05/09/11 - VCDL Update 5/9/11

Post by **allingeneral** » Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:41:36

VCDL's meeting schedule: http://www.vcdl.org/meetings.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviations used in VA-ALERT: http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Governor makes final approval for State Forest carry!
2. VCDL to have table at police benefit match in Louisa on Saturday
3. VCDL defensive pistol shoot at the Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club range
on Saturday
4. If I have a CHP, why do I still need an NICS background check?
5. Hunting with 30-round magazines?
6. Lifetime hunting licenses
7. Another insurance company
8. Citizen rights during traffic stops
9. I just bought this . . .
10. RT editorial that Cuccinelli was right on church carry law
11. Duct-tape warning -- Thomasson: Guns in church a recipe for disaster
12. D.C. can't register guns
13. Editorial: Gun laws are taking a radical turn (plus, opposing view)
14. Eight tips on contacts with 'open carry' citizens
15. America's Third War: Is the U.S. Arming Mexican Cartels?
16. Walmart gun sales

**************************************************1. Governor makes final approval for State Forest carry!**************************************************

I received a call from Mike Reynold, with Governor McDonnell's office, on Friday. He said that the Governor has approved the State Forest carry regulation and that it should become effective soon. (Another gun organization is claiming the new regulation is effective already, but out of caution I would suggest waiting until there is an official effective date.)

Here is the link showing the current status:

http://townhall.virginia.gov/L/viewstag ... ageid=5828

I will advise once we have an effective date.

Thanks to Governor Bob McDonnell for his support in this important effort!

**************************************************2. VCDL to have table at police benefit match in Louisa on Saturday**************************************************

EM Brandy Polanowski is going to have a VCDL table at a shooting match in Louisa County to benefit the Louisa County Sheriffs Office K-9 Unit.

What: Bowling Pin Competition to benefit Louisa County Sheriffs Office K-9 UnitWhere: Freemans Range located at 5672 Bibb Store Road, Louisa, VA 23093Time: 11 am for Shooters Meeting

Five shooters compete to shoot all 5 pins from the table in the fastest time. Bring eye and ear protection, gun in zipped bag or secured holster - unloaded, with ammo to use for each round. There will be handgun and shotgun classes (using #8 shot only). Each round is $5.00, winner of each round wins a prize.

All money will go to LCSO K-9 Unit.

Food, drink and live K-9 demos. (No Alcohol permitted)

**************************************************3. VCDL defensive pistol shoot at the Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club range on Saturday**************************************************

Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club (RRRC) will again host the VCDL-RRRC Defensive Pistol Shoot on May 14 at RRRC's ranges.

This event is a fund raiser for VCDL and is open to the public.

Shooter registration starts at 9:00, and shooting starts promptly at 10:00. Expect a round count of 80-100 on six stages.

We expect the shooter fees to be $20.00 per shooter.

Drawings for prizes will be held--all shooters will have their name in the "pot" for this series of drawings. (Yes, we are looking for more prizes in case anyone knows of a donor who would like to support this shoot).

A free hot dog lunch will be served with all the fixins. Plan on coming and shooting at this fun shoot, and YES, we invite those from all areas of the VCDL membership to make the trip !

Directions are here:

http://www.roanokerifle.com/?page_id=3

Please contact Al Steed, Jr. at SWVAgunshows*vcdl.org for more information.

**************************************************4. If I have a CHP, why do I still need an NICS background check?**************************************************

With the terrible response time on background checks for firearms purchases in Virginia lately, I have gotten several questions about why they are necessary for CHP holders.

Concealed Handgun Permit holders in some states, such as Nebraska, can purchase guns for dealers without having to go through a NICS check.

VCDL checked into this some years ago and Virginia CHPs do not qualify because Virginia does not prohibit someone with a ***misdemeanor*** domestic violence conviction from getting a permit. The Federal Government prohibits such a person from ever owning a gun, something that VCDL feels strongly is unconstitutional.

The idea is that when a person in Nebraska shows his permit, the seller knows that to get that permit the person cannot be disqualified from purchasing a gun under federal law and thus the NICS check is redundant.

While skipping the NICS check would be very convenient for the 240,000+ Virginia CHP holders, two wrongs don't make a right. VCDL has opposed, and will continue to oppose, any change to Virginia law to disarm a person for life for ANY misdemeanor. Once we start letting misdemeanors take away our rights, we are in deep trouble.

**************************************************5. Hunting with 30-round magazines? **************************************************

Ernie Hilliker emailed me this:

--

Phil:

As to 30 round magazines, I hunt coyotes, and feral pigs with a 223, AR-15 when I can. My son and I were talking about magazines and he said he heard that you couldn't have more than 20 rounds in the gun. So to get clarification, I contacted the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries and received this response from them:

Mr. Hilliker,

In Virginia, there are no limits on ammunition capacity for rifles for hunting. A .22-250 can be used for hunting coyotes and feral hogs as long as the county allows the use of rifles. A .22-250 cannot be used for deer or bear.

Lt. Colonel Mike ClarkDeputy Director of Law EnforcementVirginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries

**************************************************6. Lifetime hunting licenses**************************************************

Ernie Hilliker emailed me this:

--

Phil:

One more thing that will help everyone who hunts. I was reading the DGIF rule book and saw the article about lifetime hunting license for 65's and older. I found out from the DGIF finally that you have to apply the month before your birthday, but not sooner.

**************************************************7. Another insurance company**************************************************

Jim Pond emailed me this:

--

Collector's Insurance11350 McCormick RoadEP #1 Suite 700Hunt Valley, MD 21031(888) 837-9537 toll free(410) 876-9233 fax

These are the same folks that insure my collections (not just firearms). They are excellent to work with and very, very reasonable. I believe that any one piece that is worth more than $5,000 has to be appraised. Your home owners insurance would be overly expensive and much more of a hassle.

**************************************************8. Citizen rights during traffic stops**************************************************

Reminder: while many police officers in Virginia prefer to be notified during a stop that you have a sidearm, under Virginia law there is no legal requirement to provide such notification.

Most of the time the officer asks where the sidearm is and directs you not to touch it, but occasionally such notification can lead to your sidearm being seized, checked for stolen, and returned to you unloaded.

Notify or don't notify - it's up to you.

NOTE: Do not confuse this advice with an officer asking to see your CHP because he knows, or has been told, that you are carrying a concealed sidearm.. In that case you must provide the CHP as proof that you are carrying legally. If you are openly carrying your sidearm, then you don't need to have, or show, a CHP - again it would be up to you.

**************************************************9. I just bought this . . . **************************************************

Hopefully you will never have an accidental or a negligent discharge, but this product is a sort of insurance policy should the worst happen.

Ben Piper emailed me this:

--

.. . . for use in motel rooms while traveling (safedirection.com).

http://tinyurl.com/6d828nu

**************************************************10. RT editorial that Cuccinelli was right on church carry law**************************************************

EM Dave Hicks emailed me this:

--

=46rom the Roanoke Times: http://tinyurl.com/3kcpv6p

Editorial: Gun foes a little too quick on the drawCuccinelli's opinion on allowing guns in churches shouldn't be construed as a power grab.Monday, April 18, 2011

A legal opinion by state Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli that could open church doors in Virginia to people with weapons is drawing heavy fire from religious leaders and others.

Democratic state Sen. Don McEachin of Richmond accused Cuccinelli of "once again" governing by fiat and imposing his own will over that of the people. McEachin promises a legislative remedy in the 2012 General Assembly session.

Virginians for Responsible Gun Laws spokeswoman Lori Haas said, "We look forward to working with Sen. McEachin and the faith community to reverse Ken Cuccinelli's end run around our legislature."

They should have at it. Because in this case, Cuccinelli is right.

The law as written is so vague -- barring weapons of all kinds in a house of worship unless a person has "good and sufficient reason" to carry one -- it's wide open to interpretation. Folks could come in an armored Humvee, if they could get it through the door.

Cuccinelli reasons that self-defense would be "good and sufficient reason" to bring a weapon to one's place of worship. For someone truly in fear for his life, many reasonable people would agree.

Cuccinelli is never hesitant to overstep his authority to take up right-wing causes, but he's not guilty of that this time. He issued an opinion in response to an official query from Republican Del. Mark Cole of Fredericksburg. That's what taxpayers pay the attorney general to do.

He also noted correctly that houses of worship are free to bar weapons.

McEachin accuses Cuccinelli of overruling elected representatives of the people because the legislature passed on a chance to change the law last year.. Cole had sponsored a bill to allow concealed-carry permit holders to bring firearms to worship services with the permission of the faith leader. Even in the heavily Republican House, it died in committee. [PVC: It never came up for single vote because of the Republican leadership - so that statement is incorrect and misleading.]

Cole says he just wants to clarify a vague law. Cuccinelli's opinion counts, but it is not the final word. A.G. opinions are advisory. This one does not change the law -- but it gives gun-rights advocates support for their view that guns are permissible unless they are explicitly banned.

McEachin promises a bill next session to bar firearms in places of worship under any circumstances. That would be clear -- and present problems of its own. We hope he puts it in, though, and the people's representatives actually debate it and consider some change in the law. That's what taxpayers pay them to do.

**************************************************11. Duct-tape warning -- Thomasson: Guns in church a recipe for disaster**************************************************

=46rom Scripps News: http://tinyurl.com/3qgux87

By DAN K. THOMASSON, Scripps Howard News Service

There was a time when carrying a firearm or any weapon into a house of worship was considered sacrilege. Early settlers fearing Indian raids left them inside at the door but didn't carry them into the sanctuary which was called that for a reason -- it was a safe place where down through the ages man sought protection and his enemies generally respected that.

SNIP

We have to remember though that those who fight against any rational restriction on guns are in effect espousing their own religion -- one in which the real Deity a deadly weapon. For them, the Second Amendment trumps every condemnation of violence real or potential in the Bible.

SNIP

In Virginia it seems that fewer and fewer places now are safe havens from the presence of firearms. [PVC: Like the Unicorn, safe havens are a non-existent figment of overactive imaginations] Cuccinelli has managed to turn a sanctuary into a scary place where too much altar wine at communion or a disagreement over scripture might produce a tragedy. [PVC: Cuccinelli has done no such thing. He simply, and correctly, interpreted the law. In addition, Thomasson is just adding to the list of unfulfilled hysterical handwringing that guns will cause shootouts over fenderbenders, shopping cart collisions, spilt water in restaurants, and now disagreement over scripture.]

You think that is unlikely? Well, the main element for disaster will now be present. [PVC: How very naive.]

**************************************************12. D.C. can't register guns**************************************************

Live in DC and want to purchase a gun, as is your Second Amendment right? Tough luck. The one and only FFL holder from whom you can purchase that gun has lost his lease and he is now trying to find another place for his business.

Washington, D.C.'s government continues to be a national embarrassment.

David Custer emailed me this:

--

=46rom WTOP.com: http://tinyurl.com/3sqeu9c

Shot down: D.C. residents unable to register handgunsFriday - 4/29/2011, 3:51pm ET

UPDATE: 4:15 p.m.: The ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee says the D.C. government should step in to help residents of the nation's capital make legal gun purchases --something they can't do now, even though the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the city's ban on handguns nearly three years ago.

"The city government of Washington, D.C. has a responsibility to make sure that every resident of D.C. can exercise their constitutional rights. And one of those constitutional rights is the individual to have a right to bear arms," Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) told WTOP.

Grassley, after learning there's a de facto gun ban in place because the one man who could facilitate handgun ownership in Washington has stopped taking registration orders after losing his office lease, said the D.C. government needs to take action.

He says it's "absolutely wrong" that D.C. residents currently can't buy a gun legally and bring it home.

Grassley says "let the city government do the licensing, if you don't have a licensed dealer."

He says another option would be for the city to make it legal for a gun purchased legally anywhere else in the United States, to be allowed in the District.

--

Mark Segraves, wtop.comWASHINGTON - Nearly three years after the United States Supreme Court overturned the D.C. ban on handguns, residents of the District can no longer register guns in the city.

A temporary, de facto ban is in place because the one man who could facilitate handgun ownership in the nation's capital has stopped taking registration orders.

Since the lifting of the handgun ban in June 2008, Charles Sykes has processed more than 1,000 handguns for District residents. Sykes tells WTOP he's stopped taking orders for now.

"I've lost my lease," Sykes said in a phone interview. "I'll take care of the customers who already placed orders, but I don't want to take any more until I know where I will reopen."

Sykes is the sole proprietor of C S Exchange, the only licensed firearm dealer in the city that will transfer guns for individuals. Sykes doesn't sell the guns -- there are no gun stores in D.C. His company facilitates the transfer of guns from out of state stores into the District for a fee of $125 per gun.

Federal law prohibits individuals from buying a handgun outside D.C. and then bringing it into the District. That transfer has to be done by someone with a Federal Firearms License.

Michelle Lane lives on Capitol Hill, and wanted a gun for protection and target practice. She bought two guns in Virginia: a Ruger LCR revolver and a Kahr K9 Elite 9mm. After buying them, she found out she couldn't have them shipped into the city.

"It's not fair," she tells WTOP. "I followed the law. Criminals bring guns into the city. It's frustrating."

D.C. Councilmember Phil Mendelson, who helped write the District's new gun laws after the Supreme Court ruling, says the problem is not due to regulations.

"We've known for a while that (Federal Firearms License) was a vulnerability, that there is only one FFL dealer in the District," Mendelson says. "That's not because of the law, that's because of the market."

Alan Gura, the attorney who argued and won the case before the Supreme Court, says this may mean going back to court.

"This is a very serious problem," Gura said from his office in Old Town Alexandria. "It's something we are going to be taking a very close look at."

Lane's frustration may last a while, because it could be months before Sykes is able to re-open. He tells WTOP he hopes to have a new office location picked out in a week or two.

Even if Sykes were to find a new location, he is required to give the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms 30 days advance notice of his move, and then the ATF has 60 days to review and approve the new location. The move would also have to be approved by the Metropolitan Police Department and the District's Office of Zoning.

Sykes has not given any notice, but says he'll ask ATF for an expedited review.

Mike Campbell, a spokesperson for ATF, says in an email Sykes has yet to inform the agency of his intent to move.

"Mr. Sykes is free to request an expedited review/inspection of his application and his new business premises. However, he has certain responsibilities that he has to fulfill before we can do anything related to a location change. We have no record of a request for a change of address."

Approval of a new location for Sykes isn't the only road block delaying District residents from getting handguns. Zoning requirements on where gun dealers can locate are strict, making it difficult for Sykes or any potential gun dealer to find a suitable location.

Kevin Shepard owns Second Amendment Safety and Security, and has had a Federal Firearms License since 2008, but has not been able to find a location to open his business. He says the zoning requirements are too restrictive.

"It's impacted my economic liberty," Sheppard says. "I'm trying to start a business and they're making it too difficult."

Zoning regulations require gun dealers to locate in either a commercial zone or industrial zone. Most of the District is either zoned for residential use or is federal land. There is also the added restriction of dealers not being able to open a shop within 300 feet of any home, church, school, library or playground.

Gura says that's not in keeping with the Supreme Court ruling.

"The bottom line is the people who live in the Washington, D.C. are entitled to the right to keep and bear arms for self defense," he says. "The city cannot use its zoning laws to interfere with that right."

Mendelson is sympathetic, but defends the regulations.

"There are some distance requirements, such as from a school or playground and I think that makes some sense," Mendelson says. "Other cities do that."

Gura is not buying that explanation.

"Councilmember Mendelson should know the buying and selling of firearms is protected by the second amendment, the city cannot use its zoning laws to make it virtually impossible to operate a retail gun store," Gura argues.

Mendelson says he's willing to meet with any gun dealer who is having trouble finding a location and see if something can be done.

As for Lane, she just wants to bring her gun home.

"This is the one thing that would make me move out of the District," she says.

**************************************************13. Editorial: Gun laws are taking a radical turn (plus, opposing view)**************************************************

Clark Welsh emailed me this:

--

=46rom USA Today: http://tinyurl.com/4ydqo7f

Our view: Gun laws are taking a radical turn

When it comes to gun fights, things are pretty quiet on the Potomac these days. Democrats, cowed by the National Rifle Association's political clout, have no taste for pushing gun control up the agenda. And even if they did, the landmark 2008 Supreme Court ruling that the Second Amendment provides a right for individuals to own guns largely leaves them disarmed.

The states, however, are another matter. Gun rights activists have taken their national victories not as a reason to pat themselves on the back, but as reason to push forward with an agenda that ranges from radical to idiotic.

Last month, for instance, Wyoming joined Arizona, Alaska and Vermont to become the fourth state to allow concealed firearms with no permit whatsoever. Also last month, Mississippi removed most of the exceptions to its concealed weapons law, allowing people to take guns to sporting events, and into bars, churches, schools and colleges, among other places. Just this month, North Dakota joined more than a dozen other states that have said an employer cannot ban an employee from bringing a weapon to work, so long as it is kept in the worker's vehicle.

Even if you view this as a legitimate exercise of personal freedom, it's hardly wise, or without limitations on the freedom of others. Take the rights of property owners, for instance. Under many of these laws, businesses cannot object to someone bringing a weapon onto their premises.

Pennsylvania, meanwhile, is on the verge of becoming the latest to join the craze of states passing laws described as "stand your ground" by supporters and "shoot first" by critics. These give people who use deadly force in public places many of the same protections they might have in defending their homes from an intruder. They remove an individual's obligation to retreat from a threatening situation if such an option exists. And in many cases they provide a legal defense should he or she kill or injure an innocent bystander by mistake.

What we are seeing is a systematic campaign for a doctrine of guns anywhere, anytime and in the hands of just about anyone, without consequence for irresponsible actions. When the gun lobby first started winning concealed carry laws about two decades ago, it said that vigorous background checks and permitting procedures should be maintained, and that some places should remain gun-free. Having won such laws in most states, it is now working to undo those parameters.

The gun lobby is also going after the two states (Wisconsin and Illinois) that do not allow concealed firearms, and the nine that leave the issuance of a permit to the discretion of law enforcement. In its one major foray into Congress recently, gun extremists fell just two votes shy in the U.S. Senate on a 2009 bill that would have forced any state to recognize a carry permit issued by any other state. That measure -- a monumental infringement on states rights and local governance, to say the least -- would have forced urbanized states dealing with gangs, drug lords and other violent criminals to essentially adopt gun rights deemed appropriate in more rural states.

These are precisely the kinds of results that opponents of gun rights predicted during the multi-decade debate over the confused meaning of the Second Amendment. From a constitutional perspective, the Supreme Court may have gotten it right. But from a standpoint of public safety, lawmakers are getting it very wrong. A right to keep and bear arms should come with restraints that equally protect those who have no interest in owning them.

--------

=46rom USA Today: http://tinyurl.com/3ornyp3

Opposing view: Restricting firearms makes us less safeBy Erich Pratt

Several states are passing Stand Your Ground laws and loosening their concealed carry laws, making it easier for people to defend themselves ... and that's a good thing.

Consider what happens when decent people can't protect themselves.

Amanda Collins was a student at University of Nevada's Reno campus in 2007. Even though she had a concealed carry permit, she was unarmed the night she was brutally raped by James Biela. She had left her gun at home because she was scared of what could happen to her if she was caught disobeying the laws prohibiting firearms on campus.

Amanda feels certain she could have used her gun successfully that night. "I would have at some point during my rape been able to stop James Biela," she said.

Amanda has reason to be confident. There are women today who have escaped the ugliness of rape because a gun was nearby. Take the Missouri teenager who was rescued by her handgun-wielding mother one night last year. Craig Kizer jumped on the sleeping teenager but was forced to flee the house after the teen grabbed a knife and the mom entered the room with a firearm, police said.Stand Your Ground laws have passed in many states, giving homeowners added legal protection when they use guns defensively. These laws, coupled with those recognizing the right of people to defend themselves with firearms outside the home, are saving lives.

Anti-gun extremists always claim that allowing citizens to carry guns will result in random shootouts. But the truth is that these Chicken Little predictions never materialize.

Take El Paso, which was ranked by CQ Press as America's safest city in 2010.. El Paso is situated in a very pro-gun state where people can easily carry concealed firearms. Residents there live quite peacefully, despite being located across from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico-- a town with very stringent gun control laws and one of the highest murder rates in the world.

Restricting firearms only makes us less safe. So let's applaud the almost 7,000 Americans a day who use firearms in self-defense to deter criminals.

Erich Pratt is the director of communications for Gun Owners of America, a grassroots lobbying group with more than 300,000 members.

**************************************************14. Eight tips on contacts with 'open carry' citizens**************************************************

Bob Johnson emailed me this:

--

=46rom policeone.com: http://tinyurl.com/452h8rb

April 25, 20118 tips on contacts with 'open carry' citizensBy Ron Avery

Open carry is gaining momentum in areas of the country that won't allow concealed carry permits, or where those permits are so highly restricted as to be all but impossible to obtain. Debates and arguments for and against open carry are fueling increasing concerns and outright alarm on both sides.

Proponents for open carry argue that government officials in certain areas of the country routinely deny issuance of concealed carry permits and generally have an anti-gun or elitist mentality. Proponents argue also that in so doing, the government denies the right of self protection to the individual, which has in turn, helped to spark the growth of open carry as an alternative strategy for self defense.

Opponents argue that open carry creates alarm, unease, and increased threat to both citizens and law enforcement officers. Opponents argue also that open carry increases risk factors, social unrest, and general lawlessness.

In my PoliceOne article on dealing with citizens legally carrying a concealed weapon, I dealt with some of the issues already and I suggest reading that article for background.

I support the right to both own and carry a weapon for self defense, sport, or what have you. This right is supported and articulated both in the United States Constitution and in applicable laws found nationwide. I am also in support of law enforcement officers and others who wish to be able to feel safer in their dealings with people on the street.

In the end, we have to look at what the law allows and be able to deal with a legal activity, regardless of our personal feelings on the matter.

In Hunting Country

I go back to my law enforcement experience and working in situations where we worked wildlife calls and hunter trespass complaints and would have to check hunters and others in the field and in their vehicles where weapons are carried and in plain view or concealed under a garment in colder weather.

Wildlife officers, deputy sheriffs, and other law enforcement officials routinely contact people openly carrying loaded and unloaded firearms for legitimate purposes. It is simply a fact of life and part of the job.

While there are criminal types who like to hunt and fish etc., the vast majority of gun enthusiasts afield are morally-responsible citizens who are ethical human beings. While I have had encounters with hunters in the field who were acting in an irresponsible manner, I can tell you that such incidents were rare when compared to the number of positive contacts I've had.

Open carry doesn't fit into the hunting or sporting use of firearms. It really isn't about hunting or sport shooting. It's about the fundamental right of self defense and is a form of political protest. There are many internet forum discussions on open carry that deal specifically with this type of organized protest.

Signs of the Times

For citizens concerned with legitimate self defense, open carry is a way to actually be able to do that. Some of the reasons I have come across have t

o do with the perception of poor police presence and response times, the downsizing of police forces as the economy has worsened, the early release of criminals from penal institutions, and the feeling of being more at risk in today's society in general.

For the law enforcement officer, any type of weapon being carried, openly or concealed, appears as a threat to their well being and is therefore regarded as a hazard. The common perceptions of a person carrying openly is an escalation of perceived threat, potential for violence, possibility of the weapon carrier being targeted during criminal activity such as a bank robbery, and the possibility of an "untrained" person causing more harm than good in violent encounters. Add to that list the general unease from people who are simply not comfortable with the idea of people who are not cops, not in uniform, but running around with guns on their hips.

Further, what is to keep others with less than pure motivations from carrying openly? It's feasible that gang members and militia types -- who, obviously, do not have firearm ownership prohibitions stemming from prior criminal activity -- could also legally carry under open carry conditions.

Officer Safety Issues

Imagine dealing with a carload of people with guns on and having them step out of the car to confront you, no matter how peaceful their intent or actions might be. Raise the bar by having them challenge your legal authority to check them, regardless of their lack of resistance. It simply raises tensions on both sides. I dealt with this type of situation from time to time as a deputy sheriff and having to deal with posse comitatus members and other similar types in Colorado.

As with concealed carry, there seems to be a lot of hypothetical rhetoric in regards to threat situations of "what could happen?" versus "what does history show us has happened?" Is there a heightened state of criminal activity associated with open carry versus concealed carry versus no carry (other than the obvious firearms violation for school zone or whatnot)?

The answer appears to be "not really." Regardless of opinions or beliefs, there is not a spike in criminal activity associated with merely carrying a firearm. The same is true of concealed carry. It is always the intent of the person, not the firearm, that matters.

Practical Tactics & Strategies

So, what can you do as a law enforcement officer or, as a citizen who will read this article on various forums nationwide? Here are some thoughts to ponder as well as tips to go by.

1.) Open carry is a legal right. Regardless of where personal beliefs may lie, it carries the weight of law and cannot be ignored, pushed aside, or worked around. 2.) Understand that -- as with any belief that people feel strongly about -- open carry is a form of political protest. While the majority will do what is asked of them without a lot of fuss, there will be extremists who are willing to be political martyrs by doing whatever it takes to push their agenda and raise awareness to their cause. 3.) Targeting open carry by finding ways to charge people with other violations and then ticketing or arresting them may backfire and could be very expensive in the long run. One of the universities in Utah apparently tried this approach and it was leaked to the press. Now we run into civil liberties violations, etc. 4.) Know the letter of the law and the interpretations of the law in various districts. Have a written document that can be referred to online or given to those parties interested in them. 5.) Even if you don't agree with open carry, stay objective and keep your feelings to yourself. It is the behavior of the person -- not the gun -- that we key on. If they get annoyed and start protesting you, remember that unless they are threatening you with harm, they have a right to voice their opinion, even if they raise their voice at you. 6.) It still takes time to draw and load the firearm. It can be done in around two seconds for well trained individuals. As with any contact, watch the hands and body language. 7.) Follow good judgment. IF THERE IS PROBABLE CAUSE to treat them as an armed criminal, by all means do so. However, when you make contact with someone carrying openly without good probable cause, the strategy of "when in doubt, prone 'em out" would not be my first choice. Keep your distance if you can, and ask questions so you can get some indicators of the mental/emotional state of the contact prior to moving in closer. 8.) From a officer safety perspective, at least you KNOW that they are carrying a weapon! That knowledge alone will keep you from becoming complacent. Think of it as an opportunity to practice your officer safety tactics.

Conclusion

The right to self defense -- as well as the right to keep and bear arms -- is fundamental and has huge support in this country. Open carry has come about because of perceived government infringement on those rights. You as a law enforcement officer will be looked upon as part of that infringement and will incur indignation, hostility, and anger expressed as verbal or non-verbal protest. Don't take it personally. They see government when you contact them. Stay calm, professional, watchful, and respectful.

A side note to the citizen carrying openly: You should expect to be contacted law enforcement. You should expect to be feared by some, and considered to be a person of interest to many. Understand that by wearing a weapon in the open, you raise the perceived threat level in the eyes of law enforcement and other citizens. Friendly behavior goes a long way. People key on behavior rather than the weapon. Most folks respond well to a smile, polite behavior or a warm hello rather than a cold stare. I recommend that approach. You will be surprised how many people respond in a positive manner when you do that. Actually, this holds true on both sides of an open carry discussion, contact, or encounter...

I suspect that just like concealed carry, most of the perceived threats will not come to pass and it will largely be a live-and-let-live situation we'll just have to deal with. In time, perhaps concealed carry laws will pass in those jurisdictions that don't allow them, and citizens can move on to concealed carry as a means of carrying a weapon legally if they so choose.

Then, of course, you will have another set of issues to consider...

**************************************************15. America's Third War: Is the U.S. Arming Mexican Cartels? **************************************************

Robert Risacher emailed me this:

--

I guess this means we need a U.N. Small Arms Treaty?

=46rom Fox News: http://tinyurl.com/3gsnkks

America's Third War: Is the U.S. Arming Mexican Cartels?By William La JeunessePublished April 28, 2011 | FoxNews.com

If you ever watch video or look at pictures of the drug war in Mexico, you'll notice some pretty heavy weapons. This is a war being waged with rockets and plastic explosives, not pea shooters and Saturday Night Specials. Consider these incidents:

- A M26A2 fragmentation grenade used against a U.S. Consulate in Mexico in 2008

- Explosive projectiles and 21 grenades found during a raid in Guadalupe

- An unexploded grenade and pull ring used to attack a TV station in Monterrey

- Automatic weapons, including U.S.-made M16s found at a cartel crime scene in May 2009

- U.S. military-issued ammunition found in a cartel raid in Reynosa in November 2008

You can't buy this stuff at a U.S. gun store. So where do the cartels get it? According to leaked diplomatic cables, there are three sources.

1. U.S. Defense Department shipments to Latin America, known and tracked by the U.S. State Department as "foreign military sales."

2. Weapons ordered by the Mexican government, tracked by the State Department as "direct commercial sales."

3. Aging, but plentiful arsenals of military weapon stores in Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua.

Even though these facts were well-known by the Obama administration, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, it blamed much of the violence in Mexico on U.S. gun stores.

"More than 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico come from the United States, many from gun shops that line our border," President Obama said in February 2009.

That was contested, but few listened to gun store owners and former vets like Lynn Kartchner, owner of Allsafe Security, a gun shop in Douglas, Ariz.

"We in the gun industry knew from day one the allegations that the preponderance of sales came from gun stores like this one was totally not true," Kartchner said.

In fact, many of these weapons are getting to Mexico via the U.S. government. Tens of thousands of firearms and explosives are sold legally through the U.S. State Department to the Mexican government. These weapons are then funneled to the traffickers and cartels by corrupt officials within the Mexico Ministry of Defense and local and state police departments.

According to State Department documents, in 2009 Mexico bought nearly $177 million worth of American-made weapons, exceeding sales to Iraq and Afghanistan. That number includes $20 million in semi- and fully automatic weapons.

"Most of the M16s were sold legally to the Mexican government and disappeared," Kartchner added.

State Department cables obtained by WikiLeaks confirm that fear. One cable from November 2009 reads "U.S. law enforcement has fair reason to worry a number of weapons simply disappear... "Another from June 2009 says, "Rogue elements of the Guatemalan military are selling weapons to narcos."

"These are weapons that have been stockpiled either through U.S. aid programs or currently being shipped there under the guise of military support," said a confidential informant in Arizona who has worked for federal agencies such as the FBI, ATF and DEA.

"The governments and military in those countries realize that the economy is such that they are far better off to push these weapons north and sell them than they are to keep them in their own arsenals and reserves," he said.

Evidence of that is also contained in the Small Arms Survey. The table shows U.S. government sales of rifles, machine guns and handguns in the hundreds of thousands over a five-year period number.

And a GAO report from last year details both foreign military and direct commercial sales of arms from 2005 to 2009.

After looking at a warehouse full of high-powered weapons, allegedly stolen by a corrupt Mexican federal police officer, the informant said it was obvious to him that such weapons did not come from the "mom and pop" gun stores identified by the administration.

**************************************************16. Walmart gun sales **************************************************

Joe Bass emailed me this:

--

From the Wall Street Journal (subscription required to view full article): http://tinyurl.com/3rh4jhj

Wal-Mart Adds Guns Alongside ButterRetailing Giant Resumes Sales of Rifles, Shotguns at Half of Its Stores in Effort to Be One-Stop ShopAPRIL 28, 2011

BY MIGUEL BUSTILLO

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is quietly bringing back rifles, shotguns and ammunition to hundreds of U.S. stores as the hurting retail giant seeks to reinvigorate its one-stop shopping appeal and attract more male customers.

The world's largest retailer stopped selling hunting rifles and bullets at all but a third of its U.S. stores five years ago, citing diminishing sales.. It is now restoring them to hundreds of locations, bringing the total to nearly half of its more than 3,600 U.S. namesake stores, as part of a larger push to restore "heritage categories" of merchandise such as fishing rods and bolts of ...

-------------------------------------------***************************************************************************