VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 8/2/11

[Taggure]

VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 8/2/11

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

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

1. It is a Banner year!
2. VCDL picnic on August 6 at the Pocahontas State Park in Chesterfield (NEW: shelter numbers)
3. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus to have forum in DC on August 8th!
4. UVA opinion
5. D.C. police opens to gun business; suit dismissed
6. The Assault Weapons Ban: How silly was it? (part two)
7. Who needs a gun in DC (video)?
8. Ohio CCW stop
9. Iowa congressman, family safe after home invasion
10. Debate: Does bearing arms ward off violent criminals?
11. Who needs a gun at a bingo game?
12. Boy, 2, recovering from coyote attack
13. Do lead bullets continue to be a hazard after they land?
14. Ayoob Files: Interview with Joe Zamudio
15. Guns on campus
16. Food for thought
17. Fairfax County fixes bad air gun ordinance


*************************************************
1. It is a Banner year!
*************************************************

Through your efforts the VCDL presence is expanding. Tables have been manned at gun shows, but additionally they have been manned at store openings, flea markets, local charitable shoots, and more. This means the banners have had some additional wear as well as more are required. So if you are, or know someone who is, in the banner business and is willing to help us defend their right to defend themselves, please, let Bruce Jackson know. He can be reached at Bruce@vcdl.org.


*************************************************
2. VCDL picnic on August 6 at the Pocahontas State Park in Chesterfield (NEW: shelter numbers)
*************************************************

Picnic THIS SATURDAY!

To celebrate Governor McDonnell's directive earlier this year to cease enforcement of the open carry ban in State Parks, VCDL is having a picnic on Saturday, August 6, at the Pocahontas State Park in Chesterfield County from 11 AM to 2 PM.

Pocahontas State Park is located at:

10301 State Park Road
Chesterfield, VA 23832

***** We will be in shelters 5 and 6 *****

This off Beach Road (SR-655) in Chesterfield County

Pocahontas State Park

And don't forget that State Forests have been allowing carry since July 7th!

The picnic is open to the public and is free (there is a $5 parking fee that the parks charge for each vehicle entering the park, with exceptions for military and the disabled). If you are planning on attending, please RSVP to EMs Brandy Polanowski and Bob Sadtler at:

picnics@vcdl.org

Use a subject line that says "Attending" followed by the number in your party, like this, "Attending 3"

If you can help with cooking on the grill or set up and tear down, please indicate so in your email to picnics@vcdl.org


*************************************************
3. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus to have forum in DC on August 8th!
*************************************************

Students for Concealed Carry is pleased to announce its second
national conference, and would love for VCDL members to to attend.
Participants will include Ken Cuccinelli, Nicole Goeser, John Lott,
Alan Gura, Alan Gottlieb, and Amanda Carpenter.

The conference will focus principally on the issue of concealed
firearms by permit holders in the University setting. A panel of
academic experts will highlight the current research on the issue of
concealed carry, and legal experts will cover the development of
second amendment case law, with predictions on where the case law is
heading.

The conference is on Monday, August 8th from noon to 4:30 PM. It will
be held at the National Press Club, 529 14th Street Northwest
Washington, D.C. 20045.

The event is free, but space is limited. Please RSVP to
kurt.mueller@concealedcampus.org if you would like to attend.


*************************************************
4. UVA opinion
*************************************************

Charles Winkler emailed me this:

--

Phil:

The debate over Ken Cuccinelli's opinion continues in the Univ. of Virginia Magazine.

From the UVA Magazine: http://tinyurl.com/3j56569

Here's how UVA is going to prevent violence:

Resisting Violence, Step Three: Self-Defense Models

Empowerment Model

The most effective models empower people to make choices. They promote the notion that women have the right to be heard and listened to; that they have the right not to be touched against their will and that they must be respected. This method of self-defense honors women's power and strength and ability to take care of themselves.

Prevention Model

Prevention is a controversial term, for one could argue that men can prevent rape, women can't. However, research has repeatedly supported safety strategies. No one can guarantee complete immunity from sexual assault, as it is true that potential victims have no control over the actions of potential assailants. However, we all can do whatever is possible to reduce our risk. In the end, however, since upwards of 90% of all sexual assailants are male, it is men who must work to end this behavior.

Protection Model

This model used to be very popular, and in some cases, still is. In this case, authority figures (police, parents, politicians) offered women a set of rules to follow (lock your car at all times, avoid dark places, never go anywhere alone, etc...). Feminist organizations believe that these lists are ineffective, restrictive, and offensive, for they imply that women cannot take care of themselves, or make logical decisions to reduce their risks of assault. And, the reality of women's lives make it impossible to follow every rule at every minute of every day.

http://womenscenter.virginia.edu/sdvs/r ... models.htm

I posted this comment:

"Let's see how UVA protects its own against violence. I see that UVA stands ready to support survivors of violence - after the fact:

"The University of Virginia takes gender-based violence seriously and provides support and information to survivors, friends and families of survivors, and the University community." http://www.virginia.edu/sexualviolence/

UVA's model is that "potential victims have no control over the actions of potential assailants," while criminals and the deranged will just have to work a wee bit harder to change their behaviors:

"No one can guarantee complete immunity from sexual assault, as it is true that potential victims have no control over the actions of potential assailants. However, we all can do whatever is possible to reduce our risk. In the end, however, since upwards of 90% of all sexual assailants are male, it is men who must work to end this behavior."

http://womenscenter.virginia.edu/sdvs/r ... models.htm

Others adopt a different model to protect themselves."

Charles Winkler


*************************************************
5. D.C. police opens to gun business; suit dismissed
*************************************************

From wtop.com: http://tinyurl.com/3fsjm6s


D.C. police open to gun business; Suit dismissed
Wednesday - 7/20/2011

WASHINGTON -- The Metropolitan Police Department has opened up its doors to a gun dealer whose business, cleared by the D.C. Zoning Commission, will lift the de facto ban on District residents purchasing handguns.

Charles Sykes, who possesses one of the city's few licenses to transfer guns into the city and previously had the only business to do so, can now set up shop in MPD's headquarters at 300 Indiana Ave. in Northwest for $100 per month for one year.

The commission voted unanimously last week on an amendment allowing firearm retail businesses in D.C. to operate at law enforcement or licensing agencies in city government buildings. Residents must continue to purchase guns in other jurisdictions and pay dealers like Sykes to bring them into the District, since there are no gun sellers in the city.

D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray said at a Wednesday press conference the city is making "as much of an accommodation as we can" to allow legal firearms in the city, and officials hoped Sykes would accept the solution.

Sykes told WTOP Wednesday afternoon he intends to make the move, but will continue to look for private property to reopen his business permanently.

He expects the approval process for the move -- which involves the city as well as the Bureau for Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives -- to take from three to six weeks.

"I'm going to accept their offer, at least for now," he said.

Sykes had previously lost his business and was unable to reopen. Gray called the commission's decision "an option, at least for the short term," though he told WTOP categorically earlier in July that D.C. should not be in the gun business.

Meanwhile, lawyer Alan Gura's suit against D.C., the state of Virginia and the federal government over the de facto ban has been dismissed in the Alexandria federal court where he filed, Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice Paul A. Quander, Jr. said Wednesday.

Gura argued and won the case before the U.S. Supreme Court three years ago that overturned the D.C. ban on handguns.

"The court viewed our lawsuit as challenging the lack of D.C. gun dealers, and dismissed the case by finding that the government was not responsible for that situation," Gura wrote in an email to WTOP about the suit's dismissal. "We strongly believe this basically miscomprehends the nature of our claim and we look forward to the appeal."

At Wednesday's press conference, Quander said gun owners who want to legally have one in the District have a "mechanism" to do just that. But he said there is not an "overwhelming demand" for firearms in the District, which would allow multiple gun dealers to make a living.

D.C. police Chief Cathy Lanier told WTOP July 7 that it "makes sense" for a store like Wal-Mart to sell guns. The retailer has no plans to play such a role in D.C.


*************************************************
6. The Assault Weapons Ban: How silly was it? (part two)
*************************************************

James Durso emailed me this:

--

From pajamasmedia.com: http://tinyurl.com/3qrxp7y


The Assault Weapons Ban: How Silly Was It? (Part Two)
We know it failed, they know it failed. So what could possibly give the Obama admin and gun-control advocates the confidence to push for it again? (Read Part One of this series at http://tinyurl.com/4ygtq6v.)
By Bob Owens
June 24, 2011

The Washington Post, May 23, 2011:

On March 30, the 30th anniversary of the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan, Jim Brady, who sustained a debilitating head wound in the attack, and his wife, Sarah, came to Capitol Hill to push for a ban on the controversial "large magazines." Brady, for whom the law requiring background checks on handgun purchasers is named, then met with White House press secretary Jay Carney. During the meeting, President Obama dropped in and, according to Sarah Brady, brought up the issue of gun control: "to fill us in that it was very much on his agenda," she said.

"I just want you to know that we are working on it," Brady recalled the president telling them. "We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar."

In every practical respect, the firearms-related provisions of the "assault weapons ban" were an objective failure. But absurd restrictions on firearms weren't the only part of that legislation that passed only to succumb to an outcome quite different than it's anti-gun progenitors had in mind.

Along with creating the term "assault weapon," this Clinton-era law also created the similarly arbitrary term "high-capacity magazine."

A detachable magazine is a container that holds cartridges for a given firearm, and the number of cartridges typically varied with the size and the purpose of the weapon at hand and the size of the cartridge it fired. Small turn-of-the-century handguns typically carried magazines of just 6-7 cartridges. The standard magazine capacity of many pistols that became popular in the 1980s was 15 rounds or more. The standard capacity of military grade rifles and carbines was 20-30 rounds. As time progressed, firearm designers were finding ways to put a larger number of cartridges in the magazines of their weapons.

When legislators decided that the "assault weapons ban" should also include a restriction on the number of cartridges that any given magazine could hold, they declared that any magazine that held a greater amount of cartridges was a "high capacity" magazine. It didn't matter to them that many of the firearms in question had as their standard capacity magazines with round counts from 13-30 rounds or more, or that some of these firearms had had such a capacity since before the congressmen and congresswomen writing the law were born.

Congress arbitrarily decided that 10 rounds was "enough" for American citizens, and included provisions that once the law went into effect, any magazine manufactured after the date the law went into effect that had more than ten rounds would be illegal for anything other than law enforcement use.

Like the firearms provisions of the bill, these magazine provisions also had unintended consequences.

As it turns out, firearms magazines are both typically very robust and reliable in design, and incredibly easy to mass manufacture. Once made, they last indefinitely.

Between the time Congress started signaling that they would create a magazine capacity restriction and the implementation of the law, factories worked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week churning out millions of nothing but high-capacity magazines, which were stockpiled by manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers, and retailers in massive warehouses.

As a result, "high capacity magazines" for most common firearms were freely available throughout the life of the ban. As e-commerce came into early maturity during this time period, many high-capacity magazines were more available than they had been before the ban was signed into law.

How?

Congress had neglected to make the possession or sale of high-capacity magazines illegal, and only outlawed the manufacture of new magazines.

The law had another unforeseen result. As companies looked to introduce new models of pistols, they determined that if they were going to be forced to make pistols limited to a magazine capacity of just 10 rounds, it would be advantageous for them to make these new pistols as small as possible for the concealed carry market. The Glock 26 and Kahr K9 were introduced the following year, and were among the first of a new breed of powerful, ultra-concealable handguns known as "subcompacts." Similar designs from other companies quickly followed.

Objectively, based purely on the numbers, the assault weapons ban increased both the number of and public acceptance of semi-automatic, military-style rifles, and created a new class of powerful, concealable handguns.

Put another way, the assault weapons ban not only put more guns into the market, it encouraged the development of smaller, more powerful, semi-automatic firearms.

Why, then, would the Obama administration want to reintroduce the ban?

Rest assured, if the administration could find broad support for a reinstatement of the expired ban, it would do everything in its power to fix the mistakes of the past.

Instead of banning a list of guns by name or arbitrary cosmetic features or banning just the manufacture of magazines, they would attempt to model their ban on some of the more restrictive state bans, such as those in California, Maryland, and New York, which would no doubt result in more unintended (and sometimes unbearably cute) consequences.

Attempting to impose such a restrictive and prohibitionist law is far harder today in a nation where judicial interpretations favoring individual gun rights are ascendant. It would take a dramatic and drastic turn of events to undermine the growing gun rights movement and to generate the sort of popular support for more national gun control laws.

Such firearms would have to be used, repeatedly and with great affect, to generate massive levels of violence and the media furor needed to revive a flagging gun control movement. It would almost take a massive covert operation delivering thousands of weapons to violent felons to make this even potentially viable.

Luckily, we all know that can't happen here.

Read Part One of this series at http://tinyurl.com/4ygtq6v.


*************************************************
7. Who needs a gun in DC (video)?
*************************************************

Some violent punks thinking a man was reaching for a gun in his backpack was enough to make them to flee like cockroaches in the light. Lucky that they jumped to that (false) conclusion.

Kennith Modica emailed me this:

--

From video.foxbusiness.com: http://tinyurl.com/3sxqgd3


*************************************************
8. Ohio CCW stop
*************************************************

Another reason that we need to make sure that Virginia doesn't become a state where you are required to notify the police you are carrying when stopped. In this case the citizen wasn't given a chance to speak so he couldn't tell the officer that he was carrying for about 5 minutes. Because of the requirement to notify, the officer was trying to get him charged with a felony and get his permit revoked. He even threatened the permit holder with execution on the spot.

This particular officer is a disgrace to his badge and the state of Ohio.

For those of you who are police officers, be prepared to be embarrassed. However, no one should ever be held accountable for what someone else does and this certainly doesn't reflect on any of you.

Will Tynch emailed me this:

--

From hotair.com: http://tinyurl.com/3t84zha


[SNIP]
Ohio's concealed-carry law requires anyone stopped by police to immediately notify the officer if they are armed. Failure to do so is a first-class misdemeanor that can result in a six-month jail term and a thousand-dollar fine, as well as losing the license to carry. It's usually not considered a death penalty offense, unless one gets pulled over in Canton, Ohio, in a case highlighted today by Ohioans for Concealed Carry:


*************************************************
9. Iowa congressman, family safe after home invasion
*************************************************

Guns Save Lives!

From USA Today: http://tinyurl.com/3mpe5wk


Iowa congressman, family safe after home invasion
7/17/2011

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) -- A home invasion at Rep. Leonard Boswell's Iowa farm ended when his 22-year-old grandson fetched a shotgun and aimed it at the intruder, according to a statement from the congressman's office. No one was seriously injured.

The incident started about 10:45 p.m. Saturday when an armed man came in through the front door, attacked Boswell's daughter, Cindy Brown, and demanded money, the statement said. Boswell, 77, heard his daughter's screams, came into the entryway and attempted to disarm the intruder.

As they struggled, Boswell's grandson, Mitchell Brown, got a shotgun from another room. When he pointed the shotgun at the intruder, the man fled into the fields around the house outside Lamoni.

Boswell's wife, Dody Boswell, 75, also was home during the attack. His spokesman Grant Woodard said the whole family is safe and unhurt, aside from some scrapes and bruises.

The family is shaken up, but "they're dealing with it pretty well," Woodard said Sunday morning.

He deferred other questions to the Decatur County Sheriff's Office, which is investigating along with the FBI and other agencies. Sheriff Herbert Muir wasn't available for comment Sunday morning.

Boswell, a Democrat, has represented Iowa's 3rd District for eight terms in Congress. He is expected to face a challenge next year from Republican Rep. Tom Latham, who is moving into the district to avoid running against Republican Rep. Steve King after their territories were merged during once-per-decade redistricting that follows each census.

Iowa is going from five to four congressional seats because its population growth hasn't kept pace with the rest of the nation. The new 3rd District will include Des Moines and 16 counties in southwest Iowa.


*************************************************
10. Debate: Does bearing arms ward off violent criminals?
*************************************************

Deborah Jane Anderson emailed me this:

--

Philip,

More from Fox News Insider on the story about the Iowa Congressman whose grandson was able to ward off an armed intruder in the Congressman's home.

PLEASE NOTE that there's a survey/poll on the question of: "Does Having a Gun in Your Home Protect You From an Intruder?" After my "YES" vote just moments ago, the results already were extremely positive (see below) -- proving that a whole lot of folks DO believe that "Guns Save Lives!"

Yes - They remind potential criminals that victims can fight back. 97.46%

No - I think having a gun in the home presents more danger than protection. 2.54%

I hope all VCDL members will click on the link to the original article and also vote in the survey/poll, so we can keep the results just as positively on the "Guns Save Lives" side of things.

Blessings,

Deborah Jane Anderson


From foxnewsinsider.com: http://tinyurl.com/3u5sucd


[SNIP]
The decision to keep guns in his home paid off for Congressman Leonard Boswell, whose grandson was able to scare off a violent intruder with a nearby shotgun. Greg Gutfeld argued that publicizing stories similar to Boswell's do nothing but good, as they remind potential criminals of an unforeseen danger, and poses the question to victims as to whether they would prefer to be armed in a life-or-death situation.


*************************************************
11. Who needs a gun at a bingo game?
*************************************************

Violent crime never happens at a church? How many times did we hear that lie after Attorney General Cuccinelli ruled on church carry (self-defense is "good and sufficient reason" to carry in church)?

Eric Kasten emailed me this:

--

From CBS Pittsburgh: http://tinyurl.com/439tu2c


[SNIP]
BRADDOCK HILLS (KDKA) -A masked man with a gun barged into bingo at Sacred Heart Church in the Good Shepherd Parish in Braddock Hills Tuesday night.

The robber demanded money and wound up grabbing about $300 out of a cash drawer before taking off.


*************************************************
12. Boy, 2, recovering from coyote attack
*************************************************

The coyote will be killed if it is found (standard practice for such attacks). The father could have saved the game wardens a lot of trouble by just dispatching to creature himself (had he been armed).

From upi.com: http://tinyurl.com/3ekoz55

Boy, 2, recovering from coyote attack
Published: July 20, 2011

BROOMFIELD, Colo., July 20 (UPI) -- Colorado Parks and Wildlife officials say they are searching for a coyote that attacked a 2-year-old boy.

The boy was walking with his father and 9-month-old sister in Broomfield, Colo., Monday night when the coyote jumped out of some tall grass and attacked the boy, The Denver Post reported.

"As soon as I saw [the coyote] I started yelling and stuff," said the boy's father, whose name is being withheld. "He still had time to knock my son over and bite him in the lower back area. [The coyote] then ran about 20 or 25 yards up the trail before turning around and looking at me before running off."

The father promptly took the kids home, then drove the boy to a hospital, where the 2-year-old received a rabies vaccination. He is recovering well.

"We love being outside and we love wildlife, but obviously it was a little bit traumatic for me to see," the father said. "So, I think right now my attitude has changed a little bit, but I think over time it will subside and go back to where it was, which was not overly concerned [about wildlife]. I'm just glad it wasn't worse."

Colorado Parks and Wildlife spokeswoman Jennifer Churchill said if the coyote is found, it will be killed.

"There was a human injury, and any time wildlife injuries a human, it is a public safety issue," she said.


*************************************************
13. Do lead bullets continue to be a hazard after they land?
*************************************************

Stephen Wenger emailed me this:

--

From sciencedaily.com: http://tinyurl.com/3dubqoe


Do Lead Bullets Continue To Be A Hazard After They Land?

ScienceDaily (Nov. 5, 2004) -- Blacksburg, Va., November 3, 2004 -- There were 20 million metric tons of lead bullets fired in the United States in the 20th century. Is that lead having an environmental impact?

Not at or near the U.S. Forest Service firing range near Blacksburg, according to research by Virginia Tech geological scientists. Donald Rimstidt, a professor in the Department of Geosciences, College of Science at Virginia Tech, will report the conclusions of a five-year study at the 116th national meeting of the Geological Sciences of America in Denver Nov. 7-10.

There are 9,000 nonmilitary shooting ranges and a lot of military ones in the United States. Some 60,000 metric tons of lead are expended by shooting (A metric ton or "long ton" is 2,200 lbs.). "So, there is lead shot and bullets everywhere," Rimstidt said.

"We were invited by the U.S. Forest Service to look at the shooting range in the National Forest near Blacksburg."

The researchers'' survey found 11 metric tons of shot in the shotgun range and 12 metric tons of lead bullets in the rifle range. "These ranges are 10 years old. Most of the lead shot has accumulated on about four or five acres. Some shots have been into the woods, which cover hundreds of acres," Rimstidt said.

Professor James Craig, now retired, and Rimstidt looked first at lead corrosion and whether lead is leaching into the water table or streams. "Lead metal is unstable when it is in contact with air and water. It corrodes and forms hydrocerrussite, the white coating seen on old bullets in museums. That slows corrosion," Rimstidt said.

However some lead escapes, he said. "But we learned that it is absorbed in the top few inches of soil and does not migrate beyond that," Rimstidt said. "Lead is not very mobile. It does not wash away in surface or ground water."

Another finding is that there are large amounts of lead in the trees near the shooting range - but not in a large percentage of the trees, Rimstidt said. "If and when those trees are harvested, they would be contaminated with lead "

Fisheries and Wildlife professor Pat Scanlon was an investigator on the project until his death in 2003. "He found no evidence that birds were eating shot, but this portion of the research was not completed," Rimstidt said. "We are not saying that wildlife would not ingest lead, but it does not appear to be a problem on this range. Other shooting ranges may be different."

Rimstidt will give their recommendations to the Forest Service representatives so they can develop best management practices. "They already knew to put lime on the range to limit corrosion, to take measures to prevent soil erosion, and now, to keep track of the trees if they are cut. They are the experts in management. I will give them the facts, and they will make the decisions," Rimstidt said.

Rimstidt''s conclusion is that shooting on controlled ranges reduces the overall risk to the public from lead in the environment.

He will present the paper, "Lead behavior at National Forest Shooting Ranges," by Rimstidt, Craig, and Caleb Scheetz at 11:15 a.m., Nov. 8, in rooms 709/711 of the Colorado Convention Center as part of the Environmental Geosciences session. Scheetz, of Lemont, Pa., recently received his master''s in geosciences from Virginia Tech.


*************************************************
14. Ayoob Files: Interview with Joe Zamudio
*************************************************

From americanhandgunner.com: http://tinyurl.com/45xlrjd

The Tucson Atrocity: Joe Zamudio's Story
Posted in: The Ayoob Files
July 6, 2011

Situation: A loser with a gun initiates mass murder ... and you, with your concealed carry pistol, are nearby.

Lessons: Citizens who stand up and fight can stop the killing ... but anti-gun media may still spin
their heroism 180 degrees from the truth.

Jan. 8, 2011, Tucson, Ariz. Representative Gabrielle Giffords and some of her staff were holding a small meet-the-voters rally in a mall when a pathetic loser named Jared Loughner opened fire, pumping 9mm bullets into helpless victims 6 to 9 feet away as fast as he could. By the time he was on the ground, restrained, Loughner had downed his primary target, Representative Giffords, with a severe brain injury, wounded a dozen other people and killed six. Half of the murder victims were septuagenarian retirees: Dorothy Morris, 76; Phyllis Scheck, 79 and Dorwan Stoddard, 76. Chief (Federal court) Judge John Roll also lay dead, as did 30-year-old Giffords staffer, Gabe Zimmerman. Most tragic was the youngest of the slain, Christina-Taylor Green, who had been born on Sept. 11, 2001.

The takedown of the mass murderer was a study in citizens' courage. As Loughner attempted to reload after emptying his pistol, one of the intended victims in the crowd reportedly smashed him in the back of the head with a folding metal chair. Retired Colonel Bill Badger, age 74, tackled the killer and brought him to the ground. Already down on the sidewalk herself, Patricia Maisch, 61, ripped a fresh magazine out of Loughner's hand. Roger Sulzgeber separated him from his gun, and he and Joseph Zamudio held him down, immobile, until the first responding Tucson PD officer arrived at the scene.

This is being written early in second quarter 2011, with the prosecution of Loughner still in its early stages and much pertinent information not yet released. One not-completely-answered question is, how many law-abiding armed citizens were present? Representative Giffords herself was known to not only own but sometimes carry a Glock 19 pistol; it has not officially been made known whether or not her gun was within her reach when she was shot. Judge Roll was licensed to carry and known to do so regularly. Some insist he was armed at the time, but was shot by surprise before he could deploy his weapon; others say that, because he came to the rally from a church event, he was not carrying a gun at the time of the shooting. It has been said another Giffords aide present regularly carried and may have been armed when it happened; at this writing, that has not been confirmed or denied, either.

We do know one of the heroic first responders was indeed armed: Joe Zamudio, age 24. The following is drawn from his account of the incident from his perspective, shared with the rest of the class when he subsequently attended a Massad Ayoob Group program in nearby Sierra Vista, hosted by decorated combat vet Dan Southard of Gator Farm Tactical. This, lightly edited for space considerations, is his story.

Zamudio's Experience

"It was Saturday," Joe began. "I didn't have to work, so I went to have breakfast with my mom. On the way back, I went to Walgreen's. Walking up to the door, I saw a crowd of people (at the rally), and went in to get cigarettes before seeing what was going on. As I was asking the lady behind the counter for a pack of Camels, I heard one shot, then a chain of shots real fast, before she could hand me the cigarettes. It sounded like fireworks. I just responded and ran out door. As I cleared the door, a man in front of me who had been wounded in the leg said, 'Shooter! Shooter! Get down!'"

Zamudio had long kept a gun in his car. The previous August, when buying a Ruger P95 9mm, he had learned from the gun dealer that Arizona had legalized permit-less carry, and from that day on had worn the Ruger constantly. Left-handed, he was carrying it that day, butt forward in the inside right breast pocket of his jacket, fully loaded with 16 rounds.
Zamudio continued, "I reached into my pocket, put my ha
nd on my pistol, took the safety off, and ran down the sidewalk (toward the shooting scene). That's when I saw a group of people wrestling with (Loughner). The first thing I focused on was the man closest to me. His back was to me. He raised up with a Glock in his hand, open, magazine sticking out. In that second I decided that because the gun was open, I didn't have to shoot him. I immediately grabbed him by the wrist, turned the gun in toward him, told him to drop the weapon. He did.

"Even as he was dropping the gun, everyone yelled, 'It's not him, it's not him!' I said, 'Put it down.' I was hearing people yell, 'I'll kill you, you motherf***er, I'll kill you.' When the man dropped the gun I said, 'Put your foot on it, make us all feel safe,' and he did. This turned out to be Roger Sulzgeber, one of my personal heroes. He and Bill Badger had grabbed Loughner and pulled him to the ground. Apparently the gun had jammed, either misfired or didn't feed, and Loughner was trying to reload again when they grabbed him. There was an empty mag on ground, a full one that mis-fed in the gun, and another full magazine Patricia Maisch got away from him."

Killer Restrained

"The world went into slow motion," Joe continued. "I assessed the situation. Bill had Loughner by the neck on the ground. Roger stood on the gun and leaned over and grabbed Loughner's shoulder, holding him down. Patricia had been on the ground when she grabbed the loaded magazine away from him, and she shimmied over his legs. Loughner began to struggle, and Patricia asked me to take her place. I got down onto the back of his knee and put a hand on his hip. A fourth gentleman put a foot on his back, he wasn't going anywhere. I tried to call 911 but couldn't get through, tried three times. The police showed up in about four minutes. All Loughner ever said during that time was, 'Ow. You're breaking my arm.'"

Joe adds, "Bill Badger was bleeding profusely from his head. He told me as Loughner was shooting everyone, (Loughner approached him and) pointed the gun at Bill's head. Bill reflexively turned his head away, and when Loughner fired, the bullet took skin off down to the skull but did no real damage. Bill went down. When the gun stopped firing, Bill raised back up and Loughner was right in front of him. That was when the wrestling started. Bill Badger was bleeding, the first real blood I saw, and it hit me that this had really happened, all these people got shot. The enormity of it set in.

"I looked to my right, and saw a sea of wounded people. Between them and their loved ones and everyone else trying to help, there were just so many people. Many people were screaming different things at once. 'Call the police!' 'Oh, my God!' 'Where's the ambulance?' People say crazy things to deal with the trauma. One person yelled, 'Take a picture of his face!'"

The Cavalry Arrives

Zamudio remembers, "The lady from Walgreen's came out and did CPR on one victim. There were four different doctors at or near the scene who were able to provide immediate care. The first law enforcement to show up was a uniformed officer, a minute ahead of everyone else, and he got out of his car with gun in hand, looking at us. People were shouting 'He's right here, he's right here.' A lady tried to give the officer the empty magazine.

"Instead, he went straight to Loughner, cuffed him, and when the second officer arrived, they searched him. I watched them take two regular magazines, a Ziplock baggie with cash, and a folding knife from him. No phone, no ID, no keys. At that point I couldn't believe he had a knife the whole time. If he'd gotten to it, it would have been another set of problems."

Aftermath/Afterthoughts

Joe was prepared to stop the killer with gunfire if he had to. He says today, "I was just truly blessed I didn't have to pull my firearm. I didn't have to go to that place. The guy who had the gun was the wrong guy, and I'm glad I didn't pull a gun on him. I'm glad the people took him down when they did. He was heading in my direction, toward the Walgreen's, coming my way; when I stepped out the door I might have been the next victim, or would have had to shoot him."

He adds, "It was the most intense five minutes of my life, hands down. You can't be prepared to see the dead bodies and the wounded people. Some of the dead lay there for the two hours the police kept us there, covered with shirts and jackets. Some they worked on and took away. There were many people with superficial wounds: 'My arm's bleeding,' 'My back is bleeding.'"

Joe found the police response to him very reasonable when they learned he was armed at the scene. He relates, "Starting that day, (it's been) crazy ever since. I never thought about it. I take my gun with me because I might need it to protect myself. I had never thought about the other things that might be involved. The police were very cool. The investigating officer took me aside, and we went through what had happened three or four times. When it was over he said, 'Thank you, have a nice day,' and let me get in my car and drive away." Joe's gun was never taken, never came out. He explains, "I told the first policeman that I didn't want to scare anyone, but I was carrying a gun, in my coat pocket. Did he want it? He said no, tell the investigator. Another officer asked me to stand separately, that was it. When the investigator asked to see my gun, I opened my coat and showed him where it was, and he said okay. That was it."

More horrifying to Zamudio than anything else was the realization the monster he helped subdue had shot a little girl. The thought he might have stopped the killing if he'd gone over to see what the crowd was there for, instead of entering the drugstore to make his purchase, haunted Joe. "I had thought about going over there before going into the Walgreen's," he says, "and I've second-guessed myself ever since. What if I'd been standing next to that little girl and had been able to stop him in time to save her? You feel responsible. That was unbelievably hard for me. What if I was meant to go down there? You still feel like you failed. It was hard to have been so close, and not been able to stop him."

The anger hit at the same moment as the outrage in the moments after Loughner was subdued, but Zamudio controlled it. Revenge is a natural human emotion, but Joe instantly put it aside. "We had him. I don't have to look his mom in the eye and say I killed your kid. It's not my road to walk."

Being involved in something like this changes your identity in the eyes of many who know you.

Whether they treat you as a hero or something else, it changes your sense of self to some degree. Asked if those who knew him treated him differently since, Joe replied, "Some do. A lot of my friends are the same. The person closest to me is my mom. She's no longer afraid of guns, and now she's happy I keep them around. Her attitude used to be, why do you carry that chunk of metal?"

Part of the aftermath was dealing with the media. "The press descended on us," says Joe. "The day after, Sunday, they were beating down the door. By Monday, I'd said to the news that I had a gun, and it kind of turned the story. A lot wanted to know about the gun, but only wanted to ask specific questions and if they didn't get the responses they wanted, they'd move on, and that would be it. They wanted to hear me say I almost shot the wrong guy. On one show they took a short blip from a long sentence to make it sound that way ... I was not taken out of context every time, but often.

"One newspaper lady was very nice, got me when I was by myself, talked for 20 or 30 minutes about wanting to interview me, but didn't mention the discussion was the interview. She wrote an article for the L.A. Times and sold it to every AP newspaper in the country, it seemed. She was quoting me as saying I almost shot the wrong guy ... on the other hand, Charles Heller -- the talk show radio guy in Tucson -- was the most fair of all the media people. The guy from Geraldo's show was very nice, and they weren't too bad in what they played."

What would he do differently with the media, knowing what he knows now? What Joe says he's learned since is, "If you're in a position where you have news, don't talk to all of them. To do it over again, I'd have one exclusive interview, and the others will leave you alone. Make it for a few days from now so they can plug it and the others get the word and leave you alone. I didn't know that at the time," he explains. Joe adds, "I also didn't know they'll pay you for exclusive, so I didn't make any money from the interviews, either."

The Face Of The Enemy

Because of his involvement in the incident, Joe Zamudio has become something of an expert on the killer, Jared Lee Loughner. "He lived three streets off from where I live," Zamudio relates. "We had the same favorite gas station. They sold him cigarettes and candy bars and Rockstars every night. He was a loner. Even those he considered his closest friends didn't call themselves his friends. I believe he was doing a lot of drugs, beyond pot. He would come into the convenience store, loaded at 2 a.m. I understand he might have taken the gun out in the desert a couple of times, but others say he never went to the range. If he did practice, it wasn't around gun people. I've talked to a lot of people who knew him. A good friend who went to school with him said Jared was always That Weird Kid. That seemed to be unanimous."

Lessons

No good deed goes unpunished. The gun-banners were out in force as soon as the story hit the newswires, dancing in the blood of the victims. Some in the media turned their sights on the Glock 19 pistol used by the killer, ignoring the fact that Representative Giffords herself owned one and was known to carry it, and the fact the Tucson police responded with drawn Glock 22 .40 calibers, their issue sidearm. Because three of Loughner's five magazines, including the one in his gun when he opened fire, were extended to 33-round capacity, a ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds became a cause celebre once again among the anti-gunners. Gary Slider of the immensely useful compendium of gun laws handgunlaw.us was, to my knowledge, the first to point out that the extra-long, awkward magazine is probably what allowed a senior citizen female, Ms. Maisch, enough leverage to get it away from a physically strong young madman before he could reload and cause more carnage.

Similarly, the flow of BS turned toward Zamudio. The anti-gunners tried to say he added to the danger by "almost shooting a rescuer." Of course, nothing of the kind had happened, and Joe Zamudio himself has the best answer I've heard to that ridiculous claim: "By that thinking, when you get in a car you almost get in an accident. Same logic. You control your vehicle, and I controlled my firearm. I never pointed it at anyone, so how could I have almost hurt anyone?"

I watched Joe Zamudio shoot at my class two months after the incident. He handled his P95 with aplomb, and drew it smoothly from a handsome holster crafted for him by Jim March after the incident. There is no doubt in my mind that if fate had led him to confront Loughner in time, he would have swiftly put the mad dog down with the Federal Hydra-Shok hollow point that had been in his chamber, a cartridge Joe has since put aside as a reminder of the incident.

When others fled and played dead, Zamudio literally ran to the sound of the gunfire. He was ready to shoot if he had to, hand on Ruger and safety off, but was careful not to add to the panic. He superbly controlled what could have degenerated into a mistaken identity shooting. In grueling interviews since, some with reporters who had anti-gun agendas, Joe proved himself a powerful spokesman for the right of responsible people to carry guns for the protection of themselves and others.

He was one among many heroes that terrible day in Tucson ... but Joe Zamudio was our hero.

*************************************************
15. Guns on campus
*************************************************

J. Wayne Stephens emailed me this:

--


From backwoodshome.com: http://tinyurl.com/3nc9y8y


GUNS ON CAMPUS: ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE

We've talked here before about the "guns on campus" issue. Adults in the higher education environment do so (or want to) primarily for two reasons: a hedge against "school shooting" horrors, and for routine protection against muggers, rapists, etc. who consider "gun free zones" to be safe game preserves in which to hunt human victims.

Here, however, is a third good reason. It comes verbatim from one of my graduates, who spends his days at a major institution of higher education as a grad student and researcher, in a letter he sent to a state senator:

"I am a graduate student at a major Florida university. I am 27 years old. I work in biomedical research studying a condition with which my wife is afflicted. The laboratory in which I work is located on campus.

"Recently, an extremist animal activist group known as "Negotiation is Over" has been sighted on our campus. In spite of having received trespass warnings, they were recently sighted handing out fliers offering $100 bounties on the photographs and personal information of students who, like myself, conduct animal research. They have already posted on their website the name, address, home telephone number, and license plate number of a researcher in our department.

"These individuals utilize violent language and rhetoric, including the following statements taken from their website

( http://tinyurl.com/3zavmzc):

"'Every time a vivisector's car or home -- and, eventually, the abuser him/herself -- blows up, flames of liberation light up the sky.'

and,

"'Students also need to understand that making the wrong choice will result in a lifetime of grief. Aspiring scientists envision curing cancer at the Mayo Clinic. We need to impart a new vision: car bombs, 24/7 security cameras, embarrassing home demonstrations, threats, injuries, and fear. And, of course, these students need to realize that any personal risk they are willing to assume will also be visited upon their parents, children, and nearest & dearest loved ones. The time to reconsider is now.'

"I feel that my life and the lives of my loved ones are in real danger. Other researchers at UCLA have had their cars and homes firebombed and have been the target of regular death threats. While I respect the value of law enforcement, the expectation of a sub two minute police response time is generally unrealistic - and a lot of damage can be done in two minutes as a former law enforcement officer like yourself knows.

"I am a concealed weapons or firearms license holder in the state of ---- and have been since 2007. I have participated in over 100 hours of firearms and firearms safety instruction, including courses on the use and application of deadly force taught by a former chair of the firearms committee for ASLET and an ILEETA advisory board member. I have been certified by the NRA as an instructor in home firearm safety and certified pistol. Yet, in spite of all this, I am defenseless because I choose to work on a college campus. I must leave work unarmed, go to a location that is known to me to be dangerous, and return home unarmed. Any stops I make along the way on any day in which I am going to or from work must be conducted unarmed.

"For months, I have e-mailed you and other senators about this matter. I have received form letters and polite, vague responses from aides. My greatest moment of hope came when Senator --- --- proposed SB 234, which originally had language to permit concealed carry on campus - until Senator --- ----- suggested (and the criminal justice committee approved) the gutting of the bill. Their excuse had to do with an anecdote told by a family member of a young woman who was killed in a negligent homicide off campus near (a) State University. The timing of SB 234 was apparently "politically inconvenient" in light of recent events. To my knowledge, the manslaughterer involved was not a licensed permit holder and was most certainly not observing basic firearms safety.

"I am beat-down and exhausted from expressing my safety concerns and attempting to move through the proper channels. I could count up the e-mails, but there are many. Surely over 50 by now. The vague responses and form replies march on. Meanwhile, those who would harm me continue to flagrantly violate the law, trespassing on campus in spite of repeated warnings.

"Apparently, pieces of paper are not adequate defense against criminal activity.

"To be frank, I'm not sure I'm asking you to DO anything anymore. That has gotten me nowhere. Instead, I'll ask you the following:

"Why do I, as a law abiding citizen, have less freedom to protect my loved ones than a criminal has to threaten their safety?

"Why do I feel that my compliance with the law is now at odds with the safety of my family? How should I respond to these competing interests? How would you respond, senator, if you were in my situation and had my limited resources?

"What incentive do I have to continue to respect the law and work through the proper channels when it seems that my elected officials cannot even manage to protect a freedom enshrined in the bill of rights?

"Why can I carry a firearm in Wal-Mart, where I can also purchase alcohol, ammunition, and underpants, but I cannot go armed at an institution of higher learning in a workplace occupied predominantly by advanced degree holders?

"Since I can't go armed on campus, what measures do you propose to keep my family safe? And please don't suggest law enforcement - (our university police department) has one of the finest response times in the nation, but if you mime a stabbing for two minutes, that comes out to a lot of knife wounds.

"If you could respond to these questions or the sentiment behind them, I'd sure appreciate it.

"With respect,

"A concerned student"


*************************************************
16. Food for thought
*************************************************

Daniel Kohler emailed me this:

--

Antis love to say how handguns are the number one choice of criminals, so
much though that handguns alone are used more often than all other weapons
combined. They also like to say that if we got rid of all the guns, crime
would disappear. Hmmm let us see what the 2009 crime report says about that,
shall we?

I took the Aggravated Assault, Robbery, and Homicide stats and combined them
together. Remember their claim is that guns are responsible for all violent
crime... Let me be up front about my analysis:

These are CRIMES REPORTED, excludes suicide or death by accident (DBA) (Hey Sarah Brady
and Mayor Bloomberg, the DBA was 649)

Forcible rape is not included due to the FBI not gathering info on weapons
used. (There was however at least 88,097 people who wished they had a weapon
to use)

I based the analysis on all firearms used in the commission of the reported
crimes, not just handguns. (Let's be nice and give the anti-s a break, they
lost Chicago, Wisconsin, and DC!)

The Numbers:

There were a total of 1,066,266 reported crimes where a weapon of some type
was used in the 2009.

Of that number 305,254 involved a firearm of some kind.

160,203 involved a knife or other cutting instrument.

267,225 involved "other" weapons (blunt object such as a baseball bat or pipe)

333,584 involved strong arm (hands and feet when swung or an arm around your neck constitutes a weapon)

That means that in 28.63% of all violent crimes a firearm of some kind was used.

That might be a heart stopper for some but in doing analysis work; you have
to put numbers in context.

Conclusions:

First off, firearms are not the leading choice of criminals. They know how
to, and are willing to, use physical violence as a weapon against a victim.

Second, current gun laws (outlawing gun possession for convicted persons)
are working when enforced. Of the four categories, the firearm category is
the only one where an individual has a legal process to follow to obtain the
weapon. Therefore, if the weapon of choice is one of the other 3, outlawing
firearms will only take away guns from law abiding citizens.

Third, IF the all firearms used in the commission of a crime were part of
the roughly 300 million LEGALLY owned weapons in the US that would mean that
only 0.10% of legal firearms go "bad". A 1993 FBI report reflects that ~80%
of criminals get their guns from a non-legal source. If this is true than we
should be able to extrapolate that the real number of LEGALLY bought guns
going bad is about 61,000 0r 0.02%. This percentage doesn't take in account
that 1 firearm is used in multiple crimes so the actual number in reality is far lower than my analysis.

Fourth, the other 99.98% of firearms in the US have committed no crime. The
reason: GUN OWNERS ARE LAW ABIDING. Studies bound about this fact. Firearms
by their mere presence are not a threat or a danger. Changing laws to
control criminals will have a greater impact on public safety than
preventing civilians owning firearms.

"The art of Liberalism is the ability to ignore the facts with emotion"

V/R
Daniel K. Kohler
Virginia Beach, VA


*************************************************
17. Fairfax County fixes bad air gun ordinance
*************************************************

I was contacted by the Fairfax County Attorney's office a week or so ago and was told that the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors was going to finish repealing some language they did not repeal last month. The language which was left in their ordinance would not allow a school air gun rifle team to be able to cross school property, even with the permission of the principal. I am pleased to announce that indeed the Board of Supervisors did finish the repeal last week.



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

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