Why we need the NRA

“Recently the mayor of New Orleans, after denying having over a 1,000 confiscated firearms from the gun grab that was carried out after hurricane Katrina, finally admitted that they have this weapons stockpile. These guns were taken from law abiding citizens , with no receipts given as proof of ownership which shows they never had any intention of returning them, in a time when they were most needed. When they were the law abiding citizen�s only and last means of protecting themselves. The mayor finally admitted to having the guns only after the NRA took him to court.

http://www.reason.com/hod/dk091005.shtml

Now the NRA is stepping up to get laws enacted that would not allow a government to disarm law abiding citizens during a state of emergency.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1972662&page=1


"The lesson of New Orleans is all the people that said the police, the government would protect you could not be trusted. All the politicians that said 'We'll be there' couldn't keep that promise," LaPierre said. "Citizens were completely on their own against robbers, against looters, and if they didn't have a firearm they were completely defenseless against the bad guys."

- Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the NRA”

“Gov. Bush Signs Florida�s New
�Castle Doctrine� Self-Defense Law

Fairfax, VA � Today, in a ceremony at the state capitol, Gov. Jeb Bush signed Florida�s �Castle Doctrine� (SB-436) into law. Sponsored by Senator Durell Peaden and Representative Dennis Baxley, the bill unanimously passed the Senate and overwhelmingly passed in the House, 94-20.



Prior to signing the National Rifle Association (NRA) supported bill, Gov. Jeb Bush stated, "It`s a good, commonsense, anti-crime issue."



The "Castle Doctrine" simply says that if a criminal breaks into your home, your occupied vehicle or your place of business, you may presume he is there to do bodily harm and you may use any force against him.



It also removes the �duty to retreat� if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be.



Furthermore, this law provides protection from criminal prosecution and civil litigation for those who defend themselves from criminal attack.



Past National Rifle Association (NRA) president and current Executive Director of Unified Sportsmen of Florida, Marion P. Hammer, stated, "Existing law is on the side of the criminal. The new law is on the side of the law-abiding victim.�



She continued, �To suggest that you can`t defend yourself against a rapist who`s trying to drag you into an alley or against a carjacker who`s trying to drag you out of your car is nonsense. The ability to protect yourself, your children, or your spouse is important, no matter where you are.



�I want to thank Governor Bush and the bill sponsors, Sen. Peaden and Rep. Baxley, for supporting this vital measure. This law is about affirming that your home is your castle and, in Florida, you have a right to be absolutely safe inside its walls,� Hammer concluded.

________________________________________

Thankfully my state of Ohio is looking at adopting the same law. As it stands now if someone tries to kill me and I defend myself by stopping the criminal I am treated as a criminal also. My weapon is taken from me, I am taken in and booked as if I committed the crime and then I have to appear in court and prove I was justified. I must hire a lawyer for this at my own cost. Then I must face any civil action brought against me by the criminal or their family and must again hire my own lawyer to defend me which would surely wipe me out and bankrupt me.

While this law in no way gives a person cart blanch to kill without recourse or responsibility it does reasonably protect law abiding citizens against unfair legal actions and it provides the law abiding citizen with state representation. In short it allows the law abiding citizen to be innocent until proven guilty (as it does for the criminal) and not guilty until proven innocent.

Thank you NRA and thank you Florida who is the leader in gun rights.”

“I want a mandatory Coup De Grace law. You shoot the b'tard you or the cops have to finish him off.
Imagine the criminal mind if you hit him...he knows you HAVE to finish him off.”

“DnB - That post about the NO mayor was just enough to convince me .... The NRA is about to be 1 member larger.”

“For far too long the NRA has been vilified and misrepresented. They are about rights not a gun in every pot/wild west culture. Not only do they fight for our rights to own, use and carry firearms but they also have started Free Hunt which defends hunter�s rights. They are THE leader in gun education and safety.

Probably the most unknown thing they strive for is the use and enforcement of EXISTING laws. Take NYC as an example. While the constitutional rights to own guns is quickly eroding something like only 10% of all felony and misdemeanor crimes actually make it to trial. DA�s plea-bargain down crimes and the criminal is released back into the population. The NRA fights for more convictions based on the thinking that if less criminals are on the street the less need there is to defend against them in the first place.

While it is horrible and criminal what happened to the constitution in NO it was a great blow to the anti-2nd amendment crowd because anytime any claims are made that we do not need the 2nd amendment we simply answer, �Remember New Orleans.�.”

“I'll buy the new law ,but will not fall victim to the NRA.”

“Victim how Mr. Troll?”

“i could cite some good work done by PETA as well, but they have too many nut jobs for me join them.

i do agree that we need the NRA (and PETA) for the good things they accomplish, but they both go way overboard IMO.”

“I was not real happy with my NRA membership about 10 years ago. They were constantly sending me letters in the mail asking me to donate money. Plus they sold my name so I was getting tons of junk mail. I like the fact that there�s an origination out there protecting my 2nd amendment rights, I just didn�t like how they treated me as a member. Maybe they changed in the past 10 years.”

“LZ- my dad's a member of the NRA, and he's ALWAYS getting junk fron them and their associates. Since he gave them his email (sucker!) he gets lots of spam too.”

“�i could cite some good work done by PETA as well, but they have too many nut jobs for me join them.

i do agree that we need the NRA (and PETA) for the good things they accomplish, but they both go way overboard IMO.�

Over board how? Nutjobs? Which ones and why? IMHO comparing them to PETA is like apples to oranges. PETA does not stand up for any constitutional rights and they break the law. Does the NRA do this and if so, how and when?”

“The NRA can't keep to the subject of just guns.”

“Such as...

Come on man, if it's too heavy a subject try logging in under your real name and we can get down to brass tacks. I'm hearing a lot of hyperboli but littel else.”

“nigal, you might like these fellas. They are active here in Mi. I have attended some local grassroots firearms meetings and they had some JPFO folks as speakers.
http://www.jpfo.org/

Talk to your nieghbor and see if he can swing me a deal on some shooting classes. I want to see if Mi offers reciprocal on CCW. If so I am gonna look into it.”

“He�s teaching the Ohio requirements and while Michigan is a state Ohio has agreements with I�m not sure if he�s certified to teach for a Michigan permit. I�ll ask him. Thanks for the link T-mo! I do love a militant Jew. LOL!”

“Our liberty is under attack from those people whose faith in God tells them how to think and those people who have faith that they are their own God. The erosion of our right to bear arms seems similar to the erosion of our ability to choose abortion. However, abortion is not a right specifically guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

As with most beliefs espoused by the left, there appears to be no consistent logic to �gun control.� It appears to be a purely emotional response. It appears to be a visceral, angry reaction. There is no similarly consistent reaction against mothers who abort their babies or cars (more people die in car accidents each year than by accidental gun deaths).

As in most leftists� positions, �gun control� appears to be an issue of control. Their emotional discomfort causes these people to want to control the safety of others. In this case by rewriting the U.S. Constitution at the expense of Liberty. That is, the constitutionally guaranteed right of citizens to protect themselves from violent crime.

I choose to carry for the same reason I have homeowners and automobile insurance. Chances are very high that I will not need to use these things. But if I need them, and don�t have them, the cost is unacceptably high to me. That is a choice I�ve made as a responsible citizen.

This doesn�t matter to the typical leftist: �Guns are bad so don�t do �em�mmmmokay� is their mantra. They use their emotional resentments to control the lives of others in the name of safety for all. Safety belts, motorcycle helmets, warning labels, FDA, Federal Flood Insurance� their list, and the loss of liberty it brings, is endless. All this in the name of protecting us from ourselves.

Do these nearsighted people believe that the police will always be there to protect them? Do these people believe that they will always be able to avoid violent criminals? If so, why don�t they make a decision not to arm themselves while trusting the actions of responsible individuals who wish to protect themselves? Trust has no place in their minds; it�s all about control with leftists. Faith in their beliefs tells them when something is in society�s best interest; no discussion, mind made up, and they will control our choices. I am sure that these folks believe deeply that they know the answer to society�s problems and how best to fix them.

It has never surprised me that EVERY police officer, with whom I have ever talked, favors the law abiding individual citizen�s right to arm himself. That doesn�t stop the mindset of the typical leftist, because they just know best what is good for us all.

It was sick resentments that enabled many leftists to spit on soldiers returning from Vietnam, and to label them as �baby killers.� It is sick resentments that enable many leftists to dislike the people they look to for protection against violent criminals, the police. And it feeds their resentment towards any responsible citizen who decides to carry a weapon for defense, even if that person decides never to use it. That doesn�t seem to matter. �You carry a weapon, and you are wrong.�

There were people like this who were against the Revolutionary War. There were people like this who were against WWII. There were people like this who were against the Vietnam War. There will always be people like this and they don�t seem to be able to discern the difference between these conflicts. There is no cause for violence in their minds. Maybe in their world of sugar plum fairies, theaters, and art museums, leftists just believe that everyone can be behaviorally modified to act in a way that reflects the greater good of society.

In the name of Liberty and personal responsibility come certain risks. Take away all risk, and you take away all Liberty. If we could prevent people from engaging in any behavior that has the potential to be harmful, we would lose our freedom. This is something about which the totalitarian leftists never seem to realize or care.

I am not a control freak. I am unwilling to prevent leftists from driving their cars in order to prevent the chance that they will kill humans or animals. But I�d be willing to strike a deal with these folks. I won�t carry weapons in their presence (where legally allowed by The State) if they won�t bring their cars into mine.”

“I can no longer support PETA. How sad they have become.”

“Great read arc. No time to fully reply now but I'll be back in the morning.”

“However, abortion is not a right specifically guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

The right to "life" is. It doesn't guarantee your right to "choice".”

“I place the NRA, PETA and the Sierra Club in the same pot.They all start with reason and all slowly try to become political parties. If you can't understand my meaning here then you may have to miss it.”

“I keep hearing everyone say the NRA is too extreme but when I repeatedly ask for examples no one can come up with anything. The NRA is not trying to become a political party. They lobby for what they see as important just like everyone else. So again, how are they too extreme?”

“The Racist roots of gun control.

Most gun control advocates have no idea where the roots of their movement lie. The birth of gun control came about in the early 1800�s and banned black slaves from owning or possessing guns. A suppressed group with the ability to fight back against their oppressors is unacceptable to the masters in power. Even after the abolition of slavery laws were still enacted to bar free, law abiding blacks from owning guns.

Even up to the 60�s some local governments required blacks to have a license and gun safety certificate in order to own firearms. And of course the local boards who decide who can be eligible were filled with white males so few were even allowed to adhere to the laws.

Even up to the 90�s it continued when large urban areas like Chicago were experiencing large amounts of gun violence at the hands of criminals Clinton allowed the random searching of �suspicious individuals�. AKA blacks.

And to this day the largest population that falls pray to gun control are the poor minorities who live in the urban areas. John Q. Cracker who lives in the burbs runs a far slimmer chance of needing to use his firearm to defend himself than John Q. Minority in Compton does. It is the law abiding minority who actually LIVES in the dangerous areas who need the right to defend themselves the most. Yet they are the first to fall to the gun control policies of city governments.

The right to defend oneself is a right that should be held by everyone regardless of their race or economic situation. The NRA upholds everyone's rights on this point.”

“This is a bit long but a MUST READ for everyone on both sides of the gun issue.

Congress Told of ATF Seizures, Threats to Gun Buyers
By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
February 17, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - Agents of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), allegedly acting without warrants or legislative authority to do so, seized firearms from at least 50 gun show patrons in Virginia according to congressional testimony and an agency document made public Wednesday. Witnesses also testified that African-American and female gun buyers in Richmond, Va., and Pittsburgh, Pa., were profiled based on their race or sex and some in Pittsburgh were threatened with arrest by ATF agents for alleged actions that are not violations of law.

Rep. Howard Coble (R-N.C.) chairs the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, which has jurisdiction over ATF. While he supports the agency's mission, Coble questions some of its tactics.

"ATF reports that 206 [gun show] participants were stopped and interviewed while it confiscated firearms from another 50 participants," Coble said, referring to gun shows in Richmond, Va. "Although most of the firearms were ultimately returned, the purchasers were notified via official letter from ATF that [they] were ordered to appear at the local ATF office to discuss their transactions. In addition, the letter explained that failure to appear could result in an arrest warrant being issued for the alleged charges."

The form letter had blanks for the name of the gun show patron and the date and time they were ordered to appear at the ATF field office, but cited no authority for the gun confiscations or the mandatory office visits.

"An investigation has revealed that you may have violated Title 18 U.S.C. Section 924(a)(1)(A), a crime punishable by imprisonment for up to five years," the letter began. The U.S. Code citation refers, in this instance, to knowingly making a false statement on the ATF Form 4473 "Firearms Transaction Record Part I - Over-The-Counter," which is completed for each firearm purchased from a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL).

"The firearm that you purchased is being taken into ATF custody," the letter continued, citing no authority for the seizure.

Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) said the ATF letter and the reported interrogation of lawful gun buyers raise "serious questions."

"There's a way to have a sting operation that's legal. This dragnet, apparent dragnet, however, is not the way it ought to be done," Scott said. "You have to show probable cause and it can be done. But you ought not just stop people without probable cause and without any indication of guilt."

John White, a former law enforcement officer who is now an FFL operating under the business name "The Gunsmith," said female customers who approached his sales area at the Richmond shows were immediately targeted by the "undercover" officers.

"If a woman showed up at my table, she was surrounded by law enforcement," White recalled. "If the lady walked off and suddenly stopped, they would have bumped into each other. Their surveillance methods were pitiful.

"Every woman that makes a purchase, every woman who comes to my table to buy a gun was automatically [treated as] a straw purchaser," White said. (A "straw purchaser" is a person who can otherwise legally purchase a firearm, but who does so with the intent to illegally provide it to an ineligible buyer such as a convicted felon or an illegal alien. "Straw purchases" are illegal.)

As Cybercast News Service initially reported, ATF agents working with as many as 400 state, county and city police officers near Richmond, Va., conducted so-called "residency checks" on individuals who purchased firearms from the Showmasters Gun Show Aug. 13 and 14, 2005. Uniformed officers went to the homes of prospective gun buyers, while they waited for their National Instant Check System (NICS) background checks to be completed and questioned family members and neighbors about the gun buyers' firearm purchasing habits.

In a subsequent report, Cybercast News Service detailed that ATF had conducted at least seven similar gun show "sting operations" targeting Richmond-area residents since July of 2004. ATF refused to discuss any of the operations with Cybercast News Service and refused to provide any documentation in response to Freedom of Information Act requests filed by the sponsors of the Richmond gun shows.

Suzanne McComas, a licensed private investigator who has worked with the America's Most Wanted television program, was hired by the National Rifle Association (NRA) to gather information about ATF's Richmond operations. During her investigation, she learned that the agency had been conducting "residency checks" in at least one other U.S. city, but using different and "much more intimidating" tactics.

"At Pittsburgh, the Firearms Task Force there that's also headed by the ATF, instead of doing residency checks immediately, they're collecting the 4473 with the purchaser's address on it, then they go knock at the door about a week later and ask, 'Could we see the gun that you bought?'" McComas explained. "There's absolutely no process involved, there's no reason for them to do it. If you cannot produce the gun, they ask you for the sale paperwork. If you refuse to produce the paperwork they put you under arrest for a 'straw purchase.'"

Federal law requires licensed gun dealers to complete an ATF Form 4473 for each firearm sold through their business, in addition to any forms required by the state, county and/or city where they do business. Private sales between individuals, who are not engaged in the firearms trade as a business, are subject to no such federal recordkeeping requirements. Therefore a gun show purchaser could legally sell or even give the gun they purchased to someone else yet have no paperwork to meet the ATF's demand.

"You and I know that, but [a woman who bought a gun and then gave or sold it to someone else, both legally] probably doesn't," McComas told Cybercast News Service. "If she can't produce it, they arrest her for a straw purchase and her life turns into a living hell until she can prove otherwise. It's zero probable cause except for the fact that they thought it was a straw purchase because she was black and she was young and she was female."

McComas questioned not only the legality of the ATF tactics in Pittsburgh, but also the methodology.

"When I asked them what their criteria was for the people that they collected the 4473s on at the Pittsburgh show, the answer I got back was, 'If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck. That's all we need,'" McComas continued. "Translation: Under 30 and black, period. That's all they were looking for. Anyone who meets those criteria, they're doing a follow-up on."

She said that, as in Richmond, agents in Pittsburgh were also engaged in activities that gun dealers believe were designed to discourage lawful purchases by minorities.

"Anyone who was a minority, they picked up their 'tail,' if you will, and just followed them through the gun show. When they stopped at a table, the agents would literally stand on one side or the other and watch what they were doing. If they started to purchase a gun [the agents] would ask them why they were buying it, what were they buying it for, what did they need that gun for," McComas related. "It was ridiculous. There was absolutely no reason for it other than the color of their skin."

Rep. William Delahunt (D-Mass.) said he had not intended to attend the hearing, which was held immediately after a subcommittee vote on an unrelated bill, but stayed because he was fascinated by the witnesses' testimony.

"These must be the dumbest ATF agents in the entire agency," Delahunt said. "I am absolutely shocked that they could be that stupid.

"It's almost to the point that it's difficult to believe," he added. "I have never heard of an experience like the ones you recount, but you all seem to be in agreement. It's just mind-boggling."

Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) expressed curiosity that federal law enforcement officers would not know that the actions described by White and McComas violate federal statutes.

"Did anybody mention that it is a federal crime to deny women or minorities their civil rights?" Feeney asked. "Did anybody mention to the ATF that denying civil rights, including the right to bear arms, is a federal crime?"

Feeney suggested that, since ATF had refused to comply with the Freedom of Information Act requests from the gun show promoters, the subcommittee should request the information they were seeking. Coble noted that such a letter had already been sent.

ATF representatives present at Wednesday's hearing reluctantly identified themselves by raising their hands when asked to do so by Coble. They would not respond to the new allegations raised in the hearing, but referred questions to their press office. ATF officials are expected to testify on the issues raised Wednesday in a second hearing scheduled for Feb. 28.”

“The NRA is working hard to work against the loss of sovereignty as the United Nations is set to gather on the Fourth of July to vote on a global gun ban. Don�t think it could happen? All it would take was one stupid president to call it an �agreement� rather than a �treaty� and it would only take a 2/3 vote in Congress to take away our rights guaranteed in the constitution. Give away your rights to arms and the rest quickly follow.

http://www.stopungunban.org/”

“�It's a fundamental aspect of gun control. It would, for example, allow checks to be made on someone who comes to the attention of the police for gun possession in one area of the country and then moves to another area.�

Rebecca Peters International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA)

�If you miss your sport, take up another sport. American citizens should be like any other citizens of the world.�

Rebecca Peters International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA)

"Women need to be protected by police forces, by judiciaries, by criminal justice systems. People who have guns for self-defense are not safer than people who don�t . . . having a gun in that situation escalates the problem."

Rebecca Peters International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA)”

“Connecticut recently passed H.B. 5818 which is supposed to hurt gun traffickers but does nothing but target legal gun owners. If your gun is stolen and you don�t even know it and the police recover it, you are automatically guilty of a felony. If you don�t report your gun stolen within 73 hours of the theft you are guilty. But for the �straw purchaser� (the guy who legally buys guns and sells to traffickers) he can buy guns, report them stolen, sell them to the trafficker and he is completely legal.”

“Nigal, I think the amendment to the constitution still has to pass State Legislatures...hence the death of the Ain't Got Johnson Preference Amendment (ERA) in years past.


http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html”

“It would circumvent the amendment process. If it is called an "agreement" rather than a treaty all they need is a 2/3rd vote.

It�s easy to get around the constitution. Hillary Clinton has a bill right now that if passed will allow felons to vote. In 1992 86% of convicted felons voted for Clinton. In 1996 it went up to 95%. They are clearly trying to open a democratic voting block in the criminal community. This violates the 14th Amendment which gives the states the right to withhold a felon�s voting rights.

S. bill 450:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.00450:”

“A great example of how gun control is keeping Brits safe...(rated R for language)

http://www.jammyjunction.com/view.php?id=266
last edited: 5/30/06 8:50:50 AM”

“Yeah Nigal, that goodness the murder rate in America isn't as bad as Britain's!”

“I'm trying to picture someone taking a gun away from Tackleberry, ala, Police Academy I. Ain't gonna happen.”

“And Nigal - no one is going to take your guns away - don't buy into the paranoia.

In fact the NRA is winning at the moment, which means fewer responsibilities involved in owning a gun.

(but the NRA advocates reposnsible gun ownership...blah...blah...blah)”

“And no one is out to take away people's rights to an abortion either.”

“Nigal-
jus wondering, do classes like this offer training on how to defuse a situation WITH OUT guns?...like i said, just wondering, i'm by no means an anti gun person...for the most part i like gun laws the way they are i just think that for most of us having a gun for protection just makes an already chaotic situation worse...unless you're a high level exec, cop or public official you have a relatively low chance of being physically assaulted for seemingly no reason...i'm just a regular joe schmo, and if someone broke into my house it would most likely be to steal my stuff, not harm me...if i pulled a gun on him that would just elevate the situation...IMHO nobody's life, even a crook, is worth less than anything in my house...i wouldn't want to kill someone just to keep him from stealing my Daewoo TV, no my backpacking gear, that's another story”

“Exactly Thrifty! This is what the uneducated don�t know. Defending yourself with a firearm is the LAST act in the force continuum. You meet force with like force. In Ohio you must meet three criteria before lethal force can be used. 1) you are reasonably sure you are in danger of having great bodily harm done to you or that your life is in IMMIDIATE danger. 2) You did not start it. (You call someone an ass hole and he comes at you with a bat and you shoot him. You�re at fault.). 3) You must prove that you had no way of avoiding it or escaping the situation. And when defending someone else�s life you must meet the same criteria. Most times the mere presents of a gun will defuse the situation. Let�s face it, a gun has a way of chilling people out.

Also, take the home invasion situation. Everyone thinks of the gun toting cowbow who�s skulking his house after he hears a noise. This is bull crap. The best way to defend yourself in the home is to have a safe room. You lock yourself in this room, call 911 on your cell phone (criminals will cut the phone lines sometimes), and you give verbal warnings and commands from there. Only if that perp comes into your safe room to do you bodily harm do you use your firearm. Some states such as Texas do allow for defending property but I do not agree with this. Let them take whatever they want. You can always replace a TV.

Properly defending yourself begins with knowing how to avoid a violent situation all together. If you go to the post office and there are five gang bangers hanging out in front and you make a good target, what do you do? You go to the post office tomorrow. A person who is properly trained has a much higher level of awareness than the average Joe. Surviving a deadly situation begins with training and education as well as having the means to defend yourself. That is what the NRA does best.”

“Let�s face it, a gun has a way of chilling people out.

sometimes...but it can also have a way of freaking people out and doing something irrational but i do agree with your post”

“If the gun is out you are already in danger. If someone says they're going to kick your ass you don't take your gun out because it commits you to using it. You never draw your weapon unless you are going to use it.”

“If someone says they're going to kick your ass you don't take your gun out because it commits you to using it.

i thought when someone says that you're supposed to come back with some corny line like "Oh yea? you and what army?"”

“I was always fond of "Stick your head up your ass and fight for air."”

“Of course, all that is the "official" position. In real life, if somebody is in your home illegally, blast 'em. Sort of the unspoken understanding.”

“see, that's the kind of mentality i was talking about...don't know if you were serious or not but people that think like that shouldn't have guns, that's dangerous...what if in the process of "blasting" them you hit something you weren't targeting, like a family member or even yourself...it happens even to the best trained people”

“Our legislature passed a Castle Doctrine bill and repealed the requirement to get a permit from the Sheriff when purchasing a handgun. Governer Blunt is expected to sign!

Now, if only we can get the legislature to pass a bill whish will allow us to legally purchase suppressors. I'd love to get one for my plinking rifle.”

“Thanks to Gov. Ted Strickland (D) and the NRA the state of Ohio passed SB184 which has brought the Castle Doctrine to Ohio.

Governor Strickland signs SB184, Ohio's Castle Doctrine Law

Strickland called the bill “common-sense legislation”, and stressed that it will also clear up ambiguous sections of Ohio's concealed-carry law.

“What we've clarified in this bill I think will go a long way toward providing both law enforcement as well as law-abiding citizens some confidence that what they're doing is, in fact, consistent with the law,” he said.

“I want to thank all parties concerned for working together to make this victims’ rights bill the law in Ohio,” said Chris W. Cox, NRA's chief lobbyist. “When you're confronted by a criminal, you don't have the luxury of time. Under the ‘Castle Doctrine’ provision, if someone breaks into your occupied home or temporary habitation, or your occupied car, you now have an initial presumption that you may act in self defense and you will not be second-guessed by the State. The ability to protect yourself and your family from harm is important no matter where you are.””

“http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7526628.stm

A 56-year-old man from the Midwestern US state of Wisconsin has been arrested after shooting his lawn mower in his garden because it would not start.
”

“Oh right, like who hasn't wanted to do that! LOL!”

“Shelby Co. Inmate Captured After Brief Escape

SIDNEY, Ohio -- Other inmates of the Shelby County Jail told corrections officers that inmate Terrance Barnes, 19, of Lima, had been planning to escape.

Barnes is accused of running from the jail as he took out the trash from the kitchen following Sunday evening dinner.

Exactly four hours later, Barnes ran into Matt Chambers of Sidney, a concealed weapon permit holder, and a volunteer with the Shelby County Fire Department. Barnes was captured about a mile from the county jail.

Barners now faces a new charge of felony escape.

Barnes is one week into a 90-day jail sentence for receiving stolen property and a contempt charge.”

“Did the Son of the NRA-Connected Private Spy Lose His Job Because of Mom?

Is Sean McFate the first casualty of Gun-gate?

Sean McFate is the son of Mary Lou Sapone (a.k.a. Mary McFate), the NRA-connected private spy who infiltrated the gun control movement for about 15 years. Her tale was first disclosed by Mother Jones last week. That article noted that Sean, a Brown- and Harvard-educated paratrooper, and his wife, Montgomery McFate, a controversial Pentagon adviser, had once both worked for Mary Lou Sapone's business, which specialized, according to an old version of Montgomery's resume, in "domestic and internal opposition research" and "special investigations." Sean and Montgomery McFate might also have been involved in Mary Lou Sapone's penetration of the gun control community.

More recently, Sean McFate was program director of the national security initiative at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington think tank boasting an advisory board composed of four former Senate majority leaders: Howard Baker, Bob Dole, George Mitchell, and Tom Daschle. That is, he was until the appearance of the Mother Jones story on his mother.

As that story was being posted last week, McFate was listed on BPC's staff list on its website. Days later, his name was gone.

Asked about McFate's fate, the BPC issued this statement:

Prior to the publication of the recent Mother Jones article, Sean McFate resigned from the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to pursue a different professional project. The BPC was unaware of any allegations regarding the activities of Sean's family members and never had any reason to believe that Sean was involved in any questionable behavior.

The timing of the Mother Jones article was purely coincidental, and was in no way related to Sean's resignation. We wish him well as he pursues his professional interests.

A coincidence? Perhaps. But McFate, as noted above, was on the staff list until after the story hit. Moreover, after Mother Jones had contacted McFate for the story but before the article was posted, his title on the BPC website changed. Twice. He went from being listed as a program director to being described as a consultant to again being listed as a program director--all within a few days. Why the back and forth? (McFate refused to talk to Mother Jones about his mother or his work with her.)

It could be that Sean McFate's departure from the BPC was no more than a case of odd timing. But would the BPC--which works to develop "solutions that can attract the public support and political momentum to achieve real progress" and which happens to be located one floor below the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence, the nation's most prominent gun control organization (which McFate tried to penetrate)--want on its staff a fellow linked to an undercover operation that targeted a neighbor? And the work of Mary Lou Sapone was hardly in the spirit of bipartisanship. It's not surprising that Sean McFate picked this moment to move on.

Meanwhile, the NRA has yet to respond to the exposure of Mary Lou Sapone's snooping. Nor has she. After the story came out, Mary Lou Sapone skedaddled to Belize and has not replied to requests from various news organizations.”

“http://www.nrahq.org/nrabonus/

Hey everyone!! NRA is giving free memberships right now :)”

“They mainly promote safe hunting.

”