Showing posts with label Gun Control. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gun Control. Show all posts

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Once More Unto The Breach, Dear Friends, Once More

What the socialists and liberal gungrabbers in government cannot do upfront, they will swing around and sneak in from behind.

The EPA is trying to ban traditional lead core ammunition by fiat, decree. Please do not let this pass by - act on this immediately!
From American and Proud:

Today, the EPA has opened to public comment the CBD petition. The comment period ends on October 31, 2010.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) — the trade association for the firearms, ammunition, hunting and shooting sports industry — urges you to submit comment to the EPA opposing any ban on traditional ammunition. Remember, your right to choose the ammunition you hunt and shoot with is at stake.

The EPA has published the petition and relevant supplemental information as Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-0681. If you would like to read the original petition and see the contents of this docket folder, please click here. In order to go directly to the ‘submit a comment’ page for this docket number, please click here.

NSSF urges you to stress the following in your opposition:

* There is no scientific evidence that the use of traditional ammunition is having an adverse impact on wildlife populations.

* Wildlife management is the proper jurisdiction of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and the 50 state wildlife agencies.

* A 2008 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on blood lead levels of North Dakota hunters confirmed that consuming game harvested with traditional ammunition does not pose a human health risk.

* A ban on traditional ammunition would have a negative impact on wildlife conservation. The federal excise tax that manufacturers pay on the sale of the ammunition (11 percent) is a primary source of wildlife conservation funding. The bald eagle’s recovery, considered to be a great conservation success story, was made possible and funded by hunters using traditional ammunition – the very ammunition organizations like the CBD are now demonizing.

* Recent statistics from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service show that from 1981 to 2006 the number of breeding pairs of bald eagles in the United States increased 724 percent. And much like the bald eagle, raptor populations throughout the United States are soaring.

Steps to take:

1. Submit comment online to the EPA.
2. Contact Lisa Jackson directly to voice your opposition to the ban:

Lisa P. Jackson
Administrator, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20460
(202) 564-4700
Fax: (202) 501-1450
Email: jackson.lisa@epa.gov

3. Contact your congressman and senators and urge them to stop the EPA from banning ammunition. To view a sample letter, click here.


UPDATE:
The EPA has folded and refused the request of gun control freaks to ban lead core ammo.
Here.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

Why the Swiss Enjoy A Low Crime Rate

I stole this from my buddy Cookie.
The NRA should use it as a recruitment drive advertisement.



Make sure you listen to the very last thing this man says.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Calm Down - But Remain Vigilant

I subscribe to the Gunbroker.com newsletter and was relieved to read this in todays email:

Urban Legends on Gun Control Bills Continue to SurfaceIt seems urban legends about new gun-control bills are continuing to surface. The latest fallacy to cause concern is a bill, "SB 2099," that would allegedly require gun owners to list their firearms on their tax documents (and pay upward of $50 per gun owned).

There is no such bill. Also generating talk is HR 45, The Blair Holt Act. Sponsored by U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.), HR 45 calls for, amongst other things, all handgun owners to submit to the federal government a formal application including: photo identification, fingerprints, medical and mental health records and a completed written firearm safety examine.

The legislation also mandates that a federal database be established of all firearm
sales and transfers. Though this legislation is real and NSSF is continuing to monitor it, industry and gun owners should not be concerned. HR 45 has no co-sponsors and is not a threat to become law.

I have been receiving many emails over the past few months about these attempts to impose draconian gun control measures. We can perhaps calm down a bit but still remain watchful over those who would deny us our 2nd Amendment rights.

Thursday, May 07, 2009

A Warning Shot

This is a double-edged news story.
Last month, April 16, the Governor of Montana signed legislation in effect defying federal firearms laws. Any weapons or ammunition that are manufactured in Montana and kept within the state are immune from federal regulation as there is no interstate commerce.

Gov. Brian Schweitzer has signed into law a bill that aims to exempt Montana-made guns from federal regulation, adding firepower to a battery of legislative efforts to assert states’ rights across the nation.

“It’s a gun bill, but it’s another way of demonstrating the sovereignty of the state of Montana,” Democrat Schweitzer said.

Since the law applies only to those guns that are made and kept in Montana, its impact is limited. The state is home to just a handful of specialty gun makers, known for recreating rifles used to settle the West, and most of their customers are out-of-state.

But supporters of the new law hope it triggers a court case testing the legal basis for federal rules governing gun sales.

“What we need here is for Montana to be able to handle Montana’s business and affairs,” bill sponsor Rep. Joel Boniek, a Republican and wilderness guide from Livingston, told fellow lawmakers during the bill’s House debate.

The measure is one of many introduced by state lawmakers across the nation seeking to confront what some see as a federal overreach into state matters that will be extended with the national stimulus plan.

Second, so far this news has been ignored by the major media.

Google the following: "Montana Gun Laws" or any derivative. You'll find that not a single major news source has any links to this story. Not one. The link above is from a newspaper based in Helena, the capital city of Montana. I guess they couldn't ignore it.

There is absolutely no chance that New York State will even consider much less pass a law like this. You have a better chance of Janet Reno starting a new career as a pole dancer.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Just A Reminder In Case You Forgot

A retired cop buddy sent me this. Although it is a bit dated, it is still timely.

'Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not.'
~Thomas Jefferson

FIREARMS REFRESHER COURSE
1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
3. Colt: The original point and click interface.
4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
8. If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.
9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
10. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights Reserved.
11. What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?
12. The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
14. Guns only have two enemies; rust and politicians.
15. Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety.
16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
17. 911: Government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
19. Criminals love gun control; it makes their jobs safer.
20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
22. You have only the rights you are willing to fight for.
23. Enforce the gun control laws we ALREADY have; don't make more.
24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.
25. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.

H/T to Al.

Tomorrow, Friday, 24 Apr 09, at 9 0'clock there is a special two hour edition of 20/20 on TV. I never watch Baba Wawa but I will make an exception in this case.

It is special because the entire show features our Office and the murder prosecution of Stacey Castor - the Black Widow. She poisoned her two husbands with antifreeze and tried to poison her 17 yr old daughter with alcohol and drugs and then blame the other two deaths on her daughter. This woman has no soul. I previously blogged about her here.

Saturday, April 04, 2009

They Refuse To Learn

Australia leads the civilized world in crime victimization. According to a UN study, nearly a third of all Australians are victims of crime. So what do the Aussie masters do to protect their wards? What crime prevention strategies do they adopt?

They redouble their efforts to confiscate the few remaining firearms held by civilians. Now these are unregistered firearms that ostensively were not used in crimes. But it just boggles the mind how gun amnesty or gun buy backs are used time and time again as a crime-fighting tool when the best practice evidence shows that it is completely ineffective.

ALMOST 800 illegal firearms have been surrendered during the first month of a three-month amnesty.

NSW Police Minister Tony Kelly said 606 rifles, 49 handguns and 141 shotguns were handed in to police stations across the state since the amnesty began on March 1.

It had netted 11 replica firearms, 151 pieces of ammunition and 76 firearms parts and telescopic sights, while there had been 4932 applications for the registration of firearms that had previously been kept illegally.

Mr Kelly said that owning a firearm was a privilege, not a right, and it was "about time" all gun owners got that message.

This is why the 2nd Amendment is such a frightfully important document. It establishes a means of resisting tyranny. For if the means to resist are removed, then revolution is just another word.

I hope all Americans "got that message." And the message is this; Australia, New Zealand and the UK have gone to extraordinary lengths to limit the possession of firearms within their respective populations. These very same nations have the highest crime victimization rates in the civilized world.

#1 Australia: 30.1%
#2 New Zealand: 29.4%
#3 United Kingdom: 26.4%

Friday, April 03, 2009

Another Senseless Outrage

We have heard Obama's Chief of Staff say that they shouldn't let a crisis go to waste. After the awful events in Binghamton this morning, I am waiting for the liberals to amp up their harping about gun control again.

I was at a crime analysis conference last week where one of the speakers brought up the benefits of British gun control; only 61 firearm murders in England last year. I am assuming that this includes England and Wales only. I wanted to question him on the rise in violent crime in England and Australia after making it all but illegal to own a firearm but instead remained silent. There were about 3-400 cops there and I don't like to make waves.

The dirty secret is that in countries that have implemented strict gun control measures they have experienced dramatic increases in overall crime. These are the latest comparative international statistics I could find on crime victimization from 2002.

Look at the top three countries - all English speaking nations that have imposed draconian gun control. Look at #18, Switzerland, where all males must serve in the armed forces until the age of 29 and keep their government-issued automatic weapons in their homes.

Rank
#1 Australia: 30.1%
#2 New Zealand: 29.4%
#3 United Kingdom: 26.4%
#4 Netherlands: 25.2%
#5 Sweden: 24.7%
#6 Italy: 24.6%
#7 Canada: 23.8%
#8 Saint Kitts and Nevis: 23.2%
#9 Malta: 23.1%
#10 Denmark: 23%
#11 Poland: 22.7%
#12 France: 21.4%
#13 Belgium: 21.4%
#14 Slovenia: 21.2%
#15 United States: 21.1%
#16 Finland: 19.1%
#17 Austria: 18.8%
#18 Switzerland: 18.2%
#19 Portugal: 15.5%
#20 Japan: 15.2%
Weighted average: 22.4%

DEFINITION: People victimized by crime (as a % of the total population). Data refer to people victimized by one or more of 11 crimes recorded in the survey: robbery, burglary, attempted burglary, car theft, car vandalism, bicycle theft, sexual assault, theft from car, theft of personal property, assault and threats. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence.

SOURCE: UNICRI (United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute). 2002. Correspondence on data on crime victims. March. Turin

It shows that in countries with the tightest gun control, nearly a third of the population has been the victim of a crime.

Friday, January 30, 2009

The Brits Are Waking Up - Too Late

The Brits Have been betrayed by their own politicians and bureaucrats. Ordinary citizens and even the police are more at risk from armed thugs than they were twenty years ago.

The lie of gun control has become too apparent to many Brits, but is it too late?

Thursday, January 22, 2009

Busted Stuff

For years the democrats bellowed and blew steam about how Iraq was a quagmire and how we need to get out. Even one death is a terrible loss, but we are at war. In 2008, according to the icasualty.org website, a total of 314 GI's were killed in Iraq. Again, we are at war. Iraq is in the process of becoming unbusted.

Last year in Chicago (pop. 2,833,321), where there is no war, there were 508 homicide victims. This is a 15% increase in murders since the prior year. No quagmire here in Obama land.

Also of note: in 2007 the Chicago PD confiscated 13,658 firearms (2007 Annual report page 32), a ten year high, of which over 6,000 were purchased in a gun buy back program. It did absolutely nothing to stop the violence. For the past ten years firearms have been used in about 75% of all Chicago homicides. Nothing has changed.

The citizens of Chicago could have been spared some of their tax dollars if their police executives and politicians had invested some time in reading this report published in 2001: Youth Violence: A Report of the Surgeon General.

Chapter Five of this report details some of the popular violence reduction strategies that aren't worth a fart in a pew.
Among them:
D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education)
Gun Buy Back Programs
Boot Camp Programs
Individual Youth Counseling Programs

And in Tijuana, Mexico (pop. 1,483,992), US Marines stationed in nearby San Diego have been ordered not to go to this city for R&R (or for any reason for that matter) due to the incredibly high levels of violence there. Last year 843 people were slaughtered in Tijuana as compared to 337 the year before. Many of them were beheaded.

As bad as things seem to be in Chicago - they have improved; the murder rate in Tijuana is over three times as bad.

Mexican gun control laws are far more draconian than any liberal bastion here in the States. God help you if you have some much as a bullet in your possession when stopped by a Mexican cop.

Unlike Canada where you're Justify Fulllikely to be turned away at the border if you have unauthorized firearms or ammo, unwary visitors to Mexico have languished in Mexican jails for five years due to a single spent casing in their vehicle.

Mexico is totally busted. And seeing how many Mexicans are leaving the US and heading home now that the jobs in the States are disappearing, look to see it become even worse.

Friday, January 02, 2009

A Bad End To A Holiday

I'm sure that this occurs to a greater or lesser extent in many cities throughout the western nations, but for some reason Great Britain gets the rap for drunkenness and carousing. Perhaps they really are out of control (i.e., their soccer fans getting banned throughout Europe) or maybe we Anglos love to writhe and moan whilst we self excoriate ourselves for real and imagined sins.

In either event, the Brits are on a roll as alcohol-related emergency calls to ambulance services averaged one every seven seconds during London's New Year's Eve reveries. Some of the pictures included with this UK Daily Mail article are pretty gory. I have seen worse (one broken beer bottle assault in a west end Syracuse bar brawl left the victim with over 300 stitches).

One of the commenters on this article remarked that there were relatively few arrests for drunkenness so how bad could it have been? Believe me, when police are overwhelmed in any given situation, there are not many arrests simply because the cops feel it isn't worth the hassle. Why get your brains beat out by a bunch of drunks who don't want their friends arrested? Being that they are A) highly intoxicated; B) young and C) highly intoxicated, they will not hesitate in attacking a uniformed police officer. Given the hopeless state of Britain's criminal justice system, you have a better chance of doing a major bid in prison if you shoot a burglar theatening you in your own home than if you beat a cop half to death in a drunken frenzy. These examples are from a 2002 article:

In 1987 two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London subway car, trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified, "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon.

In 1994 an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house while he called the police. When the officers arrived, they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. In a similar incident the following year, when an elderly woman fired a toy cap pistol to drive off a group of youths who were threatening her, she was arrested for putting someone in fear. Now the police are pressing Parliament to make imitation guns illegal.

In 1999 Tony Martin, a 55-year-old Norfolk farmer living alone in a shabby farmhouse, awakened to the sound of breaking glass as two burglars, both with long criminal records, burst into his home. He had been robbed six times before, and his village, like 70 percent of rural English communities, had no police presence. He sneaked downstairs with a shotgun and shot at the intruders. Martin received life in prison for killing one burglar, 10 years for wounding the second, and a year for having an unregistered shotgun.

If this is the way British police operate under normal conditions, why would you expect them to do something different under extraordinary circumstances?

Friday, December 05, 2008

Disarm The Elderly

The Barking Moonbat has a post that features a 68 year old British shopkeeper being attacked by sword wielding thugs. The shopkeeper fends them off. These thugs should be dead, shot multiple times in the head and cheat.

But you can't defend yourself with a firearm when the possession of firearms is limited to only those who would break the law anyway.

The British government's insistence on disarming law biding citizens is more like a plan to control health care costs by eliminating those pesky senior citizens who insist on getting old and infirm.

Why bother building extended care facilities and geriatric centers when all you have to do is take away their guns and let vicious goons do the dirty work for you? There is no need to worry about embarassing revelations like Chuck Heston running down the street screaming "It's people!" Just let the boyz loose to do what comes naturally.



The following excerpt is from an article in the UK Mail, dated 15 NOV 2008:

Serious violent crime is going up NOT down, Home Office Chief Admits

The head of the Home Office has admitted in a leaked document that the Government has failed to reduce serious violent crime over the past decade.

In a paper marked ‘Restricted Policy’, Sir David Normington, the Department’s top civil servant, admits that under Labour the levels of the most violent crimes such as murder, serious assaults and rape are higher than they were in 1997.

The admission by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s most senior Civil Service adviser appears to be at odds with claims by Ministers that levels of violent crime have fallen since Labour came to power.

The Home Office admitted last night that its own figures showed there were 14,000 serious violent offences in 1997-98 and 16,000 in 2007-08.

Sir David’s 101-page document, sent to new Home Office Ministers appointed in Gordon Brown’s reshuffle last month.

Sir David discloses that because the most serious violent crimes have not been reduced, the Government’s long- term strategy will now concentrate on these rather than less serious ones.

In July, Jacqui Smith twice used the British Crime Survey, based on surveys of thousands of members of the public, rather than crimes recorded by the police, to claim all types of violent crime had fallen substantially since 1997.

In response to the July 2008 crime figures, she said on the Home Office website: ‘Since 1997, crime measured by the British Crime Survey has fallen by 39 per cent with violence down by 40 per cent and burglary down by over half (55 per cent).’

And on July 17 she repeated her claim that violence had dropped by 40 per cent since 1997, ‘with a 12 per cent fall in the last year alone’.

But in his document Sir David writes: ‘In view of the fact that more serious violence has not reduced in the way that we would have wanted in recent years, and that these offences cause the most harm to individual victims and to society as a whole, our long-term strategy on violence focuses on seriousness. This includes homicides, serious wounding and serious sexual offences such as rape.

‘Recorded crime statistics do indicate that despite recent falls, the levels of the most serious violence are higher than they were ten years ago.’

The document also reveals that more than 50 per cent of people surveyed by the Home Office are still not confident that the criminal justice system is effective in bringing offenders to justice.

Shadow Home Secretary Dominic Grieve said last night: ‘This document is a shocking admission that Labour’s crime reduction policy has focused on chasing petty incidents in order to spin crime statistics. Jacqui Smith’s claim that violent crime is down has been dealt a fatal blow.’

This is what happens when do-gooder bureaucrats manage things. There are now so many security cameras in England that a new national pastime has developed whereby people douse them with gasoline and burn them. There are over 4.2 million security cameras in England (2006 estimate), one camera for every 14 people. But for the most part, these cameras are used to generate revenue through traffic enforcement - and that causes a great deal of resentment, but not much security or safety.

The CCTV camera in the above video provided a documentary of the crime of attempted robbery and assault, but did nothing to enhance the safety of the shopkeeper. Those two thugs needed to learn the old prohibition about bringing a knife to a gun fight. But the Brits have removed that lesson from the curriculum.


.

Sunday, August 31, 2008

It Works For Me

Now about that school district in Texas that wants to arm its teachers; I think that is just a swell idea.

The entire nation of Georgia was a "Russian Armored Division Free Zone" and that worked real well for them.

Matter of fact, don't the laws here make America an "Illegal Alien Free Zone" also?

sonuvagun

Saturday, June 07, 2008

IMPORTANT - LISTEN TO THIS

This is the story of Tony Martin, a man who is now pining away in a British prison because he had the termitiy to defend himself with a firearm. What happened to him WILL happen here if this Country doesn't wake up to the threat posed by the gun control fanatics.



Once you are done watching this video report, ask yourself this question:

"Why aren't British politicians being strung up from light poles?"

UPDATE:
This is hilarious. At Transsylvania Phoenix, read a liberal's response to the video above and then the smackdown that follows. This definately left a mark and a brown streak besides.

wstpwstp said... Tinker45, Thanks for the thoughtful response (unlike glenn and bill07407 whose coments are kind of bone headed) Yes, I am a liberal and not a gun owner. But, NOWHERE in my post, do I suggest that Americans should be denied their right to bear arms, or support the idea of the US Government confiscating guns.

Just to set the record straight. I have lots of respect for the US Constitution. The UK has the right to make their own laws, and right or wrong, thousands of people there are in favor of very strict gun laws.

I DO think that laws should exist to control access to guns and how they are used.I have no objection to a sane adult owning a gun after mastering basic gun safety and legally obtaining a license.

It's like driving a car -- cars are useful, handy tools. However, in the wrong hands, a car is a deadly weapon that can be used to kill innocent people. Driving a car requires training and a license and sanity. When cars first were popularized a drivers license was as easy to get as a fishing license -- no test, no training, no requirements. Just plunk down a few dollars and away you go.

I don't believe that there is a god given right to drive cars and that anyone who can afford to buy a car should be allowed to drive it on the public roadways without jumping through all the hoops to help ensure public safety. Same thing with airplanes, for that matter.

I don't believe that any yahoo with cash and a copy of the Constitution in his pocket has the right to buy a gun and shoot anyone he wants whenever he gets scared or angry.

It's all a trade off -- responsibility for one's actions. You get a car to take you places etc. If you get drunk or scared or angry and run over someone with that car, you must assume responsibility for your act.

Mr Martin bought his gun and got a feeling of security from it. He got scared and killed a stupid kid. Maybe he could have scared him off with a warning shot, maybe he could have been a better shot and only wounded the kid. But, he killed him and must take responsibility for his action. That's the trade off for his feeling more secure. Maybe he could have gotten a little feeling of security by buying a can of Mace instead of a gun and still have driven off the burglars.

Yes - he was the victim of a crime, but his response was death-dealing, and there's a price for that. Had these guys attacked Mr Martin with a sword or a chain saw, the law would have allowed him to take a life to defend his life. To kill another human being to defend your television set -- not so much.

In the other case I mentioned, a mental patient waltzed into the local sheriff's office and walked out with a concealed weapon permit. The Sheriff's excuse was that the mental patient didn't mention that he was a mental patient at the time. This guy ended up shooting several people at a public festival filled with thousands of innocent people. Might have been MUCH worse.

Shouldn't there be a system that actually prevents this sort of thing from happening? In the UK, a person applying for a gun permit must submit two letters from responsible members of his community vouching for the applicant's character. Maybe that's not ideal, but it would probably stopped the mental patient from arming himself so easily.My post was mostly about that crappy propaganda film. I wonder who produced it - the NRA or the NRC?

Just as an aside, in NYS you must pass a criminal history check and have THREE responsible members of the community vouch fpor your character.
Now the RESPONSES

jlg said... wstpwstp said, "I have no objection to a sane adult owning a gun after mastering basic gun safety and legally obtaining a license."

Let's apply that idea to a reserved right other than the one covered by the Second Amendment. Start with the First:"I have no objection to a sane adult operating a printing press after mastering basic English and legally obtaining a license to speak freely."

"I have no objection to a sane adult being religious, after attending a government-run course on tolerance, and as long as his church is legally licensed."

"I have no objection to sane adults associating together, after they have submitted their fingerprints to the FBI for background checks, informed local law enforcement that they are associating, and their group is legally licensed with the state."

Fourth?"I have no objection to sane adults maintaining their privacy, after submitting a video montage containing their daily life routine, along with a list of their possessions, to the state, and obtaining approval for keeping these things private."

Or how about the Fifth?"I have no objection to a sane adult refusing to incriminate himself of a crime, as long as he has fully informed the state of his actual state of innocence or guilt, and has legally obtained a Non-Self-Incrimination license.

"Is any of this starting to make sense?


john said...
Let's just look at the comments from wstpwstp, you will see that liberal logic is birdbath deep and twice as filthy :

"I don't believe that any yahoo with cash and a copy of the Constitution in his pocket has the right to buy a gun and shoot anyone he wants whenever he gets scared or angry.

Yes, I am a liberal and not a gun owner."

This is the kind of retarded thinking that falls forth from a liberals mouth as a brilliant idea. Let's just parse our comrades first dictum, yes you can own a gun with just cash and the constitution because........the constitution says so (you gibbering idiot). Once again we must parse the twisted verses and logic of the cloudy liberal brain to ordain the true depths of stupidity : This person did not shoot "just anyone he wanted", he shot an invader in his house and his intent was not known because he assumed room temperature before he could continue with his rudimentary business model. We don't know if he was a burglar, rapist, vandal or someone who simply steals the man's porridge and dashes the contents on the cobblestone roads of Britain....thus making him a cereal killer. Anger or fear can be interchangeable in such situations and are not the catalyst of the process but instead the byproduct of it.

Admitting you are a liberal negates the need for stating "not a gun owner", oxymoron. It's like stating that I am welfare recipient and own cold fusion technology or particle accelerators as a hobby.

Now to analysis a statement so profoundly stupid that simply by reading it should negate the need to critique the cavernous holes of logic.

Maybe he could have scared him off with a warning shot, maybe he could have been a better shot and only wounded the kid.

It's like trying to explain physics to a gerbil but the honor will be in the attempt :

So the mere presence of the handgun itself was not enough for this poor innocent child of nature to flee into the lush green landscape like Bambi, he needed to hear the thunderous roar of a hand cannon to perceive that mortal danger was present. Better yet, you are to shoot up your own house first or sling shell into the atmosphere and put some other shmuck in London in the path of an "incoming" rather than drilling the miscreant where he stands.

Now for my favorite, where should I have wounded him? In the fleshy part of his head since so little is being used for thought? How about in the liver, a lifetime of dialysis would provide invaluable lessons in life, no....messy and someone has to pay for the dialysis. How about a nice leg shot? Well unless it hits a major artery in the leg and he bleeds out like a deer, guess that plan has more holes in it than a liberals skull. By the time a liberal has even made a decision to defend his silly house the thief has pawned the goods, copped a bag, got a bottle of malt liquor, has a mind numbing good buzz going and is coming back around to get the big screen TV that is playing the coronation of the ObaMessiah.

Monday, May 19, 2008

Gun Fearing Wussies Get Shot Down

From TownHall.com:

Appeals Court Shoots Down New York City Gun Law
The media have been telling us to watch the gun-control case now before the U.S. Supreme Court, where we await a decision about Americans' Second Amendment rights. But the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals just handed down an equally important gun decision that has additional implications against judicial supremacy.

The court, which convenes in New York City, shot down the longtime liberal dream of achieving gun control by suing gun manufacturers for crimes committed by firearms. In a remarkable decision, this federal appellate court dismissed City of New York v. Beretta U.S.A. Corp. and protected gun corporations against frivolous lawsuits in state and federal courts.

The lawsuit was brought by the City of New York in order to seek control over gun suppliers. At stake was not merely money but also whether liberals would obtain from judicial activists the gun control that the liberals could not get from legislatures.

Say what you will, liberals won't stop. They will drive past a gunshop or open up the Sunday paper and see the flyers from Bass Pro Shop and get the shakes. They will write letters to their congressmen, send faxes and emails to whomever demanding that evil guns (much like evil oil) be taken away from citizens whose only crime is to rely upon their own devices for protection. And they will refuse to defend themselves, but rather pay tribute to Big Government in the vain hope that they will be safe.

They just don't realize that 90% of cop training is not about crime prevention; it's about crime documentation. After. The. Fact.

Thursday, August 23, 2007

The Myth of Gun Control: Britain's Experience

While efforts are afoot in America to limit law abiding Americans' access to firearms, specifically handguns, England has already done just that. And they are reaping the whirlwind. From the Telegraph:

The number of young people prosecuted for firearms offences has soared by 20 per cent in the past five years, it was revealed earlier this month.

In 2001, 1,193 youngsters under age 21 went to magistrates courts on gun related charges.

By 2005, that had risen to 1,444. The statistics come after a recent wave of gun crime in Britain’s inner cities, with many victims not even out of their teens. Shadow home affairs minister James Brokenshire said: “The rise in gun crime demonstrated by these figures is alarming.”

England dis-armed its civilian population over a decade ago, yet gun violence is escalating. And it is rising in a population that should have difficulty in accessing such weapons - youth.

In April Bernard Hogan-Howe, the chief constable of Merseyside Police, insisted new laws to make reporting information on shootings and possession of guns a 'duty’’ were essential because people were too scared to come forward.

Mr Hogan-Howe, in the running to be the next Metropolitan Police commissioner, said the wall of silence protecting the increasing number of young people drawn into gun crime had to be broken.

In an interview with The Guardian, he said Britain should adopt laws similar to those in Australia "where people have a duty to report information about gun crime to the police".

But he called on the Government to push them further and apply them to firearm victims too frightened of reprisals to press charges.

Wait a minute. English citizens are not allowed to own firearms anymore so how can there be a gun crime problem? So the problem has been redefined.

It isn't just the possession or use of guns in the commission of a crime anymore. The problem is now the people who are terrified of thugs with guns.

Those dirty bastards! How dare they be afraid now that the nanny state has saved them from gun violence! Ingrates! The victims "wall of silence" must be broken, shattered! Teach these ingrates a lesson!

After reading this, I expected Monthy Python's comedy group to burst out of my computer. This is beyind bizarre.

"The challenge is people who survive do not want to complain and the best witness is quite often the victim who can provide a description and motive," he said.

"By refusing to help it can put the investigation on to the back foot."

Let's see if we can get this straight; "The challenge is people who survive..." So if they don't survive there's no problem? Outstanding! The solution is simple. Ban all gunshot victims from receiving medical care at the National Health Service hospitals. This will have gun crimes under control in no time.

His comments come as police chiefs voice growing frustration at the difficulty in tackling gun crime among youths. Mr Hogan-Howe told the newspaper his force was already evicting families that harboured children who possessed guns, and moving them to other areas.

Here in the U.S., several states have reintroduced predators (such as wolves) into parks and game preserves. It sounds like this idea has caught on with the Brits too. I'm sure the unarmed citizenry is overjoyed at this prospect of sharing their habitat with new predator species. Perhaps if the coppers distributed pamphlets on where to report such sightings the locals would be a bit more enthusiastic.

His officers are also instructed to stop and search suspects regularly. The chief constable, who attended a gun crime summit at Downing Street in February, said such initiatives were leading the way in stamping out the problem.

So the Brit's response is predator relocation and gun crime summits. If they are stamping out the problem, then why are more laws required? Then why are police taking action against...
victims?

Thursday, August 09, 2007

More Guns

Wayne Rausch, the Sheriff of Latah County, Idaho, has just endeared himself to me.

MOSCOW, Idaho (AP) — The sheriff of a north-central Idaho county where a shooting rampage left four dead and three wounded last May wants more people to obtain concealed weapons permits and carry guns, including on the University of Idaho campus, to improve public safety.

After an incident like that, this guy has the guts to come out and speak against the politically correct atmosphere that contributed to this outrage.

"In my opinion, if there were more students with (concealed weapons permits), the world would be safer," Latah County Sheriff Wayne Rausch told the Lewiston Tribune on Tuesday. "Just because we (law enforcement officers) are charged with protecting the public, doesn't mean the public shouldn't be able to protect itself."

Amen and amen brother. Cops only protect the public while we are physically there. Until we get there, you guys are on your own. Conduct yourselves accordingly.

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

Thank God They're OK

It has been a hellish stretch of road for our brothers in the NY State Police. One Trooper narrowly escaped death in the following incident as reported in the Post Standard. It happened yesterday:

HELD AT TROOPER'S HEAD, GUN JAMMED

Ronald E. McCarthy, of Granby, had already rammed his minivan into a trooper's SUV, attacked him with a 4-by-4 and fought through pepper spray, according to police. Now the 250-pound man had state police Sgt. Joseph Domagola pinned against a roadside guiderail, pressing the trooper's pistol against the back of Domagola's head, witnesses told state police.

"Oh, my God! No! Don't do it!" shouted a woman driving by, according to one witness.

By chance, the .45-caliber Glock malfunctioned.

With the help of another officer and passers-by, Domagola wrestled McCarthy to the ground and handcuffed him, witnesses said. McCarthy, 45, of 250 state Route 48, is charged with attempted murder of a police officer, attempted aggravated assault of a police officer and menacing a police officer, all felonies.

This is where you got to suck it up, wrestling on the side of a country road with a maniac trying kill you with your own gun. This is the stuff cop nightmares are made of.

The drama began at about 5 a.m. Saturday when state police got a call asking them to respond to a suspicious fire at the McCarthy residence, said Maj. Frank J. DeGennaro, the commander of state police Troop D.

The home was severely damaged. State police Investigator Scott Harrington interviewed McCarthy, who said he returned to his home at 3 a.m. after being out of town. McCarthy said he became upset because his wife and family were gone and some of their personal belongings, as well as family furniture, were also missing.

During the interview, McCarthy was distraught and angry over issues with his family, DeGennaro said. McCarthy left the state police barracks at around 8 a.m.

McCarthy came back to the barracks around noon, swore at his family and police, threw an empty beer bottle at a Trooper and then sped off. That's like chumming the water in the Sea World Shark Tank.

DeGennaro said Domagola witnessed the incident, hopped into his marked Chevrolet Tahoe and drove after McCarthy. Domagola saw McCarthy make a U-turn. McCarthy "then tried to ram his car head-on into the trooper car, but he missed," DeGennaro said.

Domagola turned his vehicle around and gave chase and McCarthy again made a U-turn, pulling off and stopping on the west shoulder of Route 57. DeGennaro said McCarthy waited there and intentionally drove into the path of the Tahoe, this time striking it head-on.

Domagola got out of his SUV and went to check McCarthy for injuries, DeGennaro said. McCarthy immediately became combative, and Domagola tried to subdue him with pepper spray.

A word about pepper spray, mace and other non-lethal weapons. Sometimes they are more non-lethal than at other times. Some people do not react with getting sprayed with a highly irritating fluid other then getting highly irritated themselves. Or in numbnuts case, more irritated than he was to begin with. McCarthy tried to yank other people out of their cars but failed.

McCarthy reached into the bed of the truck and pulled out a 4-by-4, 8-foot long, wood fence post. He began swinging it at Domagola, witnesses said.

DeGennaro said Domagola drew his pistol and told McCarthy to drop the fence post several times. When he didn't comply, Domagola fired one round, but it landed in the pavement, the major said.

McCarthy dropped the lumber and Domagola put the pistol back in its holster, he said.

I'm not going to second guess the Trooper on this. The State Police are highly trained in the use of deadly physical force and he reacted as he was trained.

McCarthy charged at Domagola again and the two wrestled against a guide rail with McCarthy trying to grab the gun, police said.

"The man had all his weight against the trooper with the gun in his right hand," Miller said. "He was pointing and pressing the gun up against the trooper's head and at his neck, yelling something at him."

McCarthy weighs 250 pounds; Domagola weighs 200 pounds, DeGennaro said. Both men are a little over 6 feet tall, the major said.

"He pointed the barrel of the weapon at the sergeant's head," DeGennaro said. "They both had their fingers on the trigger guard."

DeGennaro said the empty shell from Domagola's first round was still in the chamber, likely preventing the second round from going off.

DeGennaro credits passersby and witnesses to the accident with distracting McCarthy, screaming at him to stop.

This is known as a "stove pipe jam." The gun could not go off because the spent cartridge never cleared the breech. Therefore the Glock could not cycle completely and the next round in the magazine was never loaded.

Thank the Good Lord above. The next paragraph is about gun control in a crisis.

Miller said Domagola took advantage of McCarthy's distraction to get the upper hand. "The next thing I know the trooper had his gun back," Miller said.

By then, the major said, Harrington had arrived on the scene.

Harrington "immediately went at him and I went right behind him," Miller said. Harrington "grabbed him on top and I grabbed his legs and the man fell to the ground. This man was still struggling to get free, but the officer ended up getting him handcuffed."

McCarthy and Domagola were treated at A.L. Lee Memorial Hospital in Fulton and released. Domagola had scrapes and bruises, DeGennaro said.

This round goes to the good guys. At the end of his tour Trooper Domagola went home to be with his family. Right where he belongs.

I wonder how long it took him to fall asleep that night...

Saturday, June 23, 2007

Big Weasel Goes To The Big House

Another anti-gun advocate says one thing and does another. Are we surprised?

From the LA Times.

The founder of an antiviolence group called No Guns pleaded not guilty Thursday to federal weapons charges. Hector "Big Weasel" Marroquin is accused of selling an assault rifle, a machine gun, two pistols and two silencers to undercover federal agents last fall.

But he needed this armament to protect his family, in case he decided to invade El Salvador.

Marroquin, 51, of Downey, is a onetime member of the 18th Street gang who founded No Guns in 1996.

The 18th Street gang is one of the most violent criminal organizations to come out of the City of Los Angeles in the past forty years. It spans several states and crosses international borders.

No Guns received $1.5 million from the city as a subcontractor on anti-gang efforts, but its contract was canceled last year.

The same people who were advocating for Tookie Williams must have hired this jackass to run anti-gang activities. It's like hiring a child molestor to babysit your kids.

But isn't this a lovely business model? Check it out.

1) You sell guns to the gangs that you were hired to eliminate.

2) When the gang shoots people with the guns you sold to them, you go back for to the idiots in City Hall and ask for more money to run your anti-gang gig because the gang problem is getting worse.

3) Then you sell more guns to that same gang because now their people are getting whacked by the friends of the people of the other gang they whacked so they need more guns to whack them back.

Sweeeeeeeeeet.

And the liberals say that the tobacco industry is dangerous.

Marroquin is charged with three counts of manufacture, distribution and transport for sale of an unlawful assault weapon, along with one count each of machine gun conversion and possession of a silencer. He remains free on $260,000 bail.

Now where do you suppose he got that kind of money to put up for bail? Sure, California taxpayers, who else? And who supported this knucklehead?

His champions included former state Sen. Tom Hayden.

This just gets better and better.

But some law enforcement officials believed that Marroquin was a front man for the Mexican Mafia prison gang and that NO GUNS was a facade for illegal activity and a channel for public funds.

One was Richard Valdemar, a retired sheriff's sergeant and expert on gangs who led an investigation that resulted in the first federal racketeering trial of Mexican Mafia members; it resulted in the conviction of 13. Valdemar said the Mexican Mafia has a long history of using anti-gang and drug rehabilitation groups as fronts to acquire public funds.

"This is a major part of their operation," said Valdemar, whom Marroquin unsuccessfully sued for defamation of character in 2002.

Valdemar said he and others voiced these concerns to the Sheriff's Department and the city of Los Angeles.

Hee! Hee! The cops knew what was going on with these so called advocate groups, but did the City listen? Did the Sheriff's Department listen?

Oops.... who is the Sheriff? Is he the guy that completely ignored a court order and released Paris Hilton after three days in the slammer? Oh, that Sheriff.

Nevermind.

As part of its gang intervention efforts, the city through its L.A. Bridges program contracted with Toberman Settlement House, a Harbor-area social services agency, which in turn hired NO GUNS in 2003.

Bill Martinez, director of gang intervention programs for Toberman, said NO GUNS was hired because it was the only group in South Los Angeles working with Latino gangs. Over the next three years, NO GUNS collected more than $1.5 million in city funds as a subcontractor.

Marroquin's organization was contracted to help find job training for gang members and to mediate cease-fires, said Angela Estell of the city's Community Development Department.

I wonder what kind of training the Latino gang members received? Based on Marroquin's past experience, let's see what he has to offer.

Marroquin and his family have a long history of run-ins with police.

In 1998, Marroquin was tried and acquitted on illegal weapons charges. At the time, he was on probation for brandishing a gun at sheriff's deputies who had gone to his house three years earlier in response to a domestic disturbance call.

In 2001, the charred body of Hector Romero, the boyfriend of Marroquin's daughter, Charleeda, was found near Wrightwood, Valdemar said.According to several Marroquin family members, Romero was playing Russian roulette and shot himself to death.

They allegedly drove the body to the Wrightwood area of San Bernardino County, where gasoline was poured on Romero's crotch and ignited, said Valdemar, who participated in the investigation. San Bernardino sheriff's homicide
detectives eventually filed the case as a suicide and charged Charleeda Marroquin with mutilating a body, Valdemar said.

During the investigation, police searched Marroquin Sr.'s house and found knives and police batons — a violation of his probation — as well as 18th Street gang writings. Marroquin was charged with a probation violation.

Valdemar said his last contact with Marroquin was in 2003, when Marroquin moved to Cudahy. He said Marroquin began taxing Cudahy gang members and drug dealers, claiming authority from the Mexican Mafia.

Sergio "Checo" Villa, a local gang leader with his own mafia ties, objected, Valdemar said. Villa put together a crew to kill Marroquin, which included a gang member who was a Sheriff's Department informant, he said. Fearing that the informant might kill Marroquin, Valdemar said he told Marroquin of Villa's plans.

"He thinks I'm going to kill him," Valdemar said. "I said, 'I'm not here to hurt you. But you're in trouble. They're going to kill you.' He's says, 'It's just a misunderstanding.'

"Several days later, Villa was shot dead on a street in Cudahy, according to a county coroner's report. The homicide remains unsolved.

This guy is just a fount of wisdom to gang members. And what's this tax crap?

Tax collection is another area of criminal activity where 18th Street is well established. Typically, in an area that is claimed as territory by 18th Street, gang members will collect a tax from any business: legitimate or criminal. The potential taxpayers include street vendors, shop owners, prostitutes, and drug dealers, as well as the businesses which exist in the neighborhood.

Members of 18th Street then threaten to kill any individual who refuses to pay the tax. In 1994 alone, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office prosecuted 30 murders that were the result of hits made by 18th Street gang members for failure to pay taxes.

When the Mob did it, it was called extortion. Well, that's the Left Coast for ya.

Anyone wanna hire Big Weasel as a tax consultant? Or a fire prevention specialist?

Next Time, Empty The Damn Gun In His Teeth

This story out of Louisiana where the cops are more interested in taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens rather than criminals.

METAIRIE, La. (AP) -- A man with a gun was trying to force a woman out of her car at a fast-food drive-through when the woman's 17-year-old son wrestled the gun away from him and shot him.

Carl Chestnut, 44, of Kenner, is expected to survive wounds to his head and body, and will face armed robbery charges once he is released from East Jefferson General Hospital, Col. John Fortunato, a Jefferson Parish Sheriff's Office spokesman, said Monday.

It would have been safer to hand over the keys and let the gunman drive off, Sheriff Harry Lee said Monday.


What Sheriff Lee doesn't say is that the perp, Carl Chestnut, was wanted for the murder of a 60 year old trailer park manager.

Arby's Carjacker Wanted For Murder
Posted by Wanda Miles June 19, 2007

The suspect in Monday's attempted carjacking at a Metairie fast food restaurant is wanted for murder.

The Kenner Police Department issued an arrest warrant Tuesday for Carl Chestnut, 44, in connection with the death of Odrey Bordelon, a Kenner trailer park manager who was strangled in his home earlier this month.

Bordelon's body was found June 5 in his home at Dixieland Mobile Home and RV Park, 176 W. Airline Drive, Kenner. Authorities believe the motive was robbery.

And this....

Second Man Booked In Trailer Park Killing
Posted by Wanda Miles June 20, 2007

The second man wanted in the June 5 strangulation of a Kenner trailer park manager has surrendered to police, authorities said today.

Wayne Hayden, 50, of Metairie turned himself in Tuesday night, said Detective Shaun Watson, a Kenner Police Department spokesman.

Hayden and Carl Chestnut, 44, are suspects in the death of Odrey Bordelon, 60, who was found strangled in his apartment. Both will be booked with first-degree murder and aggravated burglary, police said.


Perhaps the Sheriff was just being particularly dense in this case. If that 17 year old lad had not wrestled the gun away from Chestnut and used it to defend his mother, who knows what other evil would have been committed by this murderer?

If every potential victim of a violent crime fought as hard as this teen, how many murders, robberies, etc. would be prevented? How many Sheriffs would be out of a job?

Criminals do what they do because 1) they like it, and 2) it's an easy way to get money. When a criminal perceives that there is a real risk of getting hurt or killed, all of a sudden that job at the car wash starts looking pretty good.

There are several studies, hotly contested by gun control advocates, that show how firearms are used by citizens to defend themselves. Called "Defensive Gun Use" (DGU), the studies indicate that at a minimum, over 100,000 DGU's occur every year (National Crime Victimization Study). Another study that strikes fear into gun confiscators, is that there are actually over 2 million DGU's annually (Kleck and Gertz). Whether you own a gun or, as in the instance cited above, take it away from someone else, you must be mentally and emotionally prepared to use deadly physical force to protect yourself and your loved ones.

Marvin Wolfgang, the late Director of the Sellin Center for Studies in Criminology and Criminal Law at the University of Pennsylvania, considered by many to be the foremost criminologist in he country, wrote this review of Kleck and Gertz's landmark defensive gun use study in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995:

"I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police ... What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. ["Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published in that same issue of The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology].

The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. ...I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research.

Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence.

The National Crime Victim Survey does not directly contravene this latest survey, nor do the Mauser and Hart Studies. ... the methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it. ... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically.

I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well."

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Virginia Says Enough

The Virginia Attorney General, Robert F. McDonnell, has sent a letter to New York City Mayor Bloomberg advising him to stop
... arming private investigators with hidden cameras and sending them into Virginia gun stores to try to make illegal buys.
This July a Virginia law goes into effect that prohibits this practice unless the local police or federal officers are part of the investigation. So Bloomberg wants to make a point by sending non-governmental contractors into another state to make illegal gun buys.

If Bloomberg is so concerned, why doesn't he use his police to do this? The NYPD are routinely involved investigating countless interstate criminal enterprises in cooperation with the feds and out of state local investigators. Why isn't he doing this now?

This is nothing but political football and an attempt to extort money by initiating civil suits against the gun dealers.

He has already been smacked down by the US Department of Justice for making these same illegal gun buys. When you start setting up people who otherwise would commit no crime, it is called entrapment. And by his illegal actions, Bloomberg endangered ongoing investigations by legitimate law enforcement officials.

several law enforcement officials said as many as eighteen active law enforcement investigations were put in jeopardy.

We call it deconfliction when cops from different agencies notify each other when they are commencing an investigation in another jurisdiction. You don't want your cops shooting at each other or wasting their time by investigating your cop who is investigating their cop. And you certainly don't want some private dick pissing all over your case without so much as a by your leave.

Bloomberg needs to get smacked again when the Virginia cops start locking up his PI's. And they'll get slapped with a felony to boot.