Posts Tagged ‘Gun Control’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

More Guns Less Crime: It was true before, and it is still true

December 26, 2009

The sales boom in firearms and ammunition, largely due to the Gun Salesman of the year / Ammunition Salesman of the year, Barack H. Obama and his merry band of misfits. Has yet again caused anti liberty and freedom types to shake their heads. After all, the Brady Bunch et al would have you believe that guns are sentient things that cause crime and destruction all on their own via some mystical power over people.

Yet, the FBI says otherwise: Full story here

CRIME RATES FALL
In the First Half of 2009
12/21/09

Chart showing declining crime rates in preliminary report of first half of 2009
– View the Preliminary Crime Statistics

For the third year in a row, our Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report shows that violent crime, property crime, and arson have decreased. The latest report compares January-June 2009 figures with the same time period in 2008.

Crimes reported to our Uniform Crime Program are down collectively: violent crime overall decreased 4.4 percent, property crime is down 6.1 percent, and arson fell 8.2 percent.

share.gif

Individual crimes are also decreasing across the board:

Other interesting highlights:

  • Murder was lower in all four regions of the country, with the largest decreases in the Northeast (13.7 percent) and the West (13.3 percent).
  • Motor vehicle thefts decreased significantly in all four regions of the country (Northeast, 19.3 percent; Midwest, 21.4 percent; South, 17.8 percent; and West, 18.2 percent).
  • While violent crime and aggravated assault were down in cities of more than 1 million people (7.0 percent and 6.2 percent, respectively), in cities of populations between 10,000 and 24,999, violent crime rose 1.7 percent and aggravated assault rose 3.8 percent.
  • While both metropolitan areas and non-metropolitan areas experienced decreases in violent crime and property crime in general, non-metropolitan counties saw increases in robbery (3.8 percent) and arson (1.2 percent).
  • On a regional basis, the only uptick in any crime was a slight increase in burglaries in the South (up 0.7 percent)

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on More Guns Less Crime: It was true before, and it is still true

Legalized Prostitution : The U.S. Senate and Congress

December 24, 2009

Legalized prostitution comes in many forms, and the attention whores that makeup a majority in the Senate and Congress are no different than the crack whore’s on Colfax Avenue in Denver.

Whether the pay off is in a lighter sentence, or approval from their pimp I see little difference between an honest prostitute and a politician that sells virtue period. But? They can have their uses, and just like a street cop using a confidential informant a politician can be used toward the greater good when surrounded by evil. Read on:

Gun Owners of America Wins a Skirmish on ObamaCare

— Trumpets recent victory to be grateful for this Christmas

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
703-321-8585
www.gunowners.org

“Score one for the Gun Owners of America ….” Slate, December 20, 2009

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

You guys have a lot to be thankful for this Christmas. Our efforts together in lobbying against ObamaCare have netted some positive gains, and that has the political left up in arms.

The writers at the ultra-liberal Slate magazine are beside themselves that an organization like the Gun Owners of America was able to move the Senate to include protections for gun owners.
According to Slate on December 20:

Score one for the Gun Owners of America, a lobby group positioned well to the right of the National Rifle Association…. [T]o pacify GOA, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (who represents the gun-loving state of Nevada has inserted into his “manager’s amendment” a section titled “Protecting 2nd Amendment Gun Rights.” It states that no wellness program implemented under health reform may require disclosure or collection of any information relating to gun ownership.

Medical information has already been used to deny — without due process or trial by jury — more than 150,000 military veterans the right to buy firearms.

Senator Reid tries to appease Gun Owners; leaves naysayers out on a limb

In the face of all this abuse, Senator Reid was pressured by GOA and his constituents into making a face-saving move. He wanted to silence the pro-gun community’s objections, so he took steps to strip the bill of any gun rights concerns.

But what a delicious irony this created. Prior to Senator Reid’s Second Amendment “fix,” many Senators had been telling their constituents for months that there were no Second Amendment concerns in the ObamaCare legislation — and now, Senator Reid left them out on a limb.

“There is no mention of ‘gun-related health data’ anywhere in the Senate’s health reform bill, and there is nothing in the bill that would result in any such data being reported to the government,” said Senator Bob Casey (D-PA) to one constituent. “I support the Second Amendment and will continue to uphold the rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms.”

Senator Casey supports the Second Amendment? What a laugh! Has Senator Casey seen his voting record on the GOA website? This year, he’s voted wrong on gun issues over 70% of the time.

Then there’s Democrat Senator Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico: “It is my understanding that there is no discussion within the Senate concerning firearms in relation to health care.  Please be assured I will keep your comments in mind as the Senate debates comprehensive health care reform.”

Senator Bingaman, will you really keep the views of your constituents in mind? If so, then why did you vote for the ObamaCare bill? After all, more than 60% of the American people oppose it!

To listen to these and other liberal Senators, you would think there were no Second Amendment concerns in President Obama’s signature piece of legislation. But then, lo and behold, Senator Reid included language in his substitute amendment that totally undercut these Senators’ excuses.

GOA lobbying saves gun owners from bureaucratic mischief

Slate then goes on to lament the other victory that GOA scored:

[G]un owners also won another provision forbidding private insurers participating in the bill’s exchanges from charging higher premiums, or denying coverage, or denying wellness discounts on the basis of gun ownership. Unlike the previous section, this one doesn’t place a restriction on what government may do. It places a restriction on what the private sector may choose to do on its own. It inhibits that most holy of right-wing sacred cows: free enteprise [sic].

The socialists at Slate magazine hate free enterprise so much, they can’t even spell the word correctly. It’s reminiscent of the Fonz from Happy Days trying unsuccessfully years ago to get the words “I was wr-wr-wrong” out of his mouth.

Yes, it’s true that GOA won a victory in this area. But GOA’s opposition to the “wellness” regulations was not driven by an effort to help big business, as it was totally driven by opposition to GOVERNMENT REGULATION that would impinge upon gun owners.

Every draft of the ObamaCare legislation on Capitol Hill would give Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius tremendous regulatory power. And in early versions of the Senate bill, the anti-gun Sebelius could very well have mandated that gun ownership is an activity so dangerous that your insurance coverage needed to be suspended.

The Reid “fix” prohibits companies from charging insurance premiums that would impinge upon “lawful” gun owners, but this will leave millions of gun owners in the cold — specifically, those honest Americans who cannot legally own firearms in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New York City.

Slate, of course, didn’t pick up on these loopholes in the Reid compromise, but then, you can’t expect a liberal cheerleader for the Obama machine to be overly careful about analyzing a Democrat-sponsored bill.

So the bottom line? Yes, thanks to your constant pressure, Gun Owners of America won a skirmish in the battle against socialized health care and gained some protections for gun owners.

But also remember that the ObamaCrats never really had our interests in mind and that they never really solved all the Second Amendment problems in the health care bill. Again, even with the Reid “fix,” it’s still possible that ATF agents could troll through your medical information and send that data to the FBI, who in turn, could use it to deny honest Americans their right to keep and bear arms — similar to the 150,000 military veterans who have now lost their gun rights.

The Senate is expected to vote on final passage of the ObamaCare bill tomorrow. The bill is expected to pass, but the fight is far from over. So please stay tuned, as Gun Owners of America will continue to keep you abreast of the latest developments.

Thanks again for all your activism this year. It really makes our job a whole lot easier.

Have a Merry Christmas!

————————————

Not a member yet of Gun Owners of America Please activate your membership for 2010 by going to http://gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm and joining the only “no-compromise gun lobby” in Washington!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Czar Wars, Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, Men's Issues, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

What’s that Smell?

December 23, 2009

Dave Kopel’s latest newsletter (see the link on the blog roll) unloads yet again with logic and reason. Bits and snips, with links below.

To subscribe to this free e-mail newsletter, please send a request to:
kopelnewsletter@liberty.seanet.com

Aiming for Liberty

David Kopel
Merril Press
December 4, 2009
http://www.amazon.com/Aiming-LIberty-Present-Freedom-Self-Defense/dp/0936783583/davekopel-20/
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Aiming-for-Liberty/David-B-Kopel/e/9780936783581/?itm=2

Videocast on Aiming for Liberty

Dave Kopel with Jon Caldara
Independent Thinking, KBPI 12, Denver
November 27, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EB5652D760AC2EAB
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaJgIjxmFdQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mymokhfqhJk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud36zktV3F8
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EB5652D760AC2EAB

Dave and Independence Institute President and program host Jon Caldara discuss his new book on this KBPI television broadcast, now available on YouTube. Part 1 is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaJgIjxmFdQ, Part 2, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mymokhfqhJk and Part 3, here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud36zktV3F8. The playlist with all three is here: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EB5652D760AC2EAB

New Law Review Articles by Kopel

The Right to Arms in the Living Constitution

David B. Kopel
Cardozo Law Review de Novo, Forthcoming; U. Denver Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-34
December 17, 2009
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1524103

“This Article presents a brief history of the Second Amendment as part of the living Constitution. From the Early Republic through the present, the American public has always understood the Second Amendment as guaranteeing a right to own firearms for self-defense. That view has been in accordance with �lite legal opinion, except for a period in part of the twentieth century.”

The Keystone of the Second Amendment: Quakers, the Pennsylvania Constitution, and the Questionable Scholarship of Nathan Kozuskanich

David B. Kopel with Clayton E. Cramer
Widener Law Journal, Vol. 19, 2010, forthcoming
December 19, 2009
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1502925

Kopel and Cramer examine the historical underpinnings of historian Nathan Kozuskanich’s claim that the right to arms in the 1776 Pennsylvania constitution only guaranteed a right to serve in the commonwealth’s militia.

Kopel on the Health Bill

Health Bill and Gun Ownership

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 24, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/24/health-bill-and-gun-ownership/

Dave responds to a putative rebutal of his concerns that the Government’s expanded role in health care may lead to ‘wellness programs’ that preclude firearms ownership.

Is the Senate health plan anti-gun?

Susan Ferrechio
The Washington Examiner
November 24, 2009
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/71875287.html

Ferrechio’s article includes Dave’s concern that a government putting itself in charge of people’s health may decides that habits such as firearms ownership are prohibitively expensive.

What’s that Smell?

Dave Kopel
America’s 1st Freedom
December, 2009
http://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/ACORN.htm

“Nearly everyone has heard of the corruption-plagued organization ACORN. Yet many gun owners are unaware of the organization’s strong anti-gun activities and ties.”

Missouri Court Upholds Statute Against Gun Possession While Intoxicated

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 20, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/20/missouri-court-uphelds-statute-against-gun-possession-while-intoxicated/

“In the 1979 case People v. Garcia, the Supreme Court of Colorado dealt with a similar statute. The ruled that the statute only applied to ‘actual or physical control.’ So if a person is drunk in his living room, and owns a gun which is stored in his downstairs closet, the statute would not apply. The Missouri decision is consistent with the Colorado standard, since Richard actually was possessing the handgun.”

Bloggingheads TV on Moses as the essential American hero

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 10, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ybn3ton

Dave here agrees with Bruce Feiler’s argument, in an interview on Robert Wright’s BloggingHeadsTV, that Moses is a figure of great interest as an exemplar to some of America’s most influential leaders.

United States v. Skoien

United States Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
November 18, 2009
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/TL1FFWAJ.pdf
PDF files require Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software.

The decision refers to Dave’s work on Heller on p.7, note 2.

Another Good Night for the Second Amendment

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 4, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/04/another-good-night-for-the-second-amendment/

“In sum: A bad night for advocates of gun show restrictions. Another fine night (as were election nights 2006 and 2008) for Democrats with A ratings from NRA. And good news for Second Amendment advocates in blue New Jersey and purple Virginia.”

Will the Arms Trade Treaty Provide Effective Embargos on Human Rights Violators?

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 2, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/02/will-the-arms-trade-treaty-provide-effective-embargos-on-human-rights-violators/

“Thus, the ATT might, at most, lead to more nominal embargos of arms; but nothing in an ATT can have greater force in international law than a Security Council order already does. Accordingly, the ATT will be of little or no use in achieving its purported objective. To the contrary, the ATT may be positively harmful, since it will probably declare a ‘right’ of governments to acquire arms. This ‘right’ could be used to claim that arms embargos outside the ATT system (e.g., unilateral embargos by the US, or the EU) are violations of international law.”

The Most Important Right to Arms Vote of 2009

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 4, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/04/the-most-important-right-to-arms-vote-of-2009/

“Repeal of the Canadian registry would, accordingly, be of tremendous global significance. Repeal would also shatter the claim by the Canadian gun prohibition lobby that gun control in Canada is an irreversible ratchet.”

Kopel on McDonald v. Chicago

The Kopel Amicus Brief

Brief Summary of the Kopel Brief

David B. Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/kopel-brief-in-mcdonald-v-chicago/

Here is a brief summary of the complete amicus brief, linked below, that Dave has written for the case of McDonald v. Chicago

Amicus Brief in McDonald v. Chicago: On Behalf of the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association, Et Al.

David B. Kopel
Independence Institute; Denver University, Sturm College of Law
November 22, 2009
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1511425

Here is a link to the full text of Dave’s brief on this important post-Heller case.

McDonald v. Chicago

Dave Kopel with Jon Caldara
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
December 1, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast353.mp3

Kopel and Caldara discuss Dave’s completed amicus brief and the importance of this case.

JoshCasts: Interview with Dave Kopel on McDonald v. Chicago

Dave Kopel with Josh Blackman
Josh Blackman’s Blog
November 23, 2009
http://joshblackman.com/blog/?p=2540

Here’s a podcast in which Law Clerk and Blogger-Tweeter Josh Blackman interviews Dave about the McDonald v. Chicago brief.

Dave’s Blogging on the Other Briefs in McDonald v. Chicago

Congressional brief in McDonald v. Chicago

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/congressional-brief-in-mcdonald-v-chicago/

Here is Dave’s reaction to the Congressional brief filed in the McDonald case. “Counsel of Record is former Solicitor General Paul D. Clement. Much of the brief recapitulates the lengthy historical record of congressional action (including but not limited to Reconstruction) to protect the individual right to arms from federal or state infringement.”

Academics for the Second Amendment brief in McDonald

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/academics-for-the-second-amendment-brief-in-mcdonald/

“Well before Reconstruction, the Second Amendment was considered to be mainly a guarantee of a right to own and carry guns for personal protection. Back in 1998, I wrote a hundred-page article, The Second Amendment in the Nineteenth Century, 1998 BYU Law Review 1359, which focused mainly on cases and treatises. Olson/Hardy/Cramer have gone further, and brought forward extensive evidence about the understanding of the public and of elected public officials.”

McDonald amicus: Don’t trust Fairman and Berger

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/mcdonald-amicus-dont-trust-fairman-and-berger/

“Erik S. Jaffe has written a very interesting brief for the CalGuns Foundation. In short, the argument is: ‘Charles Fairman’s and Raoul Berger’s Work on Fourteenth Amendment Incorporation of the Bill of Rights Is Deeply Flawed, Inaccurate, and Should Not Be Relied Upon by this Court.’ ”

Cato brief in McDonald v. Chicago

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/cato-brief-in-mcdonald-v-chicago/

“An outstanding brief, as one might expect. The bulk of the brief (21 pages, comprising Part I) shows that from the Founding Era into through the framing of the Fourteenth Amendment, national citizenship was paramount to state citizenship. Part II briefly argues that Slaughterhouse violated canons of constitutional construction such as by interpreting the Privileges or Immunities Clause to make it nothing more than a reiteration of the Supremacy Clause.”

Institute for Justice brief in McDonald v. Chicago

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 23, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/23/institute-for-justice-brief-in-mcdonald-v-chicago/

“The most important part of the brief is Part III, which begins: ‘To enslave a class of people requires three basic things: destroy their self-sufficiency, prevent them from fighting back, and silence any opposition.’ The brief then goes on to argue that the the Court should resist suggestions that it hold that the Privileges or Immunities clause makes the first eight amendments applicable against the states, but does nothing else.”

McDonald amicus briefs: Academics, Congress Redux, and California District Attorneys

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
November 25, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/11/25/mcdonald-amicus-briefs-academics-and-congress-redux/

“The new Kates-Ayers brief begins with a survey of the 17th-18th century philosophical view, with which the American Founders agreed, that self-defense was among the most fundamental of all rights, that it was also a duty, and that the right necessarily implied the right to use arms in self-defense.”

Privileges or Immunities Extravaganza

David Kopel
The Volokh Conspiracy
December 21, 2009
http://volokh.com/2009/12/21/privileges-or-immunities-extravaganza/

“The Question Presented by the Court asked if the bans should be considered unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process clause, or under the Privileges or Immunities clause. There’s been plenty of interesting scholarship recently on Privileges or Immunities. Here’s a guide to some of the most important articles.”

More of Dave’s Podcasts on the Case

Interview with Alan Gura

Dave Kopel with Alan Gura
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
December 7, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast358.mp3

Here is Dave’s lengthy (50 minutes) interview with Alan Gura, the lead attorney in the Heller case, now involved in McDonald v. Chicago.

McDonald v. Chicago: Is the 2nd Amendment Incorporated in the 14th Amendment? An Explanation of the Basic Constitutional Issues in the Case.

Dave Kopel with Jon Caldara
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
December 7, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast349.mp3

Dave and Jon Caldara discuss Dave’s early work on his amicus brief, and the issues and precedents at stake in McDonald v. Chicago.

Stephen Halbrook Christmas Special.

Dave Kopel with Stephen Halbrook
Dave Kopel’s Second Amendment Podcast
December 17, 2009
http://audio.ivoices.org/mp3/iipodcast362.mp3

Kopel interviews Stephen Halbrook, the leading legal defender of the Second Amendment over the last three decades. 53 minutes.

More available at the sidebar link!

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

GOA and GOF File Brief in Chicago Handgun Ban Case

December 18, 2009
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

On Monday, November 23, 2009, Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the United States Supreme Court in support of four Chicago residents seeking to invalidate a city ordinance prohibiting them from owning or possessing a handgun in their own home.

Just one year and ninth months previously, GOA and GOF filed a similar brief in support of a Washington, D.C. resident who was seeking relief from an almost identical city ordinance.

On June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the D.C. ordinance was unconstitutional because an absolute ban on handgun ownership and possession “infringed” on the D.C. citizen’s right to keep and bear arms as secured by the Second Amendment.

“The question now before the Court is whether an American citizen who resides in Chicago, Illinois has the same right to keep or bear arms as the American citizen who resides in the District of Columbia,” said GOA Executive Director Larry Pratt.

“Since both residents are American citizens, it seems logical that both ought to have the same rights,” Pratt said.

According to Heller, the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms belongs to “all Americans.”  The current GOA brief, which is supported by seven other like-minded organizations, contends that this right extends to every American citizen without regard to state of residence.

That argument is based on the Fourteenth Amendment’s straightforward prohibition against any state that makes or enforces any law that “abridge[s] the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.”

By relying expressly on this “privileges and immunities” clause, the GOA brief urges the Court not to use a gun rights case to extend the power of the federal judiciary to impose its predilections upon the states in unrelated areas, such as business regulation and moral license.

Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation usually take the side that is against the federal government because it has become too big for its britches.  And the Chicago case is no exception from that policy and principle.

Thus, it bears repeating that the Supreme Court found in Heller that the very purpose of the unalienable right to keep and bear arms is to prevent “tyrants” from “taking away the people’s arms, enabling a select militia or standing army to suppress political opponents.”  To the Court’s credit, it saw that the D.C. ban on handguns was just the kind of regulation prohibited by the Second Amendment.  Thus, the Court ruled that the keeping of handguns for self-defense was a “central component of the right itself.”

Another successful outcome of GOA’s Heller brief was in countering the Bush Administration, which had asked the Court to use the D.C. case as a justification for all sorts of gun control.  GOA was pleased that the Justices heeded our admonition to limit the Court’s holding to the case before it, thus shooting down both the D.C. government and the Bush Administration in their quest to validate other firearms restrictions.

A brief like the one we are filing regarding the Chicago case is very expensive.  We constantly hear from gun owners that we need to be challenging gun bans in court, to counter the efforts of the Brady Bunch, the ACLU and other leftist organizations.

So won’t you please join us in this monumental battle with a special year-end contribution to help pay our expenses for this important effort?

You can donate to this worthy cause at http://www.gunowners.com/mcdonald.htm

Tags:, , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on GOA and GOF File Brief in Chicago Handgun Ban Case

Federal gun regulator accused of damaging Metairie hotel room

December 15, 2009

Hat Tip to Texas Fred for the heads up on this. Regular readers know that I support LEO’s to the hilt. But, there always has to be an exception to make the rule or so the saying goes.

That exception, is the BATFE. The only agency dedicated to the destruction of The Bill of Rights. During the Clinton years Explosives were added to the responsibilities of the notoriously rogue agency. One can only guess that Clinton did that in order to lend an air of legitimacy to the group of maniacs that brought you the Ruby Ridge travesty and the Waco Holocaust.

I am on record as having stated that any thing that is legitimate that they do, should, on a federal level be performed by the FBI. No, the FBI isn’t perfect, but compared to BATFE? The FBI wins hands down when it comes to acting ethically.

Moving BATFE from the IRS to DHS hasn’t changed much…

Read about this HERE

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Federal gun regulator accused of damaging Metairie hotel room

CSU Regents Reject Logic, Reason, and State Law

December 12, 2009

As noted in an earlier post the Regents at Colorado State University were in the depths of deciding whether or not to turn the campuses into Free Fire Zones. Well, they decided that a bloody mess when, not if, the next moral degenerate decides to get their fifteen minutes of fame at the expense of the student body. Not to mention their collective decision is in direct violation of state law.

Senator Greg Brophy sent them a well-reasoned letter that, as a rather successful CSU graduate you would think that they would have listened too, as well as taken into account. However, the forces of political correctness, and anti liberty and logic held sway at the end of the day. Thereby setting the stage for yet another slaughter in an institution of learning in Colorado. I’m guessing that two were not enough for these brainy types to figure things out on their own.

In any case, Senator Brophy was kind enough to allow me to reprint some of the feed back that he has received about all this. Please note the absolute lack of critical thinking, as well as a pronounced lack of logical thought that was expressed in the emails that he responded too. Then, I will follow-up with a few additional links that have related story’s.

Whoops, I need to update the update, as
the punch line is missing from the last of my email
exchange with liberal
Leather

And my favorite exchange with Richard
Leather, also from Denver:

How many crimes or violent incidents in Colorado,
over say the past 10 years, have been interdicted by
a private gun owner?

On a national basis:

•The U.S.
has an estimated 283 million guns in civilian hands
(Hepburn),
or approximately 97 guns for every 100 people (Karp).

•Each year, about 4.5 million new firearms, including
approximately 2 million handguns, are sold in the
United States
(Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF).

•An estimated 2 million secondhand firearms are sold
each year as
well (ATF).

If there are measurable interventions by private gun
owners, including
on campus, then weapons on a campus can be argued for
with at least minimal justification.

But I do not see evidence that private citizens play
any measurable
role in prevention of crime or violence.
What am I missing?

I sent back this:

You really shouldn’t bring a knife to a gun fight, so
to speak.

Two quick examples:

Shooting justified/ Woman who wounded intruder
within her rights,

0 Comments | Gazette, The (Colorado Springs),
Nov 23, 2000 | by Jeremy Meyer

A 72-year-old woman who shot a man allegedly breaking
into her Knob
Hill home Saturday won’t be charged, the 4th District
Attorney’s Office said
Wednesday.

Aurora woman fires at intruder who cops think
was serial rapist

By Jim Kirksey

Denver Post Staff Writer

DenverPost.com 9/23/20
A man police believe may be a serial rapist
preying on women in Aurora
and Denver narrowly
escaped injury when a would-be victim fired a shot
at him as he stood in her
bedroom doorway, said Sgt. Rudy Herrera of the
Aurora Police Department.

The liberal dummy sent this back:

Ah, I see. Once in 2000. Then again in 2005.

QED. Now
really, Brophy. Not even in the old sod would that wash.

The issue, moreover, is not
guns stashed at home, wielded in face of invasive
threat.

It’s the rationality of “gunning after” CSU trustees
facing
the problem of youngsters carrying concealed weapons.
Defending one’s
self all too readily translates to defending from
insult. That is a
tradition out here that deserves burial.

Pandering to a constituent element at the expense of
good governance is
no proper part of conservatism.

So I sent him back this:

I really feel like I need to pat you on
the head and say nice try. Maybe you
forgot about the New
Life Church
attempted mass murder in December of 2007.
Jeanne Assam had a concealed carry permit and was at
church on that
fateful Sunday, thank God. This is from
the Rocky:

Firing as he moved

Murray
approached a Toyota
minivan. David and Marie Works were climbing in with
their daughters –
18-year-old twins Laurie and Stephanie, and Rachel,
16, and Grace, 11.

Murray
walked slowly, arcing around the van, firing as he moved.

“Get down! Get down!” David Works yelled.

Murray’s
bullets shattered windows on the van and cut down
Stephanie, Rachel and their
father.

Stephanie Works died in the minivan. Paramedics rushed
Rachel Works to the hospital, performing
cardiopulmonary resuscitation all the
way – and doctors fought to save her but could not.
David Works, seriously
injured, also was rushed to the hospital, where he
was treated for wounds to
his abdomen and groin.

In another part of the parking lot, shots hit a
Toyota 4Runner occupied by
Matt and Judy Purcell and their three daughters. Judy
Purcell, who was sitting
in the front passenger seat, suffered injuries to her
shoulder and face, and
her husband sped off for the hospital.

Bullets cut through the front fender of a Honda Accord,
but the woman behind the wheel wasn’t hurt.

Murray walked toward the church, according to numerous
witnesses, firing indiscriminately from his assault
rifle, blowing holes in the
glass doors on the east side of the main church
building before he entered.

Inside, in a hallway, Murray’s gunfire hit Larry
Bourbonnais, 59,
in the arm, just as he ducked behind a pillar.

At that same moment, church security officer Jeanne Assam
drew her 9 mm pistol and shouted “surrender” at Murray.

“Drop the gun,” she yelled. “Drop the gun,
or I will kill you.”

Needless to say, he is not very happy with
me. Not that I care.

I’ll continue to work to resolve
this issue and make students and visitors to CSU
safer. I’m working closely with Dudley Brown
from http://www.RMGO.org He is really going the extra mile
to help the
students at CSU. If you are not a member
of RMGO, you should be. The other gun
groups are good and work hard. RMGO is
the best; you can always count on them to side with
the Constitution, even if
it isn’t on a popular issue – no compromising on
fundamental
rights.

Greg

Note: some spacing was edited for clarity, content un-changed.

Related is a response having to do with this issue from NRA/ILA:

Anti-Gun Lunacy Abounds On Colorado College Campuses
Friday, December 11, 2009
The carrying of firearms on college campuses remains hotly debated these days.  Recently, that debate has centered on two prominent Colorado universities.

Last week, the Colorado State University (CSU) Student Senate voted overwhelmingly (21-3) to continue allowing students with valid state-issued carry permits to carry concealed firearms on campus.  The local Sheriff endorsed the students’ decision.  But the nine-member CSU Board of Governors overruled the decision, voting on Friday to strike down the proposal.

A final decision by CSU President Dr. Anthony A. Frank on the proposal is expected soon.  In the meantime, Frank will review recommendations from both the student government and his public safety and cabinet members.

Former Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo (R) reportedly called the CSU decision “stupid.”  Tancredo has proposed a 2010 ballot measure that would ask voters to recommend to Colorado’s state officials that they oppose all forms of gun restrictions.  A December 7, 2009 State Bill Colorado article reports that Tancredo said the issue is about self-defense, stopping “horrendous” incidents and protecting the Second Amendment.

“Do you want to protect people, or do you want to be politically correct?  Which is your goal?” Tancredo asked.

“You do realize that there are about 300 million firearms in the United States in private hands.  If the opponents of concealed-carry and of private ownership of firearms were right, every city in the United States would be Beirut,” he said.

Tancredo went on to note that statistics indicate gun violence in the United States has been going down over the last decade, as gun ownership has been increasing.

Meanwhile, the University of Colorado (UC) also took up the issue of banning firearms on campus last week when they confirmed a ban on¾drum roll¾Nerf guns! Yes, Nerf guns.  You know, those toy guns that shoot soft spongy balls?  The ones kids play with in the family room?  Yes, those Nerf guns.

It seems that the game of “humans vs. zombies” has become a national craze on college campuses.  The game involves “zombie” students attempting to eliminate “human” students by pelting them with spongy Nerf balls or balled-up socks.  When campus security officials got wind of the game, they moved quickly to ban the Nerf guns.  Students using the play guns could be charged with violations of the student-conduct policy or even arrested on charges of unlawful conduct.

So, while Nerf guns may be safe to sell in “Kids R Us,” and safe for use by children in their home, apparently they are seen as enough of a grave danger for college students that UC has banned them.

“We told them that the violation of the weapons policy is a serious thing,” said CU spokesman Bronson Hilliard.  “If a third party happened upon this and called 911, we’d have to respond as if it were a real incident.”

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 2 Comments »

“It’s not what you say, it’s what people hear.”

December 12, 2009

The latest from the felon Bloomberg reveals just what lengths idiots such as he, and others like Lautenberg, Schumer, and the usual gang of suspects will go to with the express goal of depriving you of life and liberty through the destruction of the Bill of Rights.

This week, anti-gun New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s anti-gun group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, released the findings of a poll conducted by a political consulting firm called “The Word Doctors,” whose slogan is “It’s not what you say, it’s what people hear.”  Word Doctors’ president is a pollster who has been reprimanded by the American Association for Public Opinion Research and censured by the National Council on Public Polls, and who says that the key to polling is “to ask a question in the way that you get the right answer.”

At some other time in our nation’s history, an organization like this would not have been commissioned to conduct a poll, and perhaps it would not even have existed. At a minimum, its poll would have been considered biased and rejected by every newspaper in the country.

But today, as the distinction between editorials and news has become blurred, information is treated so superficially that a catchy word or two is enough to get someone elected to public office, and some in positions of authority cannot conceive of the concept of shame.

Thus, earlier this week, Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) excitedly called attention to the bought-and-paid-for Word Doctors “poll,” which claimed that a majority of NRA members and other gun owners support Lautenberg’s bills to prohibit the possession of firearms by people placed (often mistakenly) on the FBI terrorist watchlist (S.1317), to require gun show promoters to send ledgers of customer information to the federal government (S.843), and to let the FBI retain records for 180 days of every gun purchase approved by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)  (S.2820).  The poll also claimed support for Bloomberg’s proposal to rescind the Tiahrt Amendment, which prevents unfettered release of BATFE firearm trace data.  (Bloomberg, of course, wants to use the data in lawsuits against the firearms industry.)

But did the poll really show such strong support?  Certainly the participants didn’t have much information to go on.  The poll didn’t explain that the watchlist has been under fire by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General’s office and the ACLU for improperly including the names of innocent people, and that many innocent people have been mistaken for those who are on the watchlist. It didn’t explain that Lautenberg’s gun show bill would do much more than require NICS checks on private gun sales at gun shows.

The poll mischaracterized the issue of NICS record retention. Instead of informing poll participants that the accused Ft. Hood murderer had been investigated by the FBI and found to not constitute a terror threat months before he went through a NICS check to purchase the gun he allegedly used in the murders, the poll simply asked whether “the FBI should be able to access and keep information about gun purchases by terror suspects in cases similar to [the accused Ft. Hood killer’s]?” Worse, Word Doctors misinformed poll participants by telling them that the accused killer was still under investigation at the time he purchased the gun.

The poll also asked if participants agreed that “The federal government should not restrict the police’s ability to access, use, and share data that helps them enforce federal, state and local gun laws,” when in fact the Tiahrt Amendment fully allows access to trace information, as long as it’s related to crimes that they’re actually investigating.

And the poll also claimed that a majority of gun owners want to “balance” their rights against the need to stop criminals from getting guns. But what it actually asked was whether gun owners agreed that “We can do more to stop criminals from getting guns while also protecting the rights of citizens to freely own them.” Coupled with the poll’s findings that an overwhelming majority of gun owners believe “Criminals . . . should be punished to the maximum extent of the law” and “Law-abiding Americans should have the freedom to choose how to protect themselves, based on their personal situation,” it’s fair to conclude that gun owners understand the two concepts aren’t mutually exclusive.  Since the ideas are compatible, they don’t require a “balance,” as suggested by gun control supporters.

Notably, Lautenberg mentioned none of the poll’s findings that undercut the anti-gun agenda, and Dionne mentioned few. These include findings that an overwhelming majority of gun owners:

  • Thinks President Obama will try to ban guns;
  • Agrees that the Supreme Court’s decision in last year’s Heller case was correct;
  • Agrees that the Second Amendment should prevent all levels of government from infringing the right to arms;
  • Agrees that people should be allowed to carry guns for protection in national parks;
  • Agrees that people should be allowed to transport firearms in baggage on Amtrak trains;
  • Agrees that gun laws should be less strict or left as they are; and
  • Opposes or is neutral about gun registration and an “assault weapon” ban.

One final note: Since Word Doctors had no access to NRA membership lists, there’s no way the pollsters could verify that any of the “NRA members” actually were NRA members.  While this is a fatal flaw, we mention it at the end only because the poll’s other flaws were even worse.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Non Compos Mentis, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Not without a fight: Second Amendment March Newsletter

December 10, 2009

Read the Second Amendment March Newsletter HERE.

Director Max Lemus has finished his documentary, “Not without a fight.” Lemus wrote on his website:

This project grew out of my frustration with anchor men and women (media as a whole) who I think portray pro-gun rights people in an unfair and mostly negative light without truly giving the person interviewed an opportunity to explain the human side of gun rights. It seemed to me that the media would select a radical to interview and let the person represent all gun rights supporters, or they would cast stones at a clean cut and articulate gun rights supporters. Unfortunately the gun rights debate is sparingly presented in a logical manner.

I am shooting the documentary so that it will accomplish two things:

1. Dispel inaccuracies and introduce gun rights supporters as the regular folk that I know them to be.

2. As people share their personal journeys, I hope that they become like a blue print for others who want to get involved but don’t know how or where to start. Not just for gun rights but for all issues that affect the nation.


Included in this documentary is Second Amendment March founder Skip Coryell.

Watch a trailer here

Download the video here

Tags:, , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, mysandry, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Not without a fight: Second Amendment March Newsletter

First, there was Sonia Sotomayor

December 9, 2009

Senate Set to Vote on Another Anti-gun Judge

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102,
Springfield, VA 22151
703-321-8585
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Here we go again.

First, there was Sonia Sotomayor.  Then there was David Hamilton.

Now, we have another radical, anti-gun judge that has been nominated for the federal judiciary.  His name is Louis Butler, and he is so radical, he was twice rejected by the people of Wisconsin (which is, by the way, one of the most liberal states in our union).

When Louis Butler first ran for the Wisconsin Supreme Court — the voters rejected him by a 2-1 margin.  When he was appointed to that court by Democrat Governor Jim Doyle and then stood for retention by the voters, they again rejected him. This was the first time a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was rejected by the voters in more than 40 years.

More importantly, Louis Butler opposes the rights of gun owners. The right to bear arms in the Wisconsin Constitution expressly notes that this right is for personal security and “any other lawful purpose.”  But in State v. Fischer, Judge Butler was the deciding vote in 2006 to hold that a Wisconsin statute barring carrying a concealed weapon for any purpose, at any time, including in a vehicle, does not violate this right to personal security that the voters of Wisconsin chose to expressly protect in their state constitution.

So he ignored the state constitution in order to impose his anti-gun views on the people of Wisconsin.

After the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Heller case upholding Second Amendment gun rights in 2008, Louis Butler spoke at an Obama for President fundraiser and specifically mentioned “gun control” as an issue that potential Obama appointees would impact.

“Gun control,” Butler said, “may ultimately be decided, and the new appointees can tip the very balance of the court.  [The] background, personal beliefs and policy decisions of the justices selected will influence how they will vote on the difficult cases before them.”

There you have it.  He is a radical activist who wants to move the courts — and our country — in a new direction.  We’ve already had enough “hope and change” for a lifetime.  We don’t need another federal judge who will use his radical “personal beliefs” to reshape our society.

ACTION:  Please contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to OPPOSE the nomination of Judge Louis Butler as U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin.  Butler was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, and could now be voted on by the full Senate at any time.

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your senators the pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

Please OPPOSE the nomination of Louis Butler as U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Wisconsin.

When Louis Butler first ran for the Wisconsin Supreme Court — the voters rejected him by a 2-1 margin.  When he was appointed to that court by Democrat Governor Jim Doyle and then stood for retention by the voters, they again rejected him. This was the first time a member of the Wisconsin Supreme Court was rejected by the voters in more than 40 years.

More importantly, Louis Butler opposes the rights of gun owners.  In State v. Fischer, Judge Butler expressly ignored the right to bear arms provision in the Wisconsin Constitution.  And after the landmark U.S. Supreme Court Heller case upholding Second Amendment gun rights in 2008, Louis Butler spoke at an Obama for President fundraiser and specifically mentioned “gun control” as an issue that potential Obama appointees would impact.

“Gun control,” Butler said, “may ultimately be decided, and the new appointees can tip the very balance of the court.  [The] background, personal beliefs and policy decisions of the justices selected will influence how they will vote on the difficult cases before them.”

Again, I urge you to OPPOSE this nomination.  Gun Owners of America will be scoring this nomination and will let me know how you vote on this radical judge.

Sincerely,

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Bloomberg And Lautenberg : What a pair of losers

December 5, 2009

The treasonous master minions of the fight against liberty and freedom are back at it.

Two Against Two: Bloomberg And Lautenberg
Pair Up To Violate The Second And Fourteenth Amendments
Friday, December 04, 2009
Is your name the same as, or similar to, that of someone on the FBI’s “terrorist watchlist?”  Or, have you been erroneously placed on the watchlist?  You can’t find out because the FBI won’t say exactly why people get watchlisted, won’t say who has been watchlisted, and therefore doesn’t offer watchlisted people the chance to clear their names immediately.  In fact, small children, federal air marshals, military personnel who have fought terrorists overseas, the late Sen. Edward Kennedy, members of Congress, and many other good Americans have even been stopped from boarding commercial aircraft for this reason.  The government has reported that there were 700,000 names in the watchlist as of April 2007, and the ACLU estimates that the number has since risen to 1.3 million.

Obviously, these people are not all terrorists.  However, politicians who hate the Second Amendment know that some of the good Americans who are erroneously on the list, or who get incorrectly flagged by the list, are gun owners.  And, because the FBI won’t reveal its watchlisting criteria, those politicians think that more gun owners can be placed on the list over time, by like-minded bureaucrats making arbitrary determinations about who ought to have guns.

One such politician is Michael Bloomberg, whose hobbies include being mayor of New York City and raising intellectually deficient complaints about gun laws.  Never one to concern himself with the facts when there is a chance to get his name in the paper, Bloomberg recently claimed that the recent murders on Ft. Hood would have been prevented if the FBI hadn’t been required to erase NICS-approved gun purchase records after 24 hours.

Mischaracterizing events related to the Ft. Hood murders for political reasons shows disrespect to the lives that were lost there and is crass to the extreme.  That said, the reason that the FBI didn’t know about the Ft. Hood suspect’s gun purchase is not that his NICS record was erased after 24 hours.  Rather, it’s that he wasn’t on the watchlist in the first place, as NICS checks the list and alerts the FBI if a listed person tries to buy a gun.

Another such politician is Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), author of legislation Bloomberg supports (S. 1317, H.R. 2159 in the House), which would allow the Attorney General to stop watchlisted people from buying guns through NICS.  It would also prevent those people from contesting their rejections in a full and open hearing in court. Obviously, that scheme would violate not only the Second Amendment, but also the Fourteenth Amendment’s protection against deprivation of liberty without due process of law.

This week Lautenberg introduced a separate bill (S. 2820), calling for NICS firearm transaction records to be retained for 10 years on a person suspected of being a member of a terrorist organization. That, however, is a smokescreen for another provision in the same bill, to retain NICS records of approved firearm transfers for 180 days for other gun buyers.

While Lautenberg introduced S. 2820 in the wake of Ft. Hood (with terrorism fresh on Americans’ minds), gun control supporters have wanted NICS records retained for longer than 24 hours since NICS’ inception.  Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a co-sponsor of the Lautenberg bill, argued in favor of a 180-day retention back in 2001.  After all, the Brady Act, as passed by Congress, required that NICS “destroy” the records of approved firearm purchases.

Along with the Lautenberg bills described above, gun control supporters are concurrently campaigning for a law to force all private gun sales to be run through NICS.  Connecting the dots is a simple task. The goal shared by gun control supporters and by government entities for whom no amount of knowledge about American citizens is too much, is to incrementally increase the amount of information the government possesses on gun owners who, through no fault of their own, end up on a secret government list.

Please call your U.S. Senators and urge them to oppose S. 1317 and S. 2820.  You can call your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121.

SOURCE

Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Czar Wars, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, News, Politics, Wordpress Political Blogs | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »