Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

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

1. Bedford Town Council discusses firearms ordinance
2. Who needs a gun in Fairfax City?
3. Safety in numbers? Not at gun-free ODU
4. Celebrities calling for a black NRA get a black eye [VIDEO]
5. Mayors' group says Frank Wolf voted to let terror suspects buy guns
6. Senate defeats expansion of gun rights
7. Caracal recalling - and refunding - all Model C pistols
8. What should you do if you're threatened by a mass murderer?
9. New women shooters take the firearms world by storm
10. More women shop for guns, participate in target shooting
11. Miller: National gun registry gets head start
12. National Federation of the Blind comments on gun ownership
13. Owner of Kennedy Jewelers: "I came out firing"
14. Parents want to know why EHS yearbook doesn't include rifle team
15. NYPD cop busted for off-duty gun-running
16. Chicago bans guns in restaurants, expects lawsuit
17. New laws aimed at boosting safety at TX schools
18. Waking a sleeping giant in CO
19. How women, hispanics, and blue collar workers defended gun rights in CO
20. Spinning your rights away: Part I
21. CNN: Emily Miller schools Piers Morgan [VIDEO]

*************************************************
1. Bedford Town Council discusses firearms ordinance
*************************************************

When Bedford went from a city to a town, they incorporated new areas. It had been legal to hunt in those incorporated areas before incorporation, but not after (ouch!) The battle over what to do continues.

Member Chris Rakes emailed me this:

From roanoke.com: http://tinyurl.com/p7zjruq

Bedford Town Council discusses firearms ordinance
by Justin Faulconer, The (Lynchburg) News & Advance
September 11, 2013

BEDFORD - Bedford Town Council decided not to pull the trigger on a proposed firearms ordinance Tuesday.

Council took aim at an ordinance allowing hunting with shotguns on parcels of five acres or more, under certain parameters, and provided shooting is not within 100 feet of buildings, parks or public land. Hunting with firearms was prohibited in the former city of Bedford, which reverted to a town in July.

Mayor Bob Wandrei said the intent of the ordinance was for hunting purposes since the town annexed areas of Bedford County where the practice was permissible.

"It's not gun control at all," Wandrei said.

Several residents spoke at the hearing, voicing opposition to the ordinance, which scales back hunting rights in the annexed areas.

Scott Thomas, a county resident, said for years he came to hunt on a 133-acre farm near U.S. 460 that was annexed by the town. Under the ordinance, he would go from hunting seven weeks to only two weeks since muzzle loaders were not allowed.

Eddie Harmony, of the town police department, said he opposes hunting with firearms in the limits of what was once the city out of concern for safety. He said he did not oppose hunting in the annexed territories.

Wandrei said the town could not discriminate and residents should be treated equally.

"I think you have to," Harmony replied.

Several council members said they were willing to grandfather in the annexed areas and oppose hunting with firearms in the former city limits.


*************************************************
2. Who needs a gun in Fairfax City?
*************************************************

Member Jay Minsky emailed me this:

--

This break in and assault took place across the street from a friend of mine, and is about 1 mile from where I live. This is a very safe Fairfax City neighborhood, and it shows that even in safe neighborhoods with fast police response times you may have to protect yourself and your family from time to time. In this case having a handgun may have prevented the residents from suffering more serious injuries.


From wusa9.com: http://tinyurl.com/pnv2uva


2 men sought in Fairfax home burglary, 1 may have been shot
September 11, 2013

FAIRFAX, Va. (WUSA9) -- Fairfax City police say that a resident may have shot one of the two burglars who entered a townhouse with weapons and assaulted some of the residents.

Police say two men forced their way into a townhouse in the 3900 block of Bradwater Street in the Comstock community at 10:45 p.m. on Tuesday. According to the residents, the men implied the had weapons, took some items and physically assaulted some of the residents. The residents suffered minor injuries, say police.

According to police, the burglars fled when one resident fired a handgun. Police think one burglar may have been shot.

Police described both burglars as black and in their twenties. One suspect was about 6 feet tall while the other was 5'9" tall. They both had an average build and were wearing gray hooded sweatshirts and blue jeans, say police.

The burglars have not been found yet.

Anyone with information about the robbery is asked to call Detective Shawn Sutherland at 703-385-7887 or Crime Solvers at 1-866-411-8477.


*************************************************
3. Safety in numbers? Not at gun-free ODU
*************************************************

Member John Young emailed me this:

--

The Norfolk Police department has advised they are investigating a robbery that was reported to have occurred at approximately 1 a.m. Monday, Sept. 2 at 42nd Street at Powhatan Avenue near the LR Hill sports complex.

Six students traveling on foot were approached by four males, one who was armed with a handgun. Each student had their wallets and Iphones taken. The students were not injured during this robbery. The suspects fled on foot north on Powhatan towards the campus.

Suspects are described as:

1. Black Male, light skin, dreadlocks, approximately 5-10 in height.
2. Black Male, light skin, dreadlocks, approximately 5-10, last scene wearing a tank top, jeans.
3. Black Male, dark skin, with short hair.
4. Black Male, no further description is available.

Members of the ODU community are reminded to take the following safety precautions:

Use the university shuttle and Saferide service. Avoid the over consumption of alcohol as it impairs your awareness. Avoid carrying cash and other valuables. Activate the tracking software on iPhones and other smartphones.

The Old Dominion University Police Department has increased patrols in the areas bordering the campus. The ODU police investigators are working with Norfolk Police to follow all available leads.


*************************************************
4. Celebrities calling for a black NRA get a black eye [VIDEO]
*************************************************

Member James Durso emailed me this:

--

From twitchy.com: http://tinyurl.com/lkj6uny


Attention celebs calling for a ‘black NRA’: Colion Noir has a video just for you
by Twitchy Staff
September 9, 2013

We here at Twitchy wholeheartedly support the creation of a Celebrity NRA. Hollywood’s best and brightest can raid their studios’ prop departments for fake guns (and they have plenty, including fully automatic rifles), and then they can hit the range and fire blanks at straw men all day.

“Funny or Die” is a video site where liberals go for political propaganda for those times when Jon Stewart just gets too serious and preachy. In today’s offering, “NRA spokesperson” Sarah Silverman briefly puts aside her obsession with bodily hygiene to announce the creation of a “black NRA,” to equip young black men with guns; after all, they need them the most.

Rainn Wilson (of the ultra-violent and gun-filled vigilante fantasy “Super”) is on board too.

OK, we get it. Look at those scary black men. Fighting to preserve the Second Amendment preserves their right to bear arms too, and do conservatives really want that? Well, yeah.

Just a heads up, celebs: there already is a black NRA, but for simplicity’s sake it just goes by, “The NRA.” And while fake NRA spokesperson Sarah Silverman points a (presumably) fake gun at the cameraman and at her own head in the “Funny or Die” spoof, very real (and black) NRA spokesman Colion Noir could use his NRA training to teach a few basics of gun safety. First, don’t point a gun at a cameraman or your own head. A “Funny or Die” video isn’t worth the risk — seriously.

He also has an informative video called “Hollywood Hypocrites” that might interest you. (Sorry Sarah, your scene didn’t make the cut.)


*************************************************
5. Mayors' group says Frank Wolf voted to let terror suspects buy guns
*************************************************

We don't want people who are on the "terrorist watch list" to be unable to buy guns because you can be put on that watch list secretly and without any kind of adjudication. Ted Kennedy was put on that list several times and was not able to get off it easily and he was a well-known U.S. Senator!

VCDL's point of view is simple: no adjudication and no legal representation for your defense? Then no loss of your gun rights.

Roy Scherer emailed me this:

--

From politifact.com: http://tinyurl.com/osntbbq


Mayors' group says Frank Wolf voted to let terror suspects buy guns
by Nancy Madsen
September 6, 2013

U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-10th, was recently targeted by the Mayors Against Illegal Guns, a group led by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

"Rep. Frank Wolf voted to allow terror suspects to buy guns," the group proclaimed on a web ad.

We decided to look at this claim, which clashes with Wolf’s tough-on-terrorism record. The 32-year congressman has accused the Obama administration of covering up details about a terrorist attack last September on an American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. He has vehemently opposed efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay prison and allow civilian trials for 9/11 terrorists.

Kelly Steele, a spokesman for the mayors’ group, said the ad is based on a July 17 vote in the House Appropriations Committee on an amendment to the nation’s Commerce, Justice and Science appropriations bill.

The amendment, introduced by Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., would have allowed the attorney general "to deny transfer of firearms to persons known or suspected to be engaged in conduct related to terrorism." It failed on a largely party-line 29-19 vote. The mayors’ group has targeted each of the representatives who voted against the amendment.

"Under current law, someone can be too dangerous to board an airplane -- but can still legally buy guns and explosives," the group says in a web posting. "This dangerous loophole in our gun laws is called the Terror Gap."

The group is focused on an omission in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which the federal government and most states use to screen those buying firearms from licensed dealers. People may be barred from buying guns for a number reasons, including felony convictions, fugitive status, drug addiction, adjudication as mentally defective, status as an illegal immigrant, stay in the U.S. on a non-immigration visa, dishonorable discharge from the Armed Forces, a domestic violence conviction and criminal indictment.

But the ban does not extend to those who are suspected of terrorist activity and are on the FBI’s terrorist watch list. That could include U.S. citizens, people in the U.S. on immigrant visas and people here from about 40 allied nations for which the U.S. does not require a visa.

Since 2004, the federal government has kept data on the number of prospective firearm purchasers who are on the terrorist watch list. The 2011 cumulative figures showed of 1,453 people on the terrorist watch list who sought to purchase firearms or obtain an explosives license, 132 were denied for other reasons, while 1,321 were allowed to proceed. The FBI could not determine whether the purchase was actually made.

The Bush administration in 2007 asked Congress to pass legislation to allow the attorney general to deny a firearm purchase or explosives license "when the background check reveals the purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist and the attorney general reasonably believes that the person may use a firearm or explosives in connection with terrorism."

Every session since 2007, a bill to that effect has been introduced by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., and referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where it has never come up for a vote. The National Rifle Association has strongly opposed the legislation, saying it could be used to persecute law-abiding gun owners. A 2009 report by the General Accounting Office said if Congress wants to ban firearm sales to suspected terrorists, it should require the Justice Department to establish guidelines to protect privacy and civil liberties.

Wolf is open-minded to closing the "terror gap", but believes the thorny issues should be resolved in the Judiciary Committee, according to Dan Scandling, the congressman’s chief of staff. Scandling said the congressman’s vote against the bill reflected his dissatisfaction with the "gotcha" procedure of bringing it up in the Appropriations Committee.

Matthew Dennis, a spokesman for Rep. Lowey, said the congresswoman sidestepped the Committee because the it was killing ground for the legislation. "Members of Congress who support closing this dangerous loophole have tried every avenue possible," he said.

In 2011, Lowey offered an identical amendment in the Appropriations Committee that was defeated by a 27-18 vote with Wolf voting against it. An article in The Hill said Wolf offered to work Lowey to "refine the amendment," but the congresswoman rejected his offer.

The article said, "Wolf said the amendment affected too many Americans since more than 500,000 people are on the terrorist list, according to the Justice Department. He noted that he regularly helps ordinary constituents get off the no-fly list after being put there by mistake."

A few final notes: Tom Culligan, Wolf’s legislative director, said the congressman supports the federal background check system and has voted to expand its funding. We should also mention that Wolf was endorsed by the NRA in last fall’s elections and received a B+ rating from the organization.

Our ruling

There’s no doubt that Wolf, sitting in the House Appropriations Committee, voted against an amendments to budget bills that would have allowed the attorney general to deny firearm sales to those suspected of abetting terrorism. Wolf had concerns that the legislation could trample the civil liberties of innocent people and objected to the procedure of bypassing Judiciary Committee -- a panel that has quashed similar bills since 2007.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns goes a step further in saying Wolf "voted to allow terror suspects to buy guns." That’s an inflammatory statement that suggests Wolf put gun rights ahead of protecting the nation from terrorists. It ignores Wolf’s spurned offer in 2011 to work with the sponsor of the amendment to find a compromise that could keep guns away from suspected terrorists while protecting the rights of those who have been unfairly placed on the government’s watch list.

So the mayors’ statement has accuracy, but omits important details about Wolf’s position. We rate it Half True.

*************************************************
6. Senate defeats expansion of gun rights
*************************************************

From washingtontimes.com: http://tinyurl.com/qgsqms6


Senate defeats expansion of gun rights
by Stephen Dinan-The Washington Times
May 8, 2013

The Senate beat back a new push to expand gun rights Wednesday, defeating a plan to let gun owners carry their weapons on federal lands in states where it would otherwise be legal.

Still, Wednesday’s vote drew more support than last month’s efforts to impose new gun controls in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, suggesting that Second Amendment supporters retain the momentum in the gun debate.

The 56-43 vote was four shy of the 60 needed to be adopted under Senate rules.

At stake was the ability to carry weapons firearms on Army Corps of Engineers lands in states where carrying weapons is legal already.

Under federal rules, it is illegal to carry weapons on Corps lands unless specifically for the purpose of hunting. Sen. Tom Coburn, who wrote the amendment, said people should be able to carry weapons for self defense, too — and said it’s already legal on Forest Service and Park Service lands.

“Why would we dare deny the rights that we give everywhere else on federal land — why would we do something different on Corps land?” the Oklahoma Republican said.

The gun showdown came as part of a broader debate over a public works bill.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, who led the charge against the amendment, said it could have created a national security risk because Mr. Coburn’s bill would allow guns to be carried near critical infrastructure such as dams or reservoirs, which could be considered a national security risk. Mr. Coburn denied that, saying other parts of federal law still prevent carrying weapons near critical infrastructure.

Mrs. Boxer pleaded with colleagues not to go into another gun debate.

“This is not a gun bill. I beg my colleagues, whatever side you are on, we cannot turn this bill into a gun bill,” she said, threatening to pull the bipartisan public works bill from the floor if the amendment succeeded.

The vote was the first gun showdown since last month’s effort to pass more gun controls failed.

Gun control advocates had hoped that the shooting deaths of 20 schoolchildren at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in December would spur Congress to expand background checks and ban some types of semiautomatic weapons. But the most important of those proposals garnered just 55 votes of support, leaving it five shy of the threshold needed.

On Wednesday, 11 Democrats and one liberal-leaning independent voted with all but one Republican to allow carrying on Corps lands.

Several years ago Mr. Coburn won an amendment that expanded the right to carry firearms to National Park Service lands. Mr. Coburn said since then, crime has dropped at parks, and he hasn’t heard of any problems under the expanded rules.

The Park Service didn’t respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

Eleven Democrats who voted for the parks measure in 2009 voted against Wednesday’s Army Corps version, including Majority Leader Harry Reid and Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy.

One Republican, Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, voted against the parks amendment in 2009 but voted for the Corps amendment this week.


*************************************************
7. Caracal recalling - and refunding - all Model C pistols
*************************************************

Member Elliot Hansen emailed me this:

--

From gunreports.com: http://tinyurl.com/m6m9fwe


Caracal Recalling — and Refunding — All Model C Pistols
September 10, 2013

(GunReports.com) — Caracal is issuing a recall of all Model C pistols in all markets, following the completion of a full investigation. This recall affects all Model C pistols, including but not limited to those with serial numbers which start with the following letters: HM, AA, AD, AG, CA, CB, CC, CD, CE, CF, CG, CH, CI, CJ, CK, CL, CM, CN, CP, CR and CS.

If you own or have access to a Caracal Model C pistol, PLEASE DO NOT LOAD OR FIRE YOUR PISTOL. Please contact Caracal customer care immediately to arrange to have your Model C pistol returned. Caracal will provide you with a full refund of the purchase price of your Caracal Model C pistol or vouchers for other Caracal products.

Unfortunately, the potential safety issues cannot be addressed through a repair of the Model C pistol and all Model C pistol’s must be returned for refund.

If you have sold or transferred your Caracal Model C pistol to any other person, the company asks you to provide them with the name and contact information for the person to whom you sold any Model C Pistol so that Caracal may also notify that person of this recall.

Contact Caracal at 205-655-7050 or info@caracal-usa.com

Gun Tests evaluated the Caracal F Quick Sight 9mm, $524; and the Caracal C Quick Sight 9mm, $524; in the September 2012 issue. Of the pistols, our testers said, "Both Caracal pistols were easy to shoot. Grip angle and size afforded plenty of support. We might have preferred target sights on the F model to maximize the potential of its longer sight radius. But when it comes to a fast-action CQB pistol, it’s hard to beat the Caracal C with Quick Sights. It was like punching your fist at the target. Firing each pistol, we read little change in control from fully laden to last shot fired. The triggers might have been too light, but we liked the near vertical rest position and how easy they were to read in terms of reset. The first-shot-low syndrome may vary from pistol to pistol, but keeping the magazine fully loaded should minimize the problem."

The Model C earned a B+ grade. The Model F full-size pistol got a B grade.

*************************************************
8. What should you do if you're threatened by a mass murderer?
*************************************************

Member Jim Dinger emailed me this:

--

This is a very informative fact filled article. Quite frankly, after reading this, I don't know how anybody could support or justify a so-called "Gun Free Zone". The author substantiates with data all of the many reasons to take down those ridiculous worthless "Gun Free Zone" signs and allow law abiding teachers and instructors to carry.


From cato.org: http://tinyurl.com/n9tg5eo


What Should You Do if You’re Threatened by a Mass Murderer?
by Jim Powell
Forbes.com on September 4, 2013

Calling 911 isn’t enough.

On July 23, 2007, two men invaded the Cheshire, Connecticut home of Dr. William Petit Jr., his wife Jennifer Hawke-Petit and their daughters 11-year-old Michaela and 17 year-old Hayley. There wasn’t a gun in the house that could have been used to ward off the attackers. They savagely beat Dr. Petit and then left him to focus on the others. He managed to call 911. The attackers tied the girls to their beds. Jennifer was raped and strangled, the girls were sexually abused, then the place was doused with gasoline and torched.

Incredibly, police who arrived at the scene didn’t go straight into the house. They were said to have stood around outside for about 25 minutes, and there were off-the-record reports of screams from the house during that time. After having committed three murders, the men tried to escape, and police caught them outside.

Dr. Pettit wanted to know why the police didn’t try to stop the killing, but evidently neither Town Manager Michael Milone, nor Police Chief Michael Cruess (when the crime occurred) nor the present Police Chief Neil Dryfe had any comments. According to the Hartford Courant, the police department didn’t review their handling of this case. Town officials similarly declined to answer questions from David Heilbroner and Kate Davis, who produced The Cheshire Murders, a documentary that HBO aired in July. The Associated Press reported, “Connecticut Cops Still Mum On ’07 Home Invasion Response.”

SWAT team and posse too slow

This could have been a matter of incompetence or cowardice. It could also have been a matter of obsolete police procedure. Officers might have been ordered not to do anything until a police supervisor arrived. Or they might have been ordered to wait until a SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) team was on the scene.

Until the mid-1960s, police work was generally handled by patrolmen. Then came a succession of difficult challenges, like the Watts riots (Los Angeles, 1965), barricaded gunmen, hostage situations and snipers. For example, on August 1, 1966, a sniper climbed to the top of the Texas Bell Tower at the University of Texas and killed 15 people, wounding 31 others.

These challenges led to the formation of specialized tactical forces — SWAT teams. Their policy has been to proceed slowly and deliberately. In any case, it was hard to move fast, since a SWAT team involved assembling men, advanced weapons and tactical equipment.

The April 20, 1999 massacre at Columbine High School, Littleton, Colorado was a wake-up call. Apparently two disgruntled seniors wanted to do copycat killings that would rival the Oklahoma City bombing (April 19, 1995). Undoubtedly one consideration was that a school was a gun-free zone where attackers could anticipate little, if any, resistance. The idea of these seniors was to detonate two bombs in the cafeteria, driving people out of the building and into a hail of gunfire. The bombs didn’t go off, so the duo went inside and began to shoot randomly. They found the largest concentration of students in the library, cowering helplessly under desks, and that’s where the killers seem to have spent most of their time. Altogether, 13 people were murdered, and another 24 were wounded. This was the most deadly attack at an American high school.

Some police who arrived at the scene reportedly entered the building but backed off when they saw the bombs. There was a decision for officers to stay outside until a bomb squad or SWAT team arrived. It isn’t known if a bomb squad ever showed up. There was a SWAT team, but it was too slow to do victims any good. The shooting began about 11:19 AM, and it ended around 12:08 PM when the killers were believed to have committed suicide. Incredibly, a SWAT team didn’t enter the building until about 1:09 PM — about an hour after the massacre ended!

All the officers gathered outside did nothing to stop the slaughter inside. The more time passed, the more people were killed. This must rank among the worst episodes in the history of American law enforcement.

If you wish to check out the police response to mass murders discussed in this article, or any other cases that might interest you, try to find a timeline and note: (1) the time when killing began, (2) the time when the first 911 call was made, (3) the time when police arrived at the scene, (4) the time when police entered the building and (5) the time when they reached or stopped the killer (who in many cases commits suicide). (1), (2) and (3) are commonly mentioned in press reports. (4) and (5) can be a problem, commonly omitted from press reports.

The point in this article isn’t to criticize police. The point is you need to understand that if you’re threatened by a killer, you’re on your own, and you must take initiative to protect yourself. There’s a high probability that police cannot stop the killer in time to save you.

The Columbine experience made many observers realize that the more quickly police intervened, the more lives might be saved. Consequently, it was better to intervene sooner, even though that meant going in with fewer officers. Police departments across the country began training officers to form small groups — commonly four officers — with whomever the early arrivals turn out to be. This is sometimes referred to as the “posse theory.” With greater recognition that faster intervention means saving more lives, the small-group strategy was refined. Especially in large, compartmentalized facilities like a school, often with much sound-proofing, it’s hard to tell where gunshots might be coming from unless the killer is nearby, so the strategy was to have small groups enter a building and split up, enabling the officers to explore more corridors, rooms, stairways and other parts of a building faster.

The posse theory, however, was never universally adopted, and in any case it, too, involved having officers wait around until there were enough to proceed.

On April 3, 2009 — almost a decade after Columbine — there was another wake-up call: a mass killing at the American Civic Association immigration center, Binghamton, New York, and it was déjà vu all over again. Around 10:30 AM, a man barricaded the rear entrance of the building with a car, so nobody could escape, then went to the front entrance, walked into the building and began shooting. Somebody called 911 right away. The gunman entered a classroom and shot everyone. He fired 88 rounds with a 9mm Beretta and 11 more rounds with a .45 caliber Beretta. Altogether 13 people were killed — the same death toll as at Columbine — and four were wounded. The killer committed suicide.

Police, who had arrived about 10:33 AM, three minutes after they had been dispatched, remained outside the building. They didn’t try to stop the killing inside. As at Columbine, they waited for a SWAT team. It entered the building at 11:13 AM, approximately a half-hour after the last victim had been shot and 43 minutes after the first 911 call — far too late to do the victims any good.

There continue to be cases where officers arrive at a scene quickly, then wait around outside while killing goes on inside. Don Alwes, a tactical trainer, noted on PoliceOne.com, “As I go around the country teaching, I encounter many departments still instructing officers to wait until 4 or 6 officers are present before making entry.”

Which makes it more likely that officers would be too late to save you.

The most critical minutes

In an effort to help save more lives, Ron Borsch, manager and lead trainer at the South East Area Law Enforcement (SEALE) Training Academy, Bedford, Ohio, began analyzing past experience. He identified approximately 150 cases of what he called rapid mass murder attempts in the U.S. since 1975. He defined this to mean more than four people murdered in 20 minutes at the same place.

“Of the pre-Columbine rapid mass murders,” he explained, “the average killing time was 11 minutes, (ranging from 2 examples of 4 minutes, to one example of 20 minutes). Among the known times of post-Columbine rapid mass murders, the average time was down to 8 minutes. Now the average killing time is only about 6 minutes.”

In many cases, Borsch pointed out, rapid mass murders are over in less time. At Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Connecticut, the killing time was 5 or 6 minutes.

A problem is that the first 911 call tends to come in about 6 minutes after a killer has started shooting.

Then officers have to be dispatched, arrive at a location, enter a building, find the killer and stop him.

The odds are that an officer won’t be able to stop much if any killing.

Nonetheless, it’s an officer’s sworn duty to try. Borsch strongly believes that the first officer who arrives at a location should go straight into a building and begin searching for the killer. He should jog through hallways and spend no more than 5 seconds scanning any suspicious room or other placelock along the way.

A rapid mass murderer almost always acts alone, so a solo officer is unlikely to be outnumbered. In addition, a solo officer has had far more training and more time on a shooting range than a killer. Reinforcements are coming for a solo officer, but nobody’s coming to help a killer. At least a third of the time, the sounds of approaching police lead a killer to commit suicide. The sooner that happens, the better, since it could mean fewer people killed.

For example, a 45-year-old man burst into the Pinelake Health & Rehab facility, Carthage, North Carolina, and began looking for victims. Within a few minutes, he killed eight people. He was stopped only because a 911 call was placed right away, police officer Justin Garner happened to be nearby, he immediately entered the premises and began a search. The killer fired his shotgun, and pellets hit Garner in the legs and feet, but Garner disabled him with a pistol at 114 feet. Moore County District Attorney Maureen Krueger reported, “We had a well-trained officer who prevented this from getting even worse than it was.”

Revelations about rapid mass murder

Ron Borsch, with three decades of police experience, has reported many important findings about rapid mass murders. For instance:

Although the overall murder rate declined by about 50 percent since 1980, the annual number of rapid mass murders has nearly quadrupled since Columbine.

A rapid mass murderer’s apparent aim is to kill as many people as possible in a short period of time. Such killers are rarely interested in negotiation.

These killers tend to be cowards, because they generally favor gun-free zones where few, if any people, are likely to resist their attacks with force.

Most common targets: 41 percent of rapid mass murder attempts occur at educational facilities — 31 percent at K-12 schools, 10 percent at colleges and universities, so killers prefer facing little children rather than big guys.

By comparison, 7 percent of rapid mass murder attempts occur at offices, 6 percent at churches, 5 percent at eating places, 5 percent at malls, 4 percent at factories, 4 percent at government offices, 3 percent at hospitals, 2 percent at grocery stores, 2 percent at post offices and 1 percent at bars and night clubs.

62 percent of rapid mass murder attempts are stopped by civilians on-site– not police based off-site.

76 percent of successful civilian attempts to stop rapid mass murder are initiated by one individual.

About two-thirds of civilians who stop a rapid mass murder attempt are unarmed.

38 percent of rapid mass murder attempts are stopped by police.

73 percent of successful police attempts to stop rapid mass murder are initiated by one individual.

Incidentally, many people refer to the perpetrators as “active shooters,” but Borsch pointed out that the overwhelming majority of shooters are generally good, law-abiding people. Some do recreational shooting, and many are in law enforcement. Obviously, when there’s a killer on the loose, everyone wants a sharp shooter capable of stopping him. Borsch recommends the phrase “active killer.”

Also, Borsch noted that most rapid mass murderers seem to want notoriety. They don’t wear masks, hoods or do anything else to conceal their identity. They appear to relish sensational headlines about their exploits. Accordingly, Borsch supports the practice of ignoring their names when discussing their murders.

You’re on your own

In 2011, the New York City Police Department published Active Shooter, Recommendations And Analysis for Risk Mitigation, a report listing 279 cases that involve “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area.” Based on internet searches, the research covers cases in office buildings, schools, homes, churches, mosques, airports, factories, warehouses, restaurants, malls, medical facilities, nursing homes, neighborhood streets — on and on. It would be hard to think of a setting that’s totally secure.

There have been cases across the U.S. and overseas, in places with and without gun controls.

The report makes clear that we must always be aware of what’s going on around us, and we must take initiative to protect ourselves and our loved ones in unexpected circumstances.

The New York City Police Department report includes much basic information about rapid mass murderers, though it doesn’t indicate when a 911 call was made, when police arrived at a scene, entered a building and reached or stopped the killer.

J. Pete Blair, Terry Nichols, David Burns and John R. Curnutt, at the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center at Texas State University, published some related findings.

These researchers studied “active killer events “ as they call crimes where the aim is to maximize killing. They gathered data on all such cases in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010. They found that about half the time, killing ended before officers reached the killer.

The point of all this is to understand that even if you’re fortunate to live in a place with a great police department, and you’ve managed to call 911, you’re still substantially on your own during a killing time.

The December 14, 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Newtown, Connecticut makes this dramatically clear. Officers didn’t enter the building until after the killer fired 154 shots, murdering 20 children and six adults.

One factor might have been the decision to take time forming three three-officer teams, rather than sending the first officer into the building and trying to save at least a few of the people threatened. Borsch derides as “tactical loitering” this practice of having officers stand around rather than going into a building immediately. Apparently none of the police fired a shot.

The 5 or 6-minute killing time suggests a compelling case to have trained, armed individuals on-site who can provide immediate resistance to a killer.

Gun control is no answer, since Connecticut already had strict gun control laws and special restrictions on assault weapons. Despite gun control laws, robbers, drug dealers, gang members and other criminals never seem to have much trouble obtaining guns. Governments can’t even keep illegal guns out of jails and prisons where government has more direct control over people than anywhere else.

Rapid mass murder is likely to go on as long as (1) there are easily accessible victims and (2) there’s no effective resistance.

It seems that the only credible solution is to have each school, business or other entity assume responsibility for maintaining its own security. The interest of such entities is different from the mission of a police department. Police respond to calls and go to crime scenes. They don’t have a budget big enough to protect everybody all the time. The surest way to gain comprehensive protection is to have trained, armed people already on-site.

Take initiative to survive

Survivors are most likely to be those who take initiative, try to protect themselves and fight if necessary. For years, we were told that when confronting an attacker, whether an urban mugger or a Nazi thug, the best advice was to be passive so as not to provoke the attacker, but plenty of experience has shown that such passivity makes it easier for killers to do whatever they want — not good for us.

In their survey of all rapid mass murder cases from 2000 to 2010, Blair, Nichols, Burns and Curnutt don’t attribute as many saves to self-help as Borsch, but they affirm that self-help is vital. They reported, “In 30 percent of the attacks stopped before police arrived, the victims took action to stop the shooter themselves either by physically subduing the attacker (81 percent) or by shooting him with their own personal weapon (19 percent). These data clearly show that it is possible to defend yourself successfully in these events even if you are unarmed.”

Blair, Nichols, Burns and Curnutt cite the Virginia Tech case that illustrates the importance of taking initiative to protect yourself. On April 16, 2007, a senior with a history of disturbing behavior went on two rampages at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg. The first was reported at 7:15 AM in West Ambler Johnston Hall, a dormitory — two dead. At 9:42, shooting was reported in Norris Hall, an engineering building. Police arrived in about three minutes, but the killer had chained all the entrances shut, so that nobody could escape. Breaking open an entrance took another five minutes. Apparently after hearing the police make their way through the building, the killer committed suicide. Altogether, 32 people were dead, and 17 more were wounded.

The Norris Hall shooting spree is of particular interest, because survival rates varied dramatically in the four second-floor classrooms. The doors didn’t have locks that would have helped turn those classrooms into safe rooms, so finding ways to prevent the killer from entering depended entirely on the initiative, resourcefulness and quickness of the people in each room.

“In room 206,” Blair, Nichols, Burns and Curnutt explained, “where the potential victims took no defensive actions other than freezing, 92 percent of the people were shot, and more than three-quarters of them died.”

In room 211, people couldn’t block the doorway, and the killer got in quickly. Everyone was shot, and two-thirds died.

In room 204, the door was blocked for a while before the killer got in. The delay enabled many people to escape through the windows before the killer was able to enter the room and start shooting. About 36 percent of the people were shot, and 14 percent were killed.

In room 205, people successfully blocked the doorway with a heavy teacher’s desk and kept the killer out. Nobody was hit — 100 percent survived.

Blair, Nichols, Burns and Curnutt concluded: “Those who took some form of defensive action at Virginia Tech fared much better than those who did not.” Freezing and playing dead didn’t work, since the killer walked back and forth, shooting at people lying on the floor, some of whom hadn’t been shot before.

Do’s and don’ts of escape — the best option

People are most likely to be killed if they’re trapped in an enclosed space, so the best option is to escape — if it’s possible.

It’s important to think through your preferred escape route and alternatives in case the preferred route is blocked.

The temptation might be to run, but that could be deadly if you’re wrong about the killer’s location, and you inadvertently run into him. Walking might be more prudent, since it would enable you to reverse direction fast.

Avoid trying to escape in an elevator (where you could be trapped) or on an escalator (where you would be exposed).

As the Virginia Tech made clear, one’s chances of surviving a drop from the second floor were much better than the odds of surviving in one of the classrooms.

How to drop from a second story window: (1) you need to keep your feet down, so you don’t land on your head, which could be fatal; so (2) carefully maneuver your way out of a window feet first, facing the building, and hang on to the bottom of the window frame; (3) when you let go, put your hands behind your head, to help protect your head and neck; (4) bend your knees and try to land on the balls of your feet; (5) push out with your legs when you hit the ground, as if you were jumping up; (6) try to roll forward, to reduce stress on your legs and spine — curl your body and pull in one shoulder to roll in that direction (depending on what’s below).

Don’t assume, though, that you’ll be safe once you’re outside — look for a place where you might find cover. More than one planned massacre involved indoor terror intended to drive people outside where killers were ready to open fire.

What you should know about hiding

It’s worthwhile thinking about how you might escape or where you might hide in the unlikely event a killer came to your school, workplace or other places you often go.

A good hiding place has a door with a solid lock. It’s an essential starting point for a safe room.

Even though movies often show somebody blasting a lock apart, a handgun is unlikely to do that.

Discovery Channel’s Mythbusters tested the ability of a 9mm handgun, a .357 magnum, a 12-gauge shotgun and an M-1 high-powered rifle to break apart standard padlocks and deadbolt locks. Testers fired three rounds through a hole in a large shooting shield at the front, side and center of each lock. The locks were battered and loosened up to various degrees, but they continued to hold, and the keys still worked.

The 12-gauge shotgun and M-1 rifle did succeed in breaking apart the locks, but the area was showered with shrapnel. Doing this in a small space like a hallway, without a shooting shield, would have been quite hazardous, probably incapacitating a shooter.

Okay, once you’re in a room, and the door is locked, you should pile as many large, heavy objects against the door as possible — desks, tables, chairs, book cases, anything available. The more difficult and time consuming it is for a killer to enter a room, the more likely he’ll go elsewhere. Also, all those things can help stop bullets.

After a door is heavily secured, turn off lights, silence cell phones, stay low and keep quiet.

A large room isn’t a good idea, especially if there are already a lot of people hiding there, because there’s no safety in numbers. Active killers go where they can find a large number of potential victims.

The closer a hiding place is to a window or outside door, the better.

You need to check out a number of possible hiding places, in case somebody else has locked one or more that you had identified.

It would be tragic if you ever desperately needed a good hiding place, and you didn’t know of one, or you hadn’t identified enough backups, even though you had been going to this school, office or other facility for years.

What if you’re face-to-face with a killer?

There are a wide range of situations. When one person acts immediately as an opportunity arises, usually others will get the idea and join in. For instance:

In a crowded supermarket parking lot, a 22-year-old man shot U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and 18 others as she held an outdoor constituent meeting. Six people died. The killer used a 9mm Glock 19 semi-automatic pistol. When he was hastily reloading, he dropped the magazine. Patricia Maisch, standing just a few feet away, grabbed it. Someone behind the killer hit him on the head with a folding chair. Then he was tackled and brought to the ground by Bill Badger, a 74-year-old retired U.S. Army colonel. Patricia Maisch, together with bystanders Roger Sulzgeber and Joseph Zamudo, reportedly helped subdue the killer until police could take him away.

A 58-year-old disgruntled maintenance worker broke into a meeting of the Kanawha County Board of Education, Charleston, West Virginia. He wounded one person with an AK-47 and doused two others with gasoline but was unable to set them afire, because three people nearby were quick to pull his gun away and subdue him.

A 16-year-old boy brought a Winchester 12-gauge pump-action sporting gun to Columbia High School in East Greenbush, New York. He began shooting randomly, but almost immediately assistant principal John Sawchuck managed jump on him from behind, and the gun went off as they hit the ground. Special-ed teacher Michael Bennett was wounded as he came to help. Because of Sawchuck’s decisive action, there were no other casualties.

A 15-year-old boy brought a shotgun and a .22 caliber pistol to school, intending to avenge grievances with the principal, teachers and students. When he aimed the shotgun at a social studies teacher, custodian Dave Thompson managed to grab it from him. The boy reached for the pistol and shot the principal who managed to tackle him and knock the gun away. Others helped hold him for the police, preventing any more shooting, but the principal subsequently died.

A 36-year-old school bus driver brought a handgun to the Laidlaw Transit Services bus yard and opened fire on her co-workers. One of them was killed, and three more were wounded. Gregory Alan Lee, another Laidlaw employee, was close enough to grab the killer until the police showed up. San Jose sergeant Steve Dixon remarked, “He saved a lot of lives.”

A man, 58, with a 12-gauge shotgun, broke into a Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s performance of Annie. He aimed toward the front of the church, killing two and wounding seven others. Jamie Parkey charged him, and several more church members helped subdue the killer.

A 69-year-old man with a .32 caliber pistol planned a massacre of residents at the Kkottongnae Retreat Camp, a Korean Catholic community where he worked as a handyman near Temecula, California. He wounded a man and killed his wife living in one bungalow, but apparently the shots alerted the couple in the next bungalow. They fought him with their fists, furniture, a dumbell and whatever else happened to be available. The killer was knocked out and taken into custody.

A 53-year-old disgruntled former employee of Grady Crawford Construction Company, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, used a handgun to kill two people and wound a third person there before he was brought to the ground by four other employees. One of them, a foreman, put his finger between the killer’s finger and the trigger guard, preventing the killer from getting off more shots.

A 32-year-old man with a .30-06 hunting rifle shot two students outside Deer Creek Middle School, Littleton, Colorado — only about three miles from Columbine High School. While he was reloading, seventh grade math teacher and track team coach David Benke tackled him and held him until police arrived. Both of the victims survived.

A 41-year-old man with a .357 magnum pistol started firing randomly at a playground where children were playing, outside Kelly Elementary School in Carlsbad, California. Then he went back to his car and tried to get away. But construction worker Carlos Partida dashed to his truck and followed, eventually hitting and stopping the assailant’s car. Partida and several other construction workers piled onto the assailant until the police arrived.

At Las Vegas’ New York, New York casino, Justin Lampert thought the popping sounds were coming from a game. Then he saw people screaming and running past him. Behind them, he noticed a shabby-looking bearded man about 20 yards from where he stood. The man, 51, stopped to reload a 9mm pistol. Lampert took off for him and wrestled him to the ground. It turned out that four people had been wounded. The situation could have been much worse. Lampert was an Iraq war veteran and a staff sergeant in the North Dakota National Guard. His brave save accomplished its mission in less than 30 seconds.

Armed civilians and off-duty cops stop killers

The fastest way to stop a killer is to have somebody on-premises who’s armed, whether a security guard, an off-duty police officer or a civilian with a permit. For example:

Two men broke into a College Park, Georgia student apartment. They separated the men and women, demanded wallets, planned to rape the women, and since the intruders counted their bullets, they seemed ready to kill everyone. Fortunately, one of the male students pulled a gun out of his backpack and began shooting. One intruder was killed, and the other fled.

A 16-year-old gunman with a Marlin 336 .30-30 caliber rifle broke into Pearl High School, Pearl, Mississippi. He killed two students and wounded seven others. Then he left the school and walked toward an elementary school across the street, presumably for more mayhem. Assistant principal Joel Myrick ran outside to his truck and grabbed his .45-caliber semi-automatic pistol. He intercepted the killer and detained him until police arrived.

A 30-year-old man with a pistol entered the Players Bar & Grill, Winnemucca, Nevada. He fired, reloaded and fired again, killing one and wounding another. Reportedly this had to do with a dispute between two families. The attacker was killed by a man from Reno who had a concealed carry license for his handgun.

A 14-year-old boy killed a teacher and wounded three others at a Parker Middle School dinner-dance in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. James Strand, who owned the banquet hall where the dinner-dance took place, got his shotgun and used it to detain the killer for the police.

A 24-year-old man started shooting his pistol at the Youth With A Mission training center, Arvada, Colorado. He killed two people and wounded two others. He left and later opened fire at the New Life Church, Colorado Springs, killing two more people, wounding another two. But former Minneapolis police officer Jeanne Assam shot back, hitting him several times, and he subsequently committed suicide.

A 79-year-old man entered a store in New York Mills, New York and began firing a .357 Magnum at employees. One was wounded. Probably somebody would have been killed if off duty police officer Donald J. Moore hadn’t been in the store at the time. He stopped the assailant with his .40 caliber handgun.

A 43-year-old man entered the Appalachian School of Law, Grundy, Virginia and opened fire on administrators with a .380 ACP semi-automatic handgun. It isn’t entirely clear what happened next, but he seems to have been subdued by one student, Ted Besen, while two other students, Tracy Bridges and Mikael Gross, retrieved guns from their cars and helped detain the killer for police.

NOTE: An armed civilian who stops a killer must be extremely cautious when police officers arrive, because they know little, if anything, about what happened. They don’t know who the good guys and bad guys are.

If they see a civilian with a gun in a place where there has been shooting, they might well assume that person is the killer and start shooting.

The best advice is to drop your gun and open your hands to show you don’t have anything.

Don’t make any sudden movements.

You might be handcuffed until you have had an opportunity to explain, because the police will be preoccupied trying to determine how many killers there are and who needs medical attention.

Talk a prospective killer out of it?

Although active killers rarely negotiate, since their goal is a maximum body count for notoriety, occasionally a confident, resourceful, compassionate individual is able to engage a killer and persuade him to not to do terrible things. It might be worth trying before shooting begins.

You probably heard about the quiet heroism of a Georgia school bookkeeper. In case you didn’t: on August 20, 2013, a man dressed in black followed a student with a pass into the Ronald E. McNair Discovery Learning Academy near Atlanta. The man, armed with a semi-automatic weapon, stopped in the office where he encountered Antoinette Tuff. He told her to call the police and warn them to stay out of the building. She did that, and while she talked with the dispatcher, the man went into the hallway and fired some shots.

The man returned to Tuff, and she relayed the message to him that no police would come into the building. Then she started a sympathetic conversation with him, captured on the 24-minute 911 recording that has some incredible moments amidst periods of silence when Tuff put the dispatcher on hold.

Apparently Tuff didn’t display any fear. She took the initiative to share some of her personal struggles. “I tried to commit suicide last year,” she explained. “My husband left me after 33 years.” She added, “I’ve got a son who’s multiple-disabled. “

He said he had nothing to live for, and she replied, “Look at me now. I’m working, and everything is OK.”

She went on to say that she had stumbled but picked herself up, and he could pick himself up, too. She offered to walk with him out of the building, so that nobody would hurt him. He agreed to give her his gun, and she put it on the other side of the office. As directed, he emptied his pockets and lay on the floor with his hands behind his back, awaiting the police.

“Nobody’s going to hate you,” she said. “You didn’t hurt anybody. It’s going to be all right, sweetie. I just want you to know I love you, OK? And I’m proud of you. That’s a good thing you’re giving up. Don’t worry about it. We all go through something in life.”

Later, after the man was in police custody, Tuff said, “I’ve never been so scared in all the days of my life.”

As these cases suggest, there are times when you must have your wits about you to survive.

Even in the most difficult circumstances, though, there are probably more ways than you might imagine to protect your life and your liberty.

*************************************************
9. New women shooters take the firearms world by storm
*************************************************

Member James Durso emailed me this:

--

From dailycaller.com: http://tinyurl.com/ndg2mmm


New women shooters take the firearms world by storm
by Steve Adcock, The Shooting Channel
September 9, 2013

Women are rapidly becoming as integrated into the world of target shooting and self-defense as men, according to a new report from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF). Recently published numbers indicate that women account for more than 1/3rd of new target shooters, and women are buying guns at drastically increased rates over year’s past.

The numbers also show that nearly half of new target shooters live in urban and suburban areas of the country, which suggests that more and more of newer shooters increasingly prioritize self-defense and preparing themselves to confront the dangers of our world. The surge in firearm sales in the past five years, especially among women, is encouraging. Men are not the only ones prepared to defend their families with deadly force.

NBC reports that more than 1 in 5 women in the United States are packing heat, which is up from a mere 13 percent back in 2005. Clearly, women are arming themselves in significant numbers, certainly in part due to the fear that politicians will succeed in stripping away our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. But more than that, women recognize the need for protection beyond a rape whistle.

Gayle Trotter, Senior Fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, told Congress back in January that guns equalize threats from men, arguing “[Women] do not have the same type of physical strength and opportunity to defend themselves in hand-to-hand struggle.” Apparently, women agree with Ms. Trotter’s assessment.

More and more new female shooters believe gun ownership empowers them to take control over their lives and their safety. Gun ownership is a powerful tool that enhances the self-image and confidence of anyone, but especially women. It is about stepping outside one’s comfort zone and refusing to become the next victim. Guns build strong and independent women that criminals need to be afraid of.

If you are ready to buy your first gun, there are a few tips to keep in mind. First, try before you buy. Many gun ranges will rent guns that can be used in their range. Since all guns have a different feel, always try shooting the gun before spending hard-earned cash on it. Second, size matters. While many women might gravitate towards smaller guns, remember that the smaller the gun, the more recoil it will have. Try guns of all sizes, not just the smaller ones, to get a more accurate indication of what weapon is right for the intended purpose.

And third, do not get caught up in the caliber debate. As one of my recent articles suggests, an easy-to-shoot 22-caliber gun can be just as effective as a larger 45-caliber. Choose the caliber that is right for you, not the caliber that a 250-pound gun store clerk claims to be the “best”. I never want a gun of any caliber pointed at my head. Most criminals don’t either.

Gun ownership is no longer primarily a man-only game. Women recognize that some threats require deadly force. Do not let yourself become another victim. Women are arming themselves.

Maybe you should too.


*************************************************
10. More women shop for guns, participate in target shooting
*************************************************

Roy Scherer emailed me this:

--

From timesdispatch.com: http://tinyurl.com/o9af7z5


More women shop for guns, participate in target shooting
For some, instruction removes fear of weapons
by Laura Kebede, Richmond Times-Dispatch
September 8, 2013

Women have become a mainstay in previously male-dominated classes offered at Colonial Shooting Academy since it opened in March 2012.

All-women classes — with female instructors — were started at the Henrico County indoor shooting range in response to growing demand that has also been seen nationwide, with more and more women purchasing guns and learning how to use them.

Glen Allen resident Berni Lane’s fear of guns dates to 1995 when she was held up at gunpoint by two men upon returning to her western Henrico apartment from work in the evening.

For years afterward, her flashbacks, which slowly went away with medication, took her back to the gun, not the men, she said. She couldn’t even be in the same room when her teenage son — “like every other 14-year-old boy” — would play video games that involved shooting.

Then, several weeks ago, her new employer took her and three other new employees to Colonial Shooting Academy for a team-building activity.

After watching a safety video and listening to detailed instructions from the shooting-range staff, Lane shot several guns, including a 9 mm — the same kind of gun the two men threatened her with — which prompted a hug from her instructor.

“‘Look, Mom, no hands!’ It was that kind of a feeling. I had overcome a major fear in my life to the point that I want to go back (to the shooting range),” Lane said. “I’m smiling thinking about it.”

Lane said she doesn’t plan on purchasing a gun or getting a concealed-carry permit, but she wants her son to learn gun safety and make a clear distinction between the guns on the screen and the guns on the street.

“You need to feel the weight of it in your hand,” she said she wants to tell her son. “The video games are fun, but it’s not real life. … This is real life.”

In an annual survey of firearms retail stores, the National Shooting Sports Foundation found about 79 percent of retailers saw more women visit their stores in 2012 compared with 2011. That’s up from 73 percent in 2011 and 61 percent in 2010.

The National Sporting Goods Association reported that 67 percent more women participate in target shooting in 2012 compared with a decade ago.

Jerry Thompson, owner of Dominion Shooting Range on Turner Road in Chesterfield County, said he has seen a similar increase since it opened in 2001, especially in the concealed-carry permit classes. Colonial and Dominion have weekly ladies nights that have gained popularity.

In reality, few crimes are thwarted by gun-wielding victims. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that only 0.8 percent of victims of nonfatal violent crime threatened or attacked their assailant with a gun between 2007 and 2011. Most offered no resistance (44 percent), tried to hit or kick their attacker (22 percent) or attempted to flee (26 percent).

Bett Randolph bought her gun for self protection six weeks before the all-women’s basic pistol class at Colonial Shooting Academy in August. A friend loaded it for her, but she kept it in a drawer because she didn’t know how to operate it and didn’t know Virginia laws related to guns.

“I was thinking about (buying a gun) for years,” Randolph said. “But then I was scared to touch it.”

When she learned how to safely store and load her gun, debunking perceptions of guns she got from the movies, she said she was ready to come back and practice on the range.

“I believe in education, and it takes the fear out of owning it,” Randolph said.

Alleviating fear was the goal in Colonial Shooting Academy’s setup, general manager Ed Coleman said. Most of the 5,000 square feet of retail space is visible from the front door and has a high ceiling and open design to make visitors more at ease, he said.

Female instructors also take off the edge in the all-women’s classes, said Coleman, who used to teach all-women’s classes himself.

Debra Smith has been a National Rifle Association certified instructor for five months. She took the certification class because many of her female friends kept asking her to teach them how to shoot.

“Practice can help change your instinct,” she said. “I don’t recommend anyone to have a gun loaded in their home without being properly trained.”

She often offers to accompany her students to the ladies night activities at Colonial Shooting Academy so they can become more familiar with gun safety, feel comfortable handling the weapons and have some fun honing their skills, all the while hoping they will never have to use them.

Daphne Huggins of Richmond took an online class for a concealed-carry permit before coming to Colonial Shooting Academy. She thought she needed it to bring the gun her deceased brother left for her across state lines. The class took her about 30 minutes to complete without ever firing a gun.

“I was shocked I got a permit in the mail,” she said.

But she knew she needed more gun education than that, she said. Now that she’s taken a class, she said she plans on bringing a few friends with her to ladies night to practice.

Lane said she had a lot of preconceived notions about guns because of her terrifying experience in 1995. She described her latest experience, however, as liberating.

“There’s a whole other side to using a gun or owning a gun,” she said. “It gave me the control I didn’t have when those men held me up.”


*************************************************
11. Miller: National gun registry gets head start
*************************************************

Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:

--

From washingtontimes.com: http://tinyurl.com/ppe35lr


MILLER: National gun registry gets head start as Maryland compromises gun owners’ privacy
by Emily Miller
September 11, 2013

Gun owners place a high value on their privacy. Anti-gun politicians realize this and are hoping they can use the prospect of entering their names into a gun registry to scare these Americans away from buying a firearm. Every time these gun grabbers get caught in the act, Second Amendment supporters need to cry foul.

Over the weekend, Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and the Maryland State Police released the confidential information of people applying for firearms purchases to five massive state agencies. The stated purpose, according to a police statement Saturday night, was to speed up the processing of a backlog of 39,000 applications.

The backlog was created by the public response to Mr. O'Malley’s radical new gun-control laws that kick in on Oct. 1, requiring anyone who wants to buy a handgun to submit to fingerprinting, licensing and the completion of a four-hour training course. This will be just like the mandatory course the District of Columbia did away with last year after concluding it was entirely unnecessary.

Citizens of states without such restrictions may wonder why the police are involved at all in the purchase of a firearm. Mr. O'Malley, a Democrat with ambitions for higher office, does not allow federally licensed dealers to have direct contact with the FBI’s National Instant Background Check System. Maryland law demands that a dealer go through the state police for the background check before releasing a gun.

However, what is supposed to be a seven-day process has stretched much longer. Mr. O'Malley refuses to rectify the situation by allowing the dealers to conduct the background checks themselves. Apparently, he will do anything to make it harder to get a gun, even if dealers are releasing guns to prohibited people to follow state law.

“First Martin O'Malley stops firearms dealers from calling in federal background checks on handgun buyers,” Patrick Shomo, the president of Maryland Shall Issue told me. “Now he now thinks it a good idea to give personal and private information — names, addresses and even Social Security numbers — on an unsecure Internet site so that dozens of random state employees can access them from anywhere in the world using a single shared password and log-in.”

The government practice of releasing of gun owners’ information came into the national spotlight when a New York newspaper, the Journal News, published an interactive map with the names and addresses of law-abiding handgun permit holders’ homes just two weeks after the tragic school shootings in Newtown, Conn.

The paper used the New York State Freedom of Information Law to procure the information from Westchester and Rockland counties, which willingly released the confidential information. Either deliberately or carelessly, the newspaper set up innocent people to be targets of theft and violence in an article titled, “The gun owner next door: What you don’t know about the weapons in your neighborhood.”

In reaction, Sen. John Barrasso, Wyoming Republican, offered an amendment in April to President Obama’s gun-control legislation in the Senate that would have blocked the government from publicly releasing any information about gun owners. Mr. Barrasso’s amendment got 67 votes and was one of just two of the 10 amendments offered that passed the upper chamber.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pulled the base bill from the floor because he couldn’t get 60 votes for it, so Mr. Barrasso’s legislation never went to the House. Since then, several states have also passed laws prohibiting the public release of gun owners’ personal information.

The larger issue is how much Americans can trust the federal government with registration lists of gun owners. Our Founding Fathers created the Second Amendment specifically so that an armed civilian populace could protect the nation from a tyranny.

When the government knows the whereabouts of every single gun in the country, the deterrence of an armed citizenry as a counterweight to overbearing authority is removed, and the possibility of confiscation becomes more likely.

When it was revealed this summer that the National Security Agency has been spying on thousands of law-abiding citizens for no reason, gun owners’ fears were reinforced. That is why the National Rifle Association filed an amicus brief last week in a case that the American Civil Liberties Union is bringing against the agency for its Prism data-mining program.

The NRA’s position is that once enough data has been collected and compiled, establishing a gun registry would be easy to create.

In the brief, the organization that represents more than 5 million Americans wrote that the “the mass-surveillance program” provides the feds with the “means of identifying members and others who communicate with the NRA and other advocacy groups, but also with the means of identifying gun owners without their knowledge or consent.”

Maryland gun owners are justified in their anger about their personal information being disseminated to a variety of state bureaucratic databases. Americans cannot trust their government with their personal information and ought to be vigilant about demanding answers when their privacy is compromised.


*************************************************
12. National Federation of the Blind comments on gun ownership
*************************************************

Yes, blind people can use a gun to defend themselves. Someone who is partially blind can see well enough if the attacker is close. Someone totally blind can use a gun like a contact weapon - push it into your attacker and pull the trigger. Also, don't underestimate the ability of a blind person to tell direction quite accurately by sound.

VCDL supports the right of blind people to be gun owners and to be able to get a CHP for their self-defense.

I was asked about VCDL's position by the press recently. I said, "Show me where there has been a problem with blind people carrying guns?" Silence and end of interview.

EM Sandy Ferris send me this:

--

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:
Chris Danielsen
Director of Public Relations
National Federation of the Blind
(410) 659-9314, extension 2330
(410) 262-1281 (Cell)
cdanielsen@nfb.org

National Federation of the Blind Comments on Gun Ownership by Blind Individuals

Baltimore, Maryland (September 12, 2013): In recent days there has been much discussion about whether blind individuals should be permitted to own and/or carry firearms.

The National Federation of the Blind, the oldest and largest nationwide organization of blind Americans, understands that guns are dangerous weapons, and that anyone who owns, carries, or uses them must therefore exercise great care and sound judgment in doing so. Blindness has no adverse impact on a person’s ability to exercise due care and good judgment.

State firearms laws must be applied in a nondiscriminatory manner to blind individuals. Recognizing that laws and regulations regarding the granting of permits to own and/or carry firearms vary throughout our country, our single position on firearms regulation is that a permit to own and/or carry a gun should not be denied to any individual solely on the basis of blindness.

For more information on our position, or for coordination of interviews with blind individuals who are experienced in owning and/or using firearms, please contact Chris Danielsen at (410) 659-9314, extension 2330, or by e-mail to cdanielsen@nfb.org.

--

About the National Federation of the Blind
The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is the oldest, largest, and most influential nationwide membership organization of blind people in the United States. Founded in 1940, the NFB advocates for the civil rights and equality of blind Americans, and develops innovative education, technology, and training programs to provide the blind and those who are losing vision with the tools they need to become independent and successful. We need your support. To make a donation, please go to www.nfb.org


*************************************************
13. Owner of Kennedy Jewelers: "I came out firing"
*************************************************

MAKE SURE YOUR SELF-DEFENSE GUNS ARE LOADED! (see second paragraph.)

From chattanoogan.com: http://tinyurl.com/q4s5pez


Owner Of Kennedy Jewelers: "I Came Out Firing"; Assault Rifle Was Tossed By Elementary School; Robber's Pants Dropped And Underwear Used As Evidence
September 10, 2013

The owner of Kennedy Jewelers on East Main Street testified Tuesday that after he spotted a 6'6" masked man armed with an assault rifle in his store he loaded his pistol and took on the robber and his accomplice.

***Shane Kennedy said he first aimed at the pair with his revolver and pulled the trigger, but found the gun was empty. He said he ducked behind his office door, loaded the weapon, then, "I came out firing."***

The pair fled the store after the Aug. 6 holdup without getting any loot. They were soon apprehended.

It was also testified in General Sessions Court that the assault rifle was tossed out of the getaway car beside an elementary school.

Also, Detective Kendon Massengale said during the robbery the accomplice's shorts fell around his knees and his blue boxer shorts were caught on video. He said when the suspect was caught, he was wearing blue boxer shorts.

Judge Christie Sell bound charges against Gerald Dewayne Jackson, 24, of 420 S. Seminole Dr., and Diontre Danforth, 18, of 1010 N. Larchmont Ave. to the Grand Jury. Jackson is charged with aggravated robbery, reckless endangerment, attempted first-degree murder and criminal conspiracy. Danforth is charged with aggravated robbery and criminal conspiracy to commit robbery.

Prosecutor Rodney Strong said Jackson should have also been charged for attempted first-degree murder against a customer and four other employees in the store. Judge Sell agreed. The prosecutor said the charges will be added at the Grand Jury level.

Judge Sell said, "It was amazing that only one person was hit and that no one is dead, and it is very fortunate that an elementary child did not pick up an assault rifle."

Mr. Kennedy said he was sitting in his office getting ready to close for the day when he heard two shots ring out. He said he reached in his desk for his pistol, opened the door, and saw the two robbers. He said it was then he tried to shoot.

He said he heard the accomplice (identified as Danforth) say, "He's got a gun. He's got a gun."

He said when the gun did not go off, he ducked behind his office door. He said the tall gunman (identified as Jackson) fired a shot toward him and some of the fragments struck him. He later was driven to the hospital to be checked out.

The store owner said he loaded the gun while behind the door, then went back out to confront the robbers. He fired several shots, causing the pair to retreat. The gunman with the assault rifle fired several shots from the hip as he ran off. Two of the shots went into the side of a customer's car.

Shane Kennedy said his brother was in another office, and he also was armed with a handgun.

A customer who was in the store to pawn some jewelry said he heard a commotion behind him and he hit the floor after a shot rang out. He said at one point he peeked up and saw the owner brandishing his weapon.

Detective Massengale said the accomplice was carrying a laundry basket and a pillow case. He was wearing a black hoodie and a black shirt. He left the laundry basket behind.

He said the pair split, with the gunman getting into a car and the accomplice running down Mulberry Street. Police who converged on the area located Danforth sitting on a nearby porch. Neighbors said he jumped a fence and ran through yards until stopping on the porch.

The black hoodie, black shirt and pillow case were found nearby.

Detective Massengale said Jackson was a suspect in a home invasion in which the same car was used. The car was stopped by police the day after the Kennedy Jewelers holdup. A search was made of the Seminole Drive residence and ammunition for the Saiga assault rifle was found in a garage.

He said a cell phone was recovered that showed Jackson posing with the Saiga assault rifle.

The jewelry store has video inside and out, and the robbery was captured on several videos with audio. As they entered, the gunman was heard saying, "C'mon. Get it."

Jackson was arrested for carjacking, kidnapping and aggravated robbery in 2010, but the charges were all dismissed.

He got a three-year suspended sentence on a 2008 burglary.


*************************************************
14. Parents want to know why EHS yearbook doesn't include rifle team
*************************************************

EM Greg Trojan emailed me this:

--

The indoctrination continues as the statists continue to wipe the memory of gun ownership and the liberty it represents out of the American lexicon.

I know it's not Virginia but how many schools in Virginia have lost their shooting teams?


From wfmz.com: http://tinyurl.com/p33pzpl


Parents want to know why EHS yearbook doesn't include rifle team
by Randy Kraft, WFMZ.com Reporter
September 10, 2013

EMMAUS, Pa. - Some parents in Lehigh County want to know why Emmaus High School’s championship rifle team was not included in the school’s new yearbook.

They hoped to find out what happened at Monday night’s school board meeting. But no explanation was offered by school board members, the superintendent or other administrators at the meeting.

“This is a high school issue,” said Superintendent Thomas Seidenberger after the board meeting.

Chris Donatelli, a Republican candidate for school board in the November election, was the only parent to address the board about the matter. But he was accompanied by two other “disappointed” parents of rifle team members.

Donatelli said 10 high school rifle teams competed in the 2012-13 district competition, which Emmaus High School won in February. “The team went undefeated in the league and in the district,” he told the school board.

After the meeting, Donatelli said parents don’t know if the rifle team was not included in the 2013 yearbook because of an oversight – or if someone was afraid to include anything about its victory because of the national debate over gun control.

“I’d hate to think it would be that,” he said. “We’re just trying to get answers.”

His son Stephen was a member of the rifle team before graduating in spring. When Stephen got his yearbook two weeks ago, he saw it did not even mention the rifle team and there was no photo of the team.

A photo of the rifle team was taken by Don Herb, a professional photographer hired to take pictures for the yearbook. It shows 21 team members posing with their advisors. Most of the students are holding rifles.

Parents said Andrew Moxey, the high school’s yearbook advisor, suggested that Herb did not turn in the picture on time. They said that angered Herb, who told one of them: “I’m really upset. I feel like I got thrown under the bus.”

The parents said Herb told them the rifle team photo was one of the best he took for the yearbook. He’s offered to send it to all rifle team members for free.

Donatelli said some families purchased the yearbook even though their children have not yet graduated, because they fully expected the rifle team’s accomplishments would be in it.

He said parents trying to find out what happened first contacted Dennis Ramella, the high school athletic director, “who claims no involvement. Mr. Herb says he fulfilled his requirement and Mr. Moxey, to date, has not come back with a satisfactory answer.”

He asked the school board for the name of the person who oversees Moxey’s position as yearbook advisor.

Donatelli suggested that everyone who gets a yearbook should receive a supplemental page showcasing the accomplishment of the rifle team.

“This issue, if not addressed, will only fester,” he warned the school board.

“I’m not going to let it lie,” said Donatelli after the meeting.

“Me either,” said parent Lorraine Husack, whose son Jonathan, an EHS junior, is on the rifle team.

Husack said she was shocked that the team’s photo was not in the yearbook. Rochelle Bachman said her daughter Siera also is a junior on the rifle team.

Bachman said Moxey told her he never received the photo of the rifle team to include in the yearbook. She then contacted Herb, who assured her the picture had been sent.

Seidenberger said the high school’s co-ed rifle team has been winning routinely for the last couple of years. He said not many high schools still have rifle teams, adding: “We go hither and yon to have a shooting match.” Also during the board meeting:

* Kristen Campbell was sworn in as assistant district superintendent by Lehigh County Judge Douglas Reichley.

* Seidenberger announced that on Friday a new ticket booth -- designed and built by Emmaus High teacher Scott Didra’s students -- was moved to Memorial Field. He said Didra’s students now are considering constructing a new press box for the football stadium.

* Seidenberger told the board he has begun writing pieces for the district’s web site in a section called Superintendent’s Timely Messages. He plans to write at least one every week. He said he will stick to pertinent themes that focus more on fact than opinion.

* He also announced East Penn School District now is on Facebook. He said Facebook will be used to celebrate student success and tell unusual human interest stories about things happening in the district that people otherwise might not learn about.

* The superintendent reported slightly less than 8,000 students are enrolled in the district for the 2013-14 school year, which he said is a little surprising. He said he’ll have a better idea of enrollment by early October, explaining the numbers often fluctuate until then. He also will present the board with an update on class sizes in October.

He reported the district hired two additional special education teachers this year “and we’re going to be looking at more staff,” because its population of special ed students is increasing. “These kids are coming and it’s our obligation to serve them.”

“For the first time in a long time, not a great number of students are going to cyber charter schools,” said the superintendent. “Maybe the publicity is starting to make an impact.”


*************************************************
15. NYPD cop busted for off-duty gun-running
*************************************************

Ah, another one of Bloomberg's corrupt New York City police officers involve in gun running. This time not into New York CIty, but into the Philippines. I'm sure Bloomberg will find a way to blame Virginia for this.

Member James Durso emailed me this:

--

From nypost.com: http://tinyurl.com/olg324z


NYPD cop busted for off-duty gun-running
By Kevin Fasick and Laura Italiano
September 6, 2013

A Manhattan cop and his customs-officer brother defiled their badges by smuggling unlicensed high-powered assault and sniper rifles from the United States to the Philippines, the feds charged Friday.

Officer Rex-Gene Maralit — who worked for the NYPD Equal Employment Opportunity Office at Police Headquarters — was so intent on making a profit throughout the five-year alleged scheme that he would ask his arms suppliers for a “law-enforcement” discount, officials said.

“One other question,” Maralit was caught on ¬e-mail asking one online dealer with whom he was negotiating the price on a special operations combat assault rifle he wished to buy.

“Do you give discounts to LEO?” officials said Maralit then asked, meaning “law-enforcement officers.”

“I am an active P-O with the NYPD,” he allegedly explained. “Please advise.”

Maralit, 44, of Lawrenceville, NJ, would purchase the rifle for $2,444, according to the complaint, which did not say if the price was indeed discounted.

Maralit bought guns from legitimate online dealers, and represented that he was the actual buyer, the complaint alleges.

Instead, he would ship the weapons for a profit to a third brother, Ariel, who lives in the Philippines — skirting arms-export laws by disassembling the components and misrepresenting the contents of the packages, the complaint ¬alleges.

“Aluminum side door railing, quantity of 5,” one such shipment was labeled.

Maralit’s brother Wilfredo — a US Customs and Border Protection officer assigned to Los Angeles International Airport — is also charged with assisting in the scheme.

“They used their knowledge of firearms licenses and their status as law-enforcement officers to engage in an illegal international arms trafficking business,” Brooklyn US Attorney Loretta Lynch said in a statement announcing the charges yesterday.

These were no starter pistols — but rather tactical weapons powerful enough to take down aircraft or penetrate brick walls and concrete cinder blocks, the feds contend.

Rex-Gene looked shaken as he was ordered held in protective custody pending a scheduled Sept. 12 bail hearing.


*************************************************
16. Chicago bans guns in restaurants, expects lawsuit
*************************************************

No wonder there is such lawlessness in Chicago when the city government, itself, is a scofflaw.

From cowboybyte.com: http://tinyurl.com/khq4l8o


Chicago bans guns in restaurants, expects lawsuit
by Cowboy Byte
September 12, 2013

Forced to weaken one of the nation’s toughest gun-control laws, the Chicago City Council clearly signaled it wasn’t backing down on Wednesday by banning concealed weapons in all bars and restaurants that sell liquor — and noting that attorneys were ready to fight the anticipated legal challenges.

State legislators were forced by a federal appeals court in July to adopt a law allowing residents to carry concealed weapons in Illinois, the only state that still banned the practice. The resulting state law largely stripped city and county officials of their authority to regulate guns, which especially irked officials in Chicago, where residents had to apply for concealed-carry permits through the police chief.


*************************************************
17. New laws aimed at boosting safety at TX schools
*************************************************

Member George Overstreet emailed me this:

--

From mobile.officer.com: http://tinyurl.com/lyfpg82


New Laws Aimed At Boosting Safety At Texas Schools
September 4th, 2013

As a deadly knife fight Wednesday at a Houston-area high school raised new concerns about student safety, officials said a package of laws that just took effect should soon help thwart such acts of violence.

Armed "school marshals" could begin patrolling campuses in 2014 after they complete a specialized training course -- in what officials say they believe will the first program of its kind in the United States.

Two other new laws will provide special training for school employees who are licensed to carry concealed handguns and will establish a state task force to bolster school safety measures.

"We're trying to cover schools that don't now have an officer on site or perhaps don't have enough in case something occurs," said state Rep. Jason Villalba, R-Dallas, who authored legislation creating the school marshal program. "We tried to craft a safe program so someone can be there at a school and respond immediately, rather than wait the six to eight minutes that it might take law enforcement to arrive."

House Bill 1009, the Protection of Texas Children Act, was among more than a dozen school-safety bills proposed when the Legislature convened in January.

Under the act, school employees who wish to become marshals would have to be licensed to carry a concealed weapon in Texas and would receive 80 hours of training through one of the state's 106 state-certified law enforcement training academies. School campuses could have one marshal for every 400 students.

Officials said the training, still being developed, would include a mental health evaluation, active shooter and emergency-situation training, as well as firearms proficiency.

The marshals, who would be known only to the school principal and local law enforcement, would be authorized to respond to an active shooter or other immediate life-threatening situations on school property. The program would be optional for school districts.

"Our goal is to design the best school marshal program in the United States," said Kim Vickers, executive director of the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Education, the state agency that is developing the training standards and will license the new marshals.

"The biggest challenge is if you're going to put a person in a crowded school hallway with a gun, you're almost thrusting them into the same type of role as a law enforcement officer -- except when law enforcement responds to an 'active shooter,' the propensity for them to get shot will be very high," Vickers said.

That same issue was raised in an August study by the Minnesota-based Center for Homicide Research of teachers who fired guns at school from 1980 and 2012. The report suggested that the opposite was a concern, as well: "The potential for both accidental and intentional shootings in which teachers can cause lethal damage to innocent actors is apparent," the report states.

That conclusion contrasts with separate recommendations from the National Rifle Association that teachers should be properly trained and armed, as a way to have a responder at the school if gunfire broke out, rather than waiting several minutes for police to arrive.

Villalba said "middle-sized districts are taking a much more active role" than large districts in wanting marshals as soon as the program launches. And some of the larger districts, initially wary of the marshal concept, are now considering them at elementary schools. Elementaries aren't continually staffed by school police, as most larger high schools and middle schools are.

Officials in Austin and other Central Texas districts said they are waiting to see the rules before they know whether marshals would be appropriate for them.

Two other bills that became law Sunday are also designed to bolster school safety. Senate Bill 1857 by state Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, will allow concealed-handgun licensees to be specially trained on how to protect students, how to properly interact with police who arrive on the scene of a school shooting, tactics for denying an armed intruder entry into a classroom or school, and methods for increasing the license-holder's shooting accuracy while under stress.

Estes said earlier that the legislation was designed to increase safety in situations other than those where school marshals are present. Under current Texas law, a school district can permit employees with concealed-handgun licenses to carry weapons in schools -- a statute that has mainly been used without incident by schools in rural areas that are long distances from first responders.

Texas considered a variety of measures earlier this year to guard against a bloody attack like the one in December 2012 at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., that left 20 students and six teachers dead.

While the new laws were aimed mostly at stopping shooting rampages in schools, it's unclear whether Texas' school marshal law would have had an effect on Wednesday's knife attack at Spring High School, officials there said. One student was fatally stabbed and three others were injured when a hallway confrontation escalated into a fight near the cafeteria about 7:10 a.m., authorities said.

State Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, whose district includes the high school, said the new legislation is designed to make students safer.

"Even with a marshal or a (concealed handgun license) holder or school police present at the school, you're not going to have someone right there every time something terrible happens," Patrick said. "But they can hopefully prevent it from spreading."


*************************************************
18. Waking a sleeping giant in CO
*************************************************

Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:

--

From nationalreview.com: http://tinyurl.com/mp9wnx9


Waking a Sleeping Giant in Colorado - Democrats knew what they wanted in Colorado, but they overreached.
By John R. Lott Jr.
September 11, 2013

Two weeks ago, the Washington Post declared the recall elections of two powerful state senators in Colorado a national “referendum on guns.” Indeed, the defeat of state-senate president John Morse and fellow state senator Angela Giron will cause some Democrats to rethink their push on gun control.

But of course, many Democrats have reacted by shrugging off the results. Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz has dismissed the losses as the result of “voter suppression, pure and simple” (orchestrated by the National Rifle Association and the Koch brothers, of course). Mark Glaze, executive director of Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns, predicted that the victory by gun owners would be short-lived at best and that gun-control legislators would take comfort in knowing that his group “will have their back.”

In reality, it is hard not to appreciate what was accomplished. The difficulties facing the recall were overwhelming:

Both state-senate districts were overwhelmingly Democratic. In 2012, President Obama carried Morse’s district by 21 percentage points and Giron’s by 19 points.

These were the first recalls of legislators in Colorado history. Nationally, recalls of state legislators, particularly state legislative leaders, has been very difficult. Morse and Giron were only the 37th and 38th state legislators in U.S. history to face recall votes (before this vote, precisely half the efforts had succeeded). Prior to Morse, there had only been four recall elections against legislative leaders, and the legislative leader was retained in three of those four races. Giron was also a powerful senator, serving as vice chairman of the very important, especially for her rural district, Agriculture, Natural Resources, and Energy Committee.

Not only did getting a recall on the ballot require a number of signatures amounting to 25 percent of all the votes in the previous election, but the Democrats didn’t take even that battle lying down. During the signature-gathering effort, recall proponents were outspent by the groups backed by billionaire Mayor Bloomberg that went in earlier with ads to discourage signature gathering.

In their last races for the state senate, in 2010, Morse raised $163,972 and Giron $68,710. By the last filing for the recall, on August 29, Morse had raised $658,230 and Giron $825,400. While the NRA had donated $361,700, just two billionaires, Bloomberg and Eli Broad, donated a total of $600,000 between them. Left-wing organizations such as the Daily Kos and MoveOn.org continually bombarded their members with requests for money. Of the $3.5 million spent on the recall election, almost $3 million came from its opponents.

Despite all that, the two Democratic state senators were decisively defeated. Morse’s race was close, with him losing by only two percentage points. But Giron was demolished by twelve points.

The votes weren’t about some abstract idea. As part of its gun-control push this spring, the Obama administration made the extremely unusual move of lobbying Colorado’s governor and its state legislators. If they could show that strict gun control could be passed in a western state such as Colorado, the administration thought, they could get it passed anyplace. The Colorado bills, like the ones in every place from Connecticut to New York to Maryland to California, had one central goal: to reduce gun ownership by making it costly to own guns.

In Colorado, one new law charges people a transfer fee whenever they obtain a gun. Democrats voted down Republican amendments that would have capped the fee and exempted people below the poverty level from paying it. How many other taxes or fees would Democrats refuse to exempt the poor from paying?

Democrats feel that the struggle to reduce gun ownership is important for a simple reason: The issue that most divides conservatives and liberals is not taxes, not abortion, but gun control. Liberals trust government to make decisions, while conservatives tend to trust individuals. Letting people possess weapons is the ultimate form of trust in individuals. Democrats also know that gun ownership and familiarity with firearms go a long way toward determining how people feel about gun control. Democrats may believe that gun control enhances safety, but they also believe that it will weaken Republicans and conservatism in the long run.

It wasn’t just gun-owner groups that cautioned Democrats about these bills. Colorado state senator Lois Tochtrop warned her fellow Democrats by saying, “I feel like all these gun bills have done — to quote the last words in the movie Tora! Tora! Tora! — is to awaken a sleeping giant.”


*************************************************
19. How women, hispanics, and blue collar workers defended gun rights in CO
*************************************************

Member James Durso emailed me this:

--

From pjmedia.com: http://tinyurl.com/kgdfdgr


How Women, Hispanics, and Blue Collar Workers Defended Gun Rights In Colorado
by Matt Vespa
September 11, 2013

As conservatives celebrate their victory over booting anti-gun legislators in Colorado’s recall elections last night, let’s look at the some of the reasons that contributed to their success. In Dave Weigel’s September 11 post on Slate, the spokeswoman for the recall, Jennifer Kerns, provided the information and showed that even Democrats love their guns. Granted, gun rights supporters have known this for quite some time. The only people who don’t get seem to get it are urban-based liberal elites.

Kerns explains how women, Hispanics, and blue collar workers helped score a victory for liberty last night.

Hispanics: In the heavily Democrat, hispanic district in Pueblo, Hispanics are strong 2nd amendment supporters.

Women: There were many women behind this Recall movement, beginning when the gun control bills were heard in the State Legislature. A new radio ad out in the final weekend of the election featured Kimberly Weeks, a victim of rape, who testified in the State Legislature and took Senator John Morse to task on why she would be robbed of her right to defend herself. Other women’s groups were the first to run ads against Senator John Morse on the theme of “a woman’s right to choose… how to defend herself” which pushed the narrative. And even the Spokesperson for the effort (me) is a woman, and I, too, was one of the first women to testify against the gun control bills back in February. I got in under the wire to testify before they shut down the testimony from the public.

Blue collar: 3 of the 3 Founders of the Pueblo Recall are blue collar workers. 2 of them are plumbers and 1 is an electrician. They connected very well with the demographics of Pueblo, which is a blue collar former-steel worker town. 1 of the founding members of the Morse Recall is also blue collar, he wears a hard hat and spends about 100 hours per week out in an oil field in steel toed boots, then would go home at night and work on the Recall.

From the beginning, we had interesting demographics on our side. Again, by the numbers: More Democrats & Independents combined signed the Recall petition than Republicans. I believe this goes back to #1 above, it struck a populist nerve that appealed to independents. When we saw the turnout on Election Day was spiking with Independent/unaffiliated voters, we were ecstatic because we knew that a majority of those votes would likely break our way.

For the future, it will be interesting to see if the anti-gun wing of America learns their lesson from this defeat. Then again, liberals’ hopeless emotionalism will probably blind them again to another electoral slaughter on this issue. At the same time, the fact that more Democrats and Independents signed the petition than Republicans only further discredits DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz insane claim that her side lost due to voter suppression.


*************************************************
20. Spinning your rights away: Part I
*************************************************

EM Greg Trojan emailed me this:

--

A very good analysis of the gun grabber marketing propaganda the leaked out recently, covers the ineffective and ever changing tactics of the anti-civil rights crowd.


From calgunlaws.com: http://tinyurl.com/q7j9tjb


Spinning Your Rights Away: Part I
by cdmichel
September 9, 2013

Marketing experts preach that redefining a market is the best way to win it over.

This is why gun control politicos are now making an effort to change their messages, targets and tactics.

Over the last twenty years or so, gun control has lost. They lost the constitutional argument. They lost the criminological debate. They lost the support of the general public. My hope was that they would continue doing exactly what they have been doing, because they would continue their losing streak and might eventually become a historical footnote.

But they are getting shrewder, as evidenced by a new publication Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging, (herein “the book”). It’s a 70+ page book that a marketing pal of mine reviewed and called “a classic market redefinition and repositioning strategy.”

The book is a field guide for gun control activists, and is intended to coach them on how to change the political tide by redefining the terms of the debate. I assume some gun control money – namely from the Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama’s old haunt and a frequent advocate in the gun-control debate – was scrapped together and invested in having Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research work on the book. Indeed the name “Joyce Foundation” litters the GQRR web site and Joyce reciprocates. Some of the suspect cash was also likely tossed to KNP Communications, a K Street communications company that divines how best to pitch political concepts. They were also involved in the book.

In other words, the book is propaganda by professional spin masters designed to charge their public message, manipulate public opinion, and reverse the gun control movement’s failures.

Though the scope of its initial distribution is unknown, the words, phrases and concepts in this 2012 publication are already dripping off the lips of anti-gun politicians. No doubt circulated through the left side of Capital Hill, the same points of persuasion are now in the skulls of every staffer and copywriter, statist politicians and “progressive” think tanks.

For this article, I’m going to focus on what are the goals of this book. Subsequent articles will dive deeper into the muck being raked and how you, an advocate for freedom, can defeat gun control politicians and their well-financed spin campaign yet again.

THE GOALS OF THE NON-GUN-CONTROL PUBLICATION

Preventing Gun Violence Through Effective Messaging is a frank admission to the failure of gun control as a political movement – so much so that in its introductory pages the book acknowledges that “The gun violence prevention movement is dormant in the public imagination.” In fact, gun control’s marketers instruct their readers to “DO talk about preventing gun violence” but “DON’T talk about gun control.” Even the term gun control now has such a negative public connotation that the gun control movement no longer uses the phrase. The book even admits that the NRA, the gun control movement’s perpetual bogyman, is considered by the public as “a mainstream organization that protects our Second Amendment rights and provides information about gun safety.”

When your core position has eroded, and despite concerted efforts at demonizing your opposition they still receive high positive marks from the public, then you have no choice but to change the game. And that is what the book and its campaign is designed to accomplish. The gun control movement is disposing of their old memes, their old tactics, even their name.

It will be readdressing voters with new language designed to:

Make the gun control movement appear to have greater moral authority
Appeal to people’s emotions over their reason
Drive wedges between undecided voters by exploiting police
Drive a wedge between NRA members and NRA leadership
Sound familiar? If you think you’ve seen some of this in action already, you’re right.

Here are the main tactical areas that the book instructs gun control advocates to take.

CLAIM MORAL AUTHORITY AND THE MANTLE OF FREEDOM

The perceived moral superiority of a messenger reflects on the perceived morality of their message. If you don’t believe that, try questioning the beliefs of a preacher or rabbi. Odds are you won’t have the stomach for it.

The book notes that gun rights forces have held the moral high ground by basing their position on freedom – the freedom to choose to own a gun and to use it for self-defense. The book seeks to commandeer the freedom-focus to … well … deny people the freedom to own the guns they prefer (so I guess they are not pro-choice after all). My marketing buddy says that attacking a competitor’s strength is better than attacking their weakness. But I suspect the gun ban lobby is now recognizing that attacking freedom is a bad strategy. So instead gun control marketers are attempting to gain the same strength by hijacking the mantle of freedom to their cause.

Their messaging, however, is odd and weak, as I’ll discuss in future articles.

ALWAYS FOCUS ON EMOTIONAL AND VALUE-DRIVEN ARGUMENTS ABOUT GUN VIOLENCE

Marketing experts and trial lawyers know that emotional pitches work better than logical ones. I know this first hand from training in how to influence juries. In the gun control debate, logic has never helped the other side. Despite their efforts to generate and manipulate them, statistics have never been Sarah Brady’s friend … or acquaintance. So the gun control movement benefits greatly by manipulating emotions rather than relying on facts because it is a better marketing strategy and it avoids entering into rational arguments that they will lose … again.

The ugly bit of their strategy is the follow-through. Once a person’s emotions are heightened and the politicos who raised them appear to have moral authority, humans tend to accept any sympathetic fiction as a fact. So the book advises that, “Compelling facts should be used to back up that emotional narrative.” But the ‘facts’ that are strewn throughout the book are often not facts, or are so cherry-picked and obfuscatory that the real danger is in the one-two punch. Their game plan is to first open hearts by telling stories with emotions, images and feelings, then lob their non-facts to a softened up, receptive and uncritical public.

CHALLENGE THE NRA ON YOUR TERMS

The gun control movement now recognizes what we have known for years – that voters likely know somebody who is an NRA member, and thus don’t think badly of the NRA. So gun control marketers are now trying to drive a wedge between the NRA membership and the NRA’s leadership.

“It’s effective to emphasize that the vast majority of NRA members are law-abiding gun owners,” the book starts “who agree with common sense laws to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of dangerous people — the NRA’s officials and lobbyists are the problem.” The gun control spin book goes on to describe NRA policies as “exposing people to needless violence.” The goal is then not to demonize the NRA, which has been a losing proposition, but to demonize NRA leadership and thus cast doubt in the minds of members and swing voters.

This part is already in play. A relative of mine recently echoed some MSNBC agitprop that, in effect, tried to force me to denounce the policy of the “NRA’s boss.” It combined the tactics of division and fake moral authority. It didn’t work on me, but it will on somebody, somewhere. Sadly, you can, at a minimum, fool some of the people some of the time.

AUDIENCE VARIATIONS

Marketers segment their markets. This means they divide the populace into groups, and then communicate to these groups differently. A breakfast cereal company communicates the same product differently to your five year old than it does to you.

The book’s propagandists do the same. They note difference between “our base” (e.g., people on the political left and pre-disposed gun control advocates), genders, age groups and minorities. Their core market messages remain the same, but the books’ authors instruct their minions to either conceal some memes or amplify others, depending on the audience (part of your job is to be in each audience and disrupt their flow). They particularly plan on:

Appealing to minorities, since minorities are more often victimized by thugs (who occasionally use guns)
Appealing to women who are receptive to reducing gun violence whereas men are more responsive to reducing gun crime
Using linguistic judo when confronted by a gun rights advocate to create affinity, swipe the freedom mantle, then pimp for gun bans

CURIOUS CONUNDRUM

This guide,” the book begins, “ is intended to help organizations and individuals choose effective arguments and language when communicating with the public on behalf of stronger public policies to prevent gun violence.” But tellingly, the book only discusses guns, never violence. It doesn’t discuss gang warfare, where most gun homicides occur. It doesn’t expose that 60% of the “gun violence deaths” it seeks to prevent are actually suicides (an entirely different discussion) or how banning a “high capacity” magazine would slow the suicide process (one bullet is usually enough). It doesn’t relate how the freedom to own guns deters and prevents violence, though it harps endlessly on how people must have the “freedom to be safe in our homes and neighborhoods.” Not true as a matter of law, but truth is a rare commodity in gun control groups.

But they never say a word about violence as it is practiced. That is an odd outcome from a “violence prevention” playbook.

In the next installment I’ll dig deeper into the book and identify where its misinformation is already being inserted into the public’s mind.


*************************************************
21. CNN: Emily Miller schools Piers Morgan [VIDEO]
*************************************************

Emily Miller stands up to Piers. CNN is looking to get rid of Piers, BTW.

Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:

--

From thegunwire.com: http://tinyurl.com/mdryndl


YouTube: VIDEO: CNN: Emily Miller Schools Piers Morgan on Gun Crime Statistics in America – CNN – 9-9-13
September 10, 2013



-------------------------------------------
***************************************************************************
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/]
***************************************************************************