Speaking engagements

  • Invite Alan Korwin to speak at your event! Thought-provoking, entertaining, freedom-oriented topics -- your guests will thank you for the excitement -- long after the applause ends!


"Brady Bill" Namesake James Brady Dies at Age 73

National Media Glorifies Him But Gets Story Wrong

Attacks on the Civil Right to Arms to Continue Unabated

Criminal acts still cleverly used as leverage to disarm the innocent

Sarah, not Jim, the real force behind the anti-rights movement

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
Aug. 6, 2014

"There's no way to tell if you're on
the Brady rights-denied list, (the "NICS Index")
and attempting to buy a firearm
if you're on the government list is a felony.
Attempting to find out if you're on the list is a crime."

James Brady, the White House Press Secretary under President Ronald Reagan has died. He was 73. He is being credited with "stunning successes" in the "gun-control" efforts in America.

Brady had been shot in the head with a .22 caliber revolver during an assassination attempt on president Reagan in 1981, and was severely incapacitated by the injury. Confined to a wheel chair for the balance of his life, in constant pain and speaking only with extreme difficulty, his ambitious and attractive young wife Sarah was understandably horrified and reportedly turned bitter by the life-changing tragedy. Their world had turned upside down. 

Continuing a long tradition of spinning gun-related news to fit a set of beliefs instead of conformance with the facts, the "news" media is portraying James Brady as the moving force behind what is now the Brady Center for the Prevention of Gun Violence, formerly the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, formerly the Brady Campaign to End Gun Violence Allied with The Million Moms March, formerly the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, formerly Handgun Control, Inc., formerly the National Council to Ban Handguns.

Jim Brady Never Ran The Brady Group

His wife Sarah however was the public face and driving force of the anti-gun-rights movement the entire time, which is common knowledge to everyone in the field. Husband Jim was wheeled out infrequently at selected events, often to thunderous applause, where he would wave weakly, occasionally say a few garbled words, and leave the rest of the activity to his wife and others. He was incapable of much else due to the unfortunate tragedy he endured.

The Brady Bill, technically The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, eventually took control of every firearm sold at retail in America, not just handguns as originally promoted, thanks to a little noticed portion that took effect automatically in 1998 -- five years after Congress voted to pass the bill in 1993. Delayed passage of unexpected, controversial or unpopular provisions of law is a questionable practice, according to leading experts. It caught most gun owners by complete surprise.

Five-Day "Cooling Off" Period Was Promo, Not Real

The much vaunted five-day waiting (or "cooling off") period, promoted by the "news" media as the reason for passing the bill, was never a significant part of even the handgun law, never part of the all-firearms bill, and is not part of the bill now.

It was basically used as feel-good leverage to pass the bill for those who didn't read it, and for media promotion. Many people still believe there is a five-day waiting period in the law, even though there isn't now and effectively never was. The "news" media has done little or nothing to clarify the point, leaving the public with the same false impression, 21 years later. But it feels good, according to some with inside knowledge of the situation.

Some states have enacted their own waiting periods of differing lengths and conditions. The 'holy grail' of waiting periods, a long sought after goal of anti-gun-rights activists, has been largely abandoned, left on the dust heap of history. It eventually became obvious, even to die-hard activists, that it was illogical to sell guns to the furiously angry, and then hope they remain calm for the rest of their lives after a five-day wait to get armed.

Rights Denied With No Due Process

Although "news" reports are literally promoting a factoid, presented with no corroboration, that the Brady bill has prevented two million gun transfers from taking place, there is no evidence that the bill has prevented any criminals from arming themselves. Disarming criminals is the stated goal of the bill.

In fact, gangs and criminals in America are known to be heavily armed despite every law on the books banning such activity. In that sense, the Brady bill is an abject failure, but at least it is enormously expensive, diverts scarce resources from other desperately needed uses, impacts every innocent person who shops for firearms, and provides massive employment for law-enforcement officials and the NICS background-check center in West Virginia. None of these points made any "news" reports.

What the two-million figure actually represents, assuming the number is correct, is people denied their fundamental civil and human right to obtain firearms -- without due process, a court hearing, submission of evidence, representation of counsel, or a decent appeals process. In fairness though, there is an administrative process that leads to frequent reversals due to bad records, name similarities and plain old government snafus, unmentioned in "news" accounts. How many should truly be denied firearms for cause is unknown, uninvestigated and unquestioned, except here.

In other words, the public's "specific, enumerated right" (District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 628 n.27 (2008) to keep and bear arms, gets banned under the Brady bill by bureaucrats and a computer terminal, without immediate or easy redress.

There is no way to tell if you are on the Brady gun-rights-denied list, (technically, the "NICS Index") and attempting to exercise your rights and buy a firearm if you are on the government list is a felony. Attempting to find out if you're on the list is a crime. The Brady system is, by design, tyrannical.

The alternative BIDS system, at 90% less cost, would accomplish the same Brady-like purpose of preventing criminals from buying firearms at retail and paying sales tax, yet would not infringe on the innocent, but has gotten a cold shoulder from officials, for reasons that were unclear at press time.

Using the BIDS approach (Blind Identification System), the list of prohibited possessors is made available, encrypted and password protected, to federally licensed dealers, who can look up prospective buyers, similar to wanted posters, to prevent sales to undesirables, while keeping the names of the innocent out of government hands. The need for huge federal employee banks and overhead is eliminated entirely.

How many of the two million prevented transfers were real criminals trying to buy guns who should be arrested for it? That's been studied. Virtually none, at astronomical cost, it's easily googled (a NICS stop is insufficient grounds to dispatch law enforcement, and virtually never "grounds for successful prosecution,"Translation: a hard-enough crime has not been committed). This is the "success" the media splashes in our faces. For shame.

Brady Gave FBI Centralized Control Over The Public

The main tangible result of the Brady bill was to authorize more than $250 million initially, with unknown subsequent funding, for the FBI to build its long-desired centralized computer center in Clarksburg, W. Va., from which it could check out any American from a single location. With funding unavailable for years, the furor over "gun control" provided the final impetus to construct the huge campus that houses the NICS center that performs background checks on every new gun sold in America. Its other uses are a closely guarded secret.

The FBI's NICS center is the largest retail-control system of any kind in the world, keeping tabs, in real time, of sales nationwide of a consumer product. It now handles an average of more than a million requests a month. See a diagram of how it works here:

The system is capable of turning off gun sales nationally -- or regionally -- at the flip of a switch, and has done so repeatedly, on "a trial basis," for "scheduled maintenance," and "unexpected outages," even during busy holiday-buying seasons, or during weekend gun shows, sometimes for days at a time. System up time has improved over the years.

National Gun Registration System Can't Be Confirmed

Although the Brady system isn't supposed to maintain a list of gun buyers, which is banned by federal law (FOPA, 1986, and the Brady bill itself), public confidence in this is low. When originally built, Janet Reno, the attorney general under whose authority it was constructed, claimed at the time the computer was incapable of deleting records, to the shock of many observers. She later recanted, and said it would be rebuilt to delete records within six months.

She recanted again, after Congressional outrage, and said records would be deleted quickly, as if her edicts could simply supplant statute (which required destruction). Ten sets of backups are deleted in sequence, according to an FBI spokesperson contacted at the SHOT Show, to protect the integrity of the system. The results of record checks performed outside the system, to foreign sources, are unclear. No audit trail is known, and the FBI, which runs the system, assures Congress and the public that it runs the system within the confines of the law. An insider has assured me this is true. The FBI had previously stated publicly that it keeps the records.

Operational Style Generated Endless Criticism

The Brady organization itself has been responsible for some of the most vicious and tasteless campaigns against the fundamental human right to self defense, and the civil right to keep and bear arms, in the history of the United States. Relying on "Rahm's Rule," named after Rahm Emanuel, now the mayor of Chicago, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."

The group never fails to use criminal actions for leverage in its endless attempts to disarm everyone who had nothing to do with the evil acts. It has become their trademark tactic, lapped up by a cooperative media that, based solely on a review of the coverage they give, largely shares their anti-gun-rights views.

The Brady group has been characterized by the late civil-rights champion Neal Knox as always "dancing in the blood of victims." When a deranged individual or prescription-drug crazed madman commits an atrocity, gun owners prepare themselves for an assault, invariably led by the Bradys and their allies, lasting for days on end, aimed at everyone who had nothing to do with the event.

Even a single murderous attack seemingly anywhere in the nation, is now broadcast repeatedly thousands of miles away, and often years later, thanks to the group's tremendous influence, and used as an argument for reducing the public's right to keep and bear arms. Pictures of the evil perpetrator, which ought to be downplayed, are instead beamed into American homes, prompting some to cynically refer to the group as the Brady Center for the Promotion of Gun Violence.

In contrast, the good that guns do, saving lives, preventing crime, keeping America free, and as a sport significantly bigger than golf, gets extremely little attention in what passes for news these days. Thirteen scholarly studies show between 700,000 and 2.5 million defensive gun uses every year, but you would hardly know it if the Brady group was your source of information.

Sarah Brady was not reached for comment. As she has aged, and the group has matured, her activity with the organization has reportedly decreased.

Alan Korwin, the author of this and countless similar articles about monkey business in media coverage of firearms issues, simply asks that you click this link, look at the books and DVDs he and his associates have produced, and get something good for yourself to help keep you safe, informed, and so he can continue his work. Do you have the gun laws for your state? Have you read up on gun-fight tactics or gun policies lately? Could you be a more effective advocate for your rights? Do you want to DO something already?

Nation's Capital Gets MORE Gunshot Heroes With Its Morning Coffee (or Bourbon)

The Real First Responders Appear in USA Today -- AGAIN

July 14, 2014 repeats earlier success


"Black Grandma, Shot 4 Times, Returns Fire, Lives"



Wash., D.C. sees it again:

GrandMa Shoots Back, Stops Two Attackers, Lives

Another "First-Responders Report" Hits Capital

Can the Beltway crowd adapt to the change?

Wash., D.C.--The second in a series of news stories about innocent people shooting criminals appeared in USA Today this morning, as a paid advertorial, in the Wash., D.C.-regional edition.

The First-Responders Report TM featured the story of a person, shot four times by two vicious thugs, who was able to return fire with a legally carried .45 caliber pistol. The black woman -- a grandmother and healthcare worker -- was returning home from a double shift when the incident took place. She says the gun saved her life.

What is remarkable about the incident is that it took eight shots to stop the two assailants. Charles Schumer, the NY state senator who campaigns for greater limits on the civil right to arms, helped pass a law that makes it a crime to have a gun with more than seven rounds of ammunition. This woman would have been a criminal if she had saved her life under Schumer's law (and possibly dead if she didn't have that last life-saving shot). The heroic crime survivor lives in Detroit.

Homeowner Slashed In Throat Fights Back,
Grabs Sidearm, Shoots Attacker, Lives

Congress and the Beltway audience are shielded from such news, because mainstream media suppress it. Research has shown monumentally lopsided coverage of gun issues, includingUSA Today's, which in one year printed 5,660 words on gun crime, and none on the good side of guns. Guns prevent at least 700,000 and as many as 2.5 million crimes every year. The First-Responders Report TM comes out again later this month.


USA Today deserves praise for running the advertorial, when until now, such content was virtually unseen in mainstream outlets. It suggests there is hope for change in the gridlock that sometimes plagues the important issue of gun ownership and use. Contact Bloomfield Press for a voice of reason in the gun debate.

In each published case in the new column there is a victorious armed first responder and authorities are clearly second responders. Officials show up later to take notes, figure out what happened, tape off the area, manage the crowd of media and onlookers, speak on camera, stand around and be videographed for replays, debrief and assist the heroic crime survivor, and sometimes even catch the perpetrator, or call for the coroner's office.

Armed Father Defends Home and Daughter --
Without Firing a Shot

The stories in the column tell what happened to the first responder during the event itself. Each one is linked to a local newscast of the aftermath of the event at Just scroll down to The First-Responders Report TM logo. Other sources are used in assembling The First-Responders Report TM.

The column is the second in a planned series by, the website of Bloomfield Press, the country's largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books, based in Scottsdale, Ariz. In business since 1988, the firm's publisher, Alan Korwin, has written ten books on the subject (out of 14 so far), and is on the speaker's bureau for Wash., D.C.-based Accuracy In Media.

Mr. Korwin was an invited guest to the U.S. Supreme Court for both the Heller and McDonaldSecond Amendment cases, and he recently won a major First Amendment censorship case against the city of Phoenix, to allow the use of his Guns Save Lives logo in gun-safety ads. See his bio, background and photos:

Nation's Capital Gets Gunshot Heroes With Its Morning Coffee

The Real First Responders Appear in USA Today, today
July 9, 2014 breaks new ground


"Black Mom With Assault Weapon
Stops Attack, Saves Kids"

Plenty more where that came from... 


Although rarely in the public eye, the Wash., D.C.-Beltway crowd are getting an eyeful of crime victims shooting their attackers in a most unusual place this morning -- USA Today.

In stories their readers don't normally get to see, a paid advertising column in the Life section features news of people who are alive today because they had ready access to fully loaded guns -- including so-called assault weapons -- and were able to shoot down vicious thugs who attacked them.

These first responders -- as the column calls them -- get very little national press, and the second responders, the police, who typically show up later, are mislabeled, leading to a badly misinformed public, according to The First-Responders Report TM, the first in an ongoing series. The second column is scheduled for next week.

"Black Bystander with Gun Saves Mother,
Helps Capture Assailants"

Read the column

"When seconds count, the police are just minutes away," says Alan Korwin, quoting common-sense street logic. He is the publisher at and Bloomfield Press, which is sponsoring the columns. "People who are victimized by murderous criminals are the real first responders. Out here we know that. It's important to set that record straight, and just maybe, to convince the media to get it right." The national media perpetually suppresses such stories.

"I once had an AP bureau chief tell me they don't want to run stories like this because they don't want to encourage this kind of behavior, it could create copy cats," Korwin recalls. "That stunned me."

"What was wrong with having people stop criminals? And if the AP was afraid people would copy behavior they wrote about, how can they run incessant stories about people who go berserk?" he asks. "Do I have to complete that thought for you?"

Some media critics agree that constant glorification of psychopaths in the news creates copy-cat behavior. But if this is true, it is all the more reason to feature people who stand up to criminals and, instead of becoming statistics in waves of crime, are heroes who stop aggressors dead in their tracks. Studies show it happens a lot -- innocent civilians stopping crimes and the police picking up the pieces, afterwards.

"Woman Alive Thanks To Sidearm;
Calls 911, Then Shoots Attacker"

Read the column

A person confronted by an active shooter or a crime in progress has two basic choices -- do nothing and hope the maniac leaves you alone, or do something to protect yourself. The law has always protected people who act to defend their lives in such situations.

The media in the past has been quick to show crime, but unfortunately has chosen not to prominently show cases of self defense, giving the public a terribly distorted view of reality. There is no penalty for giving the public a terribly distorted view of reality, or for violating the clear codes of ethics the industry itself has developed but does not enforce. Reporters are not currently regulated or licensed, and don't need to pass any level of competency or testing to practice, so little action can be taken against those who misrepresent the public trust. They are also protected by the Bill of Rights.

The First-Responders Report TM aims to change this false impression and both improve gun safety and do something about crime. USA Today has taken an important step in moving this issue to the front of the national stage, and we thank them for it, even if it was an expensive proposition. And yes, we will gladly entertain inquiries from those interested in sponsoring future editions of the column in the Wash., D.C-area and other regions of the country.

The company's USA Today advertorial column can be viewed at

To schedule and interview with Alan Korwin call 602-996-4020,

or email

"Don't be a spectator in the struggle to preserve freedom."

Click the image then scroll down
to read, copy or printout the
First-Responders Report TM



According to an analysis of related New York Times stories, in a single year, that paper ran 104 gun-crime articles totalling 50,745 words, balanced by a single 163-word story involving a retired cop. InUSA Today for the same year, the word total was 5,660 words on gun-involved crime with nothing at all for balance. USA Today has earned some respect for giving this issue the light of day, even if it's only as an ad.

Analysis of anti-gun bias in the news:

Comprehensive details on news-media bias:

Even the smallest scholarly studies estimate hundreds of thousands of armed self-defense incidents annually. The largest estimates run into the millions, with 2.5 million annually the most often cited figure, from a Florida State University study. All 13 studies are summarized and reviewed in a book Bloomfield Press sells entitled Armed, New Perspectives on Gun Control, by Gary Kleck and Don Kates.

What is an ombudsman?

The lamestream media told you:

Long ago we eliminated the position of ombudsman at our organization. We did it due to cost (but it sure made it easier on our staff).

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It's come to my attention that some of my readers don't fully understand what an ombudsman is, much less an uninvited one. Most newspapers used to have ombudsman, back when newspapers were better.

ombudsman , n. A public advocate. The employee in a news organization assigned to investigate maladministration, ethical complaints, errors, bias and similar violations of newsworthiness and accuracy, especially those noticed by members of the public. The term comes from watchdogs against government as early as 221 B.C. in China. Government ombudsman are also a thing of the past. Bringing back ombudsman helps improve things. 


The Gun Registration We Already Have

The lamestream media told you:

We're not asking for a gun registration system to keep us all safe, according to leading gun-control advocates, although other leading gun-control advocates do seek a gun-registration system.

A proposed bill, frequently referred to as a "universal background-check system," which Congress refuses to pass, would enable a gun registration system, according to its critics. It contains language that omits every federal agency, and every federal authority or person from a ban on creating a gun-registration system, with the single exception of the U.S. Attorney General. Gun rights advocates have expressed outrage over the deceptive bill and its sponsors, false campaigning.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The current system for buying any new firearm in the United States requires filing federal paperwork with federally authorized agents known as FFLs without exception.

The FFLs are required to instantly notify the FBI of all such transactions. The FBI's record-keeping procedures for these sales to the public are unknown and there is no audit procedure in place. The FFL records are kept for at least 20 years, first by the FFLs, then by the government forever if the FFL goes out of business.

The procedure the FFLs must follow is more complex than any average citizen realizes. According to the dealers trade association (the NSSF): "75 fields on a Form 4473 need to be properly completed with each firearms transaction," an enormous burden on dealers. NSSF points out that "each error can potentially translate to an unwanted violation." Violations can lead to criminal charges and a loss of the license to operate.

Due to this risk, NSSF recommends developing "sound training, processes and monitoring controls to achieve success... Orchid Advisors is an endorsed compliance information provider for NSSF members," which dealers can use to reduce the risk of filling out one of those 75 fields incorrectly.

Dealers are subject to unannounced audits by armed federal agents, and NSSF reminds its members that, "auditors will be auditors." Calls by uninformed "experts" for additional gun registration overlook the thicket already in place, and the compliance costs already facing the industry. How another government list would stop homicidal maniacs remains unexplained.

Twenty Years of Guns On The Street

The lamestream media told you:


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Talk is already circulating on what to do to recognize a special firearms anniversary coming up late this year. In October we'll be recognizing the fact that 20 years ago, millions of decent Arizonans acquired the ability to discreetly carry firearms legally, and virtually no one was harmed -- although it required a government permission slip and a lot of red tape at first.

This is despite an onslaught of media coverage that experts declared was unbiased and accurate -- yet it forecast bloody disasters that never occurred. No corrections were ever issued.

We found that permittees and others do not shoot each other at traffic lights, and all the slow waiters are still alive. Stories from the armed people evidence the crime-stopping power of an armed population.

"Whenever you deny a person's civil rights, you are doing evil and it will have bad consequences," said Charles Heller, a spokesperson for Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, a Wisconsin-based civil-rights group. The organization works to raise awareness of the link between disarming the public and genocide, the roots of which run deep throughout history and have touched many nations.

"Twenty years after Arizonans regained the civil right to discreetly carry firearms, we have incontrovertible proof that regular citizens can carry loaded guns in public without becoming dangerous to public safety, or leaving dead bodies behind them as the anti-rights extremists predicted in their Wild West fantasies," said Jeff Knox, director of The Firearms Coalition, a civil-rights group based in Buckeye, Ariz.

What the public has also noticed is that something in the culture is breaking down, because psychotic maniacs, frequently on prescribed FDA-approved psychotropic drugs, are roaming free and perpetrating acts of horrific disgrace on completely unsuspecting innocent people, murdering them in public before committing suicide.

The same media that falsely threatened psychotic madness from people who were tested and got government-issued permits -- the blood never ran -- saturates the public with tales of the psycho murderers, nationwide, never letting the stories end.

Just this week (6/26/14), USA Today, "The Nation's Newspaper," ran a major story in its Phoenix edition about two people shot dead in a horrific ghetto insultingly named Liberty City -- 2,000 miles away. "What possible relevance does that have here?" asked one expert. "Where is any semblance of balance with stories about all the lives saved by people with firearms?"

There is none, and there are no ethical consequences, though dire loss of revenues and readers might be attributed to the poor workmanship.

Then, according to critics, when challenged the media people hide behind the First Amendment. The public seems to be without recourse against such prejudice in such a well-entrenched enemy of truth.

There was a reason for the story however. It accompanied a tale from billionaire anti-rights activist Mike Bloomberg, who has two of his funded groups campaigning to change how statistics are collected and analyzed, to show that guns are worse than currently portrayed. I'm not making this up. How much control can one person exercise?

The story also campaigns to have the federal Centers for Disease Control get and spend money developing anti-gun-rights "medical" policy, which is forbidden by law. The public was warned that Bloomberg would start doing this at the Gun Rights Policy Conference back in September, 2013. 


Where Is Chris Simcox Now?

The lamestream media told you:

A completely unexpected surge of unaccompanied children from central America is flooding the U.S.-Mexican border and creating havoc in Texas and Arizona. This story is isn't airing so much outside of the effected border states, surprisingly enough. The border, as government has assured you is secure, but despite this, The Border Patrol can't keep them out. Responding to public and congressional demands, the agency plans to hire 2,000 more agents to supplement the 23,775 it now has. 

Look at the dangerous and hardened desperados our Border Patrol either cannot -- or has been told not to -- keep from entering the U.S. These pictures have generally not been presented to the general public through mainstream sources, because they are considered too inflammatory:

Invaders aboard a high-speed smuggling boat the U.S. Border Patrol cannot intercept midstream and force back to the foreign nation's shore from which it secretly came in broad daylight.

Mobs of desperate men and women storm a government facility where heavily armed U.S. Border Patrol agents with assault weapons, flash-bang grenades, armored vehicles, K-9 units and air support were unable to repel the invaders and regain control.

Border Patrol agents reading the riot act to unruly and dangerous invaders they were unable to repel, or were told to invite into the compound, which remained unclear at press time.


It remained unclear why three out of six Central American countries sent their unescorted children to the United States all at once, but it's only unclear to the U.S. public. Somebody knows exactly what's going on, they're not telling, and the lamestream media is doing no reporting, just shoveling the narrative without details or explanation. CNN did run this image, with the faces blurred out.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

We have satellites that can read a license plate from outer space. Now the Associated Press and our government wants you to believe 70,000 unaccompanied children have traveled or soon will cover 1,000 miles to America and it was unexpected. They are lying to your face.

They want you to believe that our Ambassadors and the entire staffs in those small countries didn't see the same television shows in April telling those people constantly that they could now leave for America and be granted access, asylum and citizenship; they didn't see people abandoning their homes and boarding trains and buses, and that they arrived here unexpectedly. They didn't see countless children suddenly missing from homes and small towns. They are lying to you. The "news" media is promoting their lies. The "news" media is a blatant lying propaganda arm of the government perpetrating this scam, and I don't say that lightly.

The Border Patrol, that you were told has secured our border so it is as safe as it has ever been according to the person occupying the White House and former security chief Janet Napolitano -- is incapable of keeping out unaccompanied six-year-old children. They are lying to your face. They are insulting you. 


They want you to believe 23,000 Border Patrol agents can't stop this.


Why on Earth would vice president uncle Joe Biden have traveled to visit the leaders of the three main perpetrator countries of this travesty now -- now that the damage is done and well underway, with the media reporting on his charade? Why didn't he do this when the campaign was in the planning stages and the TV shows promoting it starting airing months ago, or when the first trainloads started heading north? Because this is all part of the dog and pony show and campaign of deceit and lies you are supposed to swallow.

We need a Chris Simcox to stand up and call for civilians to go to the border and do what the Border Patrol, with tens of thousands of agents you are paying for, is incapable of doing -- or has been ordered by Mr. Obama or his minions not to do -- repel invaders. 

The Border Patrol agents who can't stop this need to be fired. Of course they can stop this. They must have been ordered to stand down. The people who gave those orders need to be brought up on charges.


Despite claims about violence in the U.S., the source of the unaccompanied children are said to have the highest murder rates in the world (despite extremely strict gun laws), and for all we know, we might soon hear the violence is the result of unauthorized low-budget muslim videos and guns smuggled in by BATFE. There are six small countries down there, why are Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama left out?

What we're seeing, and what's really going on, are not related to each other.

"Guns Save Lives" Speech Ban Is Officially Dead

And We Add Half Million Extra Viewers Per Day!

 1. At 12 midnight going into Saturday July 28th, the deadline for any appeal by the City of Phoenix passed and our victory in the censorship case became final.

2. Squeaking in just under the wire, the City of Phoenix filed a petition for review just before midnight on Friday, July 27th, prolonging the final outcome on whether or not we are free to say "Gun Save Lives" on Phoenix bus stops the way we want to in our paid advertising, to advance gun safety and marksmanship training. 


well... It's the first one. It's done. We won.

Right. I had to sweat out that deadline all this time.

Now maybe you have a little taste of what that was like.

You probably didn't even know. 

In honor of this final disposition, and for the 4th of July, and to coordinate with a big national news break I can't tell you about yet (!) -- we're adding 500,000 viewers a day to the Guns Save Lives campaign in Phoenix. Ten new locations around the city will sport both blue and red TrainMeAZ signs, 6-feet high, at street level, all illuminated until midnight, throughout July. That brings us to one million impressions every day.

If you're a firearms trainer in Arizona, sign up for a free listing, thanks to the firearm-industry sponsors who make this public awareness campaign possible.

The public is always welcome to use the TrainMeAZ resources for trainers, ranges, retailers, get the Where-To-Shoot GUN MAP or the statewide Arizona Firearms Industry Directory


Get smart --

(Click images for more info) •



Our Newest Sponsor:


The Comments I Get

"Sebulex" writes: "I'm a liberal and I have a gun and I would bet my mother's life that Obama's mysterious troops aren't going to show up at my door to confiscate it, and unlike you I don't have sexual feelings for my gun. You people are just old fashioned pussies. What aren't you afraid of? And how on earth did I get on your poisonous email list?"

Dear "Sebulex,"

Thanks for writing, and saying you're a liberal. I've heard things about liberals, but I prefer to discount them. You've made that hard to do in your case.

1. Please don't bet your mother's life on anything. 
2. What "Obama's mysterious troops" are you talking about? I've said nothing in that regard. 
3. I haven't suggested anyone is going to show up at your door, or any doors. 
4. I haven't said you have sexual feelings about your gun, and be careful about what you deny. 
5. Why do you conjecture the same about me? It's not in my writings. 
6. That's just your first sentence to me.

Your next sentence addresses some imaginary "you people" so I'll leave that for them to answer. If you'd like to write about what I've written in my report (Page Nine No. 135), please do. I have no idea how you got on my list, no need to call names, maybe you signed up and forgot, or wrote to me about something, or someone else did it when you weren't looking (our system theoretically prevents that, but you know how computers are, fallible). If you'd like to comment on the actual content of my report, I'd enjoy hearing from you. Alan.

P.S. I looked up "Sebulex." Medicated dandruff shampoo? Am I supposed to take some meaning from that? [No response received.] 




Alan, Almost all of school shootings have been by persons on mind-altering drugs. Why not mandate that anyone prescribed certain psychiatric medications be prohibited from access to firearms? The problem is not firearms, it is drugs. --Frank L.

[The drug/homicidal-rage link can't be denied, it is virtually universal, though the medical field adamantly denies it and the media downplays it as hard as they can. But deny civil rights to tens of millions of innocent people who haven't done anything because they take medicine? I can't support that, and neither should you. There is also a logical fallacy in that line of thinking, because coincidence is not causality, e.g., every drug addict in prison started on milk. A.] 




Mr. Korwin,

Regarding your open letter to Obama, why do you deal with these people as though they were interested at all in a compromise, or your reason, your arguments, or even your rights? They prove every moment that they have no concern for any of those things.

It should be abundantly clear to someone with your degree of involvement with firearms that what the "Gun Control" industry is after has absolutely no connection to the things they mouth in public. The only reason they have largely dropped the rhetoric of rank demonization in favor of rank deceptions like "Common Sense" laws, or "reasonable" anything, is to get the nose of the confiscation camel under the tent flap. They know nobody supports their real goal, which is a monopoly of physical force by those who share their affinities -- and so they seek to gull and browbeat with words like "reasonable," and reams of data showing their constituents' preferences for whatever insanity they advocate.

Arguing in good faith with these people is going wind up one way -- the same way every argument with a tyrant intent on securing untrammeled power ends. With us lined up against a wall, or on the edge of a ditch. Giving them any quarter whatsoever begets nothing but relentless demands for ever more. As an exercise, ask any one of these people to tell you exactly when they will have enough -- will it be single-shot muzzle-loading Derringers for the commoners? Or will it be nothing -- as they will not rest so long as one single gun remains in private hands?

I think you know the result of that little thought experiment. It's the same as the one where you ask them at what level of taxation will they say "enough," or how much anyone should be "allowed" to earn. No answer, because they know no satiety. They don't seek safety, accommodation, or anything else they prattle about.

They seek Utopia. And pretending they do not only aids in the deception. I urge you to reconsider the efficacy of any conciliatory approach to the statists and their demands. They have long since declared war on us, and it's time we behaved as though we realize that -- by dropping the collegial airs, and being as implacable and relentless as they are -- only in favor of liberty and not against it.

Sincerely, D.W.


[Your points are all well taken and beautifully expressed. Many other said similar things (though not as well). But perhaps you're missing the point. First, it's just a writing technique, I don't really expect the guy to read the letter, c'mon, he doesn't even read his daily security briefings.

It's aimed at the millions of people swarming around him, people who read newspapers and are on staffs, it's aimed at the court of popular opinion, to force (carefully nudge, actually) people to think about what they're doing, and win the battle for our gun rights, one step at a time. People in the media, people who are politically connected at every level, our own choir, not just the guy in the address box, that's my audience.

Sometimes you need a bludgeon, sometimes you need a soft drink. From the looks of it, it's having an effect. One of many, it's a long struggle. I've got more coming. You should send this one around, especially to non gunnies, like democrats, rattle their cages a little. Add this: How can you not support education?

As far as the guy who did release a phony birth certificate, and all the other stuff going on, I've got some other irons in the fire too, ya know. Look at some of the blue notes on the left:

or this:




I strongly suggest you unsubscribe me. Immediately. I did not sign up for this and couldn't even possibly disagree with you more. I am not your ally in any way, and do not wish to receive your messages.

[My sincerest apologies, I didn't mean to upset you. I've never had anyone express such a closed attitude. If you don't agree with education, what do you suppose might work? I've unsubscribed you of course.] 




Please please no more,
No more of this.

[Are you asking to unsubscribe,
or are you asking for an end to the awful things
the government and others are up to,
like demanding no voter ID, but ID for everything else]

Who sent this, as I am a Canadian and out of five countries lived in this is the only one armed.
I do not feel that I belong in a country armed by citizens against a govt voted in to serve.

[Hey if you don't feel like you belong here, why are you here?
I'd really like to know.
Foreigners are often complaining, but live here anyway.
Is that you? Always strikes us citizens as hypocritical, no?
You like all the good stuff an armed nation provides,
but have no end to the vacuous complaints.
If you read Page Nine, you'll learn about all this,
it will make you a better person, and part time resident.
What would you like me to do?
[No reply received.] 




Someone forwarded me your letter to President Obama. I have no problem with having a gun for security reasons in a home, for hunting and shooting. The many shootings in this country are horrendous. I am not a gun owner. What are your thoughts on banning the sale of assault weapons? Why are those legally sold in this country? I see no purpose in anyone owning an assault weapon unless they are in the armed forces. I posted this on FB and naturally got a backlash from a friend who is a gun owner. To be honest, I never heard of you but when I googled you, your bio was impressive, to say the least. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on the above question.

[Regina, Assault is a kind of behavior, it is not a kind of hardware. The media has created this term to scare people and muddle the debate. When you say "assault weapon," to what are you actually referring? Diane Feinstein' s so-called "assault-weapon" bill would have banned anything with a grip. Hard to believe right? It's no wonder everyone objected and it went no where. So what is it you're really objecting to? I'd like to hear your reply.

I hope my brief remarks have helped clarify your thoughts. It sounds like you, unfortunately, are a victim of the awful reporting that has confused so many people following the "news" media. They rant about "ugly" guns, or what they think of as "dangerous" guns, without pointing out that all guns are dangerous, they're supposed to be dangerous, and wouldn't be much good if they weren't dangerous. If you're referring to the AR-15 rifle, that's what police use, because it's accurate, reliable, it's the best, which is why the public likes it too. Using something inferior when your life might depend on it is a really bad idea.] 




Hi Alan,

Forgotten me already? I'm the guy that wrote How to Win a Gunfight, and we've met many times when we were living in Scottsdale. Now, we're living in an 18th century house overlooking the North Sea in Scarborough, in gentle retirement. Since we left AZ in November 2011, we've visited New York Berlin, Prague, Rome, Florence (Italy, not Ariz.) and Siena, and we go down to London about four times a year.

Have to admit that I do miss my guns; not so much as shooting them, but knowing that I can own them. That's why I signed up for your Page Nine newsletter -- to keep me in touch with a free society.

Incidentally, according to a friend of mine in London, if I wanted to buy an illegal handgun, it would take "no more than a couple of hours," if you knew the right people.

The politicians here tell us that street crime is down, but as Winston Churchill said; "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics," and I think we're getting some heavily-massaged statistics thrown at us. If you want to read what right-minded people think over here, I'd suggest that you read the Daily Mail online at The lefties and commentariat all sneer, but it is the biggest-selling conservative newspaper in the UK. Take a look. All the best, Tony Walker.

[Tony's book remains a good seller and a fine examination of the split-second timing that can determine the winner in a spontaneous gunfight. We have them in stock, only $14.95, click the link to read about it. Alan.] 

Paranoia Sweeps Media As Governor Expands Civil Rights

The lamestream media told you:

The Hill reports that: "Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal (R) signed sweeping gun legislation on Wednesday that some have described as unprecedented. Licensed gun owners will be able to carry their firearms into public places including bars, schools, churches and government buildings, among other areas.

"The NRA called House Bill 60, The Safe Carry Protection Act, 'the most comprehensive pro-gun bill in state history.'"

[NOTE: The bill had support from both Republicans and Democrats, passed with relative ease, (it is an expansion of civil rights) and takes effect on July 1, 2014] (4/23/14)

MSNBC called it The Guns Everywhere Bill, and quoted Americans for Responsible Solutions, the group founded by anti-gun-rights billionaire Mike Bloomberg with former Arizona congresswoman Gabby Giffords as its leader, which called the legislation "the most extreme gun bill in America."

NPR exclaimed people will be able to bring firearms into unsecured government buildings without approval (their emphasis, overlooking everything that goes into getting the license). Librarians expressed alarm that they may not be able to even speak with people who are armed, "even if there are children running around," although that made no sense and is not a part of the law.

The law will free (NPR says "allow") licensed owners to carry firearms into more public places than at any time in the past century, including bars and government buildings that don't have security checkpoints. The law also authorizes school districts to appoint staffers to carry firearms. It allows churches to "opt-in" if they want to allow weapons. Bars, which could already opt-in, must now opt-out if they so desire.

A webinar designed for 500 cities addresses bureaucrats who want to know if they can just post a no-guns sign to keep people exercising their rights out. The answer: "No." 

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

People were always able to walk into those places with guns, that's the whole point. What this law means is they can do it legally. This law covers places that are not secured, where anyone good or bad, can simply stroll in armed.

We know for a fact that many people in the past simply ignore the old bans, with both good and bad intent all the time, and discreetly went armed. All this rule change does is allow decent people to enter without being at risk of arrest. There is absolutely no change for armed bad guys intent on shooting up a place. (Well, except that maybe there might be more armed good guys around.)

Get it? People could always walk in armed to the teeth to all those places, because the places are unsecured. As long as they acted discreetly not a thing prevented them.

Now, even after two decades of licensed discreet carry in America, anti-rights activists like Bloomberg-funded groups, left-leaning media pundits, and the uninformed are still paranoid about expansions of civil rights in the firearms arena.

Georgia's governor has done nothing other state officials haven't done bit by bit, he is just in the spotlight of the moment, responding to beneficial acts of the legislature and a hailstorm of complaints.

We know for a fact that decent citizens do not start gunfights when their rights expand.

We even know that citizens who have achieved Constitutional Carry in their states -- the ability to exercise their Second Amendment rights without government interference -- are equally responsible.

Yet ill-informed portions of the public, whipped to a frenzy by an embarrassingly incompetent media, continue to exhibit signs of paranoia or hoplophobia when gun-rights grow.

The old psych 101 tapes are rolling again, hoplophobic fears of blood in the streets are beginning to manifest, none of the fearful sufferers are getting much-needed treatment, and the public is forced to suffer through this same old expensive and primitive civil-rights battle all over again -- ironically from the political left that thinks it is the harbinger of civil rights.

None are so blind as those who do not know they cannot see. 

Read what people are saying about Page Nine, or tell Alan yourself.

See the archives below, or click through to an index of Page Nine posts at

About the Author

  • Freelance writer Alan Korwin is a founder and past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Here writing as "The Uninvited Ombudsman," Alan covers the day's stories as they ought to read. Read more.

Recent Comments

Read the last 100 comments on one handy page here!