VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 3/25/16

[OakRidgeStars]

VA-ALERT: VCDL Update 3/25/16

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not yet a Virginia Citizens Defense League 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
VA-ALERT archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/727/=now
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. REMINDER: VCDL supper meeting in Roanoke on Tuesday, March 29
2. HELP: Volunteers needed for the Norfolk gun show on April 9 and 10
3. “No weapons” sign in Monroe Park (Fauquier County)
4. Some high-risk businesses that ban guns
5. VCDL president to speak at event with CSPOA Chairman, Ret. Sheriff Richard Mack, on April 9
6. HELP: Help needed for TWO events on May 14 in SW Virginia (Shoot and a Prepper’s festival)!
7. Thanks to volunteers for Richmond gun show last weekend
8. Outgoing education secretary dedicates final speech to gun control
9. Senator uses gang incidents to raise annual 'mass shootings'
10. [NH] Seven gun-controls Hillary Clinton proposed at town hall
11. DC pastor: Christians have no right to use guns for self-defense
12. [TX] Well-armed activists openly defy law to feed the homeless
13. [OH] Three masked gunmen forcibly enter home but only two escape
14. [TX] Police vow to go after anti-gun groups calling 911 on open carriers
15. What a natural disaster taught me about the 2nd amendment
16. [OH] Open Carrier detained by police and police lose in court
17. Fox host's defiant t-shirt has 2nd amendment lovers going 'hoo yeah!'
18. Op-ed: Mass shootings - it’s time and unarmed victims that are problematic, not 'assault weapons'
19. Former special-ops doctor explains why he would rather be shot with an AK-47
20. Why I decided to buy a handgun
21. [UK] Man killed in stabbing identified as lecturer Dr. Jeroen Ensink


**************************************************
1. REMINDER: VCDL supper meeting in Roanoke on Tuesday, March 29
**************************************************

From Board member Al Steed Jr.:

SW Virginia VCDL will again have a SUPPER MEETING at:

GOLDEN CORRAL
1441 Towne SQ Blvd
Roanoke (Near Sam's Club--Airport)

We will start fellowship/eating at 6:30 PM. Please enter through the regular entrance, order/pay for your food and join us in the meeting room in the right, rear area of the building.

Our speaker will be PHILIP VAN CLEAVE, President of VCDL, who will recap the 2016 Lobby Day and Legislative "wins" for VCDL and VA gun owners.

RSVP with head-count is STRONGLY requested. To RSVP, please send an email to Al@vcdl.org


**************************************************
2. HELP: Volunteers needed for the Norfolk gun show on April 9 and 10
**************************************************

We’re looking for volunteers to work the VCDL table at the upcoming gun show at Norfolk SCOPE.

The next gun show at NORFOLK SCOPE is 9th and 10th of April. The shifts are as follows:

Saturday 9 April
9:00 to 1:00
1:00 to 5:00

Sunday 10 April
10:00 to 1:00
1:00 to 5:00

If you’d like to work a shift, please contact the Norfolk Gun Show Coordinator, Chip Marce, at norfolkgunshows@vcdl.org


**************************************************
3. “No weapons” sign in Monroe Park (Fauquier County)
**************************************************

VCDL has received notice from a member that Monroe Park in Fauquier County has an illegal “No Weapons” sign.

The VCDL Board of Directors is looking at this issue right now.

You will be advised as this issue progresses.


**************************************************
4. Some high-risk businesses that ban guns
**************************************************

Whole Foods Market in Charlottesville has posted their store prohibiting open or concealed carry.

I received a call from a member pointing out that the owner of Total Beverage and Total Wine stores in Virginia, David Trone, is a Maryland Democrat running for Congress on an anti-gun platform. Indeed he is.


**************************************************
5. VCDL president to speak at event with CSPOA Chairman, Ret. Sheriff Richard Mack, on April 9
**************************************************

Retire Sheriff Richard Mack, Chairman of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), and I will be speaking at an event in Rocky Mount on Saturday, April 9th, from 1 PM to 3 PM.

The event is FREE and is being held at:

Blue Ridge Chapel
445 Blue Ridge Court
Rocky Mount, VA 24151

contact Everett Boone at 540-263-0136 email at eboone1@gmail.com for more information.

If you would like to meet Sheriff Mack, there is a $25.00 Breakfast with the Sheriff from 8 AM to 10 AM at the Blue Ridge Chapel, above

CSPOA, believes, amongst other things, that law enforcement needs to follow its oath to uphold and protect the Constitution, and not just provided lip service to that goal.


**************************************************
6. HELP: Help needed for TWO events on May 14 in SW Virginia (Shoot and a Prepper’s festival)!
**************************************************

Saturday, May 14, will be a busy day for VCDL in SW Virginia. The Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club (RRRC)/VCDL Defensive Pistol Shoot and the New Castle PREPPER FESTIVAL are on the same day!

We will need HELPERS at BOTH events.

For the PISTOL SHOOT, FRIDAY is set up day (time to be announced);
SATURDAY we need volunteers to assist with ticket sales, cooking, serving lunch, "go-fer” work, running paperwork, and clean up.
Please help!

PREPPER FESTIVAL will need at least four helpers to help set up the tent and table, talk to prospective new members, pass out literature, take down/clean up, and so on.
Please plan on helping!

Please contact al@vcdl.org to sign up to assist at either of these events.


EVENT DETAILS: RRRC/VCDL DEFENSIVE PISTOL SHOOT

The Roanoke Rifle and Revolver Club (RRRC) will again host the RRRC/VCDL Defensive Pistol Shoot on May 14 at RRRC. Sign in starts at 9 AM sharp! Shooter fee will be $25.00. Shooting will start shortly after the safety meeting, by about 10 AM. There will be 8 Stages, 150 rounds needed.

A FREE HOT DOG lunch--soft drinks and “fixin's”--will be served after the shooting is through, furnished by VCDL! Those wishing to bring salads; deserts and such will be greatly appreciated!

SPONSORS NEEDED! Sponsors assisting are welcome to set up a small table/tent or banners at this event. Prizes will be drawn using the shooter’s registration number! Donations of prizes greatly appreciated!

VCDL will have a special drawing for an EXECUTIVE PISTOL: .223 or 5.56 caliber; package includes (5) 30 round magazines, Executive briefcase, and 1000 rounds of .223 AMMO. Package valued at approximately $1,500.00! The pistol package is donated by BIG BOYZ GUNS; 4568 Blue Ridge Blvd (Highway 460), Blue Ridge, VA. Phone: 540-650-2520. Ammo is donated by VCDL. TICKET COST $5.00 each. The drawing will be held after the lunch is served.

Helpers are needed to assist in setting up the stages on FRIDAY, MAY 13 - (Time to be announced) - and again to assist in tear down after the shoot ends on Saturday. We will need assistants to help prepare the food on Saturday also.

This event is open to all RRRC members, VCDL members, family members, and any guests who wish to join us for this fun shoot!

Contact al@vcdl for sponsor support or questions.


EVENT DETAILS: PREPPER FESTIVAL

The third annual PREPPER FESTIVAL on Main Street, NEW CASTLE VA, will be held on MAY 14 from 9 AM to 5 PM. VCDL will again have a tent set up at this event! Come join VCDL at this fun festival! LOTS of vendors, live music, workshops, Prepper cook off, and prizes!

We will need at least four helpers for this interesting event!

Contact al@vcdl.org to help.


**************************************************
7. Thanks to volunteers for Richmond gun show last weekend
**************************************************

Mike Wilburt, VCDL Richmond Gun Show Coordinator, sent me this:

This past weekend offered us mixed results from the gun show at the Richmond Raceway Complex. The show was busy Saturday, but Sunday's cold, wet, and gray weather seemed to have kept the show attendance noticeably down. Nonetheless, we signed up a good number of new members, processed membership renewals, and show attendees were generous in their donations to help VCDL fight for their Virginia firearms freedoms. VCDL's efforts opposing the McAuliffe/Herring CHP reciprocity debacle did not go unnoticed. Many show attendees stopped by to offer their thanks.

I would like to express my appreciation to the VCDL volunteers, many of them first-timers working a gun show, for giving up a few hours of their weekend to help us tell Virginia's gun owners who is REALLY standing up in defense of their Second Amendment Right.

I couldn't be at the show on Saturday. Very special thanks to VCDL member Keith Bailey who drove down from Northern Virginia and spent the weekend in Richmond to help in my absence.

Other volunteers were: John Gosney, Evan Smith, John Pride, Randy Wachman, Darrell Wyatt, William Heipp, Barbara Heip, Steve Simmons, Robert Trimmer, Richard Haas, Eric Tompkins and John Miller. All of them did a terrific job meeting and greeting many hundreds of folks on behalf of VCDL.

Gun shows are often the very first contact gun owners have with VCDL and where they learn what we are doing on their behalf every day.

The next Richmond gun show is May 21-22. It's a great time for VCDL members to get "hands-on" in the ongoing stand for our Second Amendment Freedom.
Watch the VA-Alert in the coming weeks for the call-to-action for volunteers in Richmond and gun shows in your area all over the Commonwealth.


**************************************************
8. Outgoing education secretary dedicates final speech to gun control
**************************************************

A reminder that we need to dissolve the federal Department of Education.

Thanks to member Walter Jackson for sharing this:


http://tinyurl.com/qzwctsk

or

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... n-control/


Outgoing Education Secretary Arne Duncan Dedicates Final Speech to Gun Control
by AWR Hawkins
January 1, 2016

Arne Duncan gave his final speech as education secretary on December 30, expressing his “frustration” that Congress has not passed more gun control and his hope that more such control will be secured to keep school children safe.

Duncan gave the speech in the basement of Father Michael Pfleger’s Saint Sabina Church on Chicago’s South Side.

According to The Washington Post, Duncan said the “greatest frustration” of his seven years as education secretary was the failure to secure more gun control. “Fighting off tears” as he looked ahead, he said, “We have to get guns out of the wrong people’s hands. We have to make sure our babies are safe.”

According to Education Week, in 2008, it was Duncan who responded to the Supreme Court’s pro-Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller by saying, “I’m still trying to figure out who we are more in love with, our children or our guns.”

Duncan was nominated for education secretary with the hearty approval of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. And in the weeks after Adam Lanza used stolen guns to attack innocents at Sandy Hook Elementary School, President Obama tasked Duncan “with crafting and selling a package of legislative and executive actions” intended to increase gun control in the U.S.

Speaking in Pfleger’s church on Thursday, Duncan said nothing about the most obvious remedy for school buildings that are increasingly viewed as soft targets; namely, bringing in armed resource officers or arming teachers and administrators so they can defend themselves and the students trusted to their care.

He did, however, criticize the way police “unnecessarily use deadly force and aren’t held accountable.” He suggested there is a trickle-down effect among officers whereby “other cops witness that behavior and lie about it, and they aren’t held accountable.” As a result, Duncan said, “The system loses its most precious resource, and that’s the public trust.”

Duncan said “police culture” needs a “seismic change.”


**************************************************
9. Senator uses gang incidents to raise annual 'mass shootings'
**************************************************

The ends justifies the means for gun controllers.

Thanks to member Walter Jackson for sharing this link:


http://tinyurl.com/h55cgrj

or

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... ngs-4-372/


Democrat Senator Uses Gang Incidents to Raise Annual ‘Mass Shootings’ from 4 to 372
by AWR Hawkins
January 1, 2016

On December 31 Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) claimed there were 372 mass shootings–or more than one mass shooting a day–during calendar year 2015. On the other hand, Mother Jones editor Mark Follman reported four mass shootings for the whole year and USA Today reported approximately 22.

What accounts for the jump from from four–or even 22–to 372? The jump is the result of Senator Chris Murphy’s (D-CT) complete rejection of the FBI criteria for a mass shooting. That criteria is four fatalities in one shooting incident. Instead of using this, Murphy has adopted the criteria of Shooting Tracker, a website which labels any shooting or series of shootings a “mass shooting” if there are four or more injuries.

There does not have to be a death, and the injuries do not have to be the result of just one shooting incident but can be the result of numerous incidents added together. This means Senator Murphy counts a parking lot shootout–like the one WMC-TV reported between two groups of people in two separate cars in Memphis, Tennessee in October–as a “mass shooting.” And it also means that an Elkhart, Indiana, parking brawl involving over a 100 people–where some of those people pulled guns and opened fire–counts as a “mass shooting” too. The South Bend Tribune reported that “four individuals were found to be wounded” in that October 14 brawl.

In addition to inflating the number of annual mass shootings from four to 372, Senator Murphy’s tack also allows an inflation in the number of deaths from mass shootings. For example, Shooting Tracker shows 16 deaths in the San Bernardino terror attack that took the lives of 14 innocents. Shooting Tracker is able to do this by lumping in the lives of the two deceased shooters with the those of the innocent victims.

In the same way, Shooting Tracker claims 10 deaths in the attack that took place in the Umpqua Community College’s gun free zone. The real toll was nine innocents, but Shooting Tracker lumps in gunman Chris Harper Mercer’s life too.


**************************************************
10. [NH] Seven gun-controls Hillary Clinton proposed at town hall
**************************************************

Hillary is determined to make gun control one of her key platform-items. I believe that is a bad miscalculation on her part.

Thanks to member Walter Jackson for sharing this:


http://tinyurl.com/j9uxh9h

or

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... town-hall/


Seven Gun Controls Hillary Clinton Proposed At NH Town Hall
by AWR HAWKINS
December 30, 2015

On December 29, Democrat presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton responded to a question on guns by outlining seven specific new gun control laws she wants to institute if elected.

The gun question was asked by a male student who appeared to be 13 or 14 years old. Reading from a large index card, the boy said, “When you become president, what is your plan to connect mental health problems and guns to make sure that me, my brothers, and my friends are safe from violence at school?”

According to C-Span, Clinton responded, “I’m going to do everything I can do, and I’m never going to stop trying.” She talked of how many people she believes are killed annually because of guns, then said, “I think we need to pass some laws that I have been advocating for.”

She then listed those laws:

1. “Comprehensive background checks” – These are expanded or universal background checks. The same kind of checks that exist in California and Colorado where our country’s last three high profile shootings have taken place: San Bernardino on December 2, Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood on November 27, and Colorado Springs on Halloween Day.

2. Close “gun show loophole” – Democrats have been trying to place new regulations on gun shows for decades because some individuals go to a gun show to sell their shotgun, the pistol they inherited from the father, or the rifle they bought from their neighbor. Such sales do not have a background check on them and have not had a background check on them since 1791. By framing such freedom as a “loophole,” Clinton is angling to bring all gun sales under the purview of the government.

3. Close “online loophole” – There is no online loophole. What Clinton is referencing is the same thing Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) referenced in 2013 when his post-Sandy Hook gun control push went down in flames. Both Clinton and Manchin allude to online advertisements for gun sales, and new regulations on such advertisements would necessarily cover print advertisements as well. She is actually going after the advertisement, not the sale.

4. Close “Charleston loophole” – There is no Charleston loophole. Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts espoused one after the heinous Charleston, South Carolina, church shooting, but the FBI made clear that Dylann Roof’s passage of a background check was due to a clerical error, not a loophole.

5. Add no-fly list to background checks – The push to add the no-fly list to background checks was taken up in earnest following the San Bernardino terror attack. Then it was learned that neither attacker–Syed Farook and Tashfreen Malik–was on the list to begin with, so adding it to background checks would not have stopped that attack. Moreover, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, and CNN criticized efforts to add the no-fly list to gun control, chiefly because the list is imprecise and is a list of accused persons, not convicted ones. The LA Times in particular found it a violation of due process to deny constitutional rights to an individual based on accusations rather than convictions.

6. Allow gun makers to be sued for gun crime – Simply put, Clinton wants victims of gun crime to be able to sue Smith & Wesson, Glock, Ruger, H&K, Kimber, Springfield Armory, Sig Sauer, and any other gun manufacturer for crimes committed with their products.

7. Allow gun sellers to be sued for gun crime – Clinton wants to open the door for victims of gun crime to sue gun sellers over the criminal misuse of guns.

Clinton said, “I know we can do this in a constitutionally consistent way.”


**************************************************
11. DC pastor: Christians have no right to use guns for self-defense
**************************************************

This type of silliness is music to the ears of those who would like to slaughter Christians.

Thanks to member Bill Albritton for sharing this:


http://tinyurl.com/zvq3rj9

or

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... f-defense/


DC Pastor: Christians Have No Right To Use Guns For Self-Defense
by AWR HAWKINS
December 30, 2015

On December 28 Reverend Rob Schenck — chair of Evangelical Church Alliance — argued that Christians have no right to use guns for self-defense.

Schenck said he understands the tendency to want to acquire arms — “especially after terrorist attacks” — but he contends that doing is to violate biblical commands.

Writing in The Washington Post, Schenck said:

The gospel begins with God’s love for every human, and calls on Christians to be more Christ-like. At no time did Jesus use deadly force. Although he once allowed his disciples to defend themselves with “a sword,” that permission came with a limitation on the number of weapons they could possess.

Christ words are recorded in Luke 22:36(NIV): “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

So in the the midst of a contention that Christians have no right to defend themselves with a gun, Schenck admits that Christ “once allowed his disciples to defend themselves with a sword,” and also suggests Christ posited one as the limit on the number of swords that could be owned. In other words, Schenck’s own proof text betrays him.

In another part of the column Schenck writes:

I disagree with my community’s wholesale embrace of the idea that anyone should be able to buy a gun. For one thing, our commitment to the sanctity of human life demands that we err on the side of reducing threats to human life. And our belief in the basic sinfulness of humankind should make us skeptical of the NRA’s slogan, “the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun.” The Bible indicates that we are all bad guys sometimes.

Schenck makes a number of errors here. For starters, when he says we ought to “err on the side of reducing threats to human life” he fails to note that gun ownership is a key part of reducing that threat. This should be evident in light of Schenck’s emphasis on the sinfulness of man. Surely sinful, strong men are going to attack weaker, vulnerable persons. And in that situation a gun is a tool that lets the outnumbered and overpowered person level the playing field.

On December 28 three alleged home invaders forced their way into a home in Ohio where a mother was at home with four children. All the invaders were armed and the lives of the mother and four children were at risk. But the danger ended when the mother managed to retrieve a gun she kept hidden in the house, after which she opened fire on the invaders, killing one.

Would Schenck rather have seen the mother unarmed and left to the whims of the three invaders? What about the children?

Schenck also makes a big mistake in arguing that mankind’s universal sinfulness rules out one man being the “good guy” who stops a bad guy with a gun. If we followed his line of thinking to its logical end we would have to contend that no amount of authority can be given to any man in any time or place because all men are sinful and therefore untrustworthy.

Instead, our Founding Fathers understood that even fallen men can display social good, but it is a good that has to be constantly monitored and hedged in with checks and balances.

In Federalist 51 James Madison wrote:

But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

And just as each of the various branches of our government were designed to be check on the tendency toward evil in those occupying offices in other branches, so too the right to keep and bear arms was hedged in as way for one neighbor to keep a check on the evil of another and for one community to keep a check on the evil of fiends and marauders who might enter a town to steal, kill, and defile.

To argue that pacifism is the correct response to evil is tantamount to arguing that the weak must remain defenseless.


**************************************************
12. [TX] Well-armed activists openly defy law to feed the homeless
**************************************************

Thanks to member Colin Brown for sharing this link:

http://tinyurl.com/hlgltp4

or

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/well-arm ... ess_122015


WELL-ARMED ACTIVISTS OPENLY DEFY TEXAS LAW TO FEED THE HOMELESS
by Matt Agorist
December 29, 2015

When feeding the homeless becomes an act of civil disobedience, Americans have been asleep for far too long.

Luckily, however, there are still good people who are willing to defy such arbitrary and ill-conceived laws and ordinances.

The folks over at the aptly named organization Don’t Comply, took to the streets just outside the Austin Street Shelter in Dallas this weekend to perform, what has now become a revolutionary act – feeding the homeless.

“We are not complying with a bad law today,” Matthew Short, PR director of Don’t Comply said. “Evidently the city of Dallas believes that it’s wrong, or bad, or unlawful for us to feed more than a certain number of people at a time. But, during Christmas, we want to show love to our community and give these people a chance to survive the winter, whether it be with blankets or coats, or just giving them a holiday party like today with all kinds of cookies, and goodies, turkey and dressing, and the whole nine yards.”

Last December, the Dallas city council enacted Ordinance No. 29595, which makes it illegal to serve food to the homeless without jumping through a statist myriad of bureaucratic hoops, including a fee, training classes, and written notices.

One should not need to file multiple forms and pay a fee to obtain a permit to give food to those in need who are willingly ready to accept it. The folks at Don’t Comply know this.

According to Brett Sanders, hundreds of homeless people showed up to not only enjoy a fantastic array of food, snacks and beverages – but there was also an assortment of winter clothing that was donated as well.

“All of the homeless people that I talked to during the event were extremely grateful for the support and there was a sense of humanity that is indescribable. Interacting with other human beings whom most consider to be living life at rock bottom will likely alter your perspective on the world around you,” explained Sanders.

The event went off without a hitch, even after code enforcers showed up. Lead organizer of the event, Murdoch Pizgatti was confronted by the enforcers who told him to file the proper paperwork upon the event’s conclusion to which, Pizgatti politely replied, “no.”

“We’ve already had to speak to the police, they’ve already come and delivered code to us,” said Short, explaining what happened when the code enforcers showed up. “But, after shaking hands with them, they realized we’re all armed – and we’re gonna do what we’re gonna do because it’s not an immoral thing that we are doing.”

Below is the powerful video shot by Brett Sanders showing the powerful effects of such moral civil disobedience.


**************************************************
13. [OH] Three masked gunmen forcibly enter home but only two escape
**************************************************

I thought that a gun would not help women to protect themselves? That’s what domestic violence support groups said about a bill that would turn a protective order into a temporary CHP.

http://tinyurl.com/jfspud3

or

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12 ... wo-escape/


Three Masked Gunmen Forcibly Enter Armed Homeowner’s House — Only Two Escape
by Jon Street
December 30, 2015

Police say three masked gunmen forcibly entered a home in Trotwood, Ohio, early Monday, demanding money — but they soon found out the homeowners were armed.

The Montgomery County coroner’s office said one of the three men, now identified as 29-year-old Azikiwe Presley of Dayton, Ohio, was fatally shot during the alleged home invasion. Police are looking for the other two men who escaped.

The woman said she was in the laundry room when the men broke in and held her and two children, who were sleeping, at gunpoint. Home surveillance video captured part of the incident on camera.

“He hit me in the head with the gun,” the woman said, WRGT-TV reported.

The men then reportedly demanded that she lead them to “the money,” so she showed them a safe in the room where the children were sleeping. According to the victim, two of them tried to steal the safe while the third kept her and the two children at gunpoint.

But at one point the woman was able to get away and grab a gun she had hidden nearby. [PVC: It would have been much better if she had that gun on her while at home.]

“I started shooting and they ran!” the homeowner told emergency dispatchers. “They must not have had bullets, because after I pulled the trigger they just took off, instead of firing back.”

Police later found Presley lying on the ground dead between the victim’s house and another home, still armed. It was not clear whether the gun had any ammunition.

The woman said she didn’t know what type of vehicle the other two men used to get away, because it wasn’t parked in clear view of her house. Police are still searching for the two escaped individuals.


**************************************************
14. [TX] Police vow to go after anti-gun groups calling 911 on open carriers
**************************************************

Someone tried this in Fairfax a year or so ago and was prosecuted for it.

Thanks to member Bill Albritton for sharing this link:


http://tinyurl.com/j6yrnfa

or

http://gunsnfreedom.com/houston-police- ... texas/6060


Houston Police Vow to Go After Anti-Gun Groups Calling 911 on Open Carriers in Texas
BY GUNS 'N' FREEDOM
December 30, 2015

Texas will soon join the other 45 US states that allow open carry and anti-gun groups are not happy about it.

At least one anti-gun group is attempting to make life miserable for all gun owners who choose to openly and legally carry their firearms by calling 911 and making false claims.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) is using social media to urge people to call 911 any time they see someone openly carrying a firearm.

According to Outdoorlife.com,

CSGV is actively promoting “SWATting,” the act of tricking an emergency service into dispatching responders based on a false report. In a Sept. 2 screenshot of a CSGV Facebook post published by Amy Miller on legalinsurrection.com, the group urges readers to take action in this manner:

“If you see someone carrying a firearm in public — openly or concealed — and have ANY doubts about their intent, call 911 immediately and ask police to come to the scene.”

The problem is, open carry is legal and a common daily practice by millions of law-abiding and responsible gun owners. Open carry is only prohibited in five states — California, Florida, Illinois, New York, and South Carolina.

The Ohio-based Buckeye Firearms Association and Virginia-based Gun Owners of America were among the first groups to warn fellow gun owners of the CSGV’s ‘SWATting’ campaign, reported Perry Chiaramonte on FoxNews.com on Sept. 1.

“This practice is exactly what they (CSGV) are doing,” GOA spokesman Erich Pratt told Chiaramonte. “They are inciting their radical base to turn their own neighbors in. Anti-gun advocates are clearly frustrated. They want guns banned. But they have been thwarted in the past, so they are looking for alternative means.”

But this practice is not only annoying and illegal, it also can create lethal situations between police and law abiding citizens over misunderstandings due to the misinformation.

Still the gun group is wanting to use any means of falsified information in order to get open carry overturned in Texas. Here are just a few examples cited by Charles Cook in a National Review article

Cooke cites these examples:

—Reacting to a photograph of a man standing at a checkout with a handgun holstered upon his hip, a “mom-who-demands-action” Joyce Ward asks, “Why weren’t the police called immediately?” And “why,” Ward continues, “wasn’t he shot by the police for having a weapon?”

—Fellow poster Lisa McLogan Shaheen has a similar inquiry, wondering, “Why hasn’t someone called 911 so the cops can gun him down?”

—“Every time I see someone with a gun in a store I will call 911,” Jennifer Decker vows, “they’ll get tired of that right quick!!!”

—“Just call the police every time you see someone with one,” Ann Marie counsels, “the police will get sick of it eventually or have a run in with one of these clowns and then things will change.”

But a question and answer page on a Houston government website makes it clear that those who follow the anti-gun group’s advice could end up on the wrong side of the law and even face jail time.

Question: If I see a person open carrying a handgun, should I call the police?
Answer: Yes you can call the police, but before you call, observe how the person is acting. If they are acting suspicious, or enter a building such as a school, then please give us a call. But, if they are simply at a gas station filling up their car, then they are probably a law abiding citizen who is legally open carrying.

Question: Some organizations that are in opposition to open carry, have said that if they see someone openly carrying a handgun, they will call 911 and say that person is being aggressive and threatening people with the weapon. How will the police handle situations like this.
Answer: The police will act with caution when approaching the person, they will collect the facts, and when it is found that this person was doing nothing wrong, the investigation will be turned towards the person who made the false 911 call.


**************************************************
15. What a natural disaster taught me about the 2nd amendment
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/jbt3axt

or

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/w ... than-ever/


What a Natural Disaster Taught Me About the Second Amendment and Why It’s More Important Than Ever
by Brad Schaeffer
January 5, 2016

In the wake of President Barack Obama’s latest attempt to circumvent Congress and implement stricter gun controls through “executive action,” a broader discussion over the continued necessity of the Second Amendment is sure to follow.

As a Midwest transplant, one of the first things I noticed after moving to my leafy New Jersey suburb was how few of my neighbors had ever even seen a real gun let alone held or fired one. Where I grew up, which at the time was a semi-rural outlier of Chicago, shooting guns was just part of who we were.

I shot my dad’s M1 Carbine; several of my friends had small bore shotguns and even a few pistols. We all could aim straight and true. Never once was anyone even close to being injured. When you grow up with responsible gun ownership pounded into you by unforgiving teachers like my 1st U.S. Marine Division Korean War veteran father, you very quickly come to appreciate their deadly seriousness and treat them with proper respect.

Several years ago I found myself pondering the meaning of the Second Amendment beyond the traditional argument that armed civilians are a check against the tyrannical inclinations of government. Rather, I considered its broader meaning through the prism of a regional catastrophe.

From Oct. 29-31, 2012, Hurricane Sandy laid waste to much of New Jersey’s coastal region, flooding and washing away homes, ripping down power lines, paralyzing cable, internet, and telecom services, shuttering businesses, and halting food and gasoline shipments to some of most densely populated areas of the most densely populated state.

Watching the chaos unfold in the storm’s wake, I was privy to a disconcerting fact of life: we in advanced societies have grown utterly dependent upon modern transportation and technology, but that doesn’t make us any more civilized than our medieval ancestors. All it takes to regress to our more lawless days is to turn out the lights, shut off the heat, close the supermarkets and make gasoline scarce; then you will see the baser elements of our human nature unleashed in no time.

After Sandy, the hum of generators and chainsaws and sirens was the ambient sound of my neighborhood. But there was also an undercurrent of subtle fear—much more so as you ventured into the less affluent parts of the surrounding area.

Fear that winter was coming and the power may not be restored for a long time. Fear that there would not be enough gasoline to fuel the chugging portable generators that were all that stood between limited vestiges of civilization and a cold, dark reality. One could sense the anxiety as people waited in the cold for hours in literally half-mile long lines, praying that the sign “Sorry No Gas” would not appear before their little red canisters had their fill.

As I said before, many conservatives view the right to bear arms as a check against an overbearing central government and indeed that was certainly a primary concern of the Framers when grafting this and other guarantees onto the body of their new Constitution. But honestly, the federal government has become too powerful for so a quaint an idea; there is little an oppressed populace armed with shotguns, hunting rifles, pistols and even more advanced firearms can do against predator drones, M1-A1 tanks, Apache helicopters, F-22s and the like. Someone very high up in the military would have to be on its side for any popular uprising to succeed.

But what if the threat comes not from government, but each other?

In 1775, Thomas Paine understood this: “The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property … for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong.”

Like Paine, the Framers realized that, in the end, an armed citizenry is the final line of defense not just against a tyrannical state but also human nature itself. After all, in times of crisis, what is one supposed to do if marauders come to his or her home and the squad cars are either too busy or too far away and out of gas to intervene?

Where then is Big Government? I sometimes need to remind the idealistic that government is not a thing unto itself. It is, in the end, just a vast collection of fallible, sometimes dull-witted and unmotivated people. The Framers had little faith in such a collective body either to protect us from itself or, during times like Sandy, from one another.

After Sandy, New Jersey recovered and life got back on track. The fears were admittedly unfounded. But this was only a category one hurricane. What about a category three or more? What happens if the next disaster is measured not by wind gusts and tidal swells but perhaps radiation levels? What happens when it is not a matter of when we get power back and when the gas trucks will arrive, but rather IF? What will the advocates of disarming the citizenry to achieve a sham peace have to say then?

Such thoughts are not the rumination of a right-wing zealot; anyone who thinks otherwise has yet to stand in a gas line and watch someone try to cut in.

Like the Framers, I simply do not have enough faith in government or humanity to dismiss the Second Amendment as a primitive leftover from a less civilized age.

Sandy’s aftermath exposed just how vulnerable today’s technological nirvana is to a takedown, either by an indifferent natural event or more sinister forces who I am sure watched and jotted down copious notes during those anxious weeks. Should such a disaster come, it will be my right to bear arms that will protect my family and neighbors.

I have a suspicion that should it ever come to pass, those desperately pounding on the doors of the homes of law-abiding gun-owners seeking shelter from the lawless mobs will be among the very lot who, once upon a time, in a more civilized age, self-righteously advocated that their saviors be disarmed in the first place.


**************************************************
16. [OH] Open Carrier detained by police and police lose in court
**************************************************

Thanks to member Bill Albritton for sharing this:


http://tinyurl.com/zz7vt8m

or

http://gunsnfreedom.com/man-exercises-4 ... carry/5110


Man Exercises 4th Amendment And Open Carry, Meets Police
BY TIM
May 15, 2015

From the Sixth Circuit federal court of appeals decision today in Northrup v. Toledo Police Dept.:

On a midsummer evening, Shawn and Denise Northrup went for a neighborhood walk with their daughter, grandson, and dog. Apparently in a happy-go-lucky mood, Shawn wore a t-shirt reading, “This Is The Shirt I Wear When I Don’t Care.” Shawn carried a cell phone, which he holstered on his hip — next to a black semiautomatic handgun.

A passing motorcyclist stopped to complain about Shawn’s visible firearm. The stranger, Alan Rose, yelled, “[Y]ou can’t walk around with a gun like that!” But “[O]pen carry is legal in Ohio!” Denise responded. As the Northrups walked away, Denise and Rose exchanged increasingly unprintable words until he was out of view (and earshot).

Rose called 911, reporting that “a guy walking down the street” with his dog was “carrying a gun out in the open.”

The police eventually arrived, ordered Northrup to stop, demanded that he turn over the gun, handcuffed him, and kept him handcuffed in a police car for 30 minutes. Eventually, they let him go, and all charges were dropped according to the Washington Times. Northrup sued, and the Sixth Circuit allowed the case to go forward:

While open-carry laws may put police officers (and some motorcyclists) in awkward situations from time to time, the Ohio legislature has decided its citizens may be entrusted with firearms on public streets. Ohio Rev. Code §§ 9.68, 2923.125. The Toledo Police Department has no authority to disregard this decision — not to mention the protections of the Fourth Amendment — by detaining every “gunman” who lawfully possesses a firearm. And it has long been clearly established that an officer needs evidence of criminality or dangerousness before he may detain and disarm a law-abiding citizen. We thus affirm the district court’s conclusion that, after reading the factual inferences in the record in Northrup’s favor, Officer Bright could not reasonably suspect that Northrup needed to be disarmed.

The police had also initially suggested that Northrup was guilty of the Ohio crime of “causing panic,” but the court pointed out this wasn’t so (at least under Northrup’s version of the facts). Indeed, the Ohio “causing panic” statute provides,

No person shall cause the evacuation of any public place, or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience or alarm, by doing any of the following:

(1) Initiating or circulating a report or warning of an alleged or impending fire, explosion, crime, or other catastrophe, knowing that such report or warning is false;

(2) Threatening to commit any offense of violence;

(3) Committing any offense, with reckless disregard of the likelihood that its commission will cause serious public inconvenience or alarm.

None of these was present here, and even if one thinks that open carry — though allowed by Ohio law — is likely to “cause serious public inconvenience or alarm,” that is not enough under the statute: The police also have to have evidence that the person filed a false report, threatened to commit an offense, or committed some other offense.

The police are free to approach people to ask them questions, even without reasonable suspicion that the people are violating the law. They can order a person to stop for a short while if they have reasonable suspicion that the person is committing a crime or about to commit a crime. They can certainly disarm him and arrest him if they reasonably think that he’s about to shoot them, or if he is otherwise threatening them (something that the police alleged here, but that the court said is a fact question for the jury).

But to coercively stop a person — and certainly to handcuff the person, which is what happened in this case — the police do have to have such reasonable suspicion. And if all they see is someone openly carrying a gun in a state in which such open carry is legal, the Fourth Amendment prevents them from “search[ing]” or “seiz[ing]” that person. One can support open carry or oppose it (some states ban open carry of guns but broadly offer licenses to carry concealed), but if open carry is legal, this result seems quite right under Fourth Amendment law.


**************************************************
17. Fox host's defiant t-shirt has 2nd amendment lovers going 'hoo yeah!'
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/hdyc9ls

or

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/12/503315- ... -hoo-yeah/


Fox Host’s Defiant T-Shirt Has 2nd Amendment Lovers Going ‘Hoo Yeah!’
by Emily Hulsey
December 2015

Andrea Tantaros doesn’t seem afraid to say what’s on her mind – or to show it.

The Fox News “Outnumbered” host is particularly outspoken with her support of the Second Amendment:
Because what else would you rather be doing on a Tuesday night w @SandraSmithFox? @Beretta_USA pic.twitter.com/BeEgBDyGUR
— Andrea Tantaros (@AndreaTantaros) November 18, 2015

In case you still aren’t sure where she stands, she made it crystal clear during a November trip to New York City:
Good thing this was clean for my big visit to Brooklyn @michaelmalice pic.twitter.com/qFkLtmAmuj
— Andrea Tantaros (@AndreaTantaros) November 4, 2015

“Outnumbered” appears weekdays at 12pm EST on Fox News Channel.


**************************************************
18. Op-ed: Mass shootings - it’s time and unarmed victims that are problematic, not 'assault weapons'
**************************************************

http://tinyurl.com/hduqcgj

or

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... t-weapons/


Op-Ed: Time, Unarmed Victims Are Problematic, Not ‘Assault Weapons’
by AWR Hawkins
December 30, 2015

On December 25, The Salt Lake Tribune ran an op-ed in which the author pointed out that the key ingredients to mass shootings are not “assault weapons” or “high capacity” magazines, but time and unarmed victims.

Because of the fact that high profile gunmen typically pick a location where victims will be unarmed–Umpqua Community College, Chattanooga recruiting offices, Lafayette Grand Theatre, Fort Hood, DC Navy Yard, Sandy Hook Elementary School, Aurora movie theater, and Columbine–it really does not matter what kind of weapon the attacker chooses to use.

And because response time to such attacks can be lengthy, there is no real pressure to use “high capacity” magazines, as there is time to reload. Adam Lanza had over nine minutes to do whatever he wanted inside Sandy Hook Elementary, and “Columbine lasted for hours.” Thus, the author of The Salt Lake Tribune op-ed stresses, “A ban on high-capacity magazines does not necessarily result in fewer killings. When someone is trying to kill people, and no one is around to stop them, they will keep reloading until everyone around them is dead.”

The op-ed brings up another important point: the combination of time and unarmed victims means attackers can be successful without using a gun at all. The op-ed author points out:

Proponents of gun bans point to the success of Australia and England and Japan as proof that gun bans can work. But England and Japan have cultures that are totally different from our country. In those countries, for hundreds of years, their governments have banned almost all privately owned guns. China also has a ban on private guns but mentally disturbed individuals still go into elementary schools and kill children with a knife. A mentally disturbed man or woman in an enclosed space such as on a train or in a kindergarten class can kill just as well with a knife as they can with a gun.

In California–where gun ownership is being banned incrementally over a period of years–mass stabbings have already taken their place beside mass shootings. On November 4, Breitbart News reported a mass stabbing on the University of California Merced campus. And because stabber Faisal Mohammad had unarmed victims, his plan of attack involved the time-consuming tack of zip-tying his classmates to chairs once he gained the upper hand, then stealing guns with which to ambush and kill police.

Mohammad did not get to implement every aspect of his plan, but he went into the attack knowing he had time and unarmed victims. He used a knife.

It is worth noting that almost all of this comes together with the May 2014 Santa Barbara attack carried out by Elliot Rodger. He used knives to kill three people. He had time. Then he killed three people with a handgun and used only ten-round magazines. He did not need “high capacity” magazines because he operated in a place where it is very difficult for law-abiding citizens to gain the state’s permission to carry a gun for self-defense.

A ban on “high capacity” magazines and/or “assault weapons” would not have stifled Rodger in the least. And such bans will not stifle other mass attackers.


**************************************************
19. Former special-ops doctor explains why he would rather be shot with an AK-47
**************************************************

Probably best to avoid being shot by either one.

http://tinyurl.com/p5jckf5

or

http://www.businessinsider.com/ak-47-wo ... m4-2015-12


A former special-operations doctor explains why he would rather be shot with an AK-47 than an M4
by Dan Pronk, SOFREP
December 21, 2015

Admittedly, I'd rather not be shot with either, but if I had to choose, I'd take a round from the AK-47 over the M4 any day of the week. To add a caveat to that statement, I'm talking from relatively close range here — say up to 150 to 200 meters.

To understand why, it's important to first take a very basic look at the physics behind terminal ballistics.

In this case, consider the science of what happens when a penetrating missile enters a human body.

The first place to start is the following kinetic-energy equation:

KE = ½ M (V1-V2)2

Breaking this equation down into its components, we have kinetic energy (KE) influenced by the mass (M) of the penetrating missile, as well as the velocity (V) of the missile.

This makes sense; it is logical that a heavier, faster missile will do more damage than a lighter, slower missile. What is important to understand is the relative influence that mass and velocity have on kinetic energy, as this is key to understanding why I'd rather be shot with an AK than with an M4.

You'll notice that the mass component of the KE equation is halved, whereas the velocity component is squared. For this reason, the velocity of the projectile has far more bearing on the energy that it delivers into the target than the mass.

The V1-V2 component of the equation takes into consideration that the projectile might actually pass straight through the target, rather than coming to rest in the target.

In this instance, the change in the velocity of the projectile as it passes through the target (V1 being its velocity as it enters, and V2 being velocity on exit) is the factor that is considered when calculating how much energy the missile delivered into the target.

Naturally, if the projectile comes to rest in the target (i.e., no exit wound), then V2 equals zero and the projectile's velocity as it entered (V1) is used to calculate the KE.

That's enough physics for now, but you get the concept that the optimum projectile to shoot someone with is one that has a decent mass; is very, very fast; and is guaranteed to come to rest in your target so as to dissipate as much energy as possible into it, and hence do maximal damage.

The next concept to grasp is that of permanent cavitation versus temporary cavitation. Permanent cavitation is the hole left in a target from a projectile punching through it. You can think of it simply like a sharp stick being pushed through a target and leaving a hole the diameter of the stick.

The permanent cavity left by a bullet is proportionate to the surface area of the bullet as it passes through the tissue.

For instance, if an AK-47 round with a 7.62mm diameter at its widest point passes cleanly through a target, it will leave a round, 7.62mm permanent cavity.

If this hole goes through a vital structure in the body, the wound can be fatal.

If the bullet passes through soft tissues only, however, the permanent cavity can be relatively benign.

Below is a slow-motion video by Brass Fetcher of a 5.56x45mm round (same as what the M4 fires) hitting ballistic gelatin in slow motion.

After watching, the medical provider can begin to appreciate the damage done to tissues by the pressure wave of the temporary cavitation.

Having had the chance to treat dozens of high-velocity missile wounds over my years in the military, I've seen firsthand the effect that various rifle calibers can have at various distances, hitting various body parts. Naturally a multitude of variables come into play when someone gets shot, and no two gunshot wounds are ever going to be the same.

The purpose of this article is not to draw any academic conclusions about the ballistics of the AK-47 versus the M4, or argue the merits of one ammo over another; it is to introduce the concepts of the different wounding profiles of permanent and temporary cavities using a couple of case studies.

Below are two examples I was involved with that illustrate somewhat of a comparative study of an AK-47 round and an M4 round striking approximately the same anatomical location from roughly the same range (in these cases, 150 to 200 meters).

This series of photos you can see a particularly nasty M4 gunshot wound, with a small entrance wound in the right lower buttock, and a massive exit wound in the right lateral thigh.

The X-ray in the last image shows that the projectile struck the upper femur and demolished the bone, sending secondary bone fragments flying through the tissues and accounting for the majority of the exit wound.

The damage done by the pressure wave of the temporary cavity can be appreciated in the first image, with deep bruising extending up the buttock and into the casualty’s lower back. This bruising resulted from the energy dissipated through the tissues pulverizing small blood vessels in its path (think back to the ballistic gelatin video to imagine what went on in the tissues).

Don't worry, he's OK.

The granular material in the middle of the thigh wound seen on the X-ray is an older-generation QuikClot advanced clotting sponge (ACS), which was inserted at the point of injury for hemorrhage control to excellent effect. The bright white fragments on the X-ray are small pieces of the bullet, which had disintegrated on impact with the tissue and bone. This is another characteristic of the M4 round that makes it all the more unappealing to be shot with — the tendency for the bullet to disintegrate if it strikes tissue at a decent velocity.

Despite being a jacketed round, because it's smaller, lighter, and faster than an AK-47 projectile, the 5.56mm tends to yaw faster once it hits tissue. The shearing forces on the bullet once it is traveling at 90 degrees through the tissue often tears the bullet into pieces, thus creating multiple smaller projectiles and increasing the chances of all of the bullet parts remaining in the target, and hence dissipating more energy.

The AK-47 round, being slightly heavier and slower than the M4 round, has a tendency to remain intact as it strikes tissue, and while it will penetrate deeper, it tends to remain intact and not yaw until it has penetrated much deeper than the M4.

Here's a video from The Ammo Channel of the AK-47's 7.62x39mm projectile being fired into ballistic gelatin for comparison to the video above of the 5.56x45mm (M4) round. Though the video shows a soft-point round being used, which theoretically should be more destructive than its full-metal-jacket counterpart, the video still illustrates nicely the significant penetration of the AK-47 round without it yawing significantly or disintegrating.

I once saw a good case study illustrating this point, where a casualty had sustained an AK-47 gunshot wound to the right lateral thigh and we recovered the intact bullet from the inside of his left upper abdominal wall. It had passed through approximately one metre of his tissues and shredded his small bowel, but the projectile hadn't fragmented at all, and the temporary cavitation hadn't done enough damage to be lethal. The casualty required a laparotomy to remove multiple sections of small intestine, but he made a good recovery. That one is a story for another time.

The following photo is of a good friend of mine who was shot by an AK-47 from approximately 200 meters while standing right next to me!

Fortunately the bullet passed cleanly through, and after a surgical clean-out the afternoon of the injury, he turned up ready for work the very next day. They breed them tough where he is from!

The image was taken a few days after the injury and the bruising from the temporary cavity of the projectile can be seen along the path of the bullet.

Don't worry, he's OK too.

The entrance wound is at the top of the left buttock, with the exit being down on the left upper thigh. Though the injury is unpleasant to have, the fact that the AK-47 round was traveling slower than an M4's round at the same range, coupled with the fact that the projectile remained intact and didn't yaw significantly as it passed through him, meant the wound was nowhere near as devastating as the above-mentioned M4 injury in the same area.

It must be noted, however, that the comparison is far from perfect, given that the M4 injury involved the bone, with the one immediately above passing solely through soft tissues.

So there it is. All things being equal, when all is said and done, I’d rather be shot with an AK-47 than an M4 on any day of the week. Naturally, as medical responders, it is always important to treat the wound and not the rifle that inflicted it, and I have certainly seen some horrendous AK-47 wounds over the years and some relatively minor ones from M4s. It all depends.

The main take-home points for first responders and medicos are: Be aware of the magnitude of damage that can be caused by the temporary cavitation resulting from high-velocity missile wounds, and if you find an entrance wound, there's no telling where in the body the projectile might have ended up!


**************************************************
20. Why I decided to buy a handgun
**************************************************

Another light comes on.

https://tinyurl.com/oskbf3x

or

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/v ... /77693946/


Voices: Why I decided to buy a handgun
by Trevor Hughes, USA TODAY
December 25, 2015

After months of soul-searching, I’ve decided to buy a handgun.

It’s not a decision to which I’ve come lightly. At least one co-worker came near to tears as she tried to dissuade me. But after a horrendous year of violence across the country, I’m left with the undeniable feeling that I ought to do something different. I’m no longer willing to wait for the government to protect me all of the time. As a former Vermonter and Boy Scout, I just can’t escape the feeling that I need to take more responsibility for my own safety.

Here’s the thing: more than almost anyone, I know the devastation handguns can cause. As a journalist who has covered many mass shootings, I’ve watched families ripped apart by death. I’ve seen entire communities shattered because some jerk who couldn’t control himself decided to take out his anger on the world with a weapon.

I also know I’m not the only one struggling with this decision. Gun shops across our country are reporting a surge in sales. And it’s a sad fact that gun sales go up after a shooting or a terrorist attack.

I have no illusions that I’m going to be the proverbial good guy with a gun. And even worse, I know the statistics that show I’m at risk, as a middle-age white man living in Colorado, of using the gun to kill myself.

I recognize that my decision doesn't make the best logical sense. My head knows that. On the other hand, we humans are emotional creatures, and this decision helps me feel better. Perhaps there's just some comfort in feeling like I'm taking action, even if all the statistics tell me I might actually just be making the problem worse

But.

What else should I do? Our politicians have demonstrated they aren’t actually serious about reducing gun violence in America. I mean, while we accept that car crashes kill about 30,000 people annually, at least there’s a serious effort underway to reduce that number. And at the same time, there does appear to be an actual belief around the world and in our own country that Americans are a soft target.

I’ve never fired a handgun. And I hope to God I never fire mine in anger. The men and women we pay to carry guns and protect us rarely do it, and those that do often miss, or accidentally shoot their colleagues or innocent bystanders during the confusion of a gunbattle.

It’s those innocent bystanders that have me worried. I’ve been in Aurora, in Roseburg, in Killeen. Time and time again, mass murderers have targeted groups that were unprepared to fight back. Soft targets. What a terrible phrase.

For me, like for many people I’ve talked to, San Bernardino was the tipping point. As someone who goes to lots of community meetings and rallies, I’m all too aware of how vulnerable we are. A holiday party? Your co-workers? (For me, it started with movie theaters.) I’m not a fan of waiting for the next attack from a religious terrorist.

That’s got me thinking about that famous quote from Teddy Roosevelt: "Speak softly and carry a big stick.”

You don’t have to use that stick. In fact, plan on not using it. But if me carrying a concealed weapon — just like millions of my responsible neighbors in this country — deters someone from attacking my friends and neighbors, maybe that’s worth it. You don’t see terror attacks in this country on areas where there’s lots of armed men and women. Instead, it’s those soft targets that get hit. Maybe it’s time we made sure our enemies, both foreign and domestic, understand that we shoot back.

I’m starting to feel like a soft target. I don’t like feeling like a soft target. And once again, I’m left with this idea that an armed society ends up being a very polite society — and one that’s highly resistant to attack.


**************************************************
21. [UK] Man killed in stabbing identified as lecturer Dr. Jeroen Ensink
**************************************************

Banning guns neither stops guns being misused to murder, nor does it stop someone with a black heart and a knife from achieving the exact same result. England’s government still has not learned that important lesson. Self-defense should never be restricted.

http://tinyurl.com/zfvsr4a

or

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... s-stabbing


Man killed in north London stabbing named as lecturer Dr Jeroen Ensink
by Press Association
December 31, 2015

A man who was stabbed to death days after Christmas has been named as Dr Jeroen Ensink, a lecturer at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

Ensink, 41, was found suffering from stab wounds following an incident in Hilldrop Crescent, Islington, north London, on 28 December. He was pronounced dead at the scene shortly after 1.50pm.

Colleagues have paid tribute to the “popular” public health lecturer, saying he would be “greatly missed”.

Prof Peter Piot, director of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said: “We are deeply shocked and saddened by the death of Jeroen Ensink.

“Jeroen was passionately committed to a simple cause: improving access to water and sanitation in countries where children continue to die needlessly due to the lack of these basic services.”

Ensink joined the school almost a decade ago, and at the time of his death he was was leading a large study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to understand how improvements in water supply could control and prevent cholera outbreaks.

Piot added: “He was a natural educator and immensely popular with students in whom he invested much time and energy; he provided support and inspiration in equal measure and many of his students are now successful researchers and public health professionals in their own right.

“Jeroen will be greatly missed by all the staff and students who had the opportunity to know and work with him, and the legacy of his work will continue in Asia and Africa. Our deepest condolences go to his family and friends.”

Timchang Nandap, 22, from Woolwich, south-east London, has been charged with Ensink’s murder. He appeared at Highbury Corner magistrates court on Thursday and was remanded in custody to appear at the Old Bailey on 4 January, Scotland Yard said.



***************************************************************************
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/]

[wittmeba]

1. Open or concealed carry is acceptable at Golden Corral Restaurant, Roanoke Va supper meeting.