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!


« March 2013 | Main | May 2013 »

New Twist on Mental Illness and Gun Debate


The Most Dangerous of All Phobias

by Bruce N. Eimer, Ph.D., ABPP

and Alan Korwin, Author, Gun Laws of America

First in a series

Is Hoplophobia Real?

Copyright 2013 Bruce N. Eimer and Alan Korwin

Abstract: Hoplophobia, the morbid fear of guns, is a real, extremely dangerous, widespread and clinically recognizablecomplex specific phobia with a number of unique characteristics, described. It has caused and continues to cause grievous harm in America. Dr. Sarah Thompson, M.D., author of two seminal papers on gun phobia, claims hoplophobia is little more than name calling and rare, points we dispute.

Because one of the avoidance mechanisms of this phobia uniquely involves politics, its effects and importance are greater than for other phobias. Co-morbidities include suppressed rage, post-traumatic stress disorder, delusional disorder and panic disorder, with implications for society at large. Some behaviors heretofore written off because they seemed irrational may be explained.

Continue reading "New Twist on Mental Illness and Gun Debate" »

Should Pro-gun ads be allowed at Phoenix bus stops?

Front Page News:

"Should pro-gun ads be allowed at Phoenix bus stops?"

asks the Arizona Republic


Censorship Case Advances

"Surprising" Friend of the Court brief filed in support of Korwin's case
April 25, 2013

It made the front page of the B Section on Sunday: "Unlikely allies in firearm ad case" (an accurate headline would be "Unlikely allies ingun-safety ad case" but what can you expect from the "news" these days; we're not advertising firearms). The Goldwater Institute is suing Phoenix for censoring our advertisements, which Phoenix tore down without warning.

The 1st Amendment free-speech issues, and 14th Amendment due process and equal protection violations, attracted nationwide attention. We were just joined in the case by one of the greatest First Amendment advocates there is, the name you know, someone not everyone thinks of as a friend all the time, wait for it... the American Civil Liberties Union.

When it comes to free speech, the ACLU has few equals. They are certainly on the right side of things on this one. I'll have a full report on this soon. (I've been saying that too much lately, a sign that I have too much on my plate.)

Here is the Goldwater Institute news release, followed by a comment of my own. The Arizona Republic's article follows.


Continue reading "Should Pro-gun ads be allowed at Phoenix bus stops?" »

"Background gun-check records are saved."

The so-called "background check" bill is really about gun registration --
ultimate and imminent registration of every gun and gun owner in America.

The mandatory paper records are saved -- nobody denies that.
Federal agents use those all the time.

The electronic records have virtually no controls on them.
They go into a system designed as a recording device.
This bill vastly expands the electronic records federal agents will collect.


Read the bottom of page 27 of the bill* (below at the asterisk, read it, it's killer, very short) and you tell me if you think that language stops the federal government from recording, storing, collating, compiling, distributing, securing, retrieving, integrating, merging, using or... backing up its records forever. It doesn't. Show me an audit trail. You can't. It's not there.

It doesn't even limit the FBI or BATFE in this regard. It only restricts gun dealers and gun owners. It is a complete farce.

Show me where they can't go around and just use all the Form 4473 gun-registration papers you fill out that every dealer must permanently keep -- as they are doing right now and have been doing for years. You can't. This bill allows the federal government to do almost anything it wants with records of you and your firearms, and massively expands the records it can collect -- even though it can't collect absolutely every record at this time, yet.

Failure to give them all the records they currently demand under this bill, even by accident (and there are plenty of easy ways to innocently make an error), would put you in prison. The 15-year prison term they threw in for creating a federal registry is a meaningless smokescreen.

The bill requires you to get a background check to buy firearms from people you meet at a gun show, but doesn't require anyone to do a background check just because you want one. Dealers would have plenty of reasons not to do such a check -- like having paying customers, liability, fee caps, and pressure from a sometimes rogue federal agency like BATFE. That would mean the end of freedom at gun shows. This is something Sen. John McCain has been working on for more than a decade. McCain was quoted by the Associated Press today as "very favorably disposed" to this Manchin-Toomey-Schumer gun-infringement bill (meaning he likes it). This bill is totally unacceptable.

And what's that bit at the end of that section that says medical- and health-insurance-company owned guns are exempt? Say what? Where's the media on that? I'll do a more detailed report on this soon.  Or someone should -- who's planning what that got that in there?

The bill offers gun owners some trinkets -- "sweeteners" they're called. Like being able to buy a firearm in any state you are in, not just your state of residence. That would remove a grotesque infringement in place since the 1968 Gun Control Act. It was apparently squeezed in there by a gun-rights group ( now taking a lot of heat for cooperating with the anti-rights bigots. That's a good trinket, true, and I might accept that -- but only as a stand-alone bill, certainly never as a condition for gun registration.

Do you think the gun grabbers would go for that? They only accepted Retail Freedom to get their tyranny enacted. There are other "sweeteners," like restoration of rights, and other things America should have -- but only as stand-alone bills, never as bait to allow gun registration. Manchin-Toomey-Schumer must be rejected outright. The idea of making tyranny acceptable by offering trinkets is absurd and must be killed.

It's far more important to look at the underpinning of this scheme, the story behind the story the public loudspeaker omits entirely.

Why are we even having this discussion? Because a madman killed children in a kindergarten in a corner of the nation.  That's really the only reason.

This led Dianne Feinstein, Charles Schumer, and the president of the United States to begin a campaign to ban certain firearms we own by brand name and looks, our ammunition magazines by size, to restrict public gun shows, and introduce gun registration and background checks on all innocent Americans as a response. They are dancing in the blood of victims, to advance a monstrous agenda, a game they have played for decades.

They can call it background checks all they want.
It's about gun registration (and other illegal infringements).

And gun registration itself is a false flag,
and the media doesn't know that.
Most of the public doesn't either.

Think -- A gun list would not have saved or solved any of the mass killings that have ignited these law-writing frenzies, right? Right. In no way whatsoever. So what do we need? At last, the right question.

Continue reading ""Background gun-check records are saved."" »



When I wrote (Page Nine No. 121) about all the glowing reports that a compromise had been reached in the so-called "background check" bill (the Manchin-Toomey deal), I noted that no one actually knew what was in the compromise so-called "background check" bill being promoted. I was incorrect, as a sharp-eyed Page Nine reader pointed out.

The perpetrators of the scheme (Sen. Charles Schumer plus unnamed staffers), and their representatives doing the press conference (Senators Manchin and Toomey) knew. Thanks for finding this mistake, Brookes. And now, of course, we all know. And it's not good. Funny, the press coverage was so glowing. I have posted the draft bill here. It starts with 11 pages for the $100 million grant from government to government you all heard about. See my report on the gun-registration bill below.

One other error deserves mention. The media, the bill's promoters, and even Mr. Obama, are virtually bragging that "90% of Americans support universal background checks," even though everyone in America knows that NO political issue in this country has 90% support, especially any gun issue.

Plus, the bill being promoted as a background-check bill is a gun-registration bill. Is that what the unnamed survey measured? Did the respondents support the $100 million giveaway, or even know that's what they were saying "yes" to? Of course not. Did they know a paperwork error means prison time? Of course not. The anti-rights people so desperately want to enact their gun grab they will propose absurd stories, and the media obediently promotes them without research or reason. The survey is a lie. The leadership is lying. The media has become an enemy of freedom. This is getting really bad.

"The Brady bill will make the streets of America so safe
that our nation's police will not even need to carry guns anymore."

William Jefferson Clinton, on TV, while signing the Brady bill in 1993, quoted in Sheriff Richard Mack's book, The Magic of Gun Control.

"When they're not lying they're just ignorant."
--Anonymous, speaking about political leaders.

"Nobody's seen a communist in over a decade!"

See former president Bill Clinton chastise republicans for alerting Congress about communism,
while introducing candidate Obama at a fund raising rally before the 2012 election,
to a room full of rich democrat contributors laughing and applauding!
Don't take my word for it, watch his lips for 36 seconds:

In other news:
Beyonce and Jay-Z are in trouble for visiting communist Cuba;
Communist North Korea is threatening to launch possibly nuclear missiles;
Communist China refuses to free escapees from N. Korean concentration camps;
Monument being built to dead communist Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez;
U.S. representative Barney Frank asks, "What's wrong with socialism anyway?"
Maoist and Stalinist communist party USA chapters have recruitment booths at Occupy Rallies;
John Birch Society, successfully maligned by enemies, continues lonely battle against domestic communists;
Hillary Clinton forms campaign committee for 2016 presidential bid, four years early

Meet me at the NRA Annual Meeting in Houston!

I'll be autographing books from 11 a.m. to noon, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, May 3-5,
at the GALCO GUNLEATHER booth. First 20 people in line get their book free.

You can also leave a message for me in the Press Room.

No time now for other important news:

-- More than 1,000,000 background checks since the system started have denied firearms to Americans, but almost none got trials. What this means is gun-rights denial by decree. Are these people actually guilty of anything? Or are their rights just taken away by a computer and some bureaucrat in a closet somewhere? I'll have the full breakdown next time.

-- More than 99,000 of these denials were for wanted fugitives. The fugitives were standing in front of dealers, had given up their addresses, signed papers, and were waiting around with the FBI on the phone... then were turned loose. Why would you want to do more of that?

-- What about the U.N.? I have the details on the U.N. effort to disarm America, and Mr. Obama's complicity in those actions, but the urgency in getting this report on the domestic enemies of gun rights prevents me from going into it at the present time. I'll do another Page Nine report soon, tell your friends to sign up at

-- The lawsuit to allow us to say "Guns Save Lives" in public is moving along, but who has time for tiny things like that with our own Senate attempting to register innocent gun owners? Maybe soon.

-- The bomb blasts in Boston have preempted all other news; five minutes on any news channel gives you all the news there is, the rest is idle speculation, talking heads, he said she said, endless loops of the little meaningful video footage available (the same on all stations), hundreds of repeated mentions of a Saudi national... the upshot is that this will obscure real news, especially of the effort to evaporate gun rights in the U.S. Senate, which will not cease its work -- even if the flag is flying at half staff. Who gave that order? Do you lower your flag if someone kills your people? Is that proper etiquette for the United States flag? I suspect not. But I digress. 

Gun Law Drafted in Secret

NOTE: Two senators announced today (April 10, 2013) they have reached a "compromise" on so-called "universal background checks." This is a code word for universal gun registration.

A press announcement and the wording of a long new gun law are not the same thing. DO NOT BELIEVE any news media that treat them as the same.

I will read the bill when it is released. It has NOT been released. NO ONE knows what it says."News" reports are blowing smoke at you. They have no idea what's in the bill, drafted in secret.

When senator Schumer recently said his background bill "explicitly" states no registration he lied. It said no such thing. The Associated Press quoted him anyway. The "news" media in general has become a direct enemy of gun rights in this country. They violate every ethical principle there is when dealing with this subject.

I'm working on a report about the current background check system. It denies people the right to obtain firearms without a trial or due process. Despite more than one million supposedly legitimate denials, less than 150 were prosecuted in a two-year period according to the government's own numbers, with an unknown number of convictions. Who are these people? A bureaucracy set up to deny rights with little oversight and virtually no results is extremely suspect. More later.

For now, look what is happening in this legislation just enacted.

Consider the goal. Will this save children in kindergarten classes?
Or is something more sinister at work?



Bans Firearms Public Already Owns

State retains power to own all especially deadly guns

Forces federal agents to either violate state law or deny civil rights

Effectively immediately

That's not the way networks covered it, is it, but it's the identical story

by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America


Can you imagine what a tough uphill struggle the anti-gun-rights people would have if the "news" media wasn't falling all over itself to support the anti-rights side?


Connecticut just drafted 138 pages of gun law basically in secret, enacted it before it could be read and digested by those who signed it -- and certainly not by the public it pretends to legitimately control -- and in doing so ended up requiring federally licensed agents in the state to violate federal law, or flatly deny citizens their rights. Just on practical grounds this is a disaster. But that's as if nothing, according to leading experts.

Legislators who draft laws in secret are behaving like the king's men who ignited the American Revolution. They can expect no less if they continue down such a dark road, many experts say.

Continue reading "Gun Law Drafted in Secret" »

Federal Stingray Exposed

The lamestream media told you:


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

At an ACLU presentation about privacy last week, I heard from one of their attorneys representing them in federal court. There may only be nine amendments in their Bill of Rights, but they're pretty good on some issues, and limiting federal power concerning privacy is sometimes one of them. Gotta take your allies where you find them.

The important part is this. Privacy and copyright and patent law lag way behind technology and will for a long while. Anything left in The Cloud (like anything you have in a gmail account) for more than 180 days is deemed "abandoned" under the small text no one reads governing cell phones, laptops, all apps, pretty much everything, according to their attorneys.

The feds and the big firms take this to mean they can harvest it all and use it as they see fit, go gripe all you want, according to the knowledgeable ACLU attorney arguing this particularly amazing case they just came from in U.S. District court.

In the days when you downloaded stuff from a server and kept it locally this was not so much the case, so you owned it and controlled it (mostly). With The Cloud in the picture, this is no longer the case. So aside from the fact that anything you transmit is like an old-fashioned party-line telephone that people with know-how can snoop on, anything you keep in The Cloud is not solely yours if it's there for six months or more, they say. Go ahead and argue with me if it makes you feel more secure. Chuckle. Have a nice day. I'm just sayin'.

FWIW, this isn't even what their case was about. It seems the feds have been tapping everybody's cell phone, to track one individual, in an undisclosed radius, for three years, under a one-month search warrant, using a device called a Stingray. They know your location if you have a cell phone with you, in something up to a cell tower's radius (they won't reveal the full range).

The poor guy under surveillance has been in prison for five years now without a trial (it's a tax case) and the story goes downhill from there. The federal court was apparently very concerned with the 4th Amendment implications all over the case, and cloaked use of the device, and federal secrecy over the matter without court understanding or approval. Attorney Linda Lye was in from California for ACLU representing their interests, and she was in District court for three hours on what she said would normally by a 20-minute hearing.

Her description was rattling. The judge, in what she said was highly unusual, grilled the feds, who were evasive, obfuscatory and dumbfounded at some of the judge's questions. The suits huddled with each other before answering. He'd ask things like, why were you still working under a 30-day warrant. After some whispering they responded, what does "conclude" mean (I'm paraphrasing). These are the people we're supposed to trust with all the guns.

Closing Builds Business?

The lamestream media told you:

WASHINGTON (AP) - The financially struggling U.S. Postal Service said Wednesday it will stop delivering mail on Saturdays but continue to disburse packages six days a week, an apparent end-run around an unaccommodating Congress.

The service expects the Saturday mail cutback to begin the week of Aug. 5 and to save about $2 billion annually, said Postmaster General and CEO Patrick R. Donahoe. "Our financial condition is urgent," Donahoe told a press conference.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Only in government could the answer to declining revenues be to close for business one day per week. "If my business was hurting for money, the last thing I would do would close," said seven thousand businessmen interviewed for this story. "I would extend my hours, stay open late, offer extra services, cut prices, anything but close for a day and expect that to increase my margins and make business better," every single one of them said.

Leftists and bureaucrats applauded the move, displaying a total lack of understanding of an olden principle called capitalism, the engine that generated the most affluent society the world has ever known, the only proven method for lifting people out of poverty.

This pointed to a basic fact of business that every businessperson knows, that government does not, and supporters of government have never learned -- business creates wealth, government consumes wealth. If you're consuming wealth, it makes sense to shut down before you go bankrupt. If you're generating wealth, you need to stay open to make more.

See the story on how this works

Schumer Offers Nothing (oh, the irony)

The lamestream media told you:

According to published reports (AP, 3/14/13), Sen. Charles Schumer, speaking about his proposed background-check bill S.374, said, "The bill explicitly says there is no registration, explicitly says no confiscation."

Schumer Offers Nothing (oh, the irony)

A number of Page Nine readers misunderstood my recent offer to Mr. Schumer (though most got it), when I suggested we take him up on this part of his plan. We'll have nothing to do with the so-called background check part, because that's just a coverup for gun registration and everyone knows that. But the no-confiscation and no-registration part might be a good idea, let's see a bill for that part, and maybe agree at least there. I don't think that's what he expected, but why not try to hold him to his own words.

Now for the irony. His bill says nothing of the sort.
There are no explicit, implicit or smoke signals dealing with a restriction on gun confiscations or registration. We can only assume the Associated Press got it wrong, played along, failed to read the bill, took Schumer at his word, misquoted, misheard, quoted someone else, hey I'm running out of excuses here.

Even if it's in there somehow and I missed it (the bill does it's deeds in only 15 pages), we all know by now that a Schumery statement in a bill such as "There shall be no such act..." is meaningless tripe, lets the government walk, and must be coupled with punishment to count. "Anyone who acts thus shall pay..." is where the teeth are. Make it comitatus law or legislators are lying, it's that simple. If they mean it, they can say it, no problem. The idea of prison terms for actual or attempted confiscations or registrations remain sound.

I think what threw some people was the headline, designed to attract the media's attention.
Which it did.

The only part of Schumer's plan that gun owners might accept,
depending on the final draft, would be arresting politicians for infringement.
A cool word we should be using more often.


The original letter to the editor (it got a lot of ink nationwide):

Gun Owners Could Back Part of Schumer's Plan

Dear Editor,

According to published reports (AP, 3/14/13), Sen. Charles Schumer, speaking about his proposed background-check bill, said, "The bill explicitly says there is no registration, explicitly says no confiscation." It's good that Mr. Schumer put this on the table, it's a step in the right direction.

The firearms community might accept this, in principle, with slightly different wording. It's a question of laws with teeth. What if, instead of saying "no gun registration," Schumer's bill said, "Anyone who creates or attempts to create any sort of gun registration shall go to prison."

Think of it as constitutional comitatus law -- law with teeth that holds officials accountable, instead of laws that merely make statements (like Mr. Schumer's draft). The rewrite is modeled after our posse comitatus law that has worked so well for a century and a half.

Similarly, instead of "explicitly" saying no confiscation, let it say, "Anyone who confiscates or attempts to confiscate firearms (or ammo or accessories) that the public bears shall go to prison, too. And pay serious fines." Mr. Schumer's noble assurance would be met.

I'll bet the pro-rights community might support Mr. Schumer along those lines, and we'd have at least partial agreement at last. Let's work together for reasonable bipartisan compromise. No registration and no confiscation, under penalty of law. It's just common sense. Honest legislators should have no reason to object.

Note: Because the NICS background-check system is inherently a registration-prone model, the registration-free BIDS model should get serious consideration at this point in time.

Alan Korwin

Voting's Not Working

The lamestream media told you:

According to the latest surveys, Congress has an approval rating somewhere between 9 and 15%. The re-election rate for incumbents in the 2012 election was a scorching 91%, higher by far than the margin any individual official every obtains.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

That does not make any sense. I'm not looking for an explanation here. I'm just pointing out that something is severely wrong. I don't want this disjoint to slip by. The election process is not working. Is "Give them the vote and tell them they're free" actually happening before our very eyes? Whatever rolls through your mind to explain, or more likely rationalize this phenomenon, something ain't right. Voting isn't working the way it's supposed to.

Communist China Cyberattacking U.S.

The lamestream media told you:

Mandiant reports that 141 cyberattacks originate in China, Feb. 19, 2013. In front page news, the U.S. cyber-security firm has publicly accused...

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

When this ran last month it was very old news, having been reported worldwide and followed closely for years.

According to my sources (hardly the nation's height of cyber-security), warehouse-sized buildings in communist China (a brutal totalitarian dictatorship archenemy of America bent our annihilation, not the pleasant sounding neutral "China" term the lamestream prefers to use), do nothing but probe our computer infrastructure, attack us digitally, steal secrets from our government and industry daily, launch digital attacks by the thousand per second (you read that right, and we do the same to them), and we have known about it all along.

The question really is, why did Mandiant, in cooperation with the political leadership, working with the lapdog media, place this on the nation's front pages and lead TV stories when they did? Was it really that important to name the group publicly (Unit 61398 of the "People's Liberation Army")? What was really afoot there, and how do you get such great media cooperation? Wouldn't you like to have that?

The irony is that our enemy communist China, who is our friend China who makes all that great affordable Walmart merchandise, is attacking our computers and harming our big corporations, who are greedy capitalists and therefore evil and aren't people, and who are now our allies because they are being attacked by our friend who is now our enemy.
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!