Parker vs DC: Next steps?

TriggerFinger has a good analysis of the latest legal wranglings in DC with the Seegars and Parker cases.

Go read.

BREAKING NEWS: Update to Indiana Gun Confiscation Bill

In my "There's a Reason Why They Call Us 'Gun Nuts" commentary about an Indiana bill proposing to confiscate guns from individuals that a police officer deems to be mentally ill, I cited The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette's claim that "Rep. Larry Buell, R-Indianapolis, who authored the bill, says that he consulted with the National Rifle Association when he drafted the bill and that it supports the legislation."

I spoke with Stacey Stumpf of the Journal Gazette and asked her if this was correct.

"Yes," she replied. "I spoke with Rep. Buell the day before the article."

I then spoke with Buell spokesman Graig Lubsen, who also confirmed NRA support for the bill.

He informed me that the bill is undergoing changes, where the police would "need a warrant to take any weapons, and the person is entitled to have a hearing within 14 days."

He also informed me that the legislature was "talking about--but it hasn't happened yet--on second reading, an amendment that one year is the longest the state can hold the weapon. Then the person can reapply to have the weapon returned. If they reapply and are denied, the state can hold it for another year."

Mr. Lubsen assured me that Rep. Buell is a stong supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, and wanted to make sure I knew about the incident that precipitated the bill, the fatal shooting of the police officer son of a friend of Mr. Buell by a mentally ill person.

Editorial comments:

That is unfortunate. It is tragic. But it's also the rationale used to pass the Brady Law, the "assault weapon" ban, and many other gun control laws.

If a person can't be trusted with a gun because they are a danger to themselves and others, they can't be trusted without a custodian.

"Strip Search Yields Gun In 'Unusual' Place"

"LAWRENCEVILLE, GA -- -- A police spokeswoman called it 'unusual' that a 19-year-old almost smuggled a loaded pistol tucked between his buttocks into a county jail this week."

"Unusual." Now there's an understatement. Do you think they just put the gun in a Ziploc®, or did they make some poor deputy clean it before signing it into evidence?

And why can't I get the "Lemmiwinks Song" out of my head?

GunTruths Myths

I've been discussing bringing back GunTruths.com with my friend Russ Howard.

We did a lot of original things on that site, had a lot of fun, made a lot of friends, and a spinoff team launched the Citizens of America advertising campaign that ran pro-2A radio spots in every State of the union.

We may yet resurrect GT, but it won't be soon. In the meantime, I've been crawling back through time via the Wayback Machine and managed to retrieve the old GT "Myths" section. We created this figuring there's a finite set of arguments the antis use against us, and if we anticipated and recognized them in advance, it could be a useful tool for responding to their lies and for honing our debating skills.

There’s a Reason Why They Call Us “Gun Nuts”

NRA Backs Indiana Gun Confiscation Bill

“[A]s one reads the literature espoused by gun nut organizations,” University of Connecticut editorialist Robert Schiering tells his readers in The Daily Campus, “the reasoning behind this term becomes startlingly clear. Gun nuts are called as such because they are incontrovertibly insane.”

“People who bring guns into public buildings shouldn't have permits,” editorial letter writer and former mayoral candidate Charles Nance tells The Richmond Times-Dispatch. “They should have their heads examined.”

How often have we heard from the anti-choice in defense crowd that concealed carry will lead to Dodge City shootouts over fender-benders?

How often have we who warn against gun control’s “slippery slope” leading to confiscation been dismissed as paranoid?

The message is clear. Gun owners are psychotic, violent, out of control. We need to be treated for a mental disorder. And if we think anyone is trying to confiscate our guns, we’re paranoid to boot.

Enter Indiana Rep. Larry Buell, R-Indianapolis, who authored a bill that “would permit law enforcement officers to confiscate firearms from individuals for 45 days when an officer thinks the person is mentally ill and dangerous.”

Buell tells the Fort Wayne Journal-Gazette “that he consulted with the National Rifle Association when he drafted the bill and that it supports the legislation.”

Buell was endorsed and given an "A" rating by NRA-PVF in the 2004 campaign--which means if you contributed to it, you enabled him. Buell says NRA supports this confiscation without due process scheme—which means if you contributed to them, you have helped finance this edict.

So now we’re supposed to buy into street cops having the professional qualifications to adjudicate a person mentally ill, and then empower them to confiscate guns WITHOUT DUE PROCESS? What is this, Gitmo? And NRA “supports the legislation”?

Furthermore, the Buell/NRA Firearm Confiscation Bill gives the cop immunity if he makes a bad call:

“6. (a) A person who without malice, bad faith, or negligence acts according to this article and…(3) participates in…(A) a proceeding under this article for the seizure or retention of a firearm possessed by an individual alleged to be mentally ill and dangerous…is immune from any civil or criminal liability that might otherwise be imposed as a result of the person's actions.”

Here are a few questions I’d like to see NRA management and their slate of candidates for the upcoming Board of Directors election address:

Does NRA really support this legislation as A-rated Rep. Buell claims?

Does Indiana have no laws providing for the restraint and arrest of someone acting violently? If arrestees behave bizarrely, are there no statutory provisions to place them into an evaluation facility? Is there no current lawful means of removing a person deemed harmful to himself and others from the general population into custodial care and treatment?

Or do we just let a cop—any cop—declare a citizen unfit to keep and bear arms, and then implement that decision under color of authority and force of arms—with guaranteed immunity?

While some will no doubt argue the bill has provisions guaranteeing the suspect individual a hearing, how many gun owners faced with such allegations are financially able to prevail against the unlimited resources of the state?

What guarantees are there, especially with the vague criterion of “reasonableness” cited in the bill, that this confiscation edict will not be exploited by anti-gun police administrations in the guidelines they establish for its execution? Is it not apparent that there is tremendous police management opposition to citizens keeping and bearing arms, that they are looking for an excuse—any excuse—to disarm them? Doesn’t the same hold true for many of their political masters?

What if a woman is hysterical because a stalker or a vengeful ex-partner is threatening her? Seeing only the snapshot of her behavior at the moment, can we be assured the responding officer will not see fit to disarm her—for her own good? But, oh yeah, she can pick her gun back up in 45 days—if she can afford a lawyer, if she can afford a battery of self-financed psychological evaluations and if she hasn’t been attacked and killed in the interim.

Or how about a devastated individual grieving over the loss of a parent, spouse or child? Might there be instances where their behavior might indicate they are not in complete control of their emotions?

Is it not manifestly evident that the mere desire to own and use firearms is looked upon by anti-choice in defense advocates as a sign of mental instability? Doesn’t no less an “authority” than the American Psychological Association advise parents “Don't carry a gun or a weapon. If you do, this tells your children that using guns solves problems”?

What do you think the APA would say about someone who believes the reason the Founding Fathers wanted an armed citizenry was so that tyrannical leaders and their agents could be lethally repelled?

It has been my longstanding contention that anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian. After all, if we are to believe the Establishment Media (and, gee, why would we doubt them?), the single biggest mass murder in our nation’s history was initiated with mail room tools, the second biggest with fuel oil and fertilizer, and the third biggest with a dollar’s worth of gasoline.

How can any sane person advocate taking away a madman’s gun, but then leaving him free to wreak mayhem with box cutters and matches?

If the Buell/NRA Firearm Confiscation Bill becomes law, look for it to spread to other locales, and even to be proposed at the national level. After all, George Bush, who NRA reportedly amassed a $20,000,000 reelection war chest for, has introduced his Orwellian-titled “New Freedom Initiative,” which recommends mental health screening of the entire US population, from pre-school children on.

These are some of the reasons why I came up with my NRA BOD Candidate Questionnaire, to support those who will use their office to rein in the “Winning Team’s” baffling affinity for subverting “shall not be infringed,” and to expose those who will not.

So here’s another question for the candidates: Will you be an apologist for this outrage, or will you publicly and vocally condemn it?

Good For Me, But Not For Thee?

"California's secretary of state announced his resignation Friday amid investigations into his handling of federal election funds and questionable campaign contributions," The Washington Post tells us.

Let's see if the government screws him over anywhere near as bad as it did Russ Howard.

I mean, we're all s'posed to be equal under the law, right?

First Responder

The first response to my NRA Board Candidate Questionnaire has been given by Joel Friedman. It’s posted over at The High Road.

That’s a good start, and I appreciate his not only meeting the challenge, but being the first to do so. As I mentioned in my earlier article, the questionnaire was adapted from one I have sent to politicians in the past, and with very few exceptions, most of them have ignored, evaded or weasel-worded.

If you’re a voting member, you’ll need to decide if his answers match how you would have responded, or if there are any you’d like to have clarified. I encourage you to take him up on his offer to answer more questions. After all, the NRA is the most influential of the "gun groups"--policies they set and endorsements they make end up affecting all of us.

Clarifying questions that immediately come to mind:

* Do you agree with the way NRA assigns political ratings? If not, what would you change and why? Who would you have given a different rating to, what would it been and why?
* Do you disagree with any policies being promulgated by NRA management? What is you biggest area of dissent? Have you offered superior alternatives and worked with others to implement them?
* Have you ever publicly spoken out against an NRA position because you thought it was wrong? When, where, and what were the results?
* What reforms do you think are needed at NRA and why?
* If elected, how will you inform members of your performance and voting record? Will you let us know when you dissent and why?

You can learn more about Mr. Friedman, including his contact information, at:
http://www.joelforboard.com/.

Addendum since first posted:
From Mr. Friedman's Mission Statement: "I fully support the successful NRA Winning Team philosophy that has been responsible for NRA's unprecedented growth and effectiveness and promises to continue throughout the next century. I look forward to being elected to the NRA Board of Directors and helping NRA leaders, like Wayne LaPierre, Chris Cox, Kayne Robinson, and Sandy Froman, preserve the Second Amendment."

Merchants of Death

The following article was bought and paid for by GUNS & AMMO a couple years back, but the Legal Department for their new owner balked at publishing it, presumably out of concern that some of the companies mentioned might take legal action.

That don't worry me none, as I have plenty of backup from media sources to substantiate each and every statement. Anyone wants to sue me over this, let's party.

Editor Lee Hoots graciously gave me permission to use it as I see fit. I see fit to let it see the light of day right here on my new blog.

---------------------------------

Merchants of Death
By David Codrea

The visitor conduct sign posted at entrances to The Block at Orange, an open-air Southern California mall featuring trendy shops and restaurants, reads like a contract. Among the numerous terms and conditions: rules against smoking, skateboarding, and, of course, guns—even if permitted and concealed. Violators will be asked to leave and prosecuted for trespassing if they refuse to comply.

One wonders what The Block would do should a violent criminal not heed their posted prohibitions and consequences. Or if they assume responsibility for the safety of their customers—with attendant liability should they fail to provide it. A stroll through the maze of colorful storefronts and kiosks reveals no visible security presence to ask, although there’s no shortage of smokers sitting on benches or extinguishing butts in conveniently placed urns located throughout the premises. Meanwhile, over by the surf wear shop, three adolescent boys are practicing flamboyant skateboard dismounts.

“FATAL STABBING RAISES CONCERNS AT THE BLOCK,” reads the Orange County Register headline. “[O]fficers and unarmed security guards broke up a fistfight between two groups [who] then moved about 200 feet away…where the fatal melee took place,” the report says, also citing “two rapes in 2000 [and] 50 misdemeanor assaults with 24 arrests.”

“Unarmed security guards.” Clearly, they can’t protect their customers and evidently would prefer them being raped, brutalized or killed instead of lawfully armed. And some companies aren’t satisfied to merely impose such stupid, life-endangering rules—some enthusiastically work toward criminalizing gun ownership.

Dannon Yogurt, for example, was a sponsor of the so-called “Million Mom March” (although analyses of event photos estimate a more plausible attendance number at around 40,000). Its parent company, the French dairy, snack and bottled water giant Danone, is a model of globalist expansion—so its affinity for UN-style “small arms control” is not surprising.

Then there’s Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, a homegrown experiment in corporate social(ist) engineering that has supported a variety of left-leaning causes, including funding gun control through sales of their “Peace Pops” bars. It figures— with heart disease the leading cause of death in this country, you wouldn’t expect an ice cream company to focus on that threat. They are so hostile to guns they seemingly can’t even acknowledge the word— when new CEO Perry Odak came on board from “U.S. Repeating Arms Co. (Winchester) and Browning,” their press release described it as “a manufacturer of outdoor and recreation sporting goods.” And after Ben & Jerry’s railed against the chemical dioxin as “one of the most toxic substances in our environment today,” JunkScience.com performed an analysis of their “World’s Best Vanilla” ice cream, concluding it contained 200 times the EPA’s standard daily dose (in reality not a hazardous level, but certainly an example of the hysteria they promote, as well as proving them profoundly hypocritical).

Nobody doesn’t like Sara Lee? Really? Because the activist conglomerate, which includes prominent brands among its holdings like L’leggs, Hanes, Ball Park, and Hillshire Farm, sure doesn’t like gun owners. Their foundation named Sarah Brady one of its “Frontrunners” in 1997 and awarded her $50,000 for her “humanitarian” work toward rendering their customers vulnerable to attack. That same year, the FDA reported a recall of cakes, pastries and muffins because “the products may contain small quantities of sifter wire.” In the wake of this came a listeria-tainted hotdog and deli meat scandal that left 21 people dead, caused three miscarriages, and resulted in over a hundred people being sickened. This was followed last year by a Class I recall (“a health hazard situation where there is reasonable probability that the use of the product will cause serious, adverse health consequences or death”) of its Bistro Collection Pecan Tart Trays.

There’s an old bumper sticker that says “Ted Kennedy’s Car Has Killed More People than My Gun.” Perhaps it’s time to create one that says “Sara Lee Has Killed More People than the Manson Family.” And to wonder why they don’t focus on controlling their product quality instead of our guns.

There are other ways companies sabotage the Second Amendment. Many have issued employee disarmament policies in response to legislative concealed carry reforms. And many, like the Blockheads at Orange, have posted signs forbidding armed customers on their property.

These are but a few examples. Names like Levi Strauss, Disney, Toys-“R”-Us, Hyatt, Time-Warner, 7-Eleven, and many others, also figure prominently. A complete list would be impractical to compile, and there is no space to print it here, but NRA-ILA has compiled a pretty thorough one on its website. If you’re not on the Internet, you should be—much serious grassroots activism takes place there, and it provides alternative news sources free of mainstream media anti-defense bias. Just don’t sign up with America Online (a whole ‘nother story in itself).

The point being, there are plenty of products and services gun owners purchase every day where parent company policies endanger our liberty and our lives. We owe it to ourselves to know who they are and to shop accordingly. Remember that profit margins are usually small, and most companies can’t afford to lose even a percentage point to their competitors (it’s widely speculated that a gun owner boycott helped force Kmart into bankruptcy). It just doesn’t make sense to reward such businesses with our patronage—especially when they turn around and use the money we pay them to undermine our right to keep and bear arms.

As does “educational” toy retailer Zany Brainy, recipient of the Million Mom March’s “Apple Pie Award” for sponsoring a “Violent Toy Turn-In”. While such ridiculous events no doubt help them live up to the first half of their name, such brain-dead posturing should guarantee that informed gun owners find another place to buy toys.

One can only hope the Million Moms get their pie from Sara Lee. And maybe serve it with a (healthy?) scoop of Ben & Jerry’s…

NRA Board Candidate Questionnaire

The election of NRA Directors is once more upon us, with ballots due from voting members by March 27.

The only nomination of special note is actor Tom Selleck, who will no doubt be groomed as the next high-profile trophy president in the Charlton Heston mode—in other words, a handsome and popular star who reads his lines well. With the passing of Neal Knox, no serious challenge to the “Winning Team” exists, thus there is no need for a “Don’t vote for these guys” ad.

The choices this year ensure that Wayne La Pierre will maintain uncontested control. There are 31 candidates for 25 open slots, and the Nominating Committee has endorsed 28 of them. That’s outrageous.

No true reform will come to the NRA until voting members can rate director candidates based on unequivocal platforms of support for “shall not be infringed.” Unfortunately, no such demand has been made by the membership, so expect more status quo, backroom deals, political compromises and suspect politician ratings.

Too bad. As a start, I’d like to see each candidate for the BOD specifically answer the following questions, adapted from a questionnaire I have sent in the past to political candidates who claim to be pro-Second Amendment.

I won’t hold my breath, but if anyone can get a candidate to give straight for-the-record answers to these, please let me know.
--------------------------

1. Do you believe that the Constitution is the "supreme law of the land" and that the Bill of Rights acknowledges the birthrights of all Americans?

2. If so, should these rights be proactively protected from infringement by all levels of government, including city, county and state?

3. Please give some examples of gun laws you consider constitutional.

4. Please give some examples of gun laws you consider unconstitutional.

5. Does the right to bear arms include the right for any peaceable citizen to carry them concealed without a permit, as in Vermont?

6. Do you believe that Americans have a right to own, use and carry weapons of military pattern?

7. Do you support or oppose Project Exile, and do you agree with current NRA management’s call to “enforce existing gun laws”?

8. Do you support or oppose licensing requirements to own or carry firearms? Why?

9. What specific gun laws will you work to get repealed?

10. If elected to the NRA Board, will you back your words of support for firearms rights up with consistent actions? How?

Request for Historical Examples of Bearing Arms

“PLEASE,” Judson Witham writes, “I am seeking as many HISTORICAL accounts of BEARING ARMS in defense of the Family Homestead (Farm) from Hostiles as possible. My work is being made FREE as I collect cases from Colonial or Civil War era Court OPINIONS from around the USA. I ask for cases from MAINE to California ‘Bearing Arms’, ‘The Defense of Self Defense’ are sought to BOLSTER the arguments for PASSAGE of the Self Defense Act of 2005 HR 47 Currently in the Judiciary Committee of the 109th Congress."

If you can help, contact him at jurisnot@yahoo.com.

Absolutely Shameless Self-Promotion: "A Judgment Call"

Who should we trust more to establish gun policies--folksinger Peter Yarrow, pop tart Britney Spears, actor/UN "Messenger of Peace" Michael Douglas, grunge diva Courtney Love, and entertainer Rosie O'Donnell--or the Founding Fathers?

"A Judgment Call" is my Rights Watch column for the March issue of GUNS Magazine, coming this week to enlightened newsstands throughout the Republic.

The Hebrew Kid and the Apache Maiden

I first became aware of Robert J. Avrech after he wrote an excellent article titled "Jews and Guns." As a long-time gentile supporter of Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, I believe we need RKBA allies across all demographics, and the argument that an armed people won't be loaded into cattle cars is pretty damned compelling.

That he is an established voice in Hollywood, having written the screenplay for Body Double, means his voice has a far reach, and has potential to first be noticed by, and then persuade folks who might not give me the time of day.

I began corresponding with Robert and he told me about his new novel, The Hebrew Kid and the Apache Maiden, the story of a Jewish immigrant family in America's Old West. The postive value of firearms deployed in moral hands is prominently portrayed (without falling into the trap of being "preachy"), and it also explains how coerced disarmament allowed for persecution and murder of Jews in the protagonist's Russian homeland.

My verdict: I loved this book, and not just because it validates my beliefs. I read it in one sitting, devoured it, and thoroughly enjoyed myself.

Robert asked me to write a review, which you can find on Amazon.com. While there, pick up a copy, or get one at the website for Robert's publishing company, Seraphic Press.

This book is suitable for literate children, and for anyone who likes a good story with characters you care about. Buy it. I did.

"Safe Schools"--GUNS Magazine, Feb. 2005

Facing an unprecedented terrorist threat, official "readiness" policies mandate that we become conditioned sheep. This is insane.

Read complete article here:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_2_51/ai_n8591516

GUNS Magazine 50 Year Anniversary Article

Fifty years ago, when GUNS was born, we had already capitulated to decades of federal gun controls. But a 1919 excise tax, a 1927 concealable firearms mailing ban, the National Firearms Act of 1934, requiring registration and taxing of machine guns and short-barreled shotguns, and a 1938 dealer licensing requirement, were, to most Americans, irrelevant.

Read complete article here:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_1_51/ai_n7581230