The Madness of gun control:

Here is just a hint at where reasonable gun control can lead:
(stolen from "The Daily Post, UK)

New law warning to airgun dealers
Sep 25 2007 by Roland Hughes, Daily Post
POLICE yesterday warned North Wales airgun traders to register as firearm dealers or face prosecution.
Anyone selling air weapons in North Wales must register with police by next Monday or face the consequences under tough new laws.
Calls were made for a crack down on airguns after a series of incidents across the region in recent years where people and animals were hurt or killed.
But one gun shop owner said he had not been told of the changes to the law, despite requests to the government for clarification.
Ian Okell, owner of Dragon Field Sports in Wrexham, said the regulation of gun shops would not tackle the real problem – that of the illegal gun trade.
From October 1, anyone selling air weapons by way of a trade or business must be registered with the police as a firearms dealer, under changes to the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006.
Gun traders must buy a £150 registration, lasting three years, from the Firearms Licensing Department of North Wales Police.
Anyone failing to do so may face a maximum £5,000 or 12 months’ imprisonment.
Sergeant Andy Griffiths said: “Previously, there was no need for anyone to register as a firearms dealer to sell this type of weapon.
“Now fishing tackle shops, gift shops, hardware stores and others who sell air weapons will all be affected by the change in law, and will have to register with us.”
Mr Okell said he was sent a consultation document outlining proposed changes to the law 18 months ago, but had not heard anything since.
He said: “It was full of ridiculous suggestions, saying things like all gun shops must have blacked-out windows, as if we were porn shops.”
“It’s been a shambles.”
Anyone needing information on the change can contact North Wales Police’s Firearms Licensing Department on 01745 859689.
You can also visit the department between 10am and 3pm from Monday to Friday.
rolandhughes

On Rudy Giuliani

I just have to wonder, what is really in his heart. Could he actually have had a change in his previous position on gun control or is he truly the ultimate politician pandering to the real Republican base. At the recent NRA conference he he told them that they could trust him to defend the right to bear arms in spite of his high-profile support for gun control while serving as mayor of New York. However he made no apologies for his record as New York mayor, saying he needed every possible legal tool to fight crime in the city. Exactly how is curtailing the right of peaceful, law abiding citizens to have adequate means of self defence a "legal tool".
I may be far too much of a single issue voter but, I'm not sure that he really gets it. I am very leery of this mans motives and he has a long way to go before I am convinced.
I understand that he probably is the "most electable" Republican, I just hope that I don't have to hold my nose while I'm voting.

The Apathetic Ohio Gun Owner

(This post was stolen from: Buckeyefirearms web site http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/ )

The apathetic Ohio gun owner has been and may continue to be one of the biggest threat to our Ohio gun rights. This person doesn’t fight to protect their Second Amendment rights and does not feel that the gun-grabbers will ever successfully pass law that results in wide spread gun confiscation. Sadly, the fact that guns were confiscated from law-abiding citizens in New Orleans didn’t change their mind. The apathetic Ohio gun owner often does not vote, and does not volunteer on campaigns of pro-gun candidates. As a result, anti-gun candidates win elections and continue to erode our gun rights. The apathetic Ohio gun owner does not contact his/her elected representative and demand that they protect our Second Amendment rights. His or her elected representatives see his silence as an endorsement of their anti-gun policies and agenda. The apathetic Ohio gun owner also does not write letters or emails to various newspapers, television stations, and radio stations challenging their anti-gun reporting and bias. The apathetic Ohio gun owner does not belong to or support national gun advocacy groups such as the National Rifle Association (NRA), Gun Owners of America (GOA), Second Amendment Foundation, or the Jews For The Preservation of Firearm Ownership (JPFO). They are also not active at the local level with organizations such as the Buckeye Firearms Association. If they are a member, they cannot be counted on to take any action that is needed, even if it is just signing and mailing a pre-filled out postcard. The apathetic Ohio gun owner is by far the most dangerous threat to your gun rights. In fact, this person does more damage to our Ohio gun rights than the rest of the list combined. If they don’t wake up soon, it may be too late.

California Microstamping?

California Madness

Mulliga of Shangrila Towers fame gives us a heads up about a microstamping bill that passed the California Senate.

What is "microstamping"? It is where tiny serial numbers are stamped on a cartridge case every time the gun is fired. The idea is to make it easier to track guns used in crimes, since the brass ejected from the criminal's guns will also have identifying marks that will lead to the perp.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who commit violent crime have already been convicted multiple times for other felonies, which means that it is already against the law for them to even possess a firearm, let alone buy one. They have to obtain their guns illegally, usually through theft. Any microstamped brass littering a crime scene won't lead to the criminal because there won't be any record of him purchasing the gun.
The second problem is that any person who can change a flat tire has more than enough mechanical savvy to get a file and scrape away the little numbers that stamp the brass. I sincerely doubt many criminals would even bother since, like I said before, there is no record of purchase that would lead back to them anyway.
Microstamping is an idiotic idea that would do nothing to reduce crime or help the police catch criminals, and it would increase the cost of semi-automatic firearms. It is an obvious ploy by the anti-gun lobby to place yet another ridiculous restriction on firearm ownership that has no utility.

Gun Facts

INTRODUCTION:
Gun Facts is a free e-book that debunks common myths about gun control.
It is intended as a reference guide for journalists, activists, politicians, and other people interested in restoring honesty to the debate about guns, crime, and the 2nd Amendment.

Gun Facts has 89 pages of information. Divided into chapters based on gun control topics (assault weapons, ballistic finger printing, firearm availability, etc.), finding information is quick and easy.
Each chapter lists common gun control myths, then lists a number of documented and cited facts that directly dispute the gun control claim. Thus when a neighbor, editor, or politician repeats some slogan propagated by gun control advocacy groups, you can quickly find that myth, then rebuke.

Links to download the Gun Facts book are below. Other e-documents on other pages of this site are for special gun control issues, with most data lifted from the Gun Facts book.
Gun Facts version 4.2
All Gun Facts versions are in PDF format.
Click here to download Adobe Acrobat to read PDFs.


Screen version (0.7 MB)
-- Compact size suitable for on-screen viewing
Printer version (1.7 MB)
-- Good for printing on home or office laser printers
Press version (2.3 MB)
-- For sending to printers for bound, hi-rez printing
Printed version ððððððððð
-- Click here to buy a printed version

Tangled Web

What A Tangled Web They Weave

(Posted by: Cam Edwards, 9-20-07) CamEdwards.com is the online magazine written by Cam Edwards, a veteran talk show host currently hosting “Cam and Company” on NRAnews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. “Cam and Company” airs weeknights 9-midnight Eastern/6-9 p.m. Pacific.

This is just sad. On Wednesday, the International Association of Chiefs of Police held a big press conference on Capitol Hill to release a new report on “gun violence”. They had 39 specific recommendations, but you’ve heard them all before. Ban the .50 caliber rifle. Ban “assault weapons”. Institute one-gun-a-month laws. No transactions without it going through a federally licensed firearms dealer. It’s a Christmas wish-list for gun banners. Which is no surprise, given that this report was bought and paid for by the anti-gun Joyce Foundation.

I’m sure there’ll be plenty of news stories on this report, but I’d be shocked if any of them contained the following information.

In 2006, the Joyce Foundation doled out $375,000 to the IACP to convene the “Great Lakes States Summit on Gun Violence”. That conference was held in April of this year. This is in addition to the $174,788 the Joyce Foundation also paid to IACP to develop and plan the summit.

Today’s report, according to IACP, comes from that summit.

Among the report’s “contributors” is a fellow named Matthew Miller, an assistant professor at Harvard University’s School of Public Health. Coincidentally, Harvard University’s School of Public Health received a $700,000 grant from the Joyce Foundation in 2005, in part to “conduct policy-relevant firearms research”. Among the other “contributors” to the report are Mary O’Connell (Dir. of Communications for the Joyce Foundation), Tom Diaz (Senior Policy Analyst at the Violence Policy Center), Kristen Rand (Policy Advisor at the Violence Policy Center), and Roseanna Ander (Program Officer at the Joyce Foundation). The report writers were Christine Allred (who doesn’t work for IACP, or at least isn’t listed as a staff member in the report) and Valerie Denney, who runs a PR firm in Chicago that lists the Joyce Foundation as one of their clients.

Oh, by the way, the Violence Policy Center? Yeah, it also received $450,000 in 2005 and a whopping $700,000 in 2006 from the Joyce Foundation.

Now, just a couple of notes. There is not one identifiable pro-2nd Amendment individual associated with the writing or contributions for this report. That’s fine. No one’s saying anti-gunners should be forced to put pro-gunners in their little play groups. But the media will not report this as “An anti-gun group today released a new report on gun control”. They will report this as “Today our nation’s law enforcement officers, together with some of the biggest names on Capitol Hill, called for more common sense gun laws to reduce violent crime.”

That’s baloney. This is an anti-gun report bought and paid for by an anti-gun foundation, assembled by anti-gunners from the Joyce Foundation, Harvard, and the Violence Policy Center. I’ve seen more serious studies written by Carrot Top and Larry the Cable Guy.

And one other note… don’t be surprised if in the near future, we hear something from Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health about this report. The Joyce Foundation gave them $175,000 this year to “study two Midwest-based law enforcement initiatives focused on preventing firearm violence”. In other words, “we’ll pay you to critique the gun control report we just bought”. Gee, you think the Johns Hopkins study will be critical of IACP’s report?

If you do, can I interest you in some land I have for sale in Arizona? It’s got some great oceanfront views…

Guns prevent chaos

Guns prevent chaos

Lazarus Austin
Issue date: 9/18/07 Section: Opinion
Lazarus Austin is a junior majoring in history. He can be contacted at opinion@reflector.msstate.edu.

A new international poll has revealed that Americans have substantially more guns than any other country. According to the poll, nine out of 10 Americans own a gun and possess more than 250 million of the world's 600 million guns. As expected, many people are using this poll to call for more gun control. Gun critics seem to think that more guns mean more crime and fatalities. On the other hand, gun rights supporters claim it is their inalienable right to own a gun for self-defense or any other legal purpose. The simple fact of the matter is that the gun critics are just plain wrong. Time and time again, guns have proven to deter crime, not encourage it. A new video documentary concerning the St. James Massacre in South Africa was released this week. In that event, several terrorists attacked a Sunday morning service with grenades and assault rifles with the intent to kill everyone inside. However, one of the churchgoers dropped behind a bench, pulled out his .38 revolver, shot back and injured one of the terrorists. As a result, the terrorists ran away. Guns are used more for self defense than homicide-a fact, not a myth. Similar incidents occur all the time in terrorism prone countries like Israel, but are often thwarted with a violent thing of the past called a gun. That violent thing that has saved lives, protected the public from its enemies and, last but not least, helped us win our independence and keep it. Despite the results of the poll, the gun culture in America is diminishing, in some places more than others. When I was in New York with my parents this summer, I found myself passing time in the magazine section of Wal-Mart while I was waiting on my parents. When I looked for a gun or hunting magazine there was none. "Blasphemy!" was the first thought in my head. Down here, we are used to an entire shelf dedicated to hunting.
After I looked into it, I realized that guns are being gradually taken away from us all over the country. In Morton Grove, Ill., they completely prohibited the possession of handguns. What happened? Crime skyrocketed. In response to a high crime rate and the decision by Morton Grove, a city in Georgia decided to mandate the possession of a firearm in every household. Crime plummeted, including an 89 percent drop in burglary rates. In contrast, England and many other countries with strict gun control laws have much higher crime rates than the United States, while countries with very little gun control, such as Israel and Switzerland, have very low crime rates. Gun control proponents repeatedly ignore the facts. The statistics show that gun control only worsens the problem and that more guns can actually decrease crime. So, why don't we enact mandatory gun ownership laws all over the country? Who knows, maybe a few people at Virginia Tech would be grateful right now. But we'll never know. Fortunately, over 80 percent of Americans still appreciate the value of guns and do not support gun control. However, that number is decreasing. If gun control is ever favored by the majority, the country will descend into chaos.

Does News Coverage Endanger Lives?

Does News Coverage Endanger Lives?

(Post copied from:)
Investor's Business Daily, April 29, 1999, Section: Viewpoint; Pg. A20 By John R. Lott Jr., a fellow at the University of Chicago Law School. He is author of " More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun Control Laws" (University of Chicago Press, 1998).

Last week's horrific attack at Columbine High School in Colorado has at least temporarily changed the political climate on guns. Bad reporting is poisoning the public debate about guns and gun control.
Newsweek magazine reports that in the wake of the 13 victims who died, 50% of Americans polled now favor restrictions on handgun possession except by police and other authorities.
Other news stories revealed there were two additional bombings of public schools planned by students in Austin, Texas, and Richmond, Va., adding to fears. Yet the media's focus primarily remains on ''access to guns. ''
But such focus gives a distorted view of the relative costs and benefits of gun ownership.
The media have an old saying: ''If it bleeds, it leads.'' And this radically affects coverage of firearms. For instance, a death by shooting is much more likely to get news coverage than a case in which someone simply brandishes a gun and causes the criminal to run away. But the fact remains: guns are used for defensive purposes about five times as much as they are for crimes. The media refuse to tell that story.
The asymmetry in coverage goes beyond the crimes themselves. Take for example the justified news coverage accorded the heroic actions of the Columbine High School teacher who helped protect some of the students and was killed in the process. By Sunday morning, five days after the incident, over 250 news stories around the country had mentioned this hero.
Contrast this with other school attacks in which the crimes were stopped well before the police were able to arrive. In October 1997, a shooting spree at a high school in Pearl, Miss., left two students dead. It was stopped by Joel Myrick, an assistant principal. He retrieved a gun from his car and physically immobilized the shooter for about five minutes before police arrived.
A Lexis-Nexis search indicates that 687 articles appeared in the first month after the attack. Only 16 stories mentioned Myrick. Only a little more than half of these mentioned he used a gun to stop the attack.
Some stories simply stated Myrick was ''credited by police with helping capture the boy'' or that ''Myrick disarmed the shooter.'' A later story on CBS with Dan Rather notes that ''Myrick eventually subdued the young gunman.'' Such stories provide no explanation how Myrick accomplished this feat.
The school-related shooting in Edinboro, Pa., which left one teacher dead, was stopped only after James Strand, who owned a nearby restaurant, pointed a shotgun at the shooter when he started to reload his gun. The police did not arrive until 11 minutes later.
At least 596 news stories discussed this crime during the next month, and only 35 mentioned Strand. Once again, few described how he used a gun to stop the crime. The New York Daily News explained that Strand ''persuaded Wurst (the shooter) to surrender,'' while The Atlanta Journal wrote how he ''chased Wurst down and held him until police came.''
Saying that Strand ''persuaded'' the killer makes it sound as if Strand was simply an effective speaker.
Neither Myrick nor Strand was killed during their heroics. That might explain why they were ignored. Yet one suspects a more politically correct explanation - especially when the media ignore the defensive use of a gun.
In the midst of the political and media furor, we should remember the positive uses of guns. There are many other cases where citizens with permitted concealed handguns have stopped both shootings and bombings in public places.
Yet these heroes get even less attention than Myrick and Strand, especially when they have stopped the attacks before any victims have been harmed. If the heroes had not been there, one can be sure that these other incidents would have received national news attention because of the ensuing slaughter.
If the ultimate question is what will save the most lives, we can't look at just the bad things. We must also look for the bad things that don't happen because people are able to protect themselves. Given the current state of reporting, the ''public's right to know'' is being betrayed.
Now the media are talking about new gun laws. But they also are failing to look at many of the existing restrictions and what role they may have played in this tragedy. For the media, there seems to be only one story and solution, but that may be costing lives.

Purchase: More Guns, Less Crime By: John Lott, Jr.

SCHOOLS DEMONIZE GUNS

GUNS VITAL TO OUR FREEDOM, BUT SCHOOLS DEMONIZE THEM

Zero-Tolerance Gun Policy Is Ignorant, Wrong
A junior high school in suburban Chandler, Ariz., has made national headlines by exercising a zero-tolerance policy and suspending a student for sketching a gun.
Too many teachers have virtually no understanding of the value of guns, the role guns play in our history, and particularly, the fact that guns are why America is still free. They are passing their ignorance on to their students.
The paranoid and politically correct creation of zero-tolerance policies for guns by schools is an affront to everything this country stands for, and must come to an end.
There is no way to accurately teach history, sociology, politics and other subjects without a deep examination of the role guns play in protecting people and maintaining civil order. Students in these zero-tolerance days must be getting some sort of fairy tale instead of an education.
Guns have been a fundamental part of American life since the country began. Some nine million people buy new guns annually according to the FBI, and current estimates suggest nearly 100 million Americans keep at least one gun at home, for good reasons. None of this has any connection with crime or evil -- quite the contrary -- but schools don't seem to care and hide this in the classroom.
Guns save lives. Guns stop crime. Guns protect people. Guns are good. Guns are actually fun when you go to a range and practice. You never hear about that in the news though because, like the education establishment, the news media basically has a zero-tolerance policy for stories that show the truth about guns. This is linked directly to student suspensions for gun sketches.
The media exacerbates the problem by publicizing and literally promoting criminal misuse of guns incessantly, typically on page one, while suppressing news about the good guns do. Thirteen scholarly studies, including one by the Clinton Justice Dept., have found between 700,000 and three million defensive gun uses every year (depending on study length and the set of respondents questioned).
For all the "gun stuff" you see in the news, you haven't seen that, have you. Legitimate gun use outnumbers criminal misuse by orders of magnitude. Talk about unethical biased reporting. Reporters have excuses and justifications for it, but they're bogus. Guns are part of our economy, job pool, tax base, retail markets, hobby scene, sports world, balance of trade, all newsworthy.
Defensive gun use has heroes, villains, lives saved, families preserved, blood and guts, criminals brought to justice, honor, valor, courage, flashy police lights -- all the elements the media says matter.
In an unpublished study I did for a think tank, I found that Americans purchase between five and nine billion rounds of ammunition every year. Almost none of it goes into crime -- and almost none of it goes into the news, skewing everyone's view. Reporters are afraid of guns, don't go to the range to practice, have a morbid fascination with guns that only lets them see the danger and not the safety guns represent. Teachers have picked up on this, and now hurt everyone with their adopted myths.
That's why it's critical for school systems in Arizona to set an example for the country. Schools should adopt and begin teaching the Arizona Gun Safety Program our legislature enacted in 2005. This elective high school class teaches the truth about guns, and requires safely discharging a firearm at a target to get the credit toward a high-school diploma. It will move us from today's abject ignorance and cowering fear to a brighter day of enlightened, educated students and teachers. Sketching a gun in that class would merit a gold star, not punishment.
The Arizona Gun Safety Program teaches how guns work, how they are handled safely, why they are important, marksmanship, the constitutional roots of these precious rights and their place throughout history. Perhaps most important, the class examines the role of firearms in preserving peace and freedom, a linchpin to any valid education in history and politics.
When an evil person commits a vicious aggression, you send in people with guns because it's the right thing to do. The role of firearms in society is critically important, and needs to be honored and appreciated, not amputated by small-minded fearful bigots who think hiding what they hate will make everything just fine.

Posted by The Uninvited Ombudsman on Monday, September 17, 2007

Ten things about CCW holders

Ten things non-gun people should know about CCW holders:
1. We don't carry firearms so that we can ignore other basics of personal safety. Every permit holder that I know realizes that almost all dangerous situations can be avoided by vigilance, alertness and by simply making wise choices about where one goes and what one does. We don't walk down dark alleys. We lock our cars. We don't get intoxicated in public or hang out around people who do. We park our cars in well lighted spots and don't hang out in bad parts of town where we have no business. A gun is our last resort, not our first.
2. We don't think we are cops, spies, or superheros. We aren't hoping that somebody tries to rob the convenience store while we are there so we can shoot a criminal. We don't take it upon ourselves to get involved in situations that are better handled by a 911 call or by simply standing by and being a good witness. We don't believe our guns give us any authority over our fellow citizens. We also aren't there to be your unpaid volunteer bodyguard. We'll be glad to tell you where we trained and point you to some good gun shops if you feel you want to take this kind of responsibility for your personal safety. Except for extraordinary circumstances your business is your business, don't expect us to help you out of situations you could have avoided.
3. We are LESS likely, not more likely, to be involved in fights or"rage" incidents than the general public. We recognize, better than many unarmed citizens, that we are responsible for our actions. We take the responsibility of carrying a firearm very seriously. We know that loss of temper, getting into fights or angrily confronting someone after a traffic incident could easily escalate into a dangerous situation. We are more likely to go out of our way to avoid these situations. We don't pull our guns to settle arguments or to attempt to threaten people into doing what we want.
4. We are responsible gun owners. We secure our firearms so that children and other unauthorized people cannot access them. Most of us have invested in safes, cases and lock boxes as well as other security measures to keep our firearms secure. Many of us belong to various organizations that promote firearms safety and ownership.
5. Guns are not unsafe or unpredictable. Modern firearms are well made precision instruments. Pieces do not simply break off causing them to fire. A hot day will not set them off. Most modern firearms will not discharge even if dropped. There is no reason to be afraid of a gun simply laying on a table or in a holster. It is not going to discharge on its own.
6. We do not believe in the concept of "accidental discharges". There are no accidental discharges only negligent discharges or intentional discharges. We take responsibility for our actions and have learned how to safely handle firearms. Any case you have ever heard of about a gun "going off" was the result of negligence on somebody's part. Our recognition of our responsibility and familiarity with firearms makes us among the safest firearms owners in America.
7. Permit holders do their best to keep our concealed weapons exactly that: concealed. However, there are times with an observant fellow citizen may spot our firearm or the print of our firearm under our clothes. We are very cognizant that concerns about terrorism and crime are in the forefront of the minds of most citizens. We also realize that our society does much to condition our fellow citizens to have sometimes irrational fears about firearms. We would encourage citizens who do happen to spot someone carrying a firearm to use good judgment and clear thinking if they feel to need to take action. Please recognize that it's very uncommon for a criminal to use a holster. However, if you feel the need to report having spotted a firearm we would ask that you please be specific and detailed in your call to the police or in your report to a store manager or private security. Please don't generalize or sensationalize what you observed. Comments like "there's a guy running around in the store with a gun" or even simply "I saw a man with a gun in the store"could possibly cause a misunderstanding as to the true nature of the incident.
8. The fact that we carry a firearm to any given place does not mean that we believe that place to be inherently unsafe. If we believe a place to be unsafe, most of us would avoid that place all together if possible. However, we recognize that trouble could occur at any place and at any time. Criminals do not observe "gun free zones". If trouble does come, we do not want the only armed persons to be perpetrators. Therefore, we don't usually make a determination about whether or not to carry at any given time based on "how safe" we think a location is.
9. Concealed weapon permit holders are an asset to the public in times of trouble. The fact that most permit holders have the good judgment to stay out of situations better handled by a 911 call or by simply being a careful and vigilant witness does not mean that we would fail to act in situations where the use of deadly force is appropriate to save lives. Review of high profile public shooting incidents shows that when killers are confronted by armed resistance they tend to either break off the attack and flee or choose to end their own life. Lives are saved when resistance engages a violent criminal. Lives are lost when the criminal can do as he pleases.
10. The fact that criminals know that some of the population may be armed at any given time helps to deter violence against all citizens. Permit holders don't believe that every person should necessarily be armed. We recognize that some people may not be temperamentally suited to carry a firearm or simply may wish not to for personal reasons. However we do encourage you to respect our right to arm ourselves. Even if you choose not to carry a firearm yourself please oppose measures to limit the ability of law abiding citizens to be armed. As mentioned before: criminals do not observe "gun free zones".
Help by not supporting laws that require citizens to be unarmed victims.