Sarah, Jane ‘n Me

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

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

HARMAN AND BRADY STIFLE FREE SPEECH AT "PRESS CONFERENCE"

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

BREAKING NEWS: Feinstein Arrested After Gun Mishap

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

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

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

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

Read complete story.

Me & my AK-47

Josie Roberts buys a WASR-10.

She really doesn't like the fact that she can.

"Six days after Watts was murdered, four days after I applied for a driver’s license, one hour after entering the store and five minutes after a criminal record check, I legally owned a semiautomatic AK-47-style rifle," she writes.

Horrors!

Josie, I can buy gasoline, fertilizer and box cutters in a lot less time. [And, yeah, I'm aware of the disputes about OKC and 9-11.]

You can't ban everything that's potentially dangerous, Josie.

Except for balconies. Ban them.

[Thanks to SayUncle for the tip on this story.]

Mother Sues Cops For Failing to Protect Kids

"[I]t would establish restraining orders as de facto Constitutional entitlements, the enforcement of which are guaranteed by procedural due process; and, second, it would hold state police federally liable for actions they did not take rather than for their bad acts."

As tragic as this story is, the cure is worse than the disease. Innocent victims could be denied fundamental rights without due process--based solely on the say-so of a spiteful accuser. RO's are routinely issued in divorces, even though a spouse may be the most gentle soul in the world.

Society does not have the resources to provide everyone a 24/7 bodyguard, and imagine the totalitarian outcome if it tried. The truth is, we're each of us ultimately responsible for our own defense. That's the way it's always been. To deny that is to deny reality.

This proposal makes about as much sense as balcony control.

NYU Imposes Balcony Control

"In an effort to prevent suicides, New York University will restrict access to balconies in two dormitories, Carlyle Court and Coral Towers, which together house more than 1,000 students."

Let me guess: background checks, one balcony a month, registration and licensing, "smart" balconies...

Gosh, this living in a physical universe with cause and effect certainly poses some dilemmas. And this business of people making wrong choices has got to stop! But we should certainly be thankful the solons of higher education are, at least, addressing the balcony loophole.

[Note: if not registered with the NY Times, try BugMeNot.]

Godzilla vs The Bradys

Oh, the humanity!

You can visit assorted disasters on the deserving recipient of your choice thanks to the fine folks at NetDisasters.com.

A Smarter Way

I nominate Ronald Brownstein over at The Los Angeles Times for the Nobel Peace Prize. He's single-handedly come up with "A Smarter Way to Control Outbreaks of School Gun Violence."

If only the fed-gov would force us to use "smart guns," the Red Lake Massacre wouldn't have happened.

Well, the technology isn't actually ready yet, Brownstein admits, but if it was, this would sure be a smarter way to control outbreaks of school violence.

Of course he doesn't address what we'll need to do with the estimated 250 million or so "dumb" guns already in circulation. Nor that the Red Lake killer would have still been able to steal guns from his LEO grandfather, since the police will exempt themselves from using them (even though the justification for the original research was to create a smarter way to control incidents where perps shoot cops with their own guns.)

He doesn't say anything about how the new technology will likely raise the cost of basic defense pistols out of the reach of many low-income people, the ones who live in the most crime-prone neighborhoods and presumably in the most routine danger. Nor does he consider how criminals, like the police, will also be exempted from any mandates.

He also doesn't consider the near universal experience of pointing a remote control at a TV or garage door and having absolutely nothing happen. But maybe increasing the likelihood of a firearm failing to perform as intended will turn out to be a smarter way to revive gun industry lawsuits.

And he's dead silent on the certain demands for the police to have a "shutoff switch" like the engine disablers being developed as a smarter way to stop car chases. After all, what excuse could a "law-abiding" citizen have for not supporting this? Like someone who asserts his Fourth Amendment rights during a traffic stop, what have you got to hide?

The sad thing is, I'll bet over 90% of The Times' readers will never hear such arguments, and of the ones who do, the majority will find the outcomes desirable.

Ronald Brownstein is counting on that. After all, we've established that he's a pretty smart fellow.

A Sticky Situation

Jennifer Freeman over at Liberty Belles says some of their "members and supporters have been placing the Liberty Belles bumper stickers on newspaper racks and public telephone booths. Apparently these stickers have been popping up all over the country.

"While we appreciate the enthusiasm and support," Ms. Freeman says, "it has generated some complaints from the owners of the property. As such, we kindly ask that you request and receive permission prior to placing our sticker in a place where it can be easily viewed by the public."

In other words, STOP IT. STOP IT NOW.

"In the meantime," she reminds us, "Liberty Belles bumper stickers still look great on your car. (Please don't put them other people's cars!)."

These stickers are complimentary and can ordered on their website at http://www.libertybelles.org/shop.htm

Joy, and Danger, of Witlessness

The family of a bicyclist slain by a cougar at Southern California's Whiting Wilderness Park is suing the state, that would be us private individuals who have taxes extorted from us.

"Because the county installs signs warning about mountain lions — and rattlesnakes — at the entrances to all its wilderness parks," The Los Angeles Times intones, "it's likely Reynolds knew there was some chance of a mountain lion encounter."

The Times actually argues for individual responsibility for one's own safety!

Yep, the Park Rules are posted.

But I wonder why the editorial doesn't mention the one that says "Possession or use of firearms or weapons is prohibited."

Yeah, I wonder.

Tough on Guns, Weak on Brains

Mark Benjamin of Salon.com thinks frivolous lawsuits should be employed against the gun industry.

Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants BATFU to be able to harrass dealers out of existence.

And perhaps most importantly, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com wants the government to be able to declare people terrorists and deny them their right to keep and bear arms without due process.

In other words, Mark Benjamin of Salon.com is yet another in a long line of boringly unoriginal anti-gun Establishment propagandists.

Correspondent Brian Naylor shared his letter to Salon.com with WarOn Guns. Among his pithy observations:

"You go on to raise all the VPC/Brady cornerstone spectres - 'TEC-9 submachine guns' and 'street-sweepers.' You use the all-too-familiar VPC tactic of purposefully confusing fully-automatic M-16s with semi-automatics. You fail to mention that the armor-penetrating rounds for the recently fearsome FN 5.7 are not available to the public at all.

"You continue to pretend that there is a gun show 'loophole' when there is no such thing. You even weigh in on the VPC's latest manufactured boogeyman, the .50BMG, with their canonical list of imagined horrors. As far as I can tell, the only VPC bullet points you failed to hit were the use of the phrases, 'spray bullets' and 'blood in the streets.'

"Do they actually send out a list of talking points, or did you go to the trouble to cull them all yourself? I'm not sure which would be worse."

To view "Tough on terror, weak on guns," you'll need to get a "day pass" and watch an ad.

Brady Campaign: NRA Calls for More Guns in Schools

Hey, if you dry up sources of blood, how is Michael Barnes gonna dance?

I'm sure if he was addressing a school assembly on the benefits of being helpless sheep, and an armed teen psycho rushed in and opened fire, Mike would spring right into action.

I just wonder how many kids he'd trample in his haste to escape?

NRA Leader Advocates Guns for Teachers

"All options should be considered to prevent rampages like the Minnesota school shooting that took 10 lives -- including making guns available to teachers, a top National Rifle Association leader said Friday.

"'I'm not saying that that means every teacher should have a gun or not, but what I am saying is we need to look at all the options at what will truly protect the students,' the NRA's first vice president, Sandra S. Froman, told The Associated Press.'"

Why not every teacher? And why limit keeping and bearing arms based on profession? Why not acknowledge Patrick Henry's "great object"?

But there's one obstacle Sandra faces, even with her modest goal: Wayne LaPierre.

"First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period," he told NRA Annual Meeting attendees in 1999, "with the rare exception of law enforcement officers or trained security personnel.

"We believe America's schools should be as safe as America's airports. You can't talk about, much less take, bombs and guns onto airplanes.Such behavior in our schools should be prosecuted just as certainly as such behavior in our airports is prosecuted."

Right, Wayne, make 'em as safe as pre-911 airports.

I've heard some laud Ms. Froman's selection as NRA's president-elect because she likes to shoot machineguns. If being a good shooter was the sole criterion, I'd be hard pressed not to vote for Lon Horiuchi.

Call me irresponsible, but I prefer to look at things like past support for gun control.

"To curb gun violence, Froman says that it is important to enforce old laws instead of passing new ones. 'If the Brady law stopped 600,000 illegal gun purchases, where were the 600,000 prosecutions?'

"One measure she [supports] is Project Exile. 'It works...it doesn’t victimize peaceable gun owners.'"

How about REPEALING instead of ENFORCING "old laws," Sandra? Not only are most a violation of the 2nd Amendment, but the recent exhaustive National Academy of Sciences report couldn't find a single instance of these laws reducing violent crime--even the ones suppported by NRA. Besides, wasn't "enforcing existing gun laws" the reason Mr. Horiuchi was deployed in the first place?

As for Exile, no, it does not "work." Look at the results in Richmond and Philadelphia. Besides which, maybe someone from NRA leadership would be kind enought to point us to the clause in the Constitution where We the People delegated gun law prosecutions to the feds.

What, there isn't one?

Feelings, Nothing More than Feelings

As the ninnies who bleat for government destruction of our rights have consistently demonstrated, it’s not about results. Commentator Martha Blume, in Chesapeake’s Bay Weekly calls for a Constitutional amendment: “The right of the people to feel safe from gun violence in their homes, neighborhoods, schools, places of worship, employment, on the streets and in any other public places shall not be infringed.”

"Feelings, Nothing More than Feelings" is my submission for the May issue of GUNS Magazine, on sale now at emotionally secure newsstands throughout the Republic.

It's Easter Weekend

So WarOnGuns is taking a break for a few days.

I suggest you get off the damn computer and go be with the people you love.

If there are no people you love, I suggest you get off the damn computer and work on that.

Where There's Smoke

One of the themes I’ve been covering is government interference with the internet—from the FEC trial balloon to judges declaring just who gets to be an “official journalist.” After all, we can’t expect the Establishment lapdogs to give fair coverage to Second Amendment issues.

Here’s another example: Kid catches principal smoking on school grounds, in violation of state law—something the kid would get suspended for. Kid posts pictures on the internet. Principal demands kid remove pictures and suspends him.

In other words, a sovereign citizen exposes a corrupt official violating the law. The official demands that he erase all traces of his expose, and uses her official capacity to punish him.

“The school, says an AP account, “had sent the sophomore a letter telling him he was suspended for harassment and slander via the Internet.”

Yo, public skool administraitors: That would be “libel." Assuming you had a case. Which you don't.

Once exposed, the tyrant wannabe apologized—FOR SMOKING, as opposed to abusing authority to trample a sovereign individual's unalienable rights in order to protect her sorry butt. Here’s what is unclear:

“On Tuesday, the sophomore was offered reinstatement but only if he complied with the removal order.”

WTF? If I were the kid, my response would be “Remove THIS!” followed with a hefty lawsuit.

To his credit, the site still stands.

You can reach Czarina (or is that Fuhrerette?) Elaine Almagno here. Ask her who the OTHER “adult” in the picture with her is, and why HE thinks it’s OK for the law to apply to the ruled but not to the rulers.

Elaine—try suing ME for “slander,” you abusive mandarin.

Download GUNS from 50 Years Ago

GUNS Magazine is doing something cool. Each month you can download a complete copy of their issue from 50 years prior.

The March 1955 issue is now online.

And by all means, buy the current issue, or better yet, subscribe, and tell them to “Pay Codrea lots of money.” There’s no advertising or Tip Jar on WarOnGuns, nor do I plan to change this, but young Uday and Qusay have this nasty habit of expecting regular meals.

UNbelievable Hypocrisy

Kofi Annan wants to "eliminate all private weapons."

Right.

End the War on Freedom on “Vanishing Point”

Mr. St. Clair recommends it.

“Man did I hate the cops by the end of the movie,” he says.

Have you seen it yet?

Also see:

“If you love freedom, get this film. You will not regret it.”

Vanishing Point Reappears Today

Why I Love Guns

Vanishing Point Reappears

A Bum Rap

"Rising rapper THE GAME is prepared to risk going to jail by keeping a gun at his California home, because he deems the firearm vital to his survival."

What have we here, a 2A champion in The Hood, someone who can demonstrate the virtues of an armed citizenry to his peers through the example he sets?

Not exactly. It appears he's not that wholesome a character:

"A shoot-'em-up at the Hot 97 studios was triggered by a simmering feud between gangster rapper 50 Cent and his turncoat protégé The Game - and cops are bracing for more bullets."

What a disappointment. He seemed like such a nice young man.

NRA's Montana SNAFU Redux

FreedomSight makes some interesting counter-arguments about when property rights conflict with RKBA.

He raises some good points.

If you want to enter my premises, I should have the right to set the terms: only if you give me a million dollars, poke out one eye and paint yourself blue.

Assuming I can't coerce you into doing this, you have the right to either accept my terms or tell me to go to hell, and go someplace where the terms are more to your liking.

My main point is that I don't believe a state rep acts in defiance of Beltway policy.

Words and actions are sometimes very different things.