By permission from: Stephen P. Wenger
comments in () by the same
comments in () by the same
http://www.spw-duf.info
Mexican Corruption versus American Rights: The Washington Times reported today that a Washington bureaucrat believes banning semi-automatic rifles will save Mexico's government. But he ignores the real problem threatening Mexico's sovereignty. From the Times: "The former head of U.S. Customs and Border Protection [CBP] called Monday for the U.S. to reinstitute the ban on assault weapons and take other measures to rein in the war between Mexico and its drug cartels, saying the violence has the potential to bring down legitimate rule in that country." Apparently, former CBP Commissioner Robert C. Bonner didn't read the LA Times report that cartels are now arming themselves with military weaponry via the international arms market… In April 2008, USA Today reported that "one of Mexico's biggest drug cartels" had begun a public advertising campaign to recruit Mexican army soldiers, promising better pay and food, housing for their families, and free cars… It appears that an unknown quantity of military weapons ended up in cartels' armories because they were brought along by defecting military or corrupt policemen. Mexico's corruption represents an opportunity to fabricate a "reasonable" excuse to sell gun control. But can something based upon denial result in anything positive? (While the reciprocal relationship between drug trade and the War on Drugs has certainly exaggerated the effects of corruption in Mexico, corruption was a pre-existing way of life in Mexico, long before the War on Drugs.)
http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Whats-wrong-with-Mexico-Corruption-or-American-guns
---
VPC versus CCW: …According to the new Violence Policy Center on-line resource CCW Killers, during the period May 2007 through October 2009 concealed handgun permit holders killed eight law enforcement officers and 77 private citizens (including 10 shooters who killed themselves after an attack)… The 46 incidents detailed on the web site occurred in 18 states. Of these incidents, 10 were murder-suicides involving firearms and eight were mass shootings (three or more victims) that claimed as many as 11 lives at a time… Private citizens were killed in Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida (nine incidents), Idaho (two incidents), Kentucky, Michigan (three incidents), New York, North Carolina (two incidents), Ohio (three incidents), Oklahoma (two incidents), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina (two incidents), Tennessee (five incidents), Texas, Utah (two incidents), and Virginia (three incidents). All but one of the killings were committed with guns. This mass shooting resulted in 10 deaths before the permit holder took his own life… (There are several factors being blurred here. One is that news reports may list the arrests that are routine in some states, even if the incident appears to be self-defense. More important is the implication that individuals who are inclined to use a firearm criminally would not do so if they did not have a permit to carry it lawfully up until the time they choose to misuse it. The fact remains that, vague as they may be, statistics from the states that keep them show that permittees have lower rates of arrest and conviction than the general population. Further, campaigns such as this intentionally ignore the violent crimes prevented or aborted by lawful CCW.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/keeping-track-of-killings_b_360572.html
---
The "Sporting Purpose" Scam: The rabidly anti-gun Violence Policy Center's Josh Sugarmann has, predictably, joined his anti-gun cohorts in exploiting the Ft. Hood atrocity as justification for banning the FN Herstal Five-seveN pistol… Sugarmann, though, is either not confident in the chances of passing such a ban legislatively (attempts to do so have gone nowhere in each of the last two Congressional sessions- I have not, so far, noticed an attempt made yet in the current Congress), or simply lacks the patience to wait for such a process - he wants the Obama administration to simply bypass Congress, and ban the importation of these firearms by administrative fiat… Let's ignore for a moment the blatant unconstitutionality of the Gun Control Act, and its provision empowering the federal government to ban importation of a firearm merely by determining said firearm is unsuitable for sport, and consider what such a ban would do. My guess is that it would make some enterprising domestic firearms manufacturer very pleased, as it tooled up to swoop in on the newly (forcibly) vacated market - a market probably invigorated by the very hysteria against the 5.7x28mm caliber generated by groups like VPC and the Brady Campaign. I rather doubt that Sugarmann is motivated by a desire to help the domestic firearms industry, though…
http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-The-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-need-not-be-for-sporing-purposes
Whether you're a hunter, target shooter, own a firearm for self protection or don't own a firearm at all, the National Shooting Sports Foundation asks you to be informed about AR-15-style rifles. These rifles are often mislabeled "assault rifles" or "assault weapons." They are neither. Nevertheless, many hunters and shooters and the general public confuse AR-15-style rifles, which are civilian sporting rifles, with military rifles because they look similar to each other. "Groups wanting to ban AR-15-style rifles have for years purposely spread misinformation about these firearms to aid their cause," said Steve Sanetti, president of NSSF. "We must work harder to help protect the right of hunters and sports shooters to own the firearms of their choice, including semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, for lawful purposes. Gun owners everywhere can help correct the misinformed, whether it's a friend, fellow hunter, elected official or the media. NSSF is assisting this nationwide campaign by issuing the Modern Sporting Rifle Fact Card as a resource." …
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/6956
---
Schumer's at It Again: Anti-gun Sen. Charles Schumer of New York has given us a sneak peek at legislation the citizen disarmament cabal will be trial-ballooning to see if it floats. And he's exploiting the Fort Hood shootings to do it. From CBS News: "Authorities had taken a look at Hasan after intercepting messages between Hasan and a radical imam overseas. The inquiry was closed sometime in early 2009." Schumer says that should have been enough to raise a red flag when Hasan tried to buy a gun. He says Hasan should not have passed the background check. That, in Schumer's mind, is "enough" to deny someone a Constitutionally-specified right? Heck, someone e-mailing a jihad website to tell them to pound sand has sent a message that could be intercepted. Still, Schumer is nothing if not crafty. He knows there is a motherlode of untapped paranoia to exploit here, and using twin threats of terrorism and guns is a time-tested and reliable tactic for spooking and stampeding the herd. And why stop with radical Islamic terror suspects? In truth, you can't, by law. So we need to include all those "homegrown terrorists" Janet Napolitano warned us about in that DHS report on "right wing extremists." And then we need to stop gun sales to all those potential threats who have been scrutinized - especially those Oath Keepers...and maybe even you or me…
http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Schumer-proposes-terror-suspect-tipoff-act-of-2009
---
McDonald Brief Analyzed: With a strong plea to revive the Constitution's ill-fated Privileges or Immunities Clause, lawyers for four Chicagoans told the Supreme Court on Monday that history shows clearly that the Second Amendment's protection of personal gun rights applies to state and local laws as fully as to those at the federal level. The brief is dominated by a wide-ranging survey of the meaning and origins of the privileges clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, only seven pages of the 73-page brief are devoted to another provision of that Amendment: the Due Process Clause. (The Court presumably is more familiar with the Due Process Clause, repeatedly litigated for decades even as the Privileges or Immunities Clause has lain largely dormant.) In a bold thrust, the attorneys for the challengers to Chicago's strict handgun ban asked the Court to strike down three of its prior rulings: the Slaughterhouse Cases in 1873 - the ruling that made the privileges clause a nullity - and two decisions limiting the Second Amendment to a restriction only on federal laws: U.S. v. Cruikshank in 1876 and Presser v. Illinois in 1886. "Faced with a clear conflict between precedent and the Constitution, this Court should uphold the Constitution," the brief argued…
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/history-lesson-on-2nd-amendments-reach/
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/17/taking_liberties/entry5684166.shtml
… To that end, the petitioners have devoted the vast majority of their brief to carefully explaining why "the right to keep and bear arms is among the privileges or immunities of American citizenship that states may not abridge." The next step in the case is Chicago's brief, which is due to the Court on December 16, followed by the petitioner's reply brief on January 15. Oral arguments are then expected in February. Hopefully this is another one for the history books.
http://reason.com/blog/2009/11/17/will-the-supreme-court-restore
---
Senator Burr Defends Veterans' RKBA Bill: Just as the public expects elected officials to read the text of bills before they pass judgment on them, your editorial board should do the same. Yet it is clear that you did not read S. 669, the "Veterans' Second Amendment Protection Act," before you published your editorial "Guns and the mentally ill" (Nov. 16). Here's the text of my bill in its entirety: "In any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of laws and benefits under this title, a person who is mentally incapacitated, deemed mentally incompetent, or experiencing an extended loss of consciousness shall not be considered adjudicated as a mental defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to himself or herself or others." Allow me to share with you some facts about my legislation now that you've had the opportunity to read it…
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-barrletter1117,0,1252483.story
---
Bob Barr on Military Disarmament: This month's tragic - and probably preventable - mass shooting at Ft. Hood, Texas, certainly raises questions about why a lone shooter was able to unload not one but several magazines of ammunition over a several minute period – shooting and wounding more than 30 soldiers and killing 13, at a heavily restricted US Army base. Just as legitimate questions were raised following the mass killings on the Virginia Tech campus in 2007, both military personnel and civilian citizens alike ought now to be asking of themselves and our elected and appointed leaders, not only whether the perpetrators of such carnage could reasonably and appropriately have been identified in advance and prevented from carrying out their obviously well-planned mass murders; but also, whether it makes sense to disarm a captive group of citizens (at Virginia Tech, the student body; at Ft. Hood, the military personnel assigned to the base)… Why, after all, should a citizen be forced to surrender his or her right to keep and bear arms, simply because they have entered military service; service expressly supposed to teach the proper and safe use of firearms? …
http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2009/11/18/time-to-revisit-firearms-policies-on-military-posts/?cxntfid=blogs_bob_barr_blog
Related Commentary: … The news that the Fort Hood shooter was a graduate of Virginia Tech brought home the story of mass murder and opened the old wounds of the 2007 campus massacre that left 32 dead. Army officials even turned to Virginia Tech administrators for help responding to the shooting. So it would be unfortunate if neither the Army nor Virginia Tech learned the most valuable lesson from these shootings. Simply put, gun-free zones kill people. According to John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime", every public shooting where more than three people were killed took place in locations where guns were anned. Both the Virginia Tech shooter and the Fort Hood shooter violated a "gun-free" zone when they carried loaded firearms - not that breaking the law matters to a person who is about to slaughter dozens of innocent people…
http://www2.insidenova.com/isn/news/opinion/columns/article/reichley_column_the_folly_of_gun-free_zones/47149/
---
A Modest Proposal: …Surveys indicate that gun ownership is not spread evenly across U.S. households. In fact, chances are that a substantial proportion of U.S. gun owners have more than one weapon, so it's quite possible that fewer than 200 million Americans own those 260 million guns. That means there may be more than 100 million citizens left unprotected against their gun-owning fellow citizens. Surely everyone can agree that this is an outrage. Moreover, it is an outrage that Congress can easily fix, without months of committee meetings, town halls or tea parties. All that is required is a bipartisan, pro-constitutional bill to extend the Second Amendment's protection of gun ownership to all Americans, whether they like it or not. Under such legislation - let's call it the Gun Insurance Act of 2009 - every American would be required to buy some kind of gun. Those who cannot afford even the simplest weapon - say, those whose 2009 annual income is less than twice the federal poverty level - could be issued $500 vouchers that would be valid only at gun shops or gun shows, and would have to be used before the 2010 Census. (Just think: What a stimulus to private enterprise all these gun sales would provide, and how many new gun-selling jobs would be created!) … (Note that this appears in The Washington Post. I take it more as a dig at Congress forcing people to buy health insurance than an attempt to resurrect the militia system but it still make a good burr under "progressive" saddles.)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/16/AR2009111602635.html
---
Imagine That: Somali pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama on Wednesday for the second time in seven months and were thwarted by private guards on board the U.S.-flagged ship who fired off guns and a high-decibel noise device. A U.S. surveillance plane was monitoring the ship as it continued to its destination on the Kenyan coast, while a pirate said that the captain of a ship hijacked Monday with 28 North Korean crew members on board had died of wounds. Pirates hijacked the Maersk Alabama last April and took ship captain Richard Phillips hostage, holding him at gunpoint in a lifeboat for five days. Navy SEAL sharpshooters freed Phillips while killing three pirates in a daring nighttime attack. Four suspected pirates in a skiff attacked the ship again on Wednesday around 6:30 a.m. local time, firing on the ship with automatic weapons from about 300 yards (meters) away, a statement from the U.S. Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said… However, Roger Middleton, a piracy expert at the London-based think tank Chatham House, said the international maritime community was still "solidly against" armed guards aboard vessels at sea, but that American ships have taken a different line than the rest of the international community…
http://townhall.com/news/world/2009/11/18/maersk_alabama_repels_2nd_pirate_attack_with_guns?page=full
---
Oops, Wrong House: An 11-year-old boy shot a black bear on his family's front porch after he said it wouldn't leave. The boy was at his home near Driggs, just west of the Idaho-Wyoming border, with his younger sisters last Wednesday when the bear showed up. The youngster says he couldn't shoo it away, so he went and got his gun and shot it. Black bears in the area have prompted multiple complaint calls, largely because they've been hanging around a transfer station. It wasn't clear if the bear shot by the boy was also attracted by the transfer station. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Officer Lauren Wendt says, "we got multiple complaint calls. We don't like to see them down this low. But it's not uncommon.'' Fish and Game doesn't plan on pursuing any claims against the boy or his family - and they issued them a permit to keep the bear. ("Transfer station" seems to be the current term for a trash dump.)
http://www.2news.tv/news/local/70194932.html
---
Arizona DPS Arrests Three for Selling Grenades: Three people are in custody after the Department of Public Safety discovered the suspects were trying to sell 24 live grenades in the Maryvale area of west Phoenix. DPS spokesman Harold Sanders said a DPS lead task force completed an investigation Tuesday evening, culminating in the three arrests. According to officials, one suspect is still being sought by investigators. Sanders said the grenades have been rendered safe by Explosive Ordinance Disposal personnel. (Note that, contrary to implications in the Tory press, grenades are not sold at gun shops or gun shows. Mexican drug cartels get theirs from Mexican military sources or illicit importation from countries other than the US.)
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/318085.php
---
Buying a Used Handgun: This article is concerned with the purchase of used handguns by the recreational shooter. Handguns that will be used for their intended purpose, which is shooting, not with collectors' guns or wall hangers. The common reasons to purchase a used handgun are to save money or acquire a model no longer in production. For example, I own several used Colt Diamondback revolvers in .22 LR and .38 Special, all of which I purchased after the Diamondback was discontinued. Guns hold their value very well, so if you later decide to trade or sell a used gun you should be able to get pretty much what you paid for it. This is very important to those of us who have bought and sold a fair number of firearms for our personal use… (Not the be-all, end-all, this article does contain some useful information. As indicated, the used market is a source for desirable models that have been discontinued or "updated" and, depending on jurisdiction, may also allow you to acquire firearms lawfully, without creating governmental records. More detailed information about purchasing used revolvers can be gleaned from extensive threads at http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57816 and http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=1430.)
http://www.chuckhawks.com/used_handgun.htm
---
http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Whats-wrong-with-Mexico-Corruption-or-American-guns
---
VPC versus CCW: …According to the new Violence Policy Center on-line resource CCW Killers, during the period May 2007 through October 2009 concealed handgun permit holders killed eight law enforcement officers and 77 private citizens (including 10 shooters who killed themselves after an attack)… The 46 incidents detailed on the web site occurred in 18 states. Of these incidents, 10 were murder-suicides involving firearms and eight were mass shootings (three or more victims) that claimed as many as 11 lives at a time… Private citizens were killed in Alabama, California, Colorado, Florida (nine incidents), Idaho (two incidents), Kentucky, Michigan (three incidents), New York, North Carolina (two incidents), Ohio (three incidents), Oklahoma (two incidents), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina (two incidents), Tennessee (five incidents), Texas, Utah (two incidents), and Virginia (three incidents). All but one of the killings were committed with guns. This mass shooting resulted in 10 deaths before the permit holder took his own life… (There are several factors being blurred here. One is that news reports may list the arrests that are routine in some states, even if the incident appears to be self-defense. More important is the implication that individuals who are inclined to use a firearm criminally would not do so if they did not have a permit to carry it lawfully up until the time they choose to misuse it. The fact remains that, vague as they may be, statistics from the states that keep them show that permittees have lower rates of arrest and conviction than the general population. Further, campaigns such as this intentionally ignore the violent crimes prevented or aborted by lawful CCW.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/keeping-track-of-killings_b_360572.html
---
The "Sporting Purpose" Scam: The rabidly anti-gun Violence Policy Center's Josh Sugarmann has, predictably, joined his anti-gun cohorts in exploiting the Ft. Hood atrocity as justification for banning the FN Herstal Five-seveN pistol… Sugarmann, though, is either not confident in the chances of passing such a ban legislatively (attempts to do so have gone nowhere in each of the last two Congressional sessions- I have not, so far, noticed an attempt made yet in the current Congress), or simply lacks the patience to wait for such a process - he wants the Obama administration to simply bypass Congress, and ban the importation of these firearms by administrative fiat… Let's ignore for a moment the blatant unconstitutionality of the Gun Control Act, and its provision empowering the federal government to ban importation of a firearm merely by determining said firearm is unsuitable for sport, and consider what such a ban would do. My guess is that it would make some enterprising domestic firearms manufacturer very pleased, as it tooled up to swoop in on the newly (forcibly) vacated market - a market probably invigorated by the very hysteria against the 5.7x28mm caliber generated by groups like VPC and the Brady Campaign. I rather doubt that Sugarmann is motivated by a desire to help the domestic firearms industry, though…
http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-The-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-need-not-be-for-sporing-purposes
Whether you're a hunter, target shooter, own a firearm for self protection or don't own a firearm at all, the National Shooting Sports Foundation asks you to be informed about AR-15-style rifles. These rifles are often mislabeled "assault rifles" or "assault weapons." They are neither. Nevertheless, many hunters and shooters and the general public confuse AR-15-style rifles, which are civilian sporting rifles, with military rifles because they look similar to each other. "Groups wanting to ban AR-15-style rifles have for years purposely spread misinformation about these firearms to aid their cause," said Steve Sanetti, president of NSSF. "We must work harder to help protect the right of hunters and sports shooters to own the firearms of their choice, including semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns, for lawful purposes. Gun owners everywhere can help correct the misinformed, whether it's a friend, fellow hunter, elected official or the media. NSSF is assisting this nationwide campaign by issuing the Modern Sporting Rifle Fact Card as a resource." …
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/6956
---
Schumer's at It Again: Anti-gun Sen. Charles Schumer of New York has given us a sneak peek at legislation the citizen disarmament cabal will be trial-ballooning to see if it floats. And he's exploiting the Fort Hood shootings to do it. From CBS News: "Authorities had taken a look at Hasan after intercepting messages between Hasan and a radical imam overseas. The inquiry was closed sometime in early 2009." Schumer says that should have been enough to raise a red flag when Hasan tried to buy a gun. He says Hasan should not have passed the background check. That, in Schumer's mind, is "enough" to deny someone a Constitutionally-specified right? Heck, someone e-mailing a jihad website to tell them to pound sand has sent a message that could be intercepted. Still, Schumer is nothing if not crafty. He knows there is a motherlode of untapped paranoia to exploit here, and using twin threats of terrorism and guns is a time-tested and reliable tactic for spooking and stampeding the herd. And why stop with radical Islamic terror suspects? In truth, you can't, by law. So we need to include all those "homegrown terrorists" Janet Napolitano warned us about in that DHS report on "right wing extremists." And then we need to stop gun sales to all those potential threats who have been scrutinized - especially those Oath Keepers...and maybe even you or me…
http://www.examiner.com/x-1417-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m11d17-Schumer-proposes-terror-suspect-tipoff-act-of-2009
---
McDonald Brief Analyzed: With a strong plea to revive the Constitution's ill-fated Privileges or Immunities Clause, lawyers for four Chicagoans told the Supreme Court on Monday that history shows clearly that the Second Amendment's protection of personal gun rights applies to state and local laws as fully as to those at the federal level. The brief is dominated by a wide-ranging survey of the meaning and origins of the privileges clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, only seven pages of the 73-page brief are devoted to another provision of that Amendment: the Due Process Clause. (The Court presumably is more familiar with the Due Process Clause, repeatedly litigated for decades even as the Privileges or Immunities Clause has lain largely dormant.) In a bold thrust, the attorneys for the challengers to Chicago's strict handgun ban asked the Court to strike down three of its prior rulings: the Slaughterhouse Cases in 1873 - the ruling that made the privileges clause a nullity - and two decisions limiting the Second Amendment to a restriction only on federal laws: U.S. v. Cruikshank in 1876 and Presser v. Illinois in 1886. "Faced with a clear conflict between precedent and the Constitution, this Court should uphold the Constitution," the brief argued…
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/history-lesson-on-2nd-amendments-reach/
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/17/taking_liberties/entry5684166.shtml
… To that end, the petitioners have devoted the vast majority of their brief to carefully explaining why "the right to keep and bear arms is among the privileges or immunities of American citizenship that states may not abridge." The next step in the case is Chicago's brief, which is due to the Court on December 16, followed by the petitioner's reply brief on January 15. Oral arguments are then expected in February. Hopefully this is another one for the history books.
http://reason.com/blog/2009/11/17/will-the-supreme-court-restore
---
Senator Burr Defends Veterans' RKBA Bill: Just as the public expects elected officials to read the text of bills before they pass judgment on them, your editorial board should do the same. Yet it is clear that you did not read S. 669, the "Veterans' Second Amendment Protection Act," before you published your editorial "Guns and the mentally ill" (Nov. 16). Here's the text of my bill in its entirety: "In any case arising out of the administration by the Secretary of laws and benefits under this title, a person who is mentally incapacitated, deemed mentally incompetent, or experiencing an extended loss of consciousness shall not be considered adjudicated as a mental defective under subsection (d)(4) or (g)(4) of section 922 of title 18 without the order or finding of a judge, magistrate, or other judicial authority of competent jurisdiction that such person is a danger to himself or herself or others." Allow me to share with you some facts about my legislation now that you've had the opportunity to read it…
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bal-barrletter1117,0,1252483.story
---
Bob Barr on Military Disarmament: This month's tragic - and probably preventable - mass shooting at Ft. Hood, Texas, certainly raises questions about why a lone shooter was able to unload not one but several magazines of ammunition over a several minute period – shooting and wounding more than 30 soldiers and killing 13, at a heavily restricted US Army base. Just as legitimate questions were raised following the mass killings on the Virginia Tech campus in 2007, both military personnel and civilian citizens alike ought now to be asking of themselves and our elected and appointed leaders, not only whether the perpetrators of such carnage could reasonably and appropriately have been identified in advance and prevented from carrying out their obviously well-planned mass murders; but also, whether it makes sense to disarm a captive group of citizens (at Virginia Tech, the student body; at Ft. Hood, the military personnel assigned to the base)… Why, after all, should a citizen be forced to surrender his or her right to keep and bear arms, simply because they have entered military service; service expressly supposed to teach the proper and safe use of firearms? …
http://blogs.ajc.com/bob-barr-blog/2009/11/18/time-to-revisit-firearms-policies-on-military-posts/?cxntfid=blogs_bob_barr_blog
Related Commentary: … The news that the Fort Hood shooter was a graduate of Virginia Tech brought home the story of mass murder and opened the old wounds of the 2007 campus massacre that left 32 dead. Army officials even turned to Virginia Tech administrators for help responding to the shooting. So it would be unfortunate if neither the Army nor Virginia Tech learned the most valuable lesson from these shootings. Simply put, gun-free zones kill people. According to John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime", every public shooting where more than three people were killed took place in locations where guns were anned. Both the Virginia Tech shooter and the Fort Hood shooter violated a "gun-free" zone when they carried loaded firearms - not that breaking the law matters to a person who is about to slaughter dozens of innocent people…
http://www2.insidenova.com/isn/news/opinion/columns/article/reichley_column_the_folly_of_gun-free_zones/47149/
---
A Modest Proposal: …Surveys indicate that gun ownership is not spread evenly across U.S. households. In fact, chances are that a substantial proportion of U.S. gun owners have more than one weapon, so it's quite possible that fewer than 200 million Americans own those 260 million guns. That means there may be more than 100 million citizens left unprotected against their gun-owning fellow citizens. Surely everyone can agree that this is an outrage. Moreover, it is an outrage that Congress can easily fix, without months of committee meetings, town halls or tea parties. All that is required is a bipartisan, pro-constitutional bill to extend the Second Amendment's protection of gun ownership to all Americans, whether they like it or not. Under such legislation - let's call it the Gun Insurance Act of 2009 - every American would be required to buy some kind of gun. Those who cannot afford even the simplest weapon - say, those whose 2009 annual income is less than twice the federal poverty level - could be issued $500 vouchers that would be valid only at gun shops or gun shows, and would have to be used before the 2010 Census. (Just think: What a stimulus to private enterprise all these gun sales would provide, and how many new gun-selling jobs would be created!) … (Note that this appears in The Washington Post. I take it more as a dig at Congress forcing people to buy health insurance than an attempt to resurrect the militia system but it still make a good burr under "progressive" saddles.)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/16/AR2009111602635.html
---
Imagine That: Somali pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama on Wednesday for the second time in seven months and were thwarted by private guards on board the U.S.-flagged ship who fired off guns and a high-decibel noise device. A U.S. surveillance plane was monitoring the ship as it continued to its destination on the Kenyan coast, while a pirate said that the captain of a ship hijacked Monday with 28 North Korean crew members on board had died of wounds. Pirates hijacked the Maersk Alabama last April and took ship captain Richard Phillips hostage, holding him at gunpoint in a lifeboat for five days. Navy SEAL sharpshooters freed Phillips while killing three pirates in a daring nighttime attack. Four suspected pirates in a skiff attacked the ship again on Wednesday around 6:30 a.m. local time, firing on the ship with automatic weapons from about 300 yards (meters) away, a statement from the U.S. Fifth Fleet in Bahrain said… However, Roger Middleton, a piracy expert at the London-based think tank Chatham House, said the international maritime community was still "solidly against" armed guards aboard vessels at sea, but that American ships have taken a different line than the rest of the international community…
http://townhall.com/news/world/2009/11/18/maersk_alabama_repels_2nd_pirate_attack_with_guns?page=full
---
Oops, Wrong House: An 11-year-old boy shot a black bear on his family's front porch after he said it wouldn't leave. The boy was at his home near Driggs, just west of the Idaho-Wyoming border, with his younger sisters last Wednesday when the bear showed up. The youngster says he couldn't shoo it away, so he went and got his gun and shot it. Black bears in the area have prompted multiple complaint calls, largely because they've been hanging around a transfer station. It wasn't clear if the bear shot by the boy was also attracted by the transfer station. Idaho Department of Fish and Game Officer Lauren Wendt says, "we got multiple complaint calls. We don't like to see them down this low. But it's not uncommon.'' Fish and Game doesn't plan on pursuing any claims against the boy or his family - and they issued them a permit to keep the bear. ("Transfer station" seems to be the current term for a trash dump.)
http://www.2news.tv/news/local/70194932.html
---
Arizona DPS Arrests Three for Selling Grenades: Three people are in custody after the Department of Public Safety discovered the suspects were trying to sell 24 live grenades in the Maryvale area of west Phoenix. DPS spokesman Harold Sanders said a DPS lead task force completed an investigation Tuesday evening, culminating in the three arrests. According to officials, one suspect is still being sought by investigators. Sanders said the grenades have been rendered safe by Explosive Ordinance Disposal personnel. (Note that, contrary to implications in the Tory press, grenades are not sold at gun shops or gun shows. Mexican drug cartels get theirs from Mexican military sources or illicit importation from countries other than the US.)
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/318085.php
---
Buying a Used Handgun: This article is concerned with the purchase of used handguns by the recreational shooter. Handguns that will be used for their intended purpose, which is shooting, not with collectors' guns or wall hangers. The common reasons to purchase a used handgun are to save money or acquire a model no longer in production. For example, I own several used Colt Diamondback revolvers in .22 LR and .38 Special, all of which I purchased after the Diamondback was discontinued. Guns hold their value very well, so if you later decide to trade or sell a used gun you should be able to get pretty much what you paid for it. This is very important to those of us who have bought and sold a fair number of firearms for our personal use… (Not the be-all, end-all, this article does contain some useful information. As indicated, the used market is a source for desirable models that have been discontinued or "updated" and, depending on jurisdiction, may also allow you to acquire firearms lawfully, without creating governmental records. More detailed information about purchasing used revolvers can be gleaned from extensive threads at http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57816 and http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=1430.)
http://www.chuckhawks.com/used_handgun.htm
---
