Women Against Gun Control 2A Educational Forum

To EDUCATE re: Our Second Amendment RIGHT - Our basic fundamental human RIGHT to defend our lives, property AND Liberty, UNINFRINGED! The Second Amendment IS the Equal Rights Amendment! *************************************************************************** Dedicated to those who died 9-11-01 The Second Amendment IS Our Homeland Security! *************************************************************************** WOMEN AGAINST GUN CONTROL SUPPORTS OUR AMERICAN TROOPS!!!!!!!!!!!! GOD BLESS YOU ALL! STAY SAFE AND COME HOME SOON! OUR DEEPEST GRATITUDE FOR YOUR SERVICE AND SACRIFICES! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Armed Citizens SAVE over 2 million lives a year ..and that INCLUDES those attackers who are ARMED with just their BARE HANDS AND FISTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Columbine Co: Where innocent children and teachers could NOT do anything against a crazed student but hide under tables and pray that they wouldn't be next What Went Wrong with Columbine http://www.newswithviews.com/Pratt/larry.htm ------------- Pearl Miss: Where an armed administrator was able to save lives by retreiving his own weapon ---------- What school would YOU prefer YOUR children attend ?????????????????????? If it only SAVES one life........ DO IT FOR THE CHILDREN! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The Racist Origins of US Gun Control http://www.lizmichael.com/racistgc.htm http://www.mcsm.org/racist.html http://hematite.com/dragon/bans.html http://www.sightm1911.com/docs/whitelaw.htm http://www.potomac-inc.org/emercore.html ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The 2nd Amendment: Explained......Very good explanation of the meaning of the 2nd Amendment: http://www.sierratimes.com/03/08/07/greenslade.htm ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ "A gun is a TOOL ! NO better or no worse than any other tool, an axe, a knife a shovel or anything - YES~ even hands and fists! A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. REMEMBER THAT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


FW: Gun Law Update

by WAGC

FW: Gun Law Update
Date: Aug 18, 2006 12:43 AM
Hey gun owners,
If you think the Democrats have repented of wanting to grab yer
guns; check out this list of Demos who refuse to promise not to grab yer
guns during an "emergency." Pancho V.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gunlawupdates@gunlaws.com
[owner-gunlawupdates@gunlaws.com] On Behalf Of alan@gunlaws.com
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 9:34 PM
To: gunlawupdates@gunlaws.com
Subject: Gun Law Update

GUN LAW UPDATE
GUN LAW UPDATE


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Permission to circulate granted


by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America

August 17, 2006


TEXAS
Complete lists of changes for Texas and Arizona are now posted. Texas saw 83
changes since the last (fifth) edition of The Texas Gun Owner's Guide -- a
whopping 13% increase in the amount of gun law. Most of it is good news. The
BRAND NEW Sixth Edition has all the changes, is due out this week, and the
first people to order will receive autographed copies. See the changes here:
http://www.gunlaws.com/tgogup3.htm
See the new edition: http://www.gunlaws.com/tgog.htm


ARIZONA
Arizona saw changes to 17 key statutes, most of which were excellent. The
state now recognizes virtually all legally issued firearm permits, a strong
Castle Doctrine is in place, and more. Most intriguing new law -- it's now
illegal to interfere with a hunt by putting yourself in the line of fire.
Sheeesh.
See the changes here:
http://www.gunlaws.com/AGOG2006.htm
See the new edition: http://www.gunlaws.com/agog.htm


NATIONAL RKBA
The Better-Late-Than-Never Dept.: In mid July, 16 U.S. Senators violated
their oath of office ("to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution"),
by voting to allow the government to confiscate your personal firearms
during an emergency. It's a familiar list of suspects:

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)

With lawlessness run amok after the Katrina disaster, these officials'
response is to disarm the victims and leave them defenseless. Fortunately,
the "Vitter Amendment" passed in the Senate overwhelmingly, due to intense
anger over the illegal gun-confiscations, executed door-to-door against
innocent homeowners, by heavily armed government perpetrators, "acting on
orders."

The perps have not been arrested, though some of the guns they took by force
have been returned. This should never happen in a free country. The fact
that the perpetrators are known, yet still at large, is a national disgrace.


INTERNATIONAL RKBA
They're Back: International Effort to Ban Your Guns Continues

Seven Nations Start New Push for UN Arms Trade Treaty

With Input From Reuters, Dateline--Geneva: Seven nations launched an effort
in July to start new negotiations on a United Nations treaty setting
international rules for the global trade in conventional weapons, almost
immediately after a similar effort in New York ended.

The seven perpetrators -- Argentina, Australia, Britain, Costa Rica,
Finland, Japan and Kenya -- made the move at the quietly staged Geneva
Conference on Disarmament, by circulating a proposal to raise the issue at
the United Nations in New York later this year.

An earlier effort in July to use the U.N. as part of a global gun-control
plan ended in disarray, without achieving any infringements. This was hailed
as a success by gun-rights activists and derided by Reuters and other "news"
media as a complete failure.

"We propose that the United Nations begin work on this important issue as
soon as possible by establishing a Group of Government Experts," ambassadors
of the seven said in a letter to the conference. The idea that government,
the main perpetrator of genocide throughout history, could assemble experts
who could legitimately review the needs and gun-rights of the world's
citizens was not called into question.

A British statement said the proposed pact would be "a legally binding
instrument establishing common international standards for the import,
export and transfer of conventional arms through an International Arms Trade
Treaty." The effect of such a treaty on the Second Amendment right to keep
and bear arms was not addressed. This surprised no one, as the effort to gut
the traditional American right to arms was pushed ahead.

Arms import and export is already heavily regulated by national governments,
using a wide array of agencies and enforcement mechanisms. "Transfer,"
however, implies sales and possession by individuals, and may pose the
gravest threat to people's rights by unelected international power brokers.

Britain's former foreign secretary Jack Straw set out his ideas on such an
accord in March last year and British diplomats have been active in
promoting it. The British first tried to disarm Americans more than two
centuries ago, leading to the American Revolution and establishment of the
linchpin of personal freedom on the planet.

In the letter, the seven nations said that although there had been some
steps to deal with specific aspects of the trade in, and use of,
conventional weaponry in recent years, the treaty they sought would provide
"an agreed regulatory framework." In other words, they would put someone
in
charge, with enforcement power. Whether this meant that the nations of Earth
would agree to be controlled by an international body when it came to their
own arms is considered doubtful. Exercise of dominion over their citizens
seemed much more likely, adding the force of international "authority"
to
their own.

The proposal, in the form of a draft resolution to set up the so-called
"expert" group, will be presented in October to the U.N.'s First Committee,
which deals with disarmament and international security. A copy of the draft
proposal and proposed "experts" was not immediately available. The U.N.
is
not subject to Freedom of Information laws.

The group, if established, will examine the feasibility of a treaty and
draft an outline text, diplomats said. According to the British statement,
the move reflected the commitment of the seven, "to reducing the
unrestrained spread of conventional weapons, which in turn fuel conflict and
hinder development across the globe." The accuracy of that statement went
unchallenged.

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



Check out my new blog on news media accuracy:
http://www.PageNine.org
Sign up for automatic RSS feeds!
Gun Law Updates included.



We've got NOVELS!
After decades of providing facts,
we're lightening up with gun-oriented novels that the mainstream generally
ignores -- and are totally exhilarating!
"Rekindles the American Spirit."
http://www.gunlaws.com/books7novels

What would happen if the Founders returned today?
Read "Tempus Fugit" --A stunning achievement
http://www.gunlaws.com/books7novels



Contact:
Alan Korwin
Bloomfield Press
"We publish the gun laws."
4718 E. Cactus #440
Phoenix, AZ 85032
602-996-4020 Phone
602-494-0679 Fax
1-800-707-4020 Orders
http://www.gunlaws.com
alan@gunlaws.com
Call, write, fax or click for free full-color catalog

If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you're reading this in English, thank a veteran.


Posted on Aug 18, 2006, 1:37 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Armed citizens Deter crime and save lives !

by Armed citizens Deter crime and save lives !

OR) Salem police say shooting death likely self-defense
Date: May 30, 2006 11:02 PM
http://159.54.226.83/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060426/NEWS/604260303



(FL) Off-duty officer shoots, kills gator in his backyard
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:34 PM
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060610/NEWS/606100384/1419/RSS04


(TN) Man Shoots in Self-Defense, Police Say
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:35 PM
http://www.newschannel5.com/content/news/20029.asp


(IL) Korea vet had surprise for intruder
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:38 PM
http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/local/14832301.htm



(FL) Man turns table, gun on intruder
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:40 PM
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060619/NEWS/606190497/1006/SPORTS




(NC) Possible Self-Defense In One Of Fort Washington Deaths
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:43 PM
http://wusa9.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=48688


(AL) Teen shot in self defense, police say
Date: Jul 23, 2006 9:42 PM
http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060623/NEWS/60623003/0/NEWS02






Posted on Aug 17, 2006, 8:06 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Judge Rejects Motion to Dismiss SAF Lawsuit Against New Orleans

by WAGC

Judge Rejects Motion to Dismiss SAF Lawsuit Against New Orleans
Date: Aug 16, 2006 6:45 PM




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


NEWS RELEASE
JUDGE REJECTS MOTION TO DISMISS SAF LAWSUIT AGAINST NEW ORLEANS
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) today won a key battle in an on-going lawsuit against the City of New Orleans, when a federal judge rejected the city’s motion to dismiss the case.

SAF took New Orleans to court last year to stop illegal confiscation of firearms from private citizens in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Defendants in the case are the city, Mayor Ray Nagin and Police Superintendent Warren Riley. SAF was joined in the historic lawsuit by the National Rifle Association. Both organizations have members living in New Orleans.

The ruling was issued by Judge Carl Barbier of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. He ordered the city to submit a response to the original lawsuit.

“We’re encouraged by this latest ruling,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “For almost a year, we’ve been fighting the city’s delay tactics, which included outright lying by city officials that any firearms had been seized. Only when we threatened Mayor Nagin and Superintendent Riley with a motion for contempt did the city miraculously discover that they actually did have more than 1,000 firearms that had been taken from their owners.

“We’re moving ahead with this lawsuit not only to protect the rights of gun owners in New Orleans,” Gottlieb continued, “but to also make sure that this serves as a warning to public officials across the country to forget about seizing firearms from their law-abiding owners in the event of a natural or man-made disaster.

“The next step will include getting an accurate inventory of all confiscated firearms still in the city’s possession,” Gottlieb stated. “We’re not going to rest until every one of those guns is back in the hands of its rightful owner, and the city understands that it cannot defy a federal court order, state law or the Louisiana and federal constitutional provisions that guarantee the individual right to keep and bear arms.

“We’re fighting to make sure this kind of outrage will never again happen on American soil,” he concluded.


-END-



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >


Posted on Aug 16, 2006, 9:03 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


JPFO ALERT: Another Back Door to "Gun Control"

by Nancy

JPFO ALERT: Another Back Door to "Gun Control"
Date: Aug 15, 2006 4:54 PM
ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

August 15, 2006

JPFO ALERT: Another Back Door to "Gun Control"

We're hearing more and more about the possibility of
combining the US, Canada, and Mexico into a new entity
similar to the European Union. A key part of this "North
American Union" (aka "North American Community") would
expand NAFTA to include a court system that would have
supremacy over all US law (even the Supreme Court!) in
"...any matter related to the trilateral political and
economic integration" of the three countries. (1)

Details on this North American "superstate" are sketchy at
best. Requests for information submitted through the Freedom
of Information Act have been stonewalled according to the
online news 'zine WorldNetDaily. (2) But its existence is
more than a black-helicopter conspiracy theory: a super
highway system is already in the advanced planning stages.(3)
Nearly a quarter-mile wide, it will run through the heart of
the U.S. from the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas, to the
Canadian border north of Duluth, Minnesota. With the Supreme
Court rulings that your house can be "eminent-domained" for
nearly any reason (including replacing it with a Dairy Queen),
this monstronsity will undoubtedly displace thousands of
American families, maybe even yours.

This is an obvious first step toward global government, but
it is also a back door for more "gun control." Two of the
three nations are very much against civilian ownership of
firearms; it's not unreasonable to expect that laws regarding
firearm ownership would be expanded to better "consolidate"
and "standardize" regulations within the three countries.

Not possible, you say? Really? In a recent discussion between
U.S. Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer
at AU Washington College of Law, Justice Breyer -- defending
the citation of foreign court cases in US court decisions --
stated, "[F]or years people all over the world have cited the
Supreme Court, why don't we cite them occasionally?" (4)

In other words, let's see what a judge in Zimbabwe ... or
Germany ... or the UK ... thinks about firearms, free speech,
state surveillance, or torture. And if we like it, we'll use
it to "interpret" the US Constitution.

The implications are chilling.

The NAU plan is just a plan at the moment. As of this time,
the three countries have settled on a "Security and Prosperity
Partnership"(5) that promotes inter-agency cooperation for such
areas as public health, intellectual property, and the like. But
make no mistake: the NAU is coming soon ... and your right to
bear arms is certainly on their list.

Don't forget that this new North American superstate is going
to need a police force to take your guns. And who better
qualified -- and better motivated -- than the BATFE? Visit
www.thegangmovie.com for more information on this organization,
and our efforts to abolish it BEFORE they become even more
Draconian and too powerful.

- The Liberty Crew

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

(1) North American Union Would Trump U.S. Supreme Court
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15623

(2) Feds Stonewallying on "Superstate" Plan?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51132

(3) Bush Administration Quietly Plans NAFTA Super Highway
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497

(4) Transcript of Discussion Between U.S. Supreme Court Justices
Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer -- AU Washington College
of Law, Jan. 13
http://tinyurl.com/666k3

(5) Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America
http://www.spp.gov/

============================================================

JPFO mirror site: http://www.jpfo.net


Posted on Aug 15, 2006, 7:17 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


CCRKBA Says Anti-Gunners&#146; Predictions About Ohio CCW Were Lies

by Nancy

CCRKBA Says Anti-Gunners’ Predictions About Ohio CCW Were Lies
Date: Aug 15, 2006 5:02 PM




NEWS RELEASE
CCRKBA SAYS ANTI-GUNNERS’ PREDICTIONS ABOUT OHIO CCW WERE LIES
BELLEVUE, WA – Thanks to a remark by Robert Cornwell, executive director of the Buckeye State Sheriff’s Association, it is now clear that the gloom-and-doom predictions about licensed concealed carry in Ohio were all lies, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) said today.

Cornwell was quoted by the Associated Press noting, “Those with the concealed carry licenses have been good, law-abiding citizens. The worst-case scenarios that were put out there about the gunfight at the OK Corral didn’t come to fruition.”

“That’s the way it always is,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “The wild-eyed forecasts of blood in the streets never come true. Of course, anti-gunners who traditionally fight such laws know this, which means that they aren’t simply wrong in their predictions, they are liars.”

CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron noted that the Buckeye State Sheriff’s Association has reached the same conclusion other honest, open-minded law enforcement officials have about such laws in other states.

“Given the test of time,” Waldron said, “concealed carry laws give gun owners a chance not only to fight back, but also to prove to skeptics and the media that they are responsible citizens. At the end of the day, opponents of self-defense have only emotion and falsehood on which to base their prejudice against armed private citizens.”

“Demagogues in two states, Wisconsin and Illinois, continue to treat gun owners as second-class citizens,” Gottlieb observed. “Time and again, their opposition to concealed carry laws can be summed up as nothing more than social bigotry against individual reliance and self-defense. Why anti-gunners like Governors Jim Doyle in Wisconsin and Rod Blagojevich in Illinois get a pass from the press on this issue is a mystery.

“Ohio’s experience once again proves that law-abiding citizens who arm themselves for personal protection are not a threat to the police or the public,” Gottlieb concluded. “To say otherwise by perpetuating this ‘Wild West’ myth is dishonest and deplorable.”


-END-


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


< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >


Posted on Aug 15, 2006, 7:17 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


THE WAR, PLEASE READ

by Anonymous

THE WAR, PLEASE READ
Date: Aug 13, 2006 8:42 PM

long but worth reading...

THE WAR

Please take the time to read the attached essay by Dr. Chong. It is without a doubt the most articulate and convincing writing I have read regarding the War in Iraq. If you have any doubts please open your mind to his essay and give a fair evaluation.

I had no idea who Dr. Chong is or the source of these thoughts... so when I received them, I almost deleted them - as well-written as they are. But then I did a "Google search" on the Doctor and found him to be a retired Air Force Surgeon of all things and past Commander of Wilford Hall Medical Center in San Antonio. So he is real, is connected to Veterans affairs in California, and these are his thoughts. They are worth reading and thinking about!(the same Google search will direct you to some of his other thought-provoking writings.)

Subject: Muslims, terrorist and the USA. A different spin on Iraq war.

This WAR is for REAL! Dr. Vernon Chong, Major General, USAF, Retired

Tuesday, July 12, 2005
To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country
is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it,
that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII).

The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are
very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who
realize what losing really means.

First, let's examine a few basics:

1. When did the threat to us start?
Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United State
is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the
following attacks on us:

* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979;
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983;
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983;
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988;
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993;
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996;
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998;
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998;
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000;
* New York World Trade Center 2001;
* Pentagon 2001.

(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist
attacks worldwide).

2. Why were we attacked?

Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.

3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.

4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.

5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the
predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm < http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm>; )

Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others.

Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else.
The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no
protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?

6. So who are we at war with?

There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.

So with that background, now to the two major questions:

1. Can we lose this war?

2. What does losing really mean?

If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions

We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?

It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get.

What losing really means is:

We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly, for terrorist to attack us, until we were neutered and submissive to them.

We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see, we are impotent and cannot help them.

They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.

The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!

If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else?

The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.

Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.

So, how can we lose the war?

Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!

Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.

President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.

And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.

Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?

No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.

Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the
Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.

Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.

And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type of enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq.

And still more recently, the same type of enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners they held.

Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.

Can this be for real?

The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the
Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of
comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.

To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner
issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned --
totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.

Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United State, but throughout the world.

We are the last bastion of defense.

We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!

We can't!

If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive,
and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.

And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.

This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire . If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.

If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve.
Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?

Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.

And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.

They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?

I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are
united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.

After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world

Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that include the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!

Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our "leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too. There are those that find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE!

If you would like to see who this fellow is go to this Air Force web
sight and look him up. http://www.af.mil/bios/alpha.asp?alpha < http://www.af.mil/bios/alpha.asp?alpha=C>;






MAJOR GENERAL (DR.) VERNON CHONG



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


Bio Tools

Printable bio



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




Retired Nov. 1, 1994.

Major General (Dr.) Vernon Chong is the command surgeon, Headquarters U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany. He advises the commander in chief on all medical matters and health issues that may affect the readiness of military forces in the command. He is responsible for establishing policies for the employment of theater medical resources during crisis, contingency and humanitarian relief operations. Also, he coordinates and integrates medical support activities and develops theater medical plans.

The general entered the Air Force in October 1963 following the completion of a residency in general surgery. He was certified by the American Board of Surgery in April 1964. He has commanded three Air Force medical centers, served as command surgeon of two major air commands, and was commander of the Joint Military Medical Command, San Antonio. The general is a chief flight surgeon, and was a surgeon/flight surgeon member of the DOD launch site recovery team for 15 space launches during the Apollo, Skylab and Apollo-Soyuz programs.

EDUCATION
1955 Bachelor of arts degree in basic medical sciences, Stanford University
1958 Doctor of medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine
1963 Board qualification in general surgery, General Hospital of Fresno County

ASSIGNMENTS
1 October 1963 - June 1965, staff general surgeon and chief of general surgery service, USAF Hospital Scott, Scott Air Force Base, Ill.
2. June 1965 - June 1968, staff general surgeon, later director of intern and resident education, USAF Hospital Tachikawa, Tachikawa Air Base, Japan
3. June 1968 - June 1970, staff general surgeon and instructor in general surgery residency, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
4. June 1970 - June 1974, staff general surgeon, chairman department of surgery, and director of hospital services, USAF Academy Hospital, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo.
5. June 1974 - August 1976, staff general surgeon, director of hospital services, and deputy commander, USAF Regional Hospital March, March Air Force Base, Calif.
6. September 1976 - October 1978, staff general surgeon, director of hospital services, and deputy commander, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
7. October 1978 - November 1981, commander, David Grant USAF Medical Center, Travis Air Force Base, Calif.
8. November 1981 - March 1985, commander, Malcolm Grow USAF Medical Center, Andrews Air Force Base, Md.
9. March 1985 - February 1987, command surgeon, Headquarters Military Airlift Command, Scott Air Force Base, Calif.
10. February 1987 - May 1990, commander, Wilford Hall USAF Medical Center, Lackland Air Force Base, Texas
11. May 1990 - August 1991, command surgeon, Headquarters Air Training Command, and commander, Joint Military Medical Command, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas
12. August 1991 - present, command surgeon, Headquarters U.S. European Command, Stuttgart, Germany

FLIGHT INFORMATION
Rating: Chief flight surgeon
Flight hours: More than 1,600
Aircraft flown: C-141, KC-135, C-130, T-29, C-5, T-39, C-21, C-12, C-9A, T-33, T-38, H-53, H-3, UH-1

MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS
Distinguished Service Medal
Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster
Meritorious Service Medal
Air Force Commendation Medal
National Defense Service Medal
Vietnam Service Medal
Order of Merit-Brazil
Gold Cross of Honor-Germany

OTHER ACHIEVEMENTS
Order of the Sword - bestowed by enlisted personnel of Air Training Command
Clinical professor of surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center-San Antonio
Ira C. Eaker fellow - Air Force Association, Aerospace Education Foundation
Board of Governors, American College of Surgeons
Board of Regents, National Library of Medicine
Board of Regents, adviser, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Board of Trustees, Air Force Village Foundation
Board of Directors, Alamo Chapter, American Red Cross, San Antonio

EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTION
Captain Oct 14, 1963
Major Dec 15, 1966
Lieutenant Colonel Aug 8, 1968
Colonel Jun 15, 1973
Brigadier General Oct 1, 1982
Major General Apr 15, 1987

(Current as of May 1994)




Posted on Aug 13, 2006, 8:59 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Armed TN Hero Gets Faint Praise From Memphis Cop

by Armed citizens Deter crime and save lives !

Armed TN Hero Gets Faint Praise From Memphis Cop
Date: Aug 12, 2006 11:55 AM
The "surrender to your attacker" thought process is touted by the Memphis PD.
A silly and dangerous concept, correctly rejected by a courageous citizen.

The New GUN WEEK, August 10, 2006
Page 6

Armed TN Hero Gets Faint Praise From Memphis Cop

An armed citizen in Memphis, TN, who intervened in a bloody
July 21 knife attack by a grocery store employee got faint
praise from local police, despite the fact that his actions
may have prevented further mayhem.

According to The Memphis Commercial Appeal and Associated
Press (AP), the suspect in this crime faces nine counts of
attempted first-degree murder. He was identified as
Elartrice “Marcell” Ingram, 21. The man who grabbed a 9mm
pistol from his pickup truck and brought the stabbings to a
halt was identified as Chris Cope, a manager at a Beneficial
Finance service office near the store where the crimes
occurred.

Cope was quoted by AP as noting, “When he (Ingram) turned
and saw my pistol, he threw the knife away, put his hands up
and got on the ground. He saw my gun and that was pretty
much it.”

But while Memphis Police Sgt. Vince Higgins commended
Cope’s actions, he added, “We don’t encourage people to take
that kind of risk. He could have been hurt.”

By the time Cope intervened, several other people had
already been hurt, and Cope stopped it according to one of
the victims, Justin Murchison. He told The Commercial
Appeal that if Cope had not stepped in, “I’d be dead.”
Murchison was one of several people who fled the Cordova
Schnucks store with the suspect hot on their heels. When
Murchison finally could not run anymore, he reportedly
turned to face Ingram, and a moment later, Cope had the
suspect at gunpoint, on the ground.

Authorities said the attack apparently grew out of a work
dispute, and that all the victims were store employees.

Posted on Aug 12, 2006, 1:21 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Man (properly) denies gun charge after killing attacker

by WAGC

The prosecutor wants to send the message "No armed
citizens defending themselves around here!" THIS is
exactly why it is necessary to fight this gun control
nonsense.

http://www.rochesterdandc.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060810/NEWS01/608100370/1002/NEWS

"Laws provide against injury from others, but not from
ourselves." --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776
************************************************************
Man denies gun charge after killing attacker

Michael Zeigler
Staff writer

(August 10, 2006) — When Matthew L. McDonald tried to rob
Stuart D. Miles at gunpoint, Miles responded by shooting and
killing McDonald with a .38-caliber revolver.

Now Miles is in trouble for illegally possessing the gun he
used in self-defense.

Miles, 25, pleaded not guilty Wednesday to second- and
third-degree criminal possession of a weapon in connection
with the May 1 slaying of McDonald, 18, on Jefferson Avenue.

If convicted, Miles could be imprisoned up to 15 years.

Monroe County Court Judge Patricia D. Marks ordered him held
without bail in County Jail.

Miles was walking down Jefferson Avenue near Champlain
Street when he heard someone walk up behind him, rack a
pistol twice and order Miles to "up your chain" and "run
your pockets," said Miles' lawyer, Robert A. Shapiro.

Miles turned and saw McDonald pointing what appeared to be a
pistol. Miles pulled out his own gun and fired twice,
killing McDonald.

McDonald's weapon turned out to be a BB gun.

But Miles couldn't tell that as he was looking down its
barrel, Shapiro said.

Prosecutors presented a charge of second-degree murder to a
grand jury, which refused to indict him on that charge, said
Assistant District Attorney Paul Irving.

Posted on Aug 12, 2006, 8:44 AM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


homeowner defends wife baby from home

by Armed citizens Deter crime and save lives !

homeowner defends wife baby from home
invasion


> One suspect DRT, one wounded as a kick entry into a man's home
> at 130 in the morning resulted in the man defending himself, his wife
> and his 15-month old child.
>
> Story here:
> http://tinyurl.com/mbmwc
>
> Per the news story, police were still on the scene investigating the
> incident.
> The wounded suspect has been identified, police are still trying to
> figure
> out who the dead suspect is.
>
> "When you are in your home and someone armed with a weapon kicks their
> way into your home," explained Kammie Michael, with the Durham Police
> Deptartment, "you have the right to defend yourself."

Posted on Aug 11, 2006, 5:39 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


WAGC - FWD GOA ALert--An Excellent Day at the Polls

by WAGC

An Excellent Day at the Polls
Date: Aug 10, 2006 6:05 PM
Victory For Gun Owners!
-- Anti-gun incumbent defeated in Michigan;
Pro-gun champion wins in Colorado

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

August 10, 2006


Gun Owners of America members and supporters won two huge victories
on Tuesday.

In Michigan's 7th Congressional District, Tim Walberg defeated
anti-gun incumbent Joe Schwarz.

Joe Schwarz does not believe the Second Amendment is an individual
right; he opposed concealed carry in the state of Michigan; and he
voted in favor of mandatory trigger locks when he came to Washington.


Former state representative Tim Walberg has a long and consistent
record of supporting gun rights without wavering.

Gun Owners of America's Political Victory Fund was the only national
pro-gun organization to support Walberg.

Incumbents are rarely defeated; over 90% are reelected, and most
never face a serious challenge. This race was different, though,
because concerned gun owners got involved and helped push Walberg
over the top.

In Colorado's 5th Congressional District, pro-gun champion Doug
Lamborn eked out a narrow victory. Doug's proactive legislative
record as a state senator is truly impressive.

In twelve years in office, Doug Lamborn carried pro-gun bills or
amendments virtually every year on issues such as his recent
stand-your-ground bill (which would give law-abiding citizens more
rights to self defense on their own property, place of business and
in their vehicle) and Vermont-style carry (allowing law-abiding
citizens to carry concealed firearms without the government's often
onerous restrictions).

As a Congressman, Doug Lamborn will continue his steadfast support of
the Second Amendment.

Thank you to the thousands of members who responded to the GOA
e-mails and sent contributions to the Walberg and Lamborn campaigns!

GOA supporters deserve a heartfelt thank you and congratulations for
engaging in these battles and coming out victorious!

Sincerely,

Tim Macy
Vice-Chairman

Posted on Aug 11, 2006, 4:53 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


UN: Big rise in knife crime despite tougher penalties

by WAGC

UN: Big rise in knife crime despite tougher penalties
Date: Aug 10, 2006 7:29 AM


*******Until the perpetrators of crime are dealt with effectively
no amount of regulating the instruments they use will
deter crime. This is not rocket science.*****************************

FYI (copy below):
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article1217822.ece

Big rise in knife crime despite tougher penalties
By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent
Published: 09 August 2006


Levels of knife crime have soared over the past year,
figures published today show, prompting claims that the
Government has failed to tackle the menace of violent crime.

The number of muggers using knives leapt from 24,290 to
42,020 in 2005-06, an increase of 73 per cent. And the
total of other robberies in which knives were brandished
jumped by 59 per cent, from 25,500 to 40,430.

A criminal justice thinktank, which released the figures,
calculates that as many as 57,900 young people could have
been stabbed over the past year. The research said a
"significant minority" of schoolchildren and young adults
carried knives and "this problem may be growing".

It stressed that knife crime had fallen since the mid-1990s,
but had experienced an unexpected upturn in the past 12
months.

The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (CCSJ) warns that
tougher penalties for carrying knives and the recent weapons
amnesty may be futile in combating violence on the streets.

Ministers are accused of lacking a coherent strategy for
dealing with knife attacks, resorting instead to
eye-catching initiatives that fail to tackle the underlying
causes of crime.

The stinging report follows the recent murders in London of
the schoolboy Kiyan Prince and the off-duty special
constable Nisha Patel-Nasri.

The Home Office announced tougher penalties for carrying
knives and more than 100,000 blades were handed in to police
stations in a summer knife amnesty. But the CCSJ protests
that there has been little research on why young people
carry weapons, and no evidence that recent initiatives will
have any impact on crime rates.

Chris Eades, the author of the report, said: "The
Government is constructing responses without any credible
evidence that they will be successful. Knife amnesties will
have a negligible impact since knives will be available as
long as there is unsliced bread."

He said the Home Office should investigate the "root causes"
of the crime - "the inclination or desire to resort to
violence".

The CCSJ warns that carrying a knife is "not unusual",
particularly among young men, but little more is known about
its frequency. It says the level of violence involving
knives has fallen over the past decade, with a rise in the
past year. It says that what little research exists
suggests that people living in poor areas and members of
ethnic minority communities are more likely to become
victims of knife crime.

David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said: "This is an
indictment of the Government's failure to tackle the growing
problem of knife crime. It completely undermines Labour's
claims to be tough on crime."

A Home Office spokesman said: "Tackling knife crime is a
government priority. That's why we pursue a coherent
strategy with three strands: prevention, education and
enforcement. Carrying a knife is illegal and will not be
tolerated.

"People may think carrying a knife makes them feel safe, but
in fact it increases the risk of having it turned on them."
The Government has said it will increase the maximum penalty
for carrying a knife in public without good reason from two
to four years. It is also increasing the minimum age at
which knives can be bought from 16 to 18, and is giving
headteachers the power to search pupils for dangerous
weapons.

Richard Garside, acting director of the Centre for Crime and
Justice Studies, said: "This report points out just how
much we still don't know about knife-related offences, their
causes and solutions.

"Knives are but one means by which people assault and injure
one another. We need to address why individuals get into
violent confrontations with each other, and not simply
fixate on the weapons they use."

Posted on Aug 11, 2006, 4:51 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


CCW classes on 12th and 19th

by WAGC

CCW classes on 12th and 19th
Date: Aug 9, 2006 2:28 PM
Compatriots,
Because we had some students who could only take the class on the
12th and other students who could only take on the 19th, I have decided to
"bite the bullet" and hold the class on both days (gee, whatta nice guy!)
BUT because of a prior commitment on the 19th, I can't begin that class
until 12:30 pm (right after noon). It will go from 12:30pm until about 4pm
in the classroom and then from 4:30 to 6pm on the range (see map and address
at wahsatchshooters.com). Please email me back and let me know which class
you will be in, whether you need guns or bullets (no charge if yer satisfied
to shoot a .22 revolver or my wife's 9mm).

Please note again: class on 19th will be from 12:30 pm until about
6pm (I can accommodate shooters who can't go to the range by special
appointment if necessary, if you have "honey do's" on Sat evening).
But
please RSVP asap so I can get a feel for the number of students in each
class.

I just checked the lists I send to and noticed some of you are on
the list multiple times. Sorry for the hassle, I'll try to remedy that by
combining lists as soon as I get a break. If you don't want emails from me
in the future, please let me know (in a kind way so you don't hurt my
sensitive feelings!) Mitch


James D. "Mitch" Vilos
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 1148
Centerville, Utah 84014
Local Tel.No.: (801)295-3340
Mobile: (801)560-7117
1(800)530-0222
Practice Concentrating in Accidents and Personal Injury, Insurance Law,
Medical Malpractice, Defective Products, Workplace Injuries (not Worker's
Compensation), and Firearms Law (representation of gun owners in criminal
actions, and expungements).


Posted on Aug 9, 2006, 7:10 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Guns are cool - U pistol marksmanship class will most likely save my life

by WAGC

The Daily Utah Chronicle, July 31, 2006

Guns are cool
U pistol marksmanship class will most likely save my life
By: Libby Bailey
Issue date: 7/31/06 Section: Opinion




Guns are cool. I know, I should be more articulate than a 12-year-old boy, but they are cool.

As a former firearm-phobe, aside from my toils with Nintendo's "Duck Hunt," I can admit my distrust for a weapon that has the ability to kill or maim someone. Guns-particularly handguns-had always been something that I was warned against, and I had always associated them with criminals and 7-Eleven robberies.

Therefore, it came as quite a surprise that my mother, of all people, suggested I enroll in the U's pistol marksmanship summer course. After all, she was probably the one who told me guns were bad in the first place.

According to her rationale, knowing how to safely operate a gun would save me from getting shot someday in an after-school-special setting. She believed that one day I would find myself over at a friend's house, in her garage, and my friend would have secretly stolen her father's gun to impress me.

My hypothetical friend would then start to fling the revolver around her finger, cowboy-Western style, making me uncomfortable, but I would be too uneducated about guns to confidently tell her that this twirling was not a good idea. Eventually, peer pressure and a lack of firearm knowledge would cause one of us to get shot in the thigh and bleed out, just like on TV.

Although my mother may have been jumping the gun (pun completely intended), I at least recognized some value in her prophecy. Who knows when I might come into contact with a firearm?

If most of the movies I see are correct, at some point in my female adult life a gun will be jolted out of some bad guy's hand by a male rescuer, slide across the sidewalk, spinning uncontrollably, and ultimately land right in front of my high-heeled shoes. At this point, I will clumsily pick it up, aim at the bad guy incorrectly and say something tough, only to have the bad guy laugh in my face. Following the hilarity that ensues, I'll get kidnapped or someone will get killed because I had been taught guns weren't cool, but scary.

In preparation for my inevitable damsel-in-distress, clumsy-gun moment, I took my mother's suggestion and signed up for the summer course. I had never shot or touched a gun before, but it didn't matter since the makeup of the class was rather well-rounded. Students ranged from expert assassins to Barney Fife. Every level of expertise seemed welcome.

Despite the course's accommodating ways, the U's pistol markspersonship class (I suggest we all lobby for the gender-neutral name change) is one of the most dropped classes at the U, said a likely inaccurate registrar office employee.

This disappoints me.

Aside from the potential to avoid bleeding out from a gunshot wound to the thigh, pistol markspersonship is also the kind of class that will impress someone you are chatting up at a party, kind of like the world of dinosaurs class. People become bored hearing the entire U student body describe a schedule that consists of math, science and English. Pistol markspersonship ignites conversation and interest.

Conversation topics can range from the sheer unconventionality a student demonstrates by enrolling in the course to a discussion about fire-range fashion-which can focus on why a student would choose that particular tint of protective eyeglass wear-to perhaps the serious decision of earplugs versus earmuffs. Regardless, it's something new and uncharted for your party trivia.

If that does not persuade you, enrolling in the class also gives you that long-awaited excuse to roll into Sportsman's Warehouse and feel as though you belong.

Regardless of what draws you in, stick with it because it is a surprisingly rewarding class; and frankly, people, you get to shoot guns, and that's just plain cool.

Posted on Aug 9, 2006, 7:10 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Gun-wielding Senior Citizen foils carjacker

by Armed citizens save lives and deter crimes

Gun-wielding Senior Citizen foils carjacker
Date: Aug 7, 2006 8:50 PM
Just because we're old doesn't mean we're not armed.
FYI (copy below):
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060805-084419-2719r

Posted on Aug 7, 2006, 9:52 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


CCRKBA Says Detroit Gun 'Buy Back' May Help Some Killers Escape Justice

by WAGC

CCRKBA Says Detroit Gun 'Buy Back' May Help Some Killers Escape Justice
Date: Aug 4, 2006 6:22 PM




NEWS RELEASE
CCRKBA SAYS DETROIT GUN ‘BUY BACK’ MAY HELP SOME KILLERS ESCAPE JUSTICE
BELLEVUE, WA – A gun “buy back” staged this week by the Detroit, Mich. Police was so successful that it ran out of money, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) is concerned that it may have allowed some criminals to successfully get rid of their murder weapons.

“All of the guns taken in by this project will be melted down, no questions asked,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan M. Gottlieb. “That’s just swell. Detroit homicides are up 17 percent so far this year, and this program just might be letting some killer destroy the evidence that could put him or her behind bars. Brilliant, just brilliant!”

The Associated Press reported that as of July 31, there were 237 homicides in the Motor City. That’s up from 203 for the same period last year. If the pattern continues, there could be more than 400 murders by the end of this year.

“The Detroit News and Detroit Free Press both are reporting how delighted the police are that they’re getting such a great response to the gun turn-in program,” Gottlieb observed. “If you had killed somebody and the cops were promising to take your gun, no questions asked, and turn it into a boat anchor or something, you would definitely want to put a smile on the nearest cop’s face, especially if you got between $50 and $200 in the swap.

“We’re not sure what Police Chief Ella Bully-Cummings is thinking,” he added, “but she can’t be considering the possibility that a killer, or maybe several killers, are anonymously getting rid of the key piece of evidence that could link them to a violent crime.

“Aside from the fact that the term ‘buy back’ erroneously suggests that these guns were ever the property of the city, paying for surrendered firearms without even checking whether they and the people turning them in may be linked to a crime is monumentally stupid,” Gottlieb marveled. “We’ve watched this phenomenon for years in many cities, and every time, the backers of these publicity stunts indicate it is more important to get guns off the street than to possibly catch some criminal. That is both absurd and outrageous. People who fund these programs are proud of themselves when they ought to be ashamed.”


-END-


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


< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >


Posted on Aug 5, 2006, 9:29 AM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Kids and Gun safety: An excellent place for kids to learn gun safety

by Nancy

don't child proof the gun, they may save your life one day........ Gun proof the child........ teach 'em gun safety!

http://www.savetheguns.com/for_kids_only.htm

Posted on Aug 4, 2006, 3:51 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


JPFO ALERT: When Will They Learn?

by WAGC

JPFO ALERT: When Will They Learn?
Date: Aug 4, 2006 1:16 PM
ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

August 4, 2006

JPFO ALERT: When Will They Learn?

It's been nearly a week since the tragic July 28 shooting
spree at a Seattle Jewish center which left one dead and
several injured ( http://tinyurl.com/emwer ). Undoubtedly,
"gun control" advocates will start crawling out of the
woodwork in short order to use this atrocity to lobby for
yet more restrictions on firearms ownership. Sadly, many
of these advocates will be members of the Jewish community.

Only one person was armed during this shooting: the
shooter himself, who chose to ignore all of the laws he
was breaking. The law-abiding innocents in the center had
no ability to defend themselves.

"Call the police!" say the gun-prohibitionists. "That's
what they're there for!"

Not true.

As we document in our book, _Dial 911 and Die_
( www.jpfo.org/dial911anddie.htm ), police in Washington
state have NO duty to protect you. Don't believe us?
Here's an excerpt from the book:

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

Washington falls in the category of "die first, sue later"
jurisdictions. In that state, the police are not immune
from being sued. In fact, a Washington statute requires
that the sheriff and deputies "shall keep and preserve
the peace" and "arrest...all persons who break the peace,
or attempt to break it." Under that statute, however,
government owes the duty to provide police protection to
the public at large, not to individuals [Chambers Castanes,
669 P.2d at 457; Beal v City of Seattle, 954 P.2d 234 (Wash.
App. 1998)(en banc)(same rule).]

Washington courts have regularly interpreted the law to
allow injured citizens and the heirs of dead citizens to
sue police departments for the negligence of their officers.
Under Washington law, a private individual can sue the
government for failure to provide police protection if:

(1) there is some legal relationship or connection between
the police department and the victim which "sets the victim
apart from the general public," and

(2) there are "explicit assurances of protection" that
cause the victim to rely on those assurances.

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

If you have your copy of _Dial 911 and Die_ , this is the
right time to dust it off and educate those naive folks
who think they have a right to police protection. _They
don't_. Don't have the book? It's just $11.95, an
inexpensive resource for your "truth arsenal." It is the
best way to end the stupidity of promoting "gun control."

As for the "Schumerite" Jewish leadership (taken from Charles
Schumer, a rabid anti-gun Jewish politician), they should
read our alert, "'Schumerite' Jews Have Blood on Their Hands
...Again" at www.jpfo.org/alert20060713.htm . They share the
blame in this shooting, having methodically disarmed their
fellow Jews and others, leaving them helpless.

Disarm yourself to protect yourself? These folks must have
bagels for brains.

- The Liberty Crew

PS JPFO member and firearms safety instructor George Peabody
is running for Governor of Hawaii in the Republican Primary
to be held September 23 in Hawaii. Visit
www.hawaiigovernorgeorgepeabody.com for more information


============================================================

JPFO mirror site: http://www.jpfo.net

============================================================

LET JPFO KEEP YOU INFORMED -- Sign up today for JPFO Alerts!
Just send a blank e-mail to jpfoalerts-subscribe@jpfo.org.
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
jpfoalerts-unsubscribe@jpfo.org


Posted on Aug 4, 2006, 1:53 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Gun registry no help in domestic violence

by Nancy

Letter: Gun registry no help in domestic violence
Date: Aug 2, 2006 11:37 AM
PUBLICATION: The Windsor Star
DATE: 2006.08.02
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Editorial/Opinion
PAGE: A7
BYLINE: Anne Wilson
SOURCE: Windsor Star
WORD COUNT: 136

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

Gun registry no help in domestic violence

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

I read in a recent article that Wendy Cukier promotes the long-gun
registry as reducing domestic violence to women. As a survivor of
domestic violence, I strongly disagree. We have wasted a billion
dollars, but spousal murder rates haven't changed.

What we desperately needed was funding for real solutions. Last year on
an average day, 221 women and 112 children were turned away from women's
shelters in Canada, mostly due to lack of room.

Money is also needed for harm reduction and programs like anger
management in our schools and communities. Instead, our money went to
the gun registry. For what? So women can be killed with a knife instead
of a gun?

Women at risk need real solutions. Scrap the registry and use the money
to really protect abused women in Canada. They need the help.

Anne Wilson
Meadow Creek, B.C.


Posted on Aug 3, 2006, 8:10 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Column: Why Shooters Don't Like Licenses

by Nancy

Column: Why Shooters Don't Like Licenses
Date: Aug 2, 2006 9:37 AM
FIELD & STREAM
Why Shooters Don't Like Licenses
By: Dave Petzal, The Gun Nut
July 27th, 2006
Advocates of tougher gun laws are unable to understand the horror that
shooters feel when the word "license" comes up. After all, say the
anti-gunners, aren't drivers licensed? And pilots, and just about anyone
who has anything to do with anything that moves? Well, here's an example
why we don't like licensing, and it happened to a co-worker of mine who
had a permit to keep two handguns in his home in New York City.
http://fieldandstream.blogs.com/gunnut/2006/07/why_shooters_do.html


Posted on Aug 3, 2006, 8:09 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


National Post Editorial: Why was this man still free?

by Nancy

National Post Editorial: Why was this man still free?
Date: Aug 2, 2006 8:11 AM
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2006.08.02
EDITION: National
SECTION: Editorials
PAGE: A12
SOURCE: National Post
WORD COUNT: 694

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

Why was this man still free?

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

Ordinarily, we're skeptical of laws made in the immediate wake of a
sensational crime: At such junctures, rational decision-making typically
takes a back seat to public anger. But the circumstances surrounding the
abduction of two children in Saskatchewan are so outrageous that legal
reform can't come quickly enough.

It is a scandal that Peter Whitmore was out walking the street, and
entirely predictable that innocents would come to harm because of it. In
1993, Whitmore was convicted of abduction and five sexual offences
involving four Toronto boys. Subsequently, he abducted an eight-year-old
Guelph girl and took her to Toronto. In 2000, he was found in a Toronto
motel with a 13-year-old boy. And not two years later, he was found in
the company of a five-year-old boy, a parole violation that prompted him
to flee to British Columbia. Found in his possession at the time was a
"rape kit" containing latex gloves, duct tape, lubricant and zip-tie
handcuffs.

Any of his major offences on their own should have placed Whitmore
behind bars for many years. But even cumulatively, they failed to land
him a lengthy sentence. Inexplicably, he served just a year and four
months for the offences involving the four boys; it took him just nine
days following his release to commit his next one. For that, he was
sentenced to four-and-a-half years -- his longest conviction to date,
since he received only a year for the one in which he was found in the
motel room with the 13-year-old. By last year, he was living more or
less free in Chilliwack, B.C. -- then took off for a supposed three-day
trip to Alberta from which he never returned.

As with most pedophiles, it was painfully obvious that Whitmore would
reoffend each time he was left to his own devices. Indeed, it has been
reported that Whitmore himself reportedly told authorities 13 years ago
that his affinity for children could cause "serious harm" if he wasn't
stopped. This is a typical pattern with hardcore pedophiles, whose
pathologies are generally regarded by psychiatrists as entirely
incurable -- absent extraordinary methods such as chemical castration.

And so it is not just Whitmore who was apparently responsible for the
recent abductions of 10-year-old Zachary Miller of Saskatchewan and
14-year-old Jordan Bruyere of Manitoba; provided that police are right
that it was Whitmore, then the entire justice system also bears
responsibility.

Happily, Miller was found alive yesterday, in an abandoned farmhouse 60
kilometres from his home; we can only hope that Bruyere will be found
soon as well. But that does not change the lessons learned from this
experience, and particularly from Whitmore's record.

The Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime, along with other
groups, is lobbying for an expansion of the "dangerous offender"
classification that jails chronic offenders indefinitely beyond the
expiration of their prison terms. Yesterday, federal Justice Minister
Vic Toews expressed enthusiasm for the same idea. But in this case, it
shouldn't have been necessary: Whitmore's crimes were of such a nature
that normal criminal sentencing procedures should have landed him in
jail for the rest of his life.

That Whitmore was sentenced so lightly after each of his convictions
suggests that the system simply fails to take crimes against children
seriously enough, and still does not recognize the wealth of evidence
showing that pedophiles will almost inevitably reoffend. Consequently,
minimum sentences for crimes against children need to be significantly
boosted, and judges should be instructed to provide the longest ones
possible under the law.

Past history suggests that even if Whitmore is convicted for abducting
and/or abusing Miller and Bruyere, he will be back on the street in a
few years. And then -- surprise, surprise -- more children will go
missing. Let's hope lawmakers and judges prevent this from happening.
The fate of at-risk children, as well as anguished parents, rests on
their initiative.


Posted on Aug 3, 2006, 8:08 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Column: Watch your back in (gunfree) South Africa

by Nancy

Column: Watch your back in South Africa
Date: Aug 2, 2006 7:49 AM
SOUTH AFRICA: 'We're killing each other at a baffling rate'
August 01 2006 at 11:44AM

By Terry Leonard

Watch your back in South Africa. They kill folks there. Murder them at a
bewildering rate.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=qw1154424603209R131




Posted on Aug 3, 2006, 8:07 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Luke Pratt - Called to Heaven (GOA's Larry Pratt's grandson)

by WAGC

On Behalf of the WAGC family- our Prayers and thoughts are with the Pratt family !
WAGC

----------------------------------------------------
From: Larry Pratt
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:12:56 -0400
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: Luke Pratt - Called to Heaven

Dear Friends and Relatives, <>

It is with great sadness (and joy) that we report that Erich’s 23 month
old boy, Luke, went to be with the Lord on Saturday. There is sadness
because we are missing him terribly as a result of the DROWNING ACCIDENT
that ended his physical life. But there is tremendous joy in that we
know that Luke is with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, and that as
believers in Him, we will see Luke again one day.

He was a very cheerful and loving child. Before the accident occurred,
he was last seen throwing a baseball in the yard (with the wrong hand as
he had the glove on his right hand), giggling as he went along.

We will be having a memorial service for Luke on Thursday at 2:00 p.m.
The service will be held at the Harvester Presbyterian Church at 7800
Rolling Road in Springfield, VA 22153.

We would love for you to come to celebrate with us at the memorial … and
I do mean “celebrate.” Yes, we are deeply mourning for him as we miss
his presence in our lives, but we are just so thankful that God has made
a way to heaven where believers in Him can be reunited. Our hope is in
Jesus Christ, as He said, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one
comes to the Father, except through Me.” (John 14:6.)

In lieu of flowers, we would appreciate donations to the Hispanic
Ministry fund at the church. Checks should be made out to Harvester PCA
with Hispanic Ministry written in the memo line. Checks can be sent to
the address above.


God bless.

Larry Pratt on behalf of our entire family


Posted on Aug 1, 2006, 6:08 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


LETTER: GUN OWNERS' RIGHTS

by nancy

LETTER: GUN OWNERS' RIGHTS
Date: Aug 1, 2006 9:34 AM
PUBLICATION: The London Free Press
DATE: 2006.08.01
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Opinion Pages
PAGE: A6
BYLINE: E. G. TED WENT, LONDON
COLUMN: Letters to the Editor
WORD COUNT: 92

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

GUN OWNERS' RIGHTS

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

After reading Jason Menard's ink blog, Reacting to crime isn't good
enough (July 22), and his statement, "outlaw gun ownership (there are
other hobbies, get over it)," I guess he doesn't respect the rights and
privileges of his fellow citizens and some of the choices they make in
life.

The best thing about the gun control debate was the groundswell of
resistance to it by Canadians of all kinds. It shocked people like him.

What kind of people does he think we are?

If you don't like guns, don't own one, but leave those of us who do own
them legally, and are responsible, alone!




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Aug 1, 2006, 6:05 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Column: Firearms owners applaud refunds;

by nancy

Column: Firearms owners applaud refunds;
Date: Aug 1, 2006 9:10 AM
PUBLICATION: Times & Transcript (Moncton)
DATE: 2006.08.01
PAGE: B5
SECTION: SPORTS
BYLINE: Everett Mosher
WORD COUNT: 828

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

Firearms owners applaud refunds;

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

Firearms owners who renewed their firearm licences were pleasantly
surprised when they recently received refund cheques in the mail. In
fact, most were downright astonished. Several have said they were
tempted to frame the cheque, and hang it on the wall. That this occurred
so soon after the election, and not a year to two later, was a source of
astonishment and wonder.

There is, however, still much controversy about Prime Minister Stephen
Harper's plans to eliminate the long gun registry. Firearms owners are
not happy, having gone through the process of registering their
firearms, and share with non-firearm owners the concerns about the cost.
Yet the bottom line is that the long gun registry is not an effective
tool in reducing the criminal use of firearms. The money spent would
have had far more impact on crime, had it been directed to putting more
police on the streets.

One of the major concerns raised by the registry is the worry that
registration would eventually lead to confiscation.

We should be most thankful of living in Canada, and all the benefits
derived from doing so.

Without a doubt the present generation has, in the last 50 years, lived
in the best of the best of all times, far better than any time before.

Yet we are wasting our non-renewable resources at a terrific rate, and,
that, plus global warming, makes the future far less certain.

If the worst of the predictions in regards to global warming are
correct, much of the current agricultural land that is producing food
will turn into desert, with millions starving as a result. We have to
look no further than parts of Africa where drought is common, resulting
in the deaths by starvation of thousands. Is this the future of much of
the world?

A few can remember the 1930s and the dust bowl conditions common to the
mid- west. In those conditions families were forced to leave their farms
and travel to other parts of North America. If this happens on a much
larger, worldwide scale, people are going to starve.

Those that are starving and desperate are not going to abide by current
laws. Are lawlessness and the rule of the gun then going to be the order
of the day? Is this sort of thing preventable?

Perhaps. Former presidential candidate Al Gore makes a very telling
statement about the current window of opportunity to prevent this. The
reduction of greenhouse gases, using renewable resources such as solar
energy, etc. need to be top priorities, not in the future, but right
now.

Yet folks seem to be avoiding looking at the obvious. Every time a
non-profit organization asks for money to feed those that are currently
starving or destitute, I'm of the belief that the money is being
misdirected.

In a nutshell, where those people are located, the population is in
excess of the food that can be grown on the available land.

The answer is to either migrate to where the food sources are more
plentiful, or reduce the human population.

Instead of trying to feed a family of 10 kids, all of whom are starving
or close to it, would it not make more sense to only have one or two,
and thus have sufficient food for those one or two? Birth control would
indeed be the answer. Yet in those areas, often the parents will have as
many children as possible, in the hopes that at least one or two will
survive to look after the parents in their old age.

Another factor is that the average commute time in major cities such as
Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal is now an hour or more. Gas
prices will continue to rise, with the result that eventually the cost
of travelling to work via one's own vehicle will become unaffordable.

Public transportation is part of the answer, yet the spread out suburbs
of most major cities will, at some point, become untenable. Per person,
a high- rise apartment building consumes far less energy to heat than
individual homes, plus they can be located downtown close to where a
person works.

Many scientists are predicting that the recent hot weather, drought,
heavy rains, tornados, etc. the world is experiencing is going to become
more common, and is the fore-runner of the very severe weather
conditions that will be experienced as the planet continues to warm.

Future housing must be built on land where it will not be subject to
floods, landslides, forest or grass fires, and designed and built so as
to withstand tornados, hurricanes, and temperature extremes. Houses of
wood are not the answer.

Houses of concrete and steel, with foam insulation, and built partially
underground will become more common, and have a predicted lifespan of
more than 1000 years.

At present much of our food is transported in from California, South
America or other distant places, with the price and availability very
dependant on the price of gas and oil.

As a result the future importation of this food may cost more than the
average consumer can afford. In order to survive, will much of the human
population eventually have to evacuate the cities and return to rural,
almost self- sustaining farms, complete with large gardens, such as was
common in the 1880s?

One current firearm owner made an interesting prediction concerning
Canada's future. He said: "In 30 years, no-one will have a gun. In 60
years, everyone will have a gun." Something to think about, especially
while watching the current news on television. He may be right, and, if
that doesn't worry you, it should!

*Everett Mosher is a Sackville-based writer and avid outdoorsman. His
column appears on Tuesday.




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Aug 1, 2006, 6:04 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: "What about hammers?"

by nancy

Another case of.........it's NOT the tool used, it's the person using the tool , stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
___________________________________________________


Letter: "What about hammers?"
Date: Aug 1, 2006 9:28 AM
PUBLICATION: Chatham Daily News (ON)
DATE: 2006.08.01
SECTION: Opinion
PAGE: 7
COLUMN: Letter
WORD COUNT: 323

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

An evaluation situation

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

SIR: I was stunned by the story by Erica Brown in The Daily News
concerning a Patrick Robinson being sentenced to time served for
whacking a man on the head with a ball-peen hammer! While a friend of
his spoke to the other man, he hit him on the side of the head with the
hammer!

Patrick Robinson had served 71 days in pre-trial custody and his lawyer
said that he has a history of mental illness and intends to get
counselling.

When Ontario Court Justice Edward McGrath asked Robinson why he hit the
man, Robinson responded "there really was no reason." McGrath said that
makes the incident worse. Robinson agreed. McGrath put Robinson on
probation for 18 months and banned him from owning firearms for 10
years.

The judge banned him from owning firearms for 10 years? What was this
judge thinking about? What about hammers?

Anyone who would hit another human (or even a defenceless animal) with a
hammer, for no reason, as admitted by Robinson, needs to be committed to
a mental institution until he is safe to be let out into the general
public again. In my opinion, he certainly should have been detained
until an evaluation of his mental fitness and danger to the general
public is carried out. I for one will be writing to the justice minister
about this kind of sentencing and probation period that puts me and
every other citizen in danger of being attacked for no reason
whatsoever.

Is there something we are missing in this report that would give the
general public a feeling that this person would not repeat this type of
behavior in the future? Why, in God's name, wasn't he given a mental
evaluation during the 71 days he was incarcerated awaiting trial and the
report read into the record at the trial?

I suspect nothing was done to evaluate the dangerous man and now he is
on the street again.

Jim Daley Chatham




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Aug 1, 2006, 5:56 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Focus on crime control

by nancy

Letter: Focus on crime control
Date: Aug 1, 2006 8:59 AM
PUBLICATION: Sault Star (ON)
DATE: 2006.08.01
SECTION: Editorial & Opinion
PAGE: A8
COLUMN: Letters to the Editor
WORD COUNT: 87

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

Focus on crime control

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

Stats Canada tells us the homicide rate is going up - the highest levels
in a decade.

The gun control lobby tells us that shootings of specific types,
committed with specific types of guns, are down.

So, 10 years of police effort and $2 billion tax dollars spent on
Liberal "gun control" has managed to increase the number of people
killed, just fewer of them are getting killed with specific types of
guns.

Maybe it's time to stop wasting resources in an endless pursuit of
safety via bureaucratic gun control and start focusing on street-level
crime control.

Damian Kanarek, Toronto, Ont.




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Aug 1, 2006, 5:54 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


2006 Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) Invitation

by WAGC

2006 Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) Invitation
Date: Jul 31, 2006 3:20 PM




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


2006 Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC) Invitation
Dear Fellow Gun Rights Activist,

I would like to personally invite you to our 21st annual Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC), which will be taking place September 22, 23 and 24, 2006 at the Renaissance Charlotte Suites Hotel in Charlotte, North Carolina.

With the new battles over individual rights in the age of terrorism, attacks on our gun rights from the UN as well as a number of Second Amendment cases in the courts, the theme of Victory in Sight is most important as we set the pro-gun rights agenda for the year to come.

This year GRPC will be action-packed. With over 50 speakers hand-picked from the leadership of the Gun Rights Movement, the topics to be presented promise to have an impact that will help direct the path of our cause for years to come. Scheduled and invited speakers this year include: myself, Joe Tartaro, Wayne LaPierre, Sandy Froman, John Lott, Rick Patterson, Massad Ayoob, David Kopel, John Snyder, Joe Waldron, as well as staff from the Second Amendment Foundation, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, National Rifle Association, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer's Institute, KeepAndBearArms.com, and Gun Owners of America. A number of elected political leaders have been invited as well.

As in the past, the Second Amendment Foundation will not only pick up the tab for lunch and snacks, but will also provide more than $125 worth of vital pro-gun rights materials to each attendee.

In addition to the luncheon and free materials, you will have the opportunity to chat with the speakers at the two evening NSSF and NRA planned receptions.

This event is so important to our cause, that the SAF Board of Trustees has elected to help underwrite the entire cost of the event. Your cost to attend this event is absolutely free!

Because of the number of people who travel every year to attend this event, I have negotiated a special discount room rate for GRPC attendees. Reservations for the special discounted room (suite) rate of $99 per night can be made by calling 1-800-HOTELS-1 (1-800-468-3571), and telling them you are planning on attending the Gun Rights Policy Conference.

If you have any questions, please call the SAF office at (425) 454-7012 to register. You can also register online at our GRPC Registration & Information Page, or send an e-mail to grpc2006@saf.org, or fax us at 425-451-3959.

Sincerely yours,


Alan M. Gottlieb
Founder, Second Amendment Foundation






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and family >


Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:52 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Bruce Mills' Letter: Gun owner's world

by nancy

Bruce Mills' Letter: Gun owner's world
Date: Jul 31, 2006 9:36 AM
PUBLICATION: The Province
DATE: 2006.07.30
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Editorial
PAGE: A21
BYLINE: Bruce Mills
SOURCE: The Province
WORD COUNT: 56

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

Gun owner's world

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

I find Vancouver Police Chief Jamie Graham's target-shooting predicament
amusing.

He is just experiencing first-hand the kind of of stigma and persecution
that every other ordinary, law-abiding gun owner must endure every day
for even the most innocent of actions -- often at the hands of the
police themselves.

Welcome to our world, Jamie!

Bruce Mills, Dundas, Ont.


Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:51 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


NOT ALL GUNS ARE BAD.

by nancy

NOT ALL GUNS ARE BAD.
Date: Jul 31, 2006 9:27 AM
PUBLICATION: The Toronto Sun
DATE: 2006.07.30
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Sports
PAGE: SP23
ILLUSTRATION: photo by Dave Abel Former Ontario trapshooting champion
Gord Kerr sets his sights on a clay target during a practice shoot
yesterday as he prepares for next weekend's championship at Hamilton Gun
Club.
BYLINE: BILL LANKHOF, TORONTO SUN
COLUMN: The Last Word
WORD COUNT: 804

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

NOT ALL GUNS ARE BAD. MEET GORD KERR, A PROPONENT OF THE SPORT OF
TRAPSHOOTING. HE SAYS IT'S SAFE AND FUN AND INVITES YOU TO TRY IT

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

It is the game that dares not speak its name.

Its participants vilified and associated with one of the vilest
four-letter words of our blighted urban sub-culture.

Guns.

They will be coming to Hamilton next weekend from all over the province.
But don't hide the women and children, just yet. Gord Kerr is one of the
most unlikely-looking leaders of a shotgun-toting gang of sharpshooters
as you're likely to run across. He is 72, the father of four, thinks
good hunting is when he takes a walk and his dog finds a nice stick and,
oh yeah, he can knock a tick off a cat's tail at 30 paces with a
12-gauge.

Kerr, of Milton, is secretary treasurer of the Ontario Trapshooting
Association, which plans to hold its annual championships next weekend
at the Hamilton Gun Club.

MARKSMEN

It will bring to town about 250 of the keenest marksmen in this province
never to wear gang colours.

There are 22 registered trapshooting clubs in Ontario -- none in
Toronto, where firearms are regarded with the same affection as a case
of SARS. Kerr is hoping a few of the folks who believe all guns are bad,
even the sporting kind, will leave their fears at home, come down, and
have a peek.

"We have doctors, lawyers, dentists," Kerr said. "We have children
10 to
12 years of age. Sometimes the guns are longer than they are, if you can
visualize that."

And, all across the city, the only thing moms are visualizing is little
Johnny shooting his eye out, which is nothing Kerr hasn't heard 1,000
times before.

"The more people come out and get associated with the sport, the
better," he says. "It might help those people who are afraid of guns."

The Hamilton Gun Club is the oldest and largest in Canada. Trapshooting
isn't a cheap sport, with 12-gauge shotguns pricing in between $1,000
and $15,000. Ammunition isn't cheap, either. That, stringent ownership
rules, and the notoriety of gun ownership, has seen club memberships dip
to about 600 in Ontario from a high of 850 in the 1980s.

"About 85% of our membership is in the GTA, but our problem is a lot of
people classify it as a cowboy type of thing ... that we're dangerous
people," Kerr said.

"I've had bosses (he was director of fleet operations for the City of
Hamilton) who say: 'Oh, you wouldn't want to do that. It's dangerous.'
But it's no more dangerous than golf except that the club I use is a
shotgun. It's not until they come out and try it they realize gun clubs,
at least in highly regulated Canada, are not training grounds for the
next Rambo.

"The trouble is people in the city of Toronto are using guns to kill
people. To many people a gun is a gun, is a gun. And, if you own a gun,
people see you as being a dangerous person."

Kerr came to the sport late.

In 1978, his son, Ken, took him to a farm field owned by a family friend
and "we'd take turns, one of us launching while the other shot.

"I never owned a gun before that but I got hooked by the competitive
thing. I used to play a lot of sports and when you get older you find
you're not as competitive anymore. With this you can be competitive at
any age."

Trapshooting involves standing 16 to 50 yards from a bunker with a
12-gauge shotgun that fires a shot of about 375 pin-size pellets in a
pattern of 24 to 30 inches. A launcher in the bunker oscillates sending
four inch clay targets spinning out in different directions at more than
60 kilometres an hour. Last year, Kerr hit 97 of 100 targets, beating an
international field of 900 other shooters to win the senior veteran's
division at the Grand American Championship in Ohio. He also is a former
provincial champion.

Not that a whole lot of folks outside the sport would know that.

Or appreciate it.

Trapshooting was at its zenith nationally in the 1970s and 1980s. Susan
Nattrass was one of the world's top shooters.

The gun was as Canadian as beaver pelts, kids ran around the house
playing cowboys and indians and a pellet gun was a favoured Christmas
gift. Today, beavers are protected, playing cowboys and indians is
politically incorrect and a kid with a gun gets arrested. As a result,
gun clubs have become a preserve, mostly, for the middle aged.

"We're not getting the younger people because (shooting) is frowned on
in the schools," he said. "We used to get school teams and boy scout
troops would come out but we're not getting the influx of young
shooters."

Kerr believes it is a mistake.

"I think it's better if kids learned about guns," he says.

He tells the story of his granddaughter, Devin, then 8, chiding someone
for failing to properly check to see if a gun was loaded before they
picked it up. In the city, as another bullet flies; as another mother
weeps; as another young man dies; this is the flipside of the gun
culture that is seldom heard.

"I can remember when we were in high school they had a range in the
basement of Kennedy Collegiate in Windsor," Kerr said. "I'd rather
have
people know how to use a gun than not, whether they actually ever use
one or not. If they have that knowledge it would destroy the myth that
everything about them is dangerous."

The 87th provincial championships run Aug. 5-7 at the club
(905-692-4224), located at the corner of Highway 53 (Rymal Rd.) and the
5th Sideroad.

Flak jackets not required. Honest.


Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:50 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Bruce Mills' Letter: Guns and rights

by nancy

Bruce Mills' Letter: Guns and rights
Date: Jul 31, 2006 9:20 AM
PUBLICATION: GLOBE AND MAIL
DATE: 2006.07.31
PAGE: A12 (ILLUS)
BYLINE: BRUCE N. MILLS
SECTION: Letter to the Edit
EDITION: Metro
DATELINE: Dundas, Ont.
WORDS: 202

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

Guns and rights

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

Patricia Robertson hates guns -- plain and simple (Can Harper Be Tough
On Rural Crime, Too? -- July 29). It doesn't take long for her to show
her true colours with her anti-gun screed: all guns are bad, and anyone
who disagrees with her is a redneck, knuckle-dragging, regressive
troglodyte.

From the "myth of bucolic rural splendour" and the "ailing farm
economy," Ms. Robertson nicely segues into the anti-gun lobby's "big
lie" that Canadians don't have a right to keep and bear arms.

This is an absolute falsity. This inherent, innate, and sovereign right
of all human beings has never been expressly extinguished by any statute
or other act of Parliament of which I am aware. And you can bet your
bottom dollar that if there were, the gun grabbers would have been
shouting about it and waving it around from the rooftops a long time
ago.

The sad fact is that the anti-gun lobby's "vision" of gun control
just
doesn't work. It can't because it targets exactly the wrong group of
people: law-abiding gun owners. Gun control isn't crime control -- it is
only about divesting law-abiding citizens of their rights.


Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:50 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


National Post: More than 40 letters in response to Wendy Cukier

by Anonymous

National Post: More than 40 letters in response to Wendy Cukier
Date: Jul 31, 2006 7:35 AM
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2006.07.31
EDITION: All but Toronto
SECTION: Issues & Ideas
PAGE: A11
BYLINE: Paul Russell
SOURCE: National Post

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

The Week in Letters

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

[SNIP]

z The gun registry, pardon the predictable pun, is a favourite target of
many Post readers. Therefore it was not surprising that more than 40
letters came in after we published a letter from gun control advocate
Wendy Cukier last Monday, defending the gun registry. "Too bad
professional lobbyists like Wendy Cukier only seem to care about gun
deaths," wrote Geordie Pickard. "If they really cared about the victims
of violent crime, maybe we'd have spent our money on something that
would help prevent all murders, regardless of method. A billion dollars
added to police budgets might have actually saved lives -- not just
gotten people to switch from one weapon to another."

Zoltan Horvath took issue with Cukier's assertion that "... we know that
a rifle or a shotgun in the wrong hands is just as deadly as a handgun."
After arguing that "a knife or a club or box cutters -- could be just as
deadly as a handgun," Horvath asked: "Should we have a knife registry?"
And after noting that most crimes are committed with unregistered guns,
Lionel Trudel asked readers to "imagine the 'culture of safety' Canada
would have if we had given a billion dollars to our police over the last
10 years instead of the waste that the registry produced? Let's not make
the same mistake over the next 10."

prussell@nationalpost.com




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:49 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Guns and rights

by Nancy

Letter: Guns and rights
Date: Jul 31, 2006 7:30 AM
PUBLICATION: GLOBE AND MAIL
DATE: 2006.07.31
PAGE: A12 (ILLUS)
BYLINE: LIONEL TRUDEL
SECTION: Letter to the Edit
EDITION: Metro
DATELINE: Vancouver BC
WORDS: 126

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

Guns and rights

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

Thank goodness for people of such high moral fibre such as Patricia
Robertson to point out the errors of our redneck ways. Her diatribe sure
made me feel dumb for having an issue with the billion dollars the
Liberal Party wasted on the gun registry. I feel so re-educated to hear
that we were "aping" our American neighbours -- who incidentally have
had a 9-per-cent decrease in crime over the last 10 years, while Canada
has had a 9-per- cent increase.

Silly men, when will you learn that the natural governing party of
Canada knows what's best for you? No matter the results, people like Ms.
Robertson will belittle and insult anyone who attempts a common-sense
approach to government and crime.




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:48 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Even Plato knew the gun registry should be scrapped.

by Nancy

Letter: Even Plato knew the gun registry should be scrapped.
Date: Jul 31, 2006 7:27 AM
PUBLICATION: Montreal Gazette
DATE: 2006.07.31
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Editorial / Op-ed
PAGE: A14
SOURCE: The Gazette
ILLUSTRATION: Photo: Plato: Laying down the laws.
WORD COUNT: 53

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

Gun-registry issue was not Greek to him

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

About 2,400 years ago, Plato said, "To those who would follow laws; laws
need not apply. Those who would not follow laws; laws will have no
affect upon."

I think it is obvious the gun control people have yet to do their share
of serious thinking on the issue.

Even Plato knew the gun registry should be scrapped.

Tom McAuley

Winnipeg



The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 8:48 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Swedish Lahti pistol

by cung

[IMG][/IMG]

Just released, a new downloadable Ebook on the Swedish Lahti pistol.

Its title : The Lahti pistol explained


You will find the downloading page here: http://www.hlebooks.com/ebook/lahtload.htm


Many other ebooks on various firearms are now available here : http://users.skynet.be/HL-Editions/ebook/liste01.htm

Content of the ebook :

The pistol of Aimo Lahti

- The career of Aimo Johannes Lahti
- VKT Lahti pistols (four types)
- Swedish Lahti pistol under licence
- Four types of receiver can be encountered
- Other modifications
- Cracked receivers

Field stripping of the Lahti pistol

- Partly like the Luger
- A particular drawback of this design

Advanced dismounting of the bolt
- The extractor
- The firing pin

Advanced dismounting of the receiver

- The barrel nut
- The front sight
- The ejector
- The accelerator
- Parts Legend (receiver assembly)

Advanced dismounting of the frame (I)

- Dismounting of the recoil spring
- The Finnish Lahti recoil spring
- Dismounting of the takedown lever
- Dismounting of the safety lever and grip plates

Advanced dismounting of the frame (II)

- Dismounting of the magazine catch
- Dismounting of the trigger assembly

Advanced dismounting of the frame (III)

- Dismounting of the hammer and sear
- Dismounting of the hold-open catch
- Parts Legend (frame assembly)

Breech locking of the Lahti pistol

- The principle of the Lahti operating system
- Animated sequence
- Comparison with the Bergmann-Bayard Model 1903
- Animated sequence

Firing cycle of the Lahti pistol

- Chambering of a fresh cartridge
- Aimo Lahti has opted for an internal hammer
- Trigger and firing system
- Animated sequence
- The hold-open catch

Recoil accelerator, disconnector and safety
- How the recoil accelerator functions
- A system used in the Browning machine gun Model 1917
- The disconnecting process
- The Lahti's safety

Lahti's markings

- Serial number (prefix letter A, F, H or D)
- Producer markings
- Unit markings
- Acceptance markings
- Government inspectors

Lahti's accessories

- The magazine
- Holsters and accessories
- The detachable stocks
- The lanyard
- The double bin oiler

Other related sites to visit :

http://www.hlebooks.com
http://www.servicepistol.com
http://www.lugerpistol.com

Posted on Jul 31, 2006, 11:19 AM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


CCW laws, state by state

by WAGC

CCW laws, state by state
Date: Jul 29, 2006 11:00 AM
Vermonters wanting a permit for reciprocity purposes
can obtain a non-resident permit from NH or Maine.





by Dave Kopel

Thirty-eight states? Thirty-nine? Forty? We attempt to resolve the states of confusion by giving you all you ever wanted to know about the status of Right-to-Carry laws but were afraid to ask.


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

In spring 2006, the Nebraska legislature defeated a filibuster and passed a Shall-Issue law for licensing the carrying of concealed handguns by adults who pass a background check and a safety class. Nebraska’s governor signed the bill into law.

Just a few weeks earlier, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius had vetoed a Shall-Issue bill, then the Kansas legislature overrode the veto. Thanks to the hard work of pro-rights activists in Kansas and Nebraska, there are now 40 states that allow law-abiding citizens to carry handguns for lawful defense, and a grand total of 48 that allow at least some citizens to do so.

Here is the state-by-state status report:

No permit needed: Two states—Alaska and Vermont—do not require a permit for any adult who is legally allowed to possess a firearm. Alaska will issue a permit, however, upon application. An Alaskan might want to obtain a permit from his or her home state in order to use the permit to carry in another state, as is allowed by many states under the principle of “reciprocity.”

Shall-Issue: Thirty-five states, including all states not listed elsewhere, practice Shall-Issue permit distribution. Nebraska and Kansas are the newest additions to this category. As with a driver’s license, a Shall-Issue law states that the government “shall” issue a concealed handgun carry permit to a person who meets certain objective criteria, such as: being above a minimum age, passing a background check and, in some states, passing a safety class or test.

Do-Issue: Three states—Alabama, Connecticut and Iowa—have statutes that are not completely Shall-Issue, but that reserve some discretion to the issuing law enforcement agency. In these states, local law enforcement will generally issue a permit to the same kinds of persons who would qualify for a permit in a Shall-Issue state, and many times these states are included on Shall-Issue state lists.

Ten states generally do not allow such handgun carrying in public areas or only allow limited permits:

Capricious-Issue: Eight coastal states have permit laws but give local law enforcement almost unlimited discretion to deny permits. Although there can be significant variation from one locality to another, permits are rarely issued in most jurisdictions, except to celebrities or other influential people. These Capricious-Issue states are Hawaii, California, Delaware (not as bad as the others, in practice), Maryland, New Jersey (the worst), New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

No Issue: Illinois has no process for issuing Right-to-Carry permits. The state does, however, allow certain persons—such as law enforcement or security guards—to carry without a permit. Likewise exempt is carrying a gun in one’s home or place of business.

Wisconsin is the other No-Issue state, and its law is even more extreme than Illinois. In Wisconsin, the Right to Carry is outlawed under all circumstances, even in one’s home or business premises. However, a decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, interpreting Wisconsin’s state constitutional right to arms, held that in most cases the ban cannot be enforced against people who carry on their own property.

The Wisconsin legislature has twice come within one or two votes of overriding the governor’s veto of a Shall-Issue law. Historically, in every state where Shall-Issue laws have been blocked by a veto (such as Florida and Colorado), a Shall-Issue law has eventually been enacted. So Wisconsin will almost certainly become a Shall-Issue state—as soon as Second Amendment supporters there elect a new governor, or even just a couple more good legislators.

The prospects for reform in Delaware are also good. Shall-Issue legislation there has enough co-sponsors to pass both houses.

Rhode Island actually has a Shall-Issue law (for issuance by local law enforcement) and a Capricious-Issue law (for issuance by the attorney general). The attorney general has succeeded, at least temporarily, in stifling the local Shall-Issue system, but a decision of the Rhode Island Supreme Court suggests that this state of affairs is untenable. All that is necessary to implement Shall-Issue in Rhode Island is a new Attorney General with a different attitude. (My Albany Law Review article, available at www.davekopel.org, provides more details about Rhode Island and Wisconsin.)

Of the remaining seven holdouts, three states—New York, Illinois and California—have previously passed a Shall-Issue bill through a single house of the legislature. The passage suggests that Shall-Issue, although hardly easy to enact into law, might eventually be accomplished. In all seven of the final holdout states, it would appear that it would be very difficult to ever pass a Shall-Issue law by a wide enough margin to override a veto. But with legislatures, you just never know.

The more states that enact Shall-Issue laws, the more legislators in holdout states become open to the idea that Shall-Issue is not dangerous, as some continue to argue. Ohio, Minnesota and Michigan are examples of states whose enactment of Shall-Issue legislation was possible only because so many other states had acted previously. As the number of Shall-Issue states rises, so does the possibility of enacting Shall-Issue in the dwindling number of holdouts.

As momentum builds in a given state, a Shall-Issue bill eventually attracts the support of all or almost all Republican legislators, and of almost all Democrats with a c rating or higher from the National Rifle Association. Many of the swing votes (the c-rated legislators, who say that they are pro-Second Amendment, but who often vote for gun control laws) are attracted by the objective standards of the Shall-Issue system, which, unlike the Capricious-Issue system, typically forbids gun carrying in certain places (e.g., hospitals), sets objective standards about who may not receive a permit (persons with various disqualifying conditions), and (in most states) requires a specific amount of firearms safety training.

Of course, the most important effect of Shall-Issue laws is that licensed handgun carriers are able to protect themselves or other innocents from violent felons. But there is also an important cultural effect: the enactment and continuing existence of Shall-Issue laws help educate the public—including citizens who do not own guns—that defensive gun carrying by responsible citizens is a highly legitimate activity that is appropriate in almost all public places.

Posted on Jul 29, 2006, 2:35 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Marksmen aim to help sick child

by Nancy :)

Marksmen aim to help sick child
Date: Jul 28, 2006 2:58 PM
PUBLICATION: Calgary Herald
DATE: 2006.07.28
EDITION: Final
SECTION: City & Region
PAGE: B2
BYLINE: Falice Chin
SOURCE: Calgary Herald
ILLUSTRATION: Photo: Tim Fraser, Calgary Herald / Jane Campbell,
DaleCampbell, centre, and Noel Jervis are taking part in and organizing
a shooting tournament to raise money for a three-year-old child with a
rare genetic disease.
NOTE: Acts of Kindness: People - Volunteers - Good Deeds - EveryFriday
in the Herald
WORD COUNT: 203

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

Marksmen aim to help sick child

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

Load up the rifle and shoot for charity -- it's Dale Campbell's way of
giving back to the community.

"Everybody will do something for charity. They'll shave their head or
whatever," said the 57-year-old who has trained military and police
snipers. "Firearms is what I know."

For the past nine years, Campbell has been organizing benefit shooting
competitions to raise money for sick children.

Participants pay an entry fee of $50 each and vie for prizes.

Proceeds are used to help a child from the Ronald McDonald House. This
year's recipient, Dolin Provost, 3, is fighting a rare genetic disease
called mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. The disease causes his lone
kidney to flush out everything, including nutrients.

About a year ago, the boy weighed only 18 pounds. The doctors had to
remove one of his kidneys.

Sent for treatment at Alberta Children's Hospital, Dolin's parents left
their jobs and home behind in Lethbridge.

"So far that I know, we're just one step from being homeless," said
Dolin's mother, Jennean Provost, 36.

The charity shoot is expected to raise more than $3,000 in money and
gifts for the family.

"It's emotional," said Noel Jervis, 40, a longtime participant of
the
event. "Not only is it meaningful, it's fun."

From a retired dentist to a fish and wildlife officer, shooters from all
walks of life join the fundraiser every year.

"It's a real social event," said Campbell. "I know the firearms
community doesn't always get good press, but this is one of the ways we
give back to the community."

The charity shoot is set for Aug.27 in rocky Mountain House.

For more information, send an e-mail to dalec@practicalmarks manship.com
or call 730-8179.


Posted on Jul 28, 2006, 7:13 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Remember that bearing arms helps keep us free Your views

by Nancy :)

Remember that bearing arms helps keep us free Your views
Date: Jul 28, 2006 4:44 PM
http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/news/stories/20060728/opinion/113510.shtml
Remember that bearing arms helps keep us free

Your views




LETTER


An Opinion article by Mike Freeman on Monday was quite interesting. On the one hand, he makes a very convincing argument in favor of small arms possession by the "people" of this country. On the other, he bashes the motivations of those persons who direct the agenda of the National Rifle Association.

As a member of the NRA for an extended period and as one who has read all he could find on the subject, I'm thoroughly convinced the NRA and the officers thereof are completely honest in their crusade to protect the Second Amendment. Contrary to the news available from the mass media, i.e., TV, newspapers, magazines, etc., the NRA will give you both the good and the bad sides of the issue. They don't deny that bad guys get their hands on guns and that people are killed every day by firearms, but they also point out the documented benefits of having right-to-carry side arms laws in our several states. Having these laws almost always translates into lower crime rates committed with a gun.

It is also provable that the reverse in true. The British isles, Australia and Canada are excellent examples. These countries all proved the truth contained in the bumper sticker of a few years back: "When guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns." That statement has been proven over and over and why our brilliant and enlightened elected officials from some liberal states can't see it is the question Mike should be asking.

To answer some of Mike's questions: The founders of this country only had to go back a few years to see firsthand how the freedom to "keep and bear arms" caused this great nation to come into existence by way of the Revolutionary War. Without that freedom, we might still be part of Canada. The Founders looked forward to a time, not unlike today, when government would become oppressive and needed to be overhauled, replaced or restricted, and you "ain't gonna get it done throwin' rocks!"

Court rulings on the meaning of the Second Amendment are no different than court rulings on other subject as long as those courts are composed of liberals who believe the constitution is a "living document" and will read differently at different stages of our history. To quote a popular talk show host, columnist and professor: "How would you like to play poker with me but the rules are 'living' and I make them up as the game goes along?"


Harry F. Carlson

Gainesville

Originally published Friday, July 28, 2006


Posted on Jul 28, 2006, 7:07 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


In Praise of the First and Second Amendments

by Nancy

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1199

The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 28, 2006, 3:11 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Another cop blasts holes in gun registry

by Nancy

Letter: Another cop blasts holes in gun registry
Date: Jul 28, 2006 2:35 PM
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2006.07.28
EDITION: National
SECTION: Letters
PAGE: A13
BYLINE: Alex Popovic
SOURCE: National Post
WORD COUNT: 216

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

Another cop blasts holes in gun registry

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

Re: Former Cop Says Drop The Gun Registry, July 27.

As a former police officer, I support the views of Sergeant Bob
Cottingham. Like him, I believe the firearms registry serves a very
limited purpose in police work. In fact, it might be undermining the
very purpose it was supposed to support.

First, no police officer should rely on the registry to determine if
there are firearms in a home. To do so would be foolish. A second
justification for the registration has been that stolen guns will be
identified and returned to their owners. The reality is that the
Canadian Police Information Computer (CPIC) already lists stolen
property and identification numbers.

Regardless of where one stands on the need to have firearms in the hands
of civilians, the reality is criminals don't respect laws. The registry
has not saved a life or helped the justice system to stop gun
trafficking. Instead, it has created a new class of criminals, whose
only crime is that they believe in their right of ownership of property.
It is time to consider how we can really take the illegal guns out of
the hands of criminals. Spending billions on a paper exercise that
provides little tangible benefit is not the way to go.

Alex Popovic, Inspector (rtd.), Mississauga, Ont.

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

WHAT POLICE HAVE SAID ABOUT THE GUN REGISTRY
By Garry Breitkreuz, MP - Updated: July 27, 2006
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/policequotes.htm




The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 28, 2006, 3:00 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


FW: Gun Law Update

by Nancy

FW: Gun Law Update
Date: Jul 25, 2006 9:28 PM


>From: alan@gunlaws.com
>To: gunlawupdates@gunlaws.com
>Subject: Gun Law Update
>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 13:51:39 -0400
>
>Gun Law Update
>July 24, 2006
>
>by Alan Korwin, Co-Author
>The Texas Gun Owner's Guide
>
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>
>Texas First
>Texas First
>
>A whopping 83 changes to Texas gun law have been uncovered in the upcoming
>6th edition of The Texas Gun Owner’s Guide, due for release this summer.
>Many of the main ones have been described already in updates released by
>Bloomfield Press and posted at gunlaws.com, but most were only found using
>the official “statutes affected” lists issued by the state.
>http://www.gunlaws.com/updates.htm
>
>“Texas gun law grew by more than 13%,” notes Alan Korwin, co-author of the
>book. “This is similar to the growth rate we are seeing in other states we
>track, and if it doesn’t stop soon, no one will be able to comply with the
>gun laws just based on sheer size.” Advance orders are being taken for an
>expected ship date in August, with autographed copies available on request.
>The new cover is posted here: http://www.gunlaws.com/tgog.htm
>
>News from insiders in Texas confirms that in the 2007 legislature, numerous
>changes are planned. The earliest effective date will be about one year
>from now. Chief among these is fixing the “traveling” law, which continues
>to put honest Texans at risk of arrest for possession of a sidearm without
>a government-issued license.
>
>Even after extensive fixes in '03 and '05, some authorities still act
as if
>the law says, "handgun = detain suspect," and let you resolve
it in court.
>Everyone on our email list will of course get notices if and when things
>change. To help get this and other important changes made, join the Texas
>State Rifle Association: http://www.tsra.org.
>
>
>
>
>United Nations Gun Summit Successful
>United Nations Gun Summit Successful
>
>Reuters and other news outlets reported that the U.N. conference to control
>illicit trade in small arms ended in failure, with no consensus reached, no
>document produced, and the nations placing blame for the failure on a
>myriad of causes.
>
>The truth is that the U.N. conference on small arms was a success for
>people everywhere who cherish freedom, and recognize that power in the
>hands of the people is the only place power can safely rest.
>
>The U.N. effort to place control of small arms solely in the hands of
>government officials, and leave entire populations defenseless against a
>myriad of aggressors ended without ceding control of small arms to the
>one-world body. But they’ll be back.
>
>The largest source of genocidal activity is and has always been governments
>against their own people, and disarmament is the standard warm-up for
>genocide. Researchers at the University of Hawaii have labeled it
>“democide,” responsible for 180 million people’s deaths worldwide in the
>last century alone -- the largest single cause of untimely death in the
>world. The places are familiar: Stalin’s Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist
>China, Uganda, Rwanda, Cambodia, Armenia, Sudan, Bosnia and many more.
>
>Guns don’t kill people, governments kill people. With many of the attending
>nations guilty themselves of outrageous human rights abuse, the failure to
>reach consensus on public disarmament was heralded by true human rights
>organizations everywhere.
>
>The U.N. itself has disarmed vulnerable groups engaged in conflict, and
>then left them dangling in the wind for various reasons, including budget
>shortfalls, internal disagreements, changed priorities and dissolved
>coalitions. The then defenseless populations remained to be slaughtered by
>their enemies. The U.N.’s record on precipitating massacres is horrific.
>
>Dave Kopel, co-author with me of “Supreme Court Gun Cases,” describes how
>U.N.-backed gun confiscation programs in Kenya and Uganda lead to torture,
>murder and arson, and turned tens of thousands into starving refugees.
>http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/kenya-uganda.pdf. He has also
>documented the human rights atrocities of United Nations gun confiscations
>in East Africa. Other scholars have loaded the web with conference reports.
>Here’s a good one:
>http://volokh.com/posts/1152314168.shtml
>
>Rick Patterson, managing director of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition
>Manufacturers Institute (SAAMI), which represented the firearms industry at
>the conference, said, "Had the conference maintained a focus on fully
>automatic military weapons they may have been able to implement an
>effective global strategy. Issues related to sporting firearms and private
>ownership are too complex for global strategies." Ouch.
>
>CBS called the effort a failure, noting that Cuba, India, Iran, and
>Pakistan were among those resisting proposals from non-government groups
>who were numerous and adamant in their demands for influencing national
>sovereignty.
>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/08/ap/world/mainD8INH5K80.shtml.
>Mexico, Colombia, and Canada lead the effort to introduce U.N. regulation
>of civilian firearms, which repeatedly came up, but was successfully
>defeated.
>
>Ironically, the U.N. conference on government control of firearms took
>place in the United States over its Independence Day weekend, while
>Americans celebrated the establishment of the linchpin of freedom on earth,
>which was won with the use of privately held firearms, which government
>sought to confiscate. The delegates took the 4th of July off, hampering
>efforts to reach agreement.
>
>Although the U.N. made some pronouncements that its goal was not to disarm
>the public, every action it took contradicted that position, and it has
>NEVER armed victims of atrocities, preferring to send in heavily armed,
>centrally controlled, battle-ready temporary “peace keepers” instead.
>
>Indonesia's representative made the real agenda clear on the first day:
"We
>believe that no armed group outside of the State should be allowed to bear
>weapons... the issue of ammunition should also be addressed in the context
>of the Programme of Action because in the absence of ammunition, small arms
>and light weapons pose no danger."
>
>The United States opposed most attacks on Second Amendment freedoms,
>including 1 - a ban on sales of weapons to “non-state actors” (meaning
>people, including populations resisting tyrants); 2 - inclusion of
>ammunition; 3 - references to civilian possession, and 4 - a mandatory
>follow-up in hopes that a future U.S. administration would be more
>supportive of civilian disarmament -- perhaps the most dangerous of the
>strategies tried. The Associated Press and other news organizations failed
>to point this out in calling the conference a failure.
>
>Danger Still Lurks
>
>According to the AP, “Despite the failure, delegates planned to raise many
>of the same issues in the U.N. disarmament committee -- where consensus is
>not needed for agreement -- to begin preparing a treaty that would make law
>out of many of the global principles supported by non-governmental groups
>(NGOs)."
>
>In other words, the effort to destroy the right to keep and bear arms is
>proceeding unabated, with less control, and less public scrutiny, by
>unelected foreigners working to change U.S. laws. Most NGOs leaned toward
>the utopian peace model, imagining government power and enforced
>disarmament would stop aggressors. The NRA, also a participating NGO, had
>released daily reports while the conference was underway. The hubris of the
>utopian global power mongers was chilling.
>
>“Safe and Efficient Small Arms Collection and Destruction Programmes: A
>Proposal for Practical Technical Measures,” the paper from the 2001
>conference contains a detailed plan for disarming everyone but “officials.”
>It says, among other things, “Small arms are fundamentally dangerous and
>their removal from the equation either by control, neutralisation or
>removal is essential. The first step is to gain information on their
>numbers and whereabouts.”
>
>The reason for disclaiming an intent to disarm civilians is also found in
>the document. “Insensitive removal of weapons may have cultural and social
>implications, and indeed may inspire an unexpected political backlash.”
>
>The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights contains no right to arms.
>
>Thanks to Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership for background
>used in this report.
>http://www.jpfo.org
>
>
>
>Check out my new blog on news media accuracy:
>http://www.PageNine.org
>Sign up for automatic RSS feeds!
>
>
>
>Contact:
>Alan Korwin
>Bloomfield Press
>"We publish the gun laws."
>4718 E. Cactus #440
>Phoenix, AZ 85032
>602-996-4020 Phone
>602-494-0679 Fax
>1-800-707-4020 Orders
>http://www.gunlaws.com
>alan@gunlaws.com
>Call, write, fax or click for free full-color catalog
>
>If you can read this, thank a teacher.
>If you're reading this in English, thank a veteran.



Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 8:19 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


House Blocks Seizure of Legal Guns

by Nancy

House Blocks Seizure of Legal Guns
Date: Jul 26, 2006 11:11 AM


Breaking from NewsMax.com

House Blocks Seizure of Legal Guns

The House voted Tuesday to prevent law enforcement officers from confiscating legally owned guns during a national disaster or emergency.

Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal, the Louisiana lawmaker who sponsored the bill, said firearms seizures after Hurricane Katrina left residents unable to defend themselves.

"Many of them were sitting in their homes without power, without water, without communication," he said. "It was literally impossible to pick up a phone and call 911."

The House voted 322-99 in support of the bill. Senators voted 84-16 earlier this month to include a similar prohibition in a homeland security funding bill.

Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 8:19 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


South Africa: Last-Ditch Protest Against Gun Laws

by Nancy

South Africa: Last-Ditch Protest Against Gun Laws
Date: Jul 26, 2006 10:42 AM
Gun control laws respond to SA need
July 24, 2006
With regards to "Gun control is the mark of oppressive regimes" (Cape
Points, July 17).
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=137&fArticleId=3353172

Gun ownership not 'rife' nor to blame for crime
July 24, 2006
This letter refers to "Stricter gun control is needed" (Cape Points,
July 19).
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=137&fArticleId=3353171

Stricter gun control is needed
July 19, 2006
I read the letter from P van Wyk of the Gun Owners of SA ("Gun control
is the mark of oppressive regimes", July 17) with amazement.
http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=463&fArticleId=3346065

South Africa: Last-Ditch Protest Against Gun Laws
Business Day (Johannesburg)
Posted to the web July 11, 2006
Chris Van Gass, Cape Town
http://allafrica.com/stories/200607110131.html


Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 8:18 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Gun] Confiscations in California (Jennifer Freeman)

by Nancy

Gun] Confiscations in California (Jennifer Freeman)
In 1989, California was the first state in the nation to enact a ban on a specific list of semi-automatic rifles dubbed "Assault Weapons." In 1999, the ban was expanded to include a wider array of semi-automatic rifles. Rifles that possess certain cosmetic features such as a folding stock, pistol grip, or heat suppressor were deemed "Assault Weapons." In order to gain public support for these bans, the California legislature and other anti-gun groups and individuals created a image that the rifles to be banned were more dangerous than ordinary rifles and that the only reason for the existence of such rifles was to commit violent acts on human beings. To this day, many Californians, including those in the media, are under the false impression that an "Assault Weapon" is a fully automatic machine gun. This was a deliberate, yet successful, act of deception orchestrated against the people of California. "Assault Weapons" are not in the same class as fully automatic machine guns which are subject to a separate set of laws altogether. Rather, an "Assault Weapon" is a semi-automatic rifle that fires one round of ammunition for every pull of the trigger but also contains certain cosmetic features which have no bearing on the practical functionality of the firearm. These types of firearms have been commercially available since 1896.
http://www.sierratimes.com/06/07/26/Jennifer.htm

Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 8:17 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: If it saves one life

by Nancy :)

Letter: If it saves one life
Date: Jul 27, 2006 1:09 PM
PUBLICATION: The Thunder Bay Chronicle-Journal
DATE: 2006.07.27
SECTION: Columns Comment.
WORD COUNT: 192

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

If it saves one life, arms in the woods

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

Your reporting of the Waterloo, Ont. man and his dog's encounter with a
bear ("Camper uses hunting knife to kill attacking black bear near Wawa"
- story July 24) reminds me of the mantra that the anti-gun crowd often
uses to justify the Firearms Act and all the billions of dollars of
waste attached to it. Not a single life has been spared by the
implementation of this draconian legislation. As a matter of fact, six
fine RCMP officers are the dead proof that the Firearms Act is a deadly
sham.

Applying the Coalition for Gun Control's battle cry of "If it saves just
one life, it is worth it" to this situation, then if it saves just one
life then all people traveling the woods, post-spring bear hunt
cancellation, should have the right to carry a suitable handgun for
protection.

People, no matter where they are, have the right to self-defense and
they should not be denied the tools to enforce that right - especially
in the wilderness.

John Scott
Thunder Bay

Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 6:49 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Letter: Former cop says drop the gun registry

by Nancy :)

Letter: Former cop says drop the gun registry
Date: Jul 27, 2006 8:21 AM
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2006.07.27
EDITION: Toronto
SECTION: Letters
PAGE: A17
BYLINE: Sergeant Bob Cottingham (ret'd)
SOURCE: National Post
WORD COUNT: 257

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

Former cop says drop the gun registry

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

Re: In Defence Of The Gun Registry, letter to the editor, July 24.

As a former police officer who spent 25 years working in Alberta, the
last six as a detective in the criminal investigations section, I solved
a lot of crime through good old-fashioned police work, as well as
interviewing perpetrators and obtaining lawful confessions. I also
solved crimes through the collection of DNA and the comparison of
fingerprints using cost-effective, established police databases. I also
accessed these databases to find information on suspects' names,
criminal records and descriptions, which resulted in hundreds of
successful arrests.

Not once, however, during my career do I recall using the gun registry
to solve a major crime. Simply put, the vast majority of criminals use
firearms which don't come close to being included in this bureaucratic
jumble of information. Letter-writer Wendy Cukier may also be
disappointed to know that I observed that most front-line officers have
little faith in the gun registry, and see it as another bloated and
failed attempt by the former government to appease its constituents.

As loyal police officers, most of us went along with our police
associations' decisions, when they supported the registry in its
infancy. But then we saw that the registry only encroaches on our
law-abiding citizens and has little effect on most criminals using
firearms. I suggest that the courts use the existing firearms laws to
punish illegal gun users more severely. A drop in gun related crime will
surely follow.

Sergeant Bob Cottingham (ret'd), Lethbridge, Alta.


Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 6:47 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


EDITOR: Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

by Nancy :)

EDITOR: Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
Date: Jul 27, 2006 8:19 AM
PUBLICATION: The Winnipeg Sun
DATE: 2006.07.27
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Editorial/Opinion
PAGE: 8
COLUMN: Letters to the Editor

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

GUN CONTROL NOT WORKING

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

Stronger gun controls have sharply reduced deaths claims the president
of the Coalition for Gun Control. But by her own statistics Mrs. Cukier
proves herself wrong. She points out that the long-gun registry caused
the huge drop in murders from 1,444 in 1991 to 1,125 in 1995 and to 792
in 2003. The legislation was not finalized until 1995 and wasn't fully
implemented until 2002. If the registry caused that large drop before it
was in place, why is statscan reporting the murder rate rising now that
it is fully implemented? I think that billion dollars would have saved
far more lives if it had gone to women's shelters.

Ryan Dewsbury
Ottawa

EDITOR: Guns don't kill people. People kill people.


Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 6:46 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


WHEREVER YOU LIVE, GET A UTAH GUN PERMIT

by Nancy :)

WHEREVER YOU LIVE, GET A UTAH GUN PERMIT

I'd like you to join me in applying for a Utah concealed carry permit.

Let me explain why.

In Utah, they believe in the Second Amendment. So much so that they repeat
it and expand it in their state constitution. And their laws reflect that.

For example, if you have a concealed carry permit from anywhere in the
country, it's honored in Utah. And that openness has resulted in an
interesting phenomenon - Utah's concealed carry license is itself accepted
in most parts of the country.

Specifically, 30 states will honor a Utah pistol permit. If you have a Utah
permit, you can carry in those states.

Now here's the interesting thing. You don't have to live in Utah to get
a
Utah permit. You don't even have to visit Utah. You can do it all through
the mail. You will have to take a class, but you can probably do that where
you live, and the rest can be done long distance.

And two months later - if your background is clean - you will have the
closest thing there is to a national concealed carry permit. Ironically, it
may even be quicker and easier to get a Utah permit to carry in your state
than if you went directly through your state government itself.

I currently have a pistol permit from my state of legal residence - New
York. The problem is, New York doesn't accept any other state's permit.
And,

consequently, few other states accept New York's permit - even though it is
one of the most difficult and time-consuming to get.

And the odd thing is, a New York permit isn't even good in all of New York.
If you go into or through the New York City area, your permit is no good. If

you cross a county line you stop being a law-abiding citizen and become a
felon.

So my New York permit is good for driving back and forth to work and for
around home. But if you're taking any sort of a road trip, or going on
vacation to another state, it's useless. For me, the Second Amendment ends
at the Pennsylvania state line.

Because of the foolishness of my state legislature.

Fortunately, I can be saved by the Utah legislature. And so can you. A Utah
license will instantly create 30 more states where the Second Amendment will

apply to me. I won't be free in all of America - we haven't won that battle
for liberty yet - but I'll be 60 percent of the way there.

And while I'm grateful for that, I'm disappointed with a Congress that has
failed to protect either my constitutional right to keep and bear arms or my

state's right to have its licenses and permits respected by other states.

Here's what I mean.

My New York drivers license is honored in all 50 states. Ditto for my
marriage license and birth certificate. A divorce decree, or a name change,
authorized by one state would be recognized by the others. Virtually all
state-issued licenses and documents are honored by the other states -
there's
a clause in the Constitution about that - but not my pistol permit.

It is ironic that the only one of those things specifically protected by the

Constitution is the only one of them not recognized.

What America needs is a national concealed carry permit. It is a keen
disappointment that the Republican-controlled and NRA-backed Congress has
not supplied that, and we will keep working on eventually getting one.

But until then, Utah is the next-best thing.

It doesn't cover the entire country, but it covers most of it.

And it covers a whole lot more than the one my own state gave me.

Some will see this as a gun-nut loophole, that somehow Utah is opening the
door to handgun ownership and carry to a slew of goofballs from all across
the country. Some will see this as taking advantage of Utah.

I don't see it that way at all.

I see this as a situation in which the legislature of Utah has a keener
understanding of American freedom and a greater regard for the American
people than the legislatures of most other states. I see it as a service
being provided the country by this freedom-loving state. I'm not taking
advantage of it, I'm celebrating it.

I'm holding it up as a good example. I am applauding the politicians and
government of Utah for doing what their counterparts across the country
should do.

I feel the federal government - and my own state government - have failed to

honor the Constitution. Where they have failed, however, Utah has not.

And I am grateful for that.

And I'm going to get a Utah concealed carry permit.

And I'm going to be grateful to that state and its leaders for helping me be

a freer American.

- by Bob Lonsberry C 2006

Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 6:43 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


Love This Comeback

by Nancy :)

Love This Comeback



One of my sons serves in the military. He is still stateside here in California.
He called me yesterday to let me know how warm and welcoming people
were to him, and his troops. Everywhere he goes, telling me how people
shake their hands, and thank them for being willing to serve, and fight,
for not only our own freedoms but so that others may have them also.

But he also told me about an incident in the grocery store he stopped at
yesterday, on his way home from the base.
He said that ahead of several people in front of him stood a woman dressed in a burkha.
He said when she got to the cashier she loudly remarked about the U S flag
lapel pin the cashier wore on her smock.

The cashier reached up and touched the pin, and said proudly Yes, I always wear it and probably always will."

The woman in the burkha then asked the cashier when she was going to stop bombing her countrymen, explaining that she was Iraqi.

A gentleman standing behind my son stepped forward, putting his arm around my son's shoulders, and nodding towards my son, said in a calm and gentle voice to the Iraqi woman:
Lady, hundreds of thousands of men and women like this young man have
fought and died so that YOU could stand here, in MY COUNTRY and accuse a
check-out cashier of bombing YOUR countrymen.
It is my belief that, had you been this outspoken in YOUR own country,
we wouldn't need to be there today.
But, hey, if you have now learned how to speak out so loudly and clearly
I'll gladly buy you a ticket and pay your way back to Iraq so you can straighten
out the mess in YOUR country that you are obviously here in MY country to avoid"

Everyone within hearing distance cheered!

IF YOU AGREE____ Pass this on to all your proud American friends. I just DID!



The Second Amendment IS Homeland Security !

Posted on Jul 27, 2006, 6:42 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


LETTER: GUN CONTROL FAILED

by Nancy

LETTER: GUN CONTROL FAILED
Date: Jul 24, 2006 9:40 AM
PUBLICATION: The London Free Press
DATE: 2006.07.24
EDITION: Final
SECTION: Opinion Pages
PAGE: A6
BYLINE: JIM RODGER, BLENHEIM
COLUMN: Letters to the Editor
WORD COUNT: 56

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

GUN CONTROL FAILED

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

I see the murder rate in Canada hit a decade high. After the Liberals
spent a billion or so on gun control, we are hit with those headlines.
It is really funny that people would complain about the new cartoons in
The London Free Press when the biggest joke of all is on the front
pages.


Posted on Jul 25, 2006, 6:37 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home


FRASER INSTITUTE - After the Gun Registry

by Nancy

FRASER INSTITUTE - After the Gun Registry
Date: Jul 24, 2006 8:35 AM
FRASER FORUM - MAY 2006: After the Gun Registry
by Professor Gary Mauser
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/admin/books/chapterfiles/May06ffMauser.pdf

February 25, 2004 - BREITKREUZ'S PLAN TO REGISTER CRIMINALS - NOT DUCK
HUNTERS
"Statistics Canada data proves that criminals are the problem - not
law-abiding gun owners."
http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/breitkreuzgpress/guns114.htm


Posted on Jul 25, 2006, 6:36 PM

Respond to this message   

Goto Forum Home

Create your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2009 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement