|
|
Archive for May, 2010
|
|
Saturday, May 29th, 2010 |
If you are just joining the “Thirteen Tips” conversation, welcome. This series of posts lists a lawyer’s advice on what you can do when municipal government moves to suppress the practical, real-time, right to keep and bear arms. I’d further explain the need but, by now, we are all aware of Chicago’s unconstitutional handgun ban. You may be aware that local government in New Orleans went door-to-door confiscating guns a few days after Katrina. Chicago and New Orleans during Katrina represent the extreme but other cities and counties have clever council commies aiming to achieve by practical impact what the U.S. Congress and signers of the Constitution declined to impose by law.
These municipal gun control measures undermine the Second Amendment by creating exceptions or zones of gun control. The effect of this is to give a wink and a deceptive nod to the theoretical right to keep and bear arms, but to use local government to enforce gun bans that sound like ”just not here, not at this place, not at this time.” The goal of these gun controllers is to create so many piecemeal exceptions that the right to keep and bear arms cannot be practically exercised. Put another way, if you really just must own a gun (They can’t understand why anyone needs a gun.) then you should keep it at home. And, if you just must have one at home, then it should be disabled by some kind of lock–but that’s a blog for another day.
Example? You’ll hear “guns and alcohol don’t mix” as an argument for outright total bans against carrying a handgun into any establishment that serves alcohol, even if you are not drinking. If you cannot carry your handgun into a restaurant that serves alcohol, then you are an unarmed victim when the carjacker strikes as you and your wife and toddler get out of the car in the parking lot. You are unarmed when you take that after-dinner stroll through the riverside park before heading back to the hotel.
So, the “Thirteen Tips” posts guide you as you stand up to address your local governing boards and commissions most effectively. We gun owners are for the most part discrete, quiet about our guns, and unorganized below the level of membership in a national organization. That is our weakness.
The last tip was “organize.” Organizing is a “force multiplier” when standing up in opposition to some municipal Marxist making a motion to mop up your weapons. Mostly, we aren’t organized at all but, when they make too overt a move to infiltrate gun control into the back door, we stir. We might even organize. They think the NRA orchestrates our ire but, we are not lemmings following The Great Leader or usually any leader for that matter.
I recommend you drop back and read the earlier tips first, archived in May 2010, beginning with the first one. The first one, appropriately, states the mission: http://bit.ly/9AUEHT The next tips are all designed to serve that mission.
This next tip will probably be the one readers like the least but, folks, it’s just got to be said. If you were my client and we were heading to trial, this is the kind of frank, practical advice I would give you before taking the stand to testify. This tip cautions against the human tendency to be not so nice, particularly when we perceive that we are threatened. Here we go.
Tip Number 9) Email the lawmakers, but keep your anger under control and give them no ground for claiming that they were “threatened.”
They may accuse a gun rights advocate of threats anyway but give them no basis. Some politicians think threatening their seat at election time is tantamount to threatening them with assassination, but be careful little mouth what you say. Liberals love to try to turn the tables on law-abiding gun owners, making us out to be unstable and dangerous. I suspect I saw a municipal lawmaker conspire with a newspaper reporter to print a story smearing gun owners, claiming to have been threatened in emails. Oh, she had “lost” the emails so her story couldn’t be refuted, but plainly she tried to undermine the moral force of the gun owners’ arguments by general implication that we are all just barely containing our rabid near-insanity.
In this strange age in which we live, even rational, well-reasoned but passionate argument scares some. Fiery looks and words may convey to the lawmakers the exact opposite of the message you are trying to get across. What is that message? (See Tip Number One again.) The message is: “You do not have to fear the armed citizen.”
Here’s some good advice for you late night email correspondents: Draft messages and draft beer do NOT go together; walk away and reflect before you come back to hit that “Send” button.
While we’re trying to make sure we preserve the right impression, Tip 10 is good advice for appearing and speaking at public meetings, too.
Posted in Gun Control in the Culture, Individual Liberty, Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
Thursday, May 27th, 2010 |
Tip Number 8) Organize.
Remember Jonathan Winters in the movie “The Russians Are Coming–The Russians are Coming!” running around town, rallying the townspeople against what he thought was a Russian invasion, yelling, “We’ve got to get organized!?” You don’t remember? Oh, yeah, that was a while ago. Well, anyway, you’ve got to get organized or you won’t have those numbers talked about in Tips 6 and 7.
We are for the most part quiet, private and discrete about our weapons. That is our nature and, in a culture that tries to suppress the right to keep and bear arms, we try not to affront their sensibilities. That’s why many carry concealed instead of openly. We just don’t need the hassle and there are tactical reasons to be covert as well.
However, now is not the time to stay isolated. The opposition bitterly think the NRA orchestrates all of us like mean little puppets. They imagine that Chris Cox flies in personally to rally the troops, maybe even bringing in some professional ACORN type organizers with him. They HATE the NRA and scoff if you tell them how unorganized your group really is. They cannot accept that you are grassroots. Never mind that the NRA consists of about 4 million actual, human, ordinary citizen members. The point is lost on them. Best advice when you get up to speak: Don’t even mention the NRA. Form your own organization.
Organizing is fun, too. I met more gun owners during the last City Council dustup than I’ve ever met at a range! Great guys and I came away really glad that the commies proposed the gun ban ordinance. Other friends showed up whom I never suspected were so passionate about the right to keep and bear arms. But, reality check: We are just not that organized. It is not already done for you.
Tip: Come prepared to collect email addresses and names. Tell everybody that the guy who takes the list and starts doing Forward-Forward will be shot! You may have a local NRA coordinator. He may be a ball of fire, or he may be distracted and ineffective. The official NRA coordinator might take on the job of getting the troops out but you cannot count on the NRA to organize you.
You may have an already-in-place, active state organization chapter. Good! You have community-organizer infrastructure in place. In whatever form we-the-people take in your locale, and whomever the “you” turns out to be, you must locate, rally the troops, and keep them informed.The Board may put the vote off, or refer the matter to a “workshop.” Your unit may have to show more than once. It’s vital to keep in touch and honor every one’s privacy by learning to email groups of addressees without disclosing the individual email addresses to every recipient.
If you personally are not the one to take charge, that’s OK. I’m just sayin’, however you do it, the gun owners have got to get organized instead of remaining isolated, quiet individuals, appearing at the meetings alone and leaving quickly without joining together. It will be work but it will be rewarding.
Posted in Gun Control in the Culture, Individual Liberty, Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
Wednesday, May 26th, 2010 |
“Neighbors described the elderly couple, who both walk with canes, as pillars of the community in Garfield Park, where home invasions have been all too frequent.” The dead invader had also shot at the homeowner.
This is a nightmare, at least for those switched-on enough to consider the possibility of waking up pre-dawn to hear your back door being kicked in. I suppose the oblivious don’t think about such things happening until the moment of terror. For the rest of us, nothing substitutes for having a gun, loaded and readily available to shoot–even in cities where illegal gun bans are in force.
This is also a nightmare for Mayor Daley. This is the last thing he needed: a man like Mr. McDonald (law-abiding, elderly, military verteran) plus the man’s heroic, successful home defense against an armed home invader. (See my earlier 13 Tips post at http://bit.ly/dntKX0 re the power of dramatic events in arguing against gun control. )
Mayor Daley, do you dare prosecute this handgun owner? I can’t wait to see.
Fox News reports the story at http://bit.ly/aioR1D .
Posted in Gun Control in the Culture, Individual Liberty, Second Amendment, Your Constant Companion | No Comments »
|
|
Wednesday, May 26th, 2010 |
In “The American Rifleman” June 2010:
Wayne LaPierre’s page 12 “Standing Guard” column gives you a well-written, well-reasoned and unique take on McDonald v City of Chicago. He states the theme in sentence number one:
At the center of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on whether to strike down Chicago’s decades-old handgun ban—expected this month—is a clash of wills between two very different men.
Otis McDonald exemplifies good citizenship. Richard Daley exemplifies authoritarian arrogance.
If you think that contrast statement is too strong, I invite you to read Wayne’s report. The right to keep and bear arms is personal, in more than the legal “individual right” or “corporate right” sense at the heart of the legal argument. (If a corporate or public right, then the government may essentially eradicate the individual liberty. We would be back to Michael Dukakis’s dream of “Only the police and military should have guns.”) Mr. McDonald is a real human being, with real values and real experiences compelling him to be the plaintiff.
In the rest of the issue:
- In “Hollywood Guns” Stephen Hunter reviews an exciting new exhibit at the National Firearms Museum. Guns from the movies. This includes one you may never have heard of unless you thumbed the pages of Shooter’s Bible” during the sixties: the Gyrojet. You wouldn’t believe it but we can celebrate the innovative creativity even of failed inventions. Great pictures.
- Chris Cox celebrates the opening of the Clark County Shooting Park on nearly 3,000 acres in Nevada. I join them but with a different take. It’s noteworthy that this is in Nevada. Try getting your eastern, urban county to set aside land for public ranges. “A place to shoot” will be one of our second amendment battleground issues. The right is a neutered theory unless exercised in real places, not just at home. They want your faith and your guns kept at home and banned from the public.
- Chuckle. The left would be horrified to know about the quantity and quality of combat and personal defense training going on out here on any given weekend. Tier 1 Group in Arkansas expanded its training grounds and curriculum to—well, you’d have to read the article to believe it. Several decades ago, most of our training was casual against tin cans and bottles. The training imperative has taken hold. I mention this article mainly because Tier 1 extends its training to civilian citizens, too.
- Speaking of the frightened left’s horrors, consider the number of full automatic weapons that are out here. A simple ad reminds you of the Tommy Gun’s history. If you’ve never fired one, well you just have to put this on your list of things to do before you die. Listen carefully for those full auto owners out there. They are very quiet people about their guns, though. You’ll have to listen carefully.
- Speaking of .45s, this issue reviews Springfield’s new XD(M) .45 ACP striker-fired pistol. So, here we go: it’s got the same stopping power of the Model 1911 & twice the magazine capacity. So, how does it stack up on reliability and on accuracy? Let the debate rage! Having incited to riot, I’m moving on.
- Worth noting: Beretta is celebrating the M9 pistol’s 25th anniversary as the official U.S. military sidearm.
- It’s fun and useful to use a ballistics program to identify your short and long zero ranges. In other words, if you want a 200 yard zero, at what distance does the bullet intersect your line of sight first as it rises? You can zero there first, then confirm your zero at the greater distance where your bullet intersects the line of sight as it drops. You know: the 5.56 issue round zeros for 200 yards at 50 yards. Well, go to www.nikonhunting.com/spoton and download the free Spot On program and fire your screen shots.
- Likewise, Brownells lets you practice building your custom AR-15 for free. It’s much cheaper than buying a new gun, doesn’t get you in trouble someone watching over your expenditures, and you can experiment in digital cyberspace before you assemble in analog, real-time in your real basement.
- The Rifleman ads note the offering now of a waterproof Bible.
- Henry sure is making some nice .22s. Almost too nice to take out to the woods all day long. However, their pump action is reviewed in this issue.
- In the realm of the weird, Josh Sugarman of the Violence Policy Center, claims the AR is on its last legs. Wow. Send the men in white suits to take him away to be institutionalized. Reality check, Josh!
Posted in Gun Control in the Culture, Individual Liberty, Your Constant Companion | No Comments »
|
|
Sunday, May 23rd, 2010 |
If you’ve been with me since Tip Number 1, you know our mission is to calm anti-gun fears. Well, Tip Numbers 6 and 7 calm some of those fears, and create others. Good fears. Fears of voter backlash.
Tip Number 6) Show up in force.
They understand numbers. If you show with four others, you send a message alright. If you show with 200 courteous others, all sitting together and ready to stand up as a bloc, you send the message you want.
Tip Number 7) Show up with a variety of ordinary citizens.
While we’re talking numbers, let’s talk the mix. Here, you need your daughter-in-law, your son and their young friends to come out. COGs (Crusty old guys) in too great a proportion convey a sense that the right to keep and bear arms will die out soon enough on its own and proponents are “out of it.” Wives, girlfriends, now is a time for you to shine! We need the group standing up to show that the gun owners come from all walks of life and that right to keep and bear arms proponents are far more broad in scope than the opoponents want to believe.
These two tips are directly related to Tip Number 8, coming soon.
Posted in Gun Control in the Culture, Individual Liberty, Second Amendment | 2 Comments »
|
|
Sunday, May 23rd, 2010 |
By now, most of us have learned of Mayor Daley’s childish prank that would have gotten any of us arrested for assault. Got a handgun carry permit? You’d probably lose it for doing what Chicago’s Marxist mayor did when a reporter questioned the wisdom of Chicago’s totalitarian gun laws. His little asinine performance garners the flashing camera attention away from the reporter’s appropriate question: Is Chicago’s handgun ban effective to reduce crime?
We know that the off-duty police officer was leaving is parents’ home when he was confronted by four men trying to steal his motorcycle. We know the officer was killed, and that the officer’s father–a retired Chicago policeman and, therefore, a lawful handgun owner–came to his son’s defense and killed one attacker.
But, so much is missing from this story. Gun owners–particularly those who carry a handgun routinely–will want to know specifically how the murder unfolded. We need to know more. However, one lesson is the opposite of that point the mayor so shamelessly tried to make.
The father used his lawfully-owned personal sidearm to fight off the attackers, killing one of them. Assuming that the father fought in lawful defense of his son’s life, that means that the unlawfully armed thieves approached the son threatening deadly force. While the young officer was murdered in this fight, it is possible that the father’s armed combat might have saved his son’s life–because he brought a gun to the unexpected gunfight. Was the son, the off-duty officer, not armed at the time? Did his knowledge of the legal consequences of drawing his gun impede his reaction by a fatal half-second?
The mayor’s authoritarian bent approaches insanity: his gun control works only in favor of criminals. He puts everyone in his city in jeopardy.
Below, for your reference, I’ve quoted a portion of the story.
From Foxnews.com: Thomas Wortham IV, a 30-year-old Chicago police officer who recently returned from a tour of duty in Iraq, was shot and killed Thursday when several people approached him outside his family’s home and tried to steal his new motorcycle, authorities said.
Wortham IV’s father — a retired Chicago police officer — came to his son’s aid and shot two of the attackers, killing one of them late Wednesday, police said. Retired police officers are allowed to keep guns.
“This is a tragedy,” said Chicago Alderman Freddrenna Lyle. “This young man survived two tours in Iraq, and came home and got murdered on the streets in front of his house that he grew up in. In front of his father, it’s just unbelievable.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
Friday, May 21st, 2010 |
The President of Mexico wants to take guns away from Americans. Surprise! We could just laugh but it should chill our blood and make us cling even more tightly to our guns to know that the lavishly-dined Calderon swaggered from the White House to boldly proclaim his scorn for our Constitution in front of the U.S. Congress. And he drew cheers. From the dominant Democrat Party.
Furthering the insult, the press reports indulged in ignorance, misreporting the meaning of the so-called Assault Weapons Ban Calderon embraces–for us. (I am sure his bodyguards are amply armed with automatics.)
We shooters know that the Assault Weapons Ban ironically never banned the semi-automatic carbines and rifles generally labeled as assault weapons. Instead, we know that the ban imposed a strange nuisance “ugliness” standard based largely on the weapon’s appearance. Crazily, the main effect was to suppress design features that improved ergonomics.
How many of you bought your (first) SKS carbine while under the Clinton Assault Weapons Ban? I confess. How many of you have one of those odd thumbhole-stock AK variants, forced on you by the AWB? Yes, sure, it would be funny but they take these laws seriously and now….
Senor el Presidente Calderon blames removing the assault weapons ban for the violence in Mexico. He steps into the United States of America and urges our Congress to take our carbines from us. Where is Sam Houston when you need him? I bet that’s what Colonels Travis, Crockett, and Bowie were wondering. Well, now, I’m wondering too. Where is the leader who will run the current incarnation of Santa Anna back across the Rio Grande?
More seriously: Why is it that those who would be king always lust after the guns held by private citizens?
The answer is easy. The carbine–in the hands of its clingy, bitter owner–represents power dissipated away from the government. Crudely parodying The Blues Brothers singing You, You, You, that would be power away from them. World Marxists unite in their jealousy of the armed citizen. From that jealousy, springs their hatred and this corollary imperative rule: the right to keep and bear arms must be wiped out. The Power Imperative brooks no competition.
But, hey! Your ancient and parochial reverence for the 1700′s notions of liberty may be quaint but their ambitions rise far beyond and in the face of all notions of national sovereignty. Their vision of world governance may fly in the face of the U.S. and state Constitutions but it is far bigger, far grander, far more evolved than flintlock frontier freedoms. Really, shooters, it should not surprise us at all that our Democrat-dominated Congress welcomed this tin-horn and sat through his blathering vision for America. They hold more in common with Calderon than they hold with you.
So, which vision of America do you dream about? Our founders’ or his?
Americans, resist the sulfurous stench of gun control, even those cooing words that hint or sniff of it, whether from some government king wannabee, some international bureaucracy in Manhattan, or from the broader, passive public. Before us is the daunting task of awakening in our numbed citizens the dream of real freedom. That freedom–of necessity–includes the capability to shoot to keep that freedom, if need be. They knew it at Runnymede, they knew it at Lexington and Concord, and they knew it in Philadelphia when they inked the Constitution. Because they knew the necessity of arms, they put ink on the parchment and blood on the line. Some truths are timeless. The need for the individual to secure the right proclaimed by the second amendment is one of them.
Posted in Individual Liberty, Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
Thursday, May 20th, 2010 |
You’re back! Hope we get through all of these before your governing council is taking up the issue. If they are meeting to seize your guns and ammunition or otherwise stomp all over your right to keep and bear arms this week, then email me.
OK, you’ve read Tips 1, 2, and 3. You know the opponents are primed to find other reasons to be against you. You know they scoff at the Second Amendment. You’re armed with some supportive statistics that prove what responsible people law-abiding gun owners really are and then what happens? Disaster!
Tip Number 4) Watch out for late-breaking devastation in the news
Pray some bozo does not hand them a vicious anecdote to use against you on the big night. All you need is some handgun permit holder waving a pistol in a road-rage episode the afternoon before the debate. This really happened to me. Not the road rage incident. The horrendous anecdote. The anecdote used in argument is an account of extreme facts, deployed to generalize against all of the opposition group. “You claim to be law-abiding, but just look here!” Here’s what happened.
About 10 minutes before time to debate, the local news reported that a woman behind the wheel of her car had threatened an off-duty policeman in his own car, waving her pistol around at the officer in an angry road-rage episode. He arrested her. The reporter claimed the belligerent woman had a handgun carry permit. Fortunately, the news broke so late that the opposition forces failed to pick up on this devastating little sordid story. While everybody understands that one aberrational idiot does not mean that the other hundreds of thousands of law-abiding gun owners behave the same, the minute you step into the public eye, the opposition will try to make you responsible for everyone else “of your kind.” The story may not even be true. To this day, I don’t know if the woman had a permit or not. If so, I’m sure she doesn’t now but her tantrum was badly timed.
Tip Number 5) Conversely, scour the news even minutes going into the meeting, looking for just that anecdote that supports your position.
Have an accomplice online preparing to email late-breaking news to your BlackBerry or TXT. Only hours before our “Ban Guns in Parks” ordinance debate, some gang thug shotgunned one of the competition at a local park. His timing was perfect. They acted completely unaffected by this immediate proof that criminals don’t respect the dotted line boundaries and wordy ordinances that are supposed to create enclaves of safety around city parks, but it felt good to cite the example. I think it kept suppressed efforts to deploy anecdotes that did not help us. But, we would not have had the intel had we not been continuing to watch for just such the opportune crime.
You can’t do anything about what may happen out there, but you can do something effective about what will happen in that meeting room. Tip Number 6 tells you what that is.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
Tuesday, May 18th, 2010 |
If you are just joining us, here is the situation. Your local Municipal Marxist on your local governing board made a motion to pass yet another ordinance restricting your right to carry a gun. You have way to much to do but, noting the success of community activists recently, you feel compelled this time to rise to the occasion and see what you can do about it. Here are some tips from an attorney who has been there.
Tip Number 3) Cite facts and statistics.
No one will be swayed by your statistics but they make you look smart and informed. Well, more than that, you cover what is otherwise a negative. Here’s what I mean by that. You don’t get any points for having all of the stats but, if you don’t have them, then they assume that all the facts and stats are on their side even though they didn’t bring any. Your allies on the governing board are looking for statistical cover and they are counting on you to provide it.
So, to paraphrase one of our most beloved gun-sayings: Don’t show up at a fact fight without a fact. But, don’t bury them with belt-fed full automatic numbers. Pick out your hardest-hitting numbers and slam them with those.
- “Members of council–[pause dramatically and gain piercing eye contact, striving to look somewhat like Gregory Peck in "To Kill a Mockingbird"]–a mere 2/10ths of one percent of the handgun carry permit holders have misbehaved and had their permits revoked!” Resist the urge to add, “That’s a better moral track record than this council!”
- “Members of council, by this June, our state will have 400,000 law-abiding voters who got up, got out, took the training, paid the money and demanded a handgun carry permit.”
- “100% of unarmed murder victims were surprise-attacked by the murderer, at a time and place the victim did not expect, chosen, instead, by the criminal. None of us can predict where and when you will need a gun.” (That’s not really a statistic, and it makes them nervous, but it’s a fact and I like the humor it sprinkles into your speech.)
- “If safety is your concern, consider this: Accidental death by firearms ranks below the number of deaths by falls and drowning.”
Reminder–If you cite a statistic or a fact or a document, have your source ready. Assume someone will challenge you.
While all of the above statistics are true in my state and should be persuasive, don’t expect them to move anyone even one whit in response. The statistics you cite are designed to neutralize an unspoken assumption that they would otherwise hold against you: that you have no facts because you are ignorant and lazy and failed to do your homework.
Finally, remember the mission: You are trying to allay their fears about having ordinary citizens with guns running around out there. You are doing that just by standing there looking oh so innocent, but you also do that by raising their awareness over legitimate fears about crime. It will make them uncomfortable so be careful how you do it, but here is the place to deploy your crime facts.
Now, what could wreak havoc on your otherwise brilliant, mission-focused plan? Stay tuned for Tip Number 4) drawn from real-life experience and late-breaking local news.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
|
|
|
|
|