Via Keep and Bear Arms comes this WIBW TV story:

Kansas is one of only four states that doesn't give you the right to carry a concealed weapon, but some lawmakers are trying to change that. Thursday was the second day of hearings on the bill. The bill would require a background check, a permit fee and firearm training.

The committee heard testominy from a woman who says a gun could've stopped her from becoming a victim.

"I woke up to a man holding a knife to my throat. He repeatedly raped me a sodomized me, and I couldn't scream cause my girls would come and get hurt," said the woman who did not want to be identified.

This victim says if she would've had a gun, her life might be different now. Stories like this inspired Representative Candy Ruff to file conceal and carry legislation.

Similar legislation has been passed by both state houses in the past but then KS Governor Graves vetoed it. Unfortunately, I have a feeling this is also just "pissing-in-the-wind" since the current Governor Kathleen Sebelius is quite the liberal on most issues. But one can hope and I offer my support to my Kansas comrads-in-firearms...

By the way, that first line of the story about "Kansas is one of only four states" not to allow concealed carry? I can think of some others that might claim to have a mechanism to permit it but who then make it damned-near impossible to actually obtain the license...

Thanks to Weekend Pundit for the tip, New Hampshire may be on it's way to permitless concealed-carry. From WMUR TV:

The New Hampshire Senate voted Thursday to let gunowners carry concealed weapons without a license.

The 13-10 vote sent the measure to the House.

Supporters argued that the constitutional right to bear arms shouldn't be infringed by requiring gunowners to apply for licenses.

Alton Republican Robert Boyce said the constitution gives people the right to protect themselves. But opponents said getting a license from the local police department is a needed safeguard.

As the Manchester Union Leader says in a Feb. 18th editorial:

Regarding Senate Bill 454, which would repeal the concealed carry permit law, the question is whether the people of New Hampshire will be safer with or without a law requiring a state permit to carry a concealed firearm. It must be understood that criminals already carry their weapons secretly, so the bill will have no bearing on the gun-toting activity of the criminal class. Where it is designed to have impact is in the ability of law-abiding citizens to deal with that criminal class.

Citizens who are given a sudden reason to fear for their safety would be the primary beneficiaries of SB 454. For example, this winter saw a rash of rapes in central Manchester. No one has been charged with those crimes, and the perpetrator probably remains at large. Under current law, Manchester women who want to stash a pistol in their purse for self-protection have to wait for their permit applications to go through. Advantage: rapist.

Exactly. Naturally, various Democrats and other liberals are opposed to the bill and all the usual suspects such as the Brady Bunch and the N.H. chapter of the Million Mom March are uttering dire warnings. I've heard though that Gov. Benson would sign the measure.

By the way, since Vermont (which does not require a license or permit for concealed-carry) and New Hampshire share a long border, I wonder if CC will be reciprocal within the two states?

I'm sure there will be a battle between the Southern residents of N.H. (liberal, moved up from Massachusetts) and the more conservative, freedom-loving North. Stay tuned...

From Yahoo/Reuters:

Rats on Menu as Bird Flu Leaves Fowl Aftertaste

Bird flu may have decimated poultry businesses across Asia, but rat dealers have never had it so good.

"I've got a constant stream of customers," Van Vath, a rat butcher in the western Cambodian town of Battambang, told Wednesday's edition of Cambodge Soir.

Yum. And not fatty so England can't tax it...

What is it about the countries of Europe? If there's a way to regulate or legislate the personal choices people make, they do it. It's as if the whole continent is a branch of the American Democratic Party. From AFP:

Britain's government is considering trying to tackle increasing levels of obesity by imposing a so-called "fatty food tax" on foodstuffs with poor nutritional value, according to a report.

Other measures being considered include standardised labelling of fat and sugar contents in processed foods, The Times said.

Fast Food Tax is something that has been proposed here in the US by various leftist control-freaks but so far it's been resisted. Now here comes England to once again show us how it's done. I wonder what France will think of this? Will their croissants be considered "fatty food?"

First they took away our guns, then our potato chips... Residents of Bloomberg's gulag in NYC take note.

Well, it's obviously too late to produce my "Weekly Check..." for this week; it will return on Monday. I'm sure the bias in gun story reporting isn't going to disappear by then. But here's something I found interesting...

I picked up USA Today yesterday and there was a major story in the first section (not the financial section) titled: Most economists credit Bush's tax cuts in rebound. There's no link available unless you want to pay money to read it. And that's the point of this post. First, I'll type a quote from the article:

Most economists say the tax cuts helped stimulate consumer spending and the economy in the short run. The economy grew at a rapid 8.2% annual rate in the third quarter of last year, when 25 million taxpayers received rebate checks of up to $400 per child. "The basic conclusion is that it's been a very important factor," Ed McKelvey, an economist at investment firm Goldman Sachs, says of the tax cuts.

While this article does point out that there are other factors involved, it squarely places much of the upsurge -- or continued spending by consumers -- at the feet of President Bush's two tax cuts. There's also a chart that clearly shows the up-tick (my word) in consumer spending following the receipt of refund checks.

Now, I'm not stupid and I realize that a LOT of jobs have been lost over the past three years, but I certainly don't blame Bush for that, since he firstly inherited a declining economy (fueled in part by the bursting bubble of the "dot-coms" and further exasperated by the events of Sept. 11th.) Also, irregardless of events, it's a good bet that companies who sent jobs across the border or overseas would have done so anyway. Those jobs will never come back no matter what Frenchy (my new name for Kerry) says.

The point of this post isn't the news that President Bush is doing what he can to help the U.S. economy get back on it's feet. It's about what the media, in this particular case the nationally distributed USA Today chooses to make available "on-line."

I usually buy two or three newspapers everyday. I am a bookworm and newspaper-worm. I like to read leisurely and with physical contact and yes -- rightly -- most media doesn't offer everything in their "print editions" available for free to the public on the web. Otherwise, they'd all be out of business. But here's my gripe: USA Today makes many stories available on the web, both on their own website and also on Yahoo. AND... They also make available several of their financial articles for free on Yahoo here.

Here's the thing, USA is perfectly willing to post a bunch of articles for the world to read that (granted -- cover many subjects) are critical of the USA and specifically G.W. Bush and the economy. But when they have a major story about how President Bush actually did something right in regards our economy, they mysteriously DON'T make it a free link and instead bury it on their own website and make you PAY for it if you want to read it.

Look, I freely admit that maybe I'm just being paranoid. But I find it interesting that anything USA Today prints that is critical of Bush is available for free on the web and anything complimentary of him is not. Bias? You be the judge... And notice that no broadcast network thought to run with the story either. God forbid that our leftist media should give Bush credit for anything going well...

I guess I should say something about how the Democratic primaries are going. It would appear, even with John Edward's close second yesterday in Wisconsin, that Sen. John Kerry has the nomination sewn-up. Too bad. I can't stand him.

I am not a fan of G.W. Bush and I had really hoped that the Dems would put up a credible alternative. Dean is out. The guy who I would have most likely supported -- Joe Lieberman -- is out. Edwards is sort of an unknown, at least on the Second Amendment. I think he supports it but he is a trial lawyer (which means he would never sign a bill granting immunity to the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits) and also probably toes-the-line on various liberal positions on firearms.

But Kerry is absolute trash. Anyone who's been reading Alphecca for any length of time knows I have documented his anti-American position on the 2A as long ago as November of 2002 and had more last June.

Aside from ridiculous "hunting" photo-ops, this guy has voted FOR every single anti-2A bill that's ever crossed his desk. Need more proof? From Kerry's own website:

"George Bush may talk a good game when it comes to battling violent crime, but under his Administration smart anti-crime strategies have been under assault. He's chosen tax cuts for the wealthy and special favors for the special interests over funds to put cops on the beat. Our police officers are fighting a two-front war - battling common criminals on one hand and making our homeland secure from attack on the other. Taking cops off the beat is exactly the wrong thing to do. George Bush has left communities with this choice: raise local taxes, cut local services, or layoff cops."

"We can do better - if we put public safety ahead of powerful interests. As President, I will fight to preserve and strengthen the assault weapons ban. One in five law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty is killed with an assault weapon. The police officers who put their lives on the line every day should not be outgunned by criminals armed with weapons of war. We need to stand with them - and stand up to the NRA. I¹ve done that throughout my career - and I¹ll do it again as President."

"Some in my party have adopted a different strategy. Howard Dean has said he's against a ban on assault weapons, a background check for criminal records, and even a short waiting period for buying a gun. In falling in line with the most extreme elements of the NRA, Howard Dean didn¹t offer straight talk, he offered a straight-up pander to one of the most powerful special interest groups in America."

So let's look at this nonsense. "One in five law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty is killed with an assault weapon." That's ONLY if you broaden -- really broaden the definition of "assault weapons" to include almost any semi-automatic. Let me tell you folks, Frenchy not only supports but would expand the "assault weapons" bill to include almost every hand and long gun.

Now look at this line: "Howard Dean has said he's against a ban on assault weapons, a background check for criminal records, and even a short waiting period for buying a gun." So Kerry also supports a waiting period before a LAW ABIDING citizen can buy a firearm. Pity the poor estranged woman who's being terrified by a mental and abusive husband. I suppose Kerry thinks "restraining orders" actually work.

If John Kerry becomes president, it is the end of the Second Amendment and probably most of the rest of the Bill of Rights. Heck, he's been endorsed by the Brady Bunch and the Million Mom March!

I gotta' tell you this also, if Kerry becomes president, expect Jacque Chirac to be appointed Secretary of Defense and Chancellor Schroder to fill in as National Security Advisor.

Kerry has been completely ineffectual as a senator, getting almost no bills of his passed in all the years in Congress. He's flip-flopped on almost every issue and here's the thing, this slime has presented NOTHING in the way of ideas on almost any issue. It's as if he's simply saying, "Vote for me because I'm not Bush and I served in Viet Nam." What a piece of crap Kerry is. What a phony hypocrite. What a waste of flesh.

Gosh Jeff, how do you really feel?

So, if the race is between Bush and Kerry, I will indeed vote for Bush.

---

Update 2/19 comment received:

It's hard to judge Edwards's position on guns from his voting record (he doesn't have a voting record), but I live in NC, so I wrote him a letter asking him to vote against an AWB renewal. His reply: "I believe the best approach to this important issue is one which strikes a balance between two important principles: protecting the legitimate rights of law-abiding gun owners and keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals and children. As you know, our state has a rich tradition of hunting and sporting uses of guns. I value this part of our state's history, and I believe that the Second Amendment gives law-abiding citizens the right to own a gun. I also believe that there are a few common-sense measures that can improve the safety of firearms and help protect all of us from weapons in the hands of violent criminals.

I understand your view about the assault weapons ban, especially your concern that certain firearms used extensively by hunters and sportsmen are covered by the ban. While I am always open to suggestions for reform, it is my belief that the law already gives hunters and sportsmen a great deal of flexibility to choose the right weapons. Although you and I may disagree about this, please be assured that I will keep you thoughts in mind as the Senate considers this matter."

He mentions "hunters and sportsmen" several times. The man's a lawyer; he can't be that ignorant of the intent of the 2nd Amendment...can he?

-- Anthony A.

Nope! Just gone to heaven for awhile. I've been staying in a friend's camp in the Northeast Kingdom near the Canadian border for the last nine days. Just me, my thoughts, and a stack of books and stuff.

I've always thought of Fairlee as rural but the cabin I've been staying in is really out there. It's located on old papermill forest tracts with some other scattered camps. This one is unusual in that it is winterized. My friend uses it when he goes snowmobiling as it's just off the VAST trails. But it's remote alright with the only signs of civilization being the occasional groups of sledders buzzing by like a swarm of bees.

It's off the "grid" with just propane lights and refrigerator and a wood stove plus a propane/wood furnace. There is a generator that has to be used every couple of days to fill up the water tank and empty the septic storage tank. No TV, phone, or computer.

I did bring a battery operated radio in case the world was about to end and in truth, while I had brought a couple cartons of food, I did make a couple of trips to the local gas station/mini-mart for supplies and the local newspaper.

During the day just a local country music station and a religious station could be heard but at night big stations from away drifted in -- all of them carrying the same "Coast-to-Coast AM" Art Bell/George Noury program.

And let me tell you, when you're hearing about aliens and other assorted weirdness and you're in the middle of nowhere... Well, I did start to hear things. But I did have my trusty Marlin Camp Carbine with me.

Mostly though, I had wanted to "get away" from everything, people, news, politics, et al. I had carted up about a years worth of unread Asimov's and Analogs sci-fi magazines as well as my nearly complete collection of Jane Haddam "Gregor Demarkian" mystery paperbacks. By the way, if you liked "A Gathering of Saints" and "The Da Vinci Code" you would like her stuff. Not as fast paced -- more cozy than that, but still in the same vein (*slurp*) with lots of mayhem at various Catholic institutions. I especially enjoyed her book True Believers.

I got home last night. I'll try to tackle some of the email piled-up later. For now, I have so much surfing to do to catch-up with everything so I'll just post random stuff. Anyway, it was all very restful but I guess it's back to the real world...

Folks, for almost a year and a half I've been blogging every single week. I need a brief vacation to recharge my batteries. I'm going to take this week off to get away from the computer and politics and guns and elections and cold weather and exposed breasts and everything else and just get some r&r. I'm sneaking off to an undisclosed location where there is no TV or computer. I'll see you all next week. Be well.