than my life, and my ability to protect it? Why would that be fair?

How is liberty served by carving out special classes of super citizens, who enjoy privileges and immunites not available to all, in direct contradiction to the spirit and intent of equality under the law?

We don't need more elitist exceptions like "cops only" nationwide concealed carry. Show me where, once they have their place at the table, their unions or the FOP have lobbied to bring the rest of us in from the cold. More often than not, their mouthpieces are only too glad to get ink and camera time railing about the danger "guns on the street" pose to their constituents.

I can see the unintended consequences should Mr. Sacks get his wish: A cop who would have been denied a gun had he not been exempted arrests some poor slob who arms himself in spite of a restraining order.

Sorry, Mr. Sacks. If "the whole people" aren't invited, your government careerists can just share our pain. Maybe it will give them some incentive to work with us.

Goodbye, Columbus

"As a direct result of the Columbus City Council decision to ban semi-automatic firearm ownership for law-abiding citizens, the National Rifle Association (NRA) announced it will move its 2007 Annual Meeting and Convention from Columbus, OH...

"The City Council’s decision will have a negative economic impact on businesses in the greater Columbus area. Earlier this year, the Columbus Chamber of Commerce said it estimated $20 million in revenue from hotels, restaurants, entertainment and other NRA convention related spending."

Good for NRA. That's the right move.

Unfortunately, Wayne LaPierre didn't end his statement there.

“'The NRA is going to work with the people of Columbus and the Ohio Legislature to pass state preemption legislation and restore freedom to the people of Columbus,' continued LaPierre. 'When the Ohio Legislature enacts preemption, freedom will be restored to the people of Columbus.'"

We don't let the antis get away with naked hyperbole, and we shouldn't let it pass from "our side" without comment, either.

Preemption is, at best, a two-edged sword. True, having each and every municiple jurisdiction passing "gun control" laws could create a hodge-podge of edicts that would be impossible to comply with. But preemption, as practiced in states like California, results in statewide bans and edicts designed to stamp out gun ownership.

Preemption is not the Holy Grail of gun rights. Too often, it is used to codify and institutionalize statewide assaults against liberty.

Preemption will not restore freedom. Lobbying will not restore freedom. Legislation will not restore freedom. Judicial rulings will not restore freedom. Not unless and until they are backed up with a no-nonsense "or else" from We the People should government at any level usurp its powers and abridge our rights.

To believe otherwise is to hide from the harsh reality that you can't count on someone else, and a smooth talker at that, to take your turn on the wall. Only the unwavering resolve of free Americans determined to defy and resist tyranny at all costs will restore freedom--and there aren't even any guarantees that that will be enough.

No one actually thought it would be easy, and without personal costs and risks, did they?

The sooner we realize and accept that, the sooner we can quit deluding ourselves that evil--and that's what tyranny is--fears anything other than force sufficient to drive it howling back into the darkness.

Kennedy in Historic Sino-American Joint Space Venture

Please join WarOnGuns in wishing the senior senator from Massachusetts "Bon Voyage" as he boldly goes where no porcine gamete has gone before.

Think They May Be On To Something?

"Iraqis have begun barricading themselves in their homes and forming neighborhood militias in an effort to fend off relentless suicide attacks, residents in the capital said on Monday...

"'The plans of the interior and defense ministries to impose security in Iraq have failed,' Khudair al-Khuzai told parliament during a heated session following the latest blast. 'We need to bring back popular militias,' he said...

"In the Sadiya district in the south of the capital, residents have introduced a neighborhood watch program which involves men armed with pistols and AK-47s walking the streets from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. on alert for attackers..."

Militias providing security for a free state--what a novel idea! Where have I heard that before...?

Parker Update

Good analysis, as usual, from Triggerfinger.

Armed Unit to Crack Down on Fashion

"EDINBURGH'S first dedicated 24-hour armed response unit is set to hit the streets as new figures reveal another huge rise in gun-related crime.

"A crack unit of 25 specialist officers and three brand-new armed response vehicles will work in shifts from today providing round-the-clock response to armed incidents."

As it turns out, "gun crime" isn't particularly up, but "What we are experiencing is the culture of the fashion brigade to go out with an air weapon, an imitation gun or a BB weapon tucked in their trousers."

Sounds like a perfectly good use of resources to me.

I'd make a crack about the heirs of William Wallace being pathetic subjects of the Crown, but we're the heirs of the Sons of Liberty and we demand the same treatment in much of the Republic.

Serves Him Right

A man turns in a rare Japanese rifle worth $5,000 to a police "buyback" program, and now they won't give it back.

Hope he enjoys the voucher.

What do we expect? It's West "Hanging Chad" Palm Beach.

UPDATE:

They gave it back. Plus they let him keep the gift card.

I guess the media attention and his vet status made them decide this would be the best PR move. Funny how they can make exceptions to the "law" whenever they want? But we can't?

Permission Denied, Soldier!

"Uncle Sam trusts David Bardfield to carry a firearm, but the town of Brookline doesn't seem to have the same faith in the Army specialist.

"According to Bardfield, 28, Brookline police last month denied him a gun license because his name appeared in a police incident report when he was a teenager - even though he was not arrested at the time."

Not arrested, not charged, not tried and not convicted. Plus he's a member of the armed forces.

Yep--sounds like the type of person we don't want to let have a gun.

This, of course, is the inevitable result of licensing a right.

It's also a good real-world example to throw back in the face of anti-gun liars who claim they only want "reasonable, common-sense gun control," and that anyone who objects to licensing and registration must have something to hide.

Save "The Last Gun Shop"

Jim Paulson wants us to become informed and help spread the word about "The Last Gun Shop," which we've talked about several times at WarOnGuns.

He's passed along two new links:
Save The Gun Shop
and
Credit Card Shotgun

For what it's worth, our enemies don't want us to care or get involved. They'd like the same thing to happen in your city, and they're counting on gun owner apathy to help make that happen.

There's Something Rotten In Atascadero

Here's an update to the story about police seizing weapons from a citizen after it was determined the "suspicious circumstances" causing them to investigate him in the first place "were determined to be unfounded."

Now they say it looks like they're going to arrest the man, and that he's "undergoing a medical evaluation."

So far, the items described seem to be legal. The one issue it looks like police are trying to hang their hats on:

"Robinson said Friday that while the grenades weren't charged, there was material in the house that could charge them."

What does that mean? Did the citizen have reloading supplies?

Let's all keep an eye on this one. We don't know enough about this to make a judgment, but we do know blindly trusting "media" and police accounts can be--what's a nice way of saying this?-- problematic.

And Then We Have THESE Twits

Feeling really good about girls having fun in the post below, I had to go and spoil things by searching the news, where I came across the latest effort by "Mothers Against Guns," a CD titled "Why?" that "[calls] for street shootings to stop."

Yeah, you'll reform sociopathic predators by singing a song. Just like you'll keep evil at bay by whistling in the dark. They could have saved a lot of time and money by simply pulling the covers over their heads.

These people are like children--and not very bright children at that.

It's been too long since I nominated anyone for an Eloi Award, so I'll bestow the stigma this time on Lucy Cope.

Another MAG priority is to "get a total ban on replica guns," and they've produced a [slow loading!] propaganda short designed to induce the hysteria needed to do just that. It seems criminals in the disarmed UK are converting replicas to actually function, proving once again the adage that those devising foolproof plans don't account for the ingenuity of fools . I suppose it's only a matter of time before we see calls for a total ban on metal pipe and machining tools.

Girls Just Wanna Have Fun

Got these pix from friend Tom Mayhew.

Angela Having Fun

Angela Having More Fun

Angela and Kathy Having Yet Even More Fun

Note the Airborne Car Part--What Fun

Tom adds:

The event was in NW Oklahoma on June 18 & 19, 2005. Angela shot 250 rnds for $50 and was the happiest gal on the planet - until she noticed the machine-gun oil spatters on her blouse. We finally convinced her they'd wash out and meanwhile she could display her 'proof of participation' proudly.

The sponsor's WebPage is:
http://www.oklahomafullauto.com/

Kinda makes you wonder about the killjoy bluenoses who would object.

Can you even imagine the mindset of the pathetic excuses for "men" who would disarm these wonderful women? How can you look at these pictures and do anything but share in the joy?

Ladies like these give me hope for the future of the Republic. And the bonus is knowing they fill their inadequate Million Mom opposites with seething rage.

Just So We're Clear On The Rules...

"'Were they doing anything against the law? No,' Cochran said. 'Could it have gotten them killed? Yes.'"

Good Lord, man, would you listen to what you just said?

If Your Kids Kill Themselves, How Can We Enslave Them?

Alphecca points out the flaws in VPC's latest shameless attempts to equate gun ownership with a higher rate of youth suicide.

I'm sure I won't be the only one to point out the suicide statistics for disarmed Japan.

If I may add a bit of additional perspective:

"The suicide rate for the 73,000 county jail inmates in California is 52 per 100,000."

Compare this to the rate for the general population, where:

"The 1999 age-adjusted rate was 10.7/100,000, or 0.01%."

So as of a few years back, the suicide rate was about FIVE TIMES HIGHER in the California jail system, where people are locked up 24/7, disarmed and guarded, than in the general population.

If the nation ever devolves into the despair-filled Soviet gulag the VPC and its fellow travelers are aiming for, look for the rate of people checking themselves out to rise exponentially.

So What Exactly Is The Problem Here?

"The Atascadero Police Department and the San Luis Obispo County Bomb Task Force took possession of a large number of weapons and ammunition found Thursday...The suspicious circumstances were determined to be unfounded, but during a follow-up investigation, officers discovered a collection of weapons.

"The collection included about 35 firearms ranging from handguns to shotguns and rifles, about 25 swords, bayonets and daggers, between 2,000 and 3,000 rounds of ammunition and roughly 15 potentially explosive devices resembling hand grenades... According to a police report, the property taken into custody did not appear to be connected to any criminal activity."

Thanks to John Schaefer for passing this along. I'll see if I can find out any more about this. Right now, it definitely goes into the WTF? Files...

Send Out a Newsletter, Go to Jail

McGath explains the latest scheme our masters have cooked up to protect us from that icky First Amendment.

I'll bet I see an instant drop in offers to buy online prescriptions, increase my size, get free premium cable channels and wire transfer millions from Nigeria.

Dang. And I was so looking forward to meeting hot singles--right after I update my PayPal account information.

Why Don't I Feel Threatened By This?

Fun Turns to Tragedy shares a photo of everyday life in Israel.

It's a shame that conditions require this, but it's also nice to see a government realizing that The People are the frontline for Homeland Security.

Forgetting for a moment that Israel is a socialist country, this instant in time reminds me of nothing so much as a scene from the libertarian alternative world in L. Neil Smith's "The Probability Broach."

Reaching Out to Victims of Crime

An Appeal By Deborah Ann Courtney

Dear Friends and Fellow Activists:

I have recently completed the preliminary personal safety and firearm training for the Victim’s of Crime TV reality show “Front Sight True Stories”, produced by Hard Focus Media, LLC.

I have never been through such a powerful and remarkably self fulfilling and empowering experience in my life. I have come home more confident of protecting and defending myself and my loved ones, and more self aware of the potential situations around me that could lead to becoming a victim of crime once again. I have gained skills that will allow me to live without as the fears I held in the past, after having been attacked. The training was a truly awesome experience!

I hope you will spread the word of my search to meet other Victims of Crime by forwarding this email to your contact lists, in helping me to find the other victims who would benefit from the same empowerment training.

I encourage you to download the attached flyer and hand it out to any groups or meetings you may be attending, as we will be filming a second round in the next few weeks, and time is of the essence. I will need to hear from everyone before August 1st.

You may also feel free to view my personal website at www.NOVICTIMS.org, and contact me with any questions or comments you might have.

I appreciate each of you, and thank you ahead of time for any help you may give me in putting me in contact not only with those victims who are seeking further empowerment, but for also putting me in contact with those that you know, or those that can help me find others.

Deborah Ann Courtney

The Second Amendment is not just a Right-It's a Responsibility.

"The Black Arrow"--A Review

By John Geltemeyer
[Posted exclusively to WarOnGuns with permission of the author]

I don't put out too many book reviews, because to be blunt, I'm too damn busy to read any more.

This is the first book I have cracked and read to completion in two years.

I'm talking about "The Black Arrow" by Vin Suprynowicz.

Now I've always enjoyed Vin's writing style. "Send in The Waco Killers," although depressing as hell, was engrossing and well written. Mentioning depressing, I started to read his "Ballad of Carl Drega." I feared that If I had read it to conclusion I would have had to draw a warm bath and slit my wrists. I just couldn't stand to read one more tale of government thugs mowing down some innocent and getting medals for it.

"The Black Arrow" however is anything but depressing.

The tale and plot are almost comic book style, yet the writing ranges from elegant to disturbing.

His characters are like larger than life Ayn Rand - like characters with a third dimension and sound reasons for their actions. You care about their outcomes.

The year is 2030 and Amerika is pretty damn totalitarian. The book opens with immediate flash of action. It grabs you hard enough that you actually want to read the following flashback that explains why some Errol Flynn look alike is shooting government officials from rooftops with a bow and arrow.

The use of a bow has two good effects. First it's dramatic. Second, even though I like my guns, sometimes libertarian writers can get techno geeky when they write technical specifications about guns into a story. Yes, there are guns and they do get used in many action scenes, but there's no 3 page tech spec break downs about the arms being used.

Each chapter is filled with very familiar background characters. They are familiar because they and their stories are ripped from the headlines and Vin's earlier books, with just a dash of fictionalization. However, unlike reality, many of the thugs suddenly end up with a foreign object or two ramming through their body and bringing final justice for their acts.

This isn't like any other libertarian fiction I've read. Even the bad guys have deep, if not twisted character. They are not two dimensional cutouts that wreak mindless destruction upon the populace. They have backgrounds that make them what they are. Some are just rotten people. Some die in confusion saying "..but, we were just trying to keep people safe...."

The book has intrigue and romance. Love triangles and combat. Bad guys and good guys.

There's a few points where the dreaded libertarian talking head character almost appears to be surfacing. However at the point you are wondering if you got suckered in for a crappy ending, Vin suddenly rewards you with mayhem on the people who most deserve it.

If you like a good story, libertarian / freedom movement morality, romance, character building and bad guys biting the dust; then this is your book.

Those of you who live close by might be thinking, "hey I'd like to borrow that book you were talking about." And I'll say "Hell no, go buy your own and support Vin, he deserves monetary compensation for this."

I'm curious what women will have to say about the romance parts. They seemed somewhat overdone at first, but I thought they actually fit in well with the comic book style of the action flow.

Anyway, get out there and buy the damn book.

"If it's a homicide, it's likely to involve a gun"

“Why do we need them? To kill off everybody? And, what sense does that make? Somebody please tell me — although I really doubt if you can give me a good answer.”

I wrote to the author of this foolishness:

"A Good Answer"

http://keepandbeararms.com/opsd/
You would evidently prefer all of these people to have been victims.

http://www.jpfo.org/NaziLawEnglish.htm
Yep, the only ones who should have guns are the government.

http://ls.wustl.edu/WULQ/75-3/753-4.html
Gun control? Genocide?

http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html
Yeah, it makes a lot of sense for black leaders to insist on continuing the tradition of keeping human beings disarmed.

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
What, if good guys are armed, bad guys will be deterred?

Not that I expect any of this to affect your views in any way.

Surprise me.

David Codrea

"Where are the anti-gun proposals?"

Ri-ight. This hand-wringing enuretic would have us believe there is a shortage of "anti-gun proposals."

"Deploring the guns isn't enough. We need to hear specific plans from all of them about how they are going to disarm the thugs doing the shooting."

They have no specific plans, you moron. All "gun control" edicts do is disarm the "law-abiding."

"Instead of worrying about legal gun ownership why aren't they competing with ideas to rid our streets of illegal guns?"

Maybe because the "solutions" idiots like you propose only impact and restrict "legal gun ownership."

Protest Gun "Buybacks," Go To Jail

"Dickey pointed out that the incident happened at...'a city-owned property, during a city-sponsored event inviting the public onto the property.'”

I wonder what would happen if someone showed up with signs supporting the effort?

If It's A "Partnership," Are We Free To Dissolve It?

In re BATFU enforcing a frame, receiver or barrel importation ban:

"Maintaining open lines of communication is vital to the successful future of ATF’s partnership with the import community."--Lewis P. Raden, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)

Enforcement Services. Partnership. Obey us or be destroyed.

Don'tcha just love BATFU-speak?

Hey Lewis--what do you call it when someone doesn't want to be your partner, yet you force yourself upon them anyway--under threat of violence if they don't submit?

[Hat tip to Head's Bunker.]

"Canons of Journalism" Rebuttal

Cari Hammerstrom Speaks Out

"Hyperbole" reporter here.

First of all, let me say that none of this is the opinion of The Monitor, my employer. It is my personal rebuttal, because I don't like my credibility to be attacked.

Today, I got a call from a Denny Church, (sp?), inquiring about the article I wrote that appeared in Saturday's edition of The Monitor.

He referred me to this website.

I've read your attack on my credentials and have this to say.

According to the golf pro at Tierra Santa, he and fellow golfers have heard the distinctive zinging of bullets going over their heads.

My own co-workers and husband, which of course I did not interview for this article, too, have heard bullets zinging over their heads at this golf course. It was told to me by the golf pro that these bullets came from a range to the north of the course. He never said whether he had found bullets anywhere on the course.

It could be possible that this person was mistaken and doesn't know which direction the sun comes up. According to Lt. Raul Vallejo of the Weslaco Police Department, there is another range west of the course where "uncontolled" shooting goes on. The bullets may have come from there.

The northern range is property of the Weslaco police department; however, I did not know this at the time at I wrote the article.

Vallejo (the firearms instructor) informed me that, yes, you are correct, no complaints have been filed. However, does a formal complaint necessarily need to be filed for an action to have actually happened? I think not.

"Nobody's out there shooting willy nilly," Vallejo said. No citizens are shooting at the range. He told me the range points due west, and yet, the course is to the south. Highly improbable that the bullet came from the police department's range, yes. But could it happen. Sure. Or, like I said, the golf pro didn't know which range the bullets zinged from, or worse yet, he may have lied because he doesn't like guns.

Who knows?

But he said he heard bullets going over his head and it bothers him and his clients. A worthy point to consider when trying to highlight the need for an indoor range.
You obviously missed the point of the article, which was obvious by the headline, "Targeting a need."

Law enforcement officers would like an indoor range to shoot at. People, or at least golfers, would prefer if law enforcement and anybody who shoots go inside and do it. This new shooting range is obviously wanted by some. (If you still want to shoot outside, fine.)

This account of one golfer's ire was merely a way of illustrating that. And the "bang, bang...bang, bang, bang!" was a way of putting the reader in a golfer's shoes. An "overanalyzing" golfer at that.

Don't point out bias where it does not exist.

You simply chose to read my article a certain way. I'm sure others got the point.
Just so you know, my husband owns a gun. I like guns. I have two shotgun shells and a bullet casing sitting on my desk, from the times I shot with law enforcement. (I've gone through McAllen Police Citizen's Academy and the Border Patrol Citizen's Academy)

I also recently went skeet shooting for the first time and blasted that clay right out of the sky on my first try. What a feeling!

So, no, this was not some liberal media attack on the right to bear arms. This article simply pointed out the need for another indoor shooting range in Hidalgo County. Thank you very much.

Respectfully,

Cari Hammerstrom

"Canons of Journalism" Update

Whose Paranoid does his own investigation.

Job Requirements

"Later, the President heard from his wife - via an interview on NBC's 'Today Show' - about what she is looking for on the nation's highest court.

"'Sure, I would really like for him to name another woman,' First Lady Laura Bush said while on her goodwill tour of Africa."

After all, it isn't understanding and faithfulness to Founding intent that matters--it's your genitals.

Preferably Bush will also make sure his nominee is non-Caucasian and so compromised in principle even the Democrats won't filibuster.

Yeah, we'll be getting our rights recognized and protected real quick with this approach.

Vous Êtes Cordialement Invités...

À une Réunion des Traîtres!

SayUncle links to a Brady Center fundraiser at the French Embassy celebrating the birthday of Art Buchwald.

At least Americans who wish to surrender their rights have picked the right place.

I'm disappointed to see Dave Barry on the list.

Power of the Constituency

Liberty Belles Ask For Your Support

This is a time when our rights as American citizens are more in jeopardy than at any other time in our nation's history. We're witnessing an all out attack on what we traditionally know as American culture and the Bill of Rights. The evidence is in our schools, our courts, at the border, and even in the White House. The only thing that can stop our politicians, mainstream media, and big business from continuing down this treacherous path is a massive outpouring of resistance from The People. Lack of such a resistance would clearly signal a green light for the end of our nation as we know it.

We need your help to represent the Second Amendment during this very uncertain time. Only with your support and membership can we continue to be the voice your views and opinions on gun rights. And if you join before July 31st, you will receive a complimentary gift as a token of our appreciation.

Please click here to learn how you can support the cause: http://www.libertybelles.org/join.htm

Please visit our website at http://www.libertybelles.org to learn more about this topic and others including:

The Power of the Constituency
The cost of SB357
BATF - Failing the test
and more!

Thank you for your support!

Jennifer Freeman

Everybody Loves Ray Guns

Bill St. Clair points us to Ionatron, which is developing what is, for all intents and purposes, a phaser.

"Oh, joy," he observes. "The JBTs will soon have phasers. Then again, so will we."

Wanna bet?

At least not legal ones.

Prosecutor Steals Gun

Publicola tells a distressing and outrageous tale.

A Manual Effort

Civis Proeliator gives us "Manuals, Manuals & More Manuals."

"Lunatic Fringe"?

Arms and the Law refers us to Polsby and Kates' new law review article, which begins very cryptically:

"This essay seeks to reclaim a serious argument from the lunatic fringe. We argue a connection exists between the restrictiveness of a country's civilian weapons policy and its liability to commit genocide upon its own people."

I wasn't aware of a lunatic fringe making this argument.

JPFO and its supporters have been making this argument for years, and struggling mightily to get the ideas noticed. Curiously, they are not even mentioned in this paper.

Mr. Polsby--it would help if you told us exactly who you have in mind when you use the term "lunatic fringe."

Man, What IS It...

...with the Rio Grande Valley and bullets flying overhead near golf courses...?

At least in this case, it doesn't appear to be reporter hyperbole...

The Canons of Journalism

An Open Letter to Cari Hammerstrom

Dear Ms. Hammerstrom,

Your paper's website doesn't include an email address for you, so I'm sending this to its editorial department to forward to you, as well as for their cognizance.

I'm writing in response to your July 9 story in The Monitor titled "TARGETING A NEED" because it makes some remarkable, and frankly, unbelievable claims.

You say golfers at Tierra Santa golf course in Weslaco are subjected to "bullets zinging overhead," and give credence to the assertion that "residents living nearby would probably appreciate if the bullets could go somewhere else."

Is this true? Is a gun range operated so dangerously and incompetently that the public is exposed to potentially lethal gunfire, and no one is doing anything to stop it? How could a fair reading of your carefully chosen and edited words conclude otherwise?

That seems to be quite a story you have stumbled on to. It's baffling why your biggest concern seems to be some golfers' games being off at the 6th hole due to noise.

Questions I would be interested in seeing you follow up on:

How much expended ammunition has been recovered off the gun range property?

Have any homes or other property been hit?

With "bullets zinging overhead," have police reports been made?

What do the police have to say about such obviously hazardous conditions endangering lives and property?

Has anyone appealed to a court to shut the range down? If not, why not?

Or, Ms. Hammerstrom, is it more likely that this is not a straight news story at all, but intentional hyperbole designed to shape public attitudes by implying a danger that does not exist?

If that's the case, do you think you are rigorously upholding the canons of journalism, or have you given that up and embraced the role of an agenda-driven propagandist?

Let me save you the time of doing further research, Ms. Hammerstrom--I have done it for you, from my armchair in Southern California, and it took me a matter of mere minutes.

Since your story was datelined in Edinburg, I called their police department. The lady I spoke with had heard nothing about "bullets zinging overhead" at a local golf course, but said I would need to check with the Weslaco police and gave me their number. I called there and spoke to another lady in charge of records and asked her if there was anyone I could speak with on the record about the matter. She gave me the name of her lieutenant and took down my number for him to get back to me. She also volunteered that if something like that had happened, she thought she would have heard about it--and hadn't.

A few hours later, I got a return call from Lt. Raul Vallejo, who informed me that when he heard about my inquiry, he personally went out to the area to see if he could find anything out about it. I explained who I was and why I was checking out your claims and his for the record response was:

"I have not received complaints of that nature and would fully investigate anything that was brought before me like that."

Lt. Vallejo seemed like a real and genuine person, easy to talk with, and honest and forthright in his answers. You would have enjoyed speaking with him, Ms. Hammerstrom, assuming you were interested in giving your assertions a reality check.

Isn't it curious that a professional reporter, backed by the resources of a professional newsgathering organization, would make such outrageous and misleading claims and present them to the public as factual? Especially when divining the truth of the matter is almost effortless, assuming that is what one seeks? Do you attribute your false claims to carelessness, Ms. Hammerstrom, or to something more deliberate?

To your editors, I would ask if this is representative of the quality of reporting we can expect from The Monitor and its sister publications at Freedom Communications, Inc.?

In any event, I'll be monitoring The Monitor, Ms. Hammerstrom, as well as sister publications where your story has appeared, to see if a deserved correction to their readers is forthcoming. And while I hold no illusions about professional sanctions for work that can only be described as either negligent or deceptive, perhaps this will give your editors pause to scrutinize your submissions a little more closely in the future.