VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 8/21/13

[Taggure]

VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 8/21/13
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a VCDL member? Join VCDL at: http://www.vcdl.org/join
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. VCDL booth at Richmond gun show THIS weekend needs volunteers!
2. VCDL President to be on panel at Liberty University on Sept. 5th
3. In VA, self-defense is clearly spelled out
4. Resident shoots armed suspect in burglary
5. Police officer, gun store owner charged with illegal purchases
6. StellarOne Bank Weapons policy
7. If you want a Garand from CMP, you'd best get crackin'!
8. Senate Democrats abandoning gun control efforts for rest of 2013
9. The continuing saga of "living with the gun"
10. Mayor Bloomberg blames VA for many of NY's gun crimes
11. [FL] Black homicides tripled since Stand Your Ground?
12. Trayvon Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton: Repeal stand-ground law [VIDEO]
13. [IL] Sheriff's team working to seize guns from thousands
14. [WI] Armed agents raid Wisconsin animal shelter
15. [WI] S.W.A.T. team like raid takes deer from no-kill shelter [VIDEO]
16. Arkansas school district arming more than 20 teachers, staff
17. CA Attorney General to Fed Agents: No dangerous handguns for you
18. California's universal registration scheme [VIDEO]
19. Starbucks, loaded guns and lattes
20. There is a 'gun control playbook' vs. WA gun owners
21. Warning to American gun owners from Canadian news anchor [VIDEO]
22. [DC] The gray beyond: A family copes after tragedy
23. Siege warfare in Mexican town plagued by cartel [VIDEO]
24. LTE: Ban all assault vans, now!
25. Government liquidation sale of ammunition brass

*************************************************
1. VCDL booth at Richmond gun show THIS weekend needs volunteers!
*************************************************

RICHMOND http://www.showmasters.us, August 24-25

Saturday, August 24 9:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Sunday, August 25 9:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. 12:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.

Please contact David Crosby at CentralVAgunshows@vcdl.org to help
at the Richmond Raceway Complex.


*************************************************
2. VCDL President to be on panel at Liberty University on Sept. 5th
*************************************************

I'll be on a panel titled, "Why Vote 2013?" from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM on Thursday, September 5th at the Liberty University School of Law, sponsored by the Lynchburg Tea Party.

Other panel members include Jamie Radtke (former pro-gun U.S. Senate candidate), Travis Witt (Foundation for America), and Timothy Johnson (Frederic Douglass Foundation).

The event is open to the public, so bring family and friends!


*************************************************
3. In VA, self-defense is clearly spelled out
*************************************************

The article was doing pretty good until the very end:

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” [Senator Richard] Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”

That's simply not the case. You have no duty to retreat in Virginia, UNLESS you contributed in some way to the confrontation.

Member David Moorefield emailed me this:

--

From fredericksburg.com: https://tinyurl.com/lyb7xo8


In Virginia, self-defense is clearly spelled out
by Chelyen Davis, The Free Lance-Star
July 28, 2013

The trial of George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin got a lot of people talking about Florida’s “stand your ground” law, although Zimmerman didn’t use it as his defense.

Stand your ground laws are related to “castle doctrine” laws, which is named after the concept that your home is your castle. They allow you to shoot to kill an intruder in your home who you believe may injure you.

Stand your ground laws essentially broaden the castle doctrine concept to public territory outside the home. They provide a legal defense for someone who shoots someone else in self-defense, with no legal duty for that person to retreat from the situation if possible.

In Virginia, neither law is on the books. And there hasn’t been much push for a stand your ground law in the state, but several bills were filed in the General Assembly in 2012 to put castle doctrine into state law.

One of those came from Sen. Richard Stuart, R–Stafford. He said his bill was essentially an effort to codify what is common law in Virginia already—that, if necessary, you may shoot to kill an intruder in your home who is threatening you.

“Virginia’s law is also pretty comprehensive and pretty good when it comes to the right to defend your home,” Stuart said in an interview last week. “You can use deadly force to defend your life.

“You cannot use deadly force to defend property. That’s worked pretty well from the criminal aspect.”

He wanted to codify the common law, Stuart said, particularly to provide a stronger legal defense in cases where a homeowner might shoot an intruder, and then find himself sued in civil court by that intruder’s family.

His and other castle doctrine bills failed that year. Stuart said some legislators believed the existing law was good enough and that codifying the common law could have unintended consequences.

Stuart disagreed, and the argument left him reluctant to file castle doctrine bills in the future.

While Stuart supports the idea of castle doctrine legislation, he’s more leery of stand your ground laws. He said Virginia “has good self-defense laws in the open field anyway.”

“We do have a duty to retreat in Virginia,” Stuart added. “If you are threatened, and you have the ability to retreat and remove yourself from the threat, then you’ve got a responsibility to do that before you shoot to kill.”


*************************************************
4. Resident shoots armed suspect in burglary
*************************************************

Bill Petrak emailed me this:

--

Armed Woodbridge man defends home in burglary


From woodbridge-va.patch.com: https://tinyurl.com/kxgnb8q


Police: Resident Shoots Armed Suspect in Burglary
Prince William County Police identified a suspect in the burglary after he sought treatment for a gunshot wound at a D.C. hospital.
by Mary Stachyra Lopez (Editor)
July 29, 2013

A Dale City resident shot an armed intruder who had fired his weapon during a burglary early Sunday morning, Prince William County Police said.

James Darnell Latimer, 29, of Francis West Lane in Woodbridge, is charged with burglary, use of a firearm in commission of a felony, attempted malicious wounding and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Police said that a 24-year-old Woodbridge man was inside his home on the 14200 block of Princedale Drive when three masked men forced their way inside the home around 3:08 a.m. They went up the stairs to the victim's bedroom and a confrontation broke out.

"One of the men was armed with a shotgun which he fired towards the victim," police spokesman Officer Jonathan Perok said in a press release. "The victim returned fire with his own handgun and stuck the suspect before the men fled the home."

The victim was not injured, and nothing was stolen, Perok said. Detectives from the Violent Crimes Bureau identified Latimer as a suspect after he went to a hospital in Washington, D.C. to obtain treatment for a gunshot injury to his forearm.

Police have obtained warrants for Latimer's arrest, and he is still in D.C. pending extradition to Virginia. His court date is set for Aug. 26. Perok said the incident was not random and police are working to identify the other two suspects.

The first suspect is described as a black male, 20-30 years old, 6 feet tall, 180 pounds, with a medium build and brown eyes.

The second suspect is described as a white male, 20-30 years old, 5'9", 170 pounds, with a medium build.


*************************************************
5. Police officer, gun store owner charged with illegal purchases
*************************************************

Background checks are no guarantee that criminals won't still get guns - easily. Universal background checks won't make any difference to criminals, either.

Here we have a police officer who is allegedly involved in a straw purchase scheme.

From wdbj7.com: https://tinyurl.com/lobwes6


Police officer, gun store owner charged with illegal purchases
James Slate and David Haskins are charged with federal firearms violations
by David Seidel and Hollani Davis
July 26, 2013

ROANOKE, Va. - Federal investigators say that David Haskins and James Slate hatched a scheme to complete what are known as straw purchases from a competing gun store. Haskins owns Southern Gun in Bassett. Slate is a Rocky Mount police officer.

According to federal court records, Haskins gave money to Slate who would then use his law enforcement discount to buy a specialized gun from Town Police Supply in Collinsville. Town Police Supply, according to a search warrant affidavit, had exclusive rights to sell Smith and Wesson M&P 10 rifles to public safety officers and members of the military. Prosecutors allege Haskins then tried to resell the rifles online for several hundred dollars more than the purchase price. Such purchases are illegal, prosecutors allege, because federal firearms purchase forms require that the purchaser is the actual buyer of the firearm.

Haskins and Slate recruited other buyers as well. A total of 32 guns were seized according to a source with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Those buyers cooperated with the investigation and will not be charged.

Haskins was arrested July 12th. He is charged with eighteen counts of making false statements to a license firearms dealer in relation to the purchase of a firearm and one count of conspiracy to make straw purchases of firearms.

Slate turned himself in Friday and is charged with one count of conspiracy to make straw purchases of firearms.

Both Slate and Haskins face a maximum possible penalty of up to five years in prison on the conspiracy charge. Haskins faces an additional maximum possible penalty of up to ten years in prison on ten counts of making a false statement to a licensed firearms dealer and a maximum possible penalty of up to five years on the remaining eight counts of making false statements.


*************************************************
6. StellarOne Bank Weapons policy
*************************************************

Where has there EVER been a problem with a permit holder in a bank, other than in StellarOne's imagination? Clearly the bank prefers that their clients die helplessly if a robbery turns violent than to have any chance to defend themselves.

This was sent to one of our members:

Good afternoon,

I am in receipt of your email to StellarOne dated 7/30/13.

StellarOne appreciates you taking the time to reach out to us concerning these issues.

…

As for the specific prohibition against weapons, StellarOne has a duty to maintain a safe place for employees and customers, etc. to conduct business. Our bank employees are trained in industry recognized best practices and proper response before, during and after a robbery. [PVC: So a criminal is about to murder a customer in the bank. How exactly are the employees trained to save that customer's life? I'll bet their trained to simply watch the customer die.] If an armed bank customer encounters or approaches an armed robbery suspect (or vice-versa), it is likely that the risk for violence will increase, possibly resulting in catastrophic consequences for everyone inside the bank. [PVC: Sometimes the criminal's plan from the beginning is for there to be catastrophic consequences for everyone in the bank. Disarming customers serves no purpose but to protect the criminal.]

StellarOne does provide banking alternatives for customers that do not wish to come inside the bank. The majority of our financial centers (including the Christiansburg Main financial center) have drive-thru lane(s) for our customer’s convenience. A customer would not need to disarm themselves or leave their vehicle while using the drive-thru area.

We would ask you to respect our decision to best protect our customers and employees just as we would respect your property rights and your decision to allow people on your property or in your house to carry concealed weapons.

StellarOne appreciates your business and looks forward to serving your financial needs in the future.

Yours truly,

Michael D. Phillips, CFE
Corporate Security Officer


*************************************************
7. If you want a Garand from CMP, you'd best get crackin'!
*************************************************

EM and Civilian Marksmanship Coordinator, Michael Irvin, sent me this:

I understand that most members are not likely to travel to the North or South stores. However, it is worth reiterating that the CMP’s supply of M1 rifles is dwindling. If members are interested in purchasing a rifle, I would suggest that they do it sooner than later.

CMP Stores Days of Operation. Beginning in October, 2013 the CMP stores will only be open three days a week: Thursday through Saturday. The days of operation are being reduced as a result of the decreasing amount of rifles that they will have available for sale. The CMP stores will NOT be open on Wednesday, 2 Oct.


*************************************************
8. Senate Democrats abandoning gun control efforts for rest of 2013
*************************************************

Good news, but don't think they won't be back in an instant if something changes.

Member John Givargidze emailed me this:

--

From gunssavelives.net: https://tinyurl.com/kxtc443


BREAKING: Senate Democrats Abandoning Gun Control Efforts for Rest of 2013
by Dan Cannon
August 2, 2013

According to a NY Daily News article, Senate Democrats, led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, are abandoning their efforts to pass universal background checks and other gun control measures for the remainder of 2013.

According to the article, Harry Reid, in a meeting with anti-gun group “Moms Demand Action,” made it clear gun control wasn’t a high priority for lawmakers this year.

In a meeting Thursday with a pro-gun-control group, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said budget battles looming this fall will make it impossible to enact the background-check measure that failed to pass in April.

“I think sometime next year we’ll revisit that issue. I’m almost certain of it,” Reid (D-Nev.) told the group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, according to a reporter for The Nation who was allowed to sit in on the meeting.

Democrats made a big push on gun control back in April, proposing a number of bills and amendments. However, none of those could secure the 60 votes needed to pass a GOP filibuster.

Even the “bi-partisan” authored universal background check bill, which many Democrats saw as being a weak, watered down bill, didn’t pass. There is also the issue that anything that passed the Senate would still have to make it through the GOP controlled House of Representatives.

The backing off on the gun control issue could be due to lack of support, or Democrats could see the writing on the wall. In recent weeks we have seen a Reoublican take a Connecticut State House seat which had been under Democratic control for 40 years. Gun control was reportedly an issue in that special election. We’ve also seen two Colorado state senators who are going to have to defend their seats in a recall election in September.

Are Democrats running scared on the gun control issue?


*************************************************
9. The continuing saga of "living with the gun"
*************************************************

James Durso emailed me this:

--

From pagunblog.com: https://tinyurl.com/ktw34wg [PVC: This blog contains numerous quotes that are not adequately identified in the text conversion appearing below. Go to this URL to get the 11 links embedded below.]


The Continuing Saga of “Living with the Gun”
by Sebastian
July 26, 2013

When Heidi Yewman first published her highly controversial piece in Ms. Magazine, I thought she was a bit irresponsible with how she approached the topic of gun ownership. After reading her continuing drama, now published by the Daily Beast, I believe she lacks the moral clarity, level headedness, and common sense required of someone being a gun owner. On this we agree. Where we disagree is that the government’s job is to enforce responsibility, and that training can fix the problem for someone like her. Training will not help Heidi Yewman; she quite simply lacks the emotional makeup necessary for gun ownership. Perhaps that is her point, but her real problem is not something the government can successfully evaluate, and she should really stop projecting her own inadequacies onto other people. I thought a bit how to deal with her article, but a good old fashioned fisking is about all I can come up with.

I put my purse on the counter and then spent the next hour out on the back deck. Walking into the kitchen to refresh our drinks, I noticed my purse with the 9mm Glock still inside it. I’d forgotten to lock it up! Panic set in as I realized my teen son was playing videogames just 10 feet away.

If you’re a forgetful person, off body carry is not the correct option for you, and this is why. Also, your 15 year old son is old enough to be trained in responsible gun handling. If he had proper training, if he managed to find your Glock in your purse, it would be no danger to him. If you have small children, or unruly children, you quite simply need to learn to be more responsible, and perhaps consider a different carry option.

A gun in a home is 43 times more likely to be used to kill a family member than kill someone in self-defense.

No, it’s not. This is based on a study that has been long discredited as junk science.

I lie awake thinking: “Is someone breaking in? How fast can I get to the gun? Will they hear me? How much time do I have before they get to my bedroom? What if they go to my son’s room first? Will I shoot them in the face or heart or stomach?” And then I think: “How in the world would I live with myself knowing I took a life?”

I generally encourage anyone buying a firearm for self-defense to give serious thought as to whether they are capable of killing another in self-defense. Not everyone has the emotional makeup to do it. It is a serious question, and I don’t blame her for giving it thought. But nonetheless, she seems awfully fearful. As her article continues, I can’t help but come to the conclusion that her fearfulness rises to the point she ought to consider counseling.

For example, do I tell my 15-year old where the gun is so he can help if someone breaks into our house? My husband travels a lot, so often it’s just the teen and me.

That depends a lot on the teen, your relationship with him, and whether he’s been properly trained in safe and responsible gun handling, as is your moral duty as a gun owning parent to teach him.

A few years ago, a friend of mine’s 16-year-old son was given the combination to their gun safe so he could help protect his family. The very next day, after being cut from his basketball team, he opened the safe, went to the back yard, and killed himself with that gun.

Do you think your son is suicidal? If he is, why aren’t you getting him help? And yes, if he is suicidal, or your relationship with your son has issues, then no, he should not have access to the firearm.

Since having the gun I’ve had two repairmen, a carpet cleaner, and a salesmen in my home. If the gun’s for self-protection, it’s not going to do any good in the safe, but it’s not really practical to have the gun pointing at them as they work.

This would land you in jail, and rightfully so. The solution to this, if you’re concerned about a strange man in your house with you alone, is to use on-body carry with the firearm concealed and in a holster. Pointing a gun at someone not attacking you is morally wrong and illegal, but you know that, of course.

How else would I eliminate the element of surprise if I were attacked? Suspiciousness and fear of people is new to me, and I don’t like it. Living with a gun has not been easy.

If you were carrying concealed on-body, you’d have an element of surprise on your part as well. Learn how to draw and fire from concealment safely and properly. It’s not rocket science here. If you’re suspicious and fearful of people, this is something you really ought to seek help with, as it amounts to an unhealthy phobia.

The urine smell was particularly strong in the grimy, dimly lit downtown parking garage’s stairwell. I was late for a meeting and barely noticed the large man enter behind me. When I got to the second floor I became nervous, and the Oprah episode where a man attacks a woman alone in a situation just like this played in my head. I thought about the 9mm in my purse as I clumsily continued down the stairs in my skirt and heels. He followed me. I looked back at him so he knew I knew he was there (like Oprah’s expert suggested.) I thought: “Should I pull the gun out? Should I point it at him?” I realized the gun wouldn’t do me any good because he was behind me.

I would strongly advise you to not take self-defense advice from Oprah Winfrey. I’m pretty certain she is not a subject matter expert. Also, if anyone came to me an recounted this experience to me I would advise them to immediately stop carrying a firearm in public, and rethink whether they had the emotional and psychological makeup to continue the practice. This isn’t something training can fix. This is an emotional problem that you need psychological counseling to overcome. This is not an issue with carrying the gun.

Already, I’d been to the grocery store, church, the bank (yes, in a bank!), business meetings, restaurants, Starbucks, and even yoga.

Were you planning to rob the bank? If not, then what’s the problem? You’re not a bank robber, are you? Did you even think about robbing the bank?

I played two tennis matches with the gun in my backpack next to the court, and I went to three parties in homes where children played just feet from the pile of guests’ jackets and purses, including mine with the gun inside.

I can’t even begin to tell you how utterly irresponsible this is. You are not the kind of person who should be carrying a firearm in public. This is a situation where the gun is best left in a locked vehicle or at home. Though, I’ve managed to keep a firearm safely concealed while playing tennis, just wearing some shorts and an untucked t-shirt.

The worst part was running into friends as I ran errands. I’m a hugger, and I learned very quickly that hugging is not a good idea when wearing a weapon. I stuck my hip out awkwardly to avoid detection.

This part makes me skeptical she was actually carrying. How do people hug you? I’ve never had this problem, expect when children hug me who can only reach up to my waist (the only time I’ve ever been made is by children, actually). But then again, most new carriers are very awkward, and believe that other people can see or detect the gun when they really can’t.

I couldn’t go into Peet’s Coffee & Tea, and I had to leave the gun in the car when I spoke at a community college about gun violence, which was ironic, because 89 of the 90 crimes reported there last year were car break-ins. About half a million guns are stolen every year, putting them directly into the hands of criminals. I should have just left it at home.

And maybe the solution is not creating situations where people have to leave a gun in their car. In Pennsylvania, because we have so few restrictions on places you can carry, I very rarely find myself in a situation such as this.

I thought the gun would make me feel more powerful, more confident, and less fearful. I was wrong. All I felt was fear. Physically taking the gun out of the safe and putting it in a holster on my hip literally reminded me that I was going out into a big bad scary unsafe world. There were days when I put the gun back in the safe and stayed home because it simply took too much energy to be scared. It was easier to be at home without the worry and responsibility of being “the good guy with the gun.”

You feel frightened because you have emotional issues. It may be that the gun exaccerbates the issue, but you probably assume most of us who carry also feel this way. We do not. You would need professional counseling to get over your phobias if you were really interested in carrying a firearm for personal protection. I would advise counseling if you were actually serious, before continuing with carry for personal protection.

The man in the stairwell probably doesn’t remember walking down those stairs. I will never forget it. The surge of adrenaline and fear made an imprint on my psyche. If I’d confronted him with the gun, would he have fought or fled? Either way, one of us might be dead or seriously injured.

If he had drawn his own gun and shot you dead, he would have been justified in the eyes of the law. If you had shot him, you’d have been indicted for murder. Why? Because you would have been the attacker.

She later went and turned in the gun to an artist who will turn it into a sculpture. This was the smartest thing she did during the whole series, because she is psychologically unfit to carry a firearm. But that was her point, wasn’t it? Because she knows she’s unfit. Her implication, and fallacy, is that you and I are likewise unfit. This is a classic case of projecting your own inadequacies onto others.

One of the fundamental differences between us and the gun control advocates is that we generally trust that ordinary people will, much more often than not, do the right thing. Even Heidi Yewman, as someone who is not generally criminally irresponsible, knows what she’s doing is wrong and irresponsible. She committed those wrongs to make a point. She believes the government needs to step in and restrict everyone. She would put the decision in the hands of a bureaucrat, because she assumes you and I, and most everyone else, are unable to make that call.

It’s clear that concealed carry permit holders, even in states that require no training, are extremely law abiding compared to the general population. Most people do not possess her fear of others. Heidi Yewman is writing a prescription for a disease that doesn’t exist anywhere except her own mind. That’s something she has to personally wrestle with, but in doing so, it would be nice if she left the rest of us out of it.


*************************************************
10. Mayor Bloomberg blames VA for many of NY's gun crimes
*************************************************

Another Bloomberg whine-fest. The vast majority of guns used in crimes in New York City come from New York.

Bill Hine emailed me this:

--

From washingtontimes.com: https://tinyurl.com/po5huv4


Mayor Bloomberg blames Virginia for many of New York’s gun crimes
by Cheryl K. Chumley-The Washington Times
August 1, 2013

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg blames Virginia and several other southern state’s for the Big Apple’s gun crimes — so now he’s set his Mayors Against Illegal Guns’ sights on the Deep South for a Second Amendment crackdown.

“Despite all we do to keep our city safe, we’re increasingly at the mercy of weak national gun laws and weak gun laws in other states,” Mr. Bloomberg said, according to The New York Post. “We have been attacking this problem from every angle, but we cannot do it alone.”

He cited Virginia as about the worst, in terms of allowing guns to flow into New York.

In 2011, guns from Virginia were involved in 322 violent incidents, he said, The New York Post reported. He also said that guns from states other than New York were used to commit 90 percent of the city’s crimes in 2011 – and that’s up from 85 percent in 2009.

Mr. Bloomberg is using those statistics to push for national reform on right-to-carry laws. His chief of staff, John Feinblatt, said if states like Virginia only implemented common-sense provisions, then violent crime rates would fall.

“Take Virginia,” he said, at a press conference at City Hall. “That state requires no background checks for private sales and the legislature in that state even recently rolled back their state laws by stripping their one-gun-a-month purchase limit.”

Other states faulted by Mr. Feinblatt: South Carolina, for contributing 251 “crime guns” in 2011, he said. And Georgia, Alabama and Texas – all states that allow for online gun sales absent background checks.


*************************************************
11. [FL] Black homicides tripled since Stand Your Ground?
*************************************************

Jesse Jackson gets a "FALSE" on the truth-o-meter.

Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:

--

From cfnews13.com: https://tinyurl.com/myt3tqq


PolitiFact: Black homicides tripled since Stand Your Ground?
August 04, 2013

ST. PETERSBURG -- In the days and weeks following the "not guilty" verdict in the George Zimmerman trial, there has been more focus on Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law and what it has meant for African-Americans since the law was enacted. In a recent television interview, Jesse Jackson made the claim that the number of homicides against African-Americans have gone up since the 2005 law went into effect. Jackson said this:

"Homicides against blacks have tripled since this law has been in existence. Now more homicides and more guns make us less secure."

We turned to our partners at PolitiFact to check Jackson's claim about the number of homicides. Angie Holan, the editor of PolitiFact Florida, reports that Jackson's claim rates FALSE on the Truth-O-Meter. Holan says that the numbers from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement tell a different story. "FDLE emailed us the numbers regarding black homicide victims," Holan said, "The numbers have changed only minimally year to year."

PolitiFact looked at data between 2006 and 2012. "Stand Your Ground" went into effect during the middle of 2005, so that data was not included because the law was not in effect for the full year. According to FDLE, here are the number of homicides against blacks for each of those years:

2005: 428 ("Stand Your Ground" in effect for only part of the year)
2006: 524
2007: 573 (9.4% increase from 2006)
2008: 564 (7.6% increase from 2006, 1.5% decrease from 2007)
2009: 494 (6.1% decrease from 2006, 14.2% decrease from 2008)
2010: 452 (15.9% decrease from 2006, 8.8% decrease from 2009)
2011: 476 (10.1% decrease from 2006, 5.3% increase from 2010)
2012: 532 (1.5% increase from 2006, 11.8% increase from 2011)

Holan points out that a calculator is the tool that tears this claim apart. "Take any of those numbers and multiply by three to see what a tripled rate would be. For example, if you tripled the 2006 number, you would have a result of 1572. That's about 1000 more than the 2007 number. You would need a 300% increase to come into line with Jackson's claim."

So where did Jackson get his numbers? PolitiFact contacted Jackson's Rainbow PUSH Coalition for clarification, but did not get a response. PolitiFact's partner newspapers, the Tampa Bay Times and the Miami Herald, published a report back in 2010 that included FDLE data regarding "justifiable homicides." In that report, the number of justifiable homicides since the "Stand Your Ground" law went into effect did, in fact, triple. Holan theorizes that Jackson took justifiable homicides and replaced it with homicides against African-Americans when he made his claim, which rates FALSE on the Truth-O-Meter.


*************************************************
12. Trayvon Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton: Repeal stand-ground law [VIDEO]
*************************************************

She has no idea what she is talking about.

Bill Hine emailed me this:

--

From washingtontimes.com: https://tinyurl.com/lwxtbay


Trayvon Martin’s mother, Sybrina Fulton: Repeal stand-ground law
by Curt Anderson-Associated Press
July 30, 2013

MIAMI BEACH, Fla. (AP) — The mother of slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin joined a prominent African-American lawyers organization in vowing Monday to keep the pressure on legislators to repeal or overhaul “stand your ground” self-defense laws.

Sybrina Fulton repeated her assertion that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman “got away with murder” in the 2012 killing of her son largely because of Florida’s self-defense law, which generally removed a person’s duty to retreat if possible in the face of danger. It was the first of its kind in the nation when passed in 2005. Now, about two dozen states have similar laws, but the focus of repeal efforts is squarely on Florida.

“We have to change the law so that this doesn’t happen to someone else’s child,” Fulton told reporters at the National Bar Association’s annual meeting. “My son wasn’t doing anything wrong. He was simply walking home. He wasn’t a suspect.”

Florida Gov. Rick Scott, a Republican, has rejected calls for a special legislative session on “stand your ground” from protesters who have been occupying part of the Capitol in Tallahassee since Zimmerman was acquitted earlier this month by a jury in Sanford. Zimmerman claimed self-defense in shooting the 17-year-old Martin during a fight; Martin’s supporters say Zimmerman profiled and followed him because Martin was black.

Senate President Don Gaetz, also a Republican, said Monday he agrees with Scott that there is no need for a special session. Gaetz said there is little agreement on whether change is needed to the “stand your ground” law and that voters have a chance in the 2014 elections to make their views known.

“If people want to change the policymakers, if they want to change the policies, that’s why we have elections,” he said.

Part of the message of Monday’s event was just that: urging people to register to vote and contribute to sympathetic politicians if they want such laws repealed. The organization’s president, John Page, also said the legal system needs to do more to ensure that racially balanced juries are chosen.

“We need to raise our voices together and say, ‘Enough,’” Page said. “This should be the first state where ‘stand your ground’ falls. And it will fall.”

Although he was not part of the event, the Rev. Jesse Jackson appeared as a spectator and later told reporters that the “stand your ground” law reminded him of past laws that prevented blacks from sitting at the front of buses. Such an ordinance sparked the bus boycott in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955 that was key to the civil rights movement — which did not focus just on the bus drivers, but on ending the law itself, he said.

Because Zimmerman’s trial was not focused on race, Jackson added, it “did not have a foundation based on reality. We’re not looking for a fight. We’re looking for a solution.”

The Justice Department is investigating whether Zimmerman, who identifies as Hispanic, may have committed a hate crime in killing Martin. Legal experts say it would be a difficult charge to bring because no evidence has surfaced indicating Zimmerman singled out Martin because he was black or that he harbored racial bias.


*************************************************
13. [IL] Sheriff's team working to seize guns from thousands
*************************************************

Jonathan Reed emailed me this:

--

The Nazi’s did this in Germany in the late 1930’s …

“The system is broken,” the sheriff said. “The system revokes cards, but the guns are of no consequence. . . . Our strong hope is that we will eliminate tragedies.” Just like the Nazi’s eliminated tragedies?!


From foxnews.com: https://tinyurl.com/p5f94vf


Sheriff’s team working to seize guns from thousands in Illinois
July 28, 2013

An Illinois sheriff’s team is crisscrossing the Chicago suburbs in an effort to seize guns from thousands of people whose right to own a firearm has been revoked, the Chicago Sun-Times reports.

According to the paper, more than 3,000 people in Cook County have failed to surrender their revoked Firearm Owners Identification Card, or FOID, which is required to legally buy guns or ammunition.

Sheriff Tom Dart said he thinks many of the 3,000 continue to possess firearms.

The Chicago Police Department regularly conducts missions to recover revoked FOID cards and take guns from the owners, but there wasn’t a big push to do the same thing in the suburbs until now, Dart reportedly told the paper.

“The system is broken,” the sheriff said. “The system revokes cards, but the guns are of no consequence. . . . Our strong hope is that we will eliminate tragedies.”

FOID cards are meant to protect the public from gun owners who suffer from mental illness; felonies and protection orders also are grounds for the state to revoke the holders’ FOID cards. It’s illegal to buy guns or ammunition without one, the Sun-Times reports.

In one case, the team recovered more than 35 firearms, including four AR-15 assault rifles, from a suicidal man whose card was revoked. Many times, the team gets the FOID card, but not the gun.

The State Police alert the sheriff’s gun team every week to about 10 to 20 new FOID revocations in Cook County. The investigators then conduct a basic probe into the gun purchasing histories of the people they intend to contact. Then they knock on their doors.


*************************************************
14. [WI] Armed agents raid Wisconsin animal shelter
*************************************************

And the march towards a "police" army on U.S. soil continues. That or we have a bunch of kids wanting to play with their toys.

EM Pat Webb sent me this:

--

SWAT team raids animal shelter, kills fawn. They used aerial surveillance, nine Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) officers and four deputy sheriffs (all armed and dangerous). The fawn was scheduled to go to a wildlife reserve the next day.

Pat Webb


From alternet.org: https://tinyurl.com/lehq5h4


Overkill: Armed Agents Raid Wisconsin Animal Shelter; Kill Baby Deer Named Giggles
"It was like a SWAT team," shelter employee says.
August 1, 2013

When an Illinois family brought a baby fawn to a no-kill shelter at the Society of St. Francis on the Kenosha-Illinois border, they figured the fawn's mother had abandoned her, and hoped to save her life.

That hope turned into a nightmare two weeks ago when multiple squad cars and heavily armed police officers arrived at the shelter with a search warrant for the fawn that had been nicknamed Giggles for a noise she made that sounded like laughter. "It was like a SWAT team," shelter employee Ray Schulze told WISN 12 News.

Apparently, the Department of Natural Resources had received anonymous reports of a baby deer living at the shelter. Nine DNR agents and four deputy sheriffs, all armed to the teeth, was the proportionate response. The agents even had aerial photos of the fawn going in and out of the barn, because Wisconsin law forbids the posession of wildlife.

No problem, shelter employees said. Giggles was scheduled to go to the wildlife reserve the very next day.

Giggles never made it. According to WISN 12 News, the agents "corralled workers near the picnic area and then set out in search of the fawn." And that was more or less the end of Giggles.

"I was thinking in my mind they were going to take the deer and take it to a wildlife shelter, and here they come carrying the baby deer over their shoulder. She was in a body bag," Schulze said. "I said, 'Why did you do that?' He said, 'That's our policy,' and I said, 'That's one hell of a policy.'"

Later a spokeswoman for DNR made sympathetic noises about how the shelter tried to do the right thing, but policies are policies. She also denied agents killed Giggles at the shelter, saying she was tranquilized, then euthanized later.

It was not a response that satisfied shelter workers, who also wondered just how much the Operation Giggles cost the taxpayers.


*************************************************
15. [WI] S.W.A.T. team like raid takes deer from no-kill shelter [VIDEO]
*************************************************

EM Pat Webb emailed me this:

--

From beforeitsnews.com: https://tinyurl.com/mz3zrzu


S.W.A.T. Team Like Raid Takes Deer From No-kill Shelter, Kills Deer.
by Kristan T. Harris
August 1, 2013

In the video below Ray Schulze described a SWAT team like raid on a local Kenosha, Wisconsin animal shelter that held a faun. The faun was brought in by a family worried about her safety. The family believed the faun to be abandoned. The deer was slated to go to a wild life preserve in Illinois the next day that allows rehabilitation of deer. It is illegal to shelter wildlife animals in the State of Wisconsin.

9 DNR agents and 4 sheriff deputies raided the animal shelter and bagged the deer. Ray asked “why would you put the baby fawn in a body bag and carry her out over your shoulder like that”. The police responded it was policy. Ray replied “Thats one hell of a policy”.

The question asked is what did this operation cost tax payers? Why not make a phone call? This is police state style terror. This type of action is conditioning you for statism. To be afraid of the government. They are keeping you safe from getting killed by “possible” disease by killing. We need to come to our senses.

“It was like a SWAT team,” shelter employee Ray Schulze said.


*************************************************
16. Arkansas school district arming more than 20 teachers, staff
*************************************************

Member Stan Sobkowicz emailed me this:

--

FYI! Arkansas school district arms school employees.


From foxnews.com: https://tinyurl.com/k9o6zvs


Arkansas school district arming more than 20 teachers, staff

As Cheyne Dougan rounded the corner at Clarksville High School, he saw three students on the floor moaning and crying. In a split-second, two more ran out of a nearby classroom.

"He's got a gun," one of them shouted as Dougan approached with his pistol drawn. Inside, he found one student holding another at gunpoint. Dougan aimed and fired three rounds at the gunman.

Preparing for such scenarios has become common for police after a school shooting in Connecticut last December left 20 children and six teachers dead. But Dougan is no policeman. He's the assistant principal of this school in Arkansas, and when classes resume in August, he will walk the halls with a 9 mm handgun.

Dougan is among more than 20 teachers, administrators and other school employees in this town who will carry concealed weapons throughout the school day, making use of a little-known Arkansas law that allows licensed, armed security guards on campus. After undergoing 53 hours of training, Dougan and other teachers at the school will be considered guards.

"The plan we've been given in the past is `Well, lock your doors, turn off your lights and hope for the best,"' Superintendent David Hopkins said. But as deadly incidents continued to happen in schools, he explained, the district decided, "That's not a plan."

After the Connecticut attack, the idea of arming schoolhouses against gunmen was hotly debated across the country. The National Rifle Association declared it the best response to serious threats. But even in the most conservative states, most proposals faltered in the face of resistance from educators or warnings from insurance companies that schools would face higher premiums.

In strongly conservative Arkansas, where gun ownership is common and gun laws are permissive, no school district had ever used the law to arm teachers on the job, according to the state Department of Education. The closest was the Lake Hamilton School District in Garland County, which for years has kept several guns locked up in case of emergency. Only a handful of trained administrators -- not teachers -- have access to the weapons.

Clarksville, a community of 9,200 people about 100 miles northwest of Little Rock, is going further.

Home to an annual peach festival, the town isn't known for having dangerous schools. But Hopkins said he faced a flood of calls from parents worried about safety after the attack last year at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn.

Hopkins said he and other school leaders didn't see why the district couldn't rely on its own staff and teachers to protect students rather than hire someone.

"We're not tying our money up in a guard 24/7 that we won't have to have unless something happens. We've got these people who are already hired and using them in other areas," Hopkins said. "Hopefully we'll never have to use them as a security guard."

State officials are not blocking Clarksville's plan, but Arkansas Education Commissioner Tom Kimbrell is opposed to the idea of arming teachers and staff. He prefers to hire law enforcement officers as school resource officers.

There are other dissenters, too. Donna Morey, former president of the Arkansas Education Association, called the idea of arming teachers "awful." The risk of a student accidentally getting shot or obtaining a gun outweighs any benefits, she said.

"We just think educators should be in the business of educating students, not carrying a weapon," Morey said.

Participants in the program are given a one-time $1,100 stipend to purchase a handgun and holster. Hopkins said the district is paying about $50,000 for ammunition and for training by Nighthawk Custom Training Academy, a private training facility in northwest Arkansas.

The Nighthawk training includes drills like the one Dougan participated in, with various role-playing scenarios involving shooters on campus. Dougan and other teachers in the program practiced using "airsoft" pellet guns, with students wearing protective facemasks and jackets.

"There's pressure on you, because you're shooting real bullets if this actually happened," said Dougan, who has three children attending Clarksville schools. "I was nervous to start, but once it started and I was going through what they had taught us, it just took over."

The training is narrowly tailored for teachers to respond to shooters on campus.

"That teacher is going to respond to one thing and one thing alone, and that's someone is in the building either actively or attempting to kill people," Jon Hodoway, director of training for Nighthawk. "That's it. They're not going to enforce the law. They're not going to make traffic stops. If somebody is outside acting the fool, they're going to call the police."

Using students as actors helps trainers re-create the environment that teachers and staff would face in a typical school shooting, Hodoway explained. The students who participated in the exercise were children of the teachers and staff who were being trained.

Sydney Whitkanack, who will enter seventh grade this fall, said she's grown up around firearms and doesn't mind if teachers or staff are armed at school.

"If they're concealed, then it's no big deal," said Whitkanack, who was an actor in the training scenario. "It's not like someone's going to know `Oh, they have a firearm."'

The district will post signs at each school about the armed guards, but the identities of faculty and staff carrying weapons will be kept secret, Hopkins said.

Those who participate in the program will continue to receive regular training, he said.

Sherry Wommack said the program is one reason she's taking her son, an incoming eighth-grader, out of Clarksville's schools before the school year begins. Wommack said she doesn't believe teachers should make life-or-death choices involving students.

"I think police officers are trained to make those decisions, not teachers," Wommack said.


*************************************************
17. CA Attorney General to Fed Agents: No dangerous handguns for you
*************************************************

EM Greg Trojan emailed me this:

--

I love that California is telling the Feds they have to use the same stupid, idiotic, safe-gun list that the "subjects" in California have to follow! Cry me a river.


From ammoland.com: https://tinyurl.com/kqncnze


California Attorney General to Fed Agents: No Dangerous Handguns For You
July 30, 2013

Sacramento, CA --(Ammoland.com)- Apparently, Attorney General (AG) Kamala Harris has changed California State Department of Justice policy and is now limiting federal law enforcement agents’ ability to acquire handguns.

The AG says the feds can only buy firearms listed on the Roster of Handguns Certified for Sale (like the rest of us).

Understandably, federal law enforcement officers aren’t happy about it. Welcome feds, to the California disarmament festival.

California law restricts the types of handguns people can acquire through licensed firearm dealers (PC 32000). As backwards as it sounds, before most Californians can acquire a handgun, that firearm must not be considered “unsafe.” To not be considered ”unsafe,” handguns must pass performance tests and have certain features that (in theory only) make the firearms allegedly safer (PC 31910). Most problematic for the California public is the recent development that before any semiautomatic pistol can be added to the Roster of guns approved for sale they must be equipped with “microstamping” technology (PC 31910(b)(7)). Starting a couple months ago, this easily circumvented engraving technology is now required on new semiautomatic pistols before they can be added to the approved roster (pistols submitted for safety testing when “microstamping” was certified, on May 17, 2013, can still be added to the Roster).

California citizens are just as frustrated as federal law enforcement officers with the situation. When the roster of available pistols they can purchase dwindles down to a limited few – because manufacturers are refusing to implement “microstamping” – federal law enforcement’s objections will grow louder. And if pending legislation (SB 293) concerning “smart guns” passes and is signed by the Governor, federal law enforcement will also be forced to choose from an even more limited number of models … just like civilians.

Forgive us mere civilians if we aren’t completely sympathetic to the plight of the feds.

The Feds predicament stems from a recent (and correct) change in the Attorney General’s interpretation of existing California law. While California law restricts the sale of “unsafe handguns” by dealers, there are some exceptions to the restriction. The exception used by most law enforcement agencies and officers, and the one used until recently by federal law enforcement officers, was the following:

The sale or purchase of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person, if the pistol, revolver, or other firearm is sold to, or purchased by, the Department of Justice, any police department, any sheriff’s official, any marshal’s office, the Youth and Adult Correctional Agency, the California Highway Patrol, any district attorney’s office, or the military or naval forces of this state or of the United States for use in the discharge of their official duties. Nor shall anything in this section prohibit the sale to, or purchase by, sworn members of these agencies of any pistol, revolver, or other firearm capable of being concealed upon the person.
Pen. Code, § 32000(b)(4)

You might notice, as did the California’s Attorney General, that federal law enforcement officers are not mentioned in this exception! The “Department of Justice” referred to in this section is the California Department of Justice, not a federal agency. So the AG’s analysis is correct: federal law enforcement is not exempt from the “unsafe handgun” restriction.

Welcome to the party guys!

Hey, maybe the feds can try to take advantage of a number of other exceptions to “unsafe handgun” sales restriction.The private party exception (PC 32110(a)) allows “unsafe handguns” to be transferred between two individuals who reside in California. That works sometimes. In fact, maybe federal law enforcement officers can convince their friends in the Sacramento Sheriff’s Office or Los Angeles Police Department to purchase firearms on their behalf, as a few officers from those agencies have been doing. But oops, turns out that’s illegal.

Okay, if that won’t work maybe the federal officers can take advantage of the “single shot pistol” exception (PC 32100). Some civilians have tried this, by finding a single shot version of “unsafe handguns” they want to acquire, then modifying it after purchase. This voids the warranty, but we do suggest that feds buy these before the legislature closes this exception as well (AB 169 is currently in the appropriations “suspense file” but may be brought back at any time).

No doubt this screwing of federal agents will be “fixed” by the legislature when and if federal law enforcement agencies find a state politician with a compassionate ear.

Despite the law’s potential change, the question remains: why is law enforcement allowed special privileges to acquire firearms to defend themselves and their families when the general public can’t acquire the same firearms? We are all at risk. So why limit anyone’s right to access the best tools to defend themselves and their families? Why the double-standard?

Barring those few exceptions we, the self-defense civil rights activists of California, welcome federal law enforcement officers to the State of California disarmament festival. We thank them for their service. We look forward to them joining us in the limited exercise of our Second Amendment rights, or fighting for its expansion … for all of us!


*************************************************
18. California's universal registration scheme [VIDEO]
*************************************************

From nranews.com: https://tinyurl.com/kub2dry


APPS: California's Universal Registration Scheme
Special Report From Ginny Simone

APPS stands for Armed & Prohibited Persons System. The premise is confiscation of legal firearms from "prohibited" individuals. The reality is an excuse for universal registration.


*************************************************
19. Starbucks, loaded guns and lattes
*************************************************

Craig Faunce emailed me this:

--

For crying out loud! It’s like déjà vu all over again.

Perhaps whiny little people should just stay out of Starbucks and make their own coffee in the confines of their own homes. Where it’s “safe”. Or something.


From cnn.com: https://tinyurl.com/la3sefd


Starbucks, loaded guns and lattes
By Shannon Watts and Kate Beck, Special to CNN
July 30, 2013

(CNN) -- Starbucks lauds itself as a company committed to operating responsibly and ethically, and many of its policies reflect a strong corporate conscience. But when it comes to responsible gun policy, Starbucks has lost its moral compass.

Starbucks refuses to ban loaded guns from its coffee shops in the 43 states that allow people to openly carry loaded weapons.

As mothers, we wonder why the company is willing to put children and families in so much danger. Nobody needs to be armed to get a cup of coffee. And that's why thousands of moms across the nation are asking Starbucks to put the safety of its customers first.

We've started a petition asking Starbucks to ban guns from its stores. In response, Starbucks has referred concerned moms to a statement on its website, a statement last updated in March 2010, about 90,000 American gun deaths ago. The statement reads, "The political, policy and legal debates around these issues belong in the legislatures and courts, not in our stores."

Starbucks spokesman Zack Hutson recently told Seattle Weekly that it is a legal strategy. "In communities that permit open carry, we abide by local laws. Where these laws don't exist, openly carrying weapons in our stores is prohibited."

Moms don't want a gun debate with our coffee either. But when children are shot in schools, in movie theaters and even at Fourth of July parades, we can no longer keep the debate in the places where they "belong." As the debate on guns spreads to town hall meetings nationwide in August, do we really have to have one in Starbucks too?

Starbucks' refusal to ban guns from its stores has made it a nationwide venue for pro-gun rallies, where customers toting loaded weapons gather over coffee. There have even been accidental shootings: earlier this year a woman shot another customer when she dropped her purse and a loaded weapon inside discharged. A pro-gun site called I Love Guns and Coffee sells a coin that looks like the Starbucks logo, except the mermaid is wielding handguns. On Sunday, for example, 60 pro-gun activists carried handguns, semi-automatic rifles and shotguns into a Starbucks in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

Starbucks claims its open carry policy simply follows state laws and local ordinances. However, the company is willing to overlook those in other instances; it recently announced a smoking ban within 25 feet of any store. [PVC: Starbucks hasn't banned the possession of cigarettes, just the smoking of them. Most states or localities have restrictions on the discharge of a firearm, and those restrictions would apply. It would be redundant for Starbucks to post "No Shooting" signs on their stores.]

Why is Starbucks willing take a public health stand on smoking, but not gun violence, which kills more than 55 children and teens a week in America? Since when is second-hand smoke more dangerous than second-hand bullets?

Starbucks also claims that banning guns from its stores would put its employees in a "potentially unsafe position" if they had to ask a gun-wielding customer to leave. This alleged concern has not stopped other companies -- including Disney, California Pizza Kitchen, AMC Theaters, Toys R Us, and even Starbucks competitor Peet's Coffee & Tea -- from prohibiting guns in their stores in states where open carry is legal. In fact, these companies have banned guns in order to keep employees and customers safe.

Starbucks bans guns from its corporate headquarters in Seattle, where open carry is perfectly legal. This same protection should be afforded to the millions of unarmed customers Starbucks serves each week.

An overwhelming majority of Americans want common-sense gun reforms. [PVC: And we want that too. Abolish all Gun Free Zones. They just enable atrocities by criminals, terrorists, and the criminally insane.] But it's not just Congress and state legislatures that impact society; business policies also affect our safety. Shame on Congress for failing to act, but that's no excuse for companies like Starbucks to fail to lead.

We never saw ourselves becoming activists. But like so many mothers on December 14th, we were horrified by the Sandy Hook shootings. The realization that our country's lax gun laws led to the massacre of 20 innocent children shook both of us to the core. As mothers, we cannot and will not abide politics and policies that needlessly put our children and other children in danger.

Moms Demand Action has become a rallying point for mothers across the nation who refuse to tolerate the inaction over the epidemic of gun violence. We will not stop until gun reforms and responsible policies are in place at the federal level, in our states and at American businesses.

We have the most important reason of all for never backing down -- our kids. Risking their safety isn't worth a nonfat misto at Starbucks. Women make the vast majority of spending decisions in America; you can be sure we'll spend those dollars with companies that value the safety of our families.


*************************************************
20. There is a 'gun control playbook' vs. WA gun owners
*************************************************

Here's a chance to peek at the anti's playbook for gun control. The words and phrases they will use to twist the argument their way. Fortunately for us, forewarned is forearmed!

Marc Signorino emailed me this:

--

From examiner.com: https://tinyurl.com/k7kt7ba


There is a 'gun control playbook' versus Washington gun owners
by Dave Workman
August 1, 2013

The firearms community has long quipped about gun control strategies from a “playbook,” but yesterday a major gun rights group discovered that advice from a genuine guide to waging a politically-savvy gun control campaign – produced in part by Washington, D.C. consultants who did research for a Washington State gun control group – is part of that group’s political effort.

The 70-plus page guide, produced last year and posted on-line as a pdf by Temple Beth El though a link no longer appears on the TBE website, is titled “Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging.” It offers tips on everything from using effective rhetoric to dividing National Rifle Association members from NRA leadership. One of the people who prepared the guide was Al Quinlan, a principle of the Washington, D.C.-based firm of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (GQR), which also has offices in London and Buenos Aires.

A PDC report filed by the Seattle-based Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility (WAGR) shows a May expense of $43,700 paid to GQR for opinion research.

According to the guide, Quinlan was part of “a team of communicators” with “decades of experience advising organizations on message development and strategic communications.” Other members of this team were Frank O’Brien, creative director and founder of OMP, another Washington, D.C.-based firm, and Jeff Neffinger and Matthew Kohut at KNP Communications, also headquartered in Washington, D.C.

Examiner reached out to them for comment. Quinlan was traveling and leaving on vacation with his family, according to an aide. The others did not immediately respond.

Among GQR’s clients are the Mayors Against Illegal Guns, the Joyce Foundation, several state education associations, Defenders of Wildlife, National Public Radio and the Sierra Club. Among OMP’s clients are Planned Parenthood of America and the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Discovery of the links between GQR and the Initiative 594 campaign – and ostensibly the guide, itself – came somewhat by accident in an ongoing inquiry by the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation into the City of Seattle’s controversial gun buyback program in January. SAF was seeking all documents relating to the program from the office of Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn and also from King County, since Executive Dow Constantine was also involved.

According to e-mails obtained from King County by SAF under a public documents law request, WAGR’s Zach Silk sent a Feb. 20 message about progress on gun control measures during this year’s legislative session that was copied to Sung Yang, chief of staff for King County Executive Dow Constantine. That e-mail had an attachment headlined “Framing, Message, and Language for Gun Violence Prevention” from GQR. It was a three-page memo to the “Gun Violence Prevention Communications Taskforce” and was essentially a summary of key points in the larger 2012 guide.

WAGR is pushing I-594, a 15-page gun control measure to be presented to the State Legislature in January that is currently gathering signatures. It is up against I-591, filed in mid-May by Protect Our Gun Rights, a statewide grassroots coalition that includes gun rights and gun collectors groups, a major state hunting umbrella organization and the state’s law enforcement firearms trainers.

SAF is not involved in the initiative campaign, but its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, is. Local gun rights champion Alan Gottlieb founded SAF and chairs CCRKBA, and the guide raised his eyebrows.

The “Preventing Gun Violence” report reminds readers that “most Americans consider the NRA to be a mainstream organization.” During its research, GQR asked people which of the following statements came closest to their personal opinion:

“The NRA is an extreme organization with too much power in Washington that blocks any attempts to reduce gun violence in America.”
“The NRA is a mainstream organization that protects our Second Amendment rights and provides information about gun safety.”

As revealed on Page 23 of the guide, they found a “sharp ideological divide,” with self-described liberals concurring with the “extreme” statement by a two-to-one margin, while conservatives by a whopping 81 percent margin agreed with the “mainstream” description. The report acknowledges, “outside of our base, an easy assumption that people think of the NRA as an out-of-control, extreme organization would be misplaced.”

So far, the NRA has not taken a position on either Washington initiative, but the guide appears aimed, at least in part, at demonizing the five-million-member association as something of a national bogeyman.

The GQR document also advises that “An emotionally-driven conversation about what can be done to prevent incidents…is engaging.”

On Page 45, the guide addresses Stand Your Ground laws and counsels the use of provocative substitute phrases including “Shoot First” and “Kill at Will,” asserting that these terms are “more accurate and persuasive.” In the process, it also identifies terms that should be avoided in public debate, among them the term “duty to retreat,” noting that the term may be an established legal principle, but it coveys weakness to the public and is “hard to defend.” In Washington State, court rulings dating back almost a century have enshrined the principle that there is “no duty to retreat” from an attack that occurs in a place where the victim has a right to be.

The GQR attachment circulated with the Feb. 20 e-mail offers “key points” on how to frame an effective message pushing the gun control agenda. Its first point: “The core frame should be personal and emotional—centered on ‘people’ and not on facts, laws, or legislation.”

It suggests demonizing semiautomatic rifles by stressing that “These weapons are not your grandfather’s rifle.” However, gun rights advocates would counter, “They are your son’s rifle.”

The memo also suggests, “Use a few facts—but only in a way that reinforces the personal frame—not as a recitation of a list of facts without the connection to the personal anguish and loss.”

It also advises to “cite law enforcement’s support at every opportunity,” which may be a problem in this case because a major law enforcement group has already come out in opposition to I-594. The document also offers points on semantics by recommending the use of the phrase “stronger laws” rather than “stricter laws,” and “preventing gun violence” rather than “gun control.”

Indeed, since the title of the strategy guide actually is Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging, it might be fair to suggest that the title ought to be “Gun Control Through Effective Messaging.”


*************************************************
21. Warning to American gun owners from Canadian news anchor [VIDEO]
*************************************************

EM Ed Levine emailed me this:

--

This is why we don't want mandatory background checks (gun registration) on private firearms sales - This is your WARNING gun owners.


From youtube.com: https://tinyurl.com/kgpb54n


*************************************************
22. [DC] The gray beyond: A family copes after tragedy
*************************************************

Member Terrell Prude emailed me this:

--

This happened to a couple from Canada visiting Capitol Hill. Once again, Washington DC's anti-freedom laws strike again. Even on Capitol Hill, policed by at least two, maybe three, police departments, this could happen.

It's been a year, and while he's alive, he'll never be the same again.

Now, I wonder if these thugs would've tried that on a Representative or Senator, with all their armed bodyguards....


From washingtonpost.com: https://tinyurl.com/mbhvso3


The gray beyond: A family copes after tragedy
by Keith L. Alexander
July 27, 2013

HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA — Thomas “TC” Maslin easily reads to himself the local newspaper or latest issue of the Economist.

Reading aloud a simple children’s book is another story.

“Five little ducks went out one day. Over the hills and far away. The woman duck said quack, quack, quack,” he says.

Read it again, his instructor prompts. “The mother duck said quack, quack, quack,” he reads this time.

TC’s wife, Abby, beams. “Your quacking sound is awesome!”

He reads another sentence with no mistakes. “Oh my goodness,” he exclaims, laughing.

TC’s aphasia — his struggle to speak — resulted from a brutal assault on Capitol Hill last August. His intellect is largely intact. But his brain labors to command his mouth to say what he wants to say.

As the first anniversary of the attack approaches, TC, now 30, and his family are still putting their lives back together. Intensive speech therapy through a program in Canada is one way; he wants to read again to his 2-year-old son, Jack. He also wants to teach him soccer someday. He wants to return to work and provide for Jack and Abby.

TC and his family are also still absorbing how their lives will never be the same. He is no longer the man Abby married four years ago — the handsome husband, the energetic runner and soccer player, the brilliant young policy analyst specializing in energy resources.

Eighty-eight people died of homicide in Washington last year, and TC Maslin was not one of them. But there is cruelty in survival, too. That is one brutal consequence of a random act of violence on Aug. 12, 2012.

It was three days after their third wedding anniversary, and TC was walking home alone from an evening with friends. They had attended a Nationals game and gathered afterward for drinks at Tune Inn, a Capitol Hill bar.

As he crossed a park near Eastern Market just after midnight, three men approached him and demanded money. He handed over his iPhone and bank card, but as he did so, one of the men came up from behind with an aluminum bat.

Tommy Branch, 23, of Fort Washington called the bat his “Barry Bonds,” according to detectives. With a two-fisted grip, Branch wound up and swung so hard that TC’s skull shattered, an optic nerve was severed and he was left with a dent across the left side of his head.

He was found eight hours later on a front porch a few blocks from home, unconscious and bleeding internally where pieces of his skull had sliced into his brain.

TC remained in a coma for several days. He underwent six surgeries. He was left blind in his left eye and lost some use of his right arm and leg; both are noticeably thinner than the left. He faces at least two more surgeries, including one to rebuild part of his collapsed skull.

Branch was found guilty of aggravated assault and robbery, and earlier this month, he was sentenced to more than 24 years in prison. Michael Moore, 19, of Landover pleaded guilty earlier this year. Sunny Kuti, 18, of Southeast Washington was acquitted of the assault but still faces a conspiracy charge.

TC doesn’t talk about the attack. He hasn’t attended any of the court proceedings. He spends most of his time trying to recover.

“Red Sox,” the instructor in the Canadian clinic says.

“Boston,” TC replies.

“Yankees.”

“New York.”

“Dodgers.”

“Los Angeles.”

The exercise is the same each day, meant to work on both speech and memory. In this session, TC gets 10 cities right, up from five the week before. Abby Maslin is sitting at a desk in an adjacent room, watching through a mirrored window.

Abby is living through an entirely different recovery, a redefining of her identity. She is at turns nurse, cheerleader, driver, breadwinner, single parent — all new roles for her. She is no longer a fourth-grade teacher in the D.C. public schools. Some days, she mourns like a widow. Then there is the uncertainty of whether her life would have been harder — financially, physically, emotionally — had her husband died. She calls it her ambiguous grief.

“I can’t truly grieve my husband because he is still alive,” she wrote in an online essay. “But I’ll never stop missing the man I married, the one who isn’t coming back. It is an ambiguous, torturous grief that I struggle to articulate. How can I reconcile my mixed feelings of gratitude and grief as I rebuild my life in the presence of a living ghost?”

Abby launched a blog after the attack to keep friends and family informed about TC’s progress, and as an outlet for the frustrations of her new life. She is also writing a book, “Love You Hard.” The title comes from something TC said to her in his hospital bed, a poignant sample of his search for words that she found beautiful anyway.

Abby’s writings are fierce, at turns protective and despairing — a wide-open window into her mental state. The attack, she wrote on July 2, “catapulted us to the grayest of places: that space between life and death. If life is freedom and death is finality, we find ourselves stuck in that torturous place somewhere in the middle.”

Adjustment to her new life is thwarted by vivid memories of the old one. They met in 2005 at a bar in St. Mary’s County, after which Abby told her parents, “I found the man I’m going to marry.” She wanted a husband like her father — charismatic, well-read and intelligent. She wanted someone who could “hold his own” in conversations with “important” people.

TC, Abby says, was all those things. He got his undergraduate degree in economics and earned his master’s degree from Duke University in environmental management. TC was an associate director for IHS, a global consulting firm. He was an avid reader and runner, a soccer player, a guitarist with a hip-hop band.

And he took care of her. Hours before the attack, he was helping decorate her classroom for the first day of school.

“Life was perfect,” she says — and then, no more. “It was like we were running a race and halfway through the race, we were told to go back to the starting line.”

Every day, every moment, Abby must ride the waves of her new life — and fight the grief, the anger, the hopelessness that wash over her. TC sometimes calls her his sister or aunt. Recently during a dinner conversation, he bragged about making homemade bread “from trash.” He meant “from scratch.” During their road trip to Halifax, as they listened to “The Great Gatsby,” Abby had to field TC’s elementary questions about the plot.

“And I lost it. I mean, I really lost it,” Abby wrote on her blog. “This man, my husband, he’s literally the smartest man I’ve ever met. He learns things quicker than anyone could hope to. I married him, in part, because I wanted to be with someone quicker, sharper, and more worldly than myself. I never, in a hundred million years, imagined myself explaining to him the plot of a book I know he’s read before. It is the cruelest of mean jokes. It is a knife in the heart that keeps cutting at us both.”

Altogether, they have amassed more than $1 million in medical bills. Plans are on hold to have a second child after Jack turned 2.

Abby started smoking after the attack, and she dropped 10 pounds from her 5-foot-3-inch frame. She has constant neck, back and shoulder pain. Long hours sitting in hospital rooms transformed her into a ferocious coffee drinker. Just 30 herself, Abby feels twice her age.

TC grows frustrated sometimes, too. “You, you always seem mad,” he once said to Abby, according to her blog. Another time, he observed: “It’s so har-hard to know that I’ll never be exactly the same. Even if I work as hard as I can for 30 years, I will never be like I was before. But I’m hoping I can go back to work and take care of my son. Even if it’s only 80 percent. That’s enough.”

At a recent dinner, Abby talked about how she often observes waiters or grocery store clerks and ponders whether TC might take a job like that someday.

The revelation made TC angry. “Don, don’t do that. Don’t do that,” he said. “What they do is fine for them, but if it takes me 20 to 30 years, I will return to what I do.”

Abby shrinks slightly. “I’m sorry, babe,” she says.

Mostly, though, TC is upbeat — and driven to improve.

TC’s instructors in Canada attributed much of his success there to that attitude. Abby found the $18,000 program after scouring the Internet for services that could help him and deciding this one was the best. Together, they spent five weeks there this spring, leaving Jack with TC’s mom and stepfather. TC is finishing up another five-week session now.

For six hours a day, five days a week, he endures intense speech classes. When he wants to say a word, he stops, writes it down and reads it out loud. Or he recites the alphabet to find the first letter of the word he is searching for.

He is more jovial and playful than he used to be. At first, Abby worried that it would make it hard for him to reenter the workforce. Now, she loves his new playfulness. She’s also not so focused on whether he will work; in the fall, after a year taking care of TC, she will return to teaching. TC, still on medical disability from his job, will stay home and take care of Jack and their spaniel, Spencer.

TC was Jack’s primary caregiver while Abby was in graduate school, but through all the months in the hospital, Jack became more attached to his mom. Both parents expect TC’s bond with his son to strengthen again now that he’ll be home all the time.

Jack is a driving part of TC’s motivation. “My parents got, what’s the word, di-di-divorced, when I was 10,” he said. “For me, it’s about being there for Jack. I want to be the father to Jack that my father wasn’t, or couldn’t be.”

For Abby, acceptance is the goal.

“At the end of the day, don’t you just want somebody who can come home and be the best dad ever?” she says, her eyes filling with tears. “It’s that internal drive. Which I’ve always been attracted to and which I always trusted in. I’m realizing some of the other things were very superficial.”

Or, as TC says: “I’m alive. For God’s sake. That’s good.”


*************************************************
23. Siege warfare in Mexican town plagued by cartel [VIDEO]
*************************************************

Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:

--

From breitbart.com: https://tinyurl.com/kf8qtfn


SIEGE WARFARE IN MEXICAN TOWN PLAGUED BY CARTEL
July 27, 2013

(AFP) - Following deadly attacks by armed men on security forces, the Mexican police and army have gone to war against the Knights Templar, a powerful drug cartel, in Mexico's western state of Michoacan.


*************************************************
24. LTE: Ban all assault vans, now!
*************************************************

Member Leyla Myers emailed me this:

--

From villagenewsonline.com: https://tinyurl.com/mnfwbhg


Ban all assualt vans, now!

To the Editor:
I was saddened to read of the death of two motorcyclists in rural Louisa County caused when they were hit and killed by a van. The suspect driver, now in custody, has a long documented history of driving offenses. The vehicle was properly registered and licensed. And the driver, as his history shows was subject to a rigorous system of administrative checks. When are we going to do something to stop this kind of madness?

The system of registration and licensing and drivers history checks were all in place, so that cannot be the problem. So what could be the problem? The VAN! It has to be the van. There is nothing left. It was probably an assault van, although the police provide no details. It was probably white. Most assault vans are. So what we must do is BAN all assault (white) vans totally and completely in order to get a firm grip on this problem and keep it from happening again to defenseless motorcyclists, or for that matter to any of the rest of us motorists. And to prevent non-assault (non-white) vans from being converted to assault van use, we should limit the size of their gas tanks to ten gallons. Five would be better.

These actions would certainly prevent the problem experienced by the two motorcyclists in rural Louisa County from happening to someone else.

Stephen M. Anderson


*************************************************
25. Government liquidation sale of ammunition brass
*************************************************

Member John Higi sent me this:

-

I saw this site mentioned in the paper today and went to check it out.

Found literally tons of brass for sale.

http://tinyurl.com/lhlapqg

or

http://www.govliquidation.com/auction/s ... =relevance

They also have ammo cans, and a lot of other stuff.



-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
VA-ALERT is a project of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc.
(VCDL). VCDL is an all-volunteer, non-partisan grassroots organization
dedicated to defending the human rights of all Virginians. The Right to
Keep and Bear Arms is a fundamental human right.

VCDL web page: http://www.vcdl.org [http://www.vcdl.org/]
***************************************************************************