Where's the Celebration?

D.C. homicides fall 9% in 2010 to 131, lowest toll since '63
PG also down; Montgomery up

Two years after Heller, D.C. posts lowest murder rate in half-century -- In fact, two years after District residents had their right to keep and bear arms restored by the Supreme Court, the homicide rate for Washington, D.C., was the lowest it's been in half a century.

"The District finished 2010 with 131 homicides — a 9 percent reduction from 2009 and the lowest number of killings in the nation's capital since 1963," reports the Washington Times. "The drop, from 143 killings, was the second straight decline and the seventh time in the last 10 years that the city once referred to as the 'murder capital' of the U.S. recorded fewer than 200 homicides."

Does correlation imply causation? Not always, especially considering that the bureaucratic iron maiden engineered by Mayor Fenty and MPD Chief Cathy Lanier has made it quite difficult for law-abiding citizens to own guns. But it helps to remember the position taken by the Brady Center the day the Heller decision was announced: "After the Heller ruling, as before, approximately 80 Americans will continue to die from guns every day." Perhaps: But fewer of those deaths are occurring in a city that once saw 482 murders in a year. That's progress!

NRA Sells Out Gun Owners

Email from a friend out in the western part of the Territories.
HR 5175 Restriction of Free Speech
You Can't Call A Congressperson An Idiot Act

The NRA is fully prepared to sell out grassroots gun organizations across the nation, including VCDL, to the anti-gun Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives by not fighting a bill that will gag the free speech of those who criticize members of Congress.

The NRA, in a news release included below, has said it will turn a blind eye to H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act, since it exempts the NRA. Bottom line: the NRA has been bought off.

Here is the criteria in the bill for an exemption:
* More than 1 million members
* Has been in existence for more than 10 years
* Has members in all 50 states
* Raises 15 percent or less of their income from corporations

It appears the ONLY gun organization to meet that set of criteria would be the NRA - not GOA or SAF or CCRKBA, much less VCDL.

VCDL rarely criticizes another gun organization, but on this issue we cannot, and must not, hold our tongues.

Let me not mince words - this appears to be an unholy alliance between Nancy Pelosi and the NRA, which would wipe out the NRA's competition.

If you snuggle up with a rattlesnake you are going to get bit. The NRA is playing a fool's game if they think they will survive this unscathed. Nancy Pelosi is not their friend now, nor will she ever be.

For their own self-interest, the NRA is apparently choosing to drive, or at least ride in, the bus that is going to run over the rest of us.

Portion of Press Release from NRA:
On June 14, 2010, Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives pledged that H.R. 5175 would be amended to exempt groups like the NRA, that meet certain criteria, from its onerous restrictions on political speech. As a result, and as long as that remains the case, the NRA will not be involved in final consideration of the House bill.

Guns and Free Speech
16 June 2010
The Wall Street Journal

The National Rifle Association is suffering a sudden onset of amnesia this week, as the gun lobby cuts a deal to exempt itself from the latest Congressional attempt to repeal the First Amendment. NRA members may soon regret the organization's bid to ingratiate itself with Democrats at the expense of its longtime free-speech allies.

The campaign finance bill, sponsored by Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Chris Van Hollen, is the Democratic response to the Supreme Court's January decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which restored the First Amendment right of corporations, unions and nonprofits to make independent campaign expenditures. At the time, the NRA's Wayne LaPierre called Citizens United "a defeat for arrogant elitists who wanted to carve out free speech as a privilege for themselves and deny it to the rest of us."

Look who's arrogant and elitist now. Under the Schumer-Van Hollen bill, political speech would be bound up with new restrictions, including special burdens on government contractors and corporations that have a certain level of foreign ownership or received TARP funds. The bill also includes disclosure rules designed to hit corporations, requiring CEOs to appear to "approve this message" the way politicians do, and for groups to identify their donors. Except for the NRA.

Under the NRA carve-out in the House bill, the new rules won't apply to any organizations that have been around for more than 10 years, have more than a million members and receive less than 15% of their funding from corporate donors. That fits the NRA nicely, though as best we can figure, everyone else, from the Sierra Club to Planned Parenthood, fails to qualify. So much for defending the little guy against the fat cats.

This backroom deal came at the behest of Democrats from conservative states, for whom the NRA's scorecard of their legislative record can be a major boost or obstacle to election. Creating a special exception for the NRA, and thereby assuring the Democrats "good grades" on Second Amendment rights, eases the way for the bill to be passed. A failing grade on First Amendment rights is somebody else's problem.

By erecting what amounts to a grandfather clause of First Amendment rights, the bill creates a sort of interest-group incumbency, concentrating the power to speak freely among a handful of large and longstanding groups. Established organizations like the NRA provide important representation for their members, but their lobbying cause is specific and limited.

Left vulnerable by the special treatment are the smaller grassroots outfits that often pop up in response to new and immediate policy challenges. The ability of these groups to count on the full protection of the First Amendment is critical to diverse and responsive political debate.

The NRA may swing a big lobbying stick by virtue of the breadth and voting power of its members, but it draws its legitimacy from the Constitution and it has drawn support on gun rights from those who care about the entire Bill of Rights. Cutting a special deal at the expense of the First Amendment with lawmakers who have decided for now to stop gutting the Second Amendment reveals an NRA that is unprincipled and will be weaker for it in the long run.

2nd Amendment March DC Rally

Patriot's Day. The anniversary of the Battle of Lexington and Concord. An anniversary forgotten, though without this day, the Fourth of July would be just another summer's day.

I had forgotten this anniversary. No media celebrated it outside of Massachusetts. No school trumpets it. The country has forgotten about it.

But the 2nd Amendment supporters remembered. And they reminded me.

And so I went to the DC 2nd Amendment Rally to celebrate the "shot heard round the world." I went to celebrate the right to keep and bear arms; the right of a free man to defend his liberty.

And what did I find? About 2000 supporters, out of the MILLIONS in America. 2000 supporters, out of the thousands in DC that are finally allowed to keep arms, if not bear them. That fight is not over.

About 2000 from across the nation. Out of an estimated 80 million gun owners.

I don't know whether to celebrate this fact or to be ashamed. Either Americans are apathetic about the fight to retain the right to keep and bear arms or Americans are complacent because those that support the 2nd have been winning.

Since I am already familiar with the arguments and the culture of the 2nd Amendment, I decided that I would attend the rally as a "tourist" and attempt to look at the rally as a uninformed DC tourist. I traveled by bus along with the Richmond, Va. VCDL chapter. I was reunited with a long lost member of the UCV, Jesse. Go see his site at Insane Hippie.



First impressions are key. And my first impression was that the rally was small for such an important ideal. But, perhaps the rally would grow as the day went on......and it did. It was still smaller than I expected. But it was Monday and it was DC. I wouldn't want to fight that traffic....

My other initial impression was that the rally goers were cheerful and inviting. Good music, friendly smiles, and laughter abounded. The yellow Gadsen flag and the Navy Jack flew proudly in the air. An enterprising fellow sold other smaller versions and a variation of the Texan Gonzales flag utilizing an image of the AR-15. Two small boys wandered the crowd, selling buttons, their pockets filled with cash. Think about that.......where else would you let your child wander, with or without cash, knowing that your child was safe and protected. Orange "Guns Saves Lives" stickers proliferated like dandelions. Passing tourists started to sprout them.

I met people from Michigan, Ohio, California, Georgia, and Virginia. Their reasons for attending can encapsulated in one statement. Love of country. They all were there, not because of imminent threat to the 2nd Amendment, but to support it, to spread the message that the Constitution matters and if you restrict one right, all rights are vulnerable. They even offered language lessons .......

So, as a tourist, I took pictures. Hope you like them.


Re-enactors provided needed instruction to the park police about their new-fangled firearms.

Actually, the Park Police were extremely professional and seemed to enjoy themselves.
For a crowd of such dangerous individuals, the presence was slight. Except for the two on the roof of the building across the street....


Smile and wave boys... smile and wave.... Remember, cute and cuddly......


Great personages graced the rally: Davy Crocket and his brother in arms, Button Gwinnett.
Great feats of arms resulted of from the meeting....








General Washington (Kevin Grantz) and Mr. Patrick Henry reminded us of the true nature of our Republic. It is our responsibility to ensure its survival.




Michael Bane spoke of the American gun culture and the wonderment of actually succeeding on TV with no previous experience.



Philip Van Cleve spoke as well, but, I can't split his video to upload it. Sorry.

The rally went well. There will be more videos uploaded, including one by Lisa Mei who sang "Our Guns" and one from the end by Lucas Hogue. I was able to get part of the Patrick Henry speech.

Good rally.

crossposted at RedState

Latte and an M1911

EDITORIAL: Packing a gun in Starbucks

Coffee beans and firearms stir up a strong political brew

If you want to have a nice, relaxing cup of coffee in a safe environment, try Starbucks. The coffee-shop chain, generally known for environmentalist chic, is probably one of the safest places to hang out these days for a reason that doesn't fit its image - Starbucks is letting customers openly carry guns in its stores. Americans thus can enjoy their rights and wash them down with a Frappuccino.

Not surprisingly, Starbucks has taken some flak for its stand. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, an organization that has supported gun bans in Washington and Chicago, wants guns kept out of Starbucks. Collecting signatures from across the country, the gun controllers announced this week that they have gathered 28,000 signatures to try to pressure the bean sellers to hang fire. What the Brady Campaign actually did is misfire.

Here is some free PR advice for those who support gun bans: 28,000 signatures from a country of 200-some million adults is embarrassingly small. The National Rifle Association, with more than 4 million members, could collect that many signatures for the opposite position in less than an hour. It's obvious which side won this duel.

Despite all the harping from the left, a spokesman for Starbucks said last week that the company is sticking to its policy of letting customers carry guns where it's legal.
From sea to shining sea, the climate for guns is changing, and the progress extends beyond Starbucks. Major retailers such as Home Depot, Best Buy and Barnes & Noble apparently also are friendly to people who openly pack heat, according to the Wall Street Journal. The Brady Campaign warns businesses that allowing customers to carry guns will scare away other customers. Yet it seems pretty obvious that the businesses themselves - despite all the pressure they face from trial lawyers and bureaucrats to ban guns - are in a much better position to know what their customers want.

Hollywood and the liberal media have skewed public perceptions to such a degree that most Americans probably don't realize that not so long ago, people openly carried guns without a second thought all the time. Up until 1969, all but one of the
public high schools in New York City had rifle teams. Thousands of students carried their rifles every day on subways, buses and streets on their way to school, when they went to practice in the afternoon and on their way home. The students would store their guns in homerooms in the morning and then pick them up in the afternoon. In more normal times, no one thought it was a big deal.

Liberals claim they believe in science, but guns vividly illustrate their intellectual blinders. There is not a single refereed study by criminologists or economists using crime data from across America that shows that right-to-carry laws increase violent crime. The academic debate in refereed journals has been over how large the benefits are.

Here is a prediction: In a very short time, all the furor over Starbucks' pro-gun policy will be forgotten. The gun grabbers might not like it, but most Americans respect the right to keep and bear arms - even in a coffee shop.

The Question and the Answer

Saw a woman on Fox lamenting that she would have to explain to her son why someone is carrying a sidearm in a Starbucks. “What do I tell my son when he asks why that man is carrying a gun?” she whines.
Well, how about explaining that the Bill of Rights gives law-abiding citizens the right to carry a weapon, you mindless latte lapping twit?

We Have A Poll That Needs Attention

Down the page on the right.

Should more controls be placed on gun ownership?

Current totals:

Yes 25%
Probably 5%
No 68%
Unsure 2%

Total votes 1066

Opponents of Gun Control Introduce New Legislation In VA GA

This will surely bring the nutroots out in full force this month.

Gun control opponents hope to reshape handgun laws
By: William C. Flook Examiner Staff Writer
January 3, 2010

Gun control opponents in Virginia's legislature are proposing what would amount to a vast roll-back of handgun regulations, hoping to capitalize on a friendlier administration in Richmond to undo long-standing firearms restrictions.

Conservative lawmakers have filed a flurry of bills including abolishing the state's one-handgun-per-month rule and allowing college faculty to carry a concealed weapon on campus.

Despite the arrival of Republican Gov.-elect Bob McDonnell, who has an A rating from the National Rifle Association and campaigned on a pro-Second Amendment platform, none of the bills necessarily will have an easy time getting passed when the General Assembly goes into session later this month. Proponents of stronger gun laws have become much more vocal and focused since the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre and are likely to oppose the measures alongside many legislators.

Del. Scott Lingamfelter, R-Woodbridge, is proposing to do away with the Gov. Doug Wilder-era policy that limits a person to buying a single gun a month, arguing the rule "has run its course."

"I don't think it's been a very effective policy," Lingamfelter said. "It hasn't done much to prevent crime; it has done a lot to affect commerce."

Del. Mark Cole, R-Fredericksburg, has filed legislation that would legalize bringing guns into a courthouse "when the courthouse is being used for non-judicial activities," according to an online summary.

Del. Bob Marshall, R-Manassas, is proposing that full-time faculty members at state universities be allowed to carry concealed handguns into the classroom, provided they have a permit.

Del. Charles Carrico, R-Galax, authored a bill that would allow permits for concealed handguns to be renewed through the mail. Another of Carrico's bills would change the penalty for bringing a firearm onto school property from a felony to a misdemeanor.
The legislature convenes Jan. 13, and McDonnell is set to be inaugurated three days later. McDonnell replaces Democratic Gov. Tim Kaine, who has repeatedly vetoed efforts to weaken gun laws.

The incoming governor has yet to roll out his legislative agenda.

Kiss the 2nd Goodbye

Lets Have A Refresher Course on the Who, Why, and How of Blair-Holt/HR45
Originally posted in February 2009

First off, it does not contain a provision that requires reporting firearms on your tax return;
it doesn't have to. It's bad enough the way it's written.

HR45 WAS WRITTEN BY REBECCA PETERS: WHO THE HELL IS SHE?

Don’t know if you and your readers have seen this one yet.
I'm sure that you are aware, since you seem to spend so much time researching, but here goes:

This HR45 was written by Rebecca Peters. Probably written a couple years ago. The only point of the law is the name, thumb print and creating the database. It's exactly how she did it in Australia. It only took a couple years!

Rebecca Peters & Soros: Rebecca was a big part of the success in banning all guns in England. Soros was mightily impressed. He paid her way to Australia and funded her to get all guns banned in Australia. As stated from residents of Australia, "First they register everyone, then make it a felony to not report transfers or thefts, then they show up at your door with your gun list. What can you do? You turn them all over".

Mightily impressed with the speed and completeness of her work there, Soros relocated her to the U.S. and into a new position at the U.N.

About that time, he picked out Obama Saddam Husein Bin Laden, and funded his way into becoming our new president. It was accidentally leaked out back in late September that Peters had a prominent position in Obamaden's top group and that the entire gun ban protocol was already written. They even posted this on their website. Quickly removed of course. This was all before he (they) even won the election!

She has stated in public that the first and most important thing to do is to "register" everyone.

Also leaked out some months ago: "We need to create a centralized hard disk backup of all registration information, for safety and security of the data". Something like that. Of course, there is a specific law against that, but, who cares. "We are the law". So, with his new hand selected, all anti-gun, cabinet getting into place, they will implement the "centralized backup" and pass a law that every person and gun has to be registered.

They will also create a "national ID". This will help in creating the "central database" of their subjects. A basic requirement under socialism.

Then, (at the pace they are going it may be in the next month or two!), they will reinstate the "assault weapons ban". However, being that they are all lawyers and have the ban everything agenda, they'll change a few words in the final draft which will ban all semi-auto firearms and all 50cal or bigger. As each of these items come to public awareness, we can expect even more runs on guns. They also mean to register every ammo purchase as well. So, there will be further runs on ammo. These are just more steps to creating the database.

That's my little bit of info that has largely been escaping public reporting over the last year. I think the facts are accurate.... Send any corrections.I don't even peruse the gun chat sites like I used to. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/ when I'm bored.

I wonder how many "Waco" actions will start popping up over the next couple years?More happy thoughts. For every single item that they accomplish, pretty much none of them can or will be undone.

NoVa Freeper To Speak At Yorktown Teaparty

H/T FreeRepublic

The Tea Party hours are from 11 AM to 2 PM and a firm time for my talk has not been set. I requested 1 PM, so hopefully it will be close to that time.

The subject will be “Gun Rights - The Canary in the Coal Mine”

For those who would like to go, here are some directions:
From Hwy. 17 N, take last exit before crossing Coleman Bridge over York River...or...From I-64, take Rt.199 East at Williamsburg and take the Colonial Parkway directly into Yorktown Battlefield. Turn left at end of Parkway and follow road down to Riverfront area.
For more information, click here:

TAXPAYERS FOR FREEDOM TEA PARTY
Labor Day in Yorktown Virginia
September 7th, 2009
11 am - 2 pm

Thoughts on Liberty 101

That my blog partner couldn't find the time to attend.

....amidst the disparagement of grassroots efforts to push back on healthcare reform as currently envisioned in Congress, the former-community-organizer himself, President Obama, has tried to gin up grassroots workers who will pressure lawmakers into passing a massive healthcare overhaul. Contrast the “labor of love” work of my local compatriots to recent Craigslist advertisements to pay $15 per hour to “volunteers” to work to pass Obama's Healthcare Plan. Quite a difference in commitment, wouldn’t you agree? Real grassroots is “money-poor and people-rich” according to Wikipedia.
Hmmmm.....

I’ve been calling and writing to my representatives for nearly ten years. Yeah, a real time-waster, I know. Until this year, I had never marched in the vicinity of a legislator’s office, but I’ve now done so three times. I still haven’t carried a handmade sign! But I really do admire the creativity of my grassroots colleagues. Individuals around this great land have spoken up to our government leaders and found themselves thrust into the spotlight. So many of them have faced cameras and questions from all types of media and held their own in the debate. I have been enormously impressed by their courage and their passion. I don’t care much about the limelight, but I am going to keep working on the grassroots projects I’ve committed to.

No one has to pay me; it’s a labor of love.

Read the whole thing at Citizens Rountable.

ACORN Now Targeting Gun-Rights

June 8, 2009
Exclusive: Obama and ACORN Officials: Setting Sights on Gun Owners?
Jim Kouri, CPP

ACORN, the publicly funded national organization linked to voter fraud in several states, is now actively interfering with the exercise of firearm civil rights in New Jersey, and the Second Amendment Foundation is calling for an immediate federal investigation.

One example of ACORN's gun control activism is when its officials intervened in an unsuccessful attempt to defend Jersey City, New Jersey's local gun control ordinance, which was struck down December 13, 2006 in New Jersey state court as a violation of state law pre-empting stronger local gun ordinances.

"ACORN has, since 1998, received an estimated $31 million in government funding," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "Now they have intervened in a New Jersey gun rights case in defense of an illegal Jersey City one-gun-a-month ordinance that violates the state preemption statute."

"For the past few election cycles," Gottlieb noted, "ACORN has clearly grown more partisan toward the political Left. ACORN'S PAC, in fact, endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president, even though their tax-exempt status prohibits endorsement of political candidates. That's hardly surprising since he used to serve as their legal counsel and he taught the group about community organizing. ACORN and Obama are lockstep in seeking to destroy our Second Amendment rights," he stated.

Gun Grabbing Dhimmicrats

Gun Grabbing Dhimmicrats
This video is from CNN.

International Treaty Threatens 2nd Amendment

VCDL ACTION ALERT!!!!!!!
The Virginia Citizens Defense League is asking Virginia citizens to contact our Senators regarding an international treaty that could override our laws, and possibly even the constitutional protections, for the right to keep and bear arms. Reloading could become illegal, registration would be implemented, even attaching a sling to a rifle without a government license to do so would be a criminal act! The President is pushing this treaty because of Mexico's inability to control its own criminals.

NOTE: The president is pushing this treaty because he is a socialist and dis-arming America is part of his agenda.

INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS.

Of course, we all know that our senators are very concerend about the rights of gun-owners, so I'm certain they'll want to insure that the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms as delineated in the 2nd Amendment is protected.

There is a video here.

H/T to Richmond Patriots.

Firearms - Are you thinking of buying one?

Recently, both 20/20 ABC and 60 Minutes have aired shows about gun ownership and self protection. To say the least, both shows were high on negativity and low on information. Neither show addressed the realistic concerns of Americans on the responsibilities of firearm ownership.

The access of weapons by children are an ongoing concern, not only with the gun control crowd, but with any parent whose children might come into contact with firearms. The media's presentation showed a class of children finding firearms in a toy box, and then, playing with them. The show did this to discredit the idea that watching the NRA's Eddie Eagle video will protect them. However, no further reinforcement of the lessons was available.

Self defense by adults was also shown in a bad light. In another presentation, students were given an artificial scenario, in which one student was supposed to use a weapon to defend against an "active shooter" in a class. In both cases the scenarios were designed to fail.

My daughter is growing up with access to firearms. She may also encounter firearms at the homes of others and in public places. One cannot "child proof" a gun without making it useless for its intended purpose. However, one can "gun proof" a child. Or an adult. Many adults would have no clue on the proper actions when encountering a firearm. Training is the only way to teach someone to safely handle a firearm. Watching a safety video is but the first step. Unless reinforced, its training will do nothing to safeguard anyone, especially children. My child would have known what to do when those kids pulled out the gun in the toy box as I have been reviewing the proper actions since she was three years old and she went to her first gun show.

STOP. DON'T TOUCH. LEAVE THE AREA. TELL AN ADULT.

For basic safety lessons, the NRA Eddie Eagle program cannot be surpassed. It does not promote NRA membership, nor does it make distinctions on whether guns are right or wrong. It focuses only on accident prevention. For more information, Women of Caliber has a four part series on the concerns of mixing firearms and childhood. Children and Guns I, II, III, and IV.

Once the prevention of accidents has been covered, the next step is to determine what your own level of exposure to firearms is to be. Do you want to be a "firearms enthusiast?" Do you want to carry a weapon? Do you only want a firearm in the home? Or do you just want to be able to safely handle a firearm when one is encountered?

The rules of handling firearms are simple but deadly important and can never be broken.
Xavier at Xavier's Thoughts goes into greater detail on the thinking behind each Rule.

The Four Rules
1. All firearms are always loaded
2. Never let the muzzle of a firearm point at anything you are not willing to destroy
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot
4. Be sure of your target and what lies beyond it

If you wish have a closer relationship with firearms and decide to carry, Xavier lists the rules of carrying a firearm and discusses in detail those rules at the link.

The Five Rules of Concealed Carry
1. Your concealed handgun is for protection of life only.
2. Know exactly when you can use your gun.
3. If you can run away -- RUN!
4. Display your gun, be prepared to go to jail.
5. Don't let your emotions get the best of you.

Many well-intentioned adults say that children and firearms don't mix. Then again, many adults state that women and firearms don't mix. Women and children are more vulnerable to violence then are men. Children, on the main, are too immature to carry firearms and will not be the one using them for defense. Women, however, are perfectly capable of using any firearm being employed today. Women of Caliber, Home on the Range, and Cornered Cat have very good sites, and are but a few of the blogs that concern guns from a woman's point of view, that explore self defense, firearms and the mindset necessary for survival. Cornered Cat has a great site:

"articles dealing with gun safety, kids, mindset, and much more. There are glossaries and step-by-step instructions on the shooting basics. If you've ever wondered about the legal or social or practical or ethical aspects of owning a gun or carrying it, or wonder if carrying a gun is right for you, you've come to the right place."

The NRA has a great program, Refuse to Be a Victim. It is taught throughout the country.

Brigid, at Home on the Range, covers the Five Rules of Staying Alive. Xavier, yet again, comes through with a brilliant illustration on the need to have the right mindset.

1. Be aware of yourself and your surroundings. Don't be concentrating on work, your love life or school. When you're on the street you need to be alert. Walk with head up. Walk strong.
2. If you feel afraid DO SOMETHING. Fear warns you.
3. When it is obvious that you are going to be attacked, take action at the first sign of threat.
4. If there is not time to flee, fight until you know you are safe.
5. If you carry a weapon. Know how to use it. Practice with it. Have it in easy reach.

While most parents will not be training their children to this extent, this child is a perfect example of what children are capable of, with the proper training and supervision:



Mckensie has two other videos in this series, here and here. I'll be honest. She shoots better than I do. I'd like my daughter to be that proficient.

Training, however, is useless without the appropriate mindset. One should examine their motivations and any possible emotional, mental, or physical limitations or reservations. If you want to own a firearm for defense, you should understand what what that entails. Xavier's youngest daughter has figured it out for herself:

Ker-chunk Bam! ker-chunk Bam!

"Why do you have your target so close? Seven yards is too close. If you are going to pattern that gun....."

"I'm training to defend myself."

"You planning on shootin' somebody?"

"No, I'm planning to defend myself."

"From what?"

"Whatever I need to."

A firearm owner needs to also understand the local laws. Each locality will be different. Any competent firearms training school should educate about the local laws concerning firearm ownership and carry. In Virginia, the Virginia Citizen Defense League is a good resource and starting point for information about gun ownership. However, any questions should be addressed to local law enforcement.

Many still have questions about the proper role of firearms in the United States. However, this post is not to explore those questions except in the role of self defense.

Self Defense. The ultimate human right.

If you are thinking about owning a firearm of any sort, I hope this post helps. Remember, guns are tools similar to fire extinguishers. If you need one RIGHT NOW, then nothing else will do. Please educate yourself and your children, even if you don't plan to own one. Not owning one will not prevent you are your children from encountering one.

Ignorance can mean death.

Orders We Will Not Obey

There is a new website you should check out. I hope this is serious and not a tactic to identify those who believe in the founding principals of our Nation.

Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic …and meant it.

Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. We won’t “just follow orders."

Below is our declaration of orders we will NOT obey because we will consider them unconstitutional (and thus unlawful) and immoral violations of the natural rights of the people. Such orders would be acts of war against the American people by their own government, and thus acts of treason. We will not make war against our own people. We will not commit treason. We will defend the Republic.

Orders We Will Not Obey

1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people. The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order. Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10.We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
(Read the full declaration here)

HR 45

With all due respect to Mr Van Cleave, HR 45 is a dangerous bill with deadly implications currently in process in a Democrat majority, Soros controlled Congress. They can and will pass any damn thing they want, anytime they want, and to quote Billy Jack, "There isn't thing one we can do about it."

13 PAGES OF INFRINGEMENT

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.

Even after the Heller decision, Washington DC, a city that is Federal territory, and supposed to be under the control of Congress, still interferes with its citizens.

What part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?

District of Columbia Firearms Registration Requirements and Study Guide

Tell me that I'm wrong in believing that, without the actions of citizens like the members of the VCDL, that we would not have our freedoms curtailed in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

VCDL Lobby Day a success!

A veritable horde of armed men and women descended upon the General Assembly today! Women, children, and tourists were nearby! Even worse, Important people were nearby! Oh, my!
Well, that's the way the Roanoke Times might put it.....

Actually, about 300-400 law-abiding, Constitution loving, responsible citizens made their voices heard today. The assembly split into teams, each meeting with a delegate. Unsurprisingly, the Delegates were busy with committee meetings. Point papers were left with their very capable assistants. Delegate "Jimmie" Massie was quite supportive of the 2nd Amendment and its related issues, though we were not able to get into the VCDL issues due to time constraints.

A well attended rally was held at the bell tower on the Capitol grounds. First to speak was Mr. Philip Van Cleave, President of the VCDL. He spoke on the principals behind the VCDL and the necessity for keeping up the fight to protect, not only the 2nd Amendment, but all of our freedoms.

Del. Cuccinelli thanked all of the attendees for taking the time to become personally involved in politics, stating that "nothing substitutes for a personal visit to a Delegate" when conveying concerns about issues. While decrying the lack of leadership among some of his fellow Delegates in supporting issues that are based on Constitutional issues, yet locally unpopular, he said that he was proud of his own leadership on explaining how the 2nd Amendment protects the freedoms of constituents even though his district is a pro-gun control district. More politicians need to follow his example.

WRVA's Doc Thompson, a new, self-proclaimed possessor of a Concealed Carry permit, spoke eloquently on the great freedoms that we, as citizens of the USA, have that no one else, including those in other western nations, have. About the politicians that seek to restrict our freedoms, he said that there are two types: 1) Many seek to control others or to promote themselve, in the guise of "doing something." 2) These just do not understand. "We have the right to choose", he said. The left says that the "The Right to Choose" or "Pro-Choice" is important. Doc says that he chooses to "live a Free life."

And then we had a very beautiful lady speak to us. She's been seen on O'Reilly, putting him in his place and on the internet at on various videos on Youtube. Mary Katherine Ham, lately of Town Hall and now at The Weekly Standard, spoke to us about very basic issues of gun ownership. She spoke of how the Brady Bunch uses the words of Martin Luther King to smear gun owners as if gun owners were opperessive lovers of violence. She brought up the fact that the Brady Bunch, of course, refuses to acknowledge that MLK promoted the right of all people to self defense. On issues of equality, Ms. Ham states that, "a 9mm is a HELL of an equalizer."

Larry Platt of Gun Owners of America ended the rally. Re-iterating the necessity of protecting all of our rights by defending the 2nd Amendment, he spoke on the deceptions of the Left. Using the non-existent gun show loophole as an example he explained that what the Left seeks is the end of our freedom to transfer the ownership of guns without government interference.

And so, while tourists walked, children played, and legislators did whatever it is that they do, armed citizens, concerned about freedom, peacefully assembled, and made themselves heard.

Just as our Founding Fathers had planned.

Dangerous ID Act

VA Legislation to Stop Real ID in Virginia

RPVNetwork

Sat, 01/10/2009 - 09:49.
Real Id
VA Liberty Defense, along with 10 other organizations have joined forces in a statewide campaign to add Virginia to the growing list of states to enact anti-Real ID legislation.
Twenty-one (21) states have engaged in an all-out revolt against Dangerous ID (the so-called Real ID scam) and have already passed legislation that will nix the federal mandate and more are expected to follow.
There will be a Rally in support of Delegate Bob Marshall's H.B.1587 and Senator Ken Cuccinelli's S.B.481 at the Virginia State Capital Bell Tower on January 21, 2009 at 1:00 pm.

National Geographic drinking the Gun Control Kool-Aid

I watched this show when it aired and had the exact same thought. I just couldn't critique the show with any justice. The only reasonable example of the average gun owner presented was that of a local woman that lives in Chesterfield. I present the letter to National Geographic from Gun Owners of America.

National Geographic TV Takes Aim At Your Guns

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

National Geographic Channel ran a show last night entitled, "Guns In America." According to the program, there are millions of misguided gun owners across the nation. Why? Because your guns are supposedly more likely to harm you than to help you in an emergency.

"As a society, we're totally out of control with weapons," said one Philadelphia cop who was interviewed during the show. "You need to limit access that people have to these type of firearms."

That was the basic thrust of the program. National Geographic recited the usual worn-out factoids that are peddled by the Brady Campaign. It only cited anti-gun cops. And for every person who was filmed stating he or she believed in a right to own firearms for self-defense, the program would cite "facts" to prove that such a hope was misplaced.

Gun owners should let the President and CEO of National Geographic know that the channel should stick to showing pictures of kangaroos and foliage -- images that we normally attribute to National Geographic's magazine -- and keep his personal, anti-gun views to his private conversations around the Christmas dinner table.

The National Geographic Channel presents itself as an educational, unbiased alternative. But "Guns in America" was hardly unbiased, as can be seen by the following agenda items that were pushed during the program:

1. "Guns in America" would have you believe that the guns in your home are 22 times more likely to kill a family member than to protect you. This statistic can (surprise, surprise!) be found on the Brady Campaign website, but its source has been highly discredited. The factoid originates with Arthur Kellerman, who has generated multiple studies claiming that guns are a net liability.¹ But Kellerman has been found guilty of fudging his data, and even the National Academy of Sciences has stated that his "conclusions do not seem to follow" from his data.²

The truth of the matter is actually quite encouraging for gun owners. Anti-gun researchers for the Clinton Justice Department found that guns are used 1.5 million times annually for self-defense, which means that each year, firearms are used more than 50 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.³

Isn't that strange? You would think anti-gunners wouldn't mind citing a study that was commissioned by the Clinton Justice Department! Apparently, the results of the study didn't fit their agenda.

2. "Guns in America" overstates the number of children who die by unintentional gunfire. The program would have viewers believe that a child dies by accidental gunfire, once every two days. But you can only reach that figure if you count violent-prone teens as "children."

In fact, when you look at the statistics involving younger children (ages 0-14), you see that kids have a greater chance of dying from choking on things like the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that you feed them.⁴ Hmm, why doesn't National Geographic want to report on those killer peanuts?

3. "Guns in America" portrays twelve times as many negative uses of guns as positive uses -- even though in the real world, the truth is quite the opposite (as guns are used at least 50 times more often to save life than take life). The program does start with a dramatization of a legitimate self-defense story with an actual 911 call playing in the background. But after that, every dramatization is about drive-by-shootings or cops being shot or gang-related warfare.

The lesson for the viewer is: Guns are bad.

4. "Guns in America" only quotes anti-gun "authorities," thus leaving the impression that all law-enforcement support gun control. Never mind the fact that when one looks at polls of the police community, they overwhelmingly hold pro-gun attitudes:

* Should any law-abiding citizen be able to purchase a firearm for sport or self defense? -- 93% of law-enforcement said yes.⁵

* Do you believe law-abiding citizens should be limited to the purchase of no more than one firearm per month? -- 70.1% of law-enforcement said no.⁶

* Do you agree that a national concealed handgun permit would reduce rates of violent crime as recent studies in some states have already reflected? -- 68.2% of law-enforcement said yes.⁷

It's bad enough that a liberal teacher's union controls the education of our kids in the public schools, and that many of them are being brainwashed with politically correct thinking. We don't need supposedly neutral programs like National Geographic peddling the Brady Campaign's favorite factoids to an unsuspecting public.

ACTION: Please contact Tim T. Kelly, the President and CEO of National Geographic Ventures (which includes their television division), and urge him to steer the NatGeo channel away from politics. If the National Geographic Channel can't run a balanced program -- where they use real statistics -- then they just need to stick to filming those cute little animals that helped make their magazine so famous.

You can go to http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/contact to cut-and-paste the sample letter below into their webform. Since you will need to select a Topic, please choose "I have a complaint." And for "Department," we would suggest selecting "Factual Questions" or "General."

---- Pre-written letter ----

Dear Mr. Kelly:

I will think twice before ordering the National Geographic magazine, because I don't want to help you fund any more anti-gun propaganda. Your Explorer show entitled "Guns In America" -- which has run several times this month -- was heavily slanted to the gun control position. The show used fallacious statistics without rebutting them, all in an effort to demonize firearms.

For example, "Guns in America" falsely claimed that guns in the home are 22 times more likely to kill a family member than to serve as protection. That is simply not true. The author of this study, Arthur Kellerman, has been discredited many times (by groups such as the National Academy of Sciences), so it's shameful that your channel would even cite his work.

Second, "Guns in America" overstates the number of children who die by unintentional gunfire. In fact, when you look at the statistics involving younger children (ages 0-14), you see that kids have a greater chance of dying from choking on things like the peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that you feed them. Can I expect to see a show in the near future highlighting the danger of feeding children?

Third, "Guns in America" portrays twelve times as many negative uses of guns as positive uses -- even though in the real world, the truth is quite the opposite. According to statistics from the Clinton Justice Department in 1997, guns are used at least 50 times more often to save life than take life.

Finally, "Guns in America" only quotes anti-gun "authorities," thus leaving the impression that all law-enforcement support gun control. Never mind the fact that when one looks at polls of the police community, they overwhelmingly hold pro-gun attitudes. (Please see the poll results on the website for the National Association of Chiefs of Police.) Why were none of these authorities ever cited?

The National Geographic Society's purpose is "to increase and diffuse geographic knowledge while promoting the conservation of the world's cultural, historical, and natural resources." I would submit to you that pushing gun control is far afield from your stated purpose.

Sincerely,

--------------------------------

ENDNOTES:

¹ Arthur Kellerman has generated multiple studies that claim gun owners are more likely to be injured by their guns than to use those guns in self-defense. His results range from 3 to 22 to 43 times more likely to be injured by a gun in the home. His methodology has been debunked, however, many times over. (See endnote 2.)

² See http://www.gunowners.org/sk0701.htm . Also, see Charles F. Wellford, John Pepper, Carol Petrie, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (National Research Council of the National Academies, 2004), p. 118.

³ See http://www.gunowners.org/sk0802.htm

⁴ See "Children Accidental Death Rates (Ages 0-14)," Gun Control Fact Sheet (2004) at http://www.gunowners.org/fs0404.htm

⁵ National Association of Chiefs of Police, 20th Annual Survey Results (Survey questions sent to Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs in the United States: 2008).

⁶ National Association of Chiefs of Police, 15th Annual Survey Results (Survey questions sent to Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs in the United States).

⁷ Ibid.