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 2014 | Main | May 2014 »

Obama Motivates, Funds "Behavioral" Scientists

"Whoever controls people's minds controls everything."

"BRAIN" Program Designed to Physically Modify Behavior

The lamestream media told you:

According to a recent report, "The BRAIN Initiative" (Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies), could surpass the work of presidents Roosevelt (Manhattan Project for the atom bomb, 1942-1945, $26 billion in 2013 dollars, 100,000+ people); Kennedy (men on the moon, 1963-1969, $134 billion, 400,000+ people); and Clinton (the human genome project, 1990-1993, $4.6 billion, "thousands" of people).

And it could be the greatest legacy of the Obama administration, they say.

Though initial funding, announced on April 2, 2013, is small [Note: $100 million is now "small"; Wikipedia suggests it's $300 million per year for 10 years], increases are expected, and the private sector is doing well-funded parallel work to unravel the secret workings of the human brain and mind.

The White House description of what they're doing includes how Obama: "will direct his Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues to explore the ethical, legal and societal implications raised," by this and similar projects.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

According to reports, Obama's greatest achievement (that's what they call it) -- but potentially most serious threat to freedom and The American Way -- may be his slightly below-radar science project, to map the entire human brain and exercise control over how it works. I'm not making this up.

"News" outlets somehow failed to mention the brain-control aspect of the program, even though it is part of the openly public record and plan. A Science News report in mid-February brought it back to light.

Presented on its surface as a way to cure disease, ease human suffering and advance the boundaries of human knowledge, the dark side of the project is immediately obvious. This is marginally recognized by the promoters of the plan, from Obama with his promise to review the ethics and societal impact, to rank and file workers who can't figure out what name to give it so the public will more easily accept it.

A person would have to assume scientists are immune to imagination, have never seen a mind-control sci-fi movie, and have never watched a harmless science project turn into a horrific weapon. Only we the people think of such things.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is leading the research.


Their federal grant is the biggest so far. Created to avoid surprises like the Soviet launch of Sputnik, DARPA's mission includes developing new technologies for use by the military, and it also includes creating technological and strategic "surprises" for our enemies (their phrases). "Creating breakthrough technologies for national security is the mission of DARPA"(opening line of their mission statement).

The Wikipedia entry on the BRAIN Initiative is surprisingly short, q.v. According to Science News (2/22/14), "Before doctors can fix the brain, scientists must first understand how it works." Under any federal administration, not just the current one, "fixing the brain" may not be all flowers and light.

A cubic centimeter (very small piece) is believed to store more information than the Library of Congress, and with trillions of connections, 100 billion cells and possibly a lot more than just wet physics and chemistry involved, the very souls of humanity are under this new government microscope. "Success would change the world," Science News states.

The magazine reports the initiative seeks "to develop new technologies to measure and manipulate the brain," and to "explore how cells and molecules create thought and behavior," and to "build powerful new weapons for neutralizing the pathological enemies of the brain and mind." This is perfectly harmless, coming from a benevolent government here to help you. A look at the language used might imply otherwise: "powerful new weapons," to "neutralize pathological enemies."

It's a paradox really. Advancing scientific understanding of ourselves is a good thing, with all sorts of benefits. The potential for abuse though, which may be built right in, is monstrous. Private and government agencies are already at odds over how to proceed, and are complaining the funding is inadequate. "It isn't clear what victory will look like on this project," one scientist laments, from the National Institute of Mental Health. Victory?

In mapping out goals, which are in disarray, the National Institute of Health, according to Science News, has nine preliminary ideas, including, "developing techniques that can eavesdrop on many neurons at the same time and allow scientists not just to listen in, but to change how the neurons behave."

DARPA, which is spending $50 million, wants to create a device that can listen to "abnormal" electrical signals in the brain and correct them, reportedly to help military personnel with psychiatric disorders and brain injuries. It doesn't seem like a big step to move from sick people to everyone else, but this is not mentioned. Page Nine readers are now all wondering how this thing could be weaponized, and how far along that process already is.

An official with DARPA points out, "We serve a constituency," namely solders, including those with mental problems. They're interested in equipment that can "both diagnose and treat mental health problems," which is a good thing. The device would listen to your brain, pick up abnormal signals, and then correct them. Correct them to what, and who decides what's abnormal, was not addressed, at least publicly. They admit there is much to be done before testing in people can begin, which they'd like to see around 2017.

Another goal is development of implantable microchips that send wirelessly. It's time to move beyond cumbersome hard-wired probes that only work in sterile lab settings and cannot read numerous signals at once, from a distance, scientists say.

The capability of observing and recording huge numbers of brain cells, and then manipulating them in a "fully awake behaving animal, or person," is called "a breathtaking vision," by one of the methodical scientists involved.

At a recent series of nationwide symposia on identifying mass murderers before they act out, that this observer was able to attend, doctors and researchers lamented the lack of tools and methods for determining what's actually going on in peoples' brains. They wish for ways to measure what, up to now, is the vague and cloudy pseudo-science of psychoanalysis, and find foolproof methods for changing behavior. Extremely talented researchers are working on those problems full time.

At the very least, we may be on the threshold of an infallible lie detector, and at worst, behavior modification tools that will, at last, soothe the savage beast within. The benefits to anyone who needs a lobotomy could be enormous.

In their search for a snappy one-liner on which to sell the idea to the public (they're actually doing this) and more important, to denizens of Congress who will fund it, their brainstorms haven't yielded anything significant yet. That question, "creates real tension," says one member of the panel working on it. Considering their stated motives, which include "optimizing" classrooms, military training camps and courtrooms, this comes as no surprise, despite the banter about curing the sick.

I'll be taking bets on names that will not be used, including: DARPA -- We can read your mind, We know what you think, No more secrets, Lipstick On Your Collar, and Managing brains for the betterment of governance.

Big Brother move over, Oh Brother is here.

Meanwhile, in other news,
Americans are preoccupied with Mr. Obama's:
1) failure to investigate IRS criminal activity,
2) takeover of one-sixth of the U.S. economy with ObamaCare,
3) NSA spying on Americans,
4) ATF gun running to drug lords,
5) BLM treating landowners in debt like terrorists,
6) stable of 39 appointed czars (I'll run the list next time)
7) and perhaps greatest of all: his direct usurpation of undelegated powers to amend legislation without acts of Congress -- without a response from Congress.

The last one makes you wonder if what some people are starting to say is true:
"They're all in on it."

Gun Business Is Booming, Pt. II

The lamestream media told you:

The recovery is slow, the economy is slow, business is slow, jobs are slow, but at least inflation is slow.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The economic impact of the firearms and ammunition industry in the U.S. has nearly doubled in the past five years, figures from the National Shooting Sports Foundation show. The lamestream media has in large measure missed the story for five years.

The total economic impact of the industry increased from $19.1 billion in 2008 to $37.7 billion in 2013, a 97%. The total number of full-time equivalent jobs rose from more than 166,000 to more than 245,000, a 48% increase in that five-year period

Stephen Sanetti, NSSF President and CEO, said, "While our nation's overall economic recovery has been slow since 2008, our industry has been a true bright spot, increasing our direct workforce by nearly half, adding jobs that pay an average of more than $47,700 in wages and benefits."

The Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report: 2013 provides a state-by-state breakdown of job numbers, wages and output covering direct, supplier and induced employment, as well as federal excise taxes paid. The report provides national totals and breaks out each state, see how your state did:


Thought Experiment

Q: Would police, if ordered to do so, unconstitutionally confiscate weapons from the American public?

Skeptics and trusting individuals: No.

Q: What if the legislature passed a law enabling or requiring police to do so?

Skeptics and trusting individuals: No.

Q: And if the law was ex post facto, meaning yesterday's legal guns are now declared illegal contraband, would that matter?

Skeptics and trusting individuals: No.

Q: So, police everywhere would violate direct orders, give up their salaries, and pensions, and get themselves fired, and be guilty of something themselves by refusing to enforce direct orders based on enacted laws to remove guns from public hands?

Skeptics and trusting individuals: Yes.

Q: And the public would accept that:

Skeptics and trusting individuals: Yes.

Look again:

Gun owners waiting in line to get government papers so they won't be arrested for owning guns that were legal a few days ago, then declared illegal by corrupt "officials."

The gun owners that aren't in line "for their papers" are now in felony possession of contraband.

They can't take it to the range to use, or a gunsmith, they can't carry it, or take it to a store to sell.

If they even show their property to a friend, the friend becomes complicit, an accessory to the offense.

This is how it's done.

If any property owner uses the front end of one of those guns for its intended purpose -- to defend against this kind of abuse, the person will be put down like a rabid dog, by a team wearing body armor, so you only think you have a gun.

And the media will describe you as living in a compound, reading radical literature,
and behaving like a deranged criminal who was fortunately eliminated by Officer Friendly for the good of us all.

Is this how it's done?

No Gun Bills Pre-Election

Not Enough Senate Votes To Pass Anything

NSSF reports that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said that any legislation to expand the current National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) will not be considered on the Senate floor following Wednesday's shooting involving an apparently mentally unstable soldier at Fort Hood in Texas.

"People in this building are
protected by this sign."

Anti-rights bigot logic.

Don't be quiet.
Complain about make-believe gun-free zones.

While Reid pledged last year to bring gun-control legislation back to the floor, he said there are insufficient votes for passage and he won't move a bill until he can count enough positive votes. Reid understands very clearly that any vote to expand background checks would pose a huge political problem for vulnerable red-state Democrats seeking reelection this year.

If you think it is bizarre that candidates for office in America would want to work on anti-gun-rights legislation, except when they're up for election, well, you're not alone. The oath of office is in violent opposition to the bills Mr. Reid is proposing. Elections do matter. Get informed and vote right.

Gun Business Is Booming, the economy, not so much

The lamestream media told you:

The economy is bleak, the recovery is slow, unemployment is up, it's republicans' fault, government is focused on creating jobs, our statistics for counting unemployment is beyond reproach, despite all the accounting tricks revealed lately (like not counting out-of-work people who have given up, now there's a trick!), and the outlook is bleak.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation reported that the March 2014 NSSF-adjusted National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) figure of 1,224,705 is the second highest March on record for the system, even with a decrease of 18.4% compared to the March 2013 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 1,501,730.

For comparison, the unadjusted March 2014 NICS figure of 2,476,610 reflects a 12.7% increase from the unadjusted NICS figure of 2,197,116 in March 2013.

The unusually large difference in the NSSF-adjusted and unadjusted NICS numbers appears to be due to the re-submission by North Carolina of monthly background checks for CCW permits. (They re-submit their permitees each month to make sure none have fallen into a prohibited category, expensive and time consuming. No figures are available on if this accomplishes anything, or creates harm.) Other factors are known to vary the NICS numbers from an actual count of guns purchased, including multiple purchases at one time, decision not to buy, denials, delays, official uses of NICS for other purposes, etc.

"Mental-Health" Gun Bans

Where are the thought police when you need them.
Oh. There they are. I can see them.

The lamestream media told you:

The Arizona Republic, Gannett's #2 rag after USA Today, said, in an editorial, "The mentally ill should not have guns."

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Can you see where this is going? Crazy people shouldn't have guns, sure. "Mentally ill" people, that's a judgment call, not a diagnostic test. How mentally ill is ill enough to start placing people in forbidden zones? Depressed? Angry? Angry a lot? Cursing regularly?

Once you're in the NICS Index -- the federal list of people whose right to keep and bear arms is extinguished -- you're in the forbidden zone with no practical way out. The anti-gun-rights forces want to see that list grow by leaps and bounds. They understand -- it's one effective strategy for taking away all the guns.

"Boy, that guy seems crazy to me," said one neighbor to another, before calling police and, unknowingly, ruining that man's life forever. Being sufficiently crazy (or at least charged as such) to make the gun-ban list, removes your right to a lot of things.

Everyone is going to have to walk around deliberately acting "normal," being careful not to step outside "acceptable" bounds or else people around may start to think you might be "mentally ill." This massive cultural paranoia can set in, as we all watch each other, scrutinize the person next to you, wonder if he's thinking thoughts he shouldn't. Why, just owning a bunch of guns and a modest stockpile of ammo implies you might be crazy. Who would want to do such a thing? There's something about Harry...

AND in other news:

All the problems with classical Freudian psychiatry are apparently starting to resurface with a trend amongst "normal" cognative therapists. Ted K. a prominent figure in the education reform movement, is expressing concern over a new effort to stigmatize, or at least label children who aren't as bright as others. With guidelines that are not clearly established, at least some "professionals" want such kids identified as Sluggish Cognitive Tempo children. Whether this is a disabling condition for other legal purposes, and what remedies or redress might exist for having been given the label, was not clear at press time.

The New York Times told you:
"With more than six million American children having received a diagnosis of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, concern has been rising that the condition is being significantly misdiagnosed and overtreated with prescription medications." [The Uninvited Ombudsman notes that this is indicative of pretend science.]

"Yet now some powerful figures in mental health are claiming to have identified a new disorder that could vastly expand the ranks of young people treated for attention problems. Calledsluggish cognitive tempo, the condition is said to be characterized by lethargy, daydreaming and slow mental processing. By some researchers' estimates, it is present in perhaps two million children." [The Uninvited Ombudsman notes this is indicative of pretend science on steroids -- they are just making this stuff up as they go along.]

"Experts pushing for more research [read: funding to pay themselves with] into sluggish cognitive tempo say it is gaining momentum [read: pure hype to get the funding] toward recognition as a legitimate disorder [that is, recognition by the people doing the recognition, to get the funding]  -- and, as such, a candidate for pharmacological treatment [that's where the money is]. Some of the condition's researchers have helped Eli Lilly investigate how its flagship A.D.H.D. drug might treat it." [no attempt to hide self-evident bias and conflict of interest.]

Gun Registration Bill Exempts "ObamaCare" Entities

The lamestream media told you:

92% of the public supports universal background checks. 92% of the public supports universal background checks. 92% of the public supports universal background checks. 92% of the public supports universal background checks. 92% of the public supports universal background checks.

We have not reported on the contents of the bill, despite its amazing acceptance level.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It's a pelosi! People support it without knowing what's in it!

The gun-owner registration bill "92% of the public supports" leaves out guns in hospitals and any... "health insurance entity." ObamaCare is a health-insurance entity.

It's amazing what you can learn by reviewing the bills our leaders propose. Alert reader C.D. Tavares spotted an error in Page Nine No. 133, which turns out to be a major element of this breaking story.

Here's the relevant statute language from
the proposed Manchin-Toomey amendment,
the gun-registration bill being sold to the public
as a wildly supported (but repeatedly defeated)
background-check bill --


(m) The Attorney General may not consolidate or centralize the records of the --
(2) possession or ownership of a firearm, maintained by any medical or health insurance entity.

[Note that the AG, or anyone, is not prevented from recording, storing, collating, compiling, distributing, securing, retrieving, integrating, merging, using or backing up these (or, elsewhere in the bill) all other gun records on you forever; there is no audit trail or punishment for violations; and anyone except the AG could "consolidate or centralize" these or any other firearms records under this "ban." It's preposterous, a farce.]

In my Page Nine review last issue, I remarked about that last line in the section:

"And what's that bit at the end that says medical- and health-insurance-company owned guns are exempt."  Had I added "...from the paperwork rules," C.D. noted, it would have made the line more accurate, or at least more clear. But that got me thinking.

The point is this, and it's never been made before as far as I'm aware. What exactly is a "medical or health-insurance entity" and what are those places doing with all these guns? That's an anti-gunny-type question to be sure, but surely valid here. And why are they exempted?

This is for people working in ObamaCare -- a health-insurance entity. Who are these people? How many of them are out there, exempt? Can we the people get equal treatment under the law? Is this what 92% of the public supports? Or has the media been feeding you nonsense straight from the anti-rights advocates, without a single hint of skepticism or research on their part?

The AG (but no one else in this bill) is also banned from "consolidating or centralizing" records about:
"(1) acquisition or disposition of firearms, or any portion thereof, maintained by --
(A) a person with a valid, current license under this chapter;"

That's FFLs, people in the gun business. The various dealer types are exempt, because they're already well papered. For them, this would just be redundant.

The antis will look you right in the eye and lie:


Read the original article, which became the lead story in The Daily Caller --

[Note that the AG, or anyone, is not prevented from recording, storing, collating, compiling, distributing, securing, retrieving, integrating, merging, using or backing up its gun records on you forever, there is no audit trail, and anyone except the AG could "consolidate or centralize" these or any other firearms records under this "ban". It is preposterous, a farce.]

This is why anyone with a grain of knowledge understands it's not about background checks. It's about gun registration by the federal government. It's in black and white. The media is lying to you.

Arizona Moves Good Gun Laws Ahead

Good news!  The bills listed below have been scheduled for Senate Committee of the Whole (COW) hearings on Monday, April 14.  AzCDL (approaching 11,000 members) thanks everyone who has already contacted their Senator!

If you have not yet sent your emails to your Senator on these bills, please do not hesitate any longer.   To access your letter, simply go to the AzCDL Legislative Action center, and take care of business.  The following are the bills that are scheduled to be heard on Monday, April 14.

HB 2339, the AzCDL-requested bill that would allow CCW permit holders to carry in public buildings (unless everyone entering is screened for weapons).

HB 2483, which would strengthen the protection of the lawful use of firearms, air guns and archery equipment on private property.
HB 2517, which would add penalties for cities and counties violating state firearms preemption law. (This is the comitatuslanguage I've been railing for, punishment for government failure to obey the laws.)

HB 2535, which would require local law enforcement to sign required NFA transfers within 60 days after receiving a request for certification.

You get to the Legislative Action Center, and once there, the bills are listed on the right side of the page under the “Take Action” banner.  Simply click on each bill and follow instructions.  Be sure to check the “Remember Me” box when verifying your contact information.  If you encounter any difficulties, please contact Fred

We expect the following bills to be heard later in the week.  If you have already sent your letters - Thank You!  If not, there is still time to contact your legislators.  Go directly to the AzCDL Legislative Action Center to send the message we have prepared for you.

HB 2103, the AzCDL-requested bill lowering the age limit for CCW permit eligibility to 19 for those with military service, has cleared the Consent calendar and the Majority and Minority caucuses, allowing it to bypass a COW hearing.  It will soon be scheduled for a Senate Third Read vote.
HB 2338, the AzCDL-requested bill that adds to the definition of Aggravated Assault the illegal taking, or attempted taking, of a legally possessed (i.e., your) firearm, passed out of the Senate Rules Committee on April 9, and will soon be scheduled for a Senate COW hearing.

SB 1063, the AzCDL-requested bill that would make “no firearms” signs on public buildings unenforceable unless the statutory weapons storage requirements are followed, needs to pass out of the House Rules Committee before it can proceed to a House COW hearing.

SB 1366, which clarifies the definition of a firearm, also need to pass out of the House Rules Committee before it can proceed to a House COW hearing.

As bills progress AzCDL keeps you informed via direct alerts.  Watch for the "Action Alerts" on bills needing your help using the Legislative Action Center.

Don’t forget!  Every AzCDL member who sends the emails generated from the Legislative Action Center will be entered into the raffles for Brownells gift certificates.

These alerts are a project of the Arizona Citizens Defense League, an all-volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan grassroots organization.

AzCDL – Protecting Your Freedom .

Copyright © 2014 Arizona Citizens Defense League, Inc., all rights reserved.

Media Hides Gun Business Milestone

The lamestream media told you:


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that: picked up this announcement about massive economic growth, missed by the lamestream media for unknown reasons --

GUNBROKER.COM Celebrates Major Milestone:

March 15 marked the 15th anniversary of, the world's largest online auction site for firearms and accessories. Growth has been steady, as the company last year recorded nearly $1 billion in sales and cemented its position among the 400 largest U.S. websites.

Six years ago the company logged its one millionth registered user; that number now exceeds 3 million, a tripling of business and only one of several milestones.

The most popular sidearms for February: 1st - Smith & Wesson M&P, 2nd - Sig Sauer 1911, 3rd - Colt 1911, 4th - Sig Sauer P238, 5th - Sig Sauer P226. For semi rifles it was: 1st - Ruger 10/22, 2nd - Smith & Wesson M&P, 3rd - Kel Tec Sub 2000, 4th - Ruger Mini-14, 5th - Springfield M1A.

GunBroker's average customer is tech-savvy, under forty, and has a median household income of $88,000. The site attracts 5.5 million visitors monthly and averages about 650,000 firearms for sale at any one time.

This excellent news, reflects the fact that America is strong, businesses are thriving, the public has money to spend, and things are working the way they should. If the daily drumbeat of the "news" media has you convinced otherwise, even if your own situation is presently less than ideal, know that this country can overcome all its obstacles, foreign and domestic, and so can you.

The 111th U.S. Supreme Court Gun Case

Rosemond v. United States, 134 S.Ct. 1240 (2014)

There are three more SCOTUS gun-related cases that have not been addressed in Page Nine or by Bloomfield Press (my publishing company) yet.

Salinas v. Texas, No. 12-246, 6/17/13
U.S. v. Castleman, No. 12-1371 3/26/14
Abramski v. United States No. 12-1493 (not decided yet)

I'll get to them soon, I promise.
In the meanwhile, check out the first 92 decisions in my award-winning book:
Supreme Court Gun Cases,
written with lawyer-experts David Kopel and Stephen Halbrook.
See the entire list of cases on that page.
If you know of one we missed, speak up.

About this case (Rosemund)--

The lamestream media told you:

When it comes to Supreme Court cases, the "news" descriptions, and what the decision actually says and means are usually night and day. Read the decisions, they are your law, fascinating in most cases. Sickening in how different they are from what the media tells you. The media largely ignored this gun-related case.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Rosemond concerns whether a prison sentence should be increased because someone during the commission of a drug sale (one pound of pot) fired a gun. Legally speaking, it's about aiding and abetting a crime, and the difference between taking actions, wanting to (known as mens rea, a guilty mind), and foreknowledge of events.

It's an exciting story, with a drug deal, theft of the goods, seven shots from a 9mm with no hits, no gun found, witness stories all over the place, and many facts never established. Havingbrandishing or firing a gun during certain drug crimes increases the sentence (5, 7 and 10 years). It was never determined who exactly fired the gun, but the government sought the added charge and jail time because a gun was used.

Almost half of all federal prisoners are in for drug charges, and 30% of federal dockets are drug cases. This is big business for the "criminal justice" system and all the people who earn their livings there -- cops, special agents, bail bondsmen, law clerks, lawyers, court staffs, jailers, judges, stenographers, reporters, it's a long list. (They really do have a reverse incentive against seeing this sort of crime disappear, it would cost them their jobs.)

What's important to recognize in this case is that the government argued, in essence, that anyone involved in a crime is guilty of all aspects of the crime, no matter who committed them or what you thought. This is extremely dangerous for the public, because it means if you have even remote connection to some illegal act, the government's inclination is to presume you are guilty of the worst part of whatever took place.

That may have some value in dealing with gangs who, as the government pointed out, often act in concert to achieve some criminal end. But it is a terrible precedent for the innocent. Any wrong-minded youth (or adult) who gets mixed up (or suckered into) something, would end up as guilty as the people who are really bad actors, if the authorities have their way. The potential for abuse is too great to allow on those grounds alone. Like RICO forfeiture, they could condemn everything in sight, lock everything up, just for the bad acts of a lone individual.

Now, the Supreme Court shut down this line of thinking 7 to 2, in a decision written by Elana Kagan. This time. But the fact that your government, here to help you, is thinking this way, is a very bad sign.

Guns made it into a footnote denial: [8] "We did not deal in these cases, nor do we here, with defendants who incidentally facilitate a criminal venture rather than actively participate in it. A hypothetical case is the owner of a gun store who sells a firearm to a criminal, knowing but not caring how the gun will be used. We express no view about what sort of facts, if any, would suffice to show that such a third party has the intent necessary to be convicted of aiding and abetting." (But they thought enough about it to write that disclaimer. Hmmm.)

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!