02/15/11 - VCDL Update 2/15/11

[allingeneral]

VCDL Update 2/15/11

1. Reminder: VCDL meeting Thursday in Annandale to have guest speakers, press
2. Senate bill targets guns and drugs
3. Affluent DC neighborhoods with less crime have more legally owned guns
4. Man killed, 1 wounded in Sterling home invasion, Loudoun County sheriff says
5. In Va., charges rare for those who shoot intruders
6. Another post-tragedy shot from the hip
7. Concealed Carry WORKS!
8. A gun in a bank?
9. Who needs a gun at a remote, hidden, primitive camping site?
10. Gun control: Conservatives don't know what winning looks like
11. Renewing CHP in Stafford County
12. Ammunition and ballistics web sites
13. Officials stress need for civility, respect during public discourse
14. Vickie Graves says she tried to shoot intruder, gun wouldn't go off
15. 'Project Gunwalker' protest can help kill ATF's long gun reporting proposal
16. Gunmen kill 8 in violent north Mexico border city
17. Mexico's gun supply and the 90 percent myth
18. A little fun: 19 epic LEGO guns that actually work


**************************************************
1. Reminder: VCDL meeting Thursday in Annandale to have guest speakers, press
**************************************************

VCDL will have a membership meeting at the Mason Government Center on Thursday, February 17th, from 8 PM to 9:30 PM. Fellowship begins at 7:30 PM.

We will have at least 4 guest speakers:

Captain Arnn, Lt. Lee and Officer Kieffer from the Fairfax County PD will discuss how Fairfax County Officers are trained to respond to "man with a gun" calls and they will also field some questions from the meeting attendees.

Some candidates for the state legislature will also address the group about the upcoming primaries and elections this year.

I also expect there to be some members of the foreign press in attendance.

The status of legislation in the General Assembly will be covered during the meeting.

As with all VCDL membership meetings, it is open to the public, so bring a friend, family member, or coworker!

Directions can be found here:

http://www.vcdl.org/static/meetings.html

After the meeting, we will adjourn to a local restaurant for continued fellowship.


**************************************************
2. Senate bill targets guns and drugs
**************************************************

From the Altavista Journal: http://tinyurl.com/46bt49p

By Alexander Chang / Capital News Service
February 7, 2011

RICHMOND - A Senate committee this week approved a bill making it a Class 1 misdemeanor for someone who is drunk or on illegal drugs to carry a loaded gun in a public place.

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee unanimously endorsed Senate Bill 1395, introduced by Sen. A. Donald McEachin, D-Richmond. The measure is now being considered by the full Senate.

The legislation "provides that it is a Class 1 misdemeanor for a person who is under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs to carry a loaded firearm in a public place." A Class 1 misdemeanor is punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,500 fine.

In addition, under SB 1395, violators would be ineligible for a concealed handgun permit for five years.

The bill also makes it a Class 2 misdemeanor for someone to carry a loaded weapon into a bar or restaurant and drink an alcoholic beverage. A Class 2 misdemeanor can draw up to six months in jail and a $1,000 fine.

The committee voted 14-0 on Wednesday in favor of the bill, with Sen. Thomas Norment, R-Williamsburg, abstaining.

Although Sen. Richard Stuart, R-Montross, voted for SB 1395, he raised questions about the measure at a subcommittee meeting earlier in the week.

Stuart described a situation like this: Suppose somebody goes hunting for the day, locks a loaded weapon in the trunk of his car, and then decides to drink alcohol and have dinner at a lodge. Under SB 1395, Stuart feared, the individual might face criminal charges if authorities assert that the gun was in his custody.

"If you lock the gun away but did not unload it, under this bill, you're still carrying it," Stuart said.

"You don't want someone carrying a loaded firearm drunk, and I agree. And I'm the biggest gun nut at this table, I assure you. But do you really want to catch somebody in an unsuspected trap?"

Phillip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, raised another concern during the subcommittee meeting.

He noted that SB 1395 would exempt law enforcement officers, licensed security guards and military personnel. Van Cleave said that's not fair.

People exempt from the law "can all get plastered or high on illegal drugs and that's OK," Van Cleave said. "But if somebody like me is carrying a gun and has even sips of alcohol, then that's a Class 1 misdemeanor. It's like perks for government."

McEachin said his legislation seeks to enhance public safety. Somebody who has been drinking or using drugs should not have a gun, he said.

"It does not matter to me whether it's in your vehicle or on [your] person or anywhere under your control," McEachin said.


**************************************************
3. Affluent DC neighborhoods with less crime have more legally owned guns
**************************************************

DC has made it expensive and painful to get a handgun permit, which is needed for a person to have a handgun in their home. Sooo, guess which DC residents are buying handguns legally for self defense? The more wealthy residents, of course. Those who really need a gun because they are poor and can't afford all the fees and don't know how to fight their way through all the red tape are left defenseless.

To the DC City Council: Why do you wish to bath yourselves in the blood of innocents this way? Is the feeling of POWER so intense for you that you are willing to recklessly endanger lives?

EM Hal Macklin emailed me this:

--

Since D.C.'s handgun ban ended, well-heeled residents have become well armed

From The Wahington Post: http://tinyurl.com/47wgu96

[SNIP]

In 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals to own firearms for self-defense in their homes. An analysis of gun license and crime data for the District shows that the registered locations of guns do not necessarily match the pattern of gun crimes...

--

Keeping track of gun ownership and crime

From The Wahington Post: http://tinyurl.com/6bqwf8m

[SNIP]

In the 2 1/2 years since the U.S. Supreme Court ended the District's handgun ban, hundreds of residents in Washington's safest, most well-to-do neighborhoods have armed themselves, registering far more guns than people in poorer, crime-plagued areas of the city, according to D.C. police data.
Story

Since the landmark court ruling in June 2008, records show, more than 1,400 firearms have been registered with D.C. police, most in the western half of the District. Among those guns, nearly 300 are in the high-income, low-crime Georgetown, Palisades and Chevy Chase areas of Northwest.

--

DATABASE: Gun ownership in Washington, D.C.

From The Wahington Post: http://tinyurl.com/6k63kgy

[SNIP]

Search by Zip code to see how many firearms are registered throughout the District.


**************************************************
4. Man killed, 1 wounded in Sterling home invasion, Loudoun County sheriff says
**************************************************

EM Dave Hicks emailed me this:

--

From The Washington Post: http://tinyurl.com/4nroozx

By Caitlin Gibson
February 11, 2011

One man was killed and another wounded after the pair burst into a Sterling house Thursday night and were shot by a man inside, police said.

The incident, which authorities called a botched robbery, was not believed to be a random crime.

"We do feel very confident that it was targeted," Loudoun Sheriff Stephen O. Simpson said.

The men charged into the two-story, single-family house, in the 1200 block of East Kennedy Road, about 8:30 p.m., assaulting a man who lived there, authorities said. Both were shot by the man they assaulted, according to police.

Police said they are still trying to determine the nature of the suspected connection between the three men, who range in age from late 20s to early 30s. They didn't suspect any gang affiliation.

Seven people who were inside the house during the incident were interviewed, according to authorities. They told deputies the men were trying to rob them, police said.

The men "knew what they were coming for and where it was," Simpson said. "Either they have been there before or someone who has been there before instructed them where to go and what to do."

One of the alleged invaders, Anthony D. Miles, 28, of Manassas, was found shot in the house. He was taken to Inova Loudoun Hospital at Lansdowne, where he was pronounced dead, authorities said.

A second man, who police said was 32 but did not identify, fled the scene and was driven to the same hospital in a private vehicle. He was transferred to Inova Fairfax Hospital with a life-threatening gunshot wound and was in stable condition Friday, according to sheriff's officials.

The resident of the house who shot the two men suffered a bloody nose, police said. He was treated and released from the hospital. Authorities did not release his name.

No charges have been announced in connection with the incident.

Yellow police tape encircled the front yard of the brown-shuttered house on East Kennedy Road on Friday morning.

The tree-lined streets of the neighborhood were quiet, and the few neighbors who were home said they did not realize anything had happened Thursday night until police and ambulances arrived shortly before 9 p.m.

Police said they recovered the vehicle used to take the second alleged robber to the hospital and are seeking the driver's identity.


**************************************************
5. In Va., charges rare for those who shoot intruders
**************************************************

Dave Hicks emailed me this:

--

From The Virginian-Pilot: http://tinyurl.com/4jjuay5

By Veronica Gonzalez
February 12, 2011

SUFFOLK - Thinking that a man was trying to steal something from his yard, a retired police officer fired twice at the man's pickup, hitting it once. One of the bullets lodged in the man's head.

The city's top prosecutor determined that the shooting was justified, saying Charles Duck feared for his life and his wife's when the man dived into his pickup. Duck said he couldn't see the man's hands, and what if there had been a gun in the truck?

The case illustrates the complexity of distinguishing what is self-defense and what is illegal.

The Virginian-Pilot reviewed reports of several similar cases in recent years. In most, prosecutors did not file charges against people who shot intruders. When prosecutors do file charges, the cases go to juries that often are sympathetic to the shooters.

"You can instruct juries all you want to on what the law is, but juries have the ultimate power to acquit for any reason they want," said Ronald Bacigal, a professor at the University of Richmond's law school.

In Virginia, prosecutors say, citizens can use deadly force to defend their lives, but not solely to defend property.

For years, including this year, the General Assembly has considered proposals to make the so-called "castle doctrine" part of state law, which would extend more protection to those who defend themselves from intruders.

Del. Bill Cleaveland, a Botetourt County Republican, who introduced the proposal this year, said it's important for people to know they can use deadly force when their lives are threatened because the police won't always be there.

"When you codify the case law as it is now," he said, "it has an extra exclamation point, that, 'This is recognized in Virginia.' "

Still, for practical purposes, the castle doctrine already is in effect when cases involve home intruders.

In Duck's case, another factor affecting Suffolk Commonwealth's Attorney Phil Ferguson's decision was that Duck had recently gotten out of surgery and was having trouble walking, which made him more vulnerable.

Ferguson stated in his ruling that Duck stopped firing at the pickup's cab when the man started driving away, and instead fired at the tires to try to stop the truck.

Had the man complied with Duck's orders to lie down in front of the truck, there would have been no shooting, he said.

This isn't the first time Ferguson has faced a thorny self-defense issue.

In 2009, he decided not to charge a store owner in Whaleyville who shot and killed a burglar who had broken in to his store, J&L Food Mart.

Ferguson didn't prosecute the store's owner, James H. Durden Jr., he said, because the store owner believed his life was in danger.

"The shooting in this case and Whaleyville had nothing to do with property," Ferguson said. "The shootings occurred because they feared their lives were in danger."

Most other cases reviewed by The Pilot in which shooters weren't charged dealt with home intruders or store robbers.

In 1994, for example, a man confronted two people trying to break into a Virginia Beach house. He killed one of them after one fired at him. He wasn't charged.

In 1999, Clark Stuart, a Navy SEAL, was not charged because it was determined that he was acting in self-

defense when he shot and killed a retired Marine Corps officer, Edward E. Vaught.

Vaught had come to his Virginia Beach house unarmed in the middle of the night. Vaught shouted and banged on the front door before kicking it in to enter the house. Stuart's wife and child were also inside.

In 2007, a burglar trying to enter a ground-floor apartment in Norfolk was shot to death. The resident was not charged in the shooting of Keith Foreman, who had convictions for voluntary manslaughter and another break-in.

In 2008, a man trying to rob a Virginia Beach pizza and pasta restaurant was shot to death. Instead of taking money from the cash register as the shop owner insisted, the robber pressed the owner to open the safe, where he had hidden a gun. When owner Ferdinando Abbondante opened the safe, he loaded his gun. The robber shot at him, missing, and Abbondante fired back and killed him.

Ultimately, prosecutors review cases after police investigations are completed and decide how to proceed.

Still, someone can't use deadly force merely to protect property, said Virginia Beach Commonwealth's Attorney Harvey Bryant.

"If you look out your front door and someone is taking the tires off your car, you can't shoot them," he said.

"We do consider in our society that your home is your castle," Harvey said. "If somebody has broken through the castle walls and come in aggressively, you're entitled to defend yourself."

Harvey said he couldn't second-guess Ferguson's decision because each case is "fact-specific." But he cautioned homeowners against using Duck's case as carte blanche to shoot trespassers.

"I don't think citizens in Virginia Beach should take this case in Suffolk as a green light for them to shoot people in defense of their property," he said.

Last year, Richmond Commonwealth's Attorney Mike Herring charged a man with second-degree murder in the killing of a burglar who was wearing a mask while he tried to steal a car.

A jury convicted him of manslaughter. It declined to impose any jail time or a fine.

Whenever Herring looks at a case, he said, he tries to answer this question, Was the intruder there to steal something, or was he there to harm the homeowner?

"If they are there to harm the defendant, then the defendant is entitled to use reasonable force to protect and repel," he said. "If the so-called victim is on the property to steal property, then the defendant, if you would, is not entitled to use lethal force."

Herring did get a conviction when he prosecuted a homeowner who shot an intruder on his property.

An intruder had climbed an 8-foot privacy fence and was trying to disable motion lights when the homeowner spotted him.

He shot the intruder with a shotgun. A trail of birdshot indicated to Herring that the homeowner shot at the intruder while he was trying to get away.

The homeowner pleaded guilty to reckless discharge of a firearm, he said.

In another case from three years ago, Herring tried to present charges against a store owner who shot and killed a robber. Grand jurors decided not to indict the store owner.

"You had a lot of people who thought the clerk was justified in the shooting," Herring said.

Others say that people who trespass on somebody else's property are taking their chances.

Philip Van Cleave, president of Virginia Citizens Defense League Inc., said people confronted with that situation may not have the time to figure out what someone is doing.

"The truth is, when a criminal gets on to somebody's property like that, his life is in serious danger. But he's the one putting his own life in danger," he said. "Juries don't tend to be sympathetic to someone like that."


**************************************************
6. Another post-tragedy shot from the hip
**************************************************

Andy B emailed me this:

--

From The Virginian-Pilot: http://tinyurl.com/4n47dw5

By J.R. Labbe

SEN. FRANK Lautenberg, DN.J., and Rep. Caroline McCarthy, D-N.Y., are proposing legislation to reinstate a federal ban on the manufacture, import and sale of high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones Jared Loughner is accused of using in the horrific Tucson shootings that left six dead and 13 wounded, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz.

This latest manifestation of the "do-something syndrome" surprises nary one gun-rights supporter and explains why sales of high-capacity mags have jumped in recent weeks.

Ammo mags containing more than 10 bullets were illegal under a federal "assault weapons" ban in place from 1994 to 2004. That didn't mean folks couldn't own or sell them. Companies could manufacture them only for purchase by law enforcement and government agencies.

But pre-ban magazines made before Sept. 13, 1994, were grandfathered in under the law and were available if a buyer was willing to pay $60 for what was a $16 piece of equipment.

The same folks who are buying the dickens out of them now were buying them in the '90s when talk of a ban commenced. They aren't criminals; they are sports enthusiasts and entrepreneurs. The fact that you don't have to wear body armor and take your kids to school behind a bulletproof shield proves that the preponderance of America's gun owners are responsible, law-abiding people with no interest in committing crime.

The same question asked by supporters of the renewed ban was asked in '94: Why does anyone need one of those? They should be left to the police and the military, not private citizens.

Therein lies the main disconnect with gun-control advocates: They hold to the mistaken and potentially fatal belief the police will be on hand to help them in their time of crisis.

Golly, they think, as long as I live in a community with a functioning 911 system, I don't need a firearm. Even if I do want a gun for personal protection, I've got Granddad's shotgun in the closet.

Gun-rights advocates don't think that way. A self-reliant bunch as a whole, responsible gun owners don't want to leave it to a local deputy to make it to the house in time to stop the intruder who is jimmying the window to their kids' bedroom.

It is not now and has never been the job of police to save your individual hide. A slew of court cases confirm that law enforcement is necessary to help keep societal peace, not to protect individual citizens.

I'm married to a retired police officer. My security detail lives in the same house. He knows better than anyone that the only person who can give me a fighting chance to survive an attack is me.

In a self-defense situation, I don't ever want to be in a fair fight. And I don't have a clue how many rounds it might take to stop an attacker.

As I type those words, I can hear people screaming at their newspapers or computer screens: You're paranoid! You're a right-wing apologist for the NRA! You're crazy!

People will think what they want. But there's one label I'm going to do my darnedest to never let stick: victim.

For gun-rights supporters, the issue isn't what the magazines are for or how many rounds are necessary. The issue is what's the next step if the government dictates how many are too many. Will Uncle Sam be back next year with a different number? And what's so magical about 10?

With or without a ban, there is an ever-present need for vigilance on the part of gun makers, dealers, buyers, owners and law enforcement agencies to make sure that all firearms are handled legally and with the full appreciation for the harm that can result if they are misused by someone who shouldn't be in control of them.

Someone like the Tucson shooter. That unthinkable tragedy was the creation of a sick mind determined to carry out a sick idea. To presume that he would have been deterred once it became inconvenient assumes that the mind of a killer is capable of logic.

The question that gun-rights advocates want to respectfully pose to those adamant on restricting high-capacity magazine ownership is not "Why does anybody need one?" but "Why should responsible citizens not be allowed to own one?"

J.R. Labbe is the editorial director of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
**************************************************
7. Concealed Carry WORKS!
**************************************************

Roy B. Scherer emailed me this:

--

Philip -

I got this from my friend Chip, about how CHPs are working in Loraine County, Ohio. It's a nice piece, but the REALLY good piece is the editorial that also was there.


From The Morning Journal: http://tinyurl.com/4996vhs

By Taylor Dungjen
February 6, 2011

Locked and loaded: Concealed carry grows as critics' fears of 'bloodbath' proven wrong

LORAIN - Nearly 200,000 Ohioans have been issued a license to carry a concealed handgun since the state's concealed carry law took effect in April 2004.

Here in Lorain County, since 2004, a total of 5,416 concealed carry licenses have been issued. In 2010 alone, the Lorain County Sheriff's Office issued 852 new licenses, according to data provided by the Attorney General's Office and Sgt. Diana Nicholl. In 2009, 798 licenses were issued. The number of new applicants has grown annually since 2006.

Neighboring Huron County issued 234 licenses in 2009, and Erie County's sheriff issued 1,058.

"I think the consensus is that folks want them so they can, if they so desire, carry a concealed handgun to protect themselves, their loved ones or acquaintances," Erie County Sheriff Capt. Paul Sigsworth said.

When the law first went into effect, opponents argued there would be more crime and weapons assaults. That has largely proven to not be the case, Lorain County Sheriff Phil Stammitti said.

"We haven't had any big problems since the law took effect in 2004," Stammitti said.

Sigsworth said Erie County hasn't had any major problems either.

"We have had very few issues with the folks issued licenses through our agency," Sigsworth said. "And the vast majority appear to be law abiding ..."

The growth of concealed carry in Ohio reflects a widespread acceptance in most parts of the nation since 1987 when Florida opened the door to concealed carry.

Today, only Illinois and Wisconsin absolutely prohibit concealed carry.

Despite few reported problems with concealed carry in Ohio, Toby Hoover, executive director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence, says the increase in concealed carry licenses is dangerous.

"As far as concealed carry, it is promoting a culture that is one of impending violence and fear and other people are convinced to carry," Hoover said. "As far as numbers are concerned, even though it has become popular in some cultures, we keep advertising like more and more of us are protecting ourselves."

Hoover worries that the perception is that a majority of Americans carry weapons but, in reality, she said, "we've got maybe 11.5 million people in Ohio, about 7.5 million adults over 21 who could get a permit, and, if you're talking fewer than 200,000 people (with licenses), do the math. It's not the majority of people."

The concern about an increase in violent crimes among license holders was unfounded from the start, said Rick Kaleda of the Buckeye Firearms Association. The group's website describes it as "a grassroots political action committee dedicated to defending and advancing the right of Ohio citizens to own and use firearms for all legal activities, including self-defense, hunting, competition and recreation. We work to elect pro-gun candidates and lobby for pro-gun legislation."

Of the growth of concealed carry in Ohio, Kaleda said, "I expect the trend to continue. I think a lot of the increase has to do with awareness and comfortability with the law.

"As time goes, those folks have licenses in hand, then it gets to be word of mouth and start talking about different scenarios, things that will occur in people's lives, crime in their area. They say 'Maybe I should get a gun, get training.'"

For Hoover, whose husband was killed by a gunman, that doesn't sit well.

"It's bothersome to people if it happens to ordinary people who aren't doing anything wrong and it makes everyone nervous when you have another side saying, 'You better protect yourself, you better protect yourself.' It gets all in this big muddle," Hoover said.

Nikki Goeser sees it another way. The Tennessee woman has said she might have been able to stop the stalker who fatally shot her husband Ben in front of her at a bar where they were doing a karaoke show in 2009 had she been allowed to carry her gun there.


Goeser has since testified in favor of so-called "restaurant carry" bills in Tennessee and Ohio to allow concealed carry in establishments that serve alcohol, as long as the concealed carry permit holder does not drink.

U.S. Supreme Court decisions in recent years have determined that the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individual Americans "... to keep and bear arms ..." for defense.

Ohio is a "shall issue" state, meaning that county sheriffs must issue a concealed carry permit to anyone who meets the standards set in state law. Requirements include "a certificate of completion of a firearms safety course that was offered by or under the auspices of the National Rifle Association." That includes 10 hours of classroom instruction, plus two hours of live fire training and passing a written test.

With a certificate of competency in hand, a person then goes to the local county sheriff's office to fill out an application, be photographed and fingerprinted, have a background check done and pay a fee of $55. The sheriff must issue a license within 45 days, assuming the applicant passes the background check. The license is good for five years.

Basic training is just the starting point, area gun rights advocates note. Advanced and continuing training is strongly encouraged to hone firearms safety and competence, along with regular practice.

"I don't want to be Wyatt Earp, and I'm not looking for trouble," said one local concealed carry holder, who asked not to be named. "I just want to be able to protect myself or my family from death or serious harm.

"If that's only one moment in a lifetime, I want to be prepared. I have car insurance, but that doesn't mean I want to be in a crash. It just means being prepared.

"Frankly, I hope I never have to fire my gun in self-defense because of all the potential legal tangles that come with a shooting."

Before a concealed carry holder walks out the door of his or her home, even if there is no danger facing them, they must be acutely aware of how Ohio's law prohibits concealed carry in specific places. That includes courthouses, law enforcement and government offices, correctional institutions, schools and universities and places that serve alcohol, to give a much-simplified version of the full list.

Similarly, specific and strict limits are set on how a concealed handgun can be carried in a vehicle, as well as what a concealed carry holder must say and do if stopped for law enforcement purposes while in a vehicle or on foot.

Failure to observe these gun laws can bring felony prosecution and a lifetime loss of the right to possess a gun, so knowing and following Ohio's gun laws is a must, local gun rights advocates note.

In 2009, the Lorain County Sheriff's office suspended 11 concealed carry permits, revoked three and denied permits to 18 applicants. That ratio of 14 permits suspended or revoked compared to 1,220 issued or renewed backs up assertions that the vast majority of concealed carry permit holders are law-abiding citizens.

Private businesses and workplaces can ban concealed handguns on their property, if they wish. Failure to observe such bans could cost a person their job and make one liable to civil trespass litigation.

Anyone buying a firearm must fill out a federal form attesting that they are not a felon, a drug addict, been declared mentally ill by a judge, dishonorably discharged from the military, are under a restraining order as a stalker, have been convicted of domestic violence or are an illegal alien. Purchasers then must pass an FBI background check done through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

The strict requirements and background check necessary for purchasing a handgun and for getting a concealed carry permit have led some gun owners to joke that they wouldn't want their daughters to date anyone who didn't have a concealed carry permit because they know that permit holders are FBI-certified "good guys."


**************************************************
8. A gun in a bank?
**************************************************

A VCDL member emailed me this:

--

How could this even be true? Guns aren't allowed in banks in North Carolina.


From earthlink.net: http://tinyurl.com/6h6tca8

By Associated Press
February 10, 2011

CARY, N.C. (AP) . A teenager who detained several people inside a suburban bank Thursday emerged from the building holding a gun to the head of one of his captives and was shot dead by police after three hours of tense negotiations helped by a hidden hostage who was feeding authorities information.

The gruesome final scene in the quiet suburban town played out live on television during the dinner hour. None of the hostages nor any of the officers involved were injured, authorities said.

"This is absolutely not how we wanted this to end," Cary Police Chief Pat Bazemore said. "It is a very sad situation that we did end up shooting the suspect."

The standoff began around 3 p.m. when the man attempted to rob a Wachovia bank on the western edge of Cary, a booming suburb west of Raleigh that prides itself in having little crime. Police arrived within two minutes and found the man had taken hostages.

Authorities said 19-year-old Devon Mitchell of Cary held as many as seven people in the bank and officers were able to negotiate the release of four of them. Two women were released shortly after police arrived, and two more people were released an hour later.

During one of the releases, overhead television footage showed one of the hostages running from the building quickly while the second fell to the ground outside the bank's door and didn't move. Officers rushed to her side, helped her up and ran backward while keeping their guns aimed at the building's door.

Three people remained inside, but Bazemore said Mitchell wasn't aware of one of them. She said that hostage was relaying information to authorities outside.

As darkness fell, Mitchell slowly walked out of the bank with the woman hostage. Officers swarmed and the suspect fell to the ground amid a cluster of gunshots and smoke. The hostage fell to her knees but was apparently unharmed.

"I'm shaken. I hope I don't have to see something like that again," said 16-year-old Zackery Marvel, who watched the dramatic conclusion from an apartment complex nearby.

Cary is consistently ranked as both one of the nation's safest places to live and one of its fastest-growing. Marvel said he doesn't feel safe anymore after witnessing the scene unfold near his high school. The bank was not far from the Kids R Kids daycare, where officers helped evacuate about 100 children to safety. Four schools near the bank were also locked down.

Bazemore said the State Bureau of Investigation would be assessing the shooting, as it typically does with all shootings involving law enforcement officers.

"I stand behind our officers and what they did," Bazemore said.


**************************************************
9. Who needs a gun at a remote, hidden, primitive camping site?
**************************************************

And in Maryland, where citizens have no right to carry!

A VCDL member emailed me this:

--

From WTOP.com: http://tinyurl.com/4dcaoj6

By Associated Press
February 9, 2011

Md. man gets 12 years in machete attack on campers

FREDERICK, Md. - A Frederick man who allegedly wielded a machete during a robbery of four teenage campers is going to prison.

Twenty-two-year-old Nicholas Cann was sentenced Tuesday in Frederick to 12 years behind bars for his role in the attack last April at a primitive campsite along the Monocacy River near Tuscarora.

Cann pleaded guilty in November to four counts of attempted armed robbery. He denies putting a machete to the throat of a 15-year-old girl or telling the campers he had a handgun.

Cann is the second of three defendants to be sentenced. Co-defendant George Carroll of Frederick is serving 18 years for his part in the attack.

Twenty-two-year-old Zachary Lee of Hagerstown is scheduled for trial March 22.


**************************************************
10. Gun control: Conservatives don't know what winning looks like
**************************************************

Bob Johnson emailed me this:

--

From nyulocal.com: http://tinyurl.com/5u8otqu

By Rob Stengel
January 31, 2011

You know that story about Japanese soldiers hiding in the jungle on some remote Pacific island in 1970's, not knowing that World War II had ended nearly thirty years ago? What was always saddening wasn't just that the war had been over for a while - it was that they didn't even know they had already lost. Well, switch the situation around and it's a good analogy for the war over gun control that still rages in the minds of dedicated conservative activists and lobbyists. They're still fighting one of the great American social-political battles - except that the right has already won.

There was a time when gun control was a big (I mean, election-influencing) political issue. As recently as the 1990's, when both the Brady Act and the Assault Weapons Ban were enacted, Democrats were actually willing to talk about the issue in public. But as the nation turned right-ward on the issue over the last ten years, Congress failed to renew the Assault Weapons Ban and the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions striking down gun control legislation.

Even given this month's tragic mass shooting in Tuscon, support for stricter gun control remains relatively low. Jamelle Bouie at the Washington Independent wrote earlier this year that conservatives should be happy that they have mostly had it their way:


Indeed, Democrats won't even touch commonsense gun control legislation, like the assault weapons ban. During his campaign for president, Barack Obama pledged to reinstate the ban, but Obama has yet to approach the issue, and given the other challenges ahead of him, there's little chance that he will. Simply put, gun control is one area of public policy where conservatives have all but won the argument, whether they realize it or not.

So it's strange to see that some conservative organizations are still firing on all cylinders in the gun control debate. The New York Times reported last week that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has been successfully lobbying Congress to cut off funding to social scientists who study the relationship between gun control and crime rates:

The amount of money available today for studying the impact of firearms is a fraction of what it was in the mid-1990s, and the number of scientists toiling in the field has dwindled to just a handful as a result, researchers say.

The dearth of money can be traced in large measure to a clash between public health scientists and the NRA in the mid-1990s. At the time, Dr. Rosenberg and others at the CDC were becoming increasingly assertive about the importance of studying gun-related injuries and deaths as a public health phenomenon, financing studies that found, for example, having a gun in the house, rather than conferring protection, significantly increased the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.

So far academics are divided on whether gun control legislations actually lowers rates of violent crime, but it's reasonable to think that part of that is attributable to the lack of funding for that sort of research. It also stands to reason that the NRA is a bit scared of the sort of results that research might turn up. After all, if they suspected that respected academics would find that more gun ownership lowered rates of violent crime, I bet Republicans would be pushing hard to fund those projects. The fact that they are doing the exact opposite says a lot.

But even still, I doubt the public is going to care much about that side of the debate. The right tends to see gun control from a "these are our guns, and we have an absolute right to have them" perspective. So no matter the data, I don't see that changing.

The White House's recent hints that Obama will address gun control soon have made waves in conservative circles. Sarah Palin, political-surfer extraordinaire that she is, started with the familiar and overblown line that Democrats are once again coming for your guns. Given how cautious Obama has been on gun control so far, it looks to me like conservatives are once again driving their tank to a knife fight.


**************************************************
11. Renewing CHP in Stafford County
**************************************************

Walt Lyons emailed me this:

--

Phil, I thought I would share this helpful information regarding Stafford County CHP renewal instructions. The website really doesn't have a clear and simple process so I wrote the county clerk and received this response.

Walt Lyons


The fee is $50.00. You can mail your application to: Stafford Circuit Court, P.O. Box 69, Stafford, VA 22555. We will call you when the permit is ready to pick up or you can send a self address stamped envelope with the application and we will mail it back to you.

Yes a check is fine and make it out to Stafford Circuit Court.


**************************************************
12. Ammunition and ballistics web sites
**************************************************

Eddie Garcia emailed me this:

--

Ammo by the numbers: What do all those numbers on my box of ammo mean?

http://tinyurl.com/4uh4yam

Ballistics by the inch: http://tinyurl.com/4bf824c


**************************************************
13. Officials stress need for civility, respect during public discourse
**************************************************

A VCDL member emailed me this:

--

From FairfaxTimes.com: http://tinyurl.com/4tsl7bk

By Gregg MacDonald
February 1, 2011

Although the shootings in Tucson, Ariz., earlier this year have made some local municipal leaders acutely aware of their vulnerabilities, some say unfettered constituent access trumps any personal fears they might have.

On Jan. 11, just three days after a gunman killed six people and critically wounded U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) outside of a Tucson grocery, audience participation at a Herndon Town Council meeting got a little out of hand.

"At one point ... it appeared that one audience member was going to assault someone after that person spoke, if not for another member of the audience restraining him, we could have had a very embarrassing situation in the chambers," wrote Councilwoman Sheila Olem in a Jan. 14 e-mail to Herndon Mayor Steve DeBenedittis. "Civility and respect is not too much to ask of the citizens of Herndon," Olem continued.

About 40 people attended the meeting to talk about Herndon's controversial anti-street solicitation ordinance, which has become a divisive issue within the town.

"At one point ... it appeared that one audience member was going to assault someone after that person spoke, if not for another member of the audience restraining him, we could have had a very embarrassing situation in the chambers," wrote Councilwoman Sheila Olem in a Jan. 14 e-mail to Herndon Mayor Steve DeBenedittis.

"Civility and respect is not too much to ask of the citizens of Herndon," Olem continued.

Citing the events in Arizona, Herndon council member Grace Wolf also sent an e-mail to DeBenedittis, asking him to address public decorum.

"I ask that you remind the audience that while we can disagree, we need to remain civil in our interactions with others -- there is no room for harassment, bullying, profanity, verbally abusive language and threatening gestures, towards anyone in the Town of Herndon," she wrote.

"Civility is very important," DeBenedittis said Monday. "I have and will continue to address the need for decorum in the Council Chambers as appropriate."

A few miles away, Vienna Town Council member Laurie Cole agreed the vulnerability of public officials made evident by the Arizona tragedy is a topic worthy of discussion.

"We've not discussed it publicly, but of course you think about it," she said. "With public interaction comes vulnerability. It's worth a discussion with police, but I really don't know what we might change."

Falls Church Vice Mayor David Snyder agreed with Cole, citing the state's gun laws as a challenge.

"In Virginia, public figures are particularly in danger of gun violence because people can carry guns into council meetings and state law prevents localities from doing anything about it," Snyder said.

Virginia Code . 15.2-915 specifies that "no locality shall adopt or enforce any ordinance" impeding "the purchase, possession, transfer, ownership, carrying, storage or transporting of firearms" as allowed by state law.

"Diminishing mental health services and unlimited access to firepower never make for a good mix," Snyder added.

In 2004, Falls Church adopted an "administrative rule" that outlined that city staffers were to let police know if they saw someone with a gun entering a city building.

"It never actually went into effect, but it was just a precaution," Snyder said. "Well, gun activists caught wind of it, and next thing we knew, dozens of them showed up at a council meeting wearing guns.

"I held up a sign that night on which I had written the date '1865.' I told the audience that was the last year in which anyone needed a gun for protection in Falls Church." [PVC: Tell that to all the families of crime victims in Falls Church over the years. What a foolish thing to say.]

Snyder said despite his efforts, the administrative rule subsequently was taken off the books.

"That's right," said Fairfax resident Mike Stollenwerk, founder of local gun advocacy group Opencarry.org. "No locality can ban open gun carry in the state of Virginia. Legal gun carriers have the same rights as anyone else and cannot be singled out."

And even if municipal leaders would want to pursue changes to guns laws, any action would have to be approved by the General Assembly.

"We feel that local governments should be able to have the authority to prohibit firearms in town or city-owned and publicly-leased buildings," said Falls Church Mayor Nader Baroukh. "We address that issue every year in our legislative packet to the General Assembly."

To Snyder, the issue is one of common sense. [PVC: Could someone who holds up a sign saying 1865 was the last time someone in Falls Church needed a handgun to defend themselves have any common sense?]

"Because of Virginia's gun policies, our police are forced to train as if they are deploying to Afghanistan, where everyone may be heavily armed," he said. "A record number of police are killed every year. The notion that more guns make people safer is being disproven before our eyes. Across the nation, it is being proven daily that current U.S. gun laws are failing to protect public officials."

In Fairfax City, Councilman Dan Drummond has a different tack on the safety vulnerabilities of public officials.

"We have a long history of public access in Fairfax," he said. "The right of our constituents to be able to approach local officials is paramount. Speaking strictly for myself, I feel that any personal safety concerns come second." [PVC: Hats of to Mr. Drummond.]

Drummond said he does not plan on restricting constituent access based on personal safety concerns.

Back in Herndon, Olem said constituent decorum is necessary on many levels.

"Uncivil behavior is not only disrespectful to public officials, but to others as well," she said.

"All I could think about at the Jan. 11 public hearing was that in the back of the room were all these young children that were so well behaved, while all around them were adults cursing and setting a horrible example as to how to voice their political differences."

"Every American has a right to voice their dissent, but no one has a right to physically harm any individual because they disagree with them. Such violence has no place in our society," said U.S. Rep. Gerald E. Connolly (D-Dist. 11) in a statement following the Arizona tragedy. "As a nation, we must redouble our efforts to promote civility and respect for differing viewpoints in our political discourse." [PVC: And that will prevent assassinations by criminally insane individuals how exactly?]

**************************************************
14. Vickie Graves says she tried to shoot intruder, gun wouldn't go off
**************************************************

If you have a fire extinguisher, the time to learn how to use it is NOT when the house is on fire!

Ben Piper emailed me this:

--

Guns don't save lives if you don't know how to use them. Tragically. By the way, I emailed the reporter and he said the gun was a Colt .45 1911. The "three safeties" were a reference to the grip safety, the thumb safety, and the fact that the gun won't fire if the slide is pushed out of battery.


From knoxnews.com: http://tinyurl.com/4mhz8e5

By Jamie Satterfield
February 9, 2011

When the gunfire erupted inside her Washington Pike home, Vickie Graves was ready to kill.

"I'd done everything I could to get that gun to work," she said of the weapon she grabbed after shots rang out during an invasion of the home she shared with husband, Bill Graves. "I would have shot (the attacker she faced) - definitely."

When she realized her husband might be dead, however, she was ready to die.

"When I couldn't get an answer from Bill, I didn't care," she said. "I was wanting him to kill me."

Graves described for jurors in Knox County Criminal Court on Tuesday the night in May 2009 when she and her husband settled in for a movie and instead faced off with masked intruders. The encounter left the 52-year-old Bill Graves mortally wounded.

Her testimony came in the second day of trial for Gary Scott Holman, 28, who is accused along with Josh Lee Bowman of carrying out a fatal home invasion allegedly cooked up by a relative via marriage to Vickie Graves. The three are being tried separately.

Graves told jurors she and her husband were watching a movie in the living room when a buzzer sounded, alerting them to movement in the driveway. Bill Graves went to the front door.

"Just as he got to the door, this guy (identified by authorities as Bowman) just leaps in and grabs Bill in a bear hug," she testified.

Holman followed, pointing what Vickie Graves said she believed was a gun at her head. As her husband broke free and ran toward his gun case, two shots rang out, she said. Knox County Sheriff's Office detectives say it was Bowman who fired those shots.

"I started screaming, 'Bill, Bill, answer me,' " she said.

Graves has hated guns ever since her father died from an accidental shooting, but with Holman distracted by the gunfire, she said she pushed him and grabbed a gun her husband kept stashed beside his chair.

"I kept pulling the trigger," she said. "I was trying to get that gun to go off, and I just couldn't."

The gun, as it turned out, had three separate safety mechanisms. She said Holman grabbed the barrel, and the two became locked in a struggle over the weapon. But as seconds passed with no sounds from her husband, she gave up.

"I was just so tired of wrestling with him," she said.

When the two intruders ran out with one grabbing a safe on the way out, Graves found her husband collapsed and bleeding heavily. He died a day later, a gunshot having severed his femoral artery.

The safe that cost Bill Graves his life contained a handful of silver dollars and three collections of state quarters.

The trial continues today.


**************************************************
15. 'Project Gunwalker' protest can help kill ATF's long gun reporting proposal
**************************************************

Bob Johnson emailed me this:

--

White House rejected ATF request to track high powered rifle sales on the border w/o public review - here is a quote from it regarding the attempt by the ATF -

From examiner.com: http://tinyurl.com/6btuyud

By Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea
February 11, 2011

[SNIP]

One other technicality that has not been widely explored (although discussed in this column): One of ATF's criteria, that affected firearms have "a caliber greater than .22," would, without further definition, include .22s, which actually are larger than that.


**************************************************
16. Gunmen kill 8 in violent north Mexico border city
**************************************************

If there's one place you definitely need a gun, it's Mexico! Bill Hine emailed me this:

--

From MSNBC.com: http://tinyurl.com/4vjcsz8

By Olivia Torres
February 11, 2011

CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico Gunmen barged into a bar in the battered border city of Ciudad Juarez and opened fire late Thursday, killing seven women and one man, authorities said.

Three other people were wounded at the "Las Torres" bar and were in critical condition, said Arturo Sandoval, spokesman for Chihuahua state prosecutors.

Sandoval said investigators were still trying to determine who was behind the attack.

Ciudad Juarez is the center of a fierce turf war between the Sinaloa and Juarez drug cartels, and has become one of the world's most dangerous cities. More than 3,000 people were killed last year in the city of 1.3 million residents across from El Paso, Texas.

Meanwhile, a shootout between troops and armed men killed nine people in a central Mexican state that his seen a rise in drug violence, the government said Thursday.

The gun battle erupted after soldiers came under fire while investigating a tip about the presence of armed men in Tabasco, a town in the southern part of Zacatecas state, the Defense Department said in a statement.

One soldier and eight gunmen were killed in the fighting Wednesday night, the statement said. Two other soldiers were wounded and authorities seized six assault rifles, three radios and two bulletproof jackets.

The statement gave no details about who the gunmen were but Zacatecas lies between territory controlled by the Sinaloa cartel and area disputed by the Gulf and Zetas gangs, and has recently seen a surge in violence.

In Baja California, 10 soldiers were detained for alleged ties to drug traffickers and turned over to federal prosecutors, the Defense Department said Thursday.

The brief statement said the soldiers were assigned to the 67th Battalion in the Pacific coast city of San Quintin. It said the three junior officers and seven enlisted soldiers were detained Tuesday and flown to Mexico City on Wednesday.

Drug traffickers have been recruiting members of the armed forces for years.

In one of the most shocking cases, Gen. Jesus Gutierrez Rebollo was arrested in 1997 when he was Mexico's drug czar and charged with protecting then cocaine kingpin Amado Carrillo Fuentes, the late leader of the Juarez cartel. Also, the Zetas drug gang was started in the late 1990s by a small group of elite soldiers based in Tamaulipas who deserted to work for the Gulf drug cartel.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has deployed more than 40,000 troops throughout Mexico since he launched a crackdown against drug traffickers shortly after taking office in December 2006.

Drug gang violence in Mexico has seen nearly 35,000 people killed since then.

In the northern border state of Chihuahua, assailants killed a man who became a local hero after killing three gunmen who had gone to his home to demand extortion money, officials said Thursday.

Alvaro Sandoval Diaz, 50, and his 35-year-old wife, Griselda Pedroza Rocha, were killed Tuesday night in Puerto Palomas, across from Columbus, New Mexico, Sandoval, the Chihuahua state prosecutors spokesman, said earlier Thursday.

Last month, Sandoval Diaz opened fire on four armed men who arrived to extort money from him, killing three. The assailants were members of La Linea, enforcers for the Juarez Cartel, prosecutors said.

Relatives of the couple told the Ciudad Juarez newspaper El Diario on Thursday that the couple's 6-year-old daughter witnessed her parents' killings and that the whole family now planned to leave the town.

"The girl just curled up as she watched how they killed her father and then her mother," the girl's grandmother, who didn't want to be identified, told the newspaper.


**************************************************
17. Mexico's gun supply and the 90 percent myth
**************************************************

C. Scott Johnson emailed me this:

--

From Stratfor.com: http://tinyurl.com/65nnvvh

By Scott Stewart
February 10, 2011

For several years now, STRATFOR has been closely watching developments in Mexico that relate to what we consider the three wars being waged there. Those three wars are the war between the various drug cartels, the war between the government and the cartels and the war being waged against citizens and businesses by criminals.

In addition to watching tactical developments of the cartel wars on the ground and studying the dynamics of the conflict among the various warring factions, we have also been paying close attention to the ways that both the Mexican and U.S. governments have reacted to these developments. Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects to watch has been the way in which the Mexican government has tried to deflect responsibility for the cartel wars away from itself and onto the United States. According to the Mexican government, the cartel wars are not a result of corruption in Mexico or of economic and societal dynamics that leave many Mexicans marginalized and desperate to find a way to make a living. Instead, the cartel wars are due to the insatiable American appetite for narcotics and the endless stream of guns that flows from the United States into Mexico and that results in Mexican violence.

Interestingly, the part of this argument pertaining to guns has been adopted by many politicians and government officials in the United States in recent years. It has now become quite common to hear U.S. officials confidently assert that 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican drug cartels come from the United States. However, a close examination of the dynamics of the cartel wars in Mexico and of how the oft-echoed 90 percent number was reached clearly demonstrates that the number is more political rhetoric than empirical fact.

By the Numbers

As we discussed in a previous analysis, the 90 percent number was derived from a June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico (see external link).

According to the GAO report, some 30,000 firearms were seized from criminals by Mexican authorities in 2008. Of these 30,000 firearms, information pertaining to 7,200 of them (24 percent) was submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for tracing. Of these 7,200 guns, only about 4,000 could be traced by the ATF, and of these 4,000, some 3,480 (87 percent) were shown to have come from the United States.
Mexico's Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth

This means that the 87 percent figure relates to the number of weapons submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF that could be successfully traced and not from the total number of weapons seized by Mexican authorities or even from the total number of weapons submitted to the ATF for tracing. In fact, the 3,480 guns positively traced to the United States equals less than 12 percent of the total arms seized in Mexico in 2008 and less than 48 percent of all those submitted by the Mexican government to the ATF for tracing. This means that almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States.

The remaining 22,800 firearms seized by Mexican authorities in 2008 were not traced for a variety of reasons. In addition to factors such as bureaucratic barriers and negligence, many of the weapons seized by Mexican authorities either do not bear serial numbers or have had their serial numbers altered or obliterated. It is also important to understand that the Mexican authorities simply don't bother to submit some classes of weapons to the ATF for tracing. Such weapons include firearms they identify as coming from their own military or police forces, or guns that they can trace back themselves as being sold through the Mexican Defense Department's Arms and Ammunition Marketing Division (UCAM). Likewise, they do not ask ATF to trace military ordnance from third countries like the South Korean fragmentation grenades commonly used in cartel attacks.

Of course, some or even many of the 22,800 firearms the Mexicans did not submit to ATF for tracing may have originated in the United States. But according to the figures presented by the GAO, there is no evidence to support the assertion that 90 percent of the guns used by the Mexican cartels come from the United States especially when not even 50 percent of those that were submitted for tracing were ultimately found to be of U.S. origin.

This point leads us to consider the types of weapons being used by the Mexican cartels and where they come from.

Types and Sources of Guns

To gain an understanding of the dynamics of the gun flow inside Mexico, it helps if one divides the guns seized by Mexican authorities from criminals into three broad categories which, incidentally, just happen to represent three different sources.

Type 1: Guns Legally Available in Mexico

The first category of weapons encountered in Mexico is weapons available legally for sale in Mexico through UCAM. These include handguns smaller than a .357 magnum such as .380 and .38 Special.

A large portion of this first type of guns used by criminals is purchased in Mexico, or stolen from their legitimate owners. While UCAM does have very strict regulations for civilians to purchase guns, criminals will use straw purchasers to obtain firearms from UCAM or obtain them from corrupt officials. Cartel hit men in Mexico commonly use .380 pistols equipped with sound suppressors in their assassinations. In many cases, these pistols are purchased in Mexico, the suppressors are locally manufactured and the guns are adapted to receive the suppressors by Mexican gunsmiths.

It must be noted, though, that because of the cost and hassle of purchasing guns in Mexico, many of the guns in this category are purchased in the United States and smuggled into the country. There are a lot of cheap guns available on the U.S. market, and they can be sold at a premium in Mexico. Indeed, guns in this category, such as .380 pistols and .22-caliber rifles and pistols, are among the guns most commonly traced back to the United States. Still, the numbers do not indicate that 90 percent of guns in this category come from the United States.

Additionally, most of the explosives the cartels have been using in improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in Mexico over the past year have used commercially available Tovex, so we consider these explosives to fall in this first category. Mexican IEDs are another area where the rhetoric has been interesting to analyze, but we will explore this topic another time.

Type 2: Guns Legally Available in the U.S. but Not in Mexico

Many popular handgun calibers, such as 9 mm, .45 and .40, are reserved for the military and police and are not available for sale to civilians in Mexico. These guns, which are legally sold and very popular in the United States, comprise our second category, which also includes .50-caliber rifles, semiautomatic versions of assault rifles like the AK-47 and M16 and the FN Five-Seven pistol.

When we consider this second type of guns, a large number of them encountered in Mexico are likely purchased in the United States. Indeed, the GAO report notes that many of the guns most commonly traced back to the United States fall into this category. There are also many .45-caliber and 9 mm semiautomatic pistols and .357 revolvers obtained from deserters from the Mexican military and police, purchased from corrupt Mexican authorities or even brought in from South America (guns made by manufacturers such as Taurus and Bersa). This category also includes semiautomatic variants of assault rifles and main battle rifles, which are often converted by Mexican gunsmiths to be capable of fully automatic fire.

One can buy these types of weapons on the international arms market, but one pays a premium for such guns and it is cheaper and easier to simply buy them in the United States or South America and smuggle them into Mexico. In fact, there is an entire cottage industry that has developed to smuggle such weapons, and not all the customers are cartel hit men. There are many Mexican citizens who own guns in calibers such as .45, 9 mm, .40 and .44 magnum for self-defense even though such guns are illegal in Mexico.

Type 3: Guns Not Available for Civilian Purchase in Mexico or the U.S.

The third category of weapons encountered in Mexico is military grade ordnance not generally available for sale in the United States or Mexico. This category includes hand grenades, 40 mm grenades, rocket-propelled grenades, automatic assault rifles and main battle rifles and light machine guns.

This third type of weapon is fairly difficult and very expensive to obtain in the United States (especially in the large numbers in which the cartels are employing them). They are also dangerous to obtain in the United States due to heavy law-enforcement scrutiny. Therefore, most of the military ordnance used by the Mexican cartels comes from other sources, such as the international arms market (increasingly from China via the same networks that furnish precursor chemicals for narcotics manufacturing), or from corrupt elements in the Mexican military or even deserters who take their weapons with them. Besides, items such as South Korean fragmentation grenades and RPG-7s, often used by the cartels, simply are not in the U.S. arsenal. This means that very few of the weapons in this category come from the United States.

In recent years the cartels (especially their enforcer groups such as Los Zetas, Gente Nueva and La Linea) have been increasingly using military weaponry instead of sporting arms. A close examination of the arms seized from the enforcer groups and their training camps clearly demonstrates this trend toward military ordnance, including many weapons not readily available in the United States. Some of these seizures have included M60 machine guns and hundreds of 40 mm grenades obtained from the military arsenals of countries like Guatemala.

But Guatemala is not the only source of such weapons. Latin America is awash in weapons that were shipped there over the past several decades to supply the various insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in the region. When these military-grade weapons are combined with the rampant corruption in the region, they quickly find their way into the black arms market. The Mexican cartels have supply-chain contacts that help move narcotics to Mexico from South America and they are able to use this same network to obtain guns from the black market in South and Central America and then smuggle them into Mexico. While there are many weapons in this category that were manufactured in the United States, the overwhelming majority of the U.S.-manufactured weapons of this third type encountered in Mexico like LAW rockets and M60 machine guns come into Mexico from third countries and not directly from the United States.

There are also some cases of overlap between classes of weapons. For example, the FN Five-Seven pistol is available for commercial purchase in the United States, but the 5.7x28 armor-piercing ammunition for the pistol favored by the cartels is not it is a restricted item. However, some of the special operations forces units in the Mexican military are issued the Five-Seven as well as the FN P90 personal defense weapon, which also shoots the 5.7x28 round, and the cartels are obtaining some of these weapons and the armor-piercing ammunition from them and not from the United States. Conversely, we see bulk 5.56 mm and 7.62 mm ammunition bought in the United States and smuggled into Mexico, where it is used in fully-automatic AK-47s and M16s purchased elsewhere. As noted above, China has become an increasingly common source for military weapons like grenades and fully automatic assault rifles in recent years.

To really understand Mexico's gun problem, however, it is necessary to recognize that the same economic law of supply and demand that fuels drug smuggling into the United States also fuels gun smuggling into Mexico. Black-market guns in Mexico can fetch up to 300 percent of their normal purchase price a profit margin rivaling the narcotics the cartels sell. Even if it were somehow possible to hermetically seal the U.S.-Mexico border and shut off all the guns coming from the United States, the cartels would still be able to obtain weapons elsewhere just as narcotics would continue to flow into the United States from other places. The United States does provide cheap and easy access to certain types of weapons and ammunition, but as demonstrated by groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, weapons can be easily obtained from other sources via the black arms market albeit at a higher price.

There has clearly been a long and well-documented history of arms smuggling across the U.S.-Mexico border, but it is important to recognize that, while the United States is a significant source of certain classes of weapons and ammunition, it is by no means the source of 90 percent of the weapons used by the Mexican cartels, as is commonly asserted.


**************************************************
18. A little fun: 19 epic LEGO guns that actually work
**************************************************

On the light side, you won't believe what is being done with LEGOs! Sue Freivald emailed me this:

--

From tifr.com: http://tinyurl.com/3yfdusa

June 10, 2010

Jack Streat is the creator behind all the incredible LEGO weaponry you are about to see. Some fire rubber bands, while others fire LEGO blocks. Whether they are bolt action, belt fed, or motorized, there is no doubt these are the coolest LEGO creations I have ever seen.