05/19/11 - VCDL Update 5/19/11

[allingeneral]

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

1. VCDL meeting in Annandale - Thurs. 5/19/11
2. VCDL pot luck picnic in Salem, May 21
3. Obama admits stealth attack on rights, media yawns
4. Henrico Police to do presentation on "man with a gun" calls at VCDL meet
ing in Richmond on June 8th
5. More on interaction with officer in an unmarked police vehicle
6. VCDL/RRRC defensive pistol shoot wrap up
7. Bowling pin shoot wrap up
8. Can I carry here? Please, never ask!
9. VCDL member responds: Guns in churches
10. VCDL in Examiner article
11. Shooting in a church? Nah, never happens.
12. EDITORIAL: Gun-grabber misfire - Washington Times
13. Texas Senate approves handguns-on-campus amendment
14. H.R. 1865 - The Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act
15. Gun law expert: 200 US Reps now support national CCW reciprocity
16. SAF challenges interstate handgun sales ban
17. Who needs a gun in the shower?
18. Right to arms: Activists square off in gun debate
19. Editorial: The right to bear arms and self-defense

**************************************************1. VCDL meeting in Annandale - Thurs. 5/19/11**************************************************

VCDL will have its monthly membership meeting this Thursday, May 19th, at 8 PM. The meeting will be at the Mason District Government Building in Annandale. Fellowship starts at 7:30 PM and we will adjourn to a local restaurant for continued fellowship around 9:30 PM.

I expect some candidates to be at the meeting to speak about their campaigns.

I will be giving the presentation I made at George Mason University last month on college carry, along with some new information on school shootings I came across while researching that presentation.

As with all VCDL membership meetings, they are open to the public, so feel free to bring friends, family, and co-workers.

For directions, click here:

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

NOTE: There will not be a membership meeting held in Northern Virginia in June. There will be a meeting in Richmond on June 8th.

**************************************************2. VCDL pot luck picnic in Salem, May 21**************************************************

Southwest Virginia will again have a FAMILY "POT LUCK" picnic at Longwood Park, Salem VA on May 21. Food will be served starting at 11 AM. This event is open to all VCDL members, families and guests. Plan early to join us for this family event. More details will be published prior to the picnic date.

Longwood Park800 Main StreetSalem, VA 24153

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

**************************************************3. Obama admits stealth attack on rights, media yawns**************************************************

Imagine what the media would do if there had been a leak from the Bush Administration about planning a "below the radar" attack on gun-control?

The screaming and gnashing of teeth would have been intense!

But what if a reporter leaked that Obama told the Brady Campaign to be patient, that Obama is planning some below the radar gun control?

There was such a leak recently, but the media and the Brady Campaign are silent. Shhhhhh!

It does make you wonder what the Obama game plan would look like if he didn't have to worry about reelection.

Remember the price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

Kim Barton emailed me this:

--

Philip,

You have probably already seen something about this if this is true, but thought I would forward it just in case.

=46rom buckeyefirearms.org: http://tinyurl.com/3ntluq2

[SNIP]Obama Admits Stealth Attack on Rights, Media Yawns

"I just want you to know that we are working on it," Barack Obama told Sarah Brady regarding gun control. "We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar," Obama said according to Brady.

**************************************************4. Henrico Police to do presentation on "man with a gun" calls at VCDL meeting in Richmond on June 8th**************************************************

We have been working with the Henrico PD for them to make a presentation on how they handle "man with a gun" calls. They will also answer other questions you might have about their operation.

Mark your calendars for Wednesday, June 8th, from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM. We will meet at :

Tuckahoe Library1901 Starling DriveHenrico, VA 23229

Fellowship will start at 6:30 PM. We will go to a local restaurant after the meeting for further fellowship.

A similar event was held with Fairfax PD earlier this year and we had a big turn-out. People really liked the opportunity to be able to interact with the men and women who patrol our streets and protect our communities.

As with all VCDL membership meetings, they are open to the public, so bring friends, family and co-workers.

See you there!

**************************************************5. More on interaction with officer in an unmarked police vehicle**************************************************

An anonymous police officer emailed me this about a recent encounter I had with a Chesterfield police officer in an unmark vehicle while I was out for a late night walk. There is some good information here. The Chesterfield officer's hands were tied in ways I did not know:

--

Mr. Van Cleave,

On your recent encounter, I thought I would shed some light on why things may have gone the way they did. The courts have ruled that merely by turning on the flashing lights of a police car that an officer has effected a seizure in which a reasonable person might not feel they are free to leave. In your case there would have been no reason to turn the lights on as you were engaged in fully lawful activity and doing so would have put the officer in the position of having made an illegal seizure.

Additionally even things like volume and tone of voice can be considered a seizure rather then a consensual encounter. Which probably explains why you couldn't hear him. Too loud a voice or too strong a tone and again he would have effected an illegal seizure. The difference between, "Sir." and " SIR!" is sometimes a subtle intonation or slight volume change. If he had used the PA system even with a mild request, the volume alone may have been enough to be considered a seizure, aside from violating noise ordinances or departmental prohibitions on using the PA for certain encounters.

"Tactically speaking" it wouldn't have been wise to turn on his interior light as that would have highlighted him and made him vulnerable if you turned out to be a bad guy. Not only would it have lit him up for an aggressor's fire, it would have temporarily reduced his ability to see you, either from glare on interior glass or reduction in night vision. So turning on his interior light to help identify himself would have put him at a dangerous disadvantage. Something I don't think the general population would choose to endure if they were in his shoes.

It sounds like you encountered an officer who actually knew what he was doing. But I am glad to see that it ended well, despite raising your alert level.

One of the things I have found is that a lot of people who can and should carry, don't. When encountering a CHP holder on a traffic stop I often ask them, "Are you carrying today?". I would say that 9 times out of 10 they tell me they are not. To which I usually reply "Why not?" This seems to surprise a lot of people, and while some say they were coming from the communist state of Maryland or DC (my words not theirs) the rest will usually reply, "I didn't think I would need it today." Or something to that effect. I'd say another third have prohibitions against weapons at work and so they leave their guns at home.

It is a shame really that people have to choose between keeping a paycheck and potentially saving their own lives. Perhaps the VCDL should launch a campaign about gun safes in cars? Then perhaps more people would be able to avoid having to make that choice.

**************************************************6. VCDL/RRRC defensive pistol shoot wrap up**************************************************

The VCDL/Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club shoot was a great success - many thanks to Board member Al Steed, Jr. and all those below who made it a wonderful even. We have around 75 prizes handed out - so all attendees got something - very cool.

Board member Al Steed, Jr. emailed me this:

--

A VERY SPECIAL THANKS TO KEN MODICA AND JOHN EVERETTE for getting SO MANY SPONSORS to donate prizes for the shoot! Your efforts really helped make this a great shoot, and we appreciate the long hours required to get this done. Thanks also to EM DAVE HICKS for helping out on shoot day with the cooking and set ups.

Our super SPONSORS WERE:

TRADER JERRY's, SalemPSS RANGE AND TRAINING, RoanokeBRYANSTEENS GUN AND ARCHERY, RoanokeLYNCHBURG ARMS, LynchburgVALLEY POWER PRODUCTS and STEVE WIRTZ, RoanokeFRANKLIN OUTDOORS, ROCKY MTHACKSAW BAIL BONDS, RichmondROANOKE FIREARMS, RoanokeALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS (ATK), RadfordDICKS SPORTING GOOD's, RoanokeJOHN EVERETTEKATHY SMITHAL & LINDA STEED (AMSOIL products)

**Please thank all these sponsors for their support when you shop in their stores or purchase their products!**

ROANOKE RIFE AND REVOLVER CLUB hosted this shoot again this year. We want to thank the club for the use of this outstanding facility --a great place to shoot! In all shoots there are many to thank for their hard work, and without hesitation, the RANGE SAFETY OFFICERS of RRRC did a super job putting this shoot together under the leadership of MIKE HENSON---VCDL thanks all of these super folks who spent a long day at the range for this fun event! We also want to thank Kathy Smith and her helpers who did the paperwork at the registration table.

There were 69 registered shooters at this event along with a bunch of non shooters attending. 240 hot dogs with ALL the trimmings were furnished by ATK for this event----it was definitely not our fault if anyone left hungry!

We thank all who attended, those who worked hard for this shoot, and all of our super sponsors!

AL STEED JRSW VA, VCDL

**************************************************7. Bowling pin shoot wrap up**************************************************

EM Patricia Webb emailed me this:

--

On Saturday, May 14 Todd and Tammy Freeman held a bowling pin shoot to raise money for the Louisa County Sheriff's Office (LCSO) K-9 unit. Todd was kind enough to invite VCDL to set up a table and enlighten the participants about what we do. EMs Brandy Polanowski and Bruce Jackson did an excellent job manning the booth and signed up several new members.

The event was a great success, with the best turnout that Todd and Tammy have had to date. During a break in the shooting, the LCSO entertained the participants with a demonstration of their police dog. There were also some great raffle prizes donated by many of the local businesses and some firearms companies.

For those of you who have never shot bowling pins, it is a real blast! Five competitors line up on the firing line. Each one has his or her own table and each table has 5 bowling pins. At the buzzer everyone starts shooting and you must knock all the pins completely off your table. The first one to clear the table wins a cash prize. Pin placement on the table depends on caliber; .45's are at the front of the table and .22's are in the back. Other calibers are placed somewhere in between.

There were certificates awarded for the top male, top female, top senior, top youth and top law enforcement, as well as shotgun and revolver. One highlight was a demonstration of full-auto v. semi-auto...the full auto came in last! It just goes to show that shot placement is much more important than speed or number of rounds!

Todd and Tammy will be having more events like this and have promised to hold one to raise money for VCDL. Check back for future announcements!

**************************************************8. Can I carry here? Please, never ask!**************************************************

EM Chip Fetrow emailed me this in response to a question about whether carry is legal at a particular mall in Virginia:

--

Please, NEVER ASK!

The mall is either posted or it is not. If not, you may carry. If you carry openly, someone might notice and ask you to leave, which you must do. They don't needs signs to ask you to leave.

On the other hand, of you carry concealed in the absence of signs, you are fine and legal, and they won't ask you to leave because they cannot see the gun.

HOWEVER, if you ask, you have allowed them to put you on notice and you may not carry concealed either.

That is why we have that big opening notice on the Gun Unfriendly Business Page that basically says, "DON'T ASK -- DON'T TELL!"

Please, don't ever ask.

Thanks.

**************************************************9. VCDL member responds: Guns in churches **************************************************

Roy Scherer emailed me this, in response to a previous alert item ("Duct-tape warning: Thomasson: Guns in church a recipe for disaster").

--

Dear Mr. Thomasson -

I read your column on guns in churches (April 28) with some interest. You've written some columns with which I agree, and some with which I disagree, but on this one I'm afraid that you siimply have your facts wrong.

Since you have not offered public commentary on this column, I do not know if you even bother to read emails that disagree with you. I quite understand if you prefer not to do so (after all, anyone who disagrees is self-evidently wrong). Nonetheless, here are a few points where, either opinion or in objective fact, you erred in this piece. Read it if you will, respond if you care to do so.

First of all, I find it highly unlikely that the Indians in colonial times would have recognised any "right to sanctary" within a church erected to a God in whom they did not believe. Certainly the view of Native Americans shown in the Declaration of Independence gave no hint of any such delicacy on their part. Do you have any evidence to the contrary? Do you suppose that God's mercy continued to the settlers after they, in historical fact, attempted frank genocide on a number of occasions (both with poison and with biological warfare)?

Are you asserting that "self-defense" is NOT a "good and sufficient reason" for carrying a personal weapon? If so, would you then assert a better one?

You assert that "But the one time [H]e showed a violent side was when [H]e used[H\his hands and feet to kick the money changers out of the temple." Perhaps you are not familiar with the Gospel of Luke, c. 22 v.6: "he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."

You say, "The justification for this is that on an occasion or two, a mentally off balanced shooter has taken the life of a parishioner." This is not so rare an occurrence as you may think. Would you like to check the databases of hundreds of church shootings in recent years -- not to mention the church bombings and arsons in Civil Rights era America?

Finally, you are absolutely wrong on a final count, and I have absolute confidence in predicting that you will be proven wrong on a second. You say, "In Virginia it seems that fewer and fewer places now are safe havens from the presence of firearms." This ignores the fact that all a pastor has to do is to post a sign at the entrance to the church that firearms are not allowed. Presto, again you have a "safe haven" -- or, as much of one as a legal ban would have provided.

You also say, "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." Why do you think that this is inevitable? Are you not aware that every time the restrictions on guns have been loosened, there have been identical predictions? Allowing concealed-carry was going to cause shootouts over parking spaces and loud music; allowing concealed carry in places that serve alcohol was guaranteed to result in a rash of murders over cold entrees and mixed-up dessert otders. None of these other dire predictions have come true; why do you think that yours will fare any better?

Sincerely yours,Roy B. Scherer

Original Thomasson column:http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/61260

**************************************************10. VCDL in Examiner article **************************************************

This article is wrong - guns won't be allow in State Forests until at least July 7th.

=46rom the Washington Examiner: http://tinyurl.com/3bwtkqd

Guns now allowed in Va. forestsBy: Ben Giles 05/09/11 8:05 PM

Virginia state code may soon allow people to carry open or concealed guns in state forests, another move in a part of an effort by Gov. Bob McDonnell to scale back some of the state's regulations prohibiting the carrying of firearms.The governor finalized the change to the Virginia Department of Forestry's regulation on Friday, and the new code went into effect immediately.

The law originally prohibited firearms of any kind to be carried in a state forest, but now includes an exception for lawfully obtained firearms and ammunition. McDonnell announced his support for an amendment to the forestry department's code in January, but the changes only occurred after a public comment period.

"These regulations simply allow law abiding Virginians who legally own a firearm to exercise the same rights in a Virginia state forest or state park that they already possess while elsewhere in the Commonwealth," said Taylor Thornley, a spokeswoman for McDonnell.

As the state's attorney general in 2008, McDonnell wrote an opinion that the Department of Conservation and Recreation did not have the authority to enforce the no-gun policy. But then Gov. Tim Kaine ordered the department to continue to enforce the law.

An advisory opinion issued by Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in April also found that carrying guns into a place of worship for personal protection is sufficient to meet the requirements of Virginia law, which states it is illegal to do so while a religious meeting is being held "without good and sufficient reason."

Gun rights advocates at the Virginia Citizens Defense League said McDonnell's record and actions on gun control, as well as Cuccinelli's non-legally binding opinion, are a step in the right direction.

"The fact that you can protect yourself everywhere you go is key," said VCDL President Philip Van Cleave. "And every time we tear down another wall, that's one less place that a law-abiding citizen would be left vulnerable to crime."

**************************************************11. Shooting in a church? Nah, never happens.**************************************************

An interview of an armed woman who stopped a church massacre in Colorado in 2007. At the time she was volunteering as security at the church:

--

=46rom policeone.com [VIDEO]: http://tinyurl.com/3o5fmcl

**************************************************12. EDITORIAL: Gun-grabber misfire - Washington Times**************************************************

Typical anti-freedom hypocrite - Mayor Daley of Chicago wants armed guards after he leaves office for protection!

James Kiser emailed me this:

=46rom the Washington Times: http://tinyurl.com/62eu2vh

[SNIP]EDITORIAL: Gun-grabber misfireHypocrisy of the gun-control crowd fails to make us saferBy THE WASHINGTON TIMESFriday, May 6, 2011

After the Supreme Court smacked down Chicago's gun ban last year, the gun grabbers scrambled to evade their responsibilities under the Constitution. Outgoing Mayor Richard M. Daley revised the Windy City's gun laws to place so many obstacles on the path to gun ownership that few law-abiding citizens would succeed. Now we learn that Mr. Daley wants taxpayers to foot the bill for a team of armed bodyguards to protect him once he leaves office on May 17.

**************************************************13. Texas Senate approves handguns-on-campus amendment**************************************************

Now THIS is my kind of Senator. This guy is truly fighting hard for college carry and has earned my long distance respect big time. Like a pit bull he has sunk his teeth in and simply won't let go! If only we could clone him and put him in OUR Senate

James Durso emailed me this:

--

=46rom trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com:http://tinyurl.com/3makf7d

Senate approves handguns-on-campus amendmentBy Terrence Stutz/Reporter 3:47 PM on Mon., May. 9, 2011

Stymied in his previous efforts to pass a handguns-on-campus bill in the Senate, Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, was successful on his fourth try Monday as senators agreed to add the proposal to a state fiscal matters bill that was expected to win approval. The door was opened for Wentworth's handgun measure when senators added another languishing bill on higher education as an amentment to the fiscal matters legislation. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst ruled that the handgun proposal also could be added as an amendment because the fiscal matters bill relates to higher education in Texas.

The proposal, generally opposed by higher education officials across the state, would allow Texans with a concealed handgun license to carry a gun into any buildings on a college campus, including classrooms. It would also allow students with a license to keep a handgun in their dormitories, although college officials would be allowed to restrict where it could be stored. The vote to add Wentworth's amendment was 21-10, with all the no votes cast by Democrats. House members have not yet voted on similar legislation.

Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, led opposition to the handgun amendment, noting that college officials across the state have voiced opposition to opening up their campuses to the carrying of concealed handguns. She also argued it would undermine local control of campuses. "The only feedback I've had on this bill has been negative," she said. But Wentworth said there are both proponents and opponents of the idea in the higher education community of Texas. He also voiced hope that the proposal will now - finally - go forward, noting that it "seems like Groundhog Day since we've already debated this so many times."

**************************************************14. H.R. 1865 - The Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act **************************************************

Jeff Freeman emailed me this:

--

=46rom NRA-ILA:http://tinyurl.com/6b43zcg

[SNIP]H.R. 1865, The Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act Introduced

Friday, May 13, 2011

Urge your Member of Congress to Cosponsor this Important Legislation--On May 12, Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio) and Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) introduced H.R.. 1865, the Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act, which is designed to protect the rights of gun owners on lands owned or managed by the Army Corps of Engineers.

Legislation that made it legal to possess firearms for self-defense on National Park Service and National Wildlife Refuge System lands greatly expanded the places where law-abiding Americans can legally carry firearms for self-defense. However, that change in the law did not include millions of acres of recreational land managed by the Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps owns or manages over 11.7 million acres, including 400 lakes and river projects, 90,000 campsites and 4,000 miles of trails.

After passage of the change in carry regulations for National Parks, the Army Corps released a statement that read: "Public Law 111-024 does not apply to Corps projects of facilities . . . It [the Army Corps] will continue to prohibit loaded concealed weapons on Corps properties regardless of the new law and notwithstanding any contrary provisions of state law."

H.R. 1865 will reverse this Army Corps policy and prohibit the Secretary of the Army from enforcing any regulation that prohibits gun possession in compliance with state law on Corps projects and lands. The legislation would not, however, allow firearms in federal facilities such as Army Corps headquarters, Corps research facilities or lock and dam buildings.

**************************************************15. Gun law expert: 200 US Reps now support national CCW reciprocity**************************************************

As stated previously, I am conflicted on this piece of legislation. I don't think the feds should be dabbling in telling the states about CHP reciprocity, but it would be nice to be able to carry in Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, etc.

=46rom expertclick.com: http://tinyurl.com/5uvprgw

[SNIP]"There now are 200 Members of Congress cosponsoring a bipartisan national CCW reciprocity bill offered by Reps. Cliff Stearns (R-FL) and Heath Shuler (D-NC)," gun rights expert John M. Snyder said here today.

"It's time for Congress to move forward on H.R. 822, the proposed National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011," he added. "It would provide a national standard with which nonresidents of a state may carry concealed firearms in the state."

**************************************************16. SAF challenges interstate handgun sales ban**************************************************

The Second Amendment Foundation has been doing some fine work lately.

David Ford emailed me this:

--

=46rom the Second Amendment Foundation:http://tinyurl.com/3z8n4b3

SAF CHALLENGES INTERSTATE HANDGUN SALES BAN

For Immediate Release: 5/10/2011

BELLEVUE, WA - The Second Amendment Foundation today filed suit in U.S. District Court in Virginia challenging the constitutionality of federal and Virginia provisions barring handgun sales to non-residents.

SAF is joined in the lawsuit by Michelle Lane, a District of Columbia resident who cannot legally purchase handguns because there are no retail firearms dealers inside the District. The Supreme Court's 2008 Heller ruling struck down the District's handgun ban, confirming that individuals have a constitutional right to possess handguns.

SAF and Lane are represented by attorney Alan Gura of Gura & Possessky, PLLC, who won both the Heller ruling and last year's Supreme Court victory in McDonald v. City of Chicago. Named as defendants are Attorney General Eric Holder and W. Steven Flaherty, superintendent of the Virginia State Police.

"This is an important issue in the era of the national instant background check," said SAF Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. "The NICS check should allow law-abiding citizens like Miss Lane to exercise their Second Amendment rights regardless their place of residence."

"Americans don't check their constitutional rights at the state line," said Gura. "And since Michelle Lane is legally entitled to possess firearms, forcing her to seek a non-existing D.C. dealer to buy a handgun is pointless when perfectly legitimate options exist minutes across the Potomac River."

"The Supreme Court has ruled that District residents have an individual right, protected by the Constitution, to have a handgun in their home," Gottlieb noted. "The high court has also ruled that the Second Amendment applies to the states. Existing state and federal statutes violate both the spirit and letter of recent court rulings and the Constitution, and our lawsuit seeks to remedy that situation."

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

**************************************************17. Who needs a gun in the shower?**************************************************

Why you might need a gun handy when taking a shower. Dave Hicks emailed me this:

--

=46rom the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: http://tinyurl.com/3j7w2sb

Police ID slain home invasion suspectThursday, May 12, 2011By Mike Morris and John Spink The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The man who police say was killed by a homeowner during an attempted sexual assault was identified Thursday as Israel Perez Puentes, 34, of Alpharetta.

A Gwinnett County woman shot and killed Puentes Wednesday morning after the knife-wielding man attacked her in the shower, police said.

The incident happened about 6:30 a.m. at a home in the 2800 block of East Mount Tabor Circle.

Gwinnett police Cpl. Edwin Ritter told the AJC that the woman, who is in her early 50s, was getting out of the shower when the intruder, who she did not know, turned out the lights and attacked her.

She fell back into the shower, injuring her back, and attempted to fight Puentes off with the shower rod, Ritter said.

"She was telling him that she has money and please don't hurt her," Ritter

said.

"He forced her into her bedroom," Ritter said. "Once inside the bedroom, she retrieved a .22-caliber pistol and shot him several times." Ritter characterized the attack as an attempted sexual assault.

The suspect ran outside the house and collapsed. He was taken to Gwinnett Medical Center, where he died.

The victim ran to a neighbor's house after the attack, and was later taken to Duluth Medical Center for treatment of minor injuries. She was released from the hospital and returned to her home just before noon Wednesday.

Neighbor Rebecca Wisecup told the AJC that she was awakened about 6:30 a.m. to the sounds of someone screaming and crying.

"I came out of the bedroom and out into the hallway and it was just horrible screaming, and I found our neighbor on our kitchen floor," Wisecup said. "She was naked, just out of the shower. She was screaming that somebody tried to kill her, and 'Oh my God, oh, my God, he tried to kill me.'"

"She said she shot him and he got away, or she didn't know where he was, so we called the police," Wisecup said, tearing up as she recounted the morning's events. "I tried to get her up out of the floor and got a robe on her and got her to sit down, and within a few minutes the police showed up and took care of her."

Wisecup said that the victim told her that "she was in the shower, and the bathroom light went off, and she opened the shower curtain and there was a man that held a knife up to her throat."

Wisecup said her neighbor is a "a nice lady, just a sweet lady.Thank God she's OK and she had a weapon to protect herself with."

Ritter said the victim would not be charged in the incident.

"She responded to the deadly threat with deadly force," he said.

Ritter said police were checking to see if Puentes might be involved in other crimes in the area.

Marsha Day, who lives down the street, said her house has been broken into twice since she moved into the neighborhood 11 years ago.

"Fortunately, I wasn't home either time, but I've lost a lot of stuff because of break-ins," Day said.

"That's awesome that she had something to protect herself with," neighbor Michelle Church said.

"I don't know how she was good enough to get her gun like that," Church said. "She's very lucky and fortunate that she was able to defend herself. Good for her."

**************************************************18. Right to arms: Activists square off in gun debate**************************************************

Board member Bruce Jackson emailed me this:

--

=46rom cbn.com: http://tinyurl.com/3rlowwf

Right to Arms: Activists Square off in Gun DebateBy Jennifer WishonCBN News Washington CorrespondentMonday, May 09, 2011

WASHINGTON - In the wake of the shootings in Tucson, Ariz., President Obama is breaking his silence on gun control - something that has both sides of the debate gearing up for a fight.

Following the tragedy, the president acknowledged in an Arizona newspaper column Americans' Second Amendment right to bear arms.

"The fact is, almost all gun owners in America are highly responsible," Obama wrote. "They're our friends and neighbors. They buy their guns legally and use them safely, whether for hunting or target shooting, collection or protection."

Still, Obama called for better enforcement of gun laws already on the books.

Specifically, he wants to strengthen the National Instant Background Check System (NICS), run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, by rewarding states that provide the best data and making the system work faster.

But instead of pacifying everyone, the president's words only have inflamed passions on both sides of the debate.

Obama Gets 'F' on Gun Control

"I was just happy that the president finally was saying something about gun violence in this country," said Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Nevertheless, the Brady Campaign recently gave the president an "F" for not making good on campaign promises to address gun violence on America's streets.

After the shootings at Virginia Tech in 2007, Congress passed incentives for states to provide more data to the background check system. But they never fully funded the program.

"This is one of the things I think most people don't realize," Helmke said. "States are not required to send in any names. They're not required to send in names of felons. They're not required to send in names of people who are dangerously mentally ill."

Protecting the 'Good Guys'

However, Jared Laughner, the man who opened fire at a Tucson supermarket, killing 13 people and injuring six, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., would not have been flagged under any existing category on the background check.

Even if he was on the list of prohibited buyers, he still could have found a way to buy a gun.

"I'm not going to apologize for saying with absolute certainty that, in the face of the violent criminals in this country that prey on people every day, the Second Amendment is all the good guys have. And every day it saves lives," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

He suggested the administration direct U.S. attorneys to get tougher on street criminals instead of consistently favoring big, headline-grabbing cases.

"When a felon walks into a gun store, tries to buy a gun and is turned down, you prosecute him," LaPierre said. "You don't let him walk out the store."

"I mean that's like Bonnie and Clyde," he continued. "You let Clyde walk into a gun store, the instant check turns him up as a felon so they turn down the sale."

"Clyde walks home and tells Bonnie: 'I got good news and bad news. The bad news is they didn't sell me the gun. The good news is it let me go,'" he said.

Tougher Gun Control

Some members of Congress want to take gun restrictions a step further than the president.

Legislation has been introduced to ban high capacity ammunition magazines, those that contain 30 rounds or more.

Supporters of the measure say that if shooters like Laughner had to stop to reload after 10 rounds, as opposed to 31, then lives can be been saved.

"He (Laughner) was stopped from shooting, not by the police, not by somebody else with a gun; he was stopped when he ran out of bullets in that magazine. That's when he was tackled," said Helmke, who supports the legislation.

However, LaPierre said, "You look at these ranchers on the border down in Arizona right now with these drug cartels coming over the border. They ought to have any type of magazine they chose to own."

One thing is certain: As Giffords continues her miraculous recovery and her shooter Laughner moves through the criminal justice system, the issue will continue to make headlines and capture the attention of Congress.

Both sides of the debate are ready.

**************************************************19. Editorial: The right to bear arms and self-defense**************************************************

=46rom depauliaonline.com: http://tinyurl.com/43sc5cq

Editorial: The right to bear arms and self-defenseBy Allison C. Barinholtz

Published: Monday, May 9, 2011

The Illinois House voted to reject passing one of the most important and controversial pieces of legislation in a quite a while: the concealed carry bill that would allow permitted and trained individuals in Illinois to carry a gun on or near them at all times.

People feel a natural need to protect themselves and their families, which is why the second constitutional Amendment grants citizens the right to bear arms. However, there exists no constitutional amendment granting the right to government to limit the usage or ownership of private guns. Convinced of the idea that more guns will equal more gun violence overall, advocates of gun control look at past social patterns in states that allow gun ownership. They emphasize that as gun ownership increases, so does homicide. But it is important to consider whether increasing gun ownership causes increasing homicide or if it is the other way around.

It all breaks down to two aspects: the willingness of citizens to protect themselves, and the notion that individual mishaps should not have national (or state-wide) consequences.

With the capability of individuals to carry guns, coupled with the proper permits and training, the common citizen is safer overall. The permission to carry a gun grants both power and responsibility. Some are afraid that granting people more power in this field will encourage more and easily provoked gun violence. Comfort may lie within the realization that a firearm does not need to actually be used in order to gain a desired effect.

Some may argue that the availability of concealed carry in places of high crime rates (like Chicago, for example) will just aid in the ease of criminals obtaining and using guns. Bluntly and honestly, criminals will acquire the weapons they wish to use, regardless of regulations - they are criminals, after all.

But what about the terrible tragedies, like at Columbine and Virginia Tech? Obviously, guns were already not allowed on the campus in which these shootings took place, but the aggressors brought the weapon anyway, so a concealed carry law (or lack thereof) would have really no effect on this. However, what would have an effect would be the possibility that other individuals at the scene had guns as well. Think about how many fewer people could have died in those situations if others had the means to stop the shooter before harming many others.

Some argue against guns in schools because of how difficult it would be to regulate at-school crime. But, if guns aren't allowed, and the legislation passes - what about accidental gun presence on campus? For example, should someone be punished because they are carrying a gun while simply passing through campus, via car or walking? Especially at campuses like DePaul's Loop and Lincoln Park Campuses, it would be difficult to determine an aggressor from an innocent bystander at that point.

This dilemma aside, it is time for people to realize the true problems that individuals face - fear, and the willingness to surrender to any force that reduces fear, sometimes jeopardizing civil rights and liberties in the process.Benjamin Franklin said it best, "Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither."

Overall, concealed carry might be just what Illinois, including Chicago, needs to dissolve the walls of fear that keep us in our homes at night.



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