If anybody wants to buy me a gift-

I'd love a copy of this book- Shooting Back, The right and Duty of Self Defense. It is written by a South African that defended himself and fellow parishoners when armed terrorists stormed into the church where he was worshiping.

Which reminds me, I need to get my concealed carry permit renewed this week!

Yeah Dad!

In response to yesterday's post about a scaredy-cat columnist in Wisconsin being afraid to walk the streets due to the citizen's newly approved right to acquire concealed carry permits for their firearms, my dad went directly to the source and wrote an email to the columnist. I've copied it here for you to enjoy.

Congratulations to Wisconsin for allowing legal concealed carry. It is unfortunate that they are burdened with mis-guided critics such as yourself to spread fears about concealed carry.

I live in a county in south Florida that consistently, week in and week out, (or daily,) records shootings on the street, or homes. As unfortunate as it is,I have yet, in over 34 years in this area, to see or hear a news account in which the shooter is a legal gun carrier. Never is there a statement about the person
involved having the LEGAL right to carry, but does the fact that it is illegal stop them? NO More often is turns out that the person is a convicted felon, who never would be given a CWP.

To establish the right to carry, a thorough background check is required, a clean record, a willingness to have photos, fingerprints, and character examined before the permit is issued. By the way, I have held CWPs in several states over a period of 55 years, as well as having been raised with a Grandfather who was both a Deputy Sheriff and a gunsmith, and I have yet to be in a situation where I needed to display a weapon.

But I have had occasion to avoid a thorough beating,because of speaking out to stop a domestic-violence incident, which turned the boy-friend on me. He was large enough, and angry enough, to have done serious damage to me, but stopped in his tracks, as he came nose-to-nose, (literally,) with me---simply because he knew I possessed both the capability of carrying, and the attitude to do whatever was needed to stop any physical damage to myself. I was NOT carrying at that moment,just the possibility was enough to stop his attack. This is the very essence of the carry-law, the uncertainty of the perpetrator as to the possible self-defense of the victim, if needed.

Best you do more research before you spread more propaganda among the public via the print media.

What a pissant-

Read this column and ask yourself why a supposedly educated, professional journalist isn't smart enough to look around at the other 40-something states in these United states to see that none of his stated fears have occurred where the citizen's right of concealed carry has been in place for years.

What a pissant coward.

Man with gun takes wife and son out to dinner-

at Red Robin. Nothing tragic happened.

The Burnin Love Burger is not as good as a Carl's Jr. Jalepeno Burger.

Sent a letter to the editor today-

The editor of Concealed Carry Magazine, explaining my analogy about why I carry a firearm nearly every day outside my house. She wrote back promptly and asked for permission to publish my letter in the next issue! Sweet!

If you don't know my analogy already, I'll save it until the magazine publishes and reprint it then. Stand by!

Ban scary looking dogs?

Let's face it, nobody needs a 100+ pound German Sheppard or Doberman or a 75 pound Pit Bull to enjoy canine companionship. Anybody should be able to find all the love and affection that a dog can provide by owning a Corgi or a toy Fox Terrier or a miniature Poodle, right?

So why do we allow people to own big scary dogs?

Get yourself a fresh cup of coffee or a fresh drink and sit back and read We Need a Dog Ban. It is a very interesting essay with lots of links to supporting documentation and it's not all about dogs...

Here's a hint, if you won't read it yourself- the essay is concerned with GFW politicians who want to ban certain guns just because they believe they are scary looking.

Does the news make you more likely to get a gun?

There's a poll at the Patriot Ledger. Click it and tell them what you think.

You know how I voted...

Pastor killed during church service

Reports say he deflected the first shot with a Bible.

Yes, Bibles are appropriate in church. Not too surprisingly, they are not appropriate personal defense tools. Which begs the question, what would be an appropriate personal defense tool? I'm suspecting 9mm at the very least so I need to get busy with that holster purchase I have been putting off.

"Things like this just don't happen in Maryville," Mayor Larry Gulledge said.

Apparently, mayor, things like this DO happen in Maryville, so perhaps more action needs to be taken by the good citizens of your town. Except of course, this happened in Illinois, where legal Concealed Carry of firearms is denied to the citizens. Pity.

What did he say? F*ck the 2nd Amendment?

Well, yeah, that's exactly what Kaveman said- "F*ck the 2nd Amendment". Go read his 3 Rules of Duh and re-read Sword and Tome and maybe you will understand what he's saying.

And you know I agree with him!

I'm putting my money where my mouth is-

Today I bought a subscription to U.S. Concealed Carry Association. I had a look at the public portion of their website and decided I wanted to be associated with this group. My suggestion to you is to check it out for yourself and see if supporting their efforts is worthy of a few of your hard earned dollars too.

A link is going on my sidebar as well.

For every nanny-state abiding, dial 911 and wait for the police, turn the other cheek, "the disadvantaged just need our help" gun fearing liberal-

You need to go and read Sword and Tome by Dave Kopel. Right now.

I'll wait.

Back already? Now you understand what I believe. Those reasons so clearly spelled out by Mr. Kopel are the reasons I carry a handgun. Those are the reasons I am stridently opposed to any politician- from our president, Barry, and his minions, Chuckie Shumer, Diane Feinstein, John F'n Kerry, mayor Bloomberg from New York and the the Brady Bunch. All of those people have forgotten that the right to defend oneself trancends government and government's man-made laws.

I'm adding a link in my sidebar to this valuable article so that it can be a constant reminder to me and to anyone that stops by this humble spot on the internet that self-protection is not just a luxury afforded to a few but instead is the right of every person.

National Gun Rights Rally on the Washington Mall?

It seems that the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners has an idea that it is time for all of America to see how many citizens there are that will stand up and be counted for respect of our 2nd Amendment rights. They want to have a National Gun Rights Rally in Washington D.C. in the spring of 2010.

I think it seems like a great idea and today I sent this email to my gun buddies:

I say we rent a bus, load it up with beef jerky and videos to watch and go to Washington! Since none of us jumped on a bus back on Jan 20 to go to the inauguration, maybe this would be the right reason to visit our nation’s capitol.

Seriously. I’ll bet we could fill a bus just with people we know here in Utah.

If the group in Michigan can get this rally organized, I think I can arrange a small contigent from Utah!

Texas legislature to debate an Open Carry law

Good for them. I am a firm believer that if a citizen has to have a license to carry a gun for personal protection at all, then that citizen should be allowed to make their own choice between open carry or concealed carry. Sure there are good reasons for concealed carry- keeping criminals in the dark about your self-protection decisions perhaps being the most important, but I'm not at all certain that letting a criminal with evil intent see that a citizen is armed and prepared is any less of a deterrent. I believe citizens that choose not to carry firearms should simply get used to seeing their friends, neighbors and fellow Wal-Mart shoppers legally carrying a crucial self-protection device. I think a openly carried firearm should not be any bigger cause for alarm than a pocket knife carried in a belt pouch or clipped to a pocket.

Legal open carry would greatly simplify the carrying of handguns due to the plethora of quality holster choices that are available but generally require a covering garment being available for everyday use whether the activity or weather dictates. It would also allow guys to buy pants that fit all the time instead of just when wearing an inside-the-waistband holster, if that is their choice of concealed carry holster, since every article I have read suggests buying pants a size or two too big to make room for your handgun. That tells me that you would need pants to fit with and fit without your holster. Buying an outside the waistband holster eliminates that trouble and if it is visible- who cares!

I'm a firm believer in and supporter of www.opencarry.org and I hope their efforts in Texas are successful so that the rest of the states can take notice and respond similarly.

Why would anyone live in chicago?

Really, why would anyone live in a city where the rules can be so completely ignored, trampled upon and misused to ruin a citizen's life is completely beyond my comprehension. Read this incredible tale of a police force running completely outside the boundaries of common decency and written law in the ill treatment caused upon Chris Morley. Chris went through the complex and twisted and expensive procedures required to own and carry an unloaded firearm in the city of Chicago but due to his illness at work and an unauthorized search of his personal belongings he spent 48 hours in jail and a hospital. He was denied food and water and his medications and his family was unaware of his whereabouts for 24 hours.

Chris has had his legally owned firearms confiscated by the state and his ownership permission card revoked. He lost his job, can't find another due to his arrest- no conviction mind you and is being prosecuted for Unlawful Use of Weapons even though he NEVER used his weapon! Hell it wasn't even a weapon, since it was unloaded, he had a badly shaped club in his pack!

Anyway, if you live in Chicago and still believe in the American Dream and the right of citizens to act like adults, pack up and get the hell out of there! Really, pack now and get yourself somewhere west where you can be treated like an adult. If you don't live in Chicago, go read this entire story and be amazed at this misuse and abuse of written law and common decency.

And then join ICarry.org and support their efforts to raise funds for Chris' defense fund. I signed up and I hope you will too!

Rock the Vote!

Go here and tell Yahoo what you think about your citizen's right to protect yourself in a national park.

You know that I think this press release is great news and the right decision.

The most informative explanation of the 2nd Amendment

You really must go watch this video that explains in the most eloquent terms what our Second Amendment Right, under the U.S. Constitution is all about. It is brilliant and needs to be seen and shared by everyone.

The folks that paid for it are Jews For the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. If anyone understands what can happen to an unarmed society, they understand.

Thanks to Xavier for posting it where I would see it.

Would Christ carry a concealed weapon?

He didn't need to, his disciples did. Here's a pretty interesting column on Townhall.com. Be sure to read some of the loony comments.

An Open Letter to the College Students of America

Editor's note: This is no Smallest Minority uberpost, as Kevin calls his regular, doctoral level posts but it is a big post for me. I've had this on my mind ever since the shooting at Northern Illinois University. I've written this in all seriousness and not in jest, so I hope you will read it, consider it and share it with your friends.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -- Thomas Jefferson (1764) -- Quoting 18th Century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment

College students throughout America’s history have taken it as a point of pride to be changers. I believe it is part of the collegiate experience as young people gather at universities and are exposed to new ideas and concepts, that they take their combined experiences and youthful exuberance and apply those attributes to current events to implement change, either in popular culture or politics or national attitude. It is pretty easy, even for me, to point out numerous examples of changes to the American experience that have been a direct result of upheaval and of university students acting together across many campuses throughout our history. One only has to consider the positive changes in America’s Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, the demonstrations that helped bring an end to America’s participation in the Vietnam War and subsequently the end of the military draft and the incorporation of the 26th Amendment to the US Constitution that changed the voting age from 21 to 18 years of age to see the effect that students have on American policies. More recently, it is students carrying the banner of climate change seeking changes in their campus policies and general behavior. Now it is time, and I would like to recommend that young people on campuses everywhere consider a new issue that they might embrace and make their own to implement a change. The change I am recommending affects their well being directly, gives them control over a part of their life that most of them have depended upon others for and can have long lasting effect on the general American population for generations to come. It is time for college students everywhere to band together and demand the right of self-protection be the standard policy on every campus!

Certainly well publicized recent events prove beyond doubt that your campus administrators are not protecting you and are not capable of protecting you as individuals. In spite of their best efforts, their ineffective rules and laws and their protests that they are doing “all they can” to protect you, the mass shootings at Virginia Tech last year and more recently at Northern Illinois University must prove to you that you are not safe on your campuses. Less well publicized are the violent attacks that occur on every campus to you, our future leaders of America. Rape is widely recognized as prevalent but drastically under-reported and assaults of all types occur wherever students cross campus in the dark of night. My research is incomplete but it is apparent that violence does take place and no amount of parking lot flasher-warning stations or blanket email notifications can stop a single act of violence when a criminal sets their mind to doing harm. Ask among yourselves and see if I’m right. I’m certain that if you look, you can find someone close to you; on your campus; that has been a victim of a violent assault. Does your school have a violence reporting hotline or a support group for violence victims? If it does, that group exists for a reason and I encourage you to discover the reasons for their existence.

Self-protection is a basic human right and it has been recognized as such for centuries! It is not a privilege to be handed out by administration nor can it be doled out to a privileged few through legislation. In every case that you can name, violence happens to individuals or groups when they have surrendered their right of self-protection to some other entity besides themselves. It matters not if it is a community’s trust in its police force, a campus’s trust in the administration and security group or a civilian population disarmed by decree of the government, when you surrender the right of self-protection to another agency, you voluntarily place your life at risk. It should be obvious to anyone that it is not possible for the police to be in every single place where violence can occur and that at best, police officers are provided to maintain the appearance of law and order, yet in most cases of violence they can only write reports, investigate the behaviors of the law breakers and perhaps notify next-of-kin. You may believe that it is the obligation of your local law enforcement agency to protect you and seeing security guards on your campus may make you feel secure, but in fact the courts have proven time and again that there is no obligation by law enforcement to provide for an individual’s security. Note what Jeffrey R. Snyder wrote in his 1993 essay; A Nation of Cowards:

Is your life worth protecting? If so, whose responsibility is it to protect it? If you believe that it is the police's, not only are you wrong — since the courts universally rule that they have no legal obligation to do so — but you face some difficult moral quandaries. How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself? Because that is his job and we pay him to do it? Because your life is of incalculable value, but his is only worth the $30,000 salary we pay him? If you believe it reprehensible to possess the means and will to use lethal force to repel a criminal assault, how can you call upon another to do so for you?

That is why self-protection is your responsibility! Notice that I highlighted the word, feel a few sentences back; it is important to start thinking about what is real compared to what you feel. You may feel safe because you signed up for your school’s automated text messaging warning system that is supposed to warn you of a campus danger, but if you don’t get the text message until 15 minutes after a crazed student commits mass murder, how safe are you really?

Have you heard the sentiment, “When seconds count, help is just minutes away”? Do you take any solace in knowing that the security chief at Northern Illinois University bragged that his officers responded to the death of 5 students and the injury of a couple dozen more in just 2 minutes after the report came in? Were the officers in any way able to respond to the criminal mayhem before the disturbed former student finished his gruesome task by killing himself? Of course they were not! Instead, as I mentioned in the previous paragraph, they arrived in time to write reports, hold press conferences and notify next-of-kin. They obviously protected no one, yet their empty words of immediate response became the words we heard during the press conferences and we are supposed to believe that “everything possible” was done.

So, how can you, the college student, as an individual and as a group, change the circumstances of the violence you face on campus and in a bigger sense, citizens face everyday in their daily lives whether it be at the shopping mall or at lunch at Wendy's? You can accept that your protection is your responsibility and then you can choose to be prepared to face potential violence and prepared to stop the violence when it presents itself. In most cases you can do this through constant possession and training with a handgun.

You need to get past the idea that guns cause crime and that guns are “scary”. Guns are inanimate objects with no ability to operate on their own. Criminals perpetrate crime and guns, in the hands of citizens, prevent crimes. While it is possible to find published reports of citizens preventing or reducing criminal behavior, total numbers of crimes not committed because a citizen defended themselves aren’t really available- because a crime not committed is a crime not reported.

You need to arm yourself. As crucial to your young life as your laptop, cell phone or iPod might be, none of those will save you from a criminal intent to causing you harm. In 39 states, with proper training and accomplishment of a detailed background check, you can obtain a firearms carry permit and in spite of my personal belief, obtaining a firearms permit should be your first step in firearms ownership. Go to the local gun store and get educated on the types of handguns that are available. Take a training class, and learn how the different types of guns operate. Make a decision on the type and caliber of handgun that works best for you. Decide how you will keep this gun close to you and secure and buy the very best you can afford. Make regular training part of your weekly or monthly routine. And then make the mental adjustment that tells you that you are worth using lethal force against a criminal that would harm you.

That attitude adjustment and the decision to become an armed citizen will be a change for most of you. That’s the first change that I want you to implement throughout America. Read and understand the anti-gun rhetoric and apply those critical thinking skills you are learning in college to the slanted and inaccurate propaganda that you might have listened to before making this adjustment. Begin to understand how many thousands of citizens throughout America have become routine firearms carriers without open shootouts on the streets as the anti-gun crowd would have you believe. Take note of the pittance of license revocations by licensed firearms carriers and see for yourself that the simple carrying of a firearm does not make a person a danger to society.

The next step is for you as a group to demand change in the rules that govern your universities. Demand that your college administrators accept that there are no such things as “Gun Free Zones” and to drop the ban on firearms on campus carried by licensed, trained firearms permit holders. Use your power as a group, stage sit-ins, organize, use the power of the press and vote with your pocket books until you are successful changing the anti-gun, irrational fear of the administrators of your colleges and universities. Join organizations like Students for Concealed Carry, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) or Mother’s Arms to gain strength and support for your rights as a citizen.

Tell your college administrators that you will no longer tolerate their empty words and useless efforts or accept their worthless rules. Tell them that if they want to really protect students, that they build and staff with qualified instructors, proper firearms training ranges. Vote with your feet and your tuition dollars by transferring to universities that do recognize your right to self-protection. If you really want your school to change, make it clear that your continued attendance is predicated upon this simple and basic change by university management.

It is time to face facts and implement change in America’s attitudes about self-protection. Its time to place blame on the heads of criminals for their actions and recognize that adult citizens have a right to themselves and their loved ones to live, work, study and grow without fear of violence from criminals that are determined to break the law. Do not allow yourself to be one of the cowardly sheep that cower under their classroom desk and wait to die at the hands of a criminal as happened at Virginia Tech or Elizabeth City State University during a stupidly executed emergency drill. It is time to remove the stigma of citizen-carried firearms in our communities, campuses and cities and recognize that sometimes a firearm is exactly the right tool to assure personal protection. It is time for you, the college students in America to demand this right be recognized, accepted and be made the normal, not the unusual behavior.

Change this attitude with yourselves first and then your colleges and universities. Find out how successful you can be, just as your alumni did when they marched in civil rights movements, sat at segregated lunch counters and gave women the protection of reproductive rights. Be as successful as the generation that changed the Constitution to allow 18 year olds the right to vote. Take your success and build upon it as you enter the business world and as you become the next generation of elected officials in our country. Ensure through your actions that the citizens of Washington D.C. and Chicago, Illinois have the same rights of self-protection as the citizens in the rest of this country by changing the undefendable, unworkable and illegal laws imposed upon them. Ask the politicians that are already seeking your votes for change that will put them into power, what their position is on personal safety and the human right of self-protection.

Finally, as a personal favor to me, work to change the concealed carry firearms laws to simply firearms carry laws. Let’s work to make open carry as normal and unremarkable as openly carrying an iPod or a book bag. Doing so simplifies the rules, makes open or concealed carry a personal choice, expands handgun carry possibilities and further removes the stigma of a gun in public. The choice should be made by the carrier and a gun that slips and shows when it is supposed to be concealed would cease to be a scary circumstance or reason to panic by the less informed population. You can make those changes happen, can’t you?


RECOMMENDED READING AND RELATED LINKS:
First Million Mom March
Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs
Concealed Carry in Wikipedia
Just Dial 911? The Myth of Police Protection
A Nation of Cowards
Fighting Back: Crime, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry a Handgun

A believer in hypothetical criminals, bogeymen and "The Only Ones."

"If you've got a concealed weapon, don't try to protect me,"; he said. "I'll take my chances with the security forces." This quote from a guy interviewed for a story in today's Salt Lake Tribune and found via a post at The High Road.

That hypothetical criminal is a bogeyman to Steven Gunn of the Gun Violence Prevention Center of Utah. He knows state law allows guns into the airport, but he wishes it didn't. "There are plenty of authorities with guns at the airport, he said."

That's a bright example of an otherwise intelligent citizen believing in the power of "The Only Ones" that David Codrea, is always highlighting in his valuable blog, The War on Guns. I wonder if Mr. Gunn believes that he could put on his seatbelt in time to reduce injury before an automobile accident. I seriously doubt it, yet he would no doubt, not see the connection between individual self protection and responsibility through proper use of a seat belt or a sidearm. I'm also pretty certain Mr. Gunn, (or his family) would be quick on the lawsuit trail should something happen to him in the firearms carry approved area of the airport or anywhere else where he depended on "The Only Ones" to protect him from a bogeyman.

Time to support our 2nd Amendment freedoms!

As anyone that might have turned on a television set in the past week no doubt knows already, the Supreme Court of the United States of America has agreed to consider a case involving the rights of citizens of the District of Columbia to own firearms. More importantly than that distinct decision will be the greater scoped issue of what exactly does the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution mean as related to states rights or individual rights.

"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."

As you might imagine, gun rights advocates and gun ban control advocates are in a complete flutter around the internet, predicting either complete freedom from any gun restrictions or complete breakdown in law and order should individual rights win the day. Every gun blog and forum is burning up the bandwidth with experts of all stripes postulating on what will happen when SCOTUS makes a decision. You can find some links to get you started at Sailor Curt's place to understand the significance of the possibilities.

You can read a couple of editorials on the subject, first by the Attorney General of the state of Michigan and by law professor Glenn Reynolds. Professor Reynolds makes the point that no matter how SCOTUS decides, this is an election year upcoming and the politicians that are running for office better be prepared to debate, discuss and support their views on this subject or suffer for it.

My own humble opinion? I think it is time, finally, for this determination of states rights vs. individual rights is finally settled at the highest level. I think it has been too long since the Supreme Court considered this issue and it is time to get it figured out. Most of the states have resolved the question in favor of the individual and the 2nd Amendment is the only one of our specified rights in the Bill of Rights that anyone tries to bend to a state's right as opposed to an individuals right. Imagine if we decided that only the states had the 1st Amendment freedom of speech, you might not agree with going that direction, now would you? Ditto for the 2nd Amendment. I think our country has to stop being embarrassed by this part of our Constitution that makes our country unique among all the others. There is a terrific essay, The Embarrassing Second Amendment by Samuel Levinson that really spells this out. I predict that when SCOTUS rules, it will be in favor of us, individual United States citizens.

And, I'm putting my money where my mouth is, (or my electrons in this case) and I am sending money to support
Academics for the Second Amendment, a group of academics that are writing an amicus brief in support of the individual's right in the upcoming SCOTUS case. If you value your individual freedoms and believe that the 2nd Amendment gives you the right to keep and bear arms, then I'd ask you to support their efforst with some cash as well.

Finally, I've added a new link to my blogroll today, this one-Gun Cite. It a page of links that will take hours to read and digest but its a great place to begin if you want to understand why this upcoming case is so important.