----------------------------------------------------------------------
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. HELP NEEDED for Richmond gun show on July 11 and 12!
2. ACTION ITEM: Let’s keep up VCDL’s LEAD in getting the Brady Campaign's money from the Lucky Gunner!
3. ACTION ITEM: Petition to Uber asking them to reverse their “no guns” policy
4. Uber’s anti-gun policy backfiring
5. Another reason to be armed when using Uber
6. Governor McAuliffe doesn’t understand the bills he is vetoing
7. No logic: Charleston killer passed background check, so we need even more background checks!
8. A bad ruling on post offices in U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals (Colorado area)
9. Does the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage open the door for national recognition of CHPs?
10. Three ODU students fight back against armed robber
11. Gun rights advocates push for campus-carry measures like Texas' is slow going
12. Who needs a gun in Fairfax Co while gardening on a lovely Sunday afternoon?
13. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass) pushes for $60m for CDC to study 'epidemic of gun violence'
14. U.S. government stands up for gun owners at U.N. meeting(!)
15. Vets told they can 'buy back' 2nd Amendment rights
16. [NV] Metro will no longer cite or arrest for failing to register handguns
17. [MI] Armed Detroit woman fights off 5 home invaders
18. [FL] Concealed carry permit holder fends off teen robbers [VIDEO]
19. [NC] Macon bus driver called a hero [VIDEO]
20. Rasmussen survey says ... We like living where guns are allowed
21. Authors of FBI study backtrack: Mass shootings are not increasing
22. Iconic gunmaker Colt is on the brink of bankruptcy
23. Comparing murder rates and gun ownership across countries
**************************************************
1. HELP NEEDED for Richmond gun show on July 11 and 12!
**************************************************
VCDL’s new Richmond Gun Show Coordinator, Mike Wilburt, needs help for the VCDL booth at the Richmond gun show July 11 and 12 at the Richmond Raceway Complex.
Right now help is needed for ALL shifts!
Saturday 7/11 9am -1pm, 1pm-5pm
Sunday 7/12 10am-1pm, 1pm-5pm
These shift times are not chiseled in stone. Mike will be as flexible as possible to accommodate volunteers.
All Richmond area VCDL members are encouraged to get involved. Many people ask me how they can help VCDL further. THIS IS HOW! Gun shows are extremely important to VCDL.
Those who sign up to help will get free admission to the show and many of the vendors give discounts to folks working at the show.
To volunteer,
email Mike at: gunshows.richmond@vcdl.org
or call Mike at: 804-794-6277
**************************************************
2. ACTION ITEM: Let’s keep up VCDL’s LEAD in getting the Brady Campaign's money from the Lucky Gunner!
**************************************************
If you ever wonder about the power of VA-ALERT combined with the tenacity of Virginia's gun owners, look at this: as of 10 AM, Sunday, June 28th, VCDL LEADS THE PACK of all the other gun groups contending to get some of the $111,000, which a court ordered the Brady Campaign to give to the Lucky Gunner! The Lucky Gunner is an online ammunition store which successfully fought off a frivolous lawsuit filed by the Brady Campaign.
In this friendly competition with other excellent and worthy groups, VCDL has 4,016 votes, but the Illinois State Rifle Association is in second place and coming on strong with 2,873 votes. The Connecticut Citizens Defense League is in third place with 2,624 votes! Those organizations are not to be trifled with, so we must keep up the momentum or we could be overtaken.
This is free money that VCDL can use to protect our rights here in Virginia!
Click on this link to vote, VCDL is listed almost at the end. If you tried to vote before, but couldn’t or can’t remember if you did, please try again. Share this link with friends and post on chat groups you frequent:
http://www.luckygunner.com/brady-v-lucky-gunner
The vote count is currently being updated once or twice a day.
**************************************************
3. ACTION ITEM: Petition to Uber asking them to reverse their “no guns” policy
**************************************************
Let’s explode the number of signers on this petition to Uber asking them to drop their new anti-gun policy. As of right now there are 1,241 signatures. Let’s see where those numbers are on Monday after all of you jump in!
https://www.change.org/p/uber-reverse-b ... r-vehicles
**************************************************
4. Uber’s anti-gun policy backfiring
**************************************************
Uber’s anti-gun policy, like all gun control, is dangerous. An unarmed Uber driver is held up by a man carrying a rifle. I guess the criminal hadn’t read Uber’s new policy banning guns.
Thanks to member Bernard F. Brzosek Jr. for the link:
http://bearingarms.com/ubers-anti-gun-p ... ce=badaily
or
http://tinyurl.com/orn4ahl
Uber’s Anti-Gun Policy Is Working Out Really Well For Armed Robbers
Posted by Bob Owens on June 25, 2015 at 10:28 am
San Francisco-based ride-sharing service Uber just announced a presumptuous policy banning drivers and passengers from carrying firearms.
It’s working out really great so far… for armed robbers:
He was really riding shotgun.
A man with a rifle robbed an Uber driver after he was picked up in Queens early Thursday, officials said.
The 30-year-old driver for the app-powered car provider was on 67th Ave. and Burns St. in Rego Park just after midnight when he stopped for a 22-year-old customer.
After agreeing on a price, the suspect jumped into the front seat, flashed his rifle and demanded the cabbie’s money, cops said.
The thief made off with about $60, officials said. The driver wasn’t injured.
The driver wasn’t injured, this time.
Now that the company has publicly announced that they are “gun-free,” criminals will intentionally target Uber drivers as easy marks, just as retail stores who have publicly announced that they are “gun free” almost always see a rash of robberies after those announcements are made.
Why?
It’s quite simple: violent criminals operate on a primal, Darwinian level, thriving on weaknesses both real and perceived.
Ironically, until very recently UBer had a reputation for being relatively safe and was trusted by lawful gun owners, due in no small part to the success of an Uber driver in Chicago who brought down an attempted mass shooter who was charging towards a crowd, firing an illegal weapon.
Instead of capitalizing on the goodwill this driver created by saving human lives, Uber instead cravenly recoiled in horror, and determined instead that the magical thinking of turning Uber vehicles into moving “gree free zones” would somehow improve the safety of their drivers and passengers.
This time, the Uber driver survived this flawed policy.
The next one may not be so lucky.
**************************************************
5. Another reason to be armed when using Uber
**************************************************
A two-edged sword: drivers don’t know who their passengers are, but equally as important, passengers don’t know who their drivers are.
Thanks to member Mark Shinn for the link:
http://www.whosdrivingyou.org/rideshare-incidents
**************************************************
6. Governor McAuliffe doesn’t understand the bills he is vetoing
**************************************************
Based on his comments in this months “Ask the Governor” radio show, the Governor actually believes that he vetoed a bill that allowed people in Virginia to own machine guns! Here’s a flash to our “gun owning” Governor, IT IS ALREADY PERFECTLY LEGAL TO OWN A MACHINE GUN IN VIRGINIA.
The bill that McAuliffe vetoed had NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with allowing people to own machine guns. The bill just guaranteed the citizens of Virginia equal protection and fairness under the law when it came to local chief law enforcement officers (CLEO) signing a Form 4. That signature simply acknowledges the CLEO was informed of the purchase and knows of no reason it shouldn’t legally go forward. It in no way gives permission for the final sale of a machine gun. The BATFE makes the final decision on that.
Sounds like the Governor should read the bills and understand them completely before he vetoes them. Or perhaps he doesn’t believe in equal protection under the law? Or perhaps he is a “gun owner,” who hates guns?
The discussion about firearms begin at the 18-minute mark. Separately, VCDL’s plan to repeal the “good and sufficient” requirement on carrying in churches is discussed around the 20-minute mark:
http://liveblogwp.wtop.com/Event/Ask_th ... /169820837
or
http://tinyurl.com/qf6qa47
**************************************************
7. No logic: Charleston killer passed background check, so we need even more background checks!
**************************************************
Same old broken record. According to the NRA-ILA, Congressmen Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania) and Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia) are considering reintroducing their "Universal Background Check” bill because of the shooting at the church in Charleston, South Carolina.
But the bill, had it been law, would have made NO difference in that shooting. The murderer HAD a background check and passed it, allowing him to legally purchase his handgun!
But logic, reason, and truth have nothing in common with gun control, Toomey, or Manchin.
**************************************************
8. A bad ruling on post offices in U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals (Colorado area)
**************************************************
A bad ruling by a 3-judge panel says, by a 2-1 vote, that the Post Office banning guns in their parking lot IS constitutional, reversing the previous ruling by a judge.
Federal law doesn’t ban guns in the parking lots of most federal facilities, especially unsecured parking lots, but only in buildings, and then only if written notice is provided at all entryways.
The ruling doesn’t address the exception of “subsequent to hunting or other lawful purposes” in the federal law...
None of this applies here in Virginia, but it might well end up at the Supreme Court at some point.
Thanks to member Brian McDonough for the link:
http://news.yahoo.com/no-guns-post-offi ... nance.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/pptsg8r
No guns on post office property, says U.S. appeals court
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - A federal appeals court said a U.S. Postal Service regulation banning firearms on postal property is constitutional, and reversed a lower court ruling that would have let people keep weapons inside their vehicles in post office parking lots.
By a 2-1 vote on Friday, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver ruled against Tab Bonidy, a licensed gun owner who said the restrictions violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms.
Circuit Judge David Ebel said the right to carry firearms does not apply to federal buildings such as post offices, and that while it was a "closer question" he would not second-guess the Postal Service's extending the ban to its parking lots.
"The security of the postal building itself is integrally related to the security of the parking lot adjacent to it," Ebel wrote.
Bonidy, joined as a plaintiff by the National Association for Gun Rights, sued after learning he would be prosecuted if he carried a firearm into a post office in Avon, Colorado, near the Vail ski resort, or stored it in the post office parking lot while he went inside to pick up his mail.
"My clients are obviously disappointed, and we're weighing our options," said Steven Lechner, chief legal officer of the Mountain States Legal Foundation, which represented the plaintiffs.
The U.S. Department of Justice, which defended the regulation, was not immediately available for comment.
Friday's decision partially reversed a 2013 ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch in Denver.
Circuit Judge Timothy Tymkovich dissented, saying he would have voided the regulation as applied to the parking lot.
The case is Bonidy et al v. U.S. Postal Service et al, 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 13-1374.
**************************************************
9. Does the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage open the door for national recognition of CHPs?
**************************************************
Interesting idea., but I don’t really want to be the test case, though:
http://bearingarms.com/scotus-ruling-se ... ciprocity/
or
http://tinyurl.com/q34u2vu
SCOTUS Ruling On Same-Sex Marriage Mandates Nationwide Concealed Carry Reciprocity
Posted by Bob Owens on June 26, 2015 at 11:24 am
• Share on Facebook 70K
If you’re following any of the various media outlets this morning, you’re probably aware that the U.S. Supreme Court has just extended gay marriage to all 50 states.
The Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex couples have a right to marry nationwide, in a historic decision that invalidates gay marriage bans in more than a dozen states.
Gay and lesbian couples already can marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court’s ruling on Friday means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage.
The outcome is the culmination of two decades of Supreme Court litigation over marriage, and gay rights generally.
You can peruse the full ruling here, but the meat of the activist Court’s over-long decision hinges on a single paragraph.
The Court used Section 1 of the Fourteen Amendment to justify their argument, which reads:
-
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
By using the Constitution in such a manner, the Court argues that the Due Process Clause extends “certain personal choices central to individual dignity and autonomy” accepted in a majority of states across the state lines of a handful of states that still banned the practice.
-
The vast majority of states are “shall issue” on the matter of issuing concealed carry permits, and enjoy reciprocity with a large number of other states.
My North Carolina concealed carry permit, for example, was recognized yesterday as being valid in 36 states, which just so happened to be the number of states in which gay marriage was legal yesterday. But 14 states did not recognize my concealed carry permit yesterday.
Today they must.
Using the same “due process clause” argument as the Supreme Court just applied to gay marriage, my concealed carry permit must now be recognized as valid in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
I’ll be driving through the District of Columbia, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York in several weeks, places that until yesterday I did not have a legal right to concealed carry. As of today, with this decision, it would seem that these states and the District must honor my concealed carry permit, or violate my constitutional rights under the 14th and Second Amendment.
God Bless America.
**************************************************
10. Three ODU students fight back against armed robber
**************************************************
It’s despicable that Virginia universities and colleges deny the right to carry with a CHP. These students got lucky.
Member Billy Huckleberry emailed me this:
From www.13newsnow.com: http://tinyurl.com/nfup5p3
or
http://www.13newsnow.com/story/news/loc ... /71187344/
Three ODU students fight back against armed robber
WVEC
June 13, 2015
NORFOLK, Va (WVEC) -- Three Old Dominion University students took a stand and defended themselves against an armed man who attempted to rob them Saturday morning.
Norfolk Police say the incident took place around 3 a.m. in the 800 block of W. 43rd Street.
Three male students were walking in the area when the suspect, 21-year-old Kentrail H. May, approached them and brandished a handgun.
May allegedly demanded they hand over their property and belongings. At that point the students attempted to fight back and were able to detain May until police were called.
When police eventually arrived, the suspect was taken into custody and the handgun secured without further incident.
During the course of the altercation, the students and May suffered non-life-threatening injuries and were treated at a local hospital.
ODU officials sent out a safety alert to the campus later in the morning with details about the incident.
This latest criminal activity comes just barely a week after a group of five to six people robbed someone at knife-point near the campus.
**************************************************
11. Gun rights advocates push for campus-carry measures like Texas' is slow going
**************************************************
It may be slow going, but VCDL is going to keep pushing until we win this battle.
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From www.dailypress.com: http://tinyurl.com/putgn4v
or
http://www.dailypress.com/news/nationwo ... story.html
Gun rights advocates' push for campus-carry measures like Texas' is slow going
by Molly Hennessy-Fiske
June 10, 2015
This year more than a dozen states have considered measures that would allow the carrying of concealed weapons on college campuses, but so far only Texas has approved a so-called campus-carry law.
By overwhelming votes, Texas lawmakers approved the legislation last week, and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott has said he will sign it into law. It would take effect in August 2016. Texas would then join seven other states that already allow the carrying of concealed weapons on public college campuses — Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Utah and Wisconsin, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
------------
FOR THE RECORD:
Guns on campus: In the June 10 Section A, an article about a handful of states now allowing concealed weapons at public universities and colleges said the Virginia Tech shooting took place in 2008. The year was 2007.
------------
Nineteen other states ban concealed weapons on campuses, including California, Florida and New York. As so often happens with gun legislation, the rest of the nation is a hodgepodge of laws. The remaining 23 states, including Alabama and Arizona, leave campus-carry decisions to college officials or their state boards of regents.
Lawmakers proposed campus-carry measures in 15 states this year, according to Laura Cutilletta, a senior staff attorney at the San Francisco-based Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. An Ohio proposal is pending.
"For something that was such a big priority for the [National Rifle Assn.] this year, this was a failure," said Cutilletta, adding that if more state campus-carry measures pass, "it won't be because of the policy itself."
Opponents of such laws say that allowing more guns on campus does little to improve security and instead makes it more likely that shootings will occur, including accidental gunfire and suicides.
While there have been few studies of gun violence on campus, Cutilletta says opponents also fear guns will have a chilling effect on students' free speech.
"You want to encourage people to be debating things and having heated discussions. Introducing weapons into that kind of environment — some people have said it could curb that free flow of ideas and make people less likely to express themselves," she said.
Proponents of the law say it will make campuses safer and allow law-abiding people to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.
Cutilletta says she expects Texas universities will want to limit guns in certain areas, such as dorms, where prospective students "might not want to live with someone who has a gun. I think arguments can be made for why you might want to exempt those areas."
The Texas legislation includes a compromise provision worked out as the bill moved through the Legislature. The measure allows public universities to leave portions of campus gun-free, and give private universities the chance to opt out of the law, although it's not clear how many schools might succeed in becoming exempt from the law.
"It will be interesting to see how they handle the fact that they still have some authority and see what areas they prohibit and how that works out," Cutilletta said.
The University of Colorado at Boulder remained a gun-free zone long after the state passed its 2003 Concealed Carry Act. But after the Virginia Tech campus shooting in 2008, in which a gunman killed 32 people and himself, Colorado students formed a gun rights group, sued, and in 2012 won the right to carry on campus.
------------
FOR THE RECORD
7:39 a.m.: This article states that the Virginia Tech campus shooting took place in 2008. It took place in 2007.
------------
After Utah allowed guns on campuses in 2004, the University of Utah also tried to maintain its decades-long ban. University officials sued, but in 2006 the state Supreme Court ruled against them.
David Kopel, research director at the Denver-based Independence Institute, said he and his fellow gun rights advocates recognized that certain portions of campuses may need to remain gun-free, such as hospitals and other healthcare facilities. The Texas compromise will be closely watched by those in other states hoping to pass similar measures, he said.
"My prediction is that, as with licensed carry in general, this isn't something that's going to sweep the country," Kopel said. "It's going to be more of a year-by-year thing; more states will adopt it once they see how it works in the earlier ones" — Texas in particular.
"It's a big and influential state with huge universities," said Kopel, who also serves as an adjunct professor of advanced constitutional law at the University of Denver.
Kopel said that conservative states in the Rocky Mountains, South and New England are receptive to campus-carry laws. But he also said that it was not surprising that such measures failed in conservative states like Florida, Nevada and South Carolina this year, noting the incremental passage of concealed-carry laws nationwide.
"In any given year, you'll find more states where campus-carry bills failed than where they passed. It's a marginal process," he said.
Kopel said the biggest argument against allowing guns on campus — that students' tempers might flare and provoke a mass shooting — have been disproved in Colorado, Idaho and other states where the measures have been on the books for years.
"It's all these doomsday scenarios that don't come true: arguments in the classrooms and then the guns come out. Utah's had it for a long time and that hasn't happened," he said.
**************************************************
12. Who needs a gun in Fairfax Co while gardening on a lovely Sunday afternoon?
**************************************************
From www.washingtonpost.com: http://wapo.st/1B5MXTh
or
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/rab ... story.html
Two raccoon attacks in four days in Fairfax County
by Julie Zuazmer and Dana Hedgpeth
JUne 10, 2015
A raccoon charged and bit a woman who had stopped to take a picture of it Wednesday morning along a trail in Fairfax County, Va., authorities said.
It was the second raccoon attack in the county in a week.
Police said the 75-year-old woman was bitten on the leg, arms and hands about 9:30 a.m. after she stopped to take a photograph of the animal near the South Run RECenter in Springfield. The raccoon then ran into the park.
Police said that they do not know if the raccoon is rabid, but aggressive behavior is one of the symptoms of the disease.
The trail has been closed, and police are searching for the animal.
On Sunday, a raccoon approached a Fairfax County man while he was gardening in the 5300 block of Kings Park Drive in Springfield and bit him, leaving him with a 12-inch long gash.
Police did not say where the man was bitten.
An animal control unit responded and shot the raccoon after it charged at an officer. The raccoon was tested, and it was found to be positive for rabies.
Police said the man who was bitten received medical treatment.
Rabies is a viral disease that is commonly transmitted through the bite of a rabid animal, according to officials. There have been 21 reported cases in the county investigated by animal control officers this year. In 2014, there were 50 cases.
Authorities have been reminding area residents to take precautions and be aware of the potential for rabies.
Last week, there was an incident involving a rabid fox in the Rose Hill area of Fairfax County.
In that case, a dog was bitten by a fox in the 4400 block of Upland Drive. The dog had been vaccinated and animal control officers said there was “no other known exposures to the fox.”
This spring, a 75-year-old Henrico County, Va., woman strangled a rabid raccoon with her bare hands as it was trying to attack her.
Cas Overton pinned the raccoon to the ground and strangled it in about five minutes. She did not suffer any serious injuries — except for a scraped knee and hurt wrist from pinning the raccoon.
**************************************************
13. Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass) pushes for $60m for CDC to study 'epidemic of gun violence'
**************************************************
Another waste of your hard-earned tax dollars. Using junk science to disarm the public. Lock up criminals and the violence problem pretty much goes away.
Member Timothy Wise emailed me this
From www.cnsnews.com: http://tinyurl.com/qb8vyls
or
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/eric-sc ... n-violence
Sen. Markey Pushes For $60M for CDC to Study 'Epidemic of Gun Violence'
By Eric Scheiner
June 8, 2015
(CNSNews.com) - Democratic lawmakers have introduced legislation to authorize $60 million in taxpayer money to go to the Centers of Disease Control (CDC) for research on gun violence prevention.
The measure, introduced last week, would give $10 million a year “for each of fiscal years 2016 through 2021 for the purpose of conducting or supporting research on firearms safety or gun violence prevention under the Public Health Service Act.”
“The epidemic of gun violence in America is not preordained, it is preventable,” Senator Edward Markey (D-Mass.) says in a press release. “In the 21st century, we should use research and advances in technology to our advantage and save lives from tragic and needless gun violence.”
“Some would have us believe that the laws currently on the books are sufficient to address the tens of thousands of gun related deaths that occur each year,” said Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.). “A few extremists even oppose basic public health research to help us understand why gun violence has reached epidemic proportions.”
According to the CDC online self-study course in Epidemiology, “Epidemic refers to an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population in that area.”
The course later notes, “the previous description of epidemics presumes only infectious agents, but non-infectious diseases such as diabetes and obesity exist in epidemic proportion in the U.S.”
Earlier this year President Obama included $10 million for gun violence research in the Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal Year 2016 budget request.
Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Christopher Murphy (D-Conn.), Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) are listed as co-sponsors of the Senate bill calling for the CDC research funding to study gun violence.
**************************************************
14. U.S. government stands up for gun owners at U.N. meeting(!)
**************************************************
Member William Busby emailed me this:
It is not very often you can read something positive about U.S. involvement in the UN, especially when it involves guns. The attached article in the current National Review is a refreshing exception. It is written by Ted Bromund, a senior research fellow for the Heritage Foundation.
[And not to be confused with the Clinton Foundation
]It also points out that there are countries, besides the U.S., that present problems for international gun banners, though for entirely different reasons. For a change, it seems the BATF even did a good job of supporting the U.S. position based on the grounds of our 2nd Amendment. Darn near the stuff of a miracles!
From nationalreview.com: http://tinyurl.com/pv4hmp2
or
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... -r-bromund
At U.N. meeting on guns US stands up under fire
By Ted R. Bromund
June 5, 2015
This week, Turtle Bay is hosting the second Meeting of Governmental Experts for the U.N.’s Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat, and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects – mercifully abbreviated to MGE2 and PoA, respectively.
The PoA is a strange entity. It’s a political agreement, not a treaty, so it’s never come before the Senate and it has no binding legal force. But that doesn’t make it harmless. It’s one of the many international institutions engaged in creating so-called “norms” that will constrain the U.S., though not the U.N.’s many dictatorships. But despite its painful name and dubious intentions, it’s more amusing than most such institutions.
In theory, the PoA is about promoting cooperation against illicit international arms trafficking, not about what goes on inside nations. If it stuck to its job, it could be modestly useful. But in practice, it’s a forum for promoting gun control. Statements by U.N. member nations regularly assert that the civilian possession of firearms is dangerous and needs to be severely controlled, if not completely eliminated. Speakers regularly imply that the business of the PoA is to focus on the domestic realm, not international trade.
But fortunately, the PoA is hamstrung by the incapacity and malevolence of its members. Over the past two years, fewer than half of U.N. member states have submitted a report on their activities under the PoA. Then there are China, Russia, and other nations that are just not interested in tracing firearms that are involved in war crimes or criminal activities. China even managed to work into the international tracing agreement a loophole that exempts it from putting serial numbers on its firearms.
The result is that the PoA focuses resolutely on peripheral concerns and on blaming the U.S. At the MGE2, the big items on the agenda have been the 3D printing of firearms, modular firearms, and the challenges of marking and tracing polymer (i.e., plastic) firearm frames.
Those are the problems of the 1 percent. If you want to commit a crime, it’s far easier and much cheaper to buy a reliable gun on the street than it is to print one that might not work. The developing world has no problems with 3D printed guns. Modular firearms are firearms with interchangeable parts. “Modular” is merely a sexy name for that old idea — and a way of criticizing the U.S., because of the popularity in the U.S. of the “modular” AR-15 platform.
Polymer frames do pose some genuine technical challenges to marking and tracing, but they’re easy to exaggerate. No firearm marking is completely proof against defacement, and in practice, the efficiency of U.S. tracing hasn’t suffered from the rise of “plastic guns.” Nor are the battlefields of Africa and the Middle East dripping with polymer firearms: In practice, most of their guns come from China, Russia, or the former Eastern Bloc, and are made from good old-fashioned metal and wood. As the U.S. speakers pointed out, it is up to the U.S. court system to decide whether firearms manufacture inside the U.S. has violated U.S. laws.
If the PoA wanted to be serious, and to do its job, it would focus on how so many guns from these nations end up in conflict zones. But that would involve confronting African and Middle Eastern governments and, above all, China, which has an extremely poor record of cooperation on tracing small arms. When U.N.-appointed experts report uncomfortable facts about China’s arms trafficking, China gets them fired.
The result: The PoA sticks resolutely to declaiming the virtues of gun control, to non-problems like 3D printing (China, predictably, wants to require a government license to own a 3D printer), and to high-tech magic bullets like radio-frequency ID tagging (which can be defeated by putting a gun in a microwave for a few seconds, which zaps the ID chip) and the micro-stamping of ammo cartridges (which can be defeated by replacing the firing pin on an AR-15 with a common nail, a process that costs pennies and requires only a few machine tools).
And, of course, it blames the U.S. Earl Griffith, of the Firearms Technology Branch of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, spoke to the meeting on Tuesday on marking and the U.S. eTrace system. As always, the U.S. has stood out at this meeting because it is one of the few nations that knows what it is talking about — most of the so-called experts in the room are nothing of the sort. But inevitably, Griffith came under attack when he stated, accurately, that in the U.S. if you make a firearm for your own personal use, and are not engaged in the firearms business, you don’t need to mark it. There is no evidence that homemade U.S. firearms are contributing to the illicit international arms trade.
It gave me a lot of pleasure to watch Griffith, with the aid of his colleagues in the U.S. delegation, defending U.S. law and policies with determination. As the U.S. speakers pointed out, the PoA is utterly irrelevant to what the U.S. does inside its borders, and it is up to the U.S. court system to decide whether firearms manufacture inside the U.S. has violated U.S. laws. Even better was the reminder from the ATF that “we’re proud of many things here, including our Constitution and the right to lawfully possess and use our weapons.”
When the skeptical meeting chair commented that he was “quite surprised” by U.S. polices, and that “some groups of people” have the temerity to support them, Griffith replied politely but firmly that “the Second Amendment in the United States is sacred. It has been passed down through generations.”
In the U.S. firearms community, the ATF is viewed, in some quarters, with a measure of suspicion. I take no stand on the larger issues, but here at the U.N., the ATF — and the U.S. delegation as a whole — has done its job well, and we should recognize that. I am on record as an opponent of the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, and as stating that the U.S. should no longer participate in the PoA, but if we are to be here, we should do it right. So far this week, we have.
**************************************************
15. Vets told they can 'buy back' 2nd Amendment rights
**************************************************
Sad, but there it is.
Member Gil Sanderson emailed me this:
From wnd.com: http://tinyurl.com/nwj8muo
or
http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/vets-told-th ... nt-rights/
Vets told they can 'buy back' 2nd Amendment rights 'This is illegal and is called extortion'
by Bob Unruh
June 5, 2015
A legal team investigating the Obama administration’s order that certain American military veterans deemed “incompetent” give up their weapons says the problem is worse than expected.
People who live with veterans now are being ordered not to possess a gun, and some veterans are told they can “buy back” their Second Amendment rights by giving up their veterans’ benefits.
“This is simply unbelievable, On the one hand the [Veterans Administration] and the FBI have found veterans to be mentally ill and too dangerous to be allowed to own firearms, while on the other hand allowing these allegedly dangerous people to buy their firearms rights back,” wrote Michael Connelly, executive director of the United States Justice Foundation in a report.
“This is illegal and is called extortion.”
The organization has been looking into claims by a number of veterans and their family members.
The veterans were sent a letter telling them they were being classified as incompetent and the government was assigning someone to help them handle their benefits and payments.
Consequently, they were told, they could no longer own weapons, under penalty of fines and jail time.
The problem was that the veterans were being determined guilty without a hearing regarding the potential loss of their constitutional rights, USJF said at the time.
WND broke the story that the Obama administration insisted it was routine for officials to send out letters informing veterans that an unidentified “report” indicated they may be declared incompetent and consequently stripped of their Second Amendment rights.
It’s the same administration that in 2009 warned that “returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists.”
The 2009 report from the Department of Homeland Security was called “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.” It also said Obama’s governmental managers were “concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.”
So when hundreds, perhaps thousands, of veterans began receiving letters like the one dispatched from the Portland, Oregon, office of the Department of Veterans Affairs, alarm bells went off.
In the recent report, Connelly explainedhe’s uncovered so far “a coordinated effort by multiple federal agencies to disarm the American people.”
He cited the tactic of sending letters to veterans about being appointed a “fiduciary” and the resulting loss of constitutional rights.
“As we have gotten more aggressive in representing individual veterans to defend their constitutional rights the VA has adopted additional tactics against our American heroes,” the report said. “Some veterans have never gotten any letter or official notification from the VA. They find out they are on the NCIS list [of people banned from having weapons] when they try to purchase a firearm.
“Often they can’t even find out why they are on the list.”
Or veterans are told they are incompetent and can appeal the decision.
“But [they] are being told that if they do defy the government and appeal, their benefit payments can be suspended for the duration of the appeal, which can drag on for years,” the report said.
“The families of veterans are also [being] told that since they live with a veteran who has been declared incompetent they can’t own or purchase firearms.”
Or there’s that option to give up benefits, the report said.
And it’s expanding. Seniors on Medicare, some dental patients and even children seeing pediatricians have been questioned about firearm ownership.
Medical records are being passed from the Department of Health and Human Services to the FBI “of anyone who has ever told their physician they were feeling depressed, even if never treated, and anyone who has taken certain drugs for things like PTSD, ADD, or ADHD, among others.”
And, the report said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is adding regulations that ban from owning weapons anyone who ever was “examined by a psychiatrist or psychologist,” a routine part of many family court cases.
“What is next? Will you have to surrender your firearms to keep your Social Security, or to stay on Medicare? Will you have to certify that neither you nor any of you[r] employees own firearms in order to get a contract with the federal government?”
The door to the dispute opened when USJF received a copy of a letter to a veteran from the Portland VA Medical Center several years ago.
The letter warned the vet that “evidence indicates that you are not able to handle your VA benefit payments because of a physical or mental condition.”
“We propose to rate you incompetent for VA purposes. This means we must decide if you are able to handle your VA benefit payments. We will base our decision on all the evidence we already have including any other evidence you sent to us.”
The VA also warned: “A determination of incompetency will prohibit you from purchasing, possessing, receiving, or transporting a firearm or ammunition. If you knowingly violate any of these prohibitions, you may be fined, imprisoned, or both.”
The letter was signed by K. Kalama, Veterans Service Center manager in the Oregon Department of Veterans Affairs. But it didn’t present the “evidence,” the source of the evidence or why the veteran’s competency even was questioned.
At the time, WND contacted the Department of Veterans Affairs, and spokesman Randy Noller responded with a statement that the letters were no more than routine. But questions about why the letters are being sent, what evidence is used to determine a veteran is incapable of managing his or her affairs, who provides that information and why it is provided remain unanswered.
“The Department of Veterans Affairs’ policy to inform veterans of their rights regarding the Brady Act has not changed,” the statement said. “As has been policy for multiple administrations, VA acts in accordance with federal law and works with the Department of Justice to properly maintain the NCIS database. VA notifies any veteran who may be deemed by VA to be mentally incapable of managing his or her own funds of the opportunity to contest this determination and also to seek relief from the reporting requirements under the Brady Act, as required by law.”
Also unanswered was who makes the decision to put in motion the department’s decision to “deem” veterans “mentally incapable.”
Connelly noted the letter “provides no specifics on the reasons for the proposed finding of incompetency; just that is based on a determination by someone in the VA.”
“In every state in the United States no one can be declared incompetent to administer their own affairs without due process of law and that usually requires a judicial hearing with evidence being offered to prove to a judge that the person is indeed incompetent,” he explained.
“This is a requirement of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that no person shall ‘be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”
[PVC - The 3-page letter from the VA that got the investigation started is shown at the end of the article.]
**************************************************
16. [NV] Metro will no longer cite or arrest for failing to register handguns
**************************************************
Nevada is finally getting rid of an old gun registration scheme in Clark County (Las Vegas). The antis take another one on the chin.
Member Ken Martin emailed me this
From reviewjournal.com: http://tinyurl.com/qgl9g8u
or
http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-v ... r-handguns
Metro will no longer cite or arrest for failing to register handguns
by Kimberly De La Cruz and Wesley Juhl
June 10, 2015
Las Vegas police will no longer cite or arrest anyone for failing to have their handgun registered by Clark County, the department announced Wednesday.
The Assembly voted 25 to 17 to establish “state control over the regulation of policies concerning firearms.”
For decades Clark County’s so-called “blue card” ordinance has required firearms capable of being concealed to be registered and also prohibited the unlawful transfer of handguns.
On Feb. 25, the bill’s first hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Las Vegas police lobbyist Chuck Callaway testified that the department supported doing away with the handgun registration program. He asked the committee to amend the provision that would require the department to destroy its registration records due to their “investigatory value.”
How the loss of the county’s blue card program would affect Metro’s ability to track firearms that are stolen or used to commit a violent crime is unclear. Public information officer Laura Meltzer said she wasn’t sure what the department’s stance on the issue was. The department sent out a release about the end of the blue card program after office hours and were not available for interviews.
Callaway did not return phone calls seeking additional information, but he testified before the Assembly Judiciary Committee’s April 23 consideration of the bill that Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo has publicly stated his support for ending the registration program.
Metro made the call because there was confusion after Gov. Brian Sandoval signed the bill June 2, Officer Laura Meltzer said. The state changes are “in direct conflict with local ordinances,” she said.
**************************************************
17. [MI] Armed Detroit woman fights off 5 home invaders
**************************************************
Why do you need a 30-round magazine? How about if you are in a gun fight with FIVE criminals? That’s only six shots apiece.
Member Bill Albritton emailed me this:
Surprise!! I have a gun too!
From freebeacon.com: http://tinyurl.com/qzwvm3q
or
http://freebeacon.com/issues/armed-detr ... -invaders/
Armed Detroit woman fights off 5 home invaders
by Stephen Gutowski
June 10, 2015
A Detroit woman was able to fight off five home invaders in a shootout early Tuesday morning. The woman, who has a concealed carry permit, took the robbers by surprise after they burst in her bedroom window, WDIV reports.
“I was able to get to my gun. They didn’t know I had it. By that time, it was just gunfire,” Ms. Dee said.
She was hit in the foot and is expected to be OK. She said she believes at least one of the men was also shot.
Ms. Dee said she got a gun license after her home was broken into three years ago.
Dee credited God with pulling her through the ordeal.
—
A more detailed story:
From bearingarms.com: http://tinyurl.com/ozu4qwo
or
http://bearingarms.com/cancer-survivor- ... s-detroit/
Cancer Survivor With Concealed Carry Permit Drives Off FIVE Home Invaders In Detroit
by Bob Owens
June 10, 2015
By the nature, most criminals are craven predators, preferring to target those that they see as being weaker. Unfortunately, known survivors of long or chronic illnesses are often targeted by home invaders hoping to score prescription narcotics.
That was the likely motive early yesterday morning when a band of robbers forced their way into Dietta Gueye’s house and started shooting.
They quickly discovered that while her body may have been weakened by cancer, she retained the will to fight:
She was in bed when five men burst through her windows at 2:30 a.m. But they didn’t know that Dietta was locked and loaded and not afraid to start firing.
Dietta got her CPL three years ago when her house was robbed. After hearing the men come in, she grabbed her gun and started firing.
“Imagine being woke up out of your sleep with somebody (holding) a gun in your face,” she told FOX 2’s Amy Lange. “My first reaction was survival. My first thought was shoot.”
She was tucked into bed and sound asleep, when the first man crashed through her bedroom window.
It’s likely he nor the men that followed knew she was in there or that she had a gun.
She said they avoided the backyard, where the dogs were kept and climbed through using a crate to get into the front window. She couldn’t see, and said that they had taken he light bulb from the front porch.
But she didn’t need sight to grab her gun. It was by her side, in her bed.
“As soon as I was able to feel the barrel of my gun – I shot – and I was shooting,” Dietta said.
At least one of them was shooting back as they were trying to flee the house and one tried to escape through an upstairs window. When he couldn’t get out, he came back down the stairs and fired one last shot that went through Dietta’s thigh.
“The bullet it went in and it came out,” she said.
After battling and beating cancer, Dietta’s response to the through-and-through bullet wound was more or less, “meh.”
She’s part of a tough breed of women concealed carriers in Detroit whom we have featured frequently at Bearing Arms as they take on band of young male criminals and typically succeed. We wrote about another tough Detroit lady who drove off a trio of carjackers last week, a grandmother who shot her way out of an attempted robbery last year, and a retired nurse who took on an angry mob to save the victim of a racial attack.
Almost a year ago Detroit Police Chief James Craig gave credit to concealed carriers like these brave women for helping drive a dramatic reduction in violent crime.
Whle the mainstream media seeks ot discount and minimize these stories, good people with guns and courage stop bad people with guns and criminal intent on a regular basis, typically dozens to hundreds or even thousands of times every day. Most of the time the mere displayed presence of a firearm is enough to drive the predators away. Many times police reports aren’t even filed. Even when police reports are filed, only a handful of hundreds or thousands of defensive guns uses make even the local media, and typically then only when shots are fired and injuries result.
Good people with guns make a difference.
Good people with guns and solid training often end criminal careers.
**************************************************
18. [FL] Concealed carry permit holder fends off teen robbers [VIDEO]
**************************************************
Hey Geraldo Rivera, here is another case of a gun owner stopping a crime with his gun (not to mention the other such cases in this Update):
EM David Hicks emailed me this:
From guns.com: http://tinyurl.com/ouoxjbz
or
http://www.guns.com/2015/06/09/conceale ... ers-video/
Concealed carry permit holder fends off teen robbers
by Jennifer Cruz
June 9, 2015
Two teens attempted to rob a couple outside of a Tampa restaurant Friday night, but both ended up in police custody after the male victim, who is a concealed weapons permit holder, turned the tables on the suspects.
As part of an evening out, the couple had just enjoyed dinner at a Shells restaurant and were walking to their vehicle in the parking lot when they were approached by the teens, who were later identified by police as Reginald Smith and Jeremiah Walker. Smith was armed with a gun. Tampa Police Lt. Michael Stout told a local Fox affiliate that the teens were hiding in the bushes and rushed the couple while Smith aimed the gun at them.
The suspects demanded cash and cell phones and the couple complied. But when the woman attempted to flee back toward the restaurant, Smith pointed the gun directly at her. At that point, fearing for the safety of the woman, the male victim reached into his pocket, pulled out his own pistol and shot Smith in the leg.
Smith and Walker attempted to flee from the scene, dropping the cash, phones and gun along the way, and while Walker was able to get away, Smith could not run.
When police arrived a short time later, Smith was taken into custody and transferred to a local hospital to receive treatment for the non-life threatening gunshot wound.
The female victim was also treated for minor injuries she sustained during the altercation.
According to a report by WTSP, Walker turned himself in about half an hour after Smith was in custody.
Smith and Walker, who are both 17 years old, have had several run-ins with law enforcement in the past and are now facing charges for armed robbery, a first-degree felony.
Authorities discovered that the gun carried by Smith was fake, a replica with the orange tip removed.
While in most states no distinction is made between real and fake guns when they are used in the commission of a felony since both can be used to incite fear in the victims, a 2011 Florida court case ruled that a toy gun does not meet the legal requirements for a weapon, which is defined by an object which may be used to inflict great bodily harm or death.
As a result of the ruling, Stafford Hamilton, who was facing charges for armed robbery, was convicted of a lesser offense – robbery. An exception to the law is made when the toy gun is used to strike the victim or otherwise used in a manner to inflict bodily harm.
**************************************************
19. [NC] Macon bus driver called a hero [VIDEO]
**************************************************
Reminder: a vehicle in motion makes an excellent weapon in a pinch.
Member Billy Huckleberry emailed me this:
From wlos.com: http://tinyurl.com/q8ugy2b
or
http://www.wlos.com/news/features/top-s ... XT0HFxVhBf
Macon bus driver called a hero
June 6, 2015
Macon County -- Friday Macon County Sheriff Robert Holland showed the weapons and other items seized in the arrest of two people on the campus of South Macon Elementary early Thursday.
Adam Conley and Kathryn Jeter face felony charges including attempted murder.
They were arrested after alert bus driver Alice Bradley spotted them near her bus. She says when Conley pointed a gun at her, she floored her car toward him, sending him running for cover.
The sheriff says Bradley's quick action likely prevented bloodshed at the school.
Grateful parents are also calling her a hero, but she says she only did what anyone else would do.
**************************************************
20. Rasmussen survey says ... We like living where guns are allowed
**************************************************
From examiner.com: http://tinyurl.com/oq76avm
or
http://www.examiner.com/article/rasmuss ... re-allowed
Rasmussen Friday: Americans like living where guns are allowed
by Dave Workman
June 12, 2015
[SNIP]
Rasmussen Reports today revealed that an overwhelming majority of American voters “prefer living in a neighborhood where they have the option of owning a gun than to live where nobody is allowed to be armed.”
The Friday report also notes that more voters believe President Barack Obama is “less faithful to the Constitution.” The second revelation comes from a survey that found, “On issues from immigration policy to Obamacare, Obama’s executive actions have sparked criticism that the president acted outside the Constitution by circumventing Congress.”
It is significant that both of these reports appeared on the same day, because the Obama Justice Department has been under heavy criticism lately from the Second Amendment community for proposing a dozen new gun control measures. Most gun owners oppose the president's gun control policies and his administration's history concerning firearms, and they cite among the reasons as Fast and Furious, expanded long gun reporting requirements in four Southwest states, and support for bans on so-called “assault rifles” and so-called “universal background checks.” The latter, say gun rights activists, is nothing more than a registration scheme.
According to Rasmussen, 68 percent of likely voters “would feel safer in a neighborhood where guns are allowed” while only 22 percent “would feel safer living in a neighborhood where nobody was allowed to own a gun.” Many in the firearms community believe that a fair number of non-gun owners simply take advantage of the residual safety of living around neighbors who own guns.
**************************************************
21. Authors of FBI study backtrack: Mass shootings are not increasing
**************************************************
Government gets it wrong yet again in a gun study. Is this an isolated mistake or a part of a coordinated, purposeful deception?
Member Walter Jackson emailed me this:
From breitbart.com http://tinyurl.com/nhxyo2r
or
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ncreasing/
Authors of FBI study backtrack: Mass shootings are not increasing
by AWR Hawkins
June 11, 2015
Last week, the two authors of a study the FBI released on September 24, 2014, admitted they “got it wrong” when they “reported mass shootings were on the rise” in America.
Outlets like The New York Times and the Associated Press had seized on the study by Texas State University’s J. Pete Blair and M. Hunter Martaindale as proof that more gun control was needed, while outlets like Breitbart News saw a political agenda behind the report, based on the flimsy criteria used in discerning what was or was not a mass shooting for the purposes of the study.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has now reported that the study was wrong. For example, the study claimed a “16%” increase in mass shootings from 2000 to 2013. The report’s synopsis showed that “during the first 7 years included in the study, an average of 6.4 incidents occurred annually. In the last 7 years of the study, that average increased to 16.4 incidents annually.”
Blair and Martaindale even used the faulty findings to predict that mass shootings were going to continue increasing in frequency by stating that “the findings establish an increasing frequency of incidents.”
This study fed the fire Democrats wanted to build for gun control. And because it was released less than two months before the mid-term elections, it gave gun control candidates something with which they could beat pro-Second Amendment candidates over the head, something gun control candidates could quote on the campaign trail before pro-Second Amendment candidates had time to research and find the study’s inconsistencies.
Then came last week, and Blair and Martaindale gave up the inconsistencies on their own by admitting the study’s “data is imperfect.”
Moreover, they essentially admitted to creating data in the absence of extant data which supported their thesis. Blair and Martaindale said, “Because official data did not contain the information we needed, we had to develop our own.”
WSJ points out the irony of it all inasmuch as the truth is completely opposite what the study presented. The occurrences of mass shootings have remained essentially flat for 40 years, and violent crime fell significantly during the period Blair and Martindale studied.
**************************************************
22. Iconic gunmaker Colt is on the brink of bankruptcy
**************************************************
Colt had way too many eggs in the government basket.
Member Bill Albritton emailed me this:
From cnn.com
http://tinyurl.com/ndfflw7
or
http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/10/news/co ... index.html
Iconic gunmaker Colt is on the brink of bankruptcy
by Aaron Smit
June 10, 2015
Colt, the iconic American gunmaker, could be bankrupt within days.
The company, that has been making guns for 160 years, has been struggling financially and missed a $10.9 million interest payment on its debt in mid-May.
Colt admitted, in a regulatory filing, that its failure to make that interest payment raises "substantial doubt about the company's ability to continue as a going concern." Colt also said it "may seek relief under the bankruptcy code."
The company has a 30-day grace period until June 14 to make the interest payment after which it has to find a way to restructure the debt with its bondholders.
Kevin Starke, gun industry analyst for CRT, said that Colt had already signed a debt restructuring agreement with its bank, but a group of bondholders rejected it that would have dropped the bonds to 45% of their face value.
Starke said that bondholders are reluctant to agree to any pact that forces them to take a loss. That's because they might have a better chance of recovering all or most of their money in bankruptcy, assuming that Colt gets sold for enough money to cover the $250 million worth of bonds and another $102 million in additional debt.
That could be possible if a buyer emerges from among its larger gunmaking rivals such as Smith & Wesson (SWHC) or Sturm Ruger (RGR).
Colt's status in the gun industry and its role in American history cannot be overstated. The West Hartford manufacturer established by Sam Colt has been the most famous gunmaker in America since the 1840s, when the Texas Rangers adopted its revolver during their Wild West wars with Native Americans.
Colt's guns have been used in countless Hollywood war movies and action films like James Bond.
"The Colt is one of the most powerful guns I've ever fired," wrote Chris Kyle of "American Sniper" fame, in his book "American Gun."
In 1911, the U.S. Army adopted the Colt 1911 semiautomatic .45 caliber pistol as its standard issue side arm. It became one of the most famous guns ever made and was used by the U.S. military for more than 80 years.
But more recently, sales have dwindled.
So what went wrong?
Starke blames weak leadership. The company also hasn't kept up with the times.
Compact and light handguns have been popular in recent years. While Colt makes compact pistols like the Mustang and the Defender, customers seem to prefer other models made by another handgun maker Glock. American cops carry Glocks, which are known for being lighweight despite their ability to hold high capacity magazines.
Though Colt is no longer the standard issue side arm, it makes a wide variety of other weapons for military, including the AR-15, the M-16 and the M4, and also the M203 grenade launcher. But the military is no longer Colt's cash cow as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down.
Colt did not return messages from CNNMoney. A representative for the bondholders declined comment.
**************************************************
23. Comparing murder rates and gun ownership across countries
**************************************************
EM Dave Vann emailed me this:
Holy smoke! This is lengthy but man does it put the lie to the gun control advocates who want to continually point to raw data and say fewer guns make country's safer. This actually dismantles it piece by piece and country by country and points out differences in reporting types and practices as well as the question of what relevance does the number of guns owned by an individual have on crime stats.
From crimepreventionresearchcenter.org: http://tinyurl.com/n8qvthk
or
http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.or ... countries/
[PVC - To view the many graphs & charts contained in this article, go to the link above.]
Comparing murder rates and gun ownership across countries
by John R. Lott
March 31, 2014
Charles Blow in the New York Times last year made the very common argument: “America has the highest gun homicide rate, the highest number of guns per capita . . . .” In another story, the New York Times quotes researcher David Hemenway as claiming: “Generally, if you live in a civilized society, more guns mean more death.” CNN’s Piers Morgan believes: “America has the worst incidents of gun murders of any of what they call the civilized world.” Bloomberg’s Businessweek also made similar claims this spring. The one common feature for these claims is that they rely on the Small Arms Survey.
So how do homicide rates compare across countries?
Much of the debate is focused on gun ownership rate data for 109 countries from the Small Arms Survey. There are real problems with this survey. For example, the rates of gun ownership for Israel (7 per 100 people) and Switzerland (supposedly 47 guns per 100 people) . Anyone who has ever been to Israel knowns that this estimate is ridiculously low. Indeed, over time about 12 to 15 percent of the adult Jewish population in Israel is allowed to carry handguns in public.
The problem with this survey excludes weapons that are technically owned by the government. The vast majority of guns in Israel are technically owned by the government, but if people have possession of guns in their homes for decades, the issue should be that public possession, not who technically owned the guns. Similarly, at that time of the Small Arms Survey, all able bodied Swiss males between the age of 18 and 42 kept their military weapons in their homes. After age 42, they could apply for permission to continue to keep their military weapons. Israeli guns are also excluded for the same reason.
The Small Arms Survey claims that the United States has by far the highest level of gun ownership, with 88.8 guns per 100 people. Both Israel and Switzerland probably have much higher gun ownership rates, but including them the way the Small Arms Survey does biases the results to The US gun ownership is so high compared to other countries that it drives any regression results.
There are also other problems with the survey. For example, a much better measure of gun ownership would be the percentage of the population owning guns, and not the number of guns per 100 people as used by the Small Arms Survey. Presumably the issue is whether people have access to guns, not the number of guns greater than one that an individual has access to.
Looking at all countries for which the Small Arms Survey measured gun ownership, and using the Small Arms Survey data the way that it measures gun ownership, implies that more guns equals fewer homicides.
Usually only a small set of countries are used in any comparison, typically limited to so-called “civilized,” as Hemenway or Morgan calls them, or “developed” countries. It isn’t clear what is meant by “civilized” countries, so what can Americans learn from these other “developed” nations? Using the developed nations as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), developed countries in fact show that more gun ownership as measured by the Small Arms Survey is associated with fewer homicides. First, this is how homicide rates vary across developed countries.
The relationship between homicide rates and the supposed measure of gun ownership provided the Small Arms Survey shows that even with their obviously biased measure of gun ownership, more guns ownership is associated with fewer homicides, though the relationship is not statistically significant.
Because the US is claimed to be such an outlier, it makes the relationship between gun ownership and homicides less negative than it actually is. (Regressions fit the regression line to “minimize the sum of the squared errors” so you can see how much extra weight one extreme value is given.) But so what can Americans learn from these other “developed” nations?
Yet, even though the cross-country data implies that more guns equals fewer homicides, this type of comparison isn’t very convincing. There is a real problem in using cross-sectional data. Suppose for the sake of argument that high-crime countries are the ones that most frequently adopt the most stringent gun control laws. What if gun control actually lowered crime, but not by enough to reduce rates to the same low levels prevailing in the majority of countries that did not adopt the laws. Looking across countries, it would then falsely appear that stricter gun control resulted in higher crime. Economists refer to this as an “endogeniety” problem. The adoption of the policy is a reaction to other events (that is, “endogenous”), in this case crime. To resolve this, one must examine how the high-crime areas that chose to adopt the controls changed over time —not only relative to their own past levels but also relative to areas that did not institute such controls. Below is part of a long discussion in The Bias Against Guns, Chp. 5 (More Guns, Less Crime also has a long discussion in Chp. 2).
Unfortunately, many contemporary discussions rely on misinterpretations of cross-sectional data. The New York Times recently conducted a cross-sectional study of murder rates in states with and without the death penalty, and found that “Indeed, 10 of the 12 states without capital punishment have homicide rates below the national average, Federal Bureau of Investigation data shows, while half the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above the national average” (Raymond Bonner and Ford Fessenden, “States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates,” New York Times, September 22, 2000, p. A1.). However, they erroneously concluded that the death penalty did not deter murder. The problem is that the states without the death penalty (Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Vermont) have long enjoyed relatively low murder rates, something that might well have more to do with other factors than the death penalty. Instead one must compare, over time, how murder rates change in the two groups – those adopting the death penalty and those that did not.
It is because of this concern that we also provide another post that looks at crime rates before and after regulations such as bans.
Finally, as an aside, one has to be very careful in making comparisons across countries because numbers are not always comparable. For example, homicides in England and Wales are not counted the same as in other countries. Their homicide numbers typically “exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defence or otherwise” (Report to Parliament). A more detailed discussion of the difference between “offenses initially recorded as homicide” and “offenses currently recorded as homicide” in England and Wales based on the outcomes of trials is available starting on page 9 here. While this adjustment reduces overall homicides by about 15 percent, it has a larger impact on firearm homicides because those tend to be the ones most likely to involve gang fights that are much more difficult to solve. The problem isn’t just that it reduces the recorded homicide rate in England and Wales, but there would be a sizable reduction in the reported US homicide rate if this approach were used here. For example, from 2000 to 2008 only about 62 percent of US homicides are even cleared by arrest. The numbers in the UK appear to be only adjusted based on cases where charges are brought. In that case, it is useful to note that in the US only about half of those arrested are eventually convicted (also here).
Other Countries bias down their homicide numbers
You also need to be very careful before relying too heavily on homicide rates in other countries. If the Unites States is relatively more accurate in measuring its homicide rate and other countries try to hide their rates, it will look make it look like the US has a relatively higher rate than it actually does. Take two examples.
Argentina — Some countries might deliberately mischaracterize homicides into another category.
The breakdown of official statistics also raises the critical question of whether the extent of youth homicides is being obscured. With gun suicides and accidental deaths separately categorized, many of the violent deaths involving a firearm that La Nacion reports are currently listed as “unknown intent” could be homicides. . . .
UK — Homicides in England and Wales are not counted the same as in other countries. Their homicide numbers “exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defence or otherwise” (Report to Parliament). The problem isn’t just that it reduces the recorded homicide rate in England and Wales, but what would a similar reduction mean for the US.
If taken literally, and there is significant evidence that in practice the actual adjustment is no where near this large, a simple comparison can be made. In 2012, the US murder rate was 4.7 per 100,000, a total of 14,827. Arrests amounted to only 7,133. Using only people who were arrested (not just convicted) would lower the US murder rate to 2.26 per 100,000. More information on the adjustment for England and Wales is available here and it suggests that while many homicides are excluded it isn’t as large as it would appear (in 1997, the downward adjustment would be about 12 percent).
Firearm Homicides
Many gun control advocates prefer to look at only firearm homicides, not total murders. The United States has neither the highest firearm homicide rates for all countries or for developed countries. Among OECD countries, Mexico has the highest firearms homicide rate, with a rate about 3 times higher than the US rate. Brazil’s and Russia’s are much higher, though Russia does not report firearm homicides so it is only a guess for that country.
By the way, despite Israel and Switzerland having very high gun possession rates, their firearm homicide rates are extremely low. In the data shown below, Switzerland had a firearms homicide rate of 0.77 per 100,000 people and Israel has a rate of just 0.09 per 100,000.
Note that there are many countries that clearly have higher gun homicide rates than the United States that don’t have data available. Indeed, while 192 countries report total homicides, only 116 countries report firearm homicides. The average homicide rate for the countries that don’t have firearm homicides is 11.1 per 100,000. The median homicide rate for those that are missing is 8.7 per 100,000. Among the countries with higher homicide rates is Russia with a homicide rate of 11.6. The bottom line is that the countries that are missing the data are among the worst homicide countries.
Again, all the concerns provided over relying on cross-sectional data still apply here. In addition, the firearm homicide data is not available for many of the countries with the highest homicide rates, suggesting that this cross-sectional comparison is even more misleading than the discussion on homicides.
***************************************************************************
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/]