Alphecca

Weekly Check on the Bias

Welcome to my Weekly Report on media gun bias. Talk about a "slow news day..."! Still, one never knows what I'll find as I Google the net. Take, for instance, this nifty Rubberband Machine Gun from Backyard Artillery:

Here's a description of it from their website:

This beauty is a fully funcitonal machine gun with TWELVE rotating barrels and a live action trigger. Loads 12 bands per barrel for a whopping 144 rubber bands that shoot off as fast as you can turn the handle! Great fun for kids of all ages. MORE than just an amazing machine, this is a true work of art.

Hand crafted in the USA, The rubber band machine gun uses a similar mechanism to the famous Gatling Gun of the old west. It stands 40 inches tall and 44 inches from the handle to the tip of the barrels. The turret effortlessly spins a full 360 degrees and tilts from 45 degrees up to 22 degrees down so you can easily keep a moving target in your sights, no matter where it goes.

We keep one loaded in the office at all times to defend against hostile takeover attempts and pushy vendors.

I agree, it is a work of art and it reminds me of a grandfather clock I once saw that was made entirely of wood: The gears, pins, springs, everything.

Anyway, this allows a clever segue to this Arizona Republic story:

CHANDLER - People who carry toy guns that look real won't be breaking the law here anymore.
The City Council rewrote a municipal weapons ordinance that used to make it a misdemeanor to carry a loaded air gun, BB gun or paint-ball gun in a public place even though it is legal to carry real guns under state law.

The council made it legal to carry the less-lethal weapons but not fire them or display them in a threatening manner on public property. It's still legal to use them on private property.

The law came under fire from parents who said the toys aren't dangerous and the restrictions were too harsh.

But school and police officials said they are concerned about the real-gun appearance of toys and the potential for injury from plastic projectiles.

We all know that some locales have been trying to ban toy guns (or replica guns) because there have been instances of them being mistaken for real guns. Most replicas come with a bright orange muzzle plug, I believe. Paint guns couldn't be mistaken for anything but what they are, and BB guns are a part of growing-up.

None-the-less, if it is legal to carry real guns in Arizona then common sense says that toy ones should be allowed as well.

That neatly segues to a GayWired.com report about the story out of Utah of armed gays not being welcome to attend gay pride events. I've already covered it extensively but since many of you only check-in here for this Weekly Report:

(Salt Lake City, UT) - A week after the leader of a gay firearms group challenged a controversial policy from organizers of the state's annual gay- and lesbian-pride events which would have banned legally concealed firearms from most of the events, GLBT Community Center of Utah Inc. Executive Director Valerie Larabee, who is also a lifelong shooter, said on May 27 that organizers will instead welcome people who choose to take their legal firearms and instead prohibit only those who violate laws.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said that the change is an encouraging reiteration of the 2003 and 2004 pride-events rules when organizers agreed that people with legally concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events. Nelson's challenge of the policy which led to the change won the attention of state and national news media.

"Despite an unnecessarily bad start to the upcoming events, the organizers understand now that people with Utah Concealed Firearm Permits aren't the disruptive or illegal parts of their events," Nelson said. "No one who has met every legal requirement including daily FBI criminal-history investigations should be arbitrarily denied the legal, responsible and safe exercise of our human right to defend ourselves if we choose and need to do so."

As pro-2A blogger Zendo Deb points out (and the news story didn't), Utah laws on concealed-carry would make it illegal to exclude legally permitted gun toters from attending public events held on government property. So again, we have common sense (with legal backing) taking hold, this time with real guns instead of toy ones.

That story would dovetail nicely with the one from Merry Old England, where there is no common sense. Having disarmed their law-abiding citizens of any remaining right to fending--off the mutants preying on them at increasing rates, now, some misguided medical professionals are calling for kitchen knife control:

A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

The research is published in the British Medical Journal.

The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all.

I first mentioned this story last week and it's really so silly that all I can do is reprint my sarcasm:

This is sure to upset the many great chefs of England, a country deservedly renowned for it's world-class cuisine (think Haute Britannia) and second only -- perhaps -- to the fabulous fare served-up by African bushmen.

Returning to the US, there were more disturbing developments in Illinois. The Peoria Journal-Star had the confusing headline to this story, "Victories for both sides of gun debate". Here's a quote:

Illinois lawmakers handed victories to both sides of the gun-control issue Monday, approving a measure that cracks down on gun shows but making it easier for people to transport weapons.

The House voted 89-28 to close a loophole that allows people to buy firearms at gun shows without going through the normal criminal-background check. Minutes later, lawmakers approved a provision that would let gun owners travel the state with their weapons without having to comply with communities' stricter rules on safe gun storage.

Both bills go to Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who pledged to sign the gun show bill. He said he would veto an earlier version that would have also required the destruction of gun purchase records.

Certainly the Brady Bunch are happy that the so-called "gun-show loophole" has been closed. I've written that I have mixed feelings about it. Almost all dealers at gun-shows are FFL licensed and already run the NICS instant check on purchases. This bill would prevent individuals from selling to each other, say, outside in the parking lot. Unfortunately, it could (probably) also be used to declare that any group of friends who get together almost anywhere (the range or someone's living room) and swap or sell guns could also be called a "gun show" and require them to find a cop or dealer to affect the transfer.

Why am I concerned? You can find the text of the bill here. Here's the part that bothers me:

"Gun show" means the entire premises provided for an event or function, including but not limited to parking areas for the event or function, that is sponsored to facilitate, in whole or in part, the purchase, sale, offer for sale, or collection of firearms at which:

(1) 25 or more firearms are offered or exhibited for sale, transfer, or exchange; or

(2) not less than 3 gun show vendors exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange firearms.

"Gun show promoter" means a person who organizes or operates a gun show.

"Gun show vendor" means any person who exhibits, sells, offers for sale, transfers, or exchanges any firearms at a gun show, regardless of whether the person arranges with a gun show promoter for a fixed location from which to exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange any firearm.

(k) The Department of State Police shall adopt rules to carry out the provisions of this Section.

Emphasis mine.

I can head to the range with a group of co-workers or friends and there will be more than three of us and probably more than 25 firearms between us and other folks there. Is that a "gun show" if some of us are willing "in part" to sell any of our guns?

Are we "vendors" if there are three of us and we show (exhibit) each other our firearms?

I will agree that this bill has narrower definitions than some that have been attempted in other states, but we've seen time-and-again that some cops don't believe in the Second Amendment as it applies to ordinary citizens and are over-zealous to re-interpret various laws.

I would have preferred that one of the definitions of "gun show" include that it was advertised as such, or was held in a public venue where admission is charged, or some other such clause.

An earlier provision to require the police to destroy transfer records after 90-days has been stripped from this passed version of the bill.

As for the other bill mentioned in the article, to unify transport laws so that what is legal (having an unloaded firearm in the trunk of your car) in some parts of the state would now be legal in all municipalities -- I presume that is the "victory" for our side. That is, if you have to drive through Chicago with a pistol in your car, you couldn't be arrested because Chicago bans handgun ownership. This is similar to laws passed in Virginia and Colorado (although Denver continues to fight it) and only makes sense. However, as the article points out:

The other bill, which passed 79-36, would ease rules on gun owners traveling with their weapons. Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Norris City, said all gun owners should have to comply with the same state law on how guns should be stored, not have to worry about whether they're traveling through a city that has a stricter storage ordinance.

Blagojevich spokeswoman Rebecca Rausch said the governor intends to veto the legislation.

"It is an NRA bill that we believe weakens the restrictions of home rule cities," she said. "It undermines local gun ordinances."

Rather a hollow "victory" if the governor has already declared his intention to veto the legislation.

To explain why bills like this are needed, let me again use the "car analogy" in a hypothetical state: In most parts of a state, radar-detectors are legal, but one city (we'll call it "X City") has decided to enact their own ordinance that says they are not. You have to drive from "B City" to "N Township" but the highway passes through "X City" and you forgot or didn't know they had such an ordinance. You are now a criminal subject to arrest if caught with that radar-detector while in "X City". You get the picture...

Incidentally, while the Peoria Journal-Star didn't bother to get any conflicting opinions to the gun show "loophole" bill, reporter Jennifer Miller of the Herald and Review did:

Critics argue the legislation will hurt people who obey the law.

"I just feel that the rights of law-abiding gun owners need to be protected," said state Rep. Bob Flider, D-Mount Zion. "I have a position that law-abiding citizens do not commit crimes."

Lawmakers also claim the bill gives government too much power.

"We have enough laws," said state Rep. Bill Mitchell, R-Forsyth. "I think we need to get to the point that if people commit crimes with a weapon, they enhance their penalties. Some of our Chicago colleagues think the problem is the guns, not vice versa."

Good for her! That's how reporters are supposed to do it.

Yesterday was Memorial Day. While most news outlets focused on stories about our brave soldiers, this past Sunday CBS -- the sewage network -- decided to repeat their lie-filled report on .50 caliber rifles:

[Gun control advocate] Diaz says the .50-caliber rifle made by Barrett and other manufacturers is a menace in the hands of terrorists. "This gun is designed and built to smash things up and to set things on fire," says Diaz. "It’s a battlefield weapon. Yet it is sold as freely on the American civilian market as a .22 bolt action rifle."

What's wrong with Barrett's product?

"I'm glad Ronnie Barrett makes his rifle for our military forces. I think it's a great thing on the battlefield," says Diaz. "I just think that there are certain occasions when we say in our society, this product is such a threat to our health and safety, and in this case, our national security, we will not allow it."

I'm not going to rehash all the lies contained in this piece, first aired in January. Others have done that admirably. I'll just point out (as I did last week) that the .50 caliber rifle has never been implicated in any terrorist attack here in the US and by the way, if we're interested in banning anything that is "such a threat to our health and safety" then surely Diaz would support the ban of swimming-pools and automobiles. Actually, more people have died in cars driven by Ted "the lifeguard" Kennedy then have been shot with a .50 caliber rifle here in this country.

Incidentally, as one of my readers pointed out the other day, is it any coincidence that CBS rebroadcast this as the bill to ban .50 caliber guns works its way through the NY legislature?

Here's what's happening at some other blogs:

John Longenecker views some of the opposition to the confirmation of John Bolton as resulting from his 2A support.

Jed at FreedomSight demonstrates why women and other minorities should be embracing the Second Amendment.

The Techno Gypsy writes about shooting in the rural South. It's not just confined to there, we have public areas where we can pop-a-few here in Vermont.

I have to get this posted now. Thanks, everybody, for stopping by!

Carnival of the Cordite

My friend at Countertop Chronicles is hosting this week's Carnival of the Cordite. Excellent job and lots of great reading tips. Head on over there while I head off to work...

60 Minutes to Repeat .50 Story

As we celebrate the freedoms we enjoy by giving thanks to our fallen soldiers, CBS has decided that some freedoms aren't worth fighting for. Tonight they'll repeat the hack-job they did on the .50 caliber rifle. I received about ten emails about this, thanks, everyone.

Gays With Guns Welcome

In an update to a post I put up a couple weeks ago about the Utah Pride Parade organizors not welcoming legally armed gays, there's been a change for the better. David Nelson writes:

UTAH PRIDE DROPS BAN, WELCOMES GAYS WITH GUNS

SALT LAKE CITY -- A week after the leader of a gay firearms group
challenged a controversial policy from organizers of the state's annual
gay- and lesbian-pride events which would have banned legally concealed
firearms from most of the events, GLBT Community Center of Utah Inc.
Executive Director Valerie Larabee, who is also a lifelong shooter,
said on May 27 that organizers will instead welcome people who choose
to take their legal firearms and instead prohibit only those who
violate laws.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said
that the change is an encouraging reiteration of the 2003 and 2004
pride-events rules when organizers agreed that people with legally
concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events.
Nelson's challenge of the policy which led to the change won the
attention of state and national news media including 365Gay.com,
Alphecca.com, Connexion.org, DaveKopel.org, DeanEsmay.com,
Feeds4All.com, FortPride.org, Free-Press-Release.com, Funender.com,
GayGuideToronto.com, GayLinkContent.com, GayMonkey.com, GayWired.com,
HellInAHandbasket.net, JohnRLott.com, KCPW Radio, LatinoGLO.com,
LesbiaNation.com, LostTarget.com, PeskyApostrophe.com, RobThurman.com,
UtahConcealedCarry.com, UtahIndependent.com, WisconsinGayNews.com and
The Michelangelo Signorile Show on OutQ Sirius Satellite Radio among
others.

"Despite an unnecessarily bad start to the upcoming events, the
organizers understand now that people with Utah Concealed Firearm
Permits aren't the disruptive or illegal parts of their events," Nelson
said. "No one who has met every legal requirement including daily FBI
criminal-history investigations should be arbitrarily denied the legal,
responsible and safe exercise of our human right to defend ourselves if
we choose and need to do so."

The blogosphere gets results! Anyway, this is a good thing.

Memorial Day

I guess it's become a tradition (for me, anyway) to repeat my Memorial Day post from the past. For my many new readers here, enjoy.

Always remember and honor our fallen heros.

From Arlington National Cemetery:

Government issued headstones.




Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers, Amphitheater behind.




An aerial view of the Tomb of the Unknown Soldiers, showing the Mall and Fountain in front of.



On the sloping land to the left are the headstones that memorialize those whose remains could not be recovered.

This is not a day for joy. It is not a day for a "Sale." It is or should be a solemn day where we remember those who have or are at this very moment serving our country. Many have made the ultimate sacrifice to preserve the freedoms we continue to enjoy. May God bless them and may He comfort their families. May we all give thanks to them and always remember them on Memorial Day, and every other day as well. Regardless of what you think of the merits of a particular war, these brave men and women chose to serve and protect and defend all of us. There are many more young servicemen and women buried elsewhere in this great country of ours, and overseas. There are also many still who are alive but living in poverty or lanquishing in our underfunded Veteran's Hospitals. Whatever your views on conflict, know that all who served in our Armed Forces deserve respect, honor, and a "thank you."

Photos from Arlington Cemetery.org

---

Update 5/30/04:

Here is a beautiful nighttime illustration by Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jane Campbell of the World War II Memorial taken from the Department of Defense web site:

Folks, it's very easy to debate the merits of various conflicts that our great country has been involved in, though I really don't see how anyone could argue that after Pearl Harbor, much less the atrocities of Hitler's war, we could not become involved in World War II. Indeed, the question is why we didn't become involved sooner.

Most towns have a memorial statue of some sort dedicated to our fallen heros. Why not skip the crass, commercial sales tomorrow and instead find out where that local memorial is. Then, take your family to it and sit there a few minutes to reflect on those brave, dedicated souls who -- to this very day, indeed, this very minute -- have laid down their lives for our security. Take your children if you have some, and bring along a history book to explain to them what is required, and WHY it is required that so many of our fellow citizens have fought and died for our wonderful way of life, our once-in-a-lifetime experiment in democracy that we proudly call America. Tell your children that, quote: Freedom is not free.

Today, tomorrow, let us think fondly of and honor and remember those who have given their lives for us.

The Jews have a wonderful tradition of (during Passover) opening the front door, and leaving a dinner plate with food (wine?) for the ghost of the prophet Elijah. Tomorrow, when you have your barbecue, leave a seat, a place-setting for the spirit of a fallen soldier. Maybe, after explaining to your kids why, offer a moment of silence. And tomorrow night, why not write a check to the local veteran's hospital; just a simple donation to, in some small way, say, "thanks."

God bless America. It's not perfect, but it's better than anywhere else. Let's try to make Memorial Day a bit more serious, a bit more important than we have been lately. Let's all try to remember what this day is really all about.

Here's How It's Done

From Yahoo News:

A local homeowner shot and killed an intruder who entered his home overnight, Local 4 reported.

The 70-year-old Detroit resident fired four shots at a man who apparently broke into the home on the 3200 block of Fullerton.

The suspect was taken to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead at about 4 a.m. on Friday, the station reported.

Neighbors said the homeowner had a right to protect himself against the suspected robber.

"That's his house. He had to protect himself," said Jay Miller, a neighbor.

Curly Humphry, an 86-year-old neighbor who lives on his own, said he also keeps guns in his home to protect himself, the station reported.

"I've got a .38 rifle (and) a shotgun," Humphry said.

Police continue to investigate the shooting, but no charges are expected in the case.

Sounds about right to me.

A Fine Essay

Kim du Toit has a fine essay up, fittingly for the Memorial Day Weekend, titled The Traitors Within Our Walls. Required reading.

Okay then...

Lot's to do at work. See you soon, and really: Thanks for stopping by!

CCI Ammo

I happen to like CCI ammo. I've never had a problem with CCI 9mm and .38. I think their .22 is better than Remington, which seems to leave a residue of some sort. But a friend today argued otherwise. I will point out that CCI .22 has brass shells. I think it is great and at $13.99 a brick, it's a great deal. The 9mm had -- I think -- aluminum shells but it works fine in my handgun. Just my opinion. Talk amongst yourselves...

Gun Amnesty in Manitoba

Attention All Criminals: June is Gun Amnesty Month! From the National Post of Canada:

Police forces across Manitoba have declared a gun amnesty for the entire month of June.

RCMP and municipal forces are asking people to turn in their unwanted or illegal firearms.

Manitoba Justice Minister Gord Mackintosh says he doesn't expect hardened criminals will surrender their weapons.

But he says many law-abiding citizens may have inherited guns they do not need.

Mackintosh says those guns can sometimes be involved in accidental shootings, or be stolen by criminals.

He says the focus of the amnesty is to get guns off the street.

Yeah, but the law-abiding folks (who might foolishly turn in firearms) aren't the ones creating problems on "the street". The thugs, the mutants, the gang-bangers aren't going to show-up to collect a gift certificate to Lou's Pizzeria.

Of course, we all know that the Canadian Gun Registry has been a two-billion-dollar fiasco. Now, cops in the provinces are reduced to begging the nice people to disarm themselves. The criminals never will.

See You Tuesday...

I did warn you all, a couple days ago, that this weekend is my company's biggest event. I just put in an 11 hour day. I have to be back at five in the morning. I might put up a post now and then (and a couple tonight) but don't look for me until Tuesday when I do my "Weekly Check...". Sorry, but real (paying) life calls...

New England BloggerShoot

Jay at Toys In The Attic is organizing a NorthEast BloggerShoot for sometime this Summer. Sounds like a great idea to me so I'll plan on attending if I can swing it with my job (I have alternating weekends off). The plan is to have it in Massachusetts which, um, I guess will rule-out anyone bringing handguns. Still, I have some plinking rifles and will look forward to it. I'll need to learn what's necessary for me to "transport" rifles into the state. Head over there if you are also interested.

And along those lines, I hope Dale Chan and Deb will be having another NE Blogger Bash as they did last year.

CA Cops Not Trusted With Guns?

In California, even cops aren't trusted to have guns! From the North Country Times:

ESCONDIDO ---- Calling last year's San Diego County Fair a "model of a safe and secure public event," fair officials are maintaining for the second year a policy banning off-duty law enforcement officers from carrying their guns beyond the front gate.

The move has prompted the Escondido Police Officers Association to urge law enforcement officers regionwide to boycott the fair.

In a letter sent Wednesday to the fair's general manager, association President Paul Woodward said he will encourage Escondido association members "and all San Diego County law enforcement and their families" to stay away from this year's event June 10 to July 4 at the Del Mar Fairgrounds.

Linda Zweig, fairgrounds spokeswoman, said Thursday that the 2004 fair "came off as a model of a safe and secure public event," because of stepped-up security measures such as video cameras and metal detectors, as well as a "substantial and highly visible security force."

"Our incident rate at the fairgrounds is low," Zweig said, explaining the ban on off-duty officers carrying guns. "We want to provide a safe venue."

I guess the implication is that off-duty police would make the San Diego Fair, er, unsafe?

T-Shirt Control

...First they came for our guns, then our kitchen knives:

A&E doctors are calling for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives to reduce deaths from stabbing.

A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

The research is published in the British Medical Journal.

The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all.

This is sure to upset the many great chefs of England, a country deservedly renowned for it's world-class cuisine (think Haute Britannia) and second only -- perhaps -- to the fabulous fare served-up by African bushmen.

Since this will probably have no effect on crime in England, the next step is t-shirt control:

STEREOPHONICS frontman Kelly Jones has spoken of his confusion after being stopped from boarding a flight at Heathrow Airport - because the gun print on his T-shirt sparked a security alert.

The Cwmaman-born singer was celebrating yesterday after the band won 10th best album of all time for Performance & Cocktails in a UK-wide poll.

But it also emerged Jones was taken aside by over-vigilant officials after his clothes set off a metal detector.

"It was a strange one. I walked through the metal detectors and took off my belt and phone, but my boots were left beeping," he said.

And Jones was left amazed when told his T-shirt, which showed a pistol, was unsuitable for flying in.

"My T-shirt distracted the guy and he told me that I wasn't supposed to wear it. It had a painting of a gun on it and he started claiming that if the T-shirt was embossed it could be used as something.

"But surely it was more of a concern that my boots were beeping and he hadn't even asked me to take my shoes off!"

Of course, many schools in the US, practicing "zero tolerance", already ban any clothing that has a gun or an NRA symbol on it. I guess I just thought that airport screeners were a little more serious and adult about deciding which items pose a threat to airline passengers. It never ends...

Another Ploy by Gun Grabbers

A gun control group in Ohio is trying to get newspapers to stop printing ads by individuals selling guns. From Ohio News Network:

Gun-control backers are asking Ohio newspapers to drop classified ads from unlicensed gun sellers, a legal practice the advocates say can put guns in the hands of people who would flunk the background checks required by federally licensed dealers.

The Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence has written letters to Ohio's approximately 80 daily newspapers and followed up with calls to many of them. At least six newspapers ban classified ads sold by unlicensed dealers or have other restrictions, and about 10 are considering such bans, said Toby Hoover, coalition director.

A supporter of gun rights questions why dealers are being singled out when newspapers publish ads for other businesses where illegal activity could flourish. He also wondered how effective the effort would be. Few gun classifieds appear in newspapers, according to Frank Deaner, director of the Ohio Newspaper Association.

"What's next?" asked Chad Baus, spokesman for Ohioans for Concealed Carry. "Shall we ban the printing press or color printers because some use them to counterfeit currency, or the typewriter because the Unabomber used it to write his letters?"

For that matter, should bake-sales be advertised? After all, has everyone who baked something had their kitchens inspected? Do they have dairy licenses? What about folks advertising free puppies? I'll bet they're not licensed.

This is just another roundabout by the Brady Bunch types who are failing at everything else they try. It just never stops...

Having said that, I have to admit that when I've sold to individuals, they always had to be "known to me" and I would never place an ad and sell to a stranger. Mostly when I've been (*sob*) forced to sell a gun, I do it to a gun shop. I don't get as much money but I do get the peace of mind that whomever buys the gun will go through a background check.

Gun Maker Shield Bill Advances

Here's some good news from the Washington Times:

The House Judiciary Committee yesterday approved a bill that would shield gun manufacturers, distributors and importers from lawsuits seeking damages for the misuse of their products.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act now will move to the House floor, where it is expected to pass.

Lawmakers from rural districts said the time has come for Congress to protect the firearms industry from lawsuits that could put it out of business.

"This measure provides protection only against suits based on the criminal or unlawful acts of third parties -- not against their own negligent or criminal conduct," said Rep. Cliff Stearns, Florida Republican and one of the bill's sponsors. "Under this measure, manufacturers or sellers must operate entirely within federal and state law and are still liable for acts of negligence and for defective products."

Opponents of the bill have argued that distributors and dealers who knowingly sell guns to criminals or fail to report suspicious purchasing activity would be shielded. They say repeated purchases of handguns is a clear indication that the firearms are not for personal use.

Rep. Rick Boucher of Virginia, one of 46 Democrats supporting the bill, said there is no reason to allow the lawsuits to continue.

"The effort of cities to sue gun manufacturers because someone misuses a firearm is nothing but an attempt to impose gun control by judicial means," Mr. Boucher said.

He said the criminal who uses the gun should be held responsible, not the person who sold it legally or the company that made the gun.

Courts have agreed with that position. Mr. Stearns said judges have thrown out 20 cases brought by localities against gun manufacturers and distributors. Every appellate court has dismissed such cases, and 30 states have banned the lawsuits.

The claim by the Brady Bunch that "repeated purchases of handguns..." is nonsense. Sure, if someone is scooping-up ten-at-a-time, but I know lots of enthusiasts who buy several handguns every year because each one is different and interesting, or they shoot competitively (many own 3-4 of the same model) or they just want to.

Frankly though, it shouldn't matter how many or why. As long as the dealer followed the law, he should be protected. If the gun-grabbers want to limit the number of guns someone can buy, they should do it through legislation, not through civil lawsuits.

As for the claim that legitimate suits could not go forward, here again for the umpteenth-time is the text in the bill that belies that:

(5) QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTION-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term `qualified civil liability action' means a civil action or proceeding or an administrative proceeding brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, or penalties, or other relief' resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party,
but shall not include--

(i) an action brought against a transferor convicted under section 924(h) of title 18, United States Code, or a comparable or identical State felony law, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;

(ii) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;

(iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought, including--

(I) any case in which the manufacturer or seller knowingly made any false entry in, or failed to make appropriate entry in, any record required to be kept under Federal or State law with respect to the qualified product, or aided, abetted, or conspired with any person in making any false or fictitious oral or written statement with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of a qualified product; or

(II) any case in which the manufacturer or seller aided, abetted, or conspired with any other person to sell or otherwise dispose of a qualified product, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the actual buyer of the qualified product was prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm or ammunition under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code;

(iv) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product; or

(v) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that where the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injuries or property damage.

(B) NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT- As used in subparagraph (A)(ii), the term `negligent entrustment' means the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.

(C) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- The exceptions enumerated under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A) shall be construed so as not to be in conflict, and no provision of this Act shall be construed to create a public or private cause of action or remedy.

The example of the DC snipers is often used and lies are spread that the suit against the Bull's Eye Gunshop would have been prevented by this legislation. WRONG! Although the case was settled out of court, the suit could indeed have proceeded because Bull's Eye "lost" a lot of guns, including the one used, and had terrible record-keeping.

It is the suit against Bushmaster that would have been prevented (on advice from their insurance company, they also settled).

This bill only "shields" those who manufacter or sell firearms according to the letter of the law. Most of them do and there is no reason to constantly subject them to frivolous lawsuits from greedy municipalities (and their lawyers).

Lastly, gun control advocates claim that "no other industry enjoys such protection!" Well folks, maybe it's time they did.

It will be interesting to see if the bill can make it out of Congress this time without the usual suspects trying to attach the bogus "assault weapons ban" renewal to it as they did last Spring.

Light Posting Over Weekend

The company I work for holds it's big tent sale this weekend -- 12+ hour days, etc. Posting will be light at best. Just thought I'd warn you...

IL House Rejects AWB

Daley and Blagojevich are having a tough year! From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Illinois lawmakers narrowly rejected a proposed ban on assault weapons and .50-caliber rifles Tuesday amid intense lobbying by both sides in the debate.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has repeatedly called for stronger gun control measures, and Gov. Rod Blagojevich, a fellow Chicago Democrat also got personally involved by calling lawmakers and distributing videos demonstrating the firepower of assault weapons.

The National Rifle Association argued that the proposed ban was too broad.

[...]

Rep. Edward Acevedo, a Democrat and also a Chicago police officer, denied the ban would have such a broad impact, saying it contained specific exceptions meant to exempt hunting and target-shooting guns and focus instead on weapons with more sinister uses.

"I believe these weapons are made for mass destruction and war," Acevedo said.

The definitions of an assault weapon vary, but the term generally applies to semi-automatic rifles with large ammunition magazines and such features as folding stocks and bayonet mountings.

And therein lays the lie. There is no real definition of an "assault weapon". They look scary so let's ban them. The fact that they operate the same way as most other guns, the fact that they shoot the same ammo, it's all lost on the Governor, Mayor Daley, and other legislators who instead focus on cosmetics.

As I've said before, any gun, or knife or baseball bat or pork chop is "assaultive" when misused by a criminal. In this context, assault should be used as a verb, not an adjective, and the user should be prosecuted accordingly.

Weekly Check on the Bias...

"The manufacturer of a .50-caliber sniper rifle boasts that it can bring down an airplane with a single shot, and that's just one of the things about it that worries local lawmakers."

That's the opening paragraph of a story in today's NY Daily News. It's "boast" is from a brochure put out by Barrett Rifles, claims the writer of this piece.

Ronnie Barrett of Barrett Rifles

Not having seen the brochure I have to go out on a limb and presume it was a brochure aimed towards the military market, for one of Barrett's military models, and used an explosive round (which I DO know) is not available to civilians. The .50 caliber ammo that ordinary folks can purchase is a simple bullet about 2 1/2" long. I could show you a lot of popular hunting caliber cartridges that fire something equal in length (and almost in width) that could NOT bring down a plane. And if I hear one more gun-grabber claim that, "well, it could puncture the skin of a plane sitting at rest on an airstrip" I'll... Well, I'll point out that your dad's deer-hunting rifle can do the same.

Back to the article:

"There is no reason to have this [sniper rifle] in a civil society - in our society," said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-Mineola), who compared the rifle to a Humvee, saying that it is "the best of the best" in terms of sniper rifles.

She and other Democratic lawmakers are hoping to outlaw the rifle with a proposed state law called the Anti-Terrorism and Aviation Act. They say the gun could also be used to wreak havoc on chemical plants or oil storage facilities.

McCarthy, an outspoken gun-control advocate, appeared with the bill's sponsor, Assemblywoman Patricia Eddington (D-Medford), in Garden City yesterday. They urged state lawmakers to pass the bill, saying it would further protect Americans from terrorism.

Folks, this is division-by-zero. The .50 caliber firearm has not been implicated in any terroristic attacks in this country since -- actually, never! The sponsors of this NY legislation might as well claim that banning pretzels will "further protect Americans". Sure, a pretzel has never been used for terrorism but a mutant could take one a couple-days-old, set it on fire, and drop it into a bag of fertilizer...

The Daily News writer, E.W. Blankenbaker, wasn't able to produce a single quote from any makers of .50 guns, or from anyone who might provide some balance to McCarthy's claims. In fact, this piece is so biased that I had to check twice to be sure it wasn't an editorial.

For a lot more discussion on Barrett and the .50 caliber rifle, see my post here and also the comments here, both from this past January.

UPDATE: Ronnie Barrett responds. I sent off an email this morning to Ronnie Barrett asking for his comments on the allegations -- something the NY Daily News reporter apparently didn't bother doing. He wrote back:

Jeff,

Those are all VPC mis-quotes, Barrett had a Military brochure about 18 years ago that read;

“Heavy Firepower for light infantry:

This revolutionary Light .50 allows sophisticated targets to be destroyed or disabled by a single soldier. Armored personnel carriers, radar dishes, communications vehicles, aircraft and area denial summations are all vulnerable to the quick strike capability of the Barrett 82A1.”

After the first gulf war the Marines added SCUD missiles to the list. Of course all of these would have to be on the ground.

No military in the world is training its soldier to use the Barrett rifle to engage flying platforms of any kind. One would be quite foolish to suggest it, and more the fool to believe it, and regretfully, more to print it.

Barrett has information for civilian sport shooting and another for military uses and another for police. The VPC covers this up and represents to the lawmakers that we are irresponsibly marketing our product to the law-abiding citizen with these tactical scenarios.

This is the smoke that the VPC uses to deceive the legislators that don’t do their homework on topics they will be voting on.

Ronnie

So we see clearly now that Rep. McCarthy is simply mouthing the propaganda of the Violence Policy Center fundraising lobbyists. We also see that I make a better journalist than Blakenbaker!

On the other hand... Just when you thought you'd heard all you ever wanted to about missing or found fingers, we get a pointer from WFSB TV (CT):

Joel Gonzalez is bringing cutting edge equipment to the Internet. Literally.

Gonzalez, who cut off the tip of his finger outside the state Capitol in 1994 to protest efforts by the gun lobby to scuttle tougher firearms laws, is selling the homemade guillotine and hammer used in the severance on eBay. The bidding begins at $50,000.

"When I did it, people said I was crazy," said Gonzalez, a former Bridgeport city councilman. "I wonder what they are saying now."

Gonzalez told the Connecticut Post that he wants to sell the items to raise money needed to continue his activism in causes including bringing prayer back into schools, finding more money for education, abolishing the death penalty and, of course, strengthening gun control laws.

[...]

"States must consider amputating the trigger fingers of anyone who uses a firearm to commit a premeditated crime," he said.

Here's the eBay listing. I would have swiped one of the pictures from it but Gonzalez's digital snaps aren't very good. [Sorry, I should be shot for that one...] Here's a [literal] quote from it:

I as an activist have a different proposal for legislation that is sure to cut gun crime better than any other being considered, without affecting the Constitutinal right to bear arms. I was determined to be heard regarless of how the hearing process was manipulated.

I believe that the best method to send a clear and strong message to a violent society who think that using a firearm is the only way to solve differences. At times Laws must contain strong measures to keep society safe.

I believe that a strong,effective and necessary panishment for anyone commiting crimes with guns is long overdued. States must consider amputating the trigger fingers (index) of anyone who use a firearm to commit a premeditaded crime.

Well, I don't know if such a law would help us get a grip on gun crime but I have to hand it to Gonzalez, I'd support a similar measure for sex offenders.

Yesterday I mentioned a Chicago Sun-Times editorial lambasting a bill passed by the Illinois House that would close the supposed "gun show loophole" but also require state police to destroy records of firearm purchases. I won't repeat what I said, you can scroll down to it below. The Times-Press (IL) reported without bias:

“Somebody that is a law-abiding citizen should not have a problem with having a background check,” Police Chief Bill Hawbaker of the Silvis Police Department, said. “But once you know that somebody doesn’t have a criminal history, I don’t see a need to keep those records.”

The Illinois State Police keep gun transaction records for an unlimited amount of time, according to Rick Hector, a State Police spokesperson. The information includes date, time, the person's Firearms Owner’s Identification Card number, the federal firearm licensee number, a transaction number and whether the request was approved or denied.
“These records protect law enforcement officers when they serve a warrant or arrest a suspect at home,” Hector said. “It is important for officers to know whether a suspect is potentially armed.”

Chief of Police Brian Zeilmann, of the Ottawa Police Department, said he is in favor of the measure which will “keep guns out of the hands of criminals.” Although keeping records for an unlimited amount of time doesn’t really have a big impact in solving crime, he added.

“I never understood why gun purchases at gun shows don’t always require background checks,” Chief of Police Joseph Beard of the Bourbonnais Police Department, said. If records come up clean, there isn’t a need to keep records but he added that some sort of measure should be in place to track sales to people who may be providing guns to criminals.

So three police chiefs questioned didn't really see the need to hold onto records. That's good. Because keeping them would be tantamount to a gun registry and we all know where THAT leads.

I (along with many readers here) have to wonder about the fourth cop, Rick Hector from the Illinois State Police saying that officers need to know "whether a suspect is potentially armed". Shouldn't an officer always ASSUME that a suspect is armed? Isn't that just standard training?

Turning to non-U.S. stuff for a moment, I stumbled across this story from the Philipines:

MAYOR Rodrigo Duterte [of Davao City -js] is planning to buy 150 shotguns that he will distribute in the barangays [neighborhoods -js] frequently faced by problems on hooliganism.

In his weekly television program Sunday, Duterte said he will arm barangay tanods with shotgun so they could put a stop on gangsters in their respective barangays.

The mayor then reiterated his earlier warning to parents of youngsters involved in hooliganism to better buy coffins for their children now while it is still cheap.

He warned that if these children will not reform, then they will probably die sooner or later.

Duterte admitted that he is alarmed by the incidence of gang wars in several barangays especially in the city proper.

He said he would be forced to fight violence with violence just to put a stop to these riots.

"We have to terrorize the terrorists, kidnap the kidnappers, kill the killers just to stop these criminals," Duterte said.

Sounds like a lovely place to visit but seriously, while many in the US think that an unarmed populace will eliminate crime, this is a city where the unarmed have been at the mercy of gang mutants. Mayor Duterte "gets it" and knows that the police can't (or won't) be everywhere. He's going to fight fire-with-fire and give community leaders the chance to defend their neighborhoods. I think his words say it all. I also think his advice to parents of these thugs ought to be heard by parents here in the US who are letting their kids run wild.

San Francisco take note!

And from the department of Here's how it's done, the story of another fool who tried to rob a gun store, from the Tennessean:

A confrontation over stolen guns in Greenbrier's Guns and Leather store yesterday led to a man being shot twice in the back by a store worker, injuries that later proved fatal, Police Chief Richard Hatfield said.

"At 1:30 (p.m.), we were called on a gunshot call," Hatfield said. "A person named Courtney Hall II was injured, shot twice. He had come into the store and taken weapons out and re-entered the store. An employee recognized what was going on and a confrontation happened. That led to him being shot by the employee."

Hall was obviously a resident of Darwin's Waiting Room (thank you Dennis Miller).

Here's what's being chatted about elsewhere:

James R. Rummel has thoughts on the M16 and the XM8 for you military buffs or anyone interested in the developement of modern weapons.

Bruce at mASS BACKWARDS shows the reason why folks need to arm themselves: Because revolving door justice puts the mutants right-back-out on the street!

I was going to mention the Christian Science Monitor editorial about the DC gun-rights push but instead I'll just direct you to Say Uncle, who takes it apart.

Denise at The Ten Ring writes about blue states lost to folks like us. It was inspired by Kim du Toit's post here. Fortunately, for those who like the region itself, there's still NH and Vermont.

Geek With A .45 is carrying way to much!

Blogonomicon reports on a challenge to the Brady Bunch.

Time to get this posted. I'll be doing it live, as usual, on the Cam Edwards' Show during his first hour (3 Eastern) later today. Thanks for stopping by!

Illinois Gun Bill Doomed?

Here's some whining from the Chicago Sun-Times:

Such is the political clout wielded by the gun lobby, the soonest gun law reformers can expect to take two steps forward without taking one or two steps back may be the 12th of Never. At least that's the way it must look to Gov. Blagojevich after the Illinois House approved a bill that would close the ''gun show loophole'' -- something he and Mayor Daley badly want to do -- but as part of a costly trade-off.

That trade-off, as provided for in another component of the bill, would be the elimination of the State Police database of gun sales. Gun lobbyists claim it is improperly used to harass lawful gun owners. Denying any misuse, law enforcement officials say the database is crucial to their efforts to track straw purchases and gun trafficking -- and to protect themselves by knowing which suspects are likely to be armed.

Blagojevich has vowed he will veto the bill, which fell two votes short of a veto-proof margin in the House after it passed with a wide enough majority in the Senate, even if that means seeing the loophole stay open indefinitely. As it stands, the loophole allows those who buy guns from private owners at gun shows to forgo the criminal background checks that Illinois law requires of other prospective gun buyers.

However, the National Rifle Association says it can deliver enough votes to override a veto. It should know, having designed this two-faced bill not only to grease the path for the database-killing measure in the House, but also to put the governor in precisely the no-win situation in which he finds himself.

If the state police are allowed to keep all purchase records, that amounts to a "gun registry". That allows for easy confiscation if future bans are enacted. That must be avoided at all costs. We've seen what happened in England, Austrailia, Germany, and now Canada.

As for the gun show "loophole", it depends on how they are defining gun shows. Other states have tried to call any three friends getting together in someone's living room or at a range a "gun show". If that is the case here, then I'm glad there's a chance the whole mess will be vetoed.

It will be the 12th of Never before the Sun-Times is satisfied with the level of gun control in Illinois.

Only Ken...

Ken Summers answers a survey. Read his first and then second responses. Heh. It took me a second to get it...

Ohio U Students Oppose CCW

From the Ohio University Post:

Ohio University students might be forced to live with owners and carriers of concealed weapons -and even forced to sleep with guns in their own rooms -if a bill up in the Ohio Senate passes.

Under the Ohio House of Representatives Bill 91, universities, churches, day-care centers and homes must allow people to bring concealed weapons on their premises, currently considered a criminal act.

The bill also allows non-licensed citizens to carry handguns, provided they meet licensing qualifications. This means that even if a person is not licensed and is caught carrying a concealed weapon, it is still legal as long as they could potentially be licensed.

Student Senate passed a resolution last night opposed to this portion of the bill. It asks the Ohio house to allow universities to decide individually if they will allow concealed weapons on their campuses.

"Guns in public places, on college campuses such as academic buildings, libraries and dorms is a bad idea," said Linsey Pecikonis, senator for women's affairs.

I was tempted to say something snarky but in reality, I'm not sure I disagree. Granted, the students would have to be 21-years of age to be granted a license in the first place but college students are notorious for out-of-control behavior and excessive drinking. I know that's painting with a broad-brush.

I'd be curious to know my readers' thoughts on this. I'd especially like to hear from those of you currently in school. Consider this the forum of the day. Hmmm, that could be a new feature here at Alphecca!

Video Blogging

Hey! Bill Quick is now videoblogging his Daily Pundit Report. Cool beans. Warning, you need the Windows Media Player.

Lousy Weather Again

It's cold and raining. Again. For a change. I really wanted to go to the range today to continue getting to know with my new rifle. Rats!

NYT Public Editor Lets Loose

New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent has some thoughts about reporter and columnist responsibility:

In my very first column I identified myself as "an absolutist" on the First Amendment. Apart from having come to realize that absolutism in the pursuit of self-definition can be a bit reckless, my thoughts on journalism and the First Amendment have changed considerably. I still cherish the First; I still think it's the cornerstone of democracy. But I would love to see journalists justify their work not by wrapping themselves in the cloak of the law, but by invoking more persuasive defenses: accuracy, for instance, and fairness.

[...]

Op-Ed columnist Paul Krugman has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults. Maureen Dowd was still writing that Alberto R. Gonzales "called the Geneva Conventions 'quaint' " nearly two months after a correction in the news pages noted that Gonzales had specifically applied the term to Geneva provisions about commissary privileges, athletic uniforms and scientific instruments. Before his retirement in January, William Safire vexed me with his chronic assertion of clear links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, based on evidence only he seemed to possess...

Ouch! Read the whole thing because it's quite interesting.

Pro 2A Gays Will March in Utah

David Nelson of the Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah writes in:

DESPITE BAN, GAYS WITH GUNS TO ATTEND PRIDE EVENTS

SALT LAKE CITY -- With an expected attendance of almost 30,000 people,
the state's annual gay- and lesbian-pride events planned for June 8
through 12 will continue to be one of the largest outdoor events
organized in the capitol city. But, the leader of a group whose members
own and use legally concealed firearms, and attend the events said that
an events rule which would ban "weapons of any kind" is too broad,
unenforceable and shouldn't discourage the members from attending the
events with their firearms if they choose to do so.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said
that the rule, which was published in May is a departure from the 2003
and 2004 pride events when their organizers agreed that people with
legally concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events
and adopted no such rules. Nelson said that his requests to the
organizers to revise the new rule remain unanswered.

"Previous organizers understood that people with Utah Concealed Firearm
Permits have met every federal and state legal requirement to choose
carrying legally concealed firearms, and welcomed us," Nelson said.
"There were no complaints at the 2003 and 2004 events. The previous
organizers didn't confuse the difference of legal and illegal
firearms."

There's more but I can't find a link on his website. I'll put the whole thing in the extended entry. Anyway, he feels that searching people would quickly become an effort in futility. Like him, I find it strange that some groups that are fighting for their rights would deny others theirs.

Here's his whole letter:

DESPITE BAN, GAYS WITH GUNS TO ATTEND PRIDE EVENTS

SALT LAKE CITY -- With an expected attendance of almost 30,000 people,
the state's annual gay- and lesbian-pride events planned for June 8
through 12 will continue to be one of the largest outdoor events
organized in the capitol city. But, the leader of a group whose members
own and use legally concealed firearms, and attend the events said that
an events rule which would ban "weapons of any kind" is too broad,
unenforceable and shouldn't discourage the members from attending the
events with their firearms if they choose to do so.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said
that the rule, which was published in May is a departure from the 2003
and 2004 pride events when their organizers agreed that people with
legally concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events
and adopted no such rules. Nelson said that his requests to the
organizers to revise the new rule remain unanswered.

"Previous organizers understood that people with Utah Concealed Firearm
Permits have met every federal and state legal requirement to choose
carrying legally concealed firearms, and welcomed us," Nelson said.
"There were no complaints at the 2003 and 2004 events. The previous
organizers didn't confuse the difference of legal and illegal
firearms."

"New organizers announced their plan to search all attendees and their
personal property, but I suspect their 30,000 searches would quickly
become impractical and a public-relations disaster," Nelson said. "The
organizers might discover some people with weapons -- weapons which
would be legal except when they're improperly concealed -- but the
organizers may do little more than invite law-enforcement officers to
intervene legally, which they're not obligated to do. The organizers
may not, however, deny admission to those people with legally concealed
firearms or confiscate the firearms."

Previous organizers invited Nelson in 2003 to debate transgender
University of Utah Professor Barbara Nash, who also serves as the
founder of Gun Violence Prevention Campaign-Center of Utah, about the
idea of firearms for self defense.

"Both Professor Nash and I have been issued state concealed-firearm
permits," Nelson said. "While I don't know if she carried her legally
concealed firearm when we debated, I suspect she'd agree with me that
no one who has met every legal requirement including daily FBI
criminal-history investigations should be arbitrarily denied the legal,
responsible and safe exercise of our human right to defend ourselves if
we choose and need to do so."

Seven of the eight announced pride events are planned for the Salt Lake
City Public Library, Library and Washington squares, and the
surrounding city streets and sidewalks -- all government properties.
Because only one of the events is planned for church property, Nelson
described most of the events as public accommodations on public
properties where legally concealed firearms are permitted.

"State laws are very clear about who, what, when, where, why and how
legally concealed firearms may be prohibited," Nelson said. "In almost
every instance, the organizers fail the legal requirements that would
let them ban our firearms. Law-enforcement officers are, in fact,
prohibited from enforcing those local laws and rules that are
inconsistent with state firearms laws. If our hard-earned state permits
don't protect our Second Amendment rights in the public square -- this
city public square, they do no good."

A similar weapons ban was attempted in 2003 by pride-events organizers
in Columbus, Ohio. Law-enforcement officers who responded to the call
for assistance from events organizers instead protected the right of 12
attendees with legally carried firearms and warned the organizers that
their attempts to confiscate the firearms could be considered a federal
felony theft of firearms.

"As we did in 2003 and 2004, our members wish simply to attend and enjoy
one of the state's big events without complaint and without leaving one
of our constitutional rights at the festival gates," Nelson said. "It's
ironic that the celebration of a day which is set aside to renew the
call for equal rights is threatened with one of them being denied.
Banning legally concealed firearms isn't yet the easiest thing to do,
but I wonder if those who wish to do so would also assume the legal and
financial guarantee to protect everyone."

SSSU is a group of gender- and sexual-minority firearms advocates and
owners in the state, and supporters of the Pink Pistols idea that was
described nationally in 2000 by writer Jonathan Rauch for the legal,
responsible and safe use of firearms for their self defense and
shooting-sport competition and recreation, including those who are gay
and lesbian, and that of their families and friends. With hundreds of
members, they're also the largest such group worldwide.

Posted by Jeff Soyer at 08:11 AM | Comments (0)