Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Swamp drained. DOA.
Merry Christmas all!
(finally remembered my login!)
Aging gracefully Matey
Gun ban end fails to affect sales, crime
Deborah Sontag
New York Times
Apr. 24, 2005 12:00 AM
Despite predictions that the streets would be awash in military-style guns, the expiration in September of the decade-long ban on assault-style weapons has not set off a sustained surge in the weapons' sales, gun makers and sellers say.
It also has not caused any noticeable increase in gun crime in the past seven months, according to several metropolitan police departments.
The uneventful expiration did not surprise gun owners, nor it did not surprise some advocates of gun control. Rather, it underscored what many of them had said all along: that the ban was porous.
"The whole time that the American public thought there was an assault weapons ban, there never really was one," said Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, a gun-control group.
When the ban took effect in 1994, it exempted more than 1.5 million assault-style weapons already in private hands. Over the next 10 years, at least 1.17 million more of the weapons were produced - legitimately - by manufacturers that availed themselves of loopholes in the law, according to the Violence Policy Center.
Some manufacturers continued selling the rifles to civilians by "sporterizing" the military-style weapons, sawing off bayonet lugs, securing stocks so they were not collapsible and adding muzzle brakes. But the changes did not alter the guns' essence; they were still semiautomatic rifles with pistol grips.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0424assault24.html
Gun safety course a plus for the state
The Sarah Brady crowd must have their hair on fire, but Gov. Janet Napolitano has signed a bill to allow Arizona high schools to offer a voluntary course that would require students to discharge a firearm safely at a target to pass.
The law allows high schools to offer a voluntary one-semester course that will teach:
… The rules of gun safety.
… The basic operation of firearms.
… The history of firearms and marksmanship.
… The role of firearms in preserving peace and freedom.
… The constitutional basis of firearms ownership and the right to keep and bear arms.
… Practice at a shooting range and demonstration of competence with a firearm.
Even people who despise firearms and never would own one under any circumstances need to know what the course will teach.
First and foremost, everyone should know how guns work and how to handle them safely. Learning those things teaches responsibility, safety and basic "situational awareness."
Secondly, flash back to Dec. 7, 1993, when Colin Ferguson shot 25 people on a Long Island Railroad train in New York. He had a semi-automatic pistol that locks open when the magazine is empty and is safe until the shooter removes the empty magazine, replaces it with a loaded one and drops the slide on a live round.
As it happened someone with a quick learning curve realized that fact the second time Ferguson went to reload and overpowered him. Someone with a basic knowledge of firearms could have stopped him the first time the gun went empty.
This course will do the students and the state nothing but good.
http://prescottdailycourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=36&SubSectionID=73&ArticleID=35423&TM...
Gee, is this a sign that real democrats are taking back their party from the America-hating extreme liberals?
We hope!
Anti-gun activist arrested after firearm found at home
By JASON PISCIA
STAFF WRITER
A Springfield woman who began lobbying against gun violence after her son was shot to death in 2002 was arrested last week when police allegedly found an illegal gun and drugs in her home.
Annette "Flirty" Stevens, however, said Monday she's innocent, and the arrest is an attempt by police to get her to give up information about unsolved crime in the city.
The handgun, which had a scratched-off serial number, and drugs allegedly were discovered Friday morning inside Stevens' home in the 2500 block of South 15th Street. Authorities said they obtained a search warrant for the residence as part of an ongoing investigation of a recent series of drive-by shootings. No one has been hurt in the gunplay.
Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives assisted in the search.
Although police declined to get into specifics, Stevens has a "close connection" with one of two feuding groups involved in the shootings, Lt. Rickey Davis said Monday.
Stevens, 47, who is free on bond, admitted she does know some of the people allegedly involved in the drive-by shootings. But she said she only knows them because her interest in stopping gun violence - sparked by the shooting death of her son Jericko Clark, 20, on July 13, 2002 - has her in the neighborhoods talking to the youths.
She said the police wrongly believe she is the ringleader of the shootings, and they think she has information to solve those cases, as well as others, including the December murder of Andre Ayers, 22, who was shot as a procession of cars wound through the city's east side.
"This is a blatant attempt to try and undermine me," she said Monday night. "... They can't solve these crimes, and I'm familiar with these individuals, so they're going after me because I socialize with all of them."
Davis said detectives working on the drive-by cases - which already have resulted in four arrests - began taking a closer look at Stevens after her name came up in interviews with witnesses and informants.
"Basically, she has a close connection with individuals that have been involved in one side of these two groups that are feuding," Davis said, declining to elaborate.
After finding the handgun and drugs, police arrested Stevens at her job.
Stevens said she believes the search warrant was obtained illegally. She said no drugs were found in her home. And as for the gun, she admits to having it in the house. But she said it belonged to her son. She didn't find it until six or seven months after he died. Not knowing what to do with it, she wrapped it up, put it in a drawer and forgot about it.
Contacted later, Davis said he had no comment on Stevens' statements.
Since her son's death, Stevens has become involved in the anti-gun-violence movement. She helped establish and is president of a Springfield chapter of the Million Mom March, an organization that aims to prevent gun violence.
Last fall, she appeared with other anti-gun advocates at a Statehouse news conference to urge federal officials to renew a ban against semiautomatic assault weapons.
http://www.sj-r.com/Sections/News/Stories/49173.asp
Know what you mean, judd..
getting "senior discount" now.
The Klan's Favorite Law
Gun control in the postwar South
Dave Kopel
If you believe everything that Michael Moore says in Bowling for Columbine and his books, then you would think that "pro-gun" people are white racists, and that "gun control" would be a wonderful way to help minorities. But a look at America's past reveals what historian Clayton Cramer has accurately called "The Racist Roots of Gun Control."
After the Civil War, the defeated Southern states aimed to preserve slavery in fact if not in law. The states enacted Black Codes which barred the black freedmen from exercising basic civil rights, including the right to bear arms. Mississippi's provision was typical: No freedman "shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition."
Under the Mississippi law, a person informing the government about illegal arms possession by a freedman was entitled to receive the forfeited firearm. Whites were forbidden to give or lend freedman firearms or knives.
The Special Report of the Anti-Slavery Conference of 1867 complained that freedmen were "forbidden to own or bear firearms and thus.rendered defenseless against assaults" by whites. Or as a letter printed in the Jan. 13, 1866 edition of Harper's Weekly observed: "The militia of this county have seized every gun found in the hands of so-called freedmen in this section of the county. They claim that the Statute Laws of Mississippi do not recognize the Negro as having any right to carry arms."
Congress' "Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction" set forth the factual case for the need for a 14th Amendment to protect the liberties enumerated in the federal Bill of Rights. At the Committee's hearings, General Rufus Saxon testified that all over the South, whites were "seizing all fire-arms found in the hands of the freedmen. Such conduct is in clear and direct violation of their personal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States, which declares that 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"
Despite the statutes, and at the suggestion of Reconstruction governors and other leaders, blacks often formed militias to resist white terrorism. For example, in June 1867 in Greensboro, Alabama, the police let the murderer of a black voting registrar escape; in response, a freedman who would later serve in the Alabama State Legislature urged his fellow freedmen to create a permanent militia. "Union League" militias were formed all over central Alabama.
The freedmen slipped from white control. One planter protested that his workers were "turbulent and disorderly," coming and going when they wished, as if they had a choice whether or not to work. The Union League, protested another ex-master, was advising freedmen "to ignore the Southern white man as much as possible...to set up for themselves."
The next spring, the Ku Klux Klan came to central Alabama. The Klansmen, unlike the freedmen, had horses, and thus the tactical advantages of mobility. In a few months, the Klan triumph was complete. One freedman recalled that the night riders, after reasserting white control, "took the weapons from might near all the colored people in the neighborhood."
The same dynamic existed throughout the South. Sometimes militias consisting of freedmen or Unionists were able to resist the Klan or other white forces. In places like the South Carolina back-country, where the blacks were a numerical majority, the black militias kept white terrorists at bay for long periods.
While many blacks participated in informal, local militias, most of the reconstruction governors set up official state militias that were racially integrated. Like many other facets of the reconstruction governments (and the racist governments which followed them), the integrated "black" state militias were corrupt. The state militias, which sought to protect the state governments and the election process, were frequently in conflict with informal white militias. Arms shipments from the federal government to arm the militias were often intercepted and seized by white militias.
Official or unofficial, the black militias were the primary target of the white racist resistance. "Pitchfork" Ben Tillman, the U.S. Senate advocate of racism for many decades, joined a "Sweetwater Sabre Club" whose members seized control of South Carolina's Edgefield Country from a black militia in 1874-75, and attacked a black militia at Hamburg, South Carolina in 1876.
In areas where the black militias lost and the Klan or other white groups took control, "almost universally the first thing done was to disarm the negroes and leave them defenseless," wrote Albion Tourgeé in his 1880 book The Invisible Empire. (An attorney and civil rights worker from the north, Tourgeé would later represent the civil rights plaintiff in Plessy v. Ferguson.)
The Klan's objective in disarming the blacks was to leave them unable to defend their rights, a Congressional hearing found. Afraid of race war and retribution, whites were terrified at the mere sight of a black with a gun. As legal historian Kermit Hall notes, "From the southern white's point of view, a well-armed Negro militia was precisely what John Brown had sought to achieve at Harpers Ferry in 1859."
The Vicksburg white riot of 1874 typified the problem. According to a Congressional investigation, the whites conducted, "Unauthorized searches by self-constituted authority into private homes, searches for arms converted, as is unusual, into robbery and thieving...." The Congressional Report detailed one arms roundup:
One poor old man, half crazed, but harmless, sitting quietly in a neighbor's house, is brutally shot to death in the presence of terrified women and shrieking children. He gained his wretched living by hunting and fishing, and had a shot-gun. No one pretended that Tom Bidderman had anything to do with the fight, but he was black, and had a gun in his house, and so they murdered him for amusement as they were going from the city to restore order in the country.
The Radical Republican Congress observed the South with dismay. The Republicans intended to use federal power to force freedom on the South. One of the Radical Republicans' most important tools was the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which required states to respect basic human rights. While the vague language of the amendment has produced disagreement about exactly what is covered, the Congressional backers of the amendment seem to have intended, at the least, protecting the core freedoms listed in the national Bill of Rights. Announced Representative Clarke of Kansas: "I find in the Constitution an article which declared 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' For myself, I shall insist that the reconstructed rebels of Mississippi respect the Constitution in their local laws."
The earlier Freedman's Bureau Bill had also been squarely aimed at protecting the right to bear arms. The bill guaranteed federal protection of "the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and estate, including the constitutional right of bearing arms."
The Amendment was quickly emasculated by the United States Supreme Court in The Slaughter-House Cases and United States v. Cruikshank, The Supreme Court understood the social realities of the South. The Cruikshank decision gave the green light to the Klan, unofficial white militias, and other racist groups to forcibly disarm the freedmen and impose white supremacy.
One state at a time, white racists took control of government by using armed violence and the threat of violence to control balloting on election day. Freedmen and their white allies also resorted to arms. But white Republican governors were usually afraid that employing the black militias fully would set off an even broader race war.
The white South, while defeated on the battlefield in 1865, had continued armed resistance to Northern control for over a decade. When the North, an occupying power, grew weary of the struggle and abandoned its black and Republican allies in the South, the white South was again the master of its destiny.
In deference to the Fourteenth Amendment, some states did cloak their laws in neutral, non-racial terms. For example, the Tennessee legislature barred the sale of any handguns except the "Army and Navy model." The ex-Confederate soldiers already had their high quality "Army and Navy" guns. But cash-poor freedmen could barely afford lower-cost, simpler firearms not of the "Army and Navy" quality. Arkansas enacted a nearly identical law in 1881, and other Southern states followed suit, including Alabama (1893), Texas (1907), and Virginia (1925).
As Jim Crow intensified, other Southern states enacted gun registration and handgun permit laws. Registration came to Mississippi (1906), Georgia (1913), and North Carolina (1917). Handgun permits were passed in North Carolina (1917), Missouri (1919), and Arkansas (1923).
As one Florida judge explained, the licensing laws were "passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers... [and] never intended to be applied to the white population."
That gun control has a very unsavory past does not, in itself, prove that all modern gun control proposals are a bad idea. But it does offer reasons to be especially cautious about the dangers of disarming people who cannot necessarily count on their local government to protect them.
Dave Kopel is Research Director of the Independence Institute. This article is based on his book The Samurai, the Mountie, and the Cowboy: Should America Adopt the Gun Controls of Other Democracies? The book contains citations to numerous secondary sources discussing the issues in this article.
http://www.reason.com/hod/dk021505.shtml
Fortunately, none of the gangs will be harmed..
by the disarmed subjects:
Gang terror on trains
By Dick Murray Transport Editor, Evening Standard
28 February 2005
Passengers fled in terror as a gang charged through London commuter trains smashing more than 100 windows.
The vandals, believed to have been armed with iron bars, wrecked so many carriages that morning peak services were disrupted due to a shortage of stock.
When they finished with one train they boarded another and continued their spree.
Northfleet station in Kent was also attacked. Damage to equipment was so severe that part of it remained shut today. A spokeswoman for South Eastern Trains (SET) said: "This was just wanton destruction for the sake of it."
The attacks on the trains took place in the Gravesend and Northfleet area. A spokesman for British Transport Police said five people, all believed to be male, had been arrested and were being questioned today. The damage amounts to tens of thousands of pounds.
The resulting disruption worsened already severe overcrowding on the busiest commuter lines in Britain, serving Charing Cross and Cannon Street stations.
SET was forced to cancel five Metro trains and reduce the number of carriages on other services.
The spokeswoman added: "There were more than 100 windows smashed. We have had to cancel some peak services today because of the sheer volume of damage.
"We were able to repair some windows - but our depots do not carry that amount of replacement windows."
Police and rail chiefs are increasingly concerned about the huge increase in vandalism.
Latest statistics for the year ending last March show a 31.5 per cent increase in criminal damage on Britain's railways.
There was a 14 per cent increase in violent crime. The South-East is one of the worst affected regions.
Long-distance Kent commuters also suffered more delays today because night engineering work, the responsibility of Network Rail, failed to finish on time.
Early commuters on the Hastings line suffered long delays. Engineers, who should have completed their work by 4am failed to finish until 6.30am. This resulted in some cancellations and delays.
Engineering work over-ran in the Hastings and Robertsbridge area.
There was also another late finish of work at Canterbury, which caused delays to early services into Victoria.
http://www.thisislondon.com/news/londonnews/articles/16925391?source=Evening%20Standard
Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC (Brook Army Medical Center, in San Antonio, Texas) the other day. This is where soldiers who have been evac'd from Germany come to be hospitalized in the States, especially burn victims.
They have buildings there called Fisher Houses. The Fisher House is a hotel that soldiers' families can stay at for little or no charge, while their soldier is staying in the hospital. BAMC has quite a few of these houses on base, but as you can imagine, they are almost filled to the brim most of the time.
While Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC, they gave him a tour of one of the Fisher Houses. He asked how much one of them would cost to build. He got his checkbook out and wrote a check for the full amount right there on the spot. I, and many of you are familiar with the success of the Fisher House program and our hearts were warmed to hear this story. I hope you will help spread it.
By the way... Denzel has a son who is a Marine in Iraq.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC (Brook Army Medical Center, in San Antonio, Texas) the other day. This is where soldiers who have been evac'd from Germany come to be hospitalized in the States, especially burn victims.
They have buildings there called Fisher Houses. The Fisher House is a hotel that soldiers' families can stay at for little or no charge, while their soldier is staying in the hospital. BAMC has quite a few of these houses on base, but as you can imagine, they are almost filled to the brim most of the time.
While Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC, they gave him a tour of one of the Fisher Houses. He asked how much one of them would cost to build. He got his checkbook out and wrote a check for the full amount right there on the spot. I, and many of you are familiar with the success of the Fisher House program and our hearts were warmed to hear this story. I hope you will help spread it.
By the way... Denzel has a son who is a Marine in Iraq.
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Sent to me by a friend:
One of my sons serves in the military. He is still stateside, here in California. He called me yesterday to let me know how warm and welcoming people were to him, and his troops, everywhere he goes, telling me how people shake their hands, and thank them for being willing to serve, and fight, for not only our own freedoms but so that others may have them also.
But he also told me about an incident in the grocery store he stopped at yesterday, on his way home from the base.
He said that ahead of several people in front of him stood a woman dressed in a burkha. He said when she got to the cashier she loudly remarked about the US flag lapel pin the cashier wore on her smock.
The cashier reached up and touched the pin, and said proudly," yes, I always wear it and I probably always will."
The woman in the burkha then asked the cashier when SHE was going to stop bombing her countrymen, explaining that she was a Iraqi.
A gentleman standing behind my son stepped forward, putting his arm around my son's shoulders, and nodding towards my son, said in a calm and gentle voice to the Iraqi woman:
"Ma'am, hundreds of thousands of men and women like this young man have fought and died so that YOU could stand here, in MY country and accuse a check-out cashier of bombing YOUR countrymen. It is my belief that had you been this outspoken in YOUR own country, we wouldn't need to be there today. But, hey, if you have now learned how to speak out so loudly and clearly, I'll gladly buy you a ticket and pay your way back to Iraq so you can straighten out the mess in YOUR country that you are obviously here in MY country to avoid."
Everyone within hearing distance cheered.
nyc, I was teasing judd about another birthday..
I don't know if you mistook my post to him or not, but I never doubt your investment knowledge.
Matey
Defending his turf
An Oakland man, after enduring harassment from drug dealers for years, decides to 'take my safety in my own hands' and shoots an attacker
Jim Herron Zamora, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, February 26, 2005
Patrick McCullough has been complaining to Oakland police about drug dealers for the past 10 years -- and telling the young men who congregate in front of his house at 59th Street and Shattuck Avenue to beat it.
For his efforts, the 49-year-old has endured harassment, threats, vandalism and an assault in 2003.
Then, during an evening rainstorm on Feb. 18, about 15 young men surrounded McCullough and shouted "snitch" and other taunts as he walked from his front door to his driveway.
Someone hit him with a branch, and others threw punches. McCullough told police he had seen a 17-year-old reach for a gun, so he drew his own gun and shot his would-be assailant in the arm.
"I'm a man, not a mouse nor a vigilante. I'm not looking for medals, just a safe neighborhood and peaceful existence," said McCullough, who grew up in a housing project on the south side of Chicago. "I don't believe in vigilantism under any circumstances. What I did and will continue to do is take my safety in my own hands."
McCullough was arrested on suspicion of felony assault and is free on $15, 000 bail. Prosecutors are deciding whether to file charges against him or any of his assailants. McCullough has no criminal record and does not need a permit to keep the gun, which he purchased legally, on his property.
"I expect we'll be making a decision next week," said Deputy District Attorney Jim Lee.
Lt. Lawrence Green, who oversees patrols in North Oakland, is urging prosecutors to charge the wounded 17-year-old and some of his friends with felony assault. Green said the family of the 17-year-old has urged prosecutors to charge McCullough.
"The reason that Patrick was assaulted by these suspects," Green said, "is that he stands up to drug dealers in a way that normal citizens do not."
Even before the incident, Green had added patrols to the neighborhood, and a surveillance team left 59th Street about a half hour before the encounter. In the past two weeks, police have arrested seven men on drug charges within a block of McCullough's home, located in the 500 block of 59th Street.
Green and other officers have advised McCullough to move away. But he and his wife, Daphne, refuse, saying they can't afford to buy a new place.
They bought their home under a first-time buyer's program designed "to provide stability" in Oakland neighborhoods and would lose half their equity if they left before 2014.
"We feel trapped right now," said McCullough, who worked his way through college as a taxi driver after a stint in the Navy. "I'm pretty much resigned that we should move. But I don't want to. We'd been planning to stay here."
Some neighbors and friends think he's crazy to stay, but McCullough is a hero to others who have spent years trying to improve crime-ridden areas.
"It would be a real shame for 59th Street and for Oakland if they move," said Don Link, chairman of Oakland's volunteer network Neighborhood Crime Prevention Councils, who lives nearby. Link and others are urging prosecutors not to charge McCullough.
If drug dealers think they can drive away active residents, "it could unravel community policing," he said.
Bob Brokl, who has lived on 59th Street for more than 30 years, said, "I would move" if he were McCullough.
"It's a shame because Patrick and his family are kind of ideal neighbors, '' Brokl said. "Patrick is not seeking confrontation. Patrick is just this genuine family guy who doesn't want to be forced out."
Although the block has been tough for decades, the McCullough family lives in a part of North Oakland that is rapidly gentrifying and has seen a 21 percent drop in major crimes since 2003.
A three-bedroom home about two blocks away recently sold for $731,000 after receiving 43 offers.
Tom Nemeth, a neighbor, and 11 other residents filed several nuisance suits in small claims court against a 59th Street property owner who allegedly allowed a home on the same 500 block to be taken over by drug dealers. The case will be heard in late March. A similar successful suit in 2003 prodded the owner of troubled property on the same block to sell.
The McCulloughs did not join that lawsuit but have twice sued the city to make a concrete traffic barrier on 59th Street a permanent structure. The steel and concrete barrier, originally a temporary measure, prevents vehicle traffic from entering off Shattuck.
It was installed in 1993 at the request of residents after one of Oakland's most infamous killings, in which a man sprayed a neighborhood bar, Bosn's Locker -- now known as Dorsey's Locker -- with gunfire in 1992, killing two patrons and wounding eight others.
Drug dealing and other problems have ebbed and flowed since 1994.
The taunts and threats against McCullough were never accompanied by violence until 2003, when Wayne Camper, a former Newark Memorial High School football star, accused McCullough of calling the police on him and his friends. Camper and two others attacked him, police said.
Camper's assault trial was dismissed without a verdict after he was shot to death on 58th Street on Aug. 5, 2003, during a feud between gangs from North Oakland and South Berkeley.
That was about the time McCullough bought a gun.
Things on 59th were somewhat quiet for about a year. But it got worse in August, when a vigil for Camper and homicide victim Robert Perry erupted in a melee.
The McCulloughs dialed 911 and have called police several times a week ever since.
Two days after his most recent incident, McCullough said a man who called himself "Cornbread" stopped by to say the young men would quit hanging out in front of the house when the family was home but wouldn't stop "business" on the street. He also warned McCullough to "be careful."
"He said, 'These boys are crazy, and they don't care about nothing,' " McCullough said. "He didn't have to spell it out. I know it's not going to be toilet paper in the bushes."
E-mail Jim Herron Zamora at jzamora@sfchronicle.com.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/26/MNGKVBHHQ11.DTL
60 rounds, crowded mall, 1 nonfatal hit..
some "death ray, those "assault weaposn":
Friends of N.Y. mall suspect arrested
Associated Press
Feb. 16, 2005 12:00 AM
ALBANY, N.Y. - Two men were arrested after a videotape showing them detonating pipe bombs was found in the home of the man accused of opening fire at a shopping mall, officials said Tuesday.
The men are friends of shooting suspect Robert Bonelli Jr., held in Sunday's rampage at the Hudson Valley Mall that left two people wounded, one critically, authorities said.
But there was no indication that Bonelli, 25, intended to use an explosive device at the mall, and the two friends are not accused of any involvement in the shooting, Ulster Police Chief Paul Watzka said.
The friends, Kenneth Stine and Liborio Valguarnera, both 25, were arrested Monday on charges of violating federal explosive laws, according to federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives officials.
Nine long guns, a handgun, ammunition and a pipe-bomb fuse were found at Stine's house, the ATF said.
Valguarnera's lawyer said his client was shocked by the mall shooting and had nothing to do with it.
"This is not a premeditated scheme. This is nothing analogous to Columbine," attorney Edward Carroll said.
Stine ignored reporters' questions as he left court, but his girlfriend, Sarah Cobert, described the video as "like a little thing for fun."
Bonelli is accused of spraying assault-weapon fire through the mall Sunday afternoon, firing off about 60 rounds before surrendering.
Prosecutors say Bonelli was fascinated by the Columbine school massacre in Colorado and kept memorabilia about the 1999 killings.
Bonelli's father, Robert Bonelli Sr., told the Daily Freeman of Kingston that his son had had emotional problems ever since his mother left when he was a boy.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0216mallshooting16.html
Oh NO! Not another one, judd???
In the Free Territory of Arizona:
(HB 2409) would require the Department of Public Safety (DPS) to enter into reciprocal agreements with other states to allow concealed-carry weapons (CCW) permit holders to carry concealed weapons in other states. Status: in Caucus.
(SB 1269) will allow weapons-certified active duty county detention officers to obtain a concealed weapons permit without completing firearm safety training. Status: in Judicial Committee. (A similar bill also allows recently retired officers to obtain a CCW permit.)
HB 2325, which states that a CCW permit would be valid for the permit holder’s life. The Judiciary Committee amended it instead to require the DPS to conduct a criminal history records check of all permit holders every five years; require that DPS enter into reciprocal agreements only with states that have similar CCW laws to those in Arizona; and reduce the length of the firearms safety training that persons wishing to get a CCW permit must complete from 16 hours to eight hours. Lawmakers deleted the lifetime provision. Status: in Caucus.
Wow, here's a unique idea:
get the guns out of the hands of people who really shouldn't have them instead of the law abiding):
Gun crime = hard time
Armed felons drawing long federal terms
Judi Villa
The Arizona Republic
Feb. 12, 2005 12:00 AM
Bruce Lowry went to prison for 19 years for possessing 10 bullets.
Joshua Dowling is serving 15 years, not for the burglary he was caught doing but for the gun he had with him when he was arrested. (10, 20, life)
And, in Phoenix, after a jury acquitted Jacob Price of murder, police nailed him for illegally possessing guns, and he went to prison for 23 years. (Project Exile)
Across the Valley, law enforcement agencies and prosecutors are trying to get a handle on gun violence by cracking down harder on career criminals who continue to possess weapons when they shouldn't.
The idea is simple: Identify criminals who are prohibited gun possessors, catch them with guns and prosecute them, whenever possible, under tougher federal gun laws.(Project Exile) They get harsher prison sentences, keeping them off the streets for longer and, ultimately, cutting crime.
"We can wait until these guys are busted or we can intervene before the bodies start to pile up," said Special Agent John MacKenzie of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. "How do you minimize the violent crimes? You get out there and follow these guys around."
Nearly two years ago, MacKenzie started Project ARROW, an innovative, pro-active effort to identify violent felons coming out of prison and target those most likely to get another gun. In Phoenix, police recently formed a Gun Enforcement Squad to better utilize federal laws to target traditionally local crimes and bolster sentences for "prohibited possessors," those forbidden from having a gun under any circumstances.
Prohibited possessors include felons, convicts on probation, parole or any type of community supervision, undocumented immigrants, the mentally ill and those who have renounced their U.S. citizenship. Included is anyone convicted of domestic violence, even a misdemeanor.
Under federal law, a prohibited possessor with three violent felony convictions is considered an "armed career criminal" and can be sent to prison for life, even for having ammunition. The minimum sentence is 15 years.
"The guys we're seeing carrying the guns are violent people," Phoenix police Detective Darrell Smith said. "They're not burglars. These are the guys out there doing home invasions, armed robberies and carjackings. Those are the ones we need to target."
The Valley's efforts are reflective of a national push to eradicate gun violence and are largely driven by Project Safe Neighborhoods, a nationwide billion-dollar effort to reduce gun crimes. U.S. Attorney for Arizona Paul Charlton called the program "the frontline in the battle against gun crimes."
Charlton said it is widely recognized in law enforcement that 80 percent of the crimes are committed by 20 percent of the people.
"If you can focus on those 20 percent and find them with weapons and put them away," Charlton said, "then you can go a great way in reducing crime."
The cases are pretty simple to make. Catch a guy with a gun. Prove the gun is functioning. Show that he's a prohibited possessor, and there's the case. There's not a whole lot of defense.
Police efforts are not a sweep of people who possess guns legally. Authorities are looking for armed career criminals, not law-abiding citizens.
"We see these guys get picked up by patrol," Smith said. "They get booked. They get out. We see some guys with five, 10, 15 felonies, and they're still running around with a gun.
"They're only carrying a gun for one reason, and that's to hurt or kill somebody."
In 2003, gun-related homicides nationwide climbed to a six-year high, with 9,638 such murders. In Arizona, firearms were used in 282 murders in 2003, up 11.5 percent from 2002.
Guns are the most commonly used weapons in violent crimes. Traditionally, though, police have rarely thought much about tacking on gun violations in cases of murder, robbery, even burglary and domestic violence. And criminals often escaped stiff federal penalties as authorities routinely pursued the most serious state charges without considering federal ones.
But partnerships between police and federal and state prosecutors have spurred landmark changes in how gun crimes are handled. Just having a gun illegally can result in lengthy prison stints or add years to a sentence. And if a suspect is acquitted on the original charge, like Price was, he may not get off on the gun charges.
"We're really serious about doing whatever we can and stopping the violence," Phoenix police Lt. Rich Benson said.
In the first year of Project ARROW, MacKenzie sifted through the records of nearly 700 felons, evaluating their violent histories and their propensity to use guns in crimes. He identified 96 targets for surveillance, including Lowry, a leader of the Aryan Brotherhood prison gang with a lengthy rap sheet; and Dowling, who also had multiple felony convictions. About 52 percent of MacKenzie's targets were re-arrested, and nearly half of those were prosecuted for federal firearms violations, not for committing new crimes.
"We want to catch them before they do it," MacKenzie said. "It's trying to intervene before the violent crimes really get out of hand."
Phoenix's Gun Enforcement Squad now evaluates everyone arrested with a gun to see if he or she can be prosecuted federally. If that's not possible, weapons misconduct charges still can be tacked on by the state to extend sentences. The gun squad also keeps tabs on convicted criminals moving into certain areas of the city, investigates gun shop burglaries and tracks crime guns, entering bullets and casings into a national database to try to link them to unsolved crimes.
When Ronald Page, 34, was caught burglarizing a Phoenix pawnshop recently, detectives ran a background check to see if he was a felon - he wasn't - then evaluated the case to determine if state or federal charges would wield more prison time.
Before the gun squad, Page, who had outstanding warrants, likely would have just been charged with burglary and could have ended up on probation or with minimal jail time. Now, though, he'll also face a federal charge for possessing guns, the stolen ones, while under indictment.
"We're not going to let this guy take a plea and get put on probation for a couple years," Smith said. "Those guns would have ended up on the streets in some felons' hands."
Gun crime prosecutions in Arizona, like those nationwide, have more than doubled in recent years.
In fiscal 2004, 156 cases were prosecuted in Arizona, most involving felons in possession or suspects using firearms during violent crimes or drug transactions.
"Our communities are tired of the violence, the senseless violence, the violence that's created by guns," Benson said. "These people are going to get some healthy time, and the community will end up being safer because of it."
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0212guns12.html
Congratulations and thanks to those who participated in the Orange County
Register "County Line Poll" yesterday.
The question was;
'Should California make it easier for people to obtain concealed-weapons
permits?'
Result;
Yes 92%
No 8%
total votes 1,699
Another CA anti-gun politician resigns in disgrace!
California Secretary of State (and former Assemblyman of AB35 infamy) Kevin
Shelley, has just resigned (effective 03/01/05) under a cloud of alleged
improprieties.
As you will remember, Shelley's AB35 was an attempt to license all handgun
owners. Thanks to your efforts, his attempt failed and AB35 became little
more than a watered-down revamping of the BFSC that was renamed the HSC.
Today's resignation will allow Governor Schwarzenegger to appoint a
replacement to the office of Secretary of State.
Judd, you mean about the...
"Heck, I was just joshin' ya."
...criminal record????
Most Wanted Matey
Good luck, tinman.
Gun novice's decision on packin' heat
Anita Chang
Associated Press
Jan. 23, 2005 12:00 AM
COLUMBUS, Ohio - The guns were laid out on blue rubber mats printed with the Smith & Wesson logo.
I sat in my seat for several moments, just looking at the smooth metal of the barrels and the darkness of the empty chambers. I was surprised at how much they looked like the toys my brother and I used to shoot each other with when we were kids.
Tentatively, I stuck out my index finger and spun the cylinder on the revolver. Cooool. It was the first time I'd ever touched a real handgun.
A revolver and a semiautomatic were set out in front of each of the 17 students in my class. We would spend a long day together: eight hours in the classroom and four in the shooting range.
If we passed a written test at day's end, we would be eligible to apply for permits to carry concealed handguns.
•
Summer camp, when I was 9, was the only time I ever shot a firearm, and that was a rifle. So I was a surprised three years ago when my father said: "You need to get a gun. And a concealed-carry license."
I was moving away from my hometown to start my first real job in the big city of Dallas. I'd be living on my own for the first time.
Although scared, I wasn't about to admit it. The plan was, if things got rough, I'd get a big dog.
The "real world" changed my outlook. I'm petite - small enough to wear kid-sized T-shirts - and look about 16, maybe 19 if I wear makeup.
Like many young women, I sometimes get harassed, even when doing mundane chores.
I bought pepper spray to ward off one creepy security guard. Then I took up boxing. But I didn't think of myself as someone who should be packin' heat.
That was before the harassment on the highway.
•
There were plenty of motorcyclists on the interstate that Sunday, but none as reckless as the two who were merging into traffic riding only on their rear tires.
As they sped toward me, one went on the passenger side, the other the driver's side. That one leered at me, his craggy, stubbled face inches from my window.
Next, he sped ahead and, while going at least 60 mph, did daredevil tricks. .
But it wasn't long before he slowed down and was right next to me again.
While his friend rode ahead, the maniac moved in front of me, then accelerated and slowed unpredictably. I resisted the urge to go around for fear I'd accidentally hit him.
The bikers exited the interstate with me. And kept following. I could see the guys pointing and talking to each other.
What would I do if they followed me to the store? Into the store? A big dog couldn't help me now.
Two miles later, I turned and the jerks kept going straight. I turned into the store parking lot, and sat there, shaking and sweaty.
Why was I so powerless to protect myself? My second thought: I need a gun.
•
Ohio's concealed-carry law went into effect in April, after nine years of debate in the Legislature. Ohio joined 45 other states that allow concealed handguns; only Kansas, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Illinois do not.
Generally, concealed-weapons laws require a person be at least 21, not a fugitive from justice and not mentally ill. Conviction of a long list of crimes also precludes getting a permit.
As soon as I got home from the store I called New Albany Shooting Range.
•
My class was about half men, half women. Most were middle-age; I looked to be the youngest.
A table held more than two dozen revolvers and semiautomatics from which we could choose for practice.
I began to feel butterflies as instructor Terrie Bussey turned on the fan that blew downrange so the smoke and lead from the cartridges wouldn't cloud the shooters. I put on blue plastic earmuffs and smudged safety glasses.
First, I practiced dry firing. The gun looked cartoonishly oversized in my small hands.
Click, click, click.
My clammy fingers shaking, I loaded a cartridge into the one o'clock position of the cylinder. I stared at the bull's eye, squinting and squeezed the trigger.
BANG!
It was as if a bomb went off in my face. A flicker of flame burst from the barrel, followed by a curlicue of smoke and a whiff of gunpowder.
Firing a gun is shown on TV and in movies as a fluid and natural action, something that can easily be done with one hand. For me it was violent and jarring.
I later fired a .45-caliber, which was like being jolted on the tight turns of a rickety roller coaster. My neck and head snapped back, and the gun ended up over my head from the recoil.
After stationary target shooting, we had a new challenge. A target with the silhouette of a man's torso and head was programmed to move toward the shooter from 50 feet away at about the speed of someone running.
The instructors told us to yell, "Stop!" then shoot five times.
Up to this point, I'd been soaking up the safety rules and gun basics, and I even hit the target with all 10 of my shots during the first practice round with a semiautomatic. I felt confident.
When the newsprint target started fluttering toward me, I squeaked "Stop," then squeezed the trigger five times fast.
I missed.
I couldn't even hit a target moving in a straight line in a well-lit room. How was I supposed to shoot a bad guy in a dark parking garage?
I thought: What if I had a concealed gun and was confronted? Would I have the time, and the composure, to draw the gun, aim and shoot accurately? If I didn't bobble the gun and shoot my foot, there's still no guarantee that the bad guy wouldn't just snatch the gun and use it on me.
Even as a person whose job is to follow the news, there was much I didn't know about Ohio's concealed-carry law.
It requires a person with a gun to use any means to ward off an attack before resorting to deadly force. In my confrontation with the bikers, I could have driven to a crowded public place or called the police.
In this state, unlike some others, a gun can be used only when a life is threatened, one's own or someone else's, not, for example, to protect property.
After thinking it over, I paid $45 and got the concealed-carry license.
I feel better, safer, with the license.
Maybe one day I'll change my mind and get a gun, too.
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/0123packinheat23.html
The Missus bought me a 5 day tactical pistol course..
at Gunsite for Christmas! What a gal!
Matey
Go Husker, GO!
Young and old alike benefit from hunting safety classes
By DOUG COOK
The Daily Courier
PRESCOTT VALLEY — Taking and passing an Arizona Game & Fish Department-sponsored Hunter Education Class isn’t only singularly important for developing mature adult men and women for the outdoors. It’s also beneficial for children and teens who have developed an affinity for this brand of recreation.
Local hunter education lead instructor Steve Sams of Prescott Valley said that there are a couple of key reasons for completing the course.
Arizona Game and Fish Department hunter education instructor Woody Farnsworth teaches his son Tanner how to shoot a .22-caliber rifle during a class at the Usery Mountain Shooting Range in Maricopa County.
After obtaining a certificate, hunters who want to travel to other states to hunt can do so legally. Adults can also earn a bonus point for Arizona Game & Fish’s permit draw.
“Basically, you get an extra draw if you have successfully taken the hunter education program,” he said.
Based on all of his years of teaching hunter education, Sams estimates the average age of children who have enrolled in his classes is 11, while adults typically fall in the 35-year-old range.
“Usually about half of the class is adults, but it’s a pretty good mix of youngsters and adults,” he said.
Sams encourages the parents or other members of a child’s extended family to attend the classes together so that everyone’s on the same page.
At Sams’ hunter education class that starts this Saturday at the Prescott Fire Center, he will have 35 students and 60 total people, parents included, in attendance.
“We try to get the students to participate in every session,” Sams said.
Nine volunteers, most of whom are certified instructors, will help Sams in running the class. He recruits experts to teach such fields as archery, first aid, primitive firearms and wildlife management.
“We’re changing instructors all the time, and when you get the person with a passion for that particular subject it keeps the kids’ interest level up,” Sams said.
As a lead instructor, Sams not only teaches but tracks registration, fills out and processes applicable paperwork, types and distributes public service announcements, and makes arrangements for all of the class’s facilities and equipment, among other things.
He said a majority of students pass the class and that he has only flunked pupils for displaying a bad attitude.
“I have failed some students because they just were not responsible enough for me to certify,” Sams said. “I’m evaluating students on their attitude and their ability to recall the material that’s been presented.”
Sams and his instructors are inclusive of everyone. They work closely alongside children with learning disabilities, reading questions and assigning personal tutors to them.
“If there’s a person who’s deaf or blind, then we notify the state office and they’ll get somebody up here that can sign, or whatever we need, to be able to meet the requirements of that individual youngster,” Sams said. “That way, we make sure nobody is denied the opportunity to participate.”
Instructors hand out evaluation forms at the conclusion of classes so that participants can critique the courses. The questions include, for example, how the students first came to know of the class, what they would like to see changed, and their favorite and least favorite aspect of it.
“I don’t know about statewide, but in my classes we have had about 99 percent strongly support what we’re doing and the content of the class,” Sams said.
To acquire additional information about Arizona Game & Fish’s Hunter Education Program, including a current schedule of classes around the state, log on to the Internet at www.azgfd.com.
Contact the reporter at dcook@prescottaz.com
http://www.communitypapers.com/DAILYCOURIER/myarticles.asp?P=1066055&S=400&PubID=13597
Safety first, last and always
State requires hunter education for one and all
By DOUG COOK
The Daily Courier
PRESCOTT VALLEY — Arizona owns the best hunter safety record of any state in America, and that fact from the International Hunter Education Association is partly attributable to an in-depth educational program here.
Since 1955 the Arizona Game & Fish Department has offered Hunter Education classes that qualified, state-certified volunteer experts teach and emphasize the importance of firearm and bow safety.
Arizona Game and Fish Department Hunter Education Coordinator Mark Quigley teaches a young woman how to use a .22-caliber rifle during the Field Day portion of a class at the Usery Mountain Shooting Range in Maricopa County.
All Photos courtesy of George Andrejko/Arizona Game and Fish Department
This Saturday, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., the Prescott Fire Center (2400 Melville Drive) will play host to the first of three required-attendance sessions of a local, officially sanctioned Game & Fish Hunter Education Class.
For a nominal $7 fee the 35-student class, which continues Jan. 24-28 from 6 to 9 p.m. and Jan. 29 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. with a Field Day at the Prescott Valley Police Department Shooting Range, stresses the safe handling of firearms and ammunition in the home and field, safe hunting habits, outdoor ethics, conservation and survival and wildlife management techniques.
Eight to 12 hunter education classes are available annually in the tri-city area. Prescott Valley resident Steve Sams, an avid outdoorsman and hunter of 40-plus years, is one of the local class’s lead instructors. He’s retired from the U.S. Forest Service after spending a 37-year career, primarily in Arizona and New Mexico, with the federal government agency.
Sams, a veteran certified hunter education instructor, has taught the subject in Prescott for the past couple of years. He said volunteers provide all of the class’s updated materials, including books, videos, CDs and other visual aids.
In Arizona, each hunter education student in a combination class such as this must demonstrate the skill to fire both a fixed number of rounds from a .22-caliber rifle and a select amount of arrows from a bow.
The classes use only .22s, and no students can bring a firearm or ammunition to a session.
However, instructors will show five different kinds of shotguns, four different kinds of rifles, and three different kinds of primitive black-powder firearms as well as bows to students so that they know what weapons are out there.
“The guiding principle is safety,” Sams said of the class, which also preaches a hunter’s responsibility to the land, animals and other people. “I want to see the future of hunting and fishing sports continue by educating kids and adults to behave in a way that’s acceptable to society.”
Although hunter education isn’t required in the state of Arizona for those age 14 and older, children 10-13 who want to hunt big game here must, under law, complete an Arizona Game & Fish-sponsored hunter education course to get a permit.
Instructors encourage parents to attend the class alongside their children. Other states that require hunter education will recognize their eventual certification.
“If you wanted to go hunt in Minnesota or Texas or Connecticut, your certificate issued by the state of Arizona would be accepted as having fulfilled the basic requirements of a hunter education program in that state,” Sams said. “The core information is the same.”
Part of what makes the course unique is Arizona’s 28-hour requirement, which is a much greater amount of time than the typical U.S. state’s 10-hour mandate.
Sams said he allows for just 35 students per class so that he can provide more quality, hands-on instruction for pupils.
“Typically, we’ll max out,” Sams said. “I’ll have to turn students away. There’s always a demand for each class.”
For more information about Prescott’s Hunter Education Class or to inquire about registration and possible vacancies locally, call Sams at 928-772-8767.
Contact the reporter at dcook@prescottaz.com
http://www.communitypapers.com/DAILYCOURIER/myarticles.asp?P=1066061&S=400&PubID=13597
Thanks nyc..
you've confirmed my suspicions.
nyc, hear a lot of noise about gold..
BUT, I remember the 80's and notice today all the cheering about gold finally getting back up to the price it was 16-18 years ago.
I think I'm hearing hype over temporary spikes.
What say you?
Yep NYC,
Looks like the drought is being addressed if not eliminated.
We were supposed to get those storms here in Prescott but very little rain came. We could use any you all don't need!
Matey
Rains and snow helping a lot here..
in the Free Territory of AZ. Hope the snow pack in the Rockies make an impact on Lakes Powell and Mead. They are 100+ feet down!
Back at ya sheballlarry..
was at the daughter's in Florida for the Holidays and just got back late Wednesday.
Hope yours was a good one.
Matey
Happy New Year to all you Freedom-loving Americans
Justice report shows fallacy of gun sales law
Dec 28, 2004
One of the continuing debates in this country is over gun control laws and their efficacy. Gun control advocates often cite the ease with which a person can purchase a firearm from retail outlets and worry that such outlets are arming criminals in huge numbers. Lawsuits have been filed against wholesalers and retailers alleging that their marketing practices make it easy for criminals to get guns.
These advocates continually push for more restrictions on firearms purchases in vain attempts to keep guns from criminals and others who shouldn’t have access to them.
The problem with such laws is that criminals routinely ignore them (after all, they are criminals). Law-abiding citizens who have every right to purchase and own firearms are the ones who pay the price for these laws.
In the wake of the 1999 Columbine shootings, Colorado voters passed a law requiring background checks for all firearm sales at gun shows. The argument in favor of the law was that criminals were taking advantage of the fact that such checks had been required only if a licensed firearms dealer was selling a gun. But if a recent report from the Justice Department is any indicator, this law and others like it are likely not very effective.
The study noted that the number of criminals who obtained guns from retail outlets was dwarfed by the number of those who picked up their arms through means other than legal purchases. The report was the result of interviews with more than 18,000 state and federal inmates conducted nationwide. It found that nearly 80 percent of those interviewed got their guns from friends or family members, or on the street through illegal purchases.
Less than 9 percent were bought at retail outlets and only seven-tenths of 1 percent came from gun shows. So much for the much-ballyhooed closing of the “gun-show loophole.”
The Justice Department’s interviews also showed the falseness of the notion that so-called assault weapons in private hands decrease the safety of police officers and citizens.
Only about 8 percent of the inmates used one of the models covered in the now-expired assault weapons ban, passed under Bill Clinton in 1994. If the supposed increased firepower of these firearms truly made them attractive to lawbreakers the percentage would have been much higher. And so another gun-control myth ends up on the ash heap.
http://sun.yumasun.com/artman/publish/articles/story_13928.php
Guns Don't Kill People--Doctors Do!
Written by Nathan Tabor
Thursday, December 30, 2004
Back before the November election, many mainstream media pundits -- trying desperately to get John Kerry elected -- began to harp on President Bush’s unwillingness to stop certain federal gun control laws from expiring as scheduled. But their propaganda efforts came to naught because this issue was a non-starter with the American people.
The fact is, in this day of post-9/11 increased security consciousness, most average Americans simply don’t want more gun control. They want more guns on hand to defend themselves and their loved ones in the face of possible life-threatening danger. Soccer moms are now taking handgun proficiency courses down at the local firing range.
Liberals are always complaining about getting to the root of the problem -- unless it deals with gun rights. Then they abandon all logical analysis and resort to hysteria, distortion, and downright lies.
Today I want to set the record straight and dispel a few of the more common myths with some hard facts.
First, according to statistics provided by the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, there is an interesting correlation between accidental deaths caused by guns and deaths caused by doctors.
Doctors: (A) There are 700,000 physicians in the U.S. (B) Accidental deaths caused by physicians total 120,000 per year. (C) Accidental death percentage per physician is 0.171.
Guns: (A) There are 80 million gun owners in the U.S. (B) There are 1,500 accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups. (C) The percentage of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.0000188.
Statistically, then, doctors are 9,000 times more dangerous to the public health than gun owners. Fact: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR. Following the logic of liberals, we should all be warned: “Guns don’t kill people. Doctors do.”
More seriously, Dr. Glen Otero of the Claremont Institute has published an enlightening article entitled “Ten Myths About Gun Control.” (http://www.dsgl.org <http://www.dsgl.org> .)
Here are just a few of his well-documented findings.
Ø Approximately 80 percent of all adult American citizens own firearms, and a gun can be found in nearly half of American households.
Ø Between 1974 and 1995, the total number of privately owned firearms in America increased by 75 percent, to 236 million. During the same period, national homicide and robbery rates did not significantly increase.
Ø Less than 1 percent of all guns are involved in any type of crime, which means that 99 percent of all guns are not used to commit any crime.
Ø In 1987, the National Crime Victimization Survey estimated that about 83 percent of Americans would become the victims of violent crime during the course of their lifetime.
Ø The National Self-Defense Survey found that between 1988 and 1993, American civilians used firearms in self-defense almost 2.5 million times per year, saving up to 400,000 lives per year in the process.
Ø Guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens deter crime. Where U.S. counties have enacted concealed-carry laws, murder rates fell by 8 percent, rape by 5 percent, and aggravated assault by 7 percent. Urban counties recorded the largest decreases demographically.
You get the picture: Guns don’t kill people. People kill people. But sometimes law-abiding citizens with guns can save the lives of other innocent people.
It’s time to restore some common sense to the hysterical debate over gun control. When Cain killed Abel with a rock, God didn¹t ban rocks. He dealt with Cain personally. We need to enforce our criminal laws against murder, robbery, and assault.
Here’s what former Mafia underboss, self-confessed hit man, and government informant Sammy ‘The Bull’ Gravano said about gun control:
“Gun control? It’s the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I’m a bad guy, I¹m always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You pull the trigger with a lock on, and I’ll pull the trigger. We’ll see who wins.”
It’s time for liberals to go out and buy a gun. And maybe get a life or at least protect one.
About the Writer: Nathan Tabor is a conservative political activist based in Kernersville, North Carolia, where he owns a successful small business, and was a recent candidate for Congress. Nathan receives e-mail at nathan@nathantabor.com.
http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=12048
(Boy! The Than Franthithco Comical is publishing articles like these? Perhaps there IS hope for the people of Kalifornistan yet!)
Gun Control: We Won a Battle, But Not the War
December 11, 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Howard Nemerov
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson
Okay, so we had a good election cycle for the pro-liberty movement. I hope it gave you a reason for a celebratory mood at Thanksgiving. Now it’s time to get back to work. The people who fought so hard against your Second Amendment rights are still in Congress. They intend to maintain their course, as declared by their erstwhile presidential nominees:
"You can be disappointed, but you cannot walk away," Edwards said. "This fight has just begun."
To his supporters and volunteers, Kerry said, "Don't lose faith. What you did made a difference. The time will come when your work and your ballots will change the world ... It's worth fighting for."
The Democrats intend to maintain their party’s direction, believing they merely didn’t get their message out quite right, that it’s merely a matter of “comfort level.”
“We've got to make voters for whom traditional values are paramount more comfortable with the Democratic Party," said Steve Murphy, a Democratic strategist. "We're not anti-religion, anti-church and anti-gun. They think we are.”
I will leave Mr. Murphy’s first two protestations to my esteemed compatriots, but let’s look at the veracity of the claim the Democrats are not anti-gun, focusing on the Senate for a concise discussion.
S. 1805/6, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, states at the beginning “Citizens have a right, protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, to keep and bear arms.” The bill clearly states that lawsuits are still allowable when there was malfeasance on the part of the manufacturer or dealer, or if the manufacturer sold a defective product. The Act’s only goal was tort reform, doing away with nuisance lawsuits wherein a criminal used a properly manufactured firearm to commit a crime, or a person misused a non-defective firearm in a negligent manner that resulted in death or injury to an innocent party. These nuisance suits have been brought by individuals and municipalities with the intention of somehow proving that manufacturers of firearms are responsible for the improper use of their product. While the cases have been consistently dismissed or resulted in a finding for firearms manufacturers, the legal costs alone threaten this relatively small industry, and could result in bankruptcy. As these companies go out of business, the gun banners get their desired outcome via attrition: stopping the sale of civilian firearms.
So how did the Democrats, who claim to not be anti-gun, behave on this bill? Well, they didn’t exactly vote against S. 1805. What they did was to load it with “poison pill” amendments that rendered it unacceptable in its final version, resulting in it being pulled from the floor.
The entire anti-gun leadership remains in the Senate: Dianne Feinstein, Ted Kennedy, Charles Schumer, Frank Lautenberg, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton. You will find their names on all the anti-gun amendments added to S. 1805/6 that resulted in its dismissal.
Senator Feinstein added an amendment renewing the “assault weapons” ban. All the Democrat anti-gun leadership voted for this amendment.
John McCain added the “gun show loophole” amendment that could have created such a load of additional red tape and costs to gun show promoters as to put them out of business, effectively closing gun shows. All the Democrat anti-gun leadership voted for this amendment.
Such additions resulted in the entire bill being voted down as amended.
Frank Lautenberg submitted S. 1431, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003, a permanent enactment and expansion of the assault weapons ban, and the anti-gun leadership signed on as cosponsors. The bill would ban a list of “semi-automatic assault weapons” and strengthen the ban on magazines over 10 rounds capacity. The intent remains to reauthorize a ban on semi-automatic firearms that a stroke of a pen turns into “assault weapons,” despite the fact that the Department of Justice found that the 1994 ban had no impact on crime.
Conclusion
Mr. Murphy is correct; the Democrats are not anti-gun. They believe that governments should have free and unrestricted access to any firearms they desire. You, on the other hand, do not deserve the same privilege. This is because guns kill people, and in the interests of public health and safety, your guns are a danger to society.
Why do governments never hold themselves to the same standards to which the private citizen is held? History is replete with horrifyingly similar tales of government-condoned genocide and wars which slaughtered well over 100 million people in the 20th century alone. Yet they never ban the guns that enabled these horrors. Has any government ever disarmed itself because guns killed?
History also shows that once governments have total control, they revise history to promote their “goodness.” Then they make similar claims about the freedom of speech, so that discourse such as this paper are banned as well, in the interests of protecting society from the “danger” of questioning the government that needs us to believe it is taking care of We the Inept Subjects.
Every gun banned is a nail in the coffin of liberty. The battle lines are clearly drawn, and the enemy’s leadership is intact. The troops are being actively recruited from the ranks of those well-meaning Americans who are ignorant about firearms and shooting sports. The war is still on. The enemy will never stop with so much power at stake.
Arm yourself with the facts and educate people enough to at least reduce the enemy’s support. Take a new shooter to the range and introduce them to the fun of shooting sports. As an ounce prevention is worth a pound of cure, preemptive actions on your part now will save much wear and tear during the next election cycle.
Howard Nemerov
Former gun control proponent Howard Nemerov does his own research. He is now an ardent Second Amendment supporter, who wonders why gun control groups consistently lie in order to advance their agenda. He appears regularly on ChronWatch and is a frequent contributor to NRA News.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/m-n/nemerov/2004/nemerov121104.htm
Judges resist the urge
Steve Chapman
Syndicated Columnist
Judges are often accused of “activism” – a desire to extend their reach from interpreting the law and resolving cases to making policy on matters that are none of their darn business. So they deserve credit when they resist invitations to over-ride democracy. That’s what the Illinois Supreme Court did by a unanimous vote Thursday, in a decision with repercussions beyond the state’s borders.
The cases involved lawsuits against gun dealers and manufacturers who offer weaponry in Illinois. The city of Chicago has a strict ban on handgun ownership, but guns may be sold in neighboring suburbs, even to Chicago residents. Some of those guns end up being used to kill people in Chicago.
Unhappy about his inability to expand his control of the city to areas beyond, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley turned to the courts for relief. Along with the families of several murder victims, the city filed a lawsuit accusing the industry of creating a “public nuisance” merely by selling legal products to people who are legally entitled to buy them. They demanded that the gun makers and sellers pay $433 million to cover the costs of gun violence and stop doing business as they have done.
This was a novel theory, but not a novel approach. Several years ago, taking a page from the anti-tobacco movement, gun opponents decided that if they couldn’t legislate, they could litigate. They filed a host of lawsuits holding gun makers and gun dealers responsible for every unwanted consequence of firearm use.
Almost every court that has been presented with this kind of suit has rejected it, for the same reasons offered by the Illinois Supreme Court: “Any change of this magnitude in the law affecting a highly regulated industry must be the work of the legislature, brought about by the political process, not the work of the courts.”
To find out more about Steve Chapman and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
http://www.communitypapers.com/DAILYCOURIER/myarticles.asp?P=1047838&S=400&PubID =13434
Gun owners saw through Dems strategy
By ALAN GOTTLIEB
and JOE WALDRON
Special to the Courier
Democrats didn’t get it and the media still don’t.
A record turnout of gun owners once again has helped shape the political landscape, this time around not only retaining control of the White House, but also reinforcing the strength of the Republican majority in both houses of Congress.
Firearms owners, including millions of hunters, were far quicker to see through the façade John Kerry and his strategists tried to build, attempting to portray the Massachusetts liberal as pro-gun and pro-hunting when his 20-year voting record belied that image. When a politician has a track record of supporting every kind of restrictive gun control scheme that lands on his desk, it is impossible to reinvent that person as a hunter and shooter. It’s not just that the dog won’t hunt, it’s more like the dog has no legs and is blind to boot.
Whatever Senator Kerry was thinking when he showed up at a canned pheasant hunt in Iowa, a shooting range in Wisconsin and more recently on a photo-op goose shoot in Ohio, if he actually believed these publicity stunts would gain him acceptance from a voting bloc he has consistently acted against, it would indicate he was not capable of being president of the United States. Nobody that stupid should be in the Oval Office.
Democrats are now faced, once again, with the task of reassessment. On this last go-round, they believed that portraying themselves as pro-gun and pro-hunting apparently would make it so to the dumb bumpkins. The plain truth is that Democrats, as a party, and as individuals, do not understand that one does not earn points in the gun and hunting community by claiming to be something. One has to live those beliefs honestly.
Adopting a strategy of telling people you support the Second Amendment really says nothing. At this year’s Gun Rights Policy Conference, a late September gathering of gun rights leaders in Arlington, Va., it was more than skepticism that led many of those present to observe that merely supporting the Second Amendment could mean anything, and most likely translates to accepting the ridiculous notion that the amendment applies to a mythical collective right of states to form militias.
Tens of millions of American gun owners know that to be hogwash. The right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. Until Democrats step up to the plate and say so, demonstrating in the process that they mean it, that important bloc of voting gun owners will continue to take its votes elsewhere.
Likewise, Democrats need to acknowledge publicly that despite the claims of organization that pander gun control as gun safety, gun control laws have not worked. The time has come to repeal some of these onerous laws, and stop treating gun owners like criminals.
Law-abiding American citizens should be able to own any kind of firearm they want and Democrats need to accept this. The law should punish people for misusing guns, not for exercising a constitutional right. So long as Democrats think otherwise, gun owners will never again embrace them.
Curiously, the media continue largely to ignore the gun vote phenomenon.
Obviously, the press does not understand that gun owners may disagree among themselves on various social and political issues and levels. That happens in any family. But like a family, gun owners come together forcefully when they see their fundamental right to own firearms threatened. It acts with deliberation and decisiveness.
Democrats first learned this in 1994, and gun owners have reminded them about it every two years since.
One would think that by now the party would have gotten the message.
Alan Gottlieb is founder of the Second Amendment Foundation www.saf.org. Joe Waldron is executive director of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arm at www.ccrkba.org.
http://www.communitypapers.com/DAILYCOURIER/myarticles.asp?P=1047840&S=400&PubID=13434
For all the doom and gloomers, help has arrived:
http://www.helpthemleave.com/
This is from a friend in the know.
I am posting this very long message (actually two messages). I believe you should know who-supports-who, before you spend your money on sporting/outdoors products, so I did the research and this is what I found.
The decision of where to spend your money is yours. Hopefully, this will
give you more information.
The first item is a press release from several manufactures/distributors
that were supporting Kerry, in the last election. The second item is a
response from Tim Leatherman of Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. (a Kerry
supporter) to someone who inquired to Mr. Leatherman about his position.
=====================
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/040914/145916_1.html
Press Release Source: Cascade Designs, Inc.
Top Business Leaders from the Outdoor Industry Endorse Kerry-Edwards
Tuesday September 14, 2:24 pm ET
The Health of the Great American Outdoors is at Stake
OREGON CITY, Ore.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 14, 2004--Senior executives from
leading outdoor manufacturers, retailers and associations across the
country gathered today to endorse Senator John Kerry for President and
Senator John Edwards for Vice President. They announced their endorsement
at a press conference with Senator John Edwards at Clackamus Community
College in Oregon City, Oregon.
"We have come together to endorse Senators Kerry and Edwards because they
share our values and goals," said Lee Fromson, president of Seattle-based
Cascade Designs, Inc., a leading manufacturer of outdoor equipment. "And we
are here today because the Great American Outdoors is in serious jeopardy
and if we fail at protecting the outdoors then our businesses will fail,
our health will fail and we will leave future generations with air they
can't breathe and water they can't drink."
Remarks by Senator John Edwards and Cascade Design's Lee Fromson carried
common themes:
* We must clean up the air we breathe and the water we drink or the
health of all Americans will suffer
* We must provide more venues and opportunities for outdoor recreation
for the 150 million Americans who actively enjoy outdoor recreation
* We must treasure our national parks for recreation and not the
industries that mine them for treasure
* We must lower health care costs to stay in business. This is true
for all businesses not just our own.
"Our national parks are severely under-funded resulting in rampant
understaffing, site closures, eliminated visitor education programs,
neglected cultural and natural resource preservation and unsafe trails,"
said Peter Bragdon, vice president and general counsel of Columbia
Sportswear. "Protecting our parks and open space is essential to the health
of my business, the outdoor industry at large and to the many States whose
economies depend upon tourism and recreation, not to mention the millions
upon millions of Americans who enjoy the Great American Outdoors each year."
"Health care is the hardest decision I have to make each year as a business
owner," said Paul Fish, president of Mountain Gear in Spokane, WA. "I want
to provide my employees and their families with quality care but the cost
of doing so weakens the very business we are trying to build together."
Executives attending today's event included: Lee Fromson, president,
Cascade Designs, Inc.(Seattle, WA); Peter Bragden, vice president, general
counsel, Columbia Sportswear (Portland, Oregon); Menno Van Wyk, CEO
Montrail (Seattle, WA); Paul Fish, president Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA);
Carn Nielsen, vice president, Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA); Dan Nordstrom,
CEO Outdoor Research (Seattle, WA); Jeff Bowman, vice president, Cascade
Designs, Inc. (Seattle, WA); Doug Phillips, president, Metolius Climbing
(Bend, OR); Tim Leatherman, president, Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
(Portland, OR); Dunham Gooding, president, American Alpine Institute, Ltd
(Bellingham, WA); Brian Bennett, national accounts manager, Patagonia
(Ventura, CA)
Outdoor businesses depend on abundant and available recreation
opportunities so their customers can enjoy outdoor activities. In return,
outdoor businesses employ over a million Americans, contribute $18 billion
to the U.S. economy and work closely together to promote an active and
healthy lifestyle to the 149 million Americans who enjoy the great American
outdoors.
#
September 14, 2004
Dear Fellow Americans:
We are business leaders in the outdoor industry and we have come together
because we can no longer be silent. Outdoor businesses depend on abundant
and available recreation opportunities so our customers can enjoy outdoor
activities. In return, outdoor businesses employ over a million Americans,
contribute $18 billion to the U.S. economy and work together to promote an
active and healthy lifestyle to the 149 million Americans who love the
great American outdoors.
In our opinion increasing the number of venues for active outdoor
recreation, staunchly protecting the environment, bolstering recreation and
conservation funding to our public land agencies and reducing health care
costs go hand-in-hand. They are essential for the health and well being of
the outdoor industry and its customers.
Senators John Kerry and John Edwards share our values and goals. They know
that promoting active outdoor recreation promotes good health. They know
that proactively protecting and supporting public lands for recreational
use means future generations will enjoy them too. They know that improving
the quality of the air we breathe and the water we drink is not negotiable
for any industry or business in America. They know that health care costs
will continue to increase unless we are united in reducing obesity in America.
John Kerry and John Edwards are committed to preserving our national parks
for the benefit of current and future generations. President Bush has
promoted policies that break that commitment and endanger the future
sustainability of our national parks. President Bush's policies have
severely under-funded our national parks resulting in rampant
understaffing, site closures, elimination of visitor education programs and
neglected cultural and natural resource preservation, demonstrating
indifference towards unsafe trails, unclear facilities and the growing
shortage of safety staff.
As importantly, the Bush administration has rolled back basic environmental
protections that undermine parks including:
* Rolling back Clean Air Act requirements that ensure visibility and
healthy visits to our national parks;
* Eliminating federal protections for our public lands that will allow
mining, logging and development in national forests;
* Slashing the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which enables the
National Park Service to acquire new land and protect and enhance existing
parks facilities.
In contrast John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to protect the scenic
landscapes and vistas for the appreciation of future generations through
rigorous enforcement of clean air and water regulations and will preserve
the resources that embody our cultural heritage through committed funding
for parks operations by:
# Increasing the operating budget of the National Park Service by $600
million will put our parks back on the path toward recovery and
restoration. We will pay for this important objective by modernizing the
sale of mineral rights and using the revenue generated to increase the
operating budgets of our national parks.
We know that Senator Kerry is a champion on the environmental issues that
are central to our industry and customers. We also believe that Senator
Kerry's economic and health care policies will keep our businesses
competitive and health care affordable.
Therefore, we the undersigned are proud to endorse Senator Kerry as the
next President of the United States.
Sincerely,
Lee Fromson, president, Cascade Designs (Seattle, WA)
Peter Bragden, vice president, general counsel, Columbia Sportswear
(Portland, Oregon)
Menno Van Wyk, CEO, Montrail (Seattle, WA)
Paul Fish, president, Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA)
Carn Nielsen, vice president, Mountain Gear (Spokane, WA)
Dan Nordstrom, CEO, Outdoor Research (Seattle, WA)
Jeff Bowman, vice president, Cascade Designs (Seattle, WA)
Doug Phillips, president, Metolius Climbing (Bend, OR)
Tim Leatherman, president, Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. (Portland, OR)
Dunham Gooding, president, American Alpine Institute, Ltd (Bellingham, WA)
Larry Harrison, president, Earth Games (San Clemente, CA)
Jim Clark, CEO, Watermark (Arcata, CA)
Steve Barker, CEO, Eagle Creek Travel Gear (San Diego, CA)
Peter Metcalf, CEO, Black Diamond (Salt Lake City, Utah)
Ashley Korenblat, president, Western Spirit Cycling (Moab, Utah)
Mike Wallenfels, vice president, Mountain Hardware (Richmond, CA)
Roody Rasmussen, CEO, Petzl America (Clearfield, UT)
Tony Post, president, Vibram (Concord, MA)
Kelly Stone, director sales and marketing, Werner Paddles (Seattle, WA)
Joe Hyer, president, Alpine Experience (Olympia, WA)
Mike Sullivan, president, Sullivan Agency (Wimberley, TX)
Bob Olsen, president, Peregrine Outfitters (Williston, VT)
Michael Crooke, CEO, Patagonia (Ventura, CA)
Brian Bennett, director national accounts, Patagonia (Ventura, CA)
Adam Forest, managing partner, The Forest Group (Lotus, CA)
Gordon Seabury, president, Horny Toad Activewear (Santa Barbara, CA)
Paul Gagner, vice president, Gregory Mountain Products (Temecula, CA)
Tom Campion, founder and chairman, Zumiez Inc. (Everett, WA)
Malcolm Daly, president, Trango (Boulder, CO)
Rodney Smith, president, American Outdoor Products (Boulder, CO)
Joan Keller, president, Le Travel Store (San Diego, CA)
Contact:
For Cascade Designs, Inc.
Martha Keeley, 978-468-8961
Source: Cascade Designs, Inc.
=====================
Dear XXXXXX,
I have received lots of e-mails because of my endorsement of the
Kerry/Edwards ticket. Some of you merely made an inquiry as to whether it
was true. Some of you supported my position. Some of you opposed, but
were polite, and offered well reasoned arguments as why I should not have
done what I did - interesting food for thought.
Far more of you stated very, very emphatically that you were no longer
going to buy LEATHERMAN products and were going to tell family, friends,
co-workers, and everyone else with whom you come in contact to no longer do
so either. Some used unbelievably crude and vulgar language. Some made
accusations, that if proven, would get me executed. At least one of you
stated you hope I'll rot in the place the opposite of heaven. Most of you,
merely because I publicly stated how I was going to vote, jumped to a lot
of unjustified and untrue conclusions about my positions on the issues.
I did endorse Kerry/Edwards. However, the endorsement was personal. No
corporate money (or personal either, for that matter), was contributed to
any candidate, any party, PAC, or any political entity what-so-ever. In
the endorsement I did include my job title and the company I work for, and
since my name and the company name are the same, many of you said the
endorsement was by the company. Some of you say claiming after the fact
that the endorsement was personal isn't good enough to escape your
wrath. If you were one of them, I don't think anything I can say will
change your mind. If you were not one of them, you'll have to decide for
yourself.
For many of you, gun control was your one and only issue. Some of you saw
Kerry (and still see - I am still getting e-mails written as if the
election had not yet occurred) quite literally as an enemy (or worse) for
one thing and only one thing - because of how you feel he feels about gun
control. One person went so far as to tell me that I am his enemy because
being a friend of his enemy makes me his enemy. Amazingly, all those
people decided to boycott my company and called me all those names without
a single one asking me my position on gun control. My position is,
assuming you are a law abiding citizen and own weapons that are legal to
own, that no one should be able to take your guns away from you. I own a
rifle and shotgun myself.
Some of you have jumped to the conclusion that I don't want hunters and
fishermen (and women) to have access to public lands for hunting and
fishing. That is incorrect. I too am a hunter and fisherman.
Some of you have jumped to the conclusion that I am anti-military. I am
not. I think some wars need to be fought. Some of you think I am anti
Vietnam era veterans. I am not. I have never been in the military, but I
lived in Vietnam for over two years (Aug. '72 - April '75). I am probably
one of the few Americans of my generation to pay his own way to get there.
Just because I said I was going to vote for Kerry didn't mean that I
supported every position Kerry took. And I acknowledge, there were times
when it was tough to figure out what his position was. I did (and do)
believe that some of the things George W. Bush did during his first term in
office were not good for the country. Overall, I felt we needed a change
of leadership, but a majority of the country thought otherwise.
Almost all of you said I have a right to my opinion, but having stated my
opinion, you have a right to try to punish me economically by not buying
LEATHERMAN tools. I agree. You do. With your personal money. (Not
government money. See below.) Some of you were concerned that by buying
LEATHERMAN tools company funds would go to support political candidates in
which you did not believe. I have already assured you that neither company
funds nor personal funds went to any candidate, party, PAC, or other
political entity. It also seems to me you are being highly selective in
only going after those of us who were willing to stand up and state our
opinion and not require someone from every company from which you buy
anything to state a politically correct opinion or risk a boycott. Also,
it seems unfair to me to penalize all the employees of a company when one
of the employees states an opinion you oppose. Over 300 people work at
Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. Many employees do not share my opinions. U.S.
manufacturing jobs are already disappearing fast enough without taking a
hit from those of you who undoubtedly consider yourselves to be patriotic
Americans.
Most of you are worried about encroachments on your rights. I'm worried
too. Some of you say you work for government agencies, and have control
over purchases for your agency, and that you will no longer buy LEATHERMAN
tools because of how I voted. I would think that is illegal. How would
you feel if it comes to the point that individual government employees make
decisions on government purchases or providing government services based on
the public positions you are taking? How would you feel if a fire fighter
refused to come to your home to put out a fire because he or she didn't
like something you said in public?
It seems to me more reasonable to consider whether to buy a product on the
merits of the product itself, not on how one of the employees of the
company said he was going to vote.
I have to admit I was surprised by the outpouring of response. Some of you
pointed out it's Business 101 to not offend your customers. Now that I am
looking back, I agree with you. I guess my problem is that I never took
Business 101. I graduated in Engineering. And I never realized that
merely publicly stating how I was going to vote would bring such virulent
responses. I would have thought that if you didn't agree with how I was
going to vote, but knowing I had already decided, you would have put your
efforts into convincing the undecided to vote your way, rather than try to
convince me to change my mind, but I guess you didn't see it that way.
I hope I have given enough information so that those of you who still have
open minds can decide how you feel about LEATHERMAN. If not, I'd be happy
to answer any questions you might have.
Tim Leatherman
President
Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
P.S. If you are in contact with anyone who e-mailed me, but said I never
responded, ask them to check their spam filters. Some of you have set your
spam filters so high that my response won't go through.
And they wonder why we defend the 2nd!
Clearing The Room (6/15)
"Eric Verhille, a Marine Corps sniper, was accidentally shot and seriously injured while training officers with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission on how to forcefully enter and clear a room. Which raises the question: Why do Fish and Wildlife agents need to develop military close-combat shooting skills?"