Sign up to receive Alan's newsletter by email.

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!

Books

Working Less Is Good -- or is it?

Unclear who is promoting Americans to work less

What possible ulterior motive could this include



The lamestream media told you:


“Knock off from work a little early? Sure, it’s good for you.” USA Today. Page One.
https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-signal/20170211/282372629360489
Newspapers report facts, or claim to.


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Any doubt that the lamestream media no longer supports The American Way (click that link) has been finally dashed to pieces with the appearance of a front-page story in “America’s newspaper” (self-proclaimed) USA Today, proposing hard work and long hours are bad and should be abandoned in favor of working less and slacking off, like the French do. According to a new study, so it must be true.

The study, from the great fortress of science, Australia, found that hard work “erodes your mental and physical health, leaving you less time to eat well...” Americans currently suffer from an obesity epidemic, not mentioned in the story.

The work was done by Huong Dinh, from the “research school for population health,” a new discipline. The Uninvited Ombudsman is awaiting charges of xenophobia (dislike of foreigners) to come flooding in for doubting the report. Wealth of Nations, by American Founding Father Adam Smith, upon which the most successful nation in the history of the world was founded (ours), conflicts with the report.

In a shockingly sexist and misogynistic statement, Dinh and reporter Mathew Diebel note that women should work less, because they must, “spend much more time on care and domestic work.” The typical insults and attacks usually hurled for inappropriate and differential sexist mistreatment of women were missing from the story, for reasons that were unclear. Women can, according to the report, work longer if “they compromise their health.” Who decides to run this stuff as if it’s news, or even valid, was also unclear. A picture of an attractive woman staring into the distance, wearing a telephone headset at a computer terminal, accompanied the story.

Scientists March for Earth Day

"We're not political!" they say.

Bwahahahahahahaha...

The lamestream media told you:

Earth Day is a glorious event that celebrates our stewardship of the planet and recognizes all the obligations we have to treat our Earth mother properly. All laws needed to control our effect on the planet should be passed without delay.

Scientists marched this year in the parades in a coordinated effort, and promoted the thought that because they pursue science, they are not political and so, presumably, "you can trust us."





The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:


Scientists aren’t being very scientific
if they’re holding themselves out to be non-political.

Everything in the public domain is political.

Any group operating on tens of billions of taxpayer dollars,
and constantly in need of more, is as political as it gets.
Read that again.

They’re holding up pictures of DNA and vaccines? Good. How about spy satellites, nukes and labs for weaponized anthrax. It’s proof they’re not only political, they’re underhanded and deceptive, with a hidden agenda and a phony narrative. Your friend the atom. Thalidomide. The coming Ice Age. The absolute trash that passes for science lately is preposterous. "Scientific surveys" are the worst. Some "science" is even done now by voting (Pluto anyone?). It’s the real reason certain “research” funds have been cut off by Congress -- to prevent taxpayer funding of political agendas disguised as science. Government “scientists” conducted human sterilization and eugenics experiments on people -- and were only stopped when forced to by outrage and new law. All sorts of law has been enacted to prevent so-called “science” from committing atrocities.

Now don’t take this the wrong way. Like anything, there are two sides to the coin, and obviously, the wonders of modern science and technology are fabulous. Hey -- we're on computers, right? Just don’t get snowed by this white-lab-coat holier-than-thou can-do-no-wrong all-the-answers mythology.

Science is just as messed up as police, doctors, the post office and your co-workers, and for the same reason -- because they’re people. The fact that their IQs may be high is no reason to place them on a pedestal above every human frailty everyone else has. If anything, this march showed they may be worse off than many of us, believing their own fairy tales. Don’t you know Sheldon Cooper?

Everyone wants clean land, air and water, but not everyone is good with the socialist controls packaged as environmental controls and stuffed in the same wheelbarrow.

 

Is Aaron Zelman Dead?

JPFO Remains Alive and Kicking.

"Friends of JPFO"

The lamestream media told you:

"News" coverage for firearms civil-rights groups is not happening. These days.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

I’ve heard rumors that Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership had lost its moxie after founder Aaron Zelman died. It shows you what a tremendous figure Aaron was. JPFO lost its Moses and the rabble figures they’ll walk in circles for 40 years. JPFO experienced changes (posted at JPFO.org), moved, and continues breaking ground in Aaron’s strictly zero-compromise pro-gun-rights tradition. We do deeply miss his voice.

JPFO filed a court amicus brief against anti-gunners in California trying to ban gun stores. The Bill of Rights Sentinel newsletter is back in print -- and no one says what that rag does (See below, get one). The David and Goliath Award is recognizing heroes the mainstream doesn’t want you to know about. You don’t have to be Jewish to join, you just have to love freedom and want a respected, morally courageous ally on your side. Join as a Friend of JPFO. Go here to contribute, just learn more, sign up with “America’s Most Aggressive Civil Rights organization.”

Get the next JPFO Bill of Rights Sentinel:

https://www.facebook.com/jewsforthepreservationoffirearmsownership/

[Sentinel EXCERPT:]

I’ve had it with all these statist gun owners who think training should be required. Exercising your rights doesn’t require training. Failure to get training doesn’t vacate your rights or subject you to penalties. Got it? No training required to be a parent to helpless infants, none needed to buy poisons and sharp things in Home Depot, no certificate of completion needed to enter bizarre religious ritualistic buildings. Understood? A dangerous world does not justify government training your life. Smart people get trained for everything because they’re smart. Get smart. Do it on your own. With or without any kind of training, if you screw up, you're responsible. OK? Training doesn’t get you off the hook, at all, but it may help you stay off the hook (and looks good to juries). Making the government force you to be trained the way it thinks you should be trained is horrific.




Washington Times reporter Emily Miller
receives the JPFO David and Goliath award, 2013.
Who will win one this year at GRPC?

Mandatory Gun Training Demands

Excerpt from upcoming JPFO Bill of Rights Sentinel

Few people want to address this subject openly:
Gun training good. Forced training bad.

If you come out against mandatory gun training you are pilloried, and verbally attacked by leftists and other malcontents, and plenty of people who believe they support gun rights.

Each state that has mandatory training imposed as a condition for CCW permits found the government's idea of what you need, and qualified trainers ideas don't match at all. People took the CCW classes, thinking they had to, when what many needed was Guns 101, since they had never handled firearms before. Teaching them about actual carry in public is an entirely different ballgame.

Under a mandatory training regime, if some little old lady (or you) shoots an attacker in legitimate self defense, and you didn't take the approved class, you've committed a crime and go to jail, for what is essentially a righteous act. That's just not right.

Government could play a positive role if it ran public service announcements, "in cooperation with this station and the Ad Council," and put up billboards, encouraging the public to go to the range, take classes, learn about gun safety, the whole nine yards. Don't hold your breath. Promoting the Constitution and Bill of Rights is no longer any part of the federal agenda (in meaningful ways).

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, http://www.jpfo.org (JPFO) publishes its no-holds-barred newsletter, The Bill of Rights Sentinel, this is coming in the next edition:
https://www.facebook.com/jewsforthepreservationoffirearmsownership/

I’ve had it with all these statist gun owners and especially firearms instructors who think training should be required. Exercising your rights doesn’t require training. Failure to get training doesn’t vacate your rights or subject you to penalties. Got it? No training required to be a parent to helpless infants, none needed to buy poisons and sharp things in Home Depot, no certificate of completion needed to enter bizarre religious ritualistic buildings. Understood? Smart people get trained for everything because they’re smart. Get smart. Do it on your own. With or without whatever training, you screw up, your responsible. OK? Training doesn’t get you off the hook, at all, but it may help you stay off the hook (and it does look good to a jury). Making the government force you to be trained the way government thinks you should be is horrific.

Do you think this is a fable, just paranoia? Look:

GUN-RIGHTS LICENSING TEST PLANNED
http://www.gunlaws.com/GunLawUpdate4-SHOTnHR45.htm
People complain it's just scare tactics when rights activists holler about gun bans. Here's the bill that proves them right, HR 45 from Illinois congressman Bobby Rush, which goes beyond gun bans to ban gun owners. It is so far outside constitutional boundaries it defies belief -- the man deserves to be removed from office. Also, a brief SHOT Show report with pictures.

The Solution: You want everyone trained to arms, include it in school curricula. You should be firearm trained even if you don't own a gun. Maybe especially if you don't own a gun. Give it in school.

Republicans Quit Trying on Gun Rights

National Carry bill ignored, "leadership" squashes activity

"These people are not the friends you think they are."

Inside scoop -- why the National Carry Act HR38 isn't moving, despite republicans in charge of all three Houses:

Anonymous Source

"Leadership is holding up HR38. They don't want the 'distraction.' Gotta marvel at the stupidity of republicans sometimes. I think the bill has no chance in the Senate anyway*, but they need to force the vote to hold the dem's responsible. Can't understand why they don't see this as a valuable election issue -- keeping their promise, so maybe GunVoters will trust them and keep supporting them, and making the dem's own their votes against it.

"VCDL https://www.vcdl.org/ has posted an official White House online petition to Trump, but none of the bigger org's have promoted it, so it's not likely to reach the 100k threshold needed.** I haven't been able to determine exactly what NRA is doing. It's almost as if a deal has been made with the R's to let them hold off on any action this year. If they do that, they're foolish. If the R's won't push it this year, they certainly won't during an election year."

The conservative/libertarian/independent and entire right side of the nation supports gun rights, and Congress should demonstrate this. Instead, even our best representatives refuse to move against the corrupt leadership of the system, that's the swamp that needs draining.

*Whether the Senate will act properly or not, and end the infringement we all endure, is an open issue. If the House does act, pressure on Senators will increase by an order of magnitude. Then the threshold for a petition may make sense. The online White House tool attempting to take control of (under the guise of providing access for) the right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances," has some serious flaws. I'll get to that soon. Scrutinize their policy statement like I did and scratch your head. If the petition gathers 100K signatures soon, we get a reply.

**Needed for what, you ask? So that, according to the website, "we" can respond. If you reach the magic number, something happens, like an email to the list holder. Almost no petitions do, "we" know that, crazies may not apply, real petitions still count (so far), it looks more like a way to defuse energy, or be able to say later you don't count, than anything related to how the White House is really influenced. "How the White House is really influenced." Think about that, more on it later.

Here is a simple link you can share with people for the petition if you wish, at least look: http://vcdl.org/Sign-The-White-House-Petition

The commenter suggested, "All we can do is try to keep the pressure on." Is that really it? How intolerable need acts be?

HR38 has 207 House co-sponsors, 37 Senate

John Snyder, "The Dean of Gun Lobbyists" points out that "AWR Hawkins, the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News, wrote that "gun control activists are up in arms over the legislation, because it would immediately do away with strict gun controls in a number of states."

"Actually," said Snyder, "that's a good reason for supporting it and promoting it. The gun haters have had too much to say for too long. It's time to turn the tables on them and tell them to get lost."

"...it (HR38) would immediately do away with strict gun controls in a number of states." Strict gun controls is just a euphemism for infringements on your rights. Laws against gun crime are totally unaffected by this bill. The only thing missing is jail time for the perpetrators who put the controls on you into law, in violation of the rule of law.

Texas Community College Carry Activates

Built-in 1-yr. lag-time expires, another infringement falls, everyone survives

Bloody lunacy never materialized with campus carry, colleges unrepentant

Although college officials continue to hate it, campus carry has created no problems. The warnings of doom were once again proven -- proven I say -- to be paranoid delusions:

"...non-bizarre delusions are fixed false beliefs that involve situations that could potentially occur in real life, such as being followed or poisoned (Ed., or shot). Apart from their delusions, people with delusional disorder may continue to socialize and function in a normal manner and their behavior does not necessarily generally seem odd. However, the preoccupation with delusional ideas can be disruptive to their overall lives." --Wikipedia

The Texas Tribune along with many other local media outlets reported the change. Most but not all buildings are open for discreet carry by LTC (formerly CHL) license holders at the state's 72 community colleges. The paper notes, "Depending on whom you ask, the fact that guns may be carried into Performance Hall and buildings like it is either an important assertion of freedom or an affront to the very character of higher education."

One small university had an unintentional discharge and no injury. Aside from that, comments were uniform -- "(other than that) very smoothly and without incident" (Tarleton State U., which had the UD); "Virtually no impact at all" (Texas A&M); "Amazingly quiet' (Texas Tech); "I expected it to be largely uneventful, and those expectations have been pretty much borne out" (Sam Houston State U.). The paper notes, "The uneventful implementation follows the patterns of the seven other states that legalized campus carry before Texas."

A number of professors, acting out on their fears, left Texas, citing the new freedom to carry as their reason. The ability of anyone to go shoot them didn't change, only their perception of danger. The Tribune story is illuminating: https://www.texastribune.org/2017/08/01/campus-carry-one-quiet-year/

A complete description of the law is here: http://www.gunlaws.com/updates.htm New Texas laws for 2017 take effect Sep. 1, we'll have that out soon.

New Arizona and Texas Gun Laws in Place

Mostly good but as always a mixed bag

The 2017 Update for The Arizona Gun Owner's Guide will be posted in downloadable form here.

The four main new gun laws may not affect gun owners immediately, but protections are now in place against expected attempts at future infringements. All 50 states should have similar protection in place. The Arizona versions can serve as a model.

1. Firearm Tracking Ban -- It's now a class 6 felony to require a person to use any sort of electronic firearm tracking system. That includes devices on the firearm and centralized or decentralized databases. Includes electronic systems "used to locate or control the use of a firearm," which could include so-called personalized guns (sometimes erroneously called smart guns). People could opt in if they want (they did with LoJack), and there are exceptions for authorities. A not perfect but really good plan. Read more.

2. Police Protection -- Cops now get special treatment whether on duty or off. Many protections only applied in the performance of official duty, that's been removed. An assault on an officer, on or off duty, if done with "malice" is aggravated assault. A direct result of the orchestrated Fergusson, Mo. black riots. Includes a gun snatch from an officer, what Michael Brown was doing when shot (misreported to this day by most "news" outlets. USA Today recently said shot "during a scuffle."). Read more.

3. State Preemption -- Continuous struggle to keep local fiefdoms from finding creative new infringements. This amendment basically stops them from banning their employees and contractors from having firearms in their vehicles, or on their real property (homes). Read more.

4. Private Property Transfers -- Beautifully written roadblock to prevent tyrannical actors who are seeking to force gun transfers to fall under federal control or registry. Elegant -- it doesn't mention firearm in any way -- a person cannot be required to check a database before the private sale, gift, donation, or any other transfer of any personal property, and no third party can be required to be involved in such transfers. Introduce this in your state. Read more.

Stop legislators’ elitist plan to arm themselves

They get gun rights -- you don’t

Congress has so far refused to move a bill, HR 38, which would end the civil-rights ban on honest citizens carrying firearms nationwide. It was introduced soon after president Trump was elected (January 3, 2017, assigned to the House Judiciary committee Jan. 12, no further action).

The bill would lift the controversial and apparently unconstitutional restrictions on legally carrying firearms outside a person’s home state. It would apply to anyone who can legally possess firearms under federal law and their home state’s law, including legislators and the general public, with conditions. Among the generally favorable conditions (http://www.gunlaws.com/newstuff.htm), Constitutional Carry would be recognized. One congressman is suggesting a new approach.

Now Congress may consider a different fast-track bill instead, H.R. 2940, proposed by representative Mo Brooks, (R-Ala.) that would grant legislators power to carry firearms nationwide and exclude the public. The bill has been described in the media but Rep. Brooks’ office notes the bill has not been publicly posted yet. Media reports are notoriously inaccurate when describing gun legislation. http://www.gunlaws.com/NewsAccuracy.htm

The likelihood of finding enough political capital for passing two similar firearms-carry bills is vanishingly small, experts say. The reasoning behind the new bill, according to Brooks on TV, is that elected congressional officials are at risk of attack and need to be armed. But members of Congress are statistically quite safe, when compared to the 30,000 American citizens who are murdered every year. Why the congressman believes there is a risk difference is unclear. Online reactions to the proposal have been vitriolic and called elitist.

Jesse Watters, who interviewed Brooks on the FOX News network, failed to ask him about the apparent lack of equal treatment under the law, if legislators get special exclusions from the bans that deny rights to the rest of Americans.

Watters instead praised the idea live on TV, and promised to follow its progress. There was no mention of the existing bill which would accomplish the same purpose, and empower the entire nation for defense against crime, or against the jihad currently being waged here and abroad. Brooks told Watters, “I wouldn’t have to worry about what the laws are,” a statement infuriating to gun-rights advocates. When asked in an informal survey, one high-profile political respondent who refused to be identified, replied, “It’s one of the things the British did that ignited the Revolution.”

The Freedom to Carry Bill, HR 38,  is described here:
http://www.gunlaws.com/newstuff.htm
 

Guns for me but not for you



Legislators propose to arm themselves, exclude public

“I wouldn’t have to worry about what the laws are,” Representative Brooks says.


CONTACT: Alan Korwin, Author, Gun Laws of America
602-996-4020

As seen in



http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/29/concealed-carry-for-congress-but-not-for-you/

Read my other work at The Daily Caller:
http://dailycaller.com/author/alankorwin/

 

In a “more guns” bill that alarmed even pro-gun-rights activists, representative Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) has proposed arming federal legislators to the exclusion of regular citizens. An existing bill, HR 38, to make the firearm-carry permits of normal American citizens valid nationally, has languished in Congress since the election of Donald Trump. It would accomplish the same thing, freeing legislators to arm themselves, without excluding the public.

  Motivated by the attempted assassination of republican officials playing baseball in Virginia, the proposed Brooks bill would exempt elected federal officials from controversial and possibly unconstitutional laws banning their right to keep and bear arms in the nation’s capitol -- and anywhere else in the nation. The general public has suffered under such bans for decades, and has been assaulted and murdered by the tens of thousands annually while unarmed and defenseless.  

The U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment requires equal treatment under the law, which representative Brooks’ bill would ignore, in arming his own colleagues and omitting the rest of the nation. Similar discriminatory laws have been overturned in the past. According to statements he made during an interview with Jesse Watters on FOX News, “I wouldn’t have to worry about what the laws are,” indicating he would be free to exercise his rights anywhere. The rest of the public would remain under draconian barriers to possessing firearms for self defense, or any other legitimate purpose.  

When asked by Watters about arguments from anti-gun-rights activists and democratic legislators who say it would be too dangerous to let legislators be armed, since they might commit crimes or shoot people without cause, Brooks replied that’s “a ludicrous and inconsequential argument.”  

Facts back him up, since the battle for gun rights has constantly confronted this line of thought, and the facts never bear it out. Every time a new firearm-carry law comes into effect, imagined fears of upcoming bloodbaths dominate news coverage, but the projected horrors turn out to be delusions that do not occur. Retractions are never seen, contributing to widely recognized journalism-credibility problems.  

According to a Beltway lobbyist familiar with the situation, Brooks may have spoken in the heat of the moment, forgetful or unaware that HR 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 would accomplish the same purpose, without excluding the law-abiding public. That bill, sometimes referred to as Freedom To Carry (FTC), exempts lawful gun owners whose rights to carry are intact, with some conditions, against gun bans that start at state borders. Constitutional Carry is included in that bill. http://www.gunlaws.com/ConstitutionalCarryIndex.htm  

In effect, congressman Brooks, his staffers, and anyone else in America whose Second Amendment rights are whole could be protected under HR 38. The clamor to enact HR 38 has grown since the baseball assassination attempt.  

Because the political capital may not be available to enact two federal firearm-carry bills, one for an elite group and the other for the people, the smart course of action would be to put all energy behind the national Freedom To Carry bill, according to experts contacted for this news release.  

###

[Backgrounder:  Alan Korwin's Scottsdale-based Bloomfield Press, founded in 1988, is the largest publisher and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Our website, GunLaws.com, features a free national directory to gun laws and relevant contacts in all states and federally, along with our unique line of related books and DVDs. Gun Laws of America for news-media review is available on request, call 1-800-707-4020. Our authors are available for interview, call to schedule. Call for cogent positions on gun issues, informed analysis on proposed laws, talk radio that lights up the switchboard, fact sheets and position papers.  As we always say, “It doesn’t make sense to own a gun and not know the rules.”

A Fox News for the Left?

Left-wing news outlets keep failing

Will require "serious funding" or it won't work

Columbia Journalism Review reports


The lamestream media told you:

Columbia Journalism Review, a formerly highly respected centrist commentator on the state of journalism, and now an integral part of the left-wing media produced at an alt-left college, is incredulous at the inability of leftists to maintain healthy numbers in cable and talk radio, where conservative voices hold sway.

CJR, March, 2017 -- "Between the nation's number one cable news network, a vibrant talk radio circuit led by Rush Limbaugh, and a bevy of websites ranging from the "alt-right" nationalism of Breitbart to the conspiratorial fever-swamp of Infowars, conservative media has found sustained success in ways liberal outlets have consistently failed to match. In a piece co-published by CJR and The Nation, Mark Hertsgaard argues that the left needs to find a response. https://www.cjr.org/special_report/creating-a-fox-news-for-the-left.php?Daily

[Hertsgaard overlooks the virtual lock liberals maintain on print, broadcast TV and film.]

"It is past time to build a countervailing independent-media infrastructure -- not to mimic Fox and Friends' delivery of propaganda disguised as news or to slavishly carry water for any political party or cause, but rather to bring professional, truth-telling journalism to large numbers of Americans, many of whom trust neither Fox and Friends nor the mainstream media to tell the truth," Hertsgaard writes.

[Hertsgaard overlooks the delivery of propaganda disguised as news from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC and CBS, or how they slavishly carry water for any political party or cause -- if it's left wing.]

"It's not as though the left hasn't tried (see below), but any attempt to replicate the success of Breitbart, let alone Fox News, requires serious funding and the sort of breakthrough success that has so far eluded liberal outlets."

[Hertsgaard recognizes that serious funding, and not free-market results, is needed.]

CJR summarizes some of the failed almost laughable attempts, which confound the left, including the failure of Air America, with an obituary from the New York Times.

Air America, the long-suffering progressive talk radio network, abruptly shut down on Thursday, bowing to what it called a "very difficult economic environment." NYT 1/21/10 "It would be a shame if the world sees the failure of Air America as representing the failure of progressive talk radio," said Michael Harrison, the editor of Talkers Magazine, a talk radio publication. Company's chairman, in an unusual statement for a left winger, said, "our company cannot escape the laws of economics." The broadcaster had a role in the careers of Rachel Maddow and Al Franken, both of whom hosted shows there before it failed. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/business/media/22radio.html?_r=1&

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

CJR and this writer lack even a glimmer of awareness that the left’s continued failure here has something to do with their audience, and its inability to hold up their end of the news bargain, not the content. If you’ve debated with these people, you’ve found they can’t think in a straight line, or at least not for very long, they have trouble connecting dots, change subjects whenever anything gets even slightly uncomfortable, can’t grasp concepts greater than a triangle and sometimes not that.

Listen to the few left-wing outlets out there -- it’s like listening to Bizarro in a Superman comic. The pathetic thing is people who have this mental incapacity tend to congregate together, and you get the heart of that party -- and listenership. Of course it fails. Gather enough and yes you can elect candidates -- to everyone’s detriment -- but run a financially sound, audience-dependent information-based broadcast... different problem.

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 Gunlaws.com

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!