HandgunLaw

New gun grabbing bill on the way!

2009-01-29T18:46:00.000-08:00

From http://www.gunlaws.com/GunLawUpdate3.htm

Gun Law Update
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
Jan. 5, 2009

Gun-ban list proposed

Slipping below the radar (or under the short-term memory cap), the Democrats have already leaked a gun-ban list, even under the Bush administration when they knew full well it had no chance of passage (HR 1022, 110th Congress). It serves as a framework for the new list the Bradys plan to introduce shortly.

I have an outline of the Brady's current plans and targets of opportunity, I'm working on getting that news out asap after these ban lists, probably be ready in the next few days. It's horrific. They're going after the courts, regulatory agencies, firearms dealers and statutes in an all out effort to restrict we the people. They've made little mention of criminals.

Now more than ever, attention to the entire Bill of Rights is critical. Gun bans will impact our freedoms under search and seizure, due process, confiscated property, states rights, free speech, right to assemble and more, in addition to the Second Amendment. See what 250 of your peers thought during our recent Bill of Rights Day event at the Wrigley Mansion in Phoenix : http://www.gunlaws. com/BOR-Day- 2008-Report. htm

The Democrats current gun-ban-list proposal (final list will be worse):

Rifles (or copies or duplicates):

M1 Carbine, Sturm Ruger Mini-14, AR-15, Bushmaster XM15, Armalite M15, AR-10, Thompson 1927, Thompson M1;

AK, AKM, AKS, AK-47, AK-74, ARM, MAK90, NHM 90, NHM 91, SA 85, SA 93, VEPR;

Olympic Arms PCR; AR70, Calico Liberty, Dragunov SVD Sniper Rifle or Dragunov SVU, Fabrique National FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FNC, Hi-Point Carbine, HK-91, HK-93, HK-94, HK-PSG-1, Thompson 1927 Commando, Kel-Tec Sub Rifle;

Saiga, SAR-8, SAR-4800, SKS with detachable magazine, SLG 95, SLR 95 or 96, Steyr AU, Tavor, Uzi, Galil and Uzi Sporter, Galil Sporter, or Galil Sniper Rifle (Galatz).

Pistols (or copies or duplicates):

Calico M-110, MAC-10, MAC-11, or MPA3, Olympic Arms OA, TEC-9, TEC-DC9, TEC-22 Scorpion, or AB-10, Uzi..

Shotguns (or copies or duplicates):

Armscor 30 BG, SPAS 12 or LAW 12, Striker 12, Streetsweeper.

Catch-all category (for anything missed or new designs):

A semiautomatic rifle that accepts a detachable magazine and has (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a pistol grip (which includes ANYTHING that can serve as a grip, see below), (iv) a forward grip; or a barrel shroud.

Any semiautomatic rifle with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds (except tubular magazine .22 rimfire rifles).

A semiautomatic pistol that has the ability to accept a detachable magazine, and has (i) a second pistol grip, (ii) a threaded barrel, (iii) a barrel shroud or (iv) can accept a detachable magazine outside of the pistol grip, and (v) a semiautomatic pistol with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds.

A semiautomatic shotgun with (i) a folding or telescoping stock, (ii) a pistol grip (see definition below), (iii) the ability to accept a detachable magazine or a fixed magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds, and (iv) a shotgun with a revolving cylinder.

Frames or receivers for the above are included, along with conversion kits.

Attorney General gets carte blanche to ban guns at will:

Under the proposal, the U.S. Attorney General can add any "semiautomatic rifle or shotgun originally designed for military or law enforcement use, or a firearm based on the design of such a firearm, that is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, as determined by the Attorney General." Note that Obama's pick for this office (Eric Holder, confirmation hearing set for Jan. 15) wrote a brief in the Heller case supporting the position that you have no right to have a working firearm in your own home.

In making this determination, the bill says, "there shall be a rebuttable presumption that a firearm procured for use by the United States military or any federal law enforcement agency is not particularly suitable for sporting purposes, and a firearm shall not be determined to be particularly suitable for sporting purposes solely because the firearm is suitable for use in a sporting event."

In plain English this means that ANY firearm ever obtained by federal officers or the military is not suitable for the public.

That presumption can be challenged only by suing the federal government over each firearm it decides to ban, in a court it runs with a judge it pays. This virtually dismisses the principles of the Second Amendment.

The last part is particularly clever, stating that a firearm doesn't have a sporting purpose just because it can be used for sporting purpose -- is that devious or what? And of course, "sporting purpose" is a rights infringement with no constitutional or historical support whatsoever, invented by domestic enemies of the right to keep and bear arms to further their cause of disarming the innocent.

If these near-total bans aren't enough, the most dangerous part may be the phrase "pistol grip" because: "The term 'pistol grip' means a grip, a thumbhole stock, or any other characteristic that can function as a grip." In other words, any semi-auto long gun with a grip (that's ALL semi-auto long guns) would be banned under the existing proposal. It's not clear what they hope to achieve by deceptively banning guns with grips instead of just calling to ban the guns -- even an idjit can tell it's the same thing.

I didn't cover here all the magazine bans, transfer bans, dealer record-keeping and centralized reporting, and a host of nuisance details -- there will be time enough for that when the new lists are released soon: "As soon as President-elect Obama is inaugurated and the 111th Congress is sworn in," according to Ms. Brady. Congress is set to be sworn in on Jan. 6, Inauguration Day is Jan. 20.

No one expects the new proposal to be less abusive than the current one supported by the party of the Democrats. Remember -- these bans were proposed when the congressional anti-rights crowd had no chance of success. Now they are ready to run wild, or according to Sarah herself, "I have never been so confident." The "news" media has failed to report on any of this, preferring instead to blare that the incoming president supports the Second Amendment and commonsense (sic) laws.

To see the whole bill, go to http://thomas. loc.gov and search for HR 1022, (switch to the 110th Congress if the 111th has begun).

The excellent Firearms Coalition started by the late Neal Knox and now run by his family members makes these important points about the upcoming Judiciary hearings for AG nominee Holder:

"The Democrat members of the Judiciary Committee are all sworn enemies to the Second Amendment and are unlikely to be swayed at all by any firearms related arguments, but might hesitate to confirm based on Holder's participation in the pardons of 16 Puerto Rican terrorists and billionaire financier and arms merchant Marc Rich [and perhaps the Elian Gonzalez abduction by federal agents Holder authorized]. Any letters to Democrats should focus on those issues.

"On the Republican side, Arlen Specter, the ranking Republican on the committee has never been a friend to gun rights, but he owes his reelection to NRA support and has expressed concern over the pardon issues. Among the other Republicans, most are relatively reliable votes, but only Coburn has routinely taken a leadership role on Second Amendment matters. All of them need to be pressed hard to do everything they can to block the appointment.

"For more information about Eric Holder and why his appointment must be fought tooth and nail, go to our web site at http://www.FirearmsCoalition.org."

Permission to circulate or post this Gun Law Update granted.

Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

2007-01-22T22:17:00.000-08:00

Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

HR 256 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session

H. R. 256
To prevent children's access to firearms.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 5, 2007

Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To prevent children's access to firearms.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Child Gun Safety and Gun Access Prevention Act of 2007'.

SEC. 2. INCREASING YOUTH GUN SAFETY BY RAISING THE AGE OF HANDGUN ELIGIBILITY AND PROHIBITING YOUTH FROM POSSESSING SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.

Section 922(x) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)--

(A) by striking `juvenile' and inserting `person who is less than 21 years of age';

(B) by striking `or' at the end of subparagraph (A);

(C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting a semicolon; and

(D) by adding at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.';

(2) in paragraph (2)--

(A) by striking `a juvenile' and inserting `less than 21 years of age';

(B) by striking `or' at the end of subparagraph (A);

(C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting a semicolon; and

(D) by inserting at the end the following:

`(C) a semiautomatic assault weapon; or

`(D) a large capacity ammunition feeding device.';

(3) in paragraph (3)(A), by inserting `temporary' before `possession';

(4) in paragraph (3)(B), by striking `juvenile' and inserting `person who is less than 21 years of age';

(5) in paragraph (3)(C), by striking `juvenile; or' and inserting `person who is less than 21 years of age;';

(6) by striking subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) and inserting the following:

`(D) the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a person who is less than 21 years of age taken in defense of that person or other persons against an intruder into the residence of that person or a residence in which that person is an invited guest; or';

(7) by adding at the end of paragraph (3) the following:

`(E) a temporary transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a person who is at least 18 years of age and less than 21 years of age, or the temporary use or possession of a handgun or ammunition by a person who is at least 18 years of age and less than 21 years of age, if the handgun and ammunition are possessed and used by the person--

`(i) in the course of employment, in the course of ranching or farming related to activities at the residence of the person (or on property used for ranching or farming at which the person, with the permission of the property owner or lessee, is performing activities related to the operation of the farm or ranch), target practice, hunting, or a course of instruction in the safe and lawful use of a handgun; and

`(ii) in accordance with State and local law.'; and

(8) in paragraph (4), by striking `juvenile' each place it appears and inserting `person who is less than 21 years of age'.

SEC. 3. ENHANCED PENALTY FOR YOUTH POSSESSION OF HANDGUNS AND SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS AND FOR THE TRANSFER OF SUCH WEAPONS TO YOUTH.

Section 924(a)(6) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(6)(A) A juvenile who violates section 922(x) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than one year, or both, and for a second or subsequent violation, or for a first violation committed after an adjudication of delinquency or after a State or Federal conviction for an act that, if committed by an adult, would be a serious violent felony (as defined in section 3559(c) of this title), shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

`(B) A person other than a juvenile who knowingly violates section 922(x)--

`(i) shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than five years, or both; and

`(ii) if the person sold, delivered, or otherwise transferred a handgun, ammunition, semiautomatic assault weapon, or large capacity ammunition feeding device to a person who is less than 21 years of age knowing or having reasonable cause to know that such person intended to carry or otherwise possess or discharge or otherwise use the handgun, ammunition, semiautomatic assault weapon, or large capacity ammunition feeding device in the commission of a crime of violence, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.'.

SEC. 4. GUN STORAGE AND SAFETY DEVICES FOR ALL FIREARMS.

(a) Secure Gun Storage or Safety Devices by Federal Firearms Licensees- Section 922(z) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(z) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to sell, transfer, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer) unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device.'.

(b) Penalties- Section 924(p) of such title is amended to read as follows:

`(p) The Attorney General may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, suspend or revoke any license issued under this chapter or may subject the licensee to a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 if the holder of such license has knowingly violated section 922(z). The actions of the Attorney General under this subsection may be reviewed only as provided in section 923(f).'.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall be effective 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 5. RESPONSIBILITY OF ADULTS FOR DEATH AND INJURY CAUSED BY CHILD ACCESS TO FIREARMS.

Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(aa)(1) In this subsection, the term `child' means an individual who has not attained the age of 18 years.

`(2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), any person who--

`(A) keeps a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, any one of which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, within any premises that is under the custody or control of that person; and

`(B) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child is capable of gaining access to the firearm; and

`(C)(i) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that a child will use the firearm to cause death or serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of this title) to the child or any other person; or

`(ii) knows, or recklessly disregards the risk, that possession of the firearm by the child is unlawful under Federal or State law,

if the child uses the firearm to cause death or serious bodily injury to the child or any other person, shall be imprisoned not more than 3 years, fined under this title, or both.

`(3) Paragraph (2) shall not apply if--

`(A) at the time the child obtained access, the firearm was secured with a secure gun storage or safety device;

`(B) the person is a peace officer, a member of the Armed Forces, or a member of the National Guard, and the child obtains the firearm during, or incidental to, the performance of the official duties of the person in that capacity;

`(C) the child uses the firearm in a lawful act of self-defense or defense of 1 or more other persons; or

`(D) the person has no reasonable expectation, based on objective facts and circumstances, that a child is likely to be present on the premises on which the firearm is kept.'.

SEC. 6. REQUIREMENT THAT CHILD BE ACCOMPANIED BY AN ADULT DURING A GUN SHOW.

(a) Prohibitions- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is further amended by adding at the end the following:

`(bb)(1) The parent or legal guardian of a child shall ensure that, while the child is attending a gun show, the child is accompanied by an adult.

`(2) It shall be unlawful for a person to conduct a gun show to which there is admitted a child who is not accompanied by an adult.

`(3) In this subsection:

`(A) The term `child' means an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.

`(B) The term `adult' means an individual who has attained 18 years of age.'.

(b) Penalties- Section 924(a) of such title is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(8) Whoever violates section 922(bb) in a State shall be punished in accordance with the laws of the State that apply to persons convicted of child abandonment.'.

SEC. 7. GRANTS FOR GUN SAFETY EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

(a) Program Authority- The Attorney General is authorized to provide grants to units of local government to enable law enforcement agencies to develop and sponsor gun safety classes for parents and their children.

(b) Application-

(1) IN GENERAL- Any unit of local government that desires to receive a grant award under this section shall submit an application to the Attorney General at such time, in such manner and containing such information as the Attorney General may reasonably require.

(2) CONTENTS- Each application referred to in paragraph (1) shall include an assurance that--

(A) funds received under this section shall be used only to provide funds to law enforcement agencies to provide gun safety classes; and

(B) gun safety classes will be offered at times convenient to parents, including evenings and weekends.

(c) Regulations- The Attorney General shall issue any regulations necessary to carry out this section.

SEC. 8. EDUCATION: NATIONWIDE FIREARMS SAFETY PROGRAMS.

It is the sense of Congress that--

(1) each school district should provide or participate in a firearms safety program for students in grades kindergarten through 12 and should consult with a certified firearms instructor before establishing the curriculum for the program; and

(2) participation by students in a firearms safety program should not be mandatory if the district receives written notice from a parent of the student to exempt the student from the program.

CONVENIENCE STORE SHOOTOUT: Manager kills suspect

2007-01-06T17:01:00.000-08:00

Jan. 06, 2007
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

CONVENIENCE STORE SHOOTOUT: Manager kills suspect

Customers call man hero in robbery scare

By LAWRENCE MOWER
REVIEW-JOURNAL

A convenience store manager shot and killed a robbery suspect and injured another Friday after the men entered his North Las Vegas store and took the manager and several customers hostage.

The two suspects held up the American Mini Market at 2564 Las Vegas Blvd. North on Friday afternoon, North Las Vegas police said. Then, the robbery suspects bound the store manager and several customers using zip ties and tried to rob them, police said.

The manager, whose name was not released, escaped from the ties and retrieved a gun stashed inside the store. Shortly after 2 p.m., the manager exchanged "a bunch" of shots with the suspects, North Las Vegas police spokesman Tim Bedwell said.

Both of the suspects were hit with gunfire.

One of suspects stumbled out of the store and died in the parking lot, Bedwell said. The other, whose name also was not released, was hit in the lower extremities and fled on foot, leaving a trail of blood, he said.

The suspect was caught by police and taken to University Medical Center, where he was treated for injuries that were not life-threatening, Bedwell said. Police said the man could be charged with robbery and murder once he recovers from his wounds. Under Nevada law, a suspect in a felony crime in which a person dies can be charged with murder even if their actions didn't directly cause the death.

No one else was injured in the shooting.

"This is how we like these incidents to end up," Bedwell said.

The customers called the manager a hero.

"He saved us all," said 27-year-old Kevin Aden, who was in the store when the suspects came in.

Aden said that he and the other people in the store were tied up for about 10 to 15 minutes in the back room as the suspects robbed them and the store.

Aden, a tobacco company sales representative, said he was not supposed to have been at the store at the time. He was traveling north on Las Vegas Boulevard on Friday morning, stopping at convenience stores to restock cigarettes when he accidentally skipped the American Mini Market.

"I just decided to go back there in the afternoon," he said. "That was a bad idea."

Police said there were conflicting reports from witnesses about the number of suspects in the incident. Bedwell said there might have been a driver of a getaway car and others involved in the robbery. Police planned to look at video surveillance footage to see whether others were involved, he said.

Police said they believe the two men who held up the American Mini Market were involved in a similar robbery at a convenience store on Thursday night.

Bedwell said customers at a store on Lake Mead Boulevard, just west of Pecos Road, about 1.5 miles from the American Mini Market, were bound with zip ties and robbed on Thursday night.

There were four suspects in that incident, he said. They had a "cavalier" attitude during the incident, similar to the attitude described by witnesses during Friday's holdup, police said.

"Witnesses reported they were laughing and joking in there (the convenience store) with their guns," Bedwell said.

During Thursday night's holdup, Bedwell said one of the suspects would stand near the store entrance with a gun behind his back. As customers entered the store, the man would put a gun to their head, walk them to the back of the store and bind them with zip ties, Bedwell said.

"That is as dangerous a situation going on as could possibly occur," he said.

Bedwell said police weren't considering charging the store manager in Friday's shooting of the robbery suspects.

"The initial impression of everybody is this was a justifiable shooting," he said.

"In a situation where their business gets robbed and the suspects flee, you can't chase them down and shoot them," he said. "It doesn't look like anything like that happened today."

Bedwell said the store manager's gun was registered and the witnesses' opinion that the manager is a hero could be accurate.

"If everything holds up true ... then yeah, he is a hero," Bedwell said.

Find this article at:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2007/Jan-06-Sat-2007/news/11822416.html

Danny Bonaduce speaks the truth!

2006-12-28T17:36:00.000-08:00

This is one powerful message.

Long time since last post

2006-12-28T07:56:00.000-08:00

I figure it's about time for another post since I took some time off from this thing. I am ever closer to obtaining my concealed carry license and am now looking for a carry gun. My choices are narrowed to a Glock 30 or a Springfield Armory XD 45 Compact. I am leaning more towards the XD for the increased capacity and better grip angle, but the Glock has my attention for its vast array of after market accessories.

A man shot and killed an intruder

2006-09-20T21:16:00.000-07:00

Oakland Park, Florida

From the September 20, 2006 Miami Herald :

A man shot and killed an intruder who was breaking into his parents' townhouse in Oakland Park, according to the Broward Sheriff's Office.

The intruder has not been identified, but is believed to be a teenager.

Richard McKinley, 27, was sleeping in his parents townhouse at 3259 NW 44th St. around 11:54 a.m. when he was awakened by a noise, according to BSO.

McKinley noticed that an intruder was in the house, and shot him.

Deputies are investigating, and have set up a perimeter search for two possible accomplices to the home invasion.

Less than two hours after the shooting, Paul and Victoria McKinley returned to their pink townhouse in the Montage by the Lake complex to find swarms of police and TV reporters.

The couple said their son was ``doing fine.''

Family members of the dead intruder were also at the scene.

Home invasion leads to one death

2006-09-16T20:29:00.000-07:00

Beaumont, Texas

From Beaumont’s TheExaminer.com of September 16, 2006
Home invasion leads to one death

Beaumont Police officers responded to the 6000 block of Major Dr. Sept. 15 at approximately 8:37 p.m. on reports of a home invasion. Once officers arrived at the scene, the alleged perpetrators had already been apprehended … by the victim.

According to the victim, he was in his residence when he heard a knock at the door. When the door was opened, two Hispanic men allegedly forced their way into the home, brandishing knives.

The victim stated that, at that time, the two suspects demanded money. The victim went to the bedroom, followed by one of the suspects, and retrieved some money from the bedside table. The suspect did not notice the handgun belonging to the victim that was also in the bedside table, but the victim did. The suspect then, according to the victim, turned to rummage through the closet, presumably searching for more money.

The victim stated that he ordered the suspect to drop his knife. The second suspect entered the bedroom but would not drop his weapon. The victim fired three shots at the second suspect, wounding him in the left arm, the left leg and the left side. During the commotion, the first suspect retrieved his knife. The victim fired one round at the first suspect, wounding him in the left side of his chest.

Responding officers called EMS to transport the suspects to Christus St. Elizabeth Hospital. The suspect who received injuries to the chest received emergency treatment for his injuries but died a short time after arriving at the hospital. The status of the second suspect is unverified.

Gun-toting citizen foils robbery, leads APD to arrest

2006-09-15T16:13:00.000-07:00

Albany, Georgia

From Albany’s WALB.com of September 14, 2006

A bystander broke up a Northwest Albany armed robbery he witnessed by firing two gunshots in the air. He then followed the armed robbers as they fled, and alerted police who arrested the three gunmen.

Now, the man who stopped the robbers and their victims are too scared to talk to us on camera, afraid the young crooks will come after them.

Just before 11:00 Wednesday night two gunmen jumped a man and a woman in the back parking lot as they left Mama Gina's Restaurant on North Slappey.

The male victim, Michael, is afraid to show his face on camera, worried the robbers will come after him again. "He had a red bandana on, waving a gun all around, threatened to shoot us if we didn't give them the money."

Marcus saw the robbery happening, and decided to help. He is too afraid to give his name or talk to us, but when he saw the robber's guns, he went to get his. Mama Gina's owner Vinny Mannino said, "The guy go in his car and get his gun. He shoot one shot in the air to scare the guys, they run away. He shot another shot in the air to make them stop, but they keep running."

The two robbers jumped into a car and fled down Tenth Avenue. Marcus followed in his car, letting police know what was going on. Mannino said "He call 911, from the car. He was communicating with 911."

The robbers threw their guns and the victim's wallet and purse out the window as they drove North on Slappey, and then onto the bypass, where Police stopped them.

Charged with armed robbery are 19-year-old Dejean Thomas and two 16-year-old juveniles.

Marcus told us that he just wanted to help, that's why he rushed the armed robbers. Mannino said, "I think we need more people like him, help each other."

Michael said there is no doubt Marcus is a hero. "He's a pretty good guy. It's great somebody around here wants to help, and get involved."

But Marcus and Michael admit they are both still scared, worried that the robbers or their friends will seek revenge. Marcus said the Police took his .357 Magnum as evidence after the robbery, but they assured him he would get it back soon.

Too Many Bills Of Rights?

2006-09-15T06:17:00.000-07:00

From http://mensnewsdaily.com/2006/09/14/too-many-bills-of-rights/
September 14, 2006
Vox Populi, John Longenecker

There is only one Bill Of Rights. Everything else is a cloned error of nature. What’s a cloned error of nature? Well, it’s a natural mistake repeated and repeated, and a lot of Americans are making what you might call a natural mistake.

The Founding Fathers just don’t get enough ink. Our forefathers are pounded in this century nearly as much as in their time, poo-poo’d as obsolete, too young, insolent, unnecessary, over-reactive, their work product imitated if not challenged.

Yet the people who criticize them most live here, by choice, under the blessings of their forefathers’ endeavors and of their profound successes. Often, the critics imitate the forefathers’ finest product, the first ten amendments to the Constitution Of The United States. As a model, it is summoned by people seeking justice. Or compassion. Or cooperation. While ignoring the truth and guidance of the progenitor of them all.

Are these sprouting Bills necessary in the workplace, the hospital or the campus? Can they be created, only to be a tool of political abuse under color of compassion and improvement?

Yes, yes they can. And with the force of law in some cases.

In 1975, Kalifornia Governor Jerry Brown supported and signed into law the Inmate Bill Of Rights, which was not about giving justice to inmates, but latitude in viewing pornography. Nice move, Jerry. That’s about the time when people were putting the K in Kalifornia.

Decency is a real problem in politics, isn’t it?

In 1982, Brown opposed the Victims’ Bill Of Rights as costly and confusing. [Search the Internet with Keyword Jerry Brown, Bill Of Rights for that source and more.]

Many states have a Psychiatric Patient Bill Of Rights.

There is a Bill Of Rights for kids.

Some college campuses have the Students’ Bill Of Rights.

More and more groups are demanding their own Bill Of Rights.

And this is at the heart of the complaint - too much departure from the original Rights as if they are not sufficient. Okay, John, how’s this a big deal?

It’s a big deal because the original Bill Of Rights is sufficient. The idea of introducing a Bill Of Rights to a group of persons might seem kindly at first, even bold, but it is separatist in its own way. Americans – decent Americans — don’t need to be prompted by a series of binding reminders to be compassionate or decent. I know that many of these Bills were written for clarification following years of practice which operated on science or rules more than patient contact or acknowledging the client. I understand fully that some persons in America may be forgotten. It was genuinely a colder system in business, in psychiatry, everywhere. There were and are decent, compassionate and genuinely talented practitioners, sure, but the whole of every system needed re-examination and clarification as a human endeavor. I know.

These Bills may strive to serve these Americans better, to facilitate hearing complaints and to make sure they are not forgotten or mistreated, but these formalized standards are certainly not rights, except the right to be treated like a human being. It is a misconstruing of what is a Right in this country, in that Rights are often confused with entitlement, courtesy, integrity and simply feeling for others – things which should already come from the profession.

If only it ended there, it might be harmless, but practices like this tend to mislead on the very concept of what a Right is.

Something new has been added which waters down the original Document and original intent, and that is seeing rights that aren’t there and / or extending rights to non-citizens.

Rights in America are things to be protected by government, and protected by advocates of principals, attorneys. Rights in original intent were meant to be enough to get one by, the rest being up to you. This is the part being dissolved. This is an American value based on our History being dissolved.

As a broader example, tort law shifted to a doctrine not of deciding on the basis of the merits of the interference complaint – where one’s individual rights were to be respected in the interest of justice – but shifted now to social engineering away from the concept of justice to a concept of social justice for groups to be assessed on the basis of who could best bear the brunt of the damages. This was a warped kind of Bill Of Rights for the disadvantaged, and opened the door to a great deal more injustices in nuisance suits and more. In effect, it weaponized tort law and it granted unjust clout.

As our Constitution places limits on government, so we must ourselves place limits in responsibility. I’m speaking, of course, about giving rights to terrorists, illegal aliens and others who make a joke of our sovereignty and administration of justice.

A few things need to be restated about the original Bill Of Rights if you’re going to be using it as a model for your industry, profession or political purpose.

1. Our Bill Of Rights was written for Americans, and for good citizens at that. Citizenship – good citizenship – is an important facet of personal responsibility, and this includes not passing out rights willy-nilly for political gain. It’s not good citizenship to work to hand out rights to those who have themselves demonstrated bad citizenship, merely because it feels good for you. [It’s almost a sort of Stockholm Syndrome, isn’t it? Your head tells you it’s wrong, but your feelings to surrender and cooperate seem irresistable.]

Make sense? Original intent? Stockholm Syndrome?

Handing out rights to terrorists, non-combatant or not, or handing out rights to aliens or handing out privilege masquerading as rights is an attack to dissolve the rights of the citizenry everywhere, and specifically not to share them properly. And on that subject of sharing, I’m afraid that they are not to be shared as some great sense of compassion and mercy: they are to be reserved only for the sovereign in America as an integral part of what defines our way of life. Any dissolution of that – irrespective of how it is stated or spun – is a subtle attack on our sovereignty by way of dissolving the social contract.

Is there a middle ground here? If there is, I am inclined to dissolve it. It’s one of those subjects on sovereignty not open to discussion. It’s one thing to extend courtesy and humanity to anyone who enters our country – as visitors or otherwise – and even Christian to visit those in prison, but when we surrender to feelings rather than good sense or cooperate with those who do, then we give away the nation for no worthwhile return. And we don’t get it back.

If you knew the price of such false justice or compassion, would you be able to stop?

I’m afraid that some against America do in fact know the price, and that they work for just that. They have weaponized the law, the concept of rights and the cooperation of the good-hearted to the detriment of the nation, and for their political gain.

2. The amendments are pretty much clear and not in need of tweaking. It is the people who are in need of adjustment after a look at how far we’ve left behind that values system over the last few generations.

You see the rights are quite clear, but they are fudged, parsed and totally misread for political advantage instead of to the interest of the country. In this, decency – or indecency in the form of bad faith politicking – plays a very important role in social engineering, driving the nation down.

Too many Bills Of Rights? Yup.

The rights you’re really looking for are already there in the original document, spelled out in other plain language, but clearly there. In many, many ways, friends, they are limited, limited by self-restraint. You can read it for yourself. It says that rights are accompanied by responsibility. And that good citizenship has the right to demand this of each of us.

And that Citizen is fairly defined, and that rights belong to citizens only. It’s all there. What you say you’re looking for is already there. It’s limited, but there.

Additional Bills Of Rights may be well-intentioned, but they are not necessary, and like most things, can be abused and weaponized, as they are now in our dealings with enemies of America. They can be introduced as an emotional balm written to soothe, or they can find rights which do not exist, and give the flavor that they do, emboldening the enemy, summoning the good-heartedness of Americans to be used for their compassion.

I say stick to the original. It does many things for us, including defining what a right is, who has it and who doesn’t, and of who is a Citizen and who isn’t.

Why do you think Citizenship is sought so? Because it is precious.

Sorry, but you’re not a citizen until you’re a citizen. And if it means anything at all to you and to the rest of America, American Civil Rights belong only to the Citizen.

The rest may be decency, humanity and compassion, but it is not American rights.

There is a difference, and that difference is good for the country.

________________________________________________________

John Longenecker’s Second Edition of The Case For Nationwide Concealed Carry will be on bookshelves soon. Visit his website at www.TransferOfWealth.net

Man with AK-47 helps thwart robbery

2006-09-11T16:54:00.000-07:00

When Arthur Winters saw two armed robbers terrorizing his neighborhood, he did the only thing he could think of: He asked his wife to bring him his AK-47.

"I had to get it to protect my family and the neighbors and all that," Winters said.

It was part of a series of events, including a fistfight, rock-throwing and haphazard gunshots, that hammered the plans of two robbery suspects Saturday afternoon, leaving one shot and the other stuck in the mud.

Both men faced aggravated robbery charges.

A police report told the tale:

The suspects pulled up in a Ford F-150 and approached Cesar Arellano, busy installing a roof on a home under construction near Barton Court and Hughes Avenue.

Formalities were brief. One of the suspects suddenly put Arellano in a chokehold, and the other pulled out a gun. They demanded money and his rings.

Arellano grabbed the gun. The struggle began.

Arellano's brother, also on site, saw the robbery. He charged and punched one of the intruders.

Amid the mayhem, the handgun went off, and a stray bullet struck one of the suspects.

The brothers managed to break free and run to Winters' house for help.

The wounded suspect bolted for Arellano's vehicle. The other ran for his own pickup.

Neither got too far.

Police later traced the wounded suspect to a location a little more than 2 miles away. He was taken to Wilford Hall Medical Center.

The other suspect's getaway pickup had become stuck in a ditch and then between a curb and a log.

Then it got worse for him. Arellano and his brother started to hurl rocks at the pickup and broke a window. The suspect bailed out, briefly pointed a gun at the brothers and then ran through an open field.

Enter Winters.

He followed through the field, toting the military weapon at his side. When he fired a few rounds at the ground and the suspect kept going, Winters fired some more.

"Then he stopped, completely stopped," Winters said. "I ran up to him, and he just told me not to kill him."

Winters, along with Arellano and his brother, held the suspect until police arrived. The neighborhood was again safe.

"It was a robbery that just went wrong," Winters said.

Supressed .45 ACP

2006-09-04T17:48:00.000-07:00

Police: Couple Killed After Seeing Rape

2006-09-02T18:44:00.000-07:00

Friday September 1, 2006 7:01 PM

PHILADELPHIA (AP) - A couple found a man raping a young woman in their driveway and tried to flee with her but were shot to death by the attacker, police said.

The teenager was also shot and was expected to recover, police said. A suspect was arrested.

The couple came upon the attack when returning to their home in the Fern Rock neighborhood from a night out late Wednesday, police said. The 18-year-old woman broke free and began screaming about the assault, and she and the couple then fled while the attacker fired at them with a semiautomatic handgun, according to police.

The three tried to hide nearby, but the assailant found them and fired more shots as they lay on the ground, Chief Inspector Joseph Fox said.

``It sounds like it was all happening in a matter of seconds,'' Fox said.

The names of the couple were being withheld pending notification of family.

Kevin White, 24, of Philadelphia, was arrested a short time later and will be charged with murder, rape, aggravated assault and other offenses, Fox said. Police said they recovered a gun during the arrest.

The attack was one of six shootings - two of them fatal - overnight in Philadelphia.

This is just cool

2006-08-31T22:10:00.000-07:00

Hotel clerk fights back in Cleveland

2006-08-30T18:27:00.000-07:00

Hint for all the bad guys out there: Bring a gun to a gunfight and you will get shot. This feral ape took 3 rounds from the clerks 9mm and was caught in the parking lot and taken to the hospital by police.

Pro-Gun Groups Disagree on Bill Improving Background Checks

2006-08-30T08:13:00.000-07:00

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
August 30, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - A Second Amendment group is warning gun owners that a "massive gun control bill" is now working its way through Congress -- and is surprisingly close to becoming law.

Gun Owners of America also admits that it is the only national pro-gun group to oppose the "NICS Improvement Act of 2005" (H.R. 1415).

Introduced by gun control advocate Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, H.R. 1415 is intended to improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which screens would-be gun buyers for mental problems or criminal convictions that would bar them from buying guns.

Most background checks are processed through NICS in seconds, but some are delayed if the FBI lacks complete, updated, and automated information from the states.

The bill notes that approximately 24 million criminal records are not automated or not accessible to NICS; and another 16 million criminal records are not up to date. Some lack information on whether an arrested person was convicted or acquitted, for example.

Many states have failed to computerize the necessary information and make it available to NICS in a "usable format," and that's what the McCarthy bill would address.

But Gun Owners of America warns that the bill would give the states hundreds of millions of dollars to "further prop up the unconstitutional Brady Law." GOA argues that the federal government lacks the authority to conduct background checks on gun buyers under the Second and Tenth Amendments.

Rep. McCarthy and Sen. Charles Schumer, both New York Democrats, first introduced this bill in 2002 after a double murder at a Long Island Catholic church. The gunman had passed an instant background check because the NICS did not have information about his mental health problems and a restraining order that should have prevented him from buying a gun.

The bill passed the House in 2002, but was killed in the Senate.

"There are many good pro-gun members on the committee who are being fed misinformation," Gun Owners of America said. "They're being told that this is a harmless bill that will simply make the Brady law work more efficiently."

According to Gun Owners of America, the bill is "anything but harmless" because it will make available to the federal government millions of state records "that could include state tax returns, employment records, library records, DMV, hospital, mental health and some misdemeanor records -- all in the name of making sure you're not prohibited from owning a gun."

GOA argues that the bill will allow for an enormous data dump from the states to the federal government -- "laying the infrastructure for even more gun control in the future."

"H.R. 1415, perhaps the most massive expansion of gun control since the Brady bill passed in 1993, is not a bill that should be supported by pro-gun conservatives," GOA said. It warns that the bill's strongest supporters include anti-gun lawmakers and gun control groups.

"If you don't act quickly, your representative will hear only voices of support for this monstrosity," Gun Owners of America said.

Okay with NRA

The National Rifle Association takes a less ominous view of the bill.

"This bill...would improve availability of criminal history and other records for conducting background checks on firearm buyers," says an analysis on the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action website.

The NRA said the bill, among other things, also prohibits the FBI from charging a user fee for background checks on gun buyers.

The NRA agrees that NICS records are inadequate -- and it notes that inaccurate or incomplete records can delay firearm purchases and result in "wrongful denials" of law-abiding gun-buyers.

"This bill would help fix those problems," the NRA-ILA said. "Importantly," the NRA noted, H.R. 1415 also requires removal of records that are incorrect or irrelevant in determining a person's eligibility to buy a firearm.

For instance, if a person was at one time committed to a mental institution, but was later found not to be mentally ill, that record should be removed from instant check databases, the NRA said.

The bill requires federal agencies and states to provide "all relevant records" to the FBI for use in the NICS system.According to the NRA, "This would generally include records of convicted felons, fugitives from justice, persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence, and persons subject to domestic restraining orders, as well as federal records of illegal aliens."

It also includes records of people who have been adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution.

H.R. 1415 passed of a House crime subcommittee in May and is slated to come before the full Judiciary Committee in September.

All original CNSNews.com material, copyright 1998-2006 Cybercast News Service.

Best police shooting ever

2006-08-29T16:44:00.000-07:00

Gun `Microstamping` Bill Passes California Senate

2006-08-29T07:07:00.000-07:00

The California Senate on August 24 passed a bill that would require the "microstamping" of semi-automatic handguns--giving cartridges fired from those guns a unique imprint, which according to gun control advocates, somehow would help police solve crimes.

Kansans eager for concealed carry law

2006-08-28T06:20:00.000-07:00

By James Carlson
The Capital-Journal

The Kaw Valley Gun Club has no problem filling its concealed gun safety classes as Kansas gets closer to issuing its first concealed-carry permits.

"I'm getting a lot of calls," said Bill Dittman, KVGC president.

In the two months since applications became available, 1,095 people have applied to the Kansas Attorney General's office for four-year concealed-carry permits.

And the rate of submissions is only increasing. Applications to carry concealed weapons in the state became available on June 1. Permits won't be issued until Jan. 1.

In Shawnee County, 568 people have picked up applications, and 77 have returned the completed form, said Sgt. Pat McGuire with the Shawnee County Sheriff's Office.

Chuck Sexson, the new director of the concealed-carry unit in the attorney general's office, said applications came in slow at the beginning. Now he is receiving an average of 45 to 50 new applications each day, with as many as 80 coming in on some days.

"It's pretty much what we expected," Sexson said. "People want to get theirs in before January."

Most applications are coming from the population centers in Johnson, Sedgwick and Shawnee counties, where Sexson says there are more concealed gun safety instructors. As part of the application process, permit-seekers must show proof of eight hours of gun safety instruction.

"It's just harder for people to get into a class in the smaller counties," Sexson said.

Statewide, there are 302 instructors certified to teach the attorney general-approved class. Shawnee County alone has 32 instructors, more than any other county.

Dittman said he has conducted about 15 classes so far at KVGC with more than 160 people attending. But he has been surprised at the lack of women in the classes.

"I thought more women wanting to protect themselves would be coming in," he said.

Dittman estimates that 95 percent of the people in his classes are middle-aged men.

George Petersen, a geologist by week and certified concealed gun safety instructor by weekend, said he has already conducted two classes in Shawnee County with about 30 people between the two.

"I'm traveling all the time for my job, and people are asking me about the class everywhere I go," he said.

Petersen charges $150 for his class. Dittman charges $125 for KVGC members and $150 for nonmembers.

The class itself is some gun safety and a lot of Kansas law instruction.
"Basically, we tell them what they can and can't do with their gun," Dittman said.
To qualify for a permit, applicants can't have a felony criminal history. People involuntarily committed to a mental health or substance abuse treatment center also are disqualified from receiving a permit.

Of the processed applications, Sexson said about 90 percent have met the qualifications to receive a concealed-gun permit.

He said applicants will receive notices in November or December to inform them whether they have been approved. Approved applicants can then go to a Department of Motor Vehicle bureau and have a picture taken. Within seven to 10 days, they should receive their permits.

Applications, which will cost a total of $150 in fees, can be picked up at local sheriff's offices or online at the Attorney General's Web site, www.ksag.org.

James Carlson can be reached at (785) 295-1192 or james.carlson@cjonline.com.

High Flying Motorcycle Accident

2006-08-27T17:06:00.000-07:00


This guy's flying high during his motorcycle accident.

Agent Shooting Himself In The Foot During A Weapons Demonstration

2006-08-27T15:00:00.000-07:00

A Drug Enforcement Administration agent that shows shooting himself in the foot during a weapons demonstration for Florida children.

The cop during a "drug education presentation" in April 2004 to a Florida youth group when his firearm (a Glock .40) accidentally discharged.

The shooting occurred moments after the agent told the children that he was the only person in the room professional enough to carry the weapon.

He is no longer permitted or able to give "educational motivational speeches and presentations."

Plane crash into wall

2006-08-27T14:50:00.000-07:00


Wall test for atomic bomb. Plane is run into it at 500mph and nothing happens to it. The plane incinerates

We can limit gun violence by empowering responsible citizens to defend themselves

2006-08-27T12:17:00.000-07:00

By James J. Na

As Seattleites emerge from their state of shock over the July 28 shooting spree at the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle, there no doubt will be discussions on how to prevent a repeat of this kind of monstrous evil, whether perpetrated as a form of decentralized terrorism inspired by anti-Semitism, or as an act of a deranged individual.

Predictably, there will be cries to restrict the instruments of Naveed Afzal Haq's actions — firearms — as a means to control violence of this sort in the future. Coming on the heels of another shooting spree in March of this year on Capitol Hill, there will be much political temptation to be seen to be "doing something."

And legislating more restrictions on the right to keep and bear firearms is often viewed as an emotionally satisfying and politically convenient way to meet that psychological need to do something — anything — in the aftermath of a tragedy like this.

But that inclination is misguided on two points, one based on principle and the other on practicality. First, as a matter of principle, a free, open society like ours does not, and ought not, preemptively restrict freedom of the general population out of fear that a small criminal minority would misuse that freedom.

Just as the fact that a few pedophiles use the Internet to trade child porn should not move the society to restrict access to the Internet for the public at large, neither should the right of the vast majority of responsible, law-abiding citizens to own and carry guns be sacrificed in the false hope that criminals would then be constrained.

Second, as a matter of practicality, such a restriction on guns does nothing to curb violence. Even if legal firearm ownership were completely banned today, no serious person would argue that we could eradicate the availability of firearms on the black market. Those who intend to harm others will still be able to get guns — illegally.

Those who are unable to do so, but still harbor criminal intents, will use other means to inflict harm. In England, for example, a man went on a slashing spree with a sword at a church in 1999; and early this year, a recent University of North Carolina graduate, a native of Iran, plowed into a crowd with a sport utility vehicle "to avenge Muslim deaths."

Guns, knives and any other conceivable arms are obviously banned in our prison system, but despite the most strenuous control measures, people are still assaulted and murdered at prisons, often with improvised weapons. It is a fact of life that there will always be those few, for whatever reasons, who seek to inflict physical harm upon others even in the most benign of utopias.

Then what are we to do as a society?

What we ought to do is precisely the opposite — to encourage a responsible, armed citizenry. Of course, I want to make it absolutely clear that I do not encourage vigilantism. I am not suggesting that people arm themselves and go looking for trouble. You leave that to the professionals who get paid to take the risk.

Nor am I suggesting that an armed citizen could have entirely prevented the Jewish Federation attack. But an armed citizen defending his school, church, synagogue or home could mitigate the extent of the casualty level should such a calamity strike again (as happened in Pearl, Miss., in 1997, when an assistant principal interrupted a school shooting by retrieving his gun from his car — ironically it was illegal for him to bring a gun to school — and holding the suspect at bay until the police arrived).

Despite what some politicians and groups say, there is no magic solution for curbing murderous violence. We cannot ban mechanical objects and expect twisted human beings to cleanse evil from their souls suddenly. Furthermore, in a free, open society like ours, where we all live with some degree of mutual trust and a social contract to not do harm to each other, there is no reliable way of preemptively stopping someone intent on harming others.

The only thing we can do is to try to limit the damage by continuing to empower the majority of law-biding, decent individuals with the freedom to defend themselves.

James J. Na, senior foreign policy fellow at Discovery Institute (discovery.org), co-authors "The Korea Liberator" (korealiberator.org) and "Guns and Butter Blog" (gunsandbutter.blogspot.com).
Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company

Unarmed clerk in condition white

2006-08-27T01:04:00.000-07:00

Armed clerk fights back

2006-08-27T00:56:00.000-07:00

SHOCKING POLICE VIDEO

2006-08-27T00:24:00.000-07:00


SECURITY GUARD THEATER #11 An amazing armed robbery caught on tape ends when a robber gets knocked out jumping off the counter trying to get away. See the uncut police videos the networks won't air. 50+ episodes only available online. From the creator/executive producer of television's 'Shocking Police Video' and 'Protect & Serve'.

Victim focuses on self-defense as parole of attackers nears

2006-08-27T00:10:00.000-07:00

TERRY KINNEY
Associated Press

HAMILTON, Ohio - A woman who was repeatedly raped 23 years ago has learned self-defense and how to shoot a gun in case two of her attackers return to her town when they're paroled on Monday.

"If it's me or them, it's not going to be me anymore," said Cathy Lindsey. "I would not hesitate for a minute to protect my life."

At the time of the attack, Lindsey was a 24-year-old divorced mother of three, working part time and attending college.
"I thought I was doing well," she said. "Then my life was shattered."

Three men broke into her Middletown home, tied her up and held a gun to her head and raped her repeatedly. They made her beg for her life and for the safety of her children, who were in another room, and forced her to say over and over that she would not tell police.

When they finally left, Lindsey drove to a hospital and ignored the men's threats to kill her. She identified two attackers, and later picked the third from a police lineup. They had been so bold - or so inept - that they took turns wearing a single pillowcase over their heads, Lindsey said.

All three men denied any involvement, but police found their fingerprints in Lindsey's apartment and found the gun, pillowcase and clothesline used to bind her hands in the home of Richard Reed Jr., who lived across the street.

Reed, 53, and Robert Hogsten, 49, are being released Monday, after serving all but five years of their sentences on rape convictions. In exchange for their guilty pleas, prosecutors dropped charges of aggravated burglary and aggravated robbery.

Hogsten said last week he did not plan to return "so I don't have to be around the victim, so the victim does feel better."
Reed's family expects him to return to the area. He has a son in nearby Monroe.

"He just wants to spend time with his family and see his grandchildren," Richard Reed III recently told The Middletown Journal.

Lindsey dreads the possibility that either man could live near her home in Middletown. Both have been declared sexual predators, Reed during a February hearing and Hogsten last week during a hearing here in Butler County Common Pleas Court, which Lindsey attended.

"They're arrogant and violent and they can think of only one thing - revenge," Lindsey said. "I feel like a walking target. I walk down the street like I've got a bull's eye on me."

The third man convicted in the attack is Hogsten's brother, Edward Hogsten, 50. He did not take a plea bargain, was convicted of rape, aggravated burglary and aggravated robbery and was sentenced to 28 to 68 years in prison. He will be eligible for parole in 2011.

Lindsey, a licensed practical nurse, said she has nightmares about being attacked by the men again. She does not leave her house alone and depends on her husband to drive her to and from work.

Dana Gilbert, assistant director of the Rape Crisis & Abuse Center in Cincinnati, said Lindsey's fears are understandable, even after so many years. Counselors generally urge victims to seek protective orders and support groups, but learning self-defense techniques also can be helpful, she said.

"If they would feel more comfortable knowing how to defend themselves, that is certainly something that would make them feel empowered," Gilbert said. "I would hate to see a confrontation, but if someone feels safer and more empowered, that's good."

Lindsey and her husband, Michael, filed for protective orders to be served on Reed and Hogsten before their release, and have applied for permits to carry concealed weapons. Michael, a prison guard and Army veteran, has helped teach his wife to shoot.

Her preference is a snub-nosed revolver, but she also can handle his .45-caliber automatic, her husband said.

"She's not looking forward to that time, but she's prepared," he said. "I think she can pull the trigger, absolutely. Hopefully, she'll never have to find out."

Middletown City Manager Bill Becker, a former police officers who was one of the detectives investigating the case 23 years ago, said he never was a fan of concealed carry laws.

"But it's certainly Cathy's right, if she feels the need, and in this particular case, I wouldn't blame her," he said.

Although Lindsey says she hates being so afraid and dreads the public hearings that dredge up memories of her rape, her husband believes that talking about it so openly is also cathartic.

"Every time, she gets a little stronger," he said.

Let Me Show You How Stupid Kalifornia Is.

2006-08-26T23:46:00.000-07:00

August 26, 2006 Vox Populi, John Longenecker

What a disgrace.

Who puts the K in Kalifornia? It’s not the Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger because of his Austrian heritage, but the tactics of the State Legislators who put the K in Kalifornia years before anyone even heard of Governor Arnold’s running for Governor. Here is yet another example of those stupid, unAmerican tactics – Assembly Bill 352, the requirement for a semi-automatic handgun to stamp the serial number on the casing of the cartridge. If it doesn’t, the gun is deemed to be unsafe.

Uh-huh. Unsafe? Sind Sie dumm? Translation: Are you stupid?
AB 352 would “expand the definition of unsafe handgun to include semiautomatic pistols that are not designed and equipped with a microscopic array of characters, that identify the make, model, and serial number of the pistol, etched into the interior surface or internal working parts of the pistol, and which are transferred by imprinting on each cartridge case when the firearm is fired.”

It’s putting a K in Kalifornia by dint of the fact that it won’t work, it can be circumvented by criminals several different ways, it unduly penalizes innocent gun owners by forced compliance and penalty, and, of course, it exercises powers not granted. Let’s take a look.

It won’t work because the technology doesn’t exist at this time, and even without that technology – and a necessarily reliable one at that – the law still makes non-complying weapons illegal, deemed as (get this) unsafe. This kind of misnomer, or craftily using the inappropriate but emotional adjective for such a stated reason, betrays the legislature’s real intent; gun banning, a little at a time. Why?

The gun is not unsafe because supposedly in 2007-2008 it won’t further furnish its own indicting evidence (guns already furnish plenty of forensics) – any gun is unsafe in the hands of a criminal, and who says that before the fact a cartridge casing of a law-abiding owner is likely to be involved in a criminal act? This opens the door to falsified evidence, not to mention forced compliance of innocent citizens who vastly outnumber the criminals who would be stupid enough (?) to select semi-automatics from now on.

How it can be circumvented for furtherance/concealment of crime is simple enough even a legislator can see it. Which is why they wrote it against the legal gun owners. Gun laws don’t stop crime or criminals. (Idiots). If – and I’m saying if – such a mechanism can be developed to reliably imprint individual casings once they’re fired, why can’t the criminal shooter simply police their brass? This means to cover the area and take up every spent casing and dispose of it elsewhere, for good, perhaps in the Pacific Ocean. So much for the law.

Stupid legislators punish honest owners by writing a law which can be further circumvented by using a revolver instead of a semi-automatic.

At this point, I always like to point out how more than 22,000 don’t stop crime, but only frustrate the law-abiding. Is das jetz ein anderan ein? Ja, das ist einanderen ein. Is this yet another one? Yes, this is another one! *These idiots don’t understand plain English!

All of these laws, including this one, chase crime, and do not stop it, the real desire of most citizens. Dear Kalifornia legislature: name one gun law that stops crime. But on the issue of actually meeting crime - often actually stopping it for real - forty other states are more enlightened than Kalifornia is, they furnish an excellent model in that they just don’t seem to have the same crime problems Kalifornia and Washington D.C. have.

Hm. Stopping crime in progress. If it works in forty other states, why not try it here?
Furthermore, the stamping might identify the weapon but certainly not the shooter. Now, that’s three out of three that won’t work. It could never prove who did the shooting. This is as limiting as the state claiming you (or a legislator) ran over a neighbor just because someone traced the licence plate back to the vehicle: it doesn’t show who was driving, which is the critical data. I’m all for license plates, but they, too, have their evidentiary limitations: it may show who owns what, but it doesn’t show who did what, namely the criminal act. A legislator’s personal car could be used, then what? You’re going to have to locate a different type of evidence if you’re going to identify with moral certainty who shot whom, and moral certainty is technically a big deal throughout Law. And that would be the very good faith purpose of such a law, would it not?

Try again.

When this law fails - and it will - it’s will have been a terrible waste of time and professional reputation.

It would be so easy for someone to collect just one sample spent cartridge from elsewhere – perhaps months earlier and perhaps miles away – and allege it to have been found at the scene of a shooting. This could very, very easily happen for the weapon owned by a policeman or legitimate bodyguard, unless their weapons are exempt. Hm. That would not be cool. That casing could be from the shooting range, a hunting trip, a negligent discharge in the hands of a friend or even a laboratory, but the legislators don’t care who gets caught up in the nightmare – as long as a cartridge casing is produced so they can look smart, to Hell with Justice. And to exempt public servants from such allegedly valuable requirements would be very suspicious.
Of course there is the complete picture: how does the secured stamped casing match the bullet if a bullet is even recovered? [And if such a bullet isn’t recovered, how do we even know which gun then?] Supposedly recovered casings could easily be a casing just lying around and have no evidentiary significance in a shooting, except to idiots who don’t understand guns and who don’t understand Law. They just hate both.

Evidence of this is where the anti-liberty movement claims to target violence, but hits innocent bystanders. Yer a lousy shot.

President Johnson cared about the issue of rotten legislation. He cared enough to mention this (I don’t care who wrote it for him):

You do not examine legislation in light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered.
Now the concept is recognized and preserved for all time. Good. And he was a Democrat, like Humphrey, Mondale and Kennedy who were pro-liberty, and they were pro-gun enough to back that liberty and spoke of it often. What the Hell happened to our Democrats? A lot of Democrats are remembered with respect, affection and solemnity. A lot of politicians are remembered so.

Not this crowd.

What does the Kalifornia legislature speak of today and how do they intend to get it? It forgets that citizen possession of weapons is a government hands-off way of life here under our system, because the armed citizen is the first and best line of defense. (Most police officers will acknowledge this, Sacramento, if you’re interested.) Changing that system is not permitted by law, and it’s not wise for any community, but it’s done anyway. The end result is that citizens are disarmed, little by little, as official dependency industries grows and a lot of people make a lot of money.

More genius, more elitism, since law enforcement draws from the pool of the average citizen for its officer candidates, and nearly all gun owners are just as innocent and law-abiding in their background checks and values systems as police candidates/graduates (or we wouldn’t have many officers!).

As for powers not granted, legislators ignore the Constitution, which technically makes the subject of citizen ownership of guns entirely verboten and closed to discussion. When this country was formed, the founding fathers had an exquisite idea of what they didn’t want any more of, and they had the very clear idea that protecting the sovereignty they declared required that citizens, as the ultimate authority of the nation, be forever armed. Forever. Ultimate authority. This over-reach exists in every era and it always will. This is why the subject is not even open to discussion.

Yet, officials pry it open with minute issues, anti-violence rhetoric, and ridiculous go-nowhere legislation. Assumption of powers not granted – for any so-called justification, anti-violence or otherwise – reflects a very poor understanding of the nature of the relationship between them and the people they work for. It means that such persons were unfit for the job since Day One. That explains a lot.

Nope, this law won’t stop a single crime, and probably won’t solve one, but it will vex citizens in that sick, unending endeavor of supervision and surveillance and of using force to back it up. (The German word for sick is krank.)

Iss das nicht ein schtupid move? Ja, das ist ein sehr schtupid move.

It keeps the K in Kalifornia. Stupid, unreasonable laws which assume powers not granted and which will not do as promised.

How does this affect non-gun owners?

Officials want to have all the force and to Hell with the People. That’s you, and it emboldens officials to further over-reach and to take powers not granted for all other issues important to you and your household. There is a direct connection between gun control and a simultaneous official defiance of the law all other issues.

Pro-liberty assembly persons: how about a moratorium on all anti-liberty, anti-violence, anti-gun bills, including AB352?

It’s not good for California. It’s not good for the country.
______________________________________________________
John’s website is http://www.goodforthecountry.com/

Posted in Vox Populi, John Longenecker at 9:17 am by John Longenecker Permalink

Homeowner shot and killed intruder

2006-08-25T20:15:00.000-07:00

AURORA, Colo. -- A homeowner shot and killed a man who he said tried to force his way into the home Tuesday morning 8/22/06. It happened in the 1700 block Fulton at about 8:27 a.m. "The intruder used a window that was partially opened with an air conditioning unit to gain entry into the home and climbed inside," said Detective Bob Friel. "At that point he was confronted by the homeowner and the intruder was shot one time with a shotgun. "According to Friel, the intruder pushed out the air conditioner to gain just before he was shot. Police said the man was rushed to the hospital but died from his wounds. They also said the homeowner had been burglarized in the past. The investigation into the shooting is continuing.

Can’t Believe This Is Happening to Me

2006-08-25T19:28:00.000-07:00

Posted by Rob Longenecker on August 24th, 2006

In defensive situations, people deny that they are actually being attacked. “this can’t be happening to me”, “why would this guy want to hurt me?”

It’s predictable. People even say it out loud, “I can’t believe this is happening to me.”

People who are victims of violence have a hard time understanding what is happening to them. People often get so wrapped up in what’s supposed to happen, or should happen that they’re not present to what is happening.
We’re just not used to violence. Most of us have no experience of it. It doesn’t seem real when it occurs. Most adults have never been in a violent confrontation.

How do you go from the comfort your “mental recliner” to the fires of hell? How do you shift your reality that fast and react decisively, with the intention to survive?

Tucker and I had a part-time shooting school in the mid 1980’s. I lived in the country and I had a 50-yard shooting range with a big dirt backstop 8 feet high and 50 feet wide. We decided to teach people defensive shooting and had success attracting students.

One day, “Annie” came with her mom and two aunts - four ladies, all with Charter Arms .38 Special revolvers - wanting to learn to shoot defensively. We split the day alternating between classroom sessions and shooting. They all did well since we concentrated on distances from 3 feet to a maximum of 7 yards.

We taught them to combine speed and accuracy. We discussed the fact that people who were threatened or attacked often said, either out loud or to themselves, “I can’t believe this is happening to me.” We felt we had given them a good grounding in the law, mental conditioning, confrontation avoidance and shooting skills.

Several months later, I received a phone call from Annie’s mom. I was shocked to hear her mother say, “Annie’s been in a shooting.” My heart jumped. I didn’t know the outcome until she told me Annie was okay and the guy who attacked her was dead.

The story was that Annie, newly divorced, had been out late at a club. She left her purse in the trunk of her car, taking her keys, money and I.D. into the club. Her Charter Arms .38 was in her purse. When she came out after closing time, she returned to her car, opened the trunk and retrieved her purse. After closing the trunk she opened her driver’s side door.

At that moment a young guy poked a gun in her ribs and told her to get in and slide over. As I recall, his gun was a .25 auto of some kind. Thank goodness he wasn’t interested in her purse.

He drove her car and pointed the gun at her as he drove. Annie told us later that she actually said to the guy, “I can’t believe this is happening to me.” She said it several times.

After 20 minutes they were in a lightly populated area. He turned into the drive of a burned-out house, stopped the car, opened his door and got out. He turned back, pointing the gun at Annie, and told her to get out of the car and leave her clothes in it.

What he didn’t know was that Annie had gotten over her panic, placed her purse on her right side by the passenger door and slipped her hand into it. She had a good grip on the little revolver. When he told her to get out and leave her clothes in the car, she knew she had to act. There was no assurance that he’d let her live. Even so, she hesitated.

In our classroom we had discussed reaction times. She knew she had the element of surprise even though he had a gun. The guy felt in control and he relaxed. Still, it takes something to shoot another person, even when you want to survive. It was then that he reached in, grabbed her left shoulder, pointed his gun at her and yelled a command to hurry up or else.

We had told the Annie in class to fire two shots to center of mass, then assess the situation to see if more shots were required. Annie’s hand came out of the purse and emptied the gun into the threatening mass.

The first shot X-ringed the center of his chest, the second was in the same vicinity. The third shot hit him in the side as he turned away. The fourth shot hit the back of his shoulder and the fifth shot went over him as he fell face-down outside the vehicle. The little revolver only held 5 rounds. She had forgotten all about firing two shots.

Annie got to a phone, called a friend, called the police and was no-billed by the grand jury. One bad guy takes a dirt nap and one young lady gets to live and take care of her young daughter. After a few days, Annie felt remorse and questioned her actions.

Tucker went to see her since he’d been in real life shootings as a police officer and could offer some real world experience. He had her see that she had done the right thing and that the bad guy had caused his own demise. She was okay with it and glad to be alive.

One last twist to the story is that Annie wanted to get rid of the little gun that saved her life. She didn’t want it reminding her of the incident. Guess what she did - she swapped it for her mom’s identical Charter Arms .38 special revolver and has carried that since so far as we know.

Thank goodness Annie had the time and the control to go beyond “I can’t believe this is happening to me” and took the action necessary to survive.

This entry was posted on Thursday, August 24th, 2006 um 9:24 pm and is filed under Good To Know, Top Gun Life Lessons. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

So, you got your CCH

2006-08-24T20:15:00.000-07:00

Many states around the country over the last several years have enacted 'shall issue' concealed carry legislation. That means more and more citizens are arming themselves, but with what? In Kansas, the issuance of a concealed carry license more or less says that the holder of the permit has demonstrated an ability to hit a target 25 times from 3, 7, and 10 yards without shooting himself or anyone else at the range. It also says that the permit holder has been advised of the rules of engagement for concealed carry. It does not mean that the person knows what equipment to carry or how to carry it. More on that later...

Doctors kill

2006-08-24T07:51:00.000-07:00

A friend emailed this to me and I thought it was cool...

FACTS TO PONDER:
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician are 0.171.
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services.

Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80 million...)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths; per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI

So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, “Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.

My bike

2006-08-22T19:56:00.000-07:00

Here is a pic of my 2006 Buell XB12X Ulysses. I have 10k miles on it and am completely addicted to riding it. I feel pity for anyone who is stuck riding anything else.

2006-08-22T15:06:00.000-07:00

Cool motorcycle I saw at Osh Kosh this year.