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

« December 2011 | Main | March 2012 »

Pro Gun President

The lamestream media told you:

President Obama hasn't turned out to be nearly as bad on firearms as gun owners and the powerful gun lobby feared. This proves once again that these paranoid gun toters are full of baloney and afraid of their shadows. In fact, Mr. Obama has signed some pro-gun bills and basically left the Second Amendment alone, to the chagrin of huge swaths of his supporters.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Obama's record on gun-rights is atrocious, as a simple look at the facts shows. While some issues sit in near-permanent limbo, like interstate recognition of permits or rights restoration, the current occupant of the White House has allowed his administration to attack gun ownership in subtle and low visibility ways. Sarah Brady, as you probably already know, said he told her this was his "under the radar" approach. Why would he lie to someone like her?

-- A million or more fine M1 Korean-era carbines are available for shipment to collectors and enthusiasts in the United States. These are in Cold-War stockpiles in Korea, which would like to unload the valuable merchandise. The White House and State Dept. have stonewalled the effort.

-- Congress just passed an omnibus bill that prohibits spending money on lobbying for gun control and funding gun-control studies through the National Institute of Health. The president, in a signing statement, basically said these provisions do not apply to him. ("I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient" (referring to himself four times in one sentence).

-- He moved to ban target practice on huge tracts of deserted public land, where outdoor marksmanship had been practiced safely for as long as anyone can remember. He was rebuffed only by enormous and swift public outcry, showing that your voice does matter when it's used quickly and loudly enough. The fact that he "didn't" ban shooting does not make him pro rights on the issue.

-- Obama and Hillary (watch out for people who prefer not to use their full names) were both vigorously promoting the need for more gun-control laws, because of the "iron river" of guns causing mayhem in Mexico. Then just by coincidence, after it turned out that 90% of the drug cartel hardware did not come from the U.S., thoroughly undermining the claim, the Justice Department began a campaign of supplying guns to the cartels, which helped "improve" the numbers (from the administration's twisted standpoint). Caught red handed, the administration has circled the wagons and refused to let real information seep out (but that didn't work real well, it's now a matter of time to see who is taken down by GunSmuggleGate). The next congressional interrogation of AG Eric Holder is set for Feb. 2.

-- When fury over Fast and Furious grew large enough to float a vote of no confidence in Congress with 90 co-sponsors, Holder declared it's because he and his boss are black, refusing to acknowledge the crimes that led to the ongoing reprimand.

-- Hillary, with full support from the White House, is pursuing a massive gun-rights grab by the UN, being drafted in secret (because people will enjoy it so). This is not what you call standing up for your rights, even if the "news" media tells you it is. We have people working on the inside scoop, will hopefully have news on this before the draft is released. Expect the scat to hit the air circulator when it does.

-- The newly named nominee for the BATFE is a long time gun-control advocate, Andrew Traver.

-- Two Supreme Court nominees, now confirmed for life to the Bench, are ardent advocates of gun control. One of them, Sonia Sotomayor,  signed on to the dissent in McDonald v. Chicago that basically says you have no right to keep and bear arms for self defense.

-- According to FOX News, "Administration officials say they are working to develop the gun-safety measures promised" after a maniac killed people at a Tucson political rally. No one knows what these might be, and the administration isn't saying.

The Uninvited Ombudsman remains skeptical, when the lamestream media repeats its mantra that the man in the White House is moderate on guns. He's a moderate all right, but only if "yes" means "no." And since turning meaning upside down is a tactic of the international communists, who we already defeated, it can't be so.

The head of communist Korea, communist China, communist Cuba, the four countries in South America led by avowed communists, the avowed communists working with the current administration who did not undergo FBI background checks before getting their positions, and the 1.5 billion people currently living under socialism around the globe could not be reached for comment.

Thanks to scholar and author John Lott for so many leads for this story. Get on his FOX News blog for some of the most intelligent news and commentary you are likely to find.
http://www.foxnews.com/archive/author/john-lott/index.html

Hunting With Silencers

The lamestream media told you:

The movement afoot to allow people to hunt with silencers is a bad idea. A bill has been introduced in at least Arizona to allow such dangerous activity. Risks include no warning to other people in the woods if guns make no noise, it does not give wild game a fighting chance, and more.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Once again we can see where, if government would just get out of the way, an entire industry can blossom. If the ban on your freedom to buy and use these devices is lifted, sales of the tools will expand, manufacturers will have more work, new models will be created and produced to meet demand... business will flourish if government just gets out of the way. The market is between 10 and 20 million Americans who hunt for sport and food. Even the government will get money, since they extract a $200 tax on each item sold. Who else tolerates a tax as large as a (basic model) ought to cost?

To set the record straight, Larry Grupp, author of The Worldwide Gun Owner's Guide, notes:

England, the UK, New Zealand, Finland, Falkland Islands and France all
encourage hunters to use silencers.  Mostly it's a health issue, they don't want
shooters to go deaf.  France's encouragement principally centers
around using silencers on the range -- as a courtesy to other shooters.

Please keep in mind that silencer is a poor word choice.  These devices
do not really silence.  Firing anything with a silencer past a .22 cal rimfire
produces a loud, noticeable pneumatic thump.  Won't damage hearing but
definitely recognizable to folks around the shooter.

Also, bullets past the speed of sound (c. 1,126 ft. per second, in dry air at 68 °F,
which is 768 mph, or about one mile in five seconds*, thanks Wikipedia) "crack"
as they pass stationary objects.  As a young man on the farm, I recall a
demonstration of a military grade modifier on an '03 30-06 Springfield rifle
fired down a rail siding past rows of old telegraph poles.

Strange, as the bullet passed various wooden poles creating a loud crack till
about 500 yards out when the bullet fell to below the speed of sound and
became silent.

Larry

*You can use this to calculate the distance of lightning -- start timing when you see the flash, stop timing when you hear the thunder, divide the number of seconds by five, and the result is the mileage from the lightning to you.

Toys Aren't Weapons

The lamestream media told you:

Two students charged with bringing weapons to school
By Jim Jaworski, Tribune reporter

Police arrested two Julian Middle School students who were found in possession of weapons on school property, Oak Park Elementary District 97 officials said this week.

A sixth-grade boy on Thursday reportedly brought a small metal cap gun to school. School staff and the police resource officer confiscated the weapon after other students notified them, district officials said. The 12-year-old was arrested at Julian and charged with misdemeanor aggravated assault.

“He showed it to some students and displayed it in a threatening manner to others,” said Cmdr. LaDon Reynolds.

While both the district and police initially reported that the item was a starter pistol, a small firearm that shoots blanks, Reynolds said that, after they were able to examine the item, it was actually a metal cap gun that closely resembles a firearm. The gun only uses caps that create noise and was not loaded, so Reynolds said no one was in any danger.

“While I am incredibly disappointed by the news of these incidents, I am pleased to report that nobody was harmed in either one,” Superintendent Al Roberts said in a statement. “I also want to applaud everyone involved for the effective way they handled these matters. Their quick, decisive action helped ensure the continued safety of our students, staff and community.”

School officials also are conducting their own investigation into the incidents.

“The district is expected to hand down the strictest discipline allowed by board policy,” district spokesman Chris Jasculca said.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Dear Mr. Jaworski,

I have no doubt that the officials you quote in your story referred repeatedly to the "weapon" this child had, but as a reporter, you have a duty to accuracy. Accurately reporting false statements is not accuracy, and misleads your readers. A cap gun is a toy, not a weapon, by any definition you can find. A weapon can harm a person. A toy is for child's play. A cap gun is no more dangerous than a football.

With news distortion on firearms issues so high, it behooves you to be especially careful when covering such stories, to avoid the appearance of or actual bias. In the interest of journalistic integrity, you should ask your editors to run a short correction, such as, "[Ref: the article] The paper mistakenly referred to a child's cap-gun toy, as did people quoted in the story, as a weapon. It is a toy. We regret the error."

Erroneous tales like this one only serve to support the now widely circulating rumor that communists -- the old hobgoblin we all thought we defeated -- are actually at work quietly subverting American values, by attacking traditions like firearms ownership to further their goals, and capturing the minds of educators, police, the news media and others with mindless propaganda like this. Please don't support such nonsense. You know a cap gun is a toy. Make the correction.

Alan.

No reply has been received.
jjaworski@tribune.com
Permission to pile on granted

Diplomatic Carry

Discretionary carry

May issue carry

Shall issue carry

Right to Carry

Discreet Carry

Freedom to Carry

Constitutional Carry

Diplomatic Carry


The Second Second Amendment


by Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman


Officials travel armed. When a contingent of our officials visits any other country, they bring armed personnel in classic right-to-bear-arms manner. Life is dangerous and the ability to protect yourself is a reasonable and prudent thing, a fundamental human right of existence, a moral imperative. So they go armed. It's only rational. Hillary and similar bring along enough firepower that if some of their group go one way while some head off in another, they're both covered.

The same is true in reverse. When an ambassador from Trashcanistan comes to the United States, discreetly armed bodyguards accompany the party at all times, "laws to the contrary notwithstanding." That's lawyer-speak for "their right to carry supersedes any other rules," or in plainer English, "We're above those laws." The ambassador might decide to personally carry too. I'm guessing Hillary does not.

There's this whole "second system" of gun possession and carry here domestically, another layer of rules on top of the common ones you must follow, operating quietly with people in the know cooperating.

Where are the laws for this exception to every gun law on the U.S. books? How does this special class of people exempt themselves from laws controlling the rest of us?

No one is harmed by their exemption. In fact, community safety increases, because assaults on those armed people are naturally deterred, even defensible if needed. Should we the people maybe have Diplomatic Carry too? Is a diplomat's life truly at more risk -- or worth more -- than any "commoner"? How does this comply with equal protection under the law?

Local authorities understand implicitly that these armed folks aren't going to randomly shoot people, or settle arguments with gunfire, the same as you and me when we're armed. They enjoy proper respect (even if they come from regimes that don't deserve it). We on the other hand have rights denied haphazardly, even with Constitutional Carry. As good as it is, Constitutional Carry is not enough.

Americans need and deserve the next step, Diplomatic Carry.

The body politic moves slowly. After several decades of experience, police nationwide understand and operate just fine within a framework of millions of people traveling armed. As the number of people carrying arms for crime control has increased, assaultive crimes have decreased. The media generally calls this "a surprising decrease in crime that has the experts baffled." All these people are walking around armed, expressly to forestall crime, and the media can't understand why crime has dropped. But I digress.

Oh sure, armed forces within the U.S. -- from local police to secretive agents our government is now filled with -- keep a watchful eye on the armed diplomats, as well they should. They also provide backup in the event of need. The same as for us.

But in the big picture, diplomats have less need for an ever-present armed escort than the public. A rare few diplomats face death at the hands of the mobs. Thousands of citizens are murdered each year. Who needs protection more?

The freedom of Diplomatic Carry, a concept many of us can easily grasp, is mind boggling to the great unwashed. So insulated from any truth about firearms, victims of television and the government-run school system, they have imbedded ignorance that is hard to shake. Destructively misinformed kids and teachers compound the problem. I digress again.

Now, Diplomatic Carry is not going to happen overnight. Many voices will be raised in objection to such freedom.
And unfortunately, some opposition will come from people who consider themselves firearms enthusiasts. Establishing everyone's uninfringed freedom to carry is scary, at least to some. But that's OK. Real freedom is a house high on a hill.

Diplomatic Carry is a paradigm shift. A window into a world that could be, and ought to be, a lofty goal. Your right to your life and its protection cannot morally be denied. It is denied only by force, and there is only one viable countermeasure to force unfortunately, in this best of all possible worlds, and that's countervailing force. I don't like it, but there it is.

Diplomatic Carry is a new level of autonomy, of personal sovereignty. It raises the bar. In this country, the people are the sovereigns and the government is the servant. How do you justify the servants carrying arms if the masters cannot?
The only consistent position for free people to take is this:

Anything short of Diplomatic Carry is infringement.

I am in the process of dissecting the legal framework that enables Diplomatic Carry, and modeling an approach for extending those principles to the public. Conceptually this is sound. Pragmatically it is an uphill climb, but as Americans we know that anything can be climbed. I'll have early results soon in my blog, PageNine.org. Sign up to stay informed.

Copyright 2012 Alan Korwin
http://www.gunlaws.com
Permission to circulate granted

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!