Archive for January, 2007
Wednesday, January 31st, 2007
Did you happen to catch the CBS "reality" show called "Armed and Famous?" If not, you're out of luck, because the network's cancelled the show after four episodes.
Actually, you're not out of luck at all. If you missed the show, consider yourself lucky. I can't believe this junk ever got on television in the first place!
The premise was simple: take a bunch of celebrities, put them through a crash course in law enforcement, deputize them and let ‘em take to the streets.
What a goofy idea. If you want to see what the police go through every day, watch "Cops." But instead of focusing on celebrities playing make-believe, what if the network had decided to broadcast a show that dramatized some of the estimated 1.5 million defensive gun uses every year? Yeah, I know. It'll never happen.
But there is a syndicated show that does just that. It's called "CrimeStrike." Check your local listings for broadcast times, and if it doesn't air in your city, ask one of your local stations to pick it up. We don't mock law enforcement on the show. We just praise the everyday armed citizens who refuse to be victims.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Tuesday, January 30th, 2007
I think I've figured out why Paul Helmke, the new head of the Brady Campaign, is so determined to go after law-abiding gun owners instead of getting tough on criminals. It all goes back to his time as mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana.
During the late 1990's, America's violent crime rate dropped to the lowest levels in decades. While this was going on, Right-to-Carry was sweeping the nation. Gun ownership increased for a variety of reasons, including more women taking up shooting sports or getting a gun for self-defense. So if more gun owners meant more gun crime, we would've seen crime rates go up, not down.
But in Fort Wayne, Indiana, the crime rates didn't look as good as national rates. As writer Howard Nemerov points out in his recent column, "Fuzzy Math," during Helmke's last five years in office -from 1995 to 2000-the national drop in violent crime outpaced Fort Wayne's drop in crime by nearly 10 percent. Murder, rape and aggravated assaults ... all of those crimes were worse in Fort Wayne than the national average.
But in the five years after Helmke left office, just the opposite happened. Fort Wayne's crime rate was 11 percent LOWER than the national average.
They say you can't teach an old dog new tricks. I'm guessing Helmke's been an old dog for a long time. It seems he's never been that good at reducing crime, and he's always going back to the same old trick of blaming honest gun owners for the actions of violent thugs.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Monday, January 29th, 2007
Philadelphia is one of the most violent cities in America. But what the media isn't telling you is that, when it comes to fighting violent crime, Mayor John Street has no street sense.
At a rate of more than one every day, people are being murdered in Philadelphia. Last year, 406 residents of that city were victims of homicide.
And Mayor Street's response?
First, he blamed it on the war in Iraq. Then, he said the rising homicide rate was due to a lack of "love" in the city. Then, Street accused the media of exaggerating the crime problem and blamed his political opponents for speaking out about it.
Street's latest comment is just as bizarre. He brushed off the rising homicide rate by telling the Philadelphia Inquirer, "If we didn't have this uptick in shootings and homicides, we just wouldn't be talking" about it.
Uptick? 406 murders is an "uptick"?
Even one of his fellow Democratic political consultants was befuddled and quoted as saying of Street, "What is bizarre is that he just throws his hands up in the air. I can't figure out what they're doing."
Mayor Street says fighting crime is complicated. He's wrong. It just takes street sense.
Street sense tells you that if you want to get violent crime off the streets, you have to get violent criminals off the streets. Arrest them, prosecute them and lock ‘em up for a long, long time.
That's the only way criminals ever get the message that crime doesn't pay. That's common street sense. The kind of sense that Mayor John Street doesn't have.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Sunday, January 28th, 2007
My friend and fellow Second Amendment scholar David Hardy, from the Arms and the Law blog, caught the Brady Campaign in another lie.
This time, it's about what the ATF can do when they're investigating federally licensed firearms dealers. In a story about Brady President Paul Helmke pushing for more gun-control laws, the Philadelphia Inquirer quoted him: "For example, if ATF agents make a surprise visit to a gun shop suspected of breaking the law, they are not allowed to make another surprise visit for 12 months. During that period, the ATF must warn the dealer in advance that they are coming."
Well, Dave Hardy says that's a bunch of bull.
Here's the truth: If the ATF is investigating a crime, they can go and inspect the records from the firearms dealer at any time. There's no once-a-year limit. The law says that those surprise inspections Helmke's talking about are meant for ATF agents to see if the dealer is keeping up with all of the paperwork requirements.
So once again, Helmke's either full of it, doesn't understand the law he's trying to change, or both. No matter what the reason, the Philadelphia Inquirer should know better than to take a gun-grabber at his word.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Sunday, January 28th, 2007
Right-to-Carry just went into effect in Kansas, but already it's paying off. When a couple of would-be robbers burst into a Topeka gas station the other night, they were expecting an easy payday. Instead, they got an armed citizen.
Fifty-seven-year-old Michael Mah isn't a Kansas resident. He was visiting from neighboring Oklahoma, which has reciprocity with Kansas. In other words, each state honors the other state's laws about Right-to-Carry.
When Mah found himself in the middle of a robbery, he decided he wasn't gonna be a victim-and neither was the store clerk.
Mah told one of the robbers to drop his gun, but when he didn't, Mah fired. The would-be robber is now in the hospital, and Mah's being hailed as a hero.
Kansas has had Right-to-Carry for less than a month, but armed citizens are already making a difference. As the year goes on, there'll probably be more stories like this. But you'll only hear about them here.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Wednesday, January 24th, 2007
Philadelphia, the birthplace of liberty, has become a breeding ground of violence and scandal-from the streets of that great city all the way to the office of Mayor John Street.
And what the media won't tell you is that the mayor has allowed a culture of corruption that's getting people killed.
The homicide rate in the City of Brotherly Love has risen to more than one a day-406 people were murdered last year.
Why so much violence? According to Mayor Street, it's Iraq's fault. Street told the Philadelphia Daily News, "I believe the fact that we are a country at war has something to do with the attitude of people in the streets." He went on to explain that the Iraq war is a "contributing factor" in the increase in gun violence and homicides.
But what the Daily News didn't mention in its reporting of the mayor's bizarre comments is that Street himself is surrounded by charges of crooked dealing.
Just last November, Mayor Street's brother was indicted on federal corruption charges. The case was handled by the same FBI and IRS agents who worked city hall corruption cases that have led to more than 20 convictions-including two of the mayor's friends, some of his fundraisers and his city treasurer.
No wonder Mayor John Street has been called America's most corrupt mayor.
Philadelphia residents aren't as stupid as Mayor Street thinks they are. They know corruption and crime in their city has nothing to do with Iraq, but a lot to do with dishonesty condoned by the office of Mayor John Street and the failure of his administration to put criminals in jail.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Tuesday, January 23rd, 2007
After the brutal gun confiscations following Hurricane Katrina, I would think that most gun owners already hold New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin in contempt. But now the National Rifle Association is asking a court to reach that verdict in its legal sense.
We recently filed a motion asking the court to hold Nagin in contempt for failing to comply with a judge's order from last fall. Back in November of 2006, the federal judge overseeing the case gave the city until December 12 to comply with his order for discovery-which means to supply important information whether you want to or not.
Now it's late January 2007, and we still haven't seen the city produce. So on January 31, our attorneys will be back in court asking the judge to hold the New Orleans mayor and the police chief in contempt.
This isn't the first time we've had to do this. Last spring we filed another motion to hold the city in contempt, but the city finally admitted (at the eleventh hour) that they did, in fact, have firearms confiscated from legal gun owners. The mayor and police chief avoided the contempt charge last time, but I'm not sure they'll be so lucky this time around.
When they ordered the confiscation of guns from legal gun owners, I promised you that NRA would seek justice. The fight continues, and I'll keep you posted ... because most media won't.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »
Monday, January 22nd, 2007
Did you know that it's legal to carry a gun in Chicago? Well, it's not legal for you or me, but if you're an alderman-that's Chicago's word for a city council member-it's perfectly all right.
Seems a little hypocritical, doesn't it? I mean, the same people who keep a handgun ban on Chicago's books can not only own a gun, they can carry it in Chicago!
Alderwoman Arenda Troutman is one of the politicians who takes advantage of this law. When the FBI recently raided her apartment as part of their investigation into alleged corruption, they seized her pistol. Her attorney says she legally owns it, and that may be true. He also says Troutman needs the pistol because she "needed protection in the economically depressed area where she lives and serves."
Here are my questions: What about the law-abiding voters who also live in that economically depressed area? Is gun ownership approved for Alderwoman Troutman, but no one else is entitled to protect themselves?
Back in 2004 when her home was burglarized, Troutman demanded law enforcement sit outside her home and keep an eye on it. When asked if she deserved the special treatment, she replied, "Deserve it? Damn right. I should receive the protection I am receiving. I am an elected official. You're darn right."
Hypocrisy like that ... now that's criminal.
Posted in Second Amendment | No Comments »