A Bit of Humor to Start the Week

The Gospel According To John (Moses Browning)

As translated from the original ancient manuscripts by Fr. Frog.
© copyright 2002 by John C. Schaefer

1 In the beginning was the 1911, and the 1911 was THE pistol, and it was good. And behold the Lord said, "Thou shalt not muck with my disciple John's design for it is good and it workith. For John made the 1911, and lo all of his weapons, from the designs which I, the Lord, gave him upon the mountain."

2 "And shouldst thou muck with it, and hang all manner of foul implements upon it, and profane its internal parts, thou shalt surely have malfunctions, and in the midst of battle thou shalt surely come to harm."

3 And as the ages passed men in their ignorance and arrogance didst forget the word of the Lord and began to profane the 1911. The tribe of the gamesman did place recoil spring guides and extended slide releases upon the 1911 and their metal smiths didst tighten the tolerances and alter parts to their liking, their clearness of mind being clouded by lust.

4 Their artisans did hang all manner of foul implements upon the 1911 and did so alter it that it became impractical to purchase. For lo, the artisans didst charge a great tax upon the purchasers of the 1911 so that the lowly field worker could not afford one. And the profaning of the internal parts didst render it unworkable when the dust of the land fell upon it.

5 And lo, they didst install adjustable sights, which are an abomination unto the Lord. For they doth break and lose their zero when thou dost need true aim. And those who have done so will be slain in great numbers by their enemies in the great battle. a

6 And it came to pass that the Lord didst see the abomination wrought by man and didst cause, as he had warned, fearful malfunctions to come upon the abominations and upon the artisans who thought they could do no wrong.

7 Seeing the malfunctions and the confusion of men, the lord of the underworld did see an opportunity to further ensnare man and didst bring forth pistols made of plastic, whose form was such that they looked and felt like a brick, yet the eyes of man being clouded, they were consumed by the plastic pistol and did buy vast quantities of them.

8 And being a deceitful spirit the lord of the underworld did make these plastic pistols unamenable to the artisans of earth and they were unable to muck much with the design, and lo these pistols did appear to function.

9 And the evil one also brought forth pistols in which the trigger didst both cock and fire them and which require a "dingus" to make them appear safe.

10 But man being stupid did not understand these new pistols and didst proceed to shoot themselves with the plastic pistol and with the trigger cocking pistols for lo their manual of arms required great intelligence which man had long since forsaken. Yet man continue to gloat over these new pistols blaming evil forces for the negligent discharges which they themselves had committed.

11 And when man had been totally ensnared with the plastic pistol, the lord of the underworld didst cause a plague of the terrible Ka-Boom to descend upon man and the plastic pistols delivered their retribution upon men. And there was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth in the land.

12 Then seeing that the eyes of man were slowly being opened and that man was truly sorrowful for his sinful misdeeds, the Lord did send his messengers in the form of artisans who did hear and obey the teachings of the prophet and who didst restore the profaned 1911s to their proper configuration, and lo, to the amazement of men they didst begin to work as the prophet had intended.

13 And the men of the land didst drive out the charlatans and profaners from the land, and there was joy and peace in the land, except for the evil sprits which tried occasionally to prey on the men and women of the land and who were sent to the place of eternal damnation b by the followers of John.


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

a) Several old manuscripts add the following text. "And they [also rendered as "these men"] didst chamber it for cartridges who's calibers startith with numbers less than the Holy Number 4. And lo the Lord did cause great grief amongst these men when their enemies who were struck in battle with these lesser numbers didst not fall but did continue to cause great harm."

b) or Hell

I grabbed this bit of wisdom from Fr. Frogs Pad, a repository of all sorts of interesting information.

Sunday's Blog of the Week

This week Lady Liberty interviewed Matthew Bracken, author of Enemies Foreign and Domestic. Mr. Bracken his published the second book in the Enemies series. This book is titled "Domestic Enemies" and is on book shelves now.

An excerpt from the interview that is posted on The Price of Liberty:

In 2003, author Matthew Bracken published Enemies Foreign and Domestic, the first novel of a planned trilogy. With its focus on a government set-up that resulted in draconian gun control measures, it gained good reviews and much appreciation from readers. As gun control advocates have continued in their efforts to disarm the law abiding, it also seemed to offer some chilling warnings.

This year, Bracken released the second novel in the trilogy. Domestic Enemies held onto the background established in the first novel, but added to it the probable result of continued unfettered illegal immigration into the country. Once again, the reality is striking even as the story holds the reader's interest.

After reading Domestic Enemies and finding myself genuinely fearful of some of the near future it outlines, I determined to speak with Matthew Bracken and discuss just how real his fiction might - unfortunately - prove to be. Mr. Bracken kindly agreed to answer some questions, and here is the result of our recent conversation.

Lady Liberty: In your first book, the incident that led to all of the other subsequent actions was a government set-up of a shooting incident which caused, in turn, the demonization of guns and gun owners. At the time - two and a half years ago - that seemed pretty believable. As your storyline has evolved, do you still think something like that could happen?

Matthew Bracken: Sure, a false attribution sniper attack could be done. Why not? All it would take is a rifle and ammo, and a crowd penned into an easy killing zone like a packed stadium.

LL: How likely do you believe it is that it will happen - or even that something similar has already happened?

MB: Stranger things have happened, such as Oklahoma City and 9-11. It could happen tomorrow or never. But if it happens, I hope my first novel will at least cause people to look into the crime very closely.

LL: Once laws are made, they're tough to un-do. But in the case of the second volume of your planned trilogy, the problem is apparently a lack of enforcement of long extant constitutional mandate. I refer, of course, to border security. We already know how likely that is because it's already happening. But do you seriously believe that illegal immigration is as great a threat as you paint it to be in your fiction?

MB: Absolutely. I'm dead serious about the threat...

The Price of Liberty is a multi-contributor blog that always has something new and interesting to read and think about. Head on over and read the rest of this interview with Matthew Bracken, and you will find many other interesting articles to read.

How to Be a More Effective Advocate for Freedom

John Ross, the author of Unintended Consequences, wrote an article awhile back titled "Mistakes We Make in the Gun Culture". In this article he presents a primer for debating gun rights with the anti's. More and more editorials are being written by the gun control crowd, many of them sophomoric. The Internet has opened the avenues of communication up to the point where we can instantly provide feedback on these articles by commenting directly or by blogging. The mindset John illustrates in this article is one effective way of getting our point across.

One of the biggest mistakes that freedom advocates make is we often fail to take the moral high ground on freedom issues, and we let our enemies define the terms. This is a huge mistake. Never forget: We are in the right on this issue. We are on the side of the Founding Fathers. They are on the side of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, and every other leader of an oppressive, totalitarian regime.


Let me give some common examples I’ve often heard when Second Amendment advocates debate gun control supporters:

THEY SAY: “We’d be better off if no one had guns.”

WE SAY: “You can never succeed at that, criminals will always get guns.” (FLAW: the implication here is that if you could succeed at eliminating all guns, it would be a reasonable plan.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “So, you want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that’s unacceptable. Better we should require every citizen to carry a gun.”


THEY SAY: “Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don’t need a 30-round magazine for hunting deer--they’re only for killing people.”

WE SAY: “I compete in DCM High Power with my AR-15. You need a large-capacity magazine for their course of fire. My SKS is a fine deer rifle, and I’ve never done anything to give my government reason not to trust me blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implicitly conceded that it is OK to ban any gun with no sporting use. And eventually they can replace your sporting arms with arcade-game substitutes.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Your claim that ‘they’re only for killing people’ is imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people, and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns. To be precise, a high-capacity, military-type rifle or handgun is designed for conflict. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most reliable, most durable, highest-capacity weapon possible. The only thing hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is that they’re good practice.”


THEY SAY: “If we pass this License-To-Carry law, it will be like the Wild West, with shootouts all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc. We need to keep guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life, it will be worth it.”

WE SAY: “Studies have shown blah blah blah” (FLAW: You have implied that if studies showed License-To-Carry laws equaled more heat-of-passion shootings, Right-To-Carry should be illegal.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Although no state has experienced what you are describing, that’s not important. What is important is our freedom. If saving lives is more important than the Constitution, why don’t we throw out the Fifth Amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual truth serum session to the entire population. We’d catch the criminals and mistaken arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?”


THEY SAY: “I don’t see what the big deal is about a five day waiting period.”

WE SAY: “It doesn’t do any good, criminals don’t wait five days, it’s a waste of resources blah blah blah.” (FLAW: You have implied that if waiting periods did reduce crime, they would be a good idea.)

WE SHOULD SAY: “Shall we apply your logic to the First Amendment along with the Second? How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn’t that prevent lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that this law applies to people who already own a handgun tells me that it’s not about crime prevention, it’s about harassment. Personally, I want to live in a free society, not a ‘safe’ one with the government as chief nanny.”


THEY SAY: “In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have Atomic bombs.”

WE SAY: “Uh, well, uh...”

WE SHOULD SAY: “Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue--it’s in the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns as were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in 1776 each had muskets, but not the large field pieces that fired exploding shells. In 2005, soldiers are each individually issued M16s, M249s, etc. but not atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic, the laws governing free speech and freedom of the press are only valid for newspapers whose presses are hand-operated and use fixed type. After all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset printing or electricity, let alone TV, satellite transmission, FAXes, and the Internet.”


THEY SAY: “We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams bloody murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these dangerous weapons.”

WE SAY: Nothing, usually, and just sit there looking dumb.

WE SHOULD SAY: “You know, driving is a luxury, whereas firearms ownership is a right secured by the Constitution. But let’s put that aside for a moment. It’s interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can at any age go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of any size you want, and you don’t need to do anything if you don’t use them on public property. No license at all. If you do want to use them on public property, you can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. No waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns, machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public property. Sounds great to me.”



FINAL COMMENT, useful with most all arguments:



YOU SAY: “You know, I’m amazed at how little you care about your grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than anything.”

THEY SAY: “Hunh?”

YOU SAY: “Well, passing this proposal won’t have a big immediate effect. I mean, in the next couple of years, neither George W. Bush nor Hillary Clinton is going to open up internment camps for Americans like Roosevelt did sixty-odd years ago. But think of your worst nightmare of a political leader. Isn’t it possible that a person like that might be in control here some time in the next 30, 40, or 50 years, with 51% of the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him or her? If that does happen, do you really want your grandchildren to have been stripped of their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to have been stripped of it by you?

I do realize that debating anti gunners will not change the mind of the person you are debating, but, it will affect those who are reading the debate. We should always attempt to inject a bit of common sense when we find idiotic op-eds. I hope this article provides you with additional ammo for your next debate.

The #1 weapon against gun control is a shooting public. Take a non-shooter to the range today.

The Mad Hatter's Campus RKBA Roundup #3

With all the furor going on in America's Dairyland over a proposed measure to make their schools less of a target for the disaffected and disturbed, I bring to you this week's Campus RKBA Roundup:

The Cheesehead Edition

Teaching Common-Sense School Protection

Dave Kopel of National Review Online wrote an informative article covering school violence. The article covers what has been done since the Columbine murders of 1999, and what still needs to be accomplished to make our schools safe. Mr. Kopel discusses changes in police tactics and the way that the media is now focusing on the victims instead of the killers. He also talks about the anti-bullying programs and new gun control laws that were put into effect. New gun control laws... so what have the new gun control laws done to make our schools safer?

But it is pretty clear that the kinds of laws which were pushed after Columbine (one-gun-a-month in California, special restrictions on gun shows in Colorado and Oregon) are of little value in keeping guns away from people who plan their attacks a long period of time in advance.

Notably, Canada has adopted almost everything (and more) which American anti-gun lobbies have pushed in the United States. Yet this fall’s spate of copycat school shootings began on September 13 in Canada, when Dawson College, in Montreal, was attacked by a 25-year-old man who killed one victim and wounded 19 more, putting two of them into a coma. (Fortunately, two policemen happened to be on campus, and they took immediate action, rather than waiting for a SWAT team to arrive. Their prompt and heroic boldness likely saved many lives.)

That is what I thought, new gun laws have done nothing towards the protection of our schools.

The Kids are not always the killers:

The attacks this fall highlight a problem that was forgotten in the post-Columbine frenzy. There are lots of attacks which are not perpetrated by disaffected students. We knew this in 1988, when 30-year-old Laurie Dann attacked a second-grade classroom in Winnetka, Illinois, and in January 1989, when an adult criminal named Patrick Purdy attacked a school playground in Stockton, California. Or when British pederast Thomas Hamilton killed 16 kindergarteners and a teacher in Dunblane, Scotland.

One reason why adult sociopaths so often choose to attack schools — schools to which they have no particular connection — is that schools are easy targets. It is not surprising that police stations, hunting-club meetings, stateside army bases, NRA offices, and similar locations known to contain armed adults are rarely attacked.

So why are schools easy targets? Schools are easy targets due to the "gun free school zone laws".

Because of the spread of concealed-handgun licensing laws, now in 40 out of 50 states, whenever you walk into a place with a large crowd of people — a restaurant, a theater, a shopping mall — you can safely assume that several people in the crowd will have a license to carry a concealed handgun, and some of them are currently carrying.

Schools are one of the few places in the United States where the government has guaranteed that there will be no licensed, trained adults with a concealed firearm that could be used to resist a would-be mass murderer.

Since this fact is apparently obvious to random psychopaths, it would be very dangerous to assume that the fact is not obvious to terrorists also. Beslan, Russia, shows that terrorists with al Qaeda connections consider schools to be good targets. There is also the danger of self-starting jihadis, such as the man who attacked the Jewish community center in Seattle. Every Jewish school and community center should very seriously consider having at least one full-time security guard.

I think I really like the writing of Dave Kopel, he does a much better job of expressing what I have been trying to say. I even learned something new today:

Like many states, Utah enacted a concealed-handgun licensing law in 1995. Unlike most states, Utah did not make schools an exclusion zone for lawful carrying. Not only a teacher on duty, but also a parent coming to pick up a child from school, can lawfully carry a concealed handgun in a Utah school building — after, of course, passing a background check and safety training. (See Utah Code sect. 76-10-505.5. In 2003, the legislature expanded the law, by allowing principals to authorize firearms possession by individuals who did not have a concealed-handgun carry permit.)

A CHL permit holder can carry on Utah school grounds? I thought there was a federal law against that. It seems that I was wrong.

It is commonly, but incorrectly, believed that the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act creates an insurmountable barrier to arming teachers. Not so. The GFSZA has a specific exemption for persons who have a concealed handgun carry permit from the state where the school is located, if the state requires a background check before issuance of a permit.

Learn something new every day.

Mr. Kopel goes on to cover several things schools can do today to make them safer for our children. This is a very good article, and I highly recommend you go check it out.

Bill from The Ten Ring led me to this article by posting this quote:

Our nation has too many people who are not only unwilling to learn how to protect themselves, but who are also determined to prevent innocent third persons from practicing active defense. A person has the right to choose to be a pacifist, but it is wrong to force everyone else to act like a pacifist. It is the policies of the pacifist-aggressives which have turned American schools into safe zones for mass murderers.

It is well past time to tell the "pacifist-agressives" to pack sand. We need to start working now to get reasonable people nominated in the '08 primaries at both the state and national level. We need to get their names and ideas out now so that they can make it through the primaries and onto the election ballot.

Corpus Christi Teen Kills Burglar in Home

This short but sweet article from Houston Chronicle shows why firearm familiarity and safety training for your children is a much better idea than gun locks:

CORPUS CHRISTI — A 14-year-old boy shot and killed a man who broke into his family's home today and threatened to kill him and his mother, Police Chief Bryan Smith said.

Smith said the man, whose name was not immediately known, confronted a woman as she was carrying groceries into her home shortly before 1 p.m.

The man forced her inside and tied up her and her son. Smith said the woman was able to loosen the binding and free her son, who got his father's revolver from a security box beneath a bed.

As the man tried to break into the room where the two were and threatened to kill them both, the teen fired a shot through the door and hit the intruder in the head, Smith said.

The teenager either knew the security code on the box, or his mother gave it to him. There was no fumbling around for keys or other nonsense. The teenager was at least somewhat familiar with the operation of the revolver, and he killed the goblin. One goblin dead, one boy taking a very large step towards becoming a man by his adult actions.

This teenager and his mother are alive and well because there was a firearm available for protection, and the teenager knew how to use it. A teenager, one of the folks that the Brady Bunch and others are trying so very hard to keep from ever learning the safe operation of a handgun.

Man Fatally Shoots Assailant in Downtown Seattle

Beautiful downtown Seattle in the middle of the shopping district. It is a patrolled area that poses no danger for the good citizens of the city. Well, maybe not:

SEATTLE - A fight between two total strangers led to a fatal shooting in downtown Seattle Saturday morning.

It happened at Fourth Avenue and Pine Street, at 11:30 a.m., in the heart of the shopping area.

Police said a man who was visiting downtown and minding his own business was brutally attacked by a stranger. But the victim of that attack had a gun and license to carry it. So he shot his attacker.

Police said they received complaints about a man who had been harassing shoppers about a half hour before the incident. But the suspect then began assaulting a complete stranger, kicking him repeatedly.

“We heard a loud noise, we looked out the window there was a black man standing over somebody with a gun in his hand then he was walking around. And he was saying: ‘I shot him,’” said witness Annette Johnson.

This is just another fine example of why it is important to always be alert and ready for any situation that may come about. The good guy was from out of town, on business or shopping, and enjoying the day when he was attacked. If he were not armed, we might be talking about a victim, instead we are talking about a citizen who utilized his right to keep and bear arms to protect himself.

One interesting item of note in this article: The police were called about the man harassing shoppers thirty minutes before the good guy was forced to shoot him, they had thirty minutes to put a stop to this harassment.

Sunday's Blog of the Week.

The LawDog Files is a hard hitting, take no prisoners blog. A recent post, Meditations on the Combat Mindset is a good example of what you can expect to find there. From the post:

..."No! I can't take a gun or knife on a plane! I'm going to be helpless!"

Codswallop.

Put a Masterlock and a thin leather dress belt in your carry-on. If a critter presents himself, thread the Masterlock onto the dress belt and break his skull with it.

If TSA takes away your Masterlock, then beat the critter to death with your walking stick.

If they confiscate your walking stick, then you take a pencil, a fountain pen or a biro, and you puncture his vital organs in alphabetical order.

If your writing utensils are banned, you garrote the bastard with your bootlaces.

If TSA forbids foot-wear, then you break a CD disk and you cut his sodding throat with the jagged edges, BUT DON'T BLOODY WELL GIVE ME THIS "HELPLESS" BULL[DELETED]!

LawDog, they won't let me carry a gun -- I'm helpless. LawDog, they won't let them have pocket-knives, they are helpless.

BULL. [DELETED].

Helpless, my furry arse. You are helpless because you're fixated on tools. You're helpless because you -- your mind -- is letting you think that you're helpless just because some daftie took away your pretty tools.

Stop it.

Firearms don't have a single godsdamned thing to do with the Combat Mindset.

Knives don't have a single flaming thing to do with the Combat Mindset.

Combat Mindset has not a bloody thing to do with tools, and everything to do with your mind -- that's why it's called "The Combat Mindset" and not "The Combat Toolset".

Period. Full stop. End of statement.

The LawDog Files is a blog well worth your time.

Los Angeles City Councilman Seeks Ways to ID Ammo Buyers

The Los Angeles Times reports that city councilman Jack Weiss is requesting that LAPD come up with a way to identify folks who purchase ammunition. Purchasing ammo in Los Angeles currently requires a legal photo ID and a fingerprint. The establishment that sells the ammo keeps the record of the sale on file. Here is the article:

A Los Angeles councilman asked the LAPD and city attorney's office on Friday to study ways to identify those who purchase ammunition.

The request by Councilman Jack Weiss follows a Rand Corp. report, released Thursday, that found dozens of ex-felons and others legally prohibited from buying ammunition purchased more than 10,000 rounds of bullets and shotgun shells during a two-month study period in 2004. The rounds, the report said, were purchased at 10 businesses in Los Angeles that sell ammo.

So, the Rand Corporation performs an "objective analysis and study" of who bought ammunition in Los Angeles and finds that felons are purchasing ammunition. During this study, the Rand Corp. found:

A total of 2,031 people purchased 436,956 rounds of ammunition during the study period. This included 10,050 rounds of ammunition purchased by 52 people with felony convictions or other violations on their records that legally prohibit them from buying ammunition.

Felons purchase less ammo than non felons. OK, that is not quite the conclusion that the Rand Corp. came up with:

While the study examined only a short period of time, researchers say it provides the first reliable information about whether ammunition is routinely purchased by people who are barred from possessing ammunition.

“We found that it's not uncommon for people with criminal records simply to buy ammunition at a retail store,” said Greg Ridgeway, co-author of the study and a researcher at RAND, a nonprofit research organization. “It is particularly risky for communities to have guns and ammunition in the hands of such people.”

Past studies have shown that guns and ammunition possessed by felons and others prohibited from owning weapons are more likely to be used in violent crimes than weapons bought by people with no criminal histories.

The Rand Corp. has just stated that criminals are more likely to commit crimes than non-criminals. That is what we have been saying all along. I did not notice that little tidbit of fact pointed out in the news paper article, did you?

The Rand Corp. goes on to recommend the following:

The RAND study says if lawmakers want to prohibit the illegal sale of ammunition they could extend the instant background checks required before guns are sold to also cover the sale of ammunition.

It appears that this is the recommendation that Councilman Weiss is interested in promoting, but the Rand Corp. also recommended:

Another alternative is for law enforcement officials to take advantage of ammunition sales records to provide tips about felons who may illegally possess firearms, according to researchers. Ammunition logs have been used by Los Angeles area law enforcement officials to obtain search warrants that have led to the recovery of illegal firearms, according to the study.

Go after the criminals instead of making even more hoops for law abiding citizens to jump through. That is an idea that makes a bit of sense. I'll leave the discussion about whether or not Felons should be allowed Second Amendment rights for another day.

The councilman should have read that last paragraph, and then pondered upon it for a minute or two. If he had, he could have come up with this amazing idea - The city has proof of 52 felons that have purchased ammunition illegally. 52 people who have broken the law once again. They have their photographs, they have their addresses, and they have their fingerprints. If Councilman Weiss is so worried about criminals having ammunition, he should be demanding 52 arrests.

Schools look at security procedures

Our local paper, The Star Telegram, ran a story on security at local schools. Pretty much every paper in the country is running a similar story this week in the wake of three recent school shootings. It would be a shame if the end result of the current discussion was a level of security at our schools similar to that used for our prisons. It would be an outrage if further restrictions on the liberties and freedoms of law abiding citizens came about due the the actions of these psychotic killers. Here are some points brought about in our local paper:

"Acts of violence such as these have the potential to induce others to commit similar acts," she wrote.

But securing schools from all violent acts isn't possible, according to a local criminologist."What is so scary is that we have already maximized what is feasible in protecting these facilities," said James Quinn, a criminologist at the University of North Texas. "Unless you're going to put armed guards around schools, you can't defend against it."

With the current philosophy of school security, the above is a true statement.

Grapevine-Colleyville schools spokeswoman Megan Overman said that district has reviewed security plans with campuses and believes that schools are the safest places for children.

"The last few incidents that have happened have targeted kids at schools," Overman said. "Parents are always concerned about the safety of their children's schools, but it could also be anywhere our kids are gathered at a public setting."

That's important to remember, Quinn said.

These attacks can happen anywhere our kids are gathered, but they don't. The paper lists one reason:

And recent school shootings may be highlighting an even seamier side of the criminal mind -- the desire for the world to know what they've done.

"It's guaranteed if you abduct a couple of girls from a local mall, that's local or regional news," Quinn said. "When you take a school hostage, you get national attention. Schools can be attractive to people looking to do harm and make a statement."

The 15 minutes of fame factor is a very large part of what makes our schools targets for goblins, and an even bigger target for terrorist. Remember the Chechen terrorists that attacked a school in Russia? In that incident, over 200 people were killed and 700 injured. There were only a thousand people on campus at the time. The news coverage was world wide, as is the coverage of our recent shootings. The terrorist and the goblins both made their statements on a world wide stage, the terrorist for political reasons and the goblin for psychotic ones.

There is one other reason that our schools are targets of opportunity for goblins and terrorists alike. That reason is the law that requires all schools to be gun free zones. That is utter stupidity. Our laws guarentee the bad guys free reign to do as they wish in our schools. If there are armed guards, a terrorist can make provisions to take out the guard(s) first as they will be identified by their uniforms.

As reported in USA Today, one Wisconsin politician has the right idea:

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A state lawmaker, worried about a recent string of deadly school shootings, suggested arming teachers, principals and other school personnel as a safety measure and a deterrent.

It might not be politically correct, but it has worked effectively in other countries, Republican Rep. Frank Lasee said Wednesday.

"To make our schools safe for our students to learn, all options should be on the table," he said. "Israel and Thailand have well-trained teachers carrying weapons and keeping their children safe from harm. It can work in Wisconsin."

If there is the possibility that there will be unidentified armed people that will step up and stop an attack, the less likely it is that there will be an attack at that establishment. This is the reasoning behind the Air Marshals is it not? These teachers/administrators/janitors/coaches would have to qualify for a state issued concealed carry permit. Further quality training should be required to insure that they can make rational decisions and react appropriately to a dangerous situation. Think about it, one armed and trained person could have stopped any of the three school shootings that are in the news today.

Lasee said he planned to introduce legislation that would allow school personnel to carry concealed weapons. He stressed that it would hinge on school staff members getting strict training on the use of the weapons, and he acknowledged he would have to work around a federal law that bans guns on school grounds.

If you live in Wisconsin, you have a good representative in Lasee, give him all of your support. On this issue at least, he is right as rain.

Amish shootings color House debate on gun violence

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives finished up three days of debate on issues of gun related violence. The shootings in the Amish school house intensified the debate, but did not result in new gun control legislation being written:

Mention of Monday's murders in Lancaster County crept into the debate, the first two days of which have underscored tension between preserving or restricting citizens' rights to buy guns and ammunition. One by one, gun control proposals failed in nonbinding votes after a five-hour "committee of the whole" session Tuesday designed to hear all ideas and find out which could pass.

Today's debate brought sharp focus on gun laws and violence. From the side that favors the constitution comes:

One gun control opponent, Rep. Douglas Reichley, R-Berks, insisted that the killer, Charles Carl Roberts IV, had serious mental problems and that his case had nothing to do with gun laws.

And -

Gun control opponents said limiting access to a weapon would not reduce gun crimes or keep criminals from getting guns, and instead promoted a variety of ways to toughen sentencing and get more police officers on the streets.

The anti's let slip their true agenda. While debating an initiative to limit hand gun purchases to one per month, a representative stated this gem of their true intent:

But Rep. Mike Gerber, D-Montgomery, drew a parallel between the Amish school killings and legislation he supports to limit handgun purchases, saying guns make it easier to kill.

"What if that perpetrator didn't have a gun?" Gerber said. "What would have happened? Would it have been as easy for him to kill? The obvious answer is no."

That is an expression of their true intent. The legislation was to limit handgun purchases to one per month, but the long term intent is to remove all guns.

It just goes downhill from there folks. Remember that these are elected representatives of the people. These are the people who are supposed to be upholding our rights.

Thomas W. Blackwell IV, D-Philadelphia, who argued for the proposal, questioned whether gun control opponents should care more about the constitutional right to bear arms, or human life.

"Yesterday, all those children were killed," Blackwell said. "You're talking about a piece of paper while children are dying? What kind of god do you serve?"

Representative Blackwell wants to just trash the constitution, do away with the second amendment. He wants us to "do it for the children" and even goes so far as to insinuate that owning firearms is un-Christian.

The final quote kind of sums it all up:

Still, Rendell, who attended a police briefing for the news media near the Amish school, said he did not know of any gun control law that could have prevented Roberts from carrying out the killings.

Roberts had no criminal record or history of mental instability that would have prevented him from buying guns legally, Rendell said.

"I think we should all understand, no proposed law, none that I would think of or none that I've seen, could have ruled out this situation," Rendell said.

I have just one quick note of thanks to the representatives that did not let the emotions and events of the day get ahead of doing what was right. Thank you for standing firm and protecting the rights of Pennsylvania gun owners.

Hat tip to The War on Guns for leading me to this article.

Evil IS

David over at The War on Guns posted a link to an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer on the Amish school house shooting that left five young girls dead, and five more in the hospital. The Goblin (I hate to use the word man when taking about him) was evil personified. What kind of person can plan and carry out such an act? How do we, as society protect ourselves from such a person?

In the comments to David's post, E. David Quammen of GunShowOnTheNet made a statement that I wish I had written:

Don't know if I have the words to express how I feel. Sean did a good job. All I can bring myself to wonder is how the hell does someone allow themselves to get THAT EVIL? What is going through their mind?

The anti's will do their blood dance. The sheeple will bleat for more 'protection' and further government intrusions. At the cost of more of our Freedoms and Liberties being lost, of course. And this despite clear evidence to the contrary, that further infringements will only make things worse.

What is really frustrating, is that even many of our fellow gun owners will nod their heads in agreement that more 'controls' are necessary. How many gun owners actual first thought was; 'I wish I'd had been there, he'd have been dead after the first or second shot'?

Was not the founders whole intent for an armed populace, keeping evil at bay? From whatever source it might arise, whether it be foreign or domestic? Was not each citizen expected to do their part?

Is not that sound reasoning? How is it then, that so many are blinded to this fact, and refuse to accept the truth?

Our, supposed, 'civilization' is in a very bad state of affairs. When common sense is given such little regard, how much longer will our society survive?

One responsible armed citizen, aware of their duty as a citizen, could have stopped this tragedy with one shot.

The people whom have shrilly cried for 'gun control' are directly, and indirectly, responsible for this and other tragedys. The blood belongs on their hands. Not on the people that would have acted, had they not been perversely restrained from doing so. It's time to pull the kid gloves off, and really start slamming the truth home, hard. And this, while we still have some semblance of a society worth fighting for. The consequence of not doing so, will lead to anarchy and totalitarian control...

There is evil in this world. There are goblins that prey upon the innocent. It is our duty and responsibility to stand against this evil, not just for ourselves and our family, but for society as a whole.

Breast Cancer Awareness Month

I know that this is a bit of a departure from one of my regular posts, not something you were expecting when you dropped by. This is a very important topic, if not for you, then for someone you love and care for.

October has been designated as breast cancer awareness month. There is one very simple reason that there is a month designated as breast cancer awareness month. That reason is the 212,000 (two hundred twelve thousand) women that will be diagnosed with new cases of breast cancer this year, and the almost 41,000 (forty one thousand) women who will die of breast cancer during 2006. It is estimated that one out of every 8 women will develop breast cancer during their lifetime.

The single most important factor in surviving breast cancer is early detection, and early detection can only come through awareness.

The following is a list of the basic breast health steps:

• Monthly breast self-examination beginning by age 20.Clinical breast examinations at least every 3 years beginning at age 20 and annually after age 40.


• Annual screening mammography beginning at age 40.


• Women under age 40 with a family history of breast cancer and other concerns about their personal risk should consult a trained medical professional about risk assessment and when to begin screening mammography.

For more information on breast cancer and breast health issues, go to the following sites:

The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation

Y-ME National Breast Cancer Organization

The American Cancer Society

WebMD

Sunday's Blog of the Week

The Mad Hatter is performing a survey of what is being discussed on collage campuses in regards to the Second Amendment and gun rights. He is reading the student op-ed pieces and has found some interesting articles. From the post:

OK, I'll admit...I was expecting to find anti-gun op-ed's all over the board when it came to discussions over gun rights. Surprisingly enough, I found a fairly good balance, which encourages me about our universities being places where a diversity of ideas can thrive.

Sure, you had the clueless anti's breathlessly spouting off about matters they know nothing about, but often, you could find someone a little more reasonable able to lay the facts out in a well-informed manner worthy of higher education.

Here are my findings thus far:

You are going to have to head on over to read the rest.

Second Amendment Carnival V

The fifth edition of the Second Amendment Carnival is on at Free Constitution

Providing the best 2nd Amendment coverage the blogosphere has to offer.

Head on over and check it out.

The Brady Bunch and the shootings at Platt Canyon High School.

As expected, it did not take long for the Brady Campaign to use the shooting incident at Colorado's Platt Canyon High School as a platform for fundraising and more gun control. Here is their press release:

Washington DC – Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, issued the following statement:“Our prayers and good wishes go out to all of the families who went through a painful ordeal today as the hostage standoff developed at Platt Canyon High School. We also offer spiritual support to the survivors of the terrible tragedy at Columbine High School, who I know found themselves reliving bad memories today.

“We must all redouble our efforts to take all necessary steps to make our schools safer for our children. This is a responsibility we all share.”

That is all they have to say so far. Soon this incident will be mentioned in all their fundraising letters and emails, and on the floor of state legislatures across the nation. "We need more gun laws to prevent violence in our schools" and "Do it for the children" will once again be the buzz words for this bunch and the other anti-gunners.

Let us take a different and more sensible approach at making our schools safer for "the children" shall we?

Instead of making our schools targets of opportunity for any nutcase or terrorist, why don't we allow our law abiding teacher and school officials to carry firearms if they wish? We trust our schools with the minds of our children, we expect the schools to be safe places for our children to learn and develop, yet we take away the means for our teachers and school officials to protect those we hold most dear. This is lunacy.

"Gun free school zone" laws must be repealed. One man held this Colorado high school hostage. One man reportedly sexually molested hostages before killing one and then himself. Just one man. An armed teacher, parent, counselor, coach or janitor could have put a stop to this in the early stages of the crisis.

Our children are our most precious resource, protecting them should be our highest priority. Gun free school zone laws do nothing to prevent incidents like this one from occurring, they will do nothing to prevent future incidents either. As long as schools are easy targets, they will be in danger from terrorists and nut cases. When it becomes known that schools are no longer unrestricted free fire zones for the bad guys, when it is known that an attack on our children at school will not be an easy task, then our children truly will be safer.

Home work assignment: How many schools have been attached in terror laden Israel?

News story on the High School Shooting.

Jeff Cooper

Jeff Cooper

May 10, 1920 - September 25, 2006

I never had the opportunity to meet Colonel Cooper in person, but he has taught me much. My small skills in The Modern Technique of the Pistol were gained from reading his commentary and from second and third hand instruction from those he has taught in person. If you have happened to stumble upon this page and do not know who Jeff Cooper was, here is a brief biography:

If you don't know who Jeff Cooper is you are obviously not a shooter. For those who may have come in late or are new to the shooting sports, here is a little bit about him.

Born John Dean Cooper on May 10, 1920, and known to his friends as "Jeff," he is a former Marine Lt. Colonel who served in WWII and Korea, history professor and an ongoing student of history, philosopher, adventurer, author, and shottist. Jeff is recognized as the father of what is commonly referred to as "The Modern Techniques of Shooting." The modern technique deals with "practical" shooting--that is the use of firearms in their intended roles as tools for personal protection and hunting rather than just instruments of recreation.

Jeff makes no claim as to his inventing anything novel. Rather he recognized and codified the useful ideas and techniques of many different individuals spanning many years, Many of these older ideas had been forgotten in the rush to "improve" things. Combining and modifying them through observation of unrestricted competition and personal testing, he gradually developed "The Modern Technique." While his principal contributions have been in the field of defensive pistolcraft, he has also been a major (if not the major) contributor to practical riflecraft and defensive shotgunning. Many people have taken the theories he developed and now either claim that they invented them or fail to at least give him credit when they teach them. However, the fact remains that it was Jeff who started it all and whose ideas have held up to the test of time.

In addition, since ideas are useless unless taught to others, Jeff then developed new teaching techniques to impart these skills to people in the most efficient manner possible. In 1975 he founded the American Pistol Institute whose overriding purpose was to teach weaponcraft to law-abiding citizens and law enforcement personnel.

In Yavapai did Uncle Jeff
A stately shooting range decree,
Where senators and belted earls,
And cooks and cops and working girls,
Could study weaponry

As API began to teach the rifle and shotgun as well as the pistol, the name was hanged to Gunsite which Jeff ran until mid 1992 when it was sold to a new owner who pretty much destroyed the school's reputation to Jeff's dismay. He was not associated with the Gunsite Training Center that existed from that date until October 1999. The original Gunsite under Jeff has come to be known as "orange" Gunsite while the circa '92 - 99 school is generally referred to as "gray" Gunsite, due to a change in the school's colors by that management.

There were many people who felt that the things that made Gunsite under Jeff a very special experience were missing, never to be attained again.

As one graduate so aptly put it:

"Another analogy, if you will: In Winchester Cathedral in SE England rests the Round Table. One can read the legends, one can follow the code of chivalry, one can practice skill at arms. But one cannot sit at that table ever again."

However, the school has changed owners again and it is now known as Gunsite Academy. The new owners involved Jeff in the school again and things are looking up at Gunsite. The new management has restored the former status and integrity to the school and from all reports they have succeeded handsomely.

Jeff is also the founder of the International Practical Shooting Confederation, a member of the NRA Board of Directors, and Editor-at-large for Guns & Ammo magazine. He has taught defensive pistolcraft in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Costa Rica, the Philippines, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, South Africa, Southwest Africa, and Rhodesia. Jeff is the recipient of the 1995 Outstanding American handgunner award. He is the author of many thought-provoking, insightful, and well-written books and articles on many subjects besides just shooting. In February of 2001 Jeff received an award from the Saint Gabriel Possenti Society, honoring his contributions to handgunning. (St.Possenti is the patron saint of shooters--particularly handgunners)

Rest in Peace Colonel, you made this world a better, and safer place to be.

The above bio was taken from Fr. Frogs Pad.

Jeff Cooper's Commentaries can be found here.

Sunday's Blog of the Week

Tamara on View From the Porch posted an insightful piece on CCW in the home. Her piece focuses more upon firearm safety than personal safety.

...The second stumbling point I have is a more pragmatic one, and that's one of safety. The pistol on my hip is loaded and cocked. It will be loaded and cocked when it is set gently in its storage rack tonight, and will still be loaded and cocked when it gets holstered again tomorrow morning. Actually, the only time it is not loaded and cocked is when I've shot it dry on the range, or have it torn apart for cleaning; otherwise it is either sitting safely in a storage rack, or safely in the holster on my hip, where there is no chance that it will spontaneously go off. Contrast that with the more typical on-again-off-again gun toter.

1) Wake up in morning and decide that maybe they should carry today. Hmmm... Glock or Kimber? Maybe HK? They decide to take the Glock today. They pick up their (empty) pistol and a loaded mag, chamber the top round off the mag, top off the mag, and put the Glock in its holster.

2) Get done with running errands, get home, take Glock off, unchamber round, do some dry fire practice at the teevee.

3) Buddy calls and invites them to a movie. To pack or not to pack? Better take the Glock. The top round off the magazine gets re-chambered (maybe for the second or third time), the gun is re-holstered, and off they go.

4) After the movie they decide to stop for a beer. Gun is unholstered and put in glovebox. Gun is reholstered for trip home.5) Nighty-nite time. Gun is unholstered, unchambered, and the chambered round is placed in the mag so it can be chambered again tomorrow (bullet setback, anyone?)

"Actually, the only time it is not loaded and cocked is when I've shot it dry on the range, or have it torn apart for cleaning; otherwise it is either sitting safely in a storage rack, or safely in the holster on my hip, where there is no chance that it will spontaneously go off." That is pretty much my routine with one exception. Attending gun shows here in the DFW Metroplex the gun is required to be unloaded and tie wrapped in a safe condition (an irritating procedure that is good fodder for a future post).

I recommend you stop by View From the Porch, you will be glad you did.

Officer slaying adds to immigration debate

This article really got my dander up. It pretty much highlights many of the problems we have with politics and law enforcement today. This story takes place in Houston, basically the center of Harris County. The Harris County D.A. ignores Texas State legislation on individuals traveling with loaded pistols/revolvers in their vehicles and has directed the police to arrest anyone discovered with a loaded firearm in the car. The D.A. and the Houston Police are aggressively going after law abiding Texas citizens and infringing upon our right to keep and bear arms.

What the Houston Police are not doing is enforcing immigration laws. What the Harris County District Attorneys office is not doing is demanding harsh sentences for convicted violent criminals. This is what happens when you put politics ahead of good law enforcement:

HOUSTON - Houston's police chief is standing behind his policy of not enforcing immigration laws after an illegal immigrant was charged with killing a police officer during a routine traffic stop.

Chief Harold Hurtt instead directed blame for Thursday's slaying of Officer Rodney Johnson, who was shot in the face and head in his patrol car, toward federal agencies charged with securing the border.

"If the government would fulfill their responsibility of protecting the border," Hurtt said Friday, "we probably would not be standing here today."Hurtt's policy prohibits officers from questioning suspects about their residency.

The suspect, Juan Leonardo Quintero, 32, was arraigned on capital murder charges Friday. Police said he gave officers "a full confession" but has not said why he fired.

The police chief has told illegals that they are welcome in Houston, that the police will not enforce state or federal immigration laws. By doing this, he has laid out the welcome mat for illegals to cross the border and come to Houston. Before an illegal even crosses the border, he knows that all he has to do is make it to Houston and all will be well. Enticements like this draw more illegals and make it even harder to secure our borders.

Let us see just what kind of hard working, decent illegal immigrant Juan really is:

According to police, Quintero was deported as an illegal felon in 1999 after being charged with indecency with a child. His record also includes an arrest for driving while intoxicated, driving with a suspended license and for failing to stop and give information following an automobile accident.

Juan, our hardworking illegal immigrant, who is just here to do the jobs that Americans will not do, is a felon. He has been deported as a felon. He has also been arrested on three separate occasions that gave the police three separate opportunities to deport this scum. But that did not happen, it is not the "policy" to enforce immigration laws in Houston. It is just the policy to criminalize law abiding American citizens who travel with a firearm for personal protection from scum like Juan.

Some background on Officer Johnson:

Johnson was a Houston native who served in the U.S. Army as a military police officer until being honorably discharged in 1990. He graduated from the Houston police academy in 1994.

He is survived by his wife, Joslyn Johnson, an officer with the Houston police, and the couple's five children.

My prayers are with Mrs. Johnson and her children. My hopes are that she finds a great lawyer and sues the pants off of the Police Chief and the City of Houston.

The New York City Rally FOR Illegal Guns

MMDNewswire.com reported on a pro gun rally to be held in New York City. It seems that some of the citizens of NYC are getting tired of the restrictive laws currently on the books and the even more restrictive laws proposed by Mayor Bloomberg. It is about time.

New York City Gun Rights activists, Constitutional and civil libertarians, Human Rights activists, and pro-Liberty supporters will hold a rally on Monday, September 25th at 12:30pm outside City Hall in Manhattan to support so-called “illegal guns” and the thousands of decent, responsible New York State citizens and residents who own and carry them to preserve their Freedom and protect themselves from criminals, terrorists and other violent people, contrary to what NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg claims in his current campaign against “illegal guns”.

“Mayor Bloomberg is attacking our Gun Rights across the country, teaming up with big-city mayors and other powerful elitists to erode our self-defense rights and privacy rights under the guise of fighting ‘illegal guns’ and crime,” says Nic Leobold, a local Gun Rights activist and libertarian who thought up the idea for the protest. “Fortunately, most people who own ‘illegal guns’ in New York and the rest of the United States are neither criminals nor violent. They’re just decent, respectable, honest and responsible citizens who want a dependable way to defend themselves and their loved ones and defend their Liberty, and they know Michael Bloomberg or various other government thugs will seize their guns if they register them.”

Jim Lesczynski, the organizer of the famous “Guns for Tots” toy gun drive for the Manhattan Libertarian Party, who is endorsing and participating in Monday’s rally, is just as adamant: "'Illegal gun' is an oxymoron," says Lesczynski. "Any law that purports to prohibit or regulate gun ownership in any way is un-Constitutional on its face and therefore null and void. The only people who should feel threatened by armed citizens are tyrants and criminals."

"The only people who should feel threatened by armed citizens are tyrants and criminals." What an excellent statement.

I am glad to see that there are people in NYC who are willing to fight the "soft war" against illegal and immoral gun control laws. When I mention the "soft war", I am talking about people becoming politically active and publicly supporting our 2nd Amendment rights. Fighting the soft war includes writing your legislature and letters to the editor of your local news paper and speaking out against those that work to take away our right to keep and bear arms.

It does not take a whole lot to point out how ill-conceived some of these anti gun laws are to a rational person. Many firearm owners fear getting involved in the public discourse on guns. They are afraid of coming across as gun nuts or whatever the current label the anti gunners has placed upon us at the moment. That fear, that unwillingness to speak out, could be our undoing. Every individual who owns a firearm, every citizen who enjoys target or trap shooting, each of us who has a firearm for home defense or as a family heirloom, needs to speak out. If the millions of Americans that have a firearm in the home would speak out, the anti gunners would be drowned out by the magnitude of voices in favor of firearm owner rights. If every voter who owned a firearm voted for pro firearm candidates, California and New York would become as free as Vermont.

Firearm owners are a majority in America, even in states like California, Massachusetts and New York. If firearm owners voted for their guns, if we stood together against the anti gun lobby, there would be no anti gun lobby. For some reason we don't do this. The hunters support assault weapons bans, the clay pigeon shooters support politicians that prevent shall issue CHL laws from being approved, and only a few seem to want to speak out against idiotic anti gun legislation.

I am proud of these folks in NYC who are working hard to re-gain rights that have been stolen by the elected.

Hat tip to Keep and Bear Arms, where I found this story.

"Cities Win One" (citizens lose)

Sometimes I have to wonder why people fear or hate an inanimate object like a firearm with such passion that it scrambles their brains. Gun laws in general make no logical sense. Some gun laws are extra idiotic.

Take for instance this recent editorial from the Columbus Dispatch with the headline "Cities win one".

A state appeals-court decision upholding Toledo’s ban on guns and other weapons in city parks is good news for Columbus and other Ohio cities.

That is the first sentence of the article, and it goes downhill from there. Let us take a look at what this law will in all actuality do for the citizens of Ohio (which does not have reciprocity with Texas, yet).

Where do a large number of crimes occur? Where do women joggers get raped and innocent citizens get mugged? Where do people take their kids to play and run, and what kind of pedophilic predators are there? The city parks!

City parks have the potential to be a good place for drug dealers to pander their business and for deviants to pander there ... City parks are often a haven for the homeless. These are a part of city life, and people tend to become blinded to them. Now, I am not ragging on city parks. A well maintained park is a city treasure, but they do have the potential for danger.

The State of Ohio just increased that potential for danger in it's city parks. The State of Ohio just handed the criminal element an open invitation to harass, molest, rape, rob, kidnap and kill in it's city parks. The city parks will be one place where the bad guys know that the citizens will not be armed. They will take advantage of this knowledge and the easy pickings arranged for them by the state.

Yesterday afternoon, later in the day but the sun was still up, a woman that works with my wife got robbed as she was leaving the office at the hospital. She was robbed at knife point. Crime in that hospital parking lot has been on the rise of late. You see, that hospital is posted with a 30.06 sign which prohibits CHL carriers from possessing their firearm on the premises. That makes the hospital parking lot a much safer place to rob someone than, let's say, the mall parking lot.

Other gems of anti gun wisdom from this editorial:

As Mentel pointed out, the state law allows restrictions on guns in a city recreation center but would let someone carry one right up to its door.

That’s nonsense and flies in the face of public safety.

State legislators who wrote the conceal-carry law are more interested in currying favor with the National Rifle Association and gun manufacturers than they are in fostering public safety.

They are seeking to pass a measure that specifically would block cities from banning guns in city parks.

The exceptions to the conceal-carry rule are just about the only reason Ohioans didn’t kick up an even a bigger fuss about the ill-conceived conceal-carry law.

And last but not least:

Park are meant to be places of serenity and relaxation.

Visitors should not have to worry that the person next to them has a gun tucked away on their person or in a picnic basket.

If the author has their way, the person with the firearm will not be a law abiding citizen, but a criminal intent on doing harm.

Girls With Guns

Keep and Bear Arms is pretty much the place to go and find firearm related news all in one place. I guess it is kind of like the Drudge Report for folks interested in national and global firearm news.

While searching for an article to discuss, the headline "Girls With Guns" jumped out at me and demanded at least a quick read. You see, one of the happiest times with my third daughter is when she beat me at the long range .22 silhouette shoot for the first time. She is pretty sharp with that single shot Martini of hers. Reading the article reminded me of times spent shooting with my daughters, sharing their excitement at a well placed shot, and just a little bit of pride when others complemented them on safety or skills.

This article describes how women are becoming more involved in the shooting sports, and shooting in general:

ASHBURNHAM -- Esther Erickson pressed her face against the stock of her shotgun, and put her finger on the trigger.

"Pull!" she yelled.

An orange clay target soared over the field in front of her.

Erickson fired, as her target hovered for an instant.

She hit it with apparent ease and it exploded into tiny fluorescent pieces, almost like a miniature fireworks display.

The booming noise of her shot reverberated as she rested her 12-gauge shotgun on the ground and waited for others to take their turns.

"This really is just for fun," she said later as she took a break from shooting.

The Ashburnham woman is one of a growing number of women learning how to shoot.

She and others attribute the trend to a number of factors, including the desire to learn how to protect themselves, the chance to spend more time with their husbands and boyfriends and less social resistance to women learning how to shoot.

Erickson doesn't pay much attention to being a woman in what is stereotypically a man's sport, she said.

She said she likes the challenge of hitting the moving target.

"It's almost like competing against myself," she said.

I can relate to the "competing against myself" comment, that is what drives me to work harder at the range.

Patricia Natoli, of Maynard, has been shooting for more than 20 years.

She began shooting because her husband was a police officer.

"When I started shooting ... you didn't see women, like housewives, on the range," she said in a phone interview. "Now, you see a lot. The last three years, I've noticed a big change."

Part of the appeal is social, said Natoli, who now competes in single-action shooting, in which shooters dress up like cowboys and shoot with old-fashioned guns in play-acting scenarios.

"It's something I can do with my husband," she said.

I hope she is right about the number of women at the range increasing. There are a good number of women at the indoor ranges, and more are competing at the outdoor range. If Patricia is correct, this is a national trend, not just local.

Natoli, 51, works as a police dispatcher, and said she feels comfortable shooting around men.

Some women are nervous at first, but they loosen up quickly.

"There is no sexism on the range," she said.

Nell Vaughn, 50, of Royalston, said she surprised herself when she took up shooting.

She originally wanted to take archery, but no adult classes were available, so she enrolled in a pistol-shooting class.

Plus she figured that shooting was a good skill to have.

"I thought it would be a good idea to learn how to make a gun safe," she said in a phone interview.

And unexpectedly, she enjoyed the course for more than just its worst-case-scenario application.

"Bullseye is a very quiet, slow thing, it was much like meditation," she said. "You really become aware of how much your mind and body interact."

Vaughn said she enjoyed the required discipline and hand-eye coordination, which mirrored the skills she had honed playing Irish flute and violin.

There are a couple very interesting and good aspects to this article:

1. The more women that are seen involved with firearms, the more women will want to try out shooting. The more women involved with shooting, the more gun rights activist are on our side.

2. This article was written in a Massachusetts newspaper, the Sentines & Enterprise of Fitchburg, MA. The entire article was written about women with firearms in a positive light, a rare occurrence.

There is one paragraph in the article that we all need to take to heart:

"Women have been turned off by guns, mainly because of some of the good old boy antics of men, who tried to make it an exclusive-type thing"

Take a friend shooting, show them a safe and fun time. The more shooters we have, the less ears for the Brady Bunch.

Sunday's Blog of the Week!

The Ten Ring reports on the wheelchair bound grandmother in NYC that fought back when mugged. She ended up shooting her attacker in the elbow. The article discusses a John Lott editorial and some of the difficulties that we encounter when talking with the anti-gun crowd:

It’s not just a gun banning politician’s impotence at disarming criminals. It’s their visceral and emotional hatred of guns. Lott quotes Bloomberg, “I don't know why people carry guns. Guns kill people.

"This is the hardest thing to deal with when we talk to anti-gunnies, at least for me. Their minds are locked into a form of stasis as they chant their mantra of “guns kill.” They think that anyone who likes to own and shoot guns must be uncivilized and anti-social. They fear the object and hate/fear the gun owner.

The Ten Ring is an excellent firearm related blog. I highly recommend it to folks interested in commentary on the Second Amendment, firearm news and other general firearm information.

Penn and Teller: Bullshit! Gun Control

Penn and Teller show us that people kill people, not guns. If you have ever seen Penn and Teller, you know what to expect from this video, if not then I have to warn you that they do use language that is inappropriate for children.

Do away with the Second Amendment?

Kellerman: a call to disarm - Opinion

Chris kellerman, a Visual and Performing Arts student at Texas Tech has written an opinion piece for Texas Tech's newspaper, The Daily Toreador. This article concerns doing away with the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

...I think we need to take one away. Here it is: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

"You got it - the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Frankly, folks, I'm tired of it. We debate it all the time and get nowhere, so I say let's just remove it all together.

So, Mr. Kellerman is tired of debating about the Second Amendment, and is promoting doing away with it. Mr. Kellerman does not appear to understand history, the history of the United States or of the world in general. Mr. Kellerman does not understand the genius of our constitution, or of the men that wrote it. As a matter of fact he states:

...I am so tired of it! People throw quotes from Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin into political debates with me all the time, and I want to hit them in the face. Who cares what James Madison and the rest said? They've been dead for more than 150 years!

While Mr. Kellerman exercises his First Amendment rights, he wants to "hit" people in the face who use history and reason in a debate with him. He gets angry when people use logic to discredit his opinions. His anger is proof that his arguments are not sound, and that his opinion lacks merit.

Mr. Kellerman goes on to explain that the constitution is outdated because some of the Founding Fathers owned slaves. That reasoning is not worthy of comment.

Mr. Kellerman wants to do away with the Second Amendment because he wants to do away with guns. He looks at the results of gun violence and comes to the conclusion that the guns perpetrate that violence.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, there were more than 30,000 gun deaths in the United States in 2003 - all because of guns. Gun-lovers often say things such as, "Guns don't kill people. People do." Well, that's true, it is not the gun itself that kills a person. However, it certainly makes it easier.

30,000 firearm related deaths during 2003. Mr. kellerman does not mention that 16,000 of those firearm deaths were due to suicide (this is less than half the total suicides). If you take out the suicides and the deaths due to legal intervention/war, you are down to 12,900 firearm related deaths due to homicide or accident. 12,900 is still a very large number, but let us put this into perspective. How many people died in the U.S. during 2003? Care to take a guess?

2,448,288! Out of two and a half million deaths, approximately 13,000 were firearm related homicides or accidents. That is less than 1/3 the number of people who died from the flu and pneumonia. Perspective is a good thing.

If you want to reduce the number of homicides committed each year with a firearm, lock up the criminal that committed that crime. Lock him up and either dispose of him, or throw away the key forever.

Mr. Kellerman, I hope that you read this. It is important that you come to understand one of the basic building blocks of America, what had differentiated the United States of America from the rest of the world.

The Preamble to the Declaration of Independence states:

...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government...

You see Mr. Kellerman, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not given to us by the Second Amendment, it is affirmed by it. Our creator has endowed us with the unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. If we have the unalienable right to Life, then we also have the unalienable right to protect that life. If we have the unalienable right to Liberty, then we have the unalienable right to protect that liberty. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting or gun collecting. The Second Amendment is to ensure that the people have the ability to enforce their right to "...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government..."

By giving up the right to Keep and Bear arms, the right to protect our freedoms, you are giving up the right to all freedoms. Yes Chris, even the right to publish your thoughts in the school paper.

Rapist and Robber in NYC Cops Plea

September 12, 2006 -- A bank robber who raped a woman and pistol-whipped a nun during a two-week crime spree pleaded guilty yesterday in Queens Supreme Court and will do 25 years in prison.

Roy Williams, 33, was facing more than 50 years behind bars. But on the eve of jury selection, the ex-con took a plea deal.

This criminal, Roy Williams, robbed three banks, rapped and robbed a 34 year old woman and pistol whipped a 69 year old nun. What is the best New York can do to him? 25 years in prison, much less with parole. Roy Williams will be on the streets of New York City again. Roy Williams will be set free to prey upon innocents and wreck havoc as he sees fit. There are thousands of hardened criminals like Roy Williams on the streets of New York City today, criminals who give no thought to the pain and agony they cause others.

What can you do to protect yourself in NYC from criminals like Roy Williams? Not a whole lot. You see, NYC has some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation (note that Roy, even though he used a firearm in his robberies and the pistol whipping did not face any gun charges). You have to be permitted by the city just to have a firearm in your home. Any firearm requires a permit to purchase, and a permit to have in your home or business. If you want to carry a firearm for protection, there are four different permits to choose from. The fees to own a shotgun for home defense in NYC start at $154.00. You have to have a permit and registration. Once you are approved and pay the fees, you can purchase the shotgun. So you purchase the shotgun and get some defensive training at the local indoor range. The range fees in NYC start around $260.00 for the first year and training classes are extra. So you are putting out at least $750.00 over and above the cost of the shotgun just to be a responsible gun owner in NYC. Now that you have jumped through all the hoops, and 6 or 8 months have passed since you decided to defend your home, guess what? You have to keep the shot gun locked up unless it is in your immediate possession or control. I will not even get into the consequences of protecting your family and home with a firearm in NYC, just not enough time tonight. Let us just say that the laws in NYC make it very hard for a law abiding, tax paying, citizen to defend themselves from the criminal element.

Roy and his ilk have pretty easy pickings in NYC. The law abiding citizens are disarmed, and if they do have arms, they are locked up. And hey, if Roy gets caught, he can count on a lite sentence and the opportunity to terrorise the people again soon.

Five Years

It seems like just the other day when my wife called me at work and told me to turn on a radio, that an airplane had crashed into the World Trade Center. It does not feel like 5 years had passed since that nation changing day. But when you think about it, a lot has happened during those short 5 years.

The United States has been involved in not just one, but two significant wars overseas. Our military has done an outstanding job in record time. The battle for territory in both countries went quickly with very few casualties. The occupations are going better than reported by the media, but still not as well as hoped. In Iraq enemy combatants are coming from all over the Middle East to fight and attempt to disrupt the new Iraqi government, military and police. I never thought that this would be a quick war, but it appears that many in government did, at least they are saying they did.

Enough time has passed that our politicians have forgotten the importance of pulling together as a nation and fighting terrorism with one voice and one goal. Partisan politics has gotten as ugly as I have ever seen it. Nothing this administration does is right, the Democrats hinder the presidents efforts at every opportunity. Americans look at these actions on the hill with a touch of disgust and resignation to politics as usual. The enemy, be they terrorist or insurgents, look at this as a weakness that they can capitalize upon. They know that if they create a little bit more havoc, kill a few more Americans, there is a faction in our government that will use this news to try and divide our country further. The enemy understands the meaning of the strategy "Divide and Conquer". The enemy makes good use of our media to promote divisiveness here in the United States.

We have had a very public and partisan 9/11 commission convene to determine how this happened and how to prevent an act such as this from happening in the future. For my money, the commission was a waste of time and money. It did come up with a few good ideas for increasing security, but most of what they came up with was already in the works.

The Patriot Act was passed and reached the end of it's first sunset period. I am torn on this act, there are parts that are necessary, and there are parts that are a violation of the freedoms that we Americans hold dear to our hearts. The Patriot Act does need some cropping and tweaking to make it something that will work for Americans.

Since 9/11 five new grand babies have been added to our family to make a total of six. What lies ahead for these children? Are they going to grow up in a world where radical Islam spreads throughout Europe and suicide bombers walk the malls of America? I do fear for the future of my grandchildren. I fear that they will grow up in an ever more repressive environment of stronger and more invasive security requirements. I fear that may live to see a shooting war in the United States. I fear that they may watch the United States decline until it is not much different than a third world country due to unimpeded illegal immigration, and a majority of "New Americans" not being willing to assimilate into our culture.

Which leads me to what we have not done in the last five years:

We have not secured our borders, and it does not look like our representatives are too awful interested in getting that task done.

We have not figured out that the vast majority of terrorist are Muslim Men, between the ages of 18 and 45. We have not directed our security screening at airports and other public places to people that fit the description of most terrorist. Yes, we do still need to randomly check the general population, but lets see a little more emphasis placed upon the people who really want to kill us, not my Mom.

We have not really gotten serious about airport screening at all. We hire a bunch of high school graduates with no experience in dealing with people, much less in a security atmosphere, how can we expect them to succeed. We should be looking at what Israel does at their airports. How have they been so successful in screening out potential terrorist? If it works for them, maybe we should use some if their procedures.

We have not done much to get away from our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

This started out to be a memorial to what happened five years ago on Sept. 11th, but it turned into a bit of a rant. I apologize to my readers, but sometimes you never know just where your fingers are going to take you when you sit down at the keyboard.

So, what is the best plan for the future? How should we go forward and ensure a great future for our children and grandchildren? I think Big White Hat has nailed it on the head with this post.

Sunday's Blog of the Week!

Irons in the Fire posted a short, but important blog this week titled "Practical vs. 'best' accuracy". He stated:

Best accuracy is what you can get under ideal conditions; the best possible load for accuracy under the best possible firing conditions with the best possible aiming system.

Practical is what you can get with the best ammo for THAT USE with standard sights under field conditions. That's how I put it, anyway.

I would like to take this concept just a bit further. Pratical accuracy is what you can achieve under stress with the firearm that you carry, use for home defense, or hunt with.

Each of these uses of a firearm involve stresses that you really can not duplicate at a firing range. All you can do is train. Send lots of ammo down range under stressful situations that you can develop. Accuracy under a timer, or while moving or at distance. Shooting with friends can increase the stress level by adding a little competition. Go to a formal training class, especially if you carry a firearm for self defense or plan to use one to defend your home. Professional training will not only help you improve your marksmanship under stress, but should give you good ideas for training at your home range.

Irons in the Fire is a great blog and very much worthy of being "Blog of the Week"

A Brief History of Federal Gun Control, Part 1

The National Firearms Act of 1934

Prior to 1934, the federal government stayed out of the states way when it came to the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Some states and cities passed laws requiring permits to carry a firearm, many of these laws were intended to keep Blacks and other minorities from carrying a firearm. Not very many whites were ever arrested for violating these "Jim Crow" type laws. A good article on gun control laws and racism can be found at CORAD.

Many people in the United States legally owned Machine Guns. They were relatively inexpensive and could be purchase in hardware stores, gun stores and through mail order. Quite a few WWI veterans brought home "souvenirs" of their time in the military. These souvenirs included machine guns, trench guns and fire arms of all sorts. There was also no age limit on firearm purchases. Most of the youth grew up with and around firearms, they were tools.

Then along comes prohibition. Prohibition caused the rise of the famous gangsters of the day, Al Capone and those who wanted to be Al Capone trafficked in illegal booze. They built up territories and violently defended those territories from other gangsters and from Treasury Agents that could not be bought off.

As a reaction to the violence of organized crime, the National Firearms Actwas passed. The National Firearms Act (NFA)is a part of the Internal Revenue Code, it is a tax act. The NFA was not meant to prohibit ownership of certain firearms and accessories, just to discourage it.

What the act covered:

1. Machine guns.

2. Silencers (suppressors).

3. Shotguns with an overall length of less than 26" or a barrel length of less than 18".

4. Rifles with an overall length of less than 26" or a barrel length of less than 16".

5. Any Other weapons: I have to just paste this from the act because it is hard to explain. "The term "any other weapon" means any weapon or device capable of being concealed on the person from which a shot can be discharged through the energy of an explosive, a pistol or revolver having a barrel with a smooth bore designed or redesigned to fire a fixed shotgun shell, weapons with combination shotgun and rifle barrels 12 inches or more, less than 18 inches in length, from which only a single discharge can be made from either barrel without manual reloading, and shall include any such weapon which may be readily restored to fire. Such term shall not include a pistol or a revolver having a rifled bore, or rifled bores, or weapons designed, made, or intended to be fired from the shoulder and not capable of firing fixed ammunition."


What the act did:

1. Required importers, manufactures and dealers of affected firearms and accessories to register with the Treasury Department. They also had to pay a tax of $1000.00 per year for importers and manufacturers, and $500.00 per year for dealers. Remember this was 1934. A thousand dollars in 1934 is approximately $15,000 now.

2. Regulated the transferring of affected firearms and accessories. To transfer an effected firearm or silencer became a chore. You have to fill out the paperwork, in duplicate. You have to supply a photo and fingerprints. You had to pay a $200.00 tax for each firearm. This was an oppressive tax. Most of these firearms could be had for $20.00 or so. Then you had to wait until the Treasury Department approved the application.

3. Required unique serial numbers be engraved on each of the affected firearms and accessories.

4. Required the Manufactures of affected firearms and accessories to apply to the Treasury Department before manufacturing the item. The manufacturer also had to pay a $200.00 tax on each item.

5. Importers could only import affected items for use by the U.S. government. No more souvenirs for the military.

These are the five main parts of the NFA. When it was passed and placed into effect, most people just ignored it. The majority of firearms owners thought it was pretty stupid and would not hold up to scrutiny by the Supreme Court. The passage of this law turned a very large portion of the citizenry into criminals.

The effects of the NFA have nothing to do with crime, organized or not. The criminals did not care that there was a law passed that made them criminals. The gangsters did not all of a sudden become civilly minded and decide to register the Thompson's they had in the boot of the automobile. What the NFA did do was horrible for the United States.

As stated earlier, the NFA made a very large number of law abiding citizens criminals.

The NFA also severely crippled the United States Military. Where were the new machine gun designs? Who was going to keep our small arms up to par with those of the European nations? Our military is still using the same firearms they used in Vietnam. There are no John Browning's coming up with a better machine gun for the military. Not me, I am not going to risk everything I have to come up with a shoulder mounted, lightweight, accurate, mini gun that fires case-less ammo at a rate of 1000+ rpm with no recoil. Neither is anyone else.

By taxing silencers, the NFA has caused people to be affected with permanent hearing loss and caused firing ranges to be shut down due to "too much noise".

The NFA (along with later laws) has caused the price of machine guns and silencers to sky rocket. Registered machine guns in the United States can cost dozens of times more than what they are worth in the world market (hmm.. that may be an enticement for the criminal element to smuggle... nah, it's against the law)

The National Firearms Act was challenged in Federal District Court and found unconstitutional. The case went to the Supreme Court, but the defendants and their lawyers did not appear. This is how the court ruled:

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense

At the time, short barreled shotguns were in use by the military. They were considered "Trench Guns". One lawyer could have changed the history of gun control if he would have just showed up that day. On a side note, short barreled shot guns are in use today by police departments all over the United States. They are in use with out tax stamps or special registration of the users.

So, to sum up all this information. The National Firearms Act of 1934 did nothing to curb crime, as a matter of fact it created criminals out of ordinarily law abiding citizens.

What the act did do was suppress the ingenuity of our small arms manufacturers and put our military decades behind the curve when it comes to weaponry. The act also made owning a piece of metal or wood that might be 1/8" too short a crime. The act also set the ground work for the formation of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. A tax collection agency that has "special" police powers.

New Idiotic U.N. Campaign Aims to Disarm Gangsters

An interesting find in this evenings news. The U.N. is now trying to appease gangs in Haiti with promises of food, money and job training. This is really going to work, just like the "guns for basketball tickets" programs work here in America. Here is the story:

Haiti's government and U.N. peacekeepers will launch a major campaign seeking to persuade hundreds of gangsters to disarm with promises of money, food and job training, but top gang leaders will not be eligible

Special U.N. envoy Edmond Mulet said officials would begin airing radio and television ads in coming days to inform the public about the disarmament plan.

The move represents the most sweeping effort to persuade gangsters to lay down their weapons and rejoin society since U.N. troops arrived in the nation two years ago.

This is what all of the money that America sends to support the U.N. is spent on? Offering gang members the opportunity to become what they despise? Gang members become gang members because they want the feeling of belonging to the "gang family" and the feeling of power over those who are considered weaker to them. The government may not believe in capitol punishment for wrong doing, but the gangs do. Even if one of these guys wanted out, the fear of Voodoo curses, along with the fear of gang punishment for selling out and leaving the gang will keep these guys home come "sign up day" for this U.N. program.

Hint to the U.N. (free of charge), recommend to the Haitians that they arrest these gang members, try them, convict them and remove them from society. That might just work a little better than offering them a job at the local Wal Mart (sorry, I could not think of anything made in Haiti other than drugs and Voodoo charms).

A nice surprise.

We had a great time over the weekend at the Hideaway Ranch and Retreat. Our hosts were very enjoyable people that made you feel right at home. The cabin was comfortable and clean and the kids had a blast.

The surprise was what I found on The Liberal Lie, The Conservative Truth when I got back. They did a nice little spot on this blog and I really appreciate what was said. Thanks guys.

Sunday's Blog of the Week! (a couple of days early)

In just a couple of hours we are leaving for The Hideaway Ranch and Retreat with family and friends. It does not look like I will be able to do any shooting this weekend with the grand kids at this place, but it will still be fun. I am really looking forward to a weekend away with people I love and respect.

What this means to you, is that my Sunday's Blog of the Week feature is a couple of days early.

This weeks Blog was posted by a "Jacksonian" on Dumb Looks Still Free.

The Quiet and Hidden News of Iraq is a well researched article on progress in Iraq that is not generally being reported in the evening news. There is commentary on progress in rebuilding the electrical and water supply infrastructure and a couple of quotes from Iraqi government press releases. The part of this particular article that caught my eye is the banking/economical figures for Iraq. That is a country that appears to be in a pretty good economic recovery for one that the evening news portrays as a hell hole with no hope for the people. A question and a quote from the article:

So, here is the big question: what kind of civil war is it that brings unemployment down by establishing legitimate jobs, raises the economy up, stabilizes inflation and pays off foreign debts?

The building of a Nation is a quiet thing and lost in the noise because a screaming headline of death always beats, hands down, a new school, a completed sewer project, additional electrical capacity and a stabilized economy.

The links given in the article make it well worth a visit