Dear Judge Baylson,

Bill St. Clair writes an interesting letter...

Victim Empowerment Media Project

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

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

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

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

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

Who'da thunk?

Night of the Evil Tortilla

[BugMeNot userid and password: Erasmus.]

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

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

[Thanks to KABA Newslinks.]

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

Out of the Gray Zone

Now THIS looks interesting...

Shameless Plug: "Weapons of Choice"

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

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

Fool Me Once...

This was a hoax.

Triggerfinger is Learning...

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

Matthew Hunter writes:

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

That about pegs the guy's MO.

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

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

An Expert's Advice on the Militia

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

Lord Hugh Percy, 1775

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

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

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

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

"'Why not bullets?' he said."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UPDATE: Publicola has some good observations on this.

Des Moines Implements Chance Control

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

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

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

SCROTUS "Conservatives" Screw Us Again

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

REFERENCES:

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

The Majority Opinion

The Dissenting Opinion

Microstamping Advances in Assembly

Per the Liberty Belles:

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

See also:

Microstamping for Macroinfringement

Microstamping--An Alternative View

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

Microstamping...What is it?

McClintock for Lieutenant Governor

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

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

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

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

Why should California gun owners support him?

Here's why.

One for the Road

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

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

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

And I think this story is pretty funny.

BATFU Honcho: We Lie in Court

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

Via David Hardy at Arms & the Law.

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

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

Viagra Falls

or Falling On Hard Times

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Guess Who's Not Allowed to Own a Gun?

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

French Fried Guns

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

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

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

So what's with V&M Tubes?

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