WASHINGTON (WUSA) -- District residents can start registering their guns today. But at least one very high profile application was already rejected.
Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District's 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.
But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.
Read the entire article here.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
This from Alan Korwan
link to *PAGE NINE*
11- No D.C. Handguns
The lamestream media told you:
Although we very don’t like it, and our editorial department is in conniptions and working overtime to denigrate it, and even our “news” department is trying to spin it so it doesn’t say what it says, the Supreme Court has ruled that residents of Washington, D.C. can keep handguns in their homes (just like criminals, gang bangers, drug dealers, parolees, ex-felons, miscreants, assorted wackos and police and federal officers) but only for self defense and personal protection. What’s the world coming to, here comes Armageddon, or at least the Wild Wild West.
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Although innocent, defenseless, law-abiding, decent, harmless, female, gay, weak, elderly, victimized, abused and other citizens in D.C can now keep and bear arms thanks to the Supreme Court’s glorious ruling supposedly restoring the rights the government had mercilessly confiscated, creating the biggest crime-ridden phony “gun-free” zone in the nation, D.C. residents cannot obtain handguns, which are “the quintessential self defense weapon” according to the Court, thanks to federal law:
18 USC § 922(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver --(3) any firearm to any person who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the licensee’s place of business is located...
No word yet on whether dealers in adjacent Maryland and Virginia are willing to risk their business licenses and incur prison sentences, to sell legal firearms to residents of D.C. Officials in D.C. implied slightly that it would be OK, but they have no authority over BATFE, the agency that would make the arrests.
11- No D.C. Handguns
The lamestream media told you:
Although we very don’t like it, and our editorial department is in conniptions and working overtime to denigrate it, and even our “news” department is trying to spin it so it doesn’t say what it says, the Supreme Court has ruled that residents of Washington, D.C. can keep handguns in their homes (just like criminals, gang bangers, drug dealers, parolees, ex-felons, miscreants, assorted wackos and police and federal officers) but only for self defense and personal protection. What’s the world coming to, here comes Armageddon, or at least the Wild Wild West.
The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:
Although innocent, defenseless, law-abiding, decent, harmless, female, gay, weak, elderly, victimized, abused and other citizens in D.C can now keep and bear arms thanks to the Supreme Court’s glorious ruling supposedly restoring the rights the government had mercilessly confiscated, creating the biggest crime-ridden phony “gun-free” zone in the nation, D.C. residents cannot obtain handguns, which are “the quintessential self defense weapon” according to the Court, thanks to federal law:
18 USC § 922(b) It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver --(3) any firearm to any person who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the licensee’s place of business is located...
No word yet on whether dealers in adjacent Maryland and Virginia are willing to risk their business licenses and incur prison sentences, to sell legal firearms to residents of D.C. Officials in D.C. implied slightly that it would be OK, but they have no authority over BATFE, the agency that would make the arrests.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
D.C. Council refuses to obey SCOUTS
If the below articles are to be believed, it seems to me that the council in W. DC. doesn't get it...Or are they emboldened by the fact that 4 of the 9 justices on the Supreme Court are unable to read with any comprehension? (Be afraid, be very afraid)
DC to vote on new gun laws after court ruling Staff and agencies15 July, 2008
WASHINGTON The District of Columbia Council planned to vote today on allowing handguns if they are used only for self-defense in the home and carry fewer than 12 rounds of ammunition.
The emergency legislation announced Monday comes as officials try to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month striking down the city’s 32-year-old ban.
The proposal, which maintains some of the city’s strict gun-ownership rules and adds more regulations, was criticized by gun-rights advocates threatening more legal action.
The nation’s capital would still require all legal firearms — including handguns, rifles and shotguns — to be kept in the home unloaded and disassembled, or equipped with trigger locks,with an exception for guns used against the “reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm.”
Police Chief Cathy Lanier will limit registration to one handgun per person for the first 90 days.
LINK
Wanna Load Your D.C. Handgun? Better Be a “Reasonably Perceived Threat of Immediate Harm”
Local gun enthusiasts, note these words: “reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm.”
That there, laid out in a law likely to be passed tomorrow by the D.C. Council, lays out exactly when you’ll be allowed to actually load a gun in the District of Columbia for self-defense purposes.
This policy was announced this afternoon at a Wilson Building press conference featuring Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles, police chief Cathy Lanier, council Chair Vincent C. Gray, and various council members. Much of the presser was devoted to the nuts and bolts of actually registering a handgun—you’ll be able to apply for a handgun permit likely later this week, Nickles said, and the whole process should take “weeks or months.” That includes taking a written firearms safety test and getting fingerprinted, plus a ballistics sample for every registered gun. Getting your hands on a gun is a trickier process; you can buy a gun in another state then have it transferred to a dealer in the District (for a fee)—last week, WTOP’s Mark Segraves found the one guy in town who’s willing to do that for you: one Charles Sykes, Jr.
As to where you can load that gun...(snip)
LINK to full article
DC to vote on new gun laws after court ruling Staff and agencies15 July, 2008
WASHINGTON The District of Columbia Council planned to vote today on allowing handguns if they are used only for self-defense in the home and carry fewer than 12 rounds of ammunition.
The emergency legislation announced Monday comes as officials try to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last month striking down the city’s 32-year-old ban.
The proposal, which maintains some of the city’s strict gun-ownership rules and adds more regulations, was criticized by gun-rights advocates threatening more legal action.
The nation’s capital would still require all legal firearms — including handguns, rifles and shotguns — to be kept in the home unloaded and disassembled, or equipped with trigger locks,with an exception for guns used against the “reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm.”
Police Chief Cathy Lanier will limit registration to one handgun per person for the first 90 days.
LINK
Wanna Load Your D.C. Handgun? Better Be a “Reasonably Perceived Threat of Immediate Harm”
Local gun enthusiasts, note these words: “reasonably perceived threat of immediate harm.”
That there, laid out in a law likely to be passed tomorrow by the D.C. Council, lays out exactly when you’ll be allowed to actually load a gun in the District of Columbia for self-defense purposes.
This policy was announced this afternoon at a Wilson Building press conference featuring Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, Interim Attorney General Peter Nickles, police chief Cathy Lanier, council Chair Vincent C. Gray, and various council members. Much of the presser was devoted to the nuts and bolts of actually registering a handgun—you’ll be able to apply for a handgun permit likely later this week, Nickles said, and the whole process should take “weeks or months.” That includes taking a written firearms safety test and getting fingerprinted, plus a ballistics sample for every registered gun. Getting your hands on a gun is a trickier process; you can buy a gun in another state then have it transferred to a dealer in the District (for a fee)—last week, WTOP’s Mark Segraves found the one guy in town who’s willing to do that for you: one Charles Sykes, Jr.
As to where you can load that gun...(snip)
LINK to full article
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Radio Program
This has nothing to do with Shooting but I can't help but note that I will be dong my radio program this Sunday morning!! (Note the photo at the bottom of this page at the left) I share a time slot with Costa (our programs run every other Sunday--mine this week--his next) My program is called "Going Up Yonder" I play a variety of Gospel music starting at 6:00 A.M. with bluegrass and then shift to some more modern A Cappella at around 7:30 AM. The program runs until 9:00 on KAFM 88.1. KAFM streams its programing on the Web at KAFM so my program has the potential of the whole world!
On another note I will be participating in the New Instructor Academy for Hunter Safety Instructors today July 12, 2008. I hope to have some fun learning a new discipline involving more than just firearms safety. I have always enjoyed teaching and am looking forward to learning this program produced by the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
On another note I will be participating in the New Instructor Academy for Hunter Safety Instructors today July 12, 2008. I hope to have some fun learning a new discipline involving more than just firearms safety. I have always enjoyed teaching and am looking forward to learning this program produced by the Colorado Division of Wildlife.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Saturday, July 5, 2008
A Web page for your consideration!
Be assured this will come about for real. This page however shows the duplicity present. And that we need to be on our toes and take a vocal stance in this years elections.
LINK Sportsmen for Obama?
Friday, July 4, 2008
NOISE INDUCED HEARING LOSS
What is noise-induced hearing loss?
Every day, we experience sound in our environment, such as the sounds from television and radio, household appliances, and traffic. Normally, we hear these sounds at safe levels that do not affect our hearing. However, when we are exposed to harmful noise—sounds that are too loud or loud sounds that last a long time—sensitive structures in our inner ear can be damaged, causing noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL).
Can NIHL be prevented?
NIHL is 100 percent preventable. All individuals should understand the hazards of noise and how to practice good hearing health in everyday life.
LINK.
Where can I get more information?
NIDCD maintains a directory of organizations that can answer questions and provide printed or electronic information on NIHL. Please see the list of organizations at
a href="http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/directory">www.nidcd.nih.gov/directory.
Use the following keywords to help you search for organizations that are relevant to NIHL:
Noise-induced hearing loss
Hard-of-hearing
For more information, additional addresses and phone numbers, or a printed list of organizations, contact:
NIDCD Information Clearinghouse
1 Communication Avenue
Bethesda, MD 20892-3456
Toll-free Voice: (800) 241-1044Toll-free TTY: (800) 241-1055
Fax: (301) 770-8977
E-mail: nidcdinfo@nidcd.nih.gov
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Pro Gun article in a Canadian newspaper!
When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Washington's ban on handguns, our beloved mayor warned this would add to gun violence in Toronto. The mayor is out to lunch -- fear mongering. Again. Under Mayor David Miller's prodding, city council recently voted 31-9 to ban gun clubs in Toronto, hopefully en route to making Toronto a gun-free city.
(snip)
In reality, overturning Washington's ban on handguns may even make that city safer, and other cities in the U.S. safer. We don't like to consider that possibility, because it goes against the grain of our precious Canadian prejudices.
The law banning handguns in Washington homes came into effect in 1977 -- a year in which there were 192 murders. By 1989, and for the next six years, Washington had the reputation of being "Murder Capital of the U.S." with over 400 murders per year, peaking in 1991 with 482 murders.
LINK HERE
(snip)
In reality, overturning Washington's ban on handguns may even make that city safer, and other cities in the U.S. safer. We don't like to consider that possibility, because it goes against the grain of our precious Canadian prejudices.
The law banning handguns in Washington homes came into effect in 1977 -- a year in which there were 192 murders. By 1989, and for the next six years, Washington had the reputation of being "Murder Capital of the U.S." with over 400 murders per year, peaking in 1991 with 482 murders.
LINK HERE
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Pro Second Amendment Committee Essay Contest Winner
The 2nd Amendment
by: Sage G.
by: Sage G.
2nd Place Middle School
7th grade
7th grade
The 2nd Amendment says, “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Some people think that the 2nd Amendment does not apply today, but it does. The 2nd Amendment is very important for our freedoms, and our future.
The government is constantly trying to break the law of the 2nd Amendment. Some people in our government believe the 2nd Amendment means something else. Imagine if our founding fathers never made the 2nd Amendment If citizens did not own firearms we would have lost the Revolutionary war. We would have lost the war because nobody would have been able to protect themselves or their property.
A perfect example of people not being able to protect themselves came from the Jews in the 1930’s. Before World War 2 the Jews gave their guns over to their cruel government in an order to create peace, but this allowed Hitler to terrorize the Jews. We must try to keep our rights safe and not give up our guns to tyranny. The 2nd Amendment is not only about self-security, it is also about freedom. If the government takes away the right of the 2nd Amendment we would not be able to protect ourselves.
Many people think that guns cause crime, but if guns cause crime then why isn’t there more crime in Switzerland? The crime rate in Switzerland is very low because every person over the age of 16 owns a gun and is highly trained in using it. The only thing that causes crime is human nature. To stop crime all humans would have to be dead. I think if the government was to take away the guns from the people America would fall apart.
The 2nd Amendment affects everybody in America in how it keeps us safe and able to provide. Nobody knows what is going to happen to America but we can help to shape the future. To help shape the future we can teach the next generation to understand our laws and our rights. As you can see the 2nd Amendment is very important to our history and our freedoms.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
...And the Beat Goes On
Jun 28, 12:33 AM EDT
NRA sues to overturn S.F. gun ban in city housing
By PAUL ELIAS Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The National Rifle Association sued the city of San Francisco on Friday to overturn its ban on handguns in public housing, a day after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a handgun ban in the nation's capital.
The legal action follows a similar lawsuit against the city of Chicago over its handgun ban, filed within hours of Thursday's high court ruling.
(snip)
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said that the Supreme Court ruling didn't address gun bans on government property and that he is "confident that our local gun control measures are on sound legal footing and will survive legal challenges."
San Francisco also requires residents to keep guns in lockboxes or equip them with trigger locks. That law, passed by the county supervisors last year, wasn't challenged in Friday's lawsuit.
A state appeals court has overturned a broader citywide gun ban that voters approved in 2005.
The Chicago lawsuit challenges the city's 1982 ordinance making it illegal to possess or sell handguns there.NRA lawyer C.D. Michel said both lawsuits were necessary to expand the Supreme Court's ruling beyond Washington, a federal district, to states and cities.
LINK to full story here
In other news Washington D.C. officials say that they will not allow Semi-auto pistols to be possessed in D.C.
NRA sues to overturn S.F. gun ban in city housing
By PAUL ELIAS Associated Press Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The National Rifle Association sued the city of San Francisco on Friday to overturn its ban on handguns in public housing, a day after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a handgun ban in the nation's capital.
The legal action follows a similar lawsuit against the city of Chicago over its handgun ban, filed within hours of Thursday's high court ruling.
(snip)
San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said that the Supreme Court ruling didn't address gun bans on government property and that he is "confident that our local gun control measures are on sound legal footing and will survive legal challenges."
San Francisco also requires residents to keep guns in lockboxes or equip them with trigger locks. That law, passed by the county supervisors last year, wasn't challenged in Friday's lawsuit.
A state appeals court has overturned a broader citywide gun ban that voters approved in 2005.
The Chicago lawsuit challenges the city's 1982 ordinance making it illegal to possess or sell handguns there.NRA lawyer C.D. Michel said both lawsuits were necessary to expand the Supreme Court's ruling beyond Washington, a federal district, to states and cities.
LINK to full story here
In other news Washington D.C. officials say that they will not allow Semi-auto pistols to be possessed in D.C.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Speak Up Now On Right-To-Carry In National Parks
I am putting this up again because it is so important, especially after the decision yesterday by the Supreme Court.
June 30th is the last day that comments will be accepted. If you haven't made a comment yet please do so Soon!
Comments can submitted by clicking on the link below:
Comment Here
Remember, all comments must be received by June 30. Submit your comments today!
June 30th is the last day that comments will be accepted. If you haven't made a comment yet please do so Soon!
Comments can submitted by clicking on the link below:
Comment Here
Remember, all comments must be received by June 30. Submit your comments today!
Michael Reagan Says
"Liberals, who hate guns almost as much as they hate cars, got a well-deserved lesson in Second Amendment rights when the Supreme Court spit in their face by ruling that the Constitution really does guarantee the right of Americans to own guns.
The ruling, which struck down the District of Columbia’s laws almost totally restricting handgun ownership, affirmed the traditional view that the Second Amendment means exactly what it says when it guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." (snip)
The District of Columbia law was based on the fallacious idea that by banning hand gun ownership by citizens except under the most onerous conditions, criminals -- a not un-sizeable part of the district’s population even with the exclusion of members of Congress as a criminal class -- wouldn’t be able to buy and own guns and thus continue their murderous ways.
C’mon now. Do they really believe that criminals buy their guns in legitimate gun shops? ...
Link to full article!
I find it disheartening that four (4) of the Supreme Court Justices haven't a clue to the meaning and importance of the Constitution! --dean0
The ruling, which struck down the District of Columbia’s laws almost totally restricting handgun ownership, affirmed the traditional view that the Second Amendment means exactly what it says when it guarantees "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." (snip)
The District of Columbia law was based on the fallacious idea that by banning hand gun ownership by citizens except under the most onerous conditions, criminals -- a not un-sizeable part of the district’s population even with the exclusion of members of Congress as a criminal class -- wouldn’t be able to buy and own guns and thus continue their murderous ways.
C’mon now. Do they really believe that criminals buy their guns in legitimate gun shops? ...
Link to full article!
I find it disheartening that four (4) of the Supreme Court Justices haven't a clue to the meaning and importance of the Constitution! --dean0
Thursday, June 26, 2008
The "Supremes" decide?
Today is the day the fateful decision will be made public. Since I get to work today I won't know what it is until later tonight.
How will this effect us here in Western Colorado? I expect if the Supreme Court decision is in favor of the Constitution much will stay the same. On the other hand if they decide to interpret the Constitution incorrectly there will be no doubt some action of some sort. How about a "OPEN CARRY" demonstration one way or the other?
Here is an early article:
WASHINGTON - Anxious District officials prepared Wednesday to respond if the city’s handgun ban is struck down when the U.S. Supreme Court issues its decision in a case challenging that ban, a ruling the court signaled will come today. D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray said the high court was not likely to come down on the District’s side in D.C. v. Heller.
Link to full article
How will this effect us here in Western Colorado? I expect if the Supreme Court decision is in favor of the Constitution much will stay the same. On the other hand if they decide to interpret the Constitution incorrectly there will be no doubt some action of some sort. How about a "OPEN CARRY" demonstration one way or the other?
Here is an early article:
WASHINGTON - Anxious District officials prepared Wednesday to respond if the city’s handgun ban is struck down when the U.S. Supreme Court issues its decision in a case challenging that ban, a ruling the court signaled will come today. D.C. Council Chairman Vincent Gray said the high court was not likely to come down on the District’s side in D.C. v. Heller.
Link to full article
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
High noon: Out-of-state gun permit battle begins
There's a gunfight shaping up in the Utah Legislature. Gun advocates who want Utah to continue to arm the nation versus government bureaucrats and gun-control advocates who see the dangers in Utah's permissive concealed-carry permitting system.
Utah permits are the Tootsie Pops of concealed-carry permits: easily obtained, inexpensive, long-lasting and unhealthy, for Utahns and the nation as a whole. More than a third of Utah's 100,000-plus permits are in the hands of non-residents, who bypass more-stringent requirements in their home states. That doesn't seem fair.
The opening shots were fired last week at a meeting of the Legislature's Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice interim committee.
_________
An article in the Salt Lake Tribune LINK HERE
Some pursued Utah permits before Colorado had a "Shall Issue" and reciprocity with other states was not available to Colorado Permit holders. Why have a Utah permit?
Utah permits are the Tootsie Pops of concealed-carry permits: easily obtained, inexpensive, long-lasting and unhealthy, for Utahns and the nation as a whole. More than a third of Utah's 100,000-plus permits are in the hands of non-residents, who bypass more-stringent requirements in their home states. That doesn't seem fair.
The opening shots were fired last week at a meeting of the Legislature's Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice interim committee.
_________
An article in the Salt Lake Tribune LINK HERE
Some pursued Utah permits before Colorado had a "Shall Issue" and reciprocity with other states was not available to Colorado Permit holders. Why have a Utah permit?
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Training in The Grand Valley
As was pointed out by Gene at Living the Grand Life I (dean0) helped teach a couple of NRA classes over that last weekend (June 21,22--2008). We had a great time with some great students.
I have been involved in NRA basic courses in Mesa County for a number of years (since 1994).
Also I have been involved in a very minor role in some other training that has taken place in Mesa County as well.
From time to time Alone Stivi brings his experts to Grand Junction and trains our citizens as well as our "protectors".
Direct Measures International is unlike any other security company in the world. We provide a full range of interdisciplinary training, consulting and protective services.
When faced with adversity, people look for PROVEN SOLUTIONS. Our team of elite American and Israeli operators and security specialists has over fifty years of DIRECT experience combating terrorism and violence.
Alon Stivi
Some Testimonials from folks in our area that have taken the training
offered.
"Thank you for the service you have provided to me by training a member of my staff. He now feels more confident in performing his duties as my personal security." - Scott McInnis, Member of Congress
Best tactical training I had in 22 years of law enforcement." - Patrol
Sgt.Roy Kinney - Rio Blanco County Sheriff.
I feel better equipped to do my job as a result of your training" - Sgt. Anthony Mazzola - Rio Blanco County Sheriff Department.
Your program should be taught in every law enforcement academy." - Officer Rachel Luchco - Meeker Police Department.
Best shooting / Active Shooter Response class I have ever attended." - Vince Wilczek, Chief of Police - Rangely Police Department.
"The entire course material was relevant and transferable. It taught me some of the best flashlight techniques I have ever tried" - Art Smith MCSD
SWAT /Firearm Instructor.
"The training was very realistic. The instructor was very,very knowledgeable." - Jim Rewald, Deputy, Los Angeles Sheriff
Department.
"The course taught effective survival techniques that addresses
real situations. This program should be taught to all law enforcement." - Sgt. Donna Dougherty, Mesa County Sheriff Department.
"Your arrest & control and defensive tactics can be use on the job
every day and should be taught to every profession that has to deal with
combative,resistive and out of control persons." - Lt. Laurie Galvin,
Professional Standards Training, Mesa County Sheriff Department.
I will Let you know before the next time Alon comes to town for civilian training !
Monday, June 23, 2008
GOD BLESS AMERICA
God Bless America,Land that I love.
Stand beside her, and guide her
Thru the night with a light from above.
From the mountains, to the prairies,
To the oceans, white with foam
God bless America,
My home sweet home.
Pro Second Amendment Committee Essay Contest Winner
Bret C.
2nd Grade
Taupe Elementary
I think that everyone should learn how to use and respect guns when they are kids and then I don’t think that the United States would have as many problems with grown ups doing bad things with guns. I also think that it is important that everyone be allowed to own there own guns to protect there families and homes from bad guys. When I read the second amendment with my mom and looked up what militia means I decided that it means more than just the policemen and military. I think that it means all people who are citizens of the United States and like the second amendment says we need to be able to protect our country and we couldn’t with just bows and arrows, spears and knives. So I think that we will always need guns to protect our country from the bad guys.
I don’t think that guns kill people I think bad people kill people with guns. If the government like the president took away everyone’s guns I don’t think that we would be free anymore because then only the police and military would have guns and they would be the only ones who could protect us and there aren’t enough of them to protect everyone all the time. I think even if the president took away all the guns the bad guys would hide there’s and then the good guys would have nothing to protect themselves and there families with. Plus if we give everything to the president then we would lose all of our freedom.
I got my first rifle this year for Christmas and I know that it is a big responsibility because my mom and dad have taught me how to take care of it and that it is important to always be safe with it. I would be very sad if someone ever tried to take my rifle away because I want to become the best shooter and sniper that I can so that when I’m big enough I can hunt with my dad and help feed my family. When I grow up I want to be a SWAT officer. I know that I need to practice shooting a lot with my gun now so that I can help protect people who don’t have guns later. When I grow up I also want to be able to keep my family safe against burglars like my dad keeps us safe now. Those are the ways that I think the second amendment affects me.
2nd Grade
Taupe Elementary
I think that everyone should learn how to use and respect guns when they are kids and then I don’t think that the United States would have as many problems with grown ups doing bad things with guns. I also think that it is important that everyone be allowed to own there own guns to protect there families and homes from bad guys. When I read the second amendment with my mom and looked up what militia means I decided that it means more than just the policemen and military. I think that it means all people who are citizens of the United States and like the second amendment says we need to be able to protect our country and we couldn’t with just bows and arrows, spears and knives. So I think that we will always need guns to protect our country from the bad guys.
I don’t think that guns kill people I think bad people kill people with guns. If the government like the president took away everyone’s guns I don’t think that we would be free anymore because then only the police and military would have guns and they would be the only ones who could protect us and there aren’t enough of them to protect everyone all the time. I think even if the president took away all the guns the bad guys would hide there’s and then the good guys would have nothing to protect themselves and there families with. Plus if we give everything to the president then we would lose all of our freedom.
I got my first rifle this year for Christmas and I know that it is a big responsibility because my mom and dad have taught me how to take care of it and that it is important to always be safe with it. I would be very sad if someone ever tried to take my rifle away because I want to become the best shooter and sniper that I can so that when I’m big enough I can hunt with my dad and help feed my family. When I grow up I want to be a SWAT officer. I know that I need to practice shooting a lot with my gun now so that I can help protect people who don’t have guns later. When I grow up I also want to be able to keep my family safe against burglars like my dad keeps us safe now. Those are the ways that I think the second amendment affects me.
Friday, June 20, 2008
OPEN CARRY --A MOVEMENT--?--
IN PENNSYLVAINA
Four members that were part of a group openly carrying guns at a restaurant in Dickson City last month have filed a lawsuit against the borough and its police officers.
Though not yet served, borough officials have said they are not surprised by the news.
LINK
ALSO
Mr. Banks, Mr. McCarren, Larry Meyer, of Susquehanna, and Mr. Banks’ wife, Judy Banks, filed the suit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The suit names as defendants two officers, Karen Gallagher and Anthony Mariano, along with Police Chief William Stadnitski and Dickson City Borough.
The plaintiffs are asking for compensatory damages in excess of $100,000 and an “injunction requiring the individual defendants to receive such additional training as may be necessary to prevent a recurrence.” The compensatory figure doesn’t include punitive damages, which can be awarded as a punishment and a deterrent to the alleged rights violation being repeated.
The suit differs from the incident report on several points, including an allegation that police demanded “under threat of being arrested” that Mrs. Banks stop video-recording the incident. The police report indicated Officer Gallagher simply asked Mrs. Banks to turn off the recorder.
LINK
AND JUST WEST OF US IN UTAH
In Utah, there are places no one but law enforcement can take a gun, and there are restrictions, for example people without a concealed carry permit can't openly carry a loaded gun, but much of the time, it's allowed.
Jared Belcher is among those who choose to carry a gun. "It's a Bursa Thunder 380 I carry just about every day," he says. He carries it on his belt, out in the open. He said, "Most people, surprisingly, don't notice I have it."
Belcher says he's never had a problem taking the gun anywhere, but he's concerned because others he's met through the organization opencarry.org have. Travis Deveraux says he was walking in his West Valley neighborhood when an officer pulled up, pulled out her gun and ordered him on the ground.
"At the end there were a total of eight officers who'd cuffed me up, taken my firearm. But they let me go because there was nothing wrong I'd done," Deveraux said.
LINK
I find these situations interesting, but are these situations furthering any good cause?
Will there be anyone in Colorado take up this issue, and what will be the consequences of any “Civil Disobedience” in regard to Open Carry in Colorado? (It is legal in many situations, but is it necessary and/or is it wise?)
It seems to me that this is a growing movement and may eventually be an issue in Western Colorado.
Four members that were part of a group openly carrying guns at a restaurant in Dickson City last month have filed a lawsuit against the borough and its police officers.
Though not yet served, borough officials have said they are not surprised by the news.
LINK
ALSO
Mr. Banks, Mr. McCarren, Larry Meyer, of Susquehanna, and Mr. Banks’ wife, Judy Banks, filed the suit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The suit names as defendants two officers, Karen Gallagher and Anthony Mariano, along with Police Chief William Stadnitski and Dickson City Borough.
The plaintiffs are asking for compensatory damages in excess of $100,000 and an “injunction requiring the individual defendants to receive such additional training as may be necessary to prevent a recurrence.” The compensatory figure doesn’t include punitive damages, which can be awarded as a punishment and a deterrent to the alleged rights violation being repeated.
The suit differs from the incident report on several points, including an allegation that police demanded “under threat of being arrested” that Mrs. Banks stop video-recording the incident. The police report indicated Officer Gallagher simply asked Mrs. Banks to turn off the recorder.
LINK
AND JUST WEST OF US IN UTAH
In Utah, there are places no one but law enforcement can take a gun, and there are restrictions, for example people without a concealed carry permit can't openly carry a loaded gun, but much of the time, it's allowed.
Jared Belcher is among those who choose to carry a gun. "It's a Bursa Thunder 380 I carry just about every day," he says. He carries it on his belt, out in the open. He said, "Most people, surprisingly, don't notice I have it."
Belcher says he's never had a problem taking the gun anywhere, but he's concerned because others he's met through the organization opencarry.org have. Travis Deveraux says he was walking in his West Valley neighborhood when an officer pulled up, pulled out her gun and ordered him on the ground.
"At the end there were a total of eight officers who'd cuffed me up, taken my firearm. But they let me go because there was nothing wrong I'd done," Deveraux said.
LINK
I find these situations interesting, but are these situations furthering any good cause?
Will there be anyone in Colorado take up this issue, and what will be the consequences of any “Civil Disobedience” in regard to Open Carry in Colorado? (It is legal in many situations, but is it necessary and/or is it wise?)
It seems to me that this is a growing movement and may eventually be an issue in Western Colorado.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
More on Open Carry
. . . Now an "open carry" movement encourages gun owners to wear their weapons ostentatiously on their belts, "to make a firearm," in the words of a Los Angeles Times story last week, "as common an accessory as an iPod." Or, as one open carrier said, "Hey, we're normal people who carry guns."
In the great American gun debate, some would forgo the primordial shame the weapon still generates. Hence the "open carry" movement. But given the gun-deaths of children, and the sponsoring gun-paralysis of politics, Americans should have more shame, not less. A gun is no iPod. Shame is the children's last protection.
Entire Article Here
I put this article under the "News Tag" but it is clearly an opinion piece written by an uninformed fear-monger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
