The big headline in the U.S. Supreme Court’s McDonald v. Chicago gun-ban-case decision, handed down on June 28, 2010, is that the individual states are now bound by the Second Amendment. Previously, only the federal government was technically bound.

The right to keep and bear arms is “incorporated” under the 14th Amendment and applies to the states, under the Due Process clause used to apply other Bill of Rights requirements to the states. For publicity, bragging rights, moral and many legal purposes, this is a big win.

And it is a win, despite some negativity floating around. The alternative — no gun-rights protection at the state level, which was avoided by just a single vote — would have been an unmitigated disaster. Everyone now has a claim to constitutional gun-rights protection instead of none, which is what four of the nine Justices would have given you.

Exactly how bound the states are though is unknown, and will be the subject of endless debate and future court actions. No standard of review for acceptable laws is provided, although the extremely low and virtually meaningless standard of “interest balancing” that Breyer would like to see is off the table. The decision is emphatic on the point. One pundit says this is virtually “strict scrutiny,” the highest standard possible, though that’s a bit overstated.

Attorney Nick Dranias at the Goldwater Institute told me he considers this the strongest part of the decision:

“…its embrace of the statement in Heller that the scope of the right to bear arms will be determined strictly by its original meaning and not by judicial balancing tests. This is something that the Court has not even said with respect to the right to free speech. The court is getting it right from the inception and may be able to avoid decades of meandering that the balancing tests in First Amendment jurisprudence forced. The court’s complete disavowal of balancing tests is huge.”

This does however still leave legislatures and lower courts to act independently, and seek further SCOTUS clarification in the years to come, but that’s to be expected, and throws us back to the need for eternal vigilance. But the decision does give the pro-rights forces a Superman-strong leg up at the bargaining table.

The very troubling sub-head of the story is that Chicago apparently will be free to act like Washington, D.C. did after Heller. Chicago’s law died, in effect, two years ago when the D.C. law died, and their response will be similar. Chicago under mayor Daley will do everything it can — including maneuvers that will be totally rejected later as unconstitutional — to keep its people repressed and deny, as fully as possible, the right to own, have and use guns for personal defense and other lawful purposes. The mayor has said as much (noted at the end of this article, along with other antis and news media gaffs).

We on the pro-rights side of the aisle had hoped for “reversed,” meaning the 7th Circuit decision saying we had no rights would be overturned. And we got it, hallelujah, but with the predictable “and remanded,” meaning the 7th Circuit will get another crack at the law, and must do something to make it acceptable. If precedent is any gauge, they’ll do as little as they can, leave Chicago dangerously unfettered, make the public hopelessly fettered, and instigate more lawsuits and endless wrestling with our rights. Hey, more lawsuits are just job security for lawyers — a pretty slick conflict of interest.

Contrary to some exuberant reports, the people of Chicago do not have their right to keep and bear arms restored. All they have is that this onerous near-total ban goes too far. And that, my friends, is disastrously troubling. Just how far can “authorities” go in infringing your rights, before they’ve gone too far? Nothing in this decision apparently comes anywhere near “shall not be infringed,” a phrase that is used a few times as a reference — but never as a tenet of the holding. It is all but ignored as the meaning of the Second Amendment. In its place is the assumption that only so much regulation is tolerable, a dangerous and moving target.

The Court clearly set the baseline for us, several times, repeating the decision in Heller: “…the Second Amendment protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense.” This is established as a core purpose of the Amendment — not the only one, but for now, a threshold below which no statute can go.

Fortunately, the decision does recognize what many of us would put as the true core of the Amendment, the “palladium of liberty” idea (which is fortunately referenced several times) that “the right of the citizens to keep and bear arms… offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them” (quoting Justice Story from 1833).

Skeptics who have come out insisting they will not celebrate this ruling have a point too horrifying to think about. This is the first step down the road to “official” licensing, registration, list making, and condition demanding that every level of government down to the tiniest bureaucrats will insist upon, to “allow” you to have some kind of firearm, locked up and safe in your home. Yes, Heller ruled out keeping arms so locked up that they’re totally useless, but didn’t stipulate much past that.

The antis are already shifting their position to the question of how much regulation is allowed. They have craftily “conceded” that the extremes are now gone — they can’t get a complete total ban, much as they would like to, and the pro-rights people can’t have anything anytime anywhere, something that was never in fact sought. Why let facts interfere with a good argument?

In D.C., with a similar overturned law and a similar stipulation to fix it, they’ve done everything possible to ignore even that, and we can only wish the Heller decision and McDonald did more to constrain them, let alone read them the riot act.

Gun uselessness is off the table but remains what too many authorities crave, and will press for. They should be indicted for trying — as denial of civil rights under color of law (q.v., 18 USC §241 et seq.). It’s past time to dust off those fine laws that put officials in prison as common criminals for denying or attempting to deny people their rights. Read that law — you’ll like it. Some of you state folks should introduce a local version, since the feds won’t enforce it against themselves anytime soon.

Because the High Court slices its baloney very thin, you clearly will be able to legally keep handguns for self defense at home. The right to keep and bear anything else anywhere else is not addressed. Getting everything else formally back into the picture (outdoor carry, firearm types, acceptable uses, commercial activity, much more) will take many moons.

This extraordinarily event-filled day at the Court included Justice Stevens’ last day in public as a member, Justice Ginsburg’s husband’s death the night before, the beginning of senate confirmation hearings for liberal High Court candidate Elena Kagan, and the much awaited McDonald decision, on this the last day of the current session.

Although some people had held out hope that Sotomayor, in her first gun case, would lean on her known respect for civil rights and find for the right to keep and bear, she turned out to be the disappointment most expected, and voted for denial of rights in the 5-4 squeaker decision. She joined Breyer’s dissent, a masterpiece of odd reasoning and lack of appreciation for this fundamental right. Kagan, cut from similar cloth, is likely to respond similarly if confirmed.

The McDonald v. Chicago decision is a 214-page document, with a six-page syllabus (the summary that precedes decisions), a 45-page decision of the Court written by Justice Alito (which is all that’s covered below, given the amount of time this took), a 15-page concurrence by Scalia, a separate 56-page concurrence by Thomas, and two dissents — 57 pages from Stevens, and 31 pages from Breyer with a four-page appendix (joined by Ginsburg and Sotomayor). That’s a lot of reading (116 pages of “you have rights,” 92 pages of “you should not”), and by the time you see this, news organizations will have moved on to other subjects, but I will have just finished figuring out what the Court actually said. In the interest of speed, here’s Alito’s portion, and I’ll get to the concurrences and dissents soon.

Because I worked very fast (or perhaps, because I read very slowly, I have to pore over this stuff with a marker and examine and ponder every piece) you may find a slightly elevated error rate from my usually squeaky clean style. Please forgive me, and as usual, corrections will be forthcoming as needed.

---

The decision is remarkably well structured and addresses each of the key issues one at a time. It begins with a lengthy justification for its reasoning. The Court notes the petitioners (the pro-rights side led by Alan Gura) rest the bulk of their case on the 14th Amendment’s “privileges or immunities” clause. This broad protection of rights, 137 years old, was gutted completely by the Slaughterhouse cases in 1873, and petitioners point out convincingly that no modern scholar seriously argues that Slaughterhouse was correctly decided, and ask that P or I be reinstated. The High Court flatly rejects this and leaves P or I a dead letter. They showed disdain for it in oral arguments, and demolish the notion here.

As a second thought, petitioners suggested the Second Amendment could also be incorporated against state infringement through the 14th Amendment’s “due process” clause, which is how all other BOR provisions have been adopted. To this, the Court agrees, and it is on this point that the right to keep and bear arms won the day. The NRA in large measure championed this winning approach, over the harshly dismissed P or I stratagem.

In page after page Alito carefully justifies and explains why due process is the right tool, and how it has been used similarly in the past (with roots dating to 1884, in what’s now known as the “selective incorporation” doctrine). Because a right proposed for incorporation must be fundamental and deeply rooted in our history, he describes a mountain of evidence to establish the right to keep and bear as unassailibly fundamental, a real joy to read. (There have been as many as five guidelines to consider, simplified over the years to essentially, “fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty… and whether this right is deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.”)

As a sidelight, the Court notes that at this point in time, all the rights of the first eight amendments have been fully incorporated except: (in addition to the right to keep and bear arms) “the Sixth Amendment right to a unanimous jury verdict… the Third Amendment’s protection against quartering of soldiers… the Fifth Amendment’s grand jury indictment requirement… the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial in civil cases… and the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on excessive fines,” and then provides good detail on why this is so.

The purpose of the 14th Amendment is critical to understanding the incorporation process, and even more so, its role in protecting the right to arms for blacks who were being violently disarmed after the Civil War. The fight against racism, the effort to establish equal justice, the need for anyone in the south to be protected from racist former-confederate abuses, the value of arms to oppressed masses, these were driving forces behind adoption of the 14th, and that record is now indisputably out in the open. Denials, at least rational ones, will have to cease.

[Note for future research -- the decision makes frequent reference to armed blacks being disarmed... isn't that what the arms are for, to prevent such things? Did blacks in the antebellum south do as folks in modern Louisiana did after Katrina, meekly hand over their guns when bad guys ("officials") simply showed up at the door? Where is the resistance-to-tyranny part? Where are the cold dead fingers? Many of the blacks were then shot to death after being disarmed, what did they have to lose from armed resistance? Is the armed-resistance-to-tyranny thing not exactly what it's cracked up to be? See, e.g., p. 23-25]

This decision provides blatant exposure of the need blacks had for arms, and the efforts to disarm them. The revisionists and victimization lobbies who would prefer locking away these relevant parts of history should never recover. That may turn out to be one of the best parts of this case — which after all has a black man, Otis McDonald, at its center. His desire to have a firearm at home for personal protection against thugs, much like his predecessors after the civil war, was denied by prejudicial government tyrants, and is now reinstated. This 14th Amendment debate quote from Sen. Pomeroy makes the point with remarkable color and clarity:

“Every man… should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead. And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enters for purposes as vile as were known to slavery, then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever remain complete.”

The popular canard that, “When seconds count, the police are just minutes away,” gets a historical context from the Old West. Examining how state Constitutions recognized the right to arms, the Court notes how people living in lawless frontier towns had to fend for themselves:

“These state constitutional protections often reflected a lack of law enforcement in many sections of the country. In the frontier towns that did not have an effective police force, law enforcement often could not pursue criminals beyond the town borders… Settlers in the West and elsewhere, therefore, were left to repel force by force when the intervention of society… [was] too late to prevent an injury.”

The decision then moves to excoriate the respondents — Chicago and Oak Park, who sought to deny McDonald’s (and everyone’s) right to defend themselves with a firearm. The Court shows them no mercy, in large measure because their arguments are bogus, invented, specious and without value. One by one they demolish the balderdash Chicago used to justify its position.

The one I liked the most was Chicago’s suggestion that “if it is possible to imagine any civilized legal system that does not recognize a particular right, then the Due Process Clause does not make that right binding on the States.” “Therefore, the municipal respondents continue, because such countries as England, Canada, Australia, Japan, Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, and New Zealand either ban or severely limit handgun ownership it must follow that no right to possess such weapons is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.”

The Court virtually ridicules the suggestion, calling it “stunning,” pointing out that if this were a standard for the U.S.,

“For example, many of the rights that our Bill of Rights provides for persons accused of criminal offenses are virtually unique to this country. If our understanding of the right to a jury trial, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to counsel were necessary attributes of any civilized country, it would follow that the United States is the only civilized Nation in the world.”

The one place where I believe respondents have a point, echoed by some gun-rights enthusiasts, is that incorporation weakens federalism, and to this I have some sympathy. Incorporation does limit states’ ability to act, experimentation and variety, but this is an old argument as the Court notes, has never deterred incorporation of fundamental rights, and is an unavoidable side effect of ensuring that states don’t abuse their residents.

Where gun-rights activists will get the most stress is the Court’s assurance, repeated from Heller, that this case will not eliminate “longstanding regulatory measures [such] as ‘prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,’ ‘laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.’ We repeat those assurances here. Despite municipal respondents’ doomsday proclamations, incorporation does not imperil every law regulating firearms.” On the other side of the coin, however, how many laws does it sanction? No one knows.

In closing, Alito first dismisses Stevens’ dissent with a wave of his hand, saying Stevens’ “eloquent opinion covers ground already addressed, and therefore little need be added in response.” Well, he does give the guy a few paragraphs of iron rebuttal.

Breyer’s dissent has essentially four arguments, and Alito takes them apart in order. First, “there is no popular consensus” that 2A is fundamental, but that falls under the overwhelming evidence, and the consensus of 251 representatives and 58 senators who filed a brief supporting incorporation (plus, consensus has never been a factor).

The argument that incorporation affects federalism has already been disposed of and is not grounds to deny action. Again, this does have a troubling aspect, but as the Court points out,

“Incorporation always restricts experimentation and local variations, but that has not stopped the Court from incorporating virtually every other provision of the Bill of Rights. The enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.”

The idea that the right doesn’t protect minorities “and those lacking political clout” is easily dismissed, especially since 80% of murder victims in Chicago are black — that old demographic, geographic and socio-economic side of the gun “problem” the media persistently hides. Amici insist it is crucial for minorities, including Women State Legislators, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and the Pink Pistols specifically named in the opinion. And the lament that this would give judges a difficult task when questions arise, in an area where they lack expertise, well, the Court reiterates to Breyer that interest balancing is not acceptable, so the poor overworked judges don’t have the problem.

The bottom line ends the majority decision:

“In Heller, we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis [prior precedent] counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States… We therefore hold that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller.”

News Coverage Errors:

“The ruling finds it unconstitutional for state and local governments to restrict individual gun rights of law-abiding Americans.”

–Kay Bailey Hutchinson in an eblast from her Texas U.S. Senate campaign. [The decision actually supports restrictions, specifying some that are OK, and leaving the scope of the restrictions up to future court actions.]

“Thanks to the Supreme Court, average Chicago residents like Mr. McDonald will now enjoy the same right of self-defense as a squad of bodyguards provides to Mayor Richard Daley.”

–Alan Gottlieb in a same-day press release. [The sentiment is understandable and evocative, but it's impossible to imagine that Daley's bodyguards could be disarmed wherever they travel or be limited in what they can carry, while Chicagoans will have narrowly prescribed conditions under which they can keep and bear; for the moment, the decision only includes handguns, only for self defense, and only at home.]

“Today, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment means what it says, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

–Judge Napolitano, FOX news 2:58 p.m. [One of my biggest complaints is that the decision fails to even address "shall not be infringed" let alone require that as a condition and in fact does the opposite, by stating infringements that are acceptable and reinforcing some from Heller, like no guns in government buildings, schools and other unnamed "sensitive" areas.]

“Americans can now carry guns anywhere,”

–The Ed Show, MSNBC [Pure hogwash meant to instill fear and misconceptions, it is totally untrue and has nothing to do with what this decision does. The idea of "can now carry" completely ignores the endless legal battles coming to define the decision, only for Chicago, before anyone can do anything. MSNBC is not expected to issue a correction.]

“The Supreme Court today told state and city governments that they can regulate the right to keep and bear arms.”

–CNN Radio same-day news [Spun to match CNN's notorious anti-rights view on the topic, this is unfortunately all too true, though it's only half the story -- since first, states and cities only have delegated powers and not rights, and basically undefined constraints were indeed placed on them by the decision.]

From the anti-rights advocates:

Jackie Hilly, Executive Director of New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, approves of the decision:

“All the other amendments have reasonable restrictions on them. So I actually really like the Heller decision and the McDonald decision because they put the Second Amendment in the context of all the other amendments… people from the gun lobby like to promote the idea that you have an absolute or god-given right to possess a gun. That’s clearly not true; your right can be restricted.”

Paul Helmke, the Brady Campaign to Promote Gun Violence (interviewed in The Atlantic):

“They both (Heller and McDonald) deal just with the right to have a gun in your home for self defense… Alito today repeated the language that Justice Scalia used two years ago and said this right is not unlimited. In his decision they talk about it… you can restrict who gets guns, you can restrict where they take the guns, you can restrict how guns are carried, you can restrict how guns are sold, you can restrict how guns are stored, you can restrict what kind of guns there are… Alito reinforced that outside of a handgun ban, cities can do a number of things… They feel that you have a right to the gun in your home for self defense, and that anything beyond that, probably, I think they’re going to defer to the government’s interest…

“The one extreme of handgun bans, total gun bans, that’s off the table now. But they’ve also taken the extreme any gun, anywhere, anybody, anytime — that’s off the table too, and once elected officials at the federal level, at the state level, get that part of the decisions through their head, I think we could actually see some progress…

“The ruling today is really is fairly narrow. It deals only with guns in the home, that you’ve got a right to a gun in the home for self defense, and that everything else is subject to reform and restriction…

“Every criminal defendant out there with a gun charge is going to raise this to try to get a better plea deal, so that’s one issue. There aren’t that many gun laws out there. There are only a few at the federal level, there aren’t that many states that have done a lot, but the ones that are out there are going to be challenged… New York’s registration and licensing scheme… California’s assault weapon restrictions… the one-gun limit restrictions in the states that have those are all going to be challenged.”

Chicago mayor Daley at his same-day press conference:

“We’ll publicly propose a new ordinance very soon… As a city we must continue to stand up and fight for a ban on assault weapons as well as a crackdown on gun shops and their owners, at the federal and state level… We’ll also look for new ways to challenge gun manufacturers, including how they market to our younger people. We’ll continue our efforts to close the gun shop (sic) loophole in Washington D.C… We are a country of laws not a nation of guns.”

Alderman Anthony Beale, chairman of Police and Fire Co. Committee on Chicago’s City Council:

“We are digesting the 200 pages and will have something tomorrow to stand up to the court’s ruling.”

The Chicago Tribune, writing the day before the decision, said:

“Daley has discussed several options if the 1982 handgun ban is no longer in effect. Chicago could require firearm owners to purchase insurance and receive training or maintain a registry of how many guns are in particular homes so that police responding to an address will know what they’re up against.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
May 10, 2009

Contents:
(searchable by item number)1- Environmental Firearm Abuse
2- Pocket Knife Ban
3- Fires From Muzzleloaders
4- Obama’s Mama’s Hajj
5- Tenth Amendment Smokescreen
6- “The Montana Firearms Freedom Act” HB246

STARTERS:

The NRA Annual Meeting will be in my home town this year, Phoenix, May 15-17. Anyone can go, you can get in free, meet scores of leaders and zillions of people in the pro-rights movement. You should plan to hang out with these people — your compatriots. Join me there. My band The Cartridge Family is making numerous appearances.

The brand new state gun guides are available for Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, South Carolina and Ohio. It doesn’t make sense to own a gun and not know the rules. Plus — we’ve introduced the Armed Response series of self-defense DVDs, truly excellent, take a look.

Please also note — the new 7th edition of The Virginia Gun Owner’s Guide is now off press, with lots of changes and completely up to date.

The Montana Firearms Freedom Act has started a blaze nationwide. People are asking, “Is it real?” It is. It’s now law. Montana is attempting to get the feds out of the state’s gun business. I have first-hand details in this issue of Page Nine.

——–

1- Environmental Firearm Abuse

The lamestream media told you:

The National Parks won’t fight the environmental impact review now stalling CCW carry on those federal lands.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Even a blind man can see that the environmental impact of CCW-permit holders carrying guns which aren’t fired is so small that this is a total subterfuge and stonewalling effort to deny the right to keep and bear, even for people with FBI-certified approval.

The serious issue here is setting the precedent that statutes, such as various environmental protection laws, can supercede the Bill of Rights — the uninfringeable right to keep and bear arms. If discreet carry, with no measurable impact, can be halted on those grounds, then what of four guys out on a day enjoying marksmanship practice, and returning with an empty ammo can?

The CCW National Parks silliness is a prelude to bans on outdoor shooting.

Environmental terrorism is on the rise, even the government is tracking this. We now see the green terrorists preparing a frontal assault on the right to discharge firearms outdoors. The National Parks “impact study” is inappropriate and should be terminated without delay. The people proposing it should be brought up on charges of denial of civil rights under color of law, 18 USC §241 et. seq.

——–

2- Pocket Knife Ban

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Hawaii, the island paradise that has long been a haven for tyrannical government denial of civil rights, with virtual bans on the Second Amendment, has introduced a bill to ban pocket knives of any type. Knives are theoretically protected under the Second Amendment, whose careful wording protects “arms” and not just firearms.

No criminal activity or intent is required. Mere possession of the private property is all that’s needed, if the bill passes.

Senate Bill 126 defines a pocket knife as “a knife with a blade that folds into the handle and which is suitable for carrying in the pocket.” Blade length doesn’t matter. The bill then proposes that “Any person who knowingly manufactures, sells, transfers, possesses, or transports a pocket knife in the State shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”

It adds that, once enacted, “no person shall import or manufacture pocket knives into the State for the purpose of selling or distributing pocket knives.” No criminal charges have been filed against the people proposing the blatantly anti-rights law, who have no legitimate delegated authority to do so.

The bill’s chances of passage are unknown, but if enacted, it would take effect on January 1, 2010. U.S. Senator Charles Schumer could not be reached to see if he plans a national version of Hawaii’s proposed common-sense law.

——–

3- Fires From Muzzleloaders

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

One of 18,579 contract-bid opportunities currently offered by the federal government is this interesting item, tucked away among requests for analysis of airplane fire-retardant drop patterns.

“Multi-variable analysis on the probability and prediction of fire ignitions from muzzle loaded guns.”

The feds now have a combined bid website, allowing people to review and bid upon active and upcoming contract work from across the “entire federal contracting community.” Working for the federal government is one way to get some of your tax dollars back, but you have to be able to read and write bureaucratese: “The successful offeror shall analyze provided data and create statistical analysis to support the project goals. The goals can be, but are not limited to, probability, design for experiments, spatial statistical analysis, multivariable analysis, etc.”

Marksmen of course know from practical experience that the probability of starting fires (in National Forests, since this request comes from the Dept. of Agriculture) is quite low, but why should that stop our apparatchiks from spending money on a study which, if it shows any probability at all, could fan the flames of gun bans on public lands.

The Founding Fathers would be aghast at the way we spend money, that taxes could be taken for such things, and the idea that peripheral threats to gun rights could come from the Dept. of Agriculture (nowhere authorized in the Constitution).

——–

4- Obama’s Mama’s Hajj

The lamestream media told you:

Islam, the religion of peace, is doing so little these days there is no need to mention them, associate their religion with the word terror, or put them in the news for almost any reason at all. There’s no problem with DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano deciding to call extremist Muslim terrorism “man-caused disasters,” she’s merely using “nuance” to avoid offending jihadis. Even the “man” part doesn’t offend anything.

According to Richard Engel, the chief foreign correspondent for NBC-TV, speaking on national TV, “people in the Middle East consider Obama a Muslim.” [Note: I witnessed it with my own eyes and ears but cannot find a link for you, please send me one if you have it.]

Obama himself is believed to consider himself a Christian, and his campaign has repeatedly made this claim, although he hasn’t attended church since taking the presidency. FOX News reported the anomaly, which is unreported elsewhere.

According to the usually reliable LA Times, Mr. Obama has decided to not celebrate the National Day of Prayer in the White House this year, a tradition in place since Harry Truman held the office. The Times, with typical opprobrium, notes that “religion was a core tenet of Republican politics,” and quotes an Obama spokesmanwoman that, “I think the president understands, in his own life and in his family’s life, the role that prayer plays.” He thinks.

The Times goes on to say that, “Obama has shown an unusual sensitivity toward atheists, the first president to mention non-believers in an inaugural address.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Engel’s comment about Obama being seen as a Muslim in Muslim countries got no news coverage to speak of. If it did, the whole issue of Obama’s faith, if any, would be called into question, a topic the media has avoided like a third rail. (Can’t say “avoided like a plague,” because they’re all over the swine non-pandemic.)

In other news, missing from lamestream news, Obama’s grandmother Mama Sara Obama (on his black Kenyan father’s side), has decided to go on hajj.

This is the Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca, required at least once in a lifetime from all Muslims. She plans to go with her son, Syeed Obama.

According to Muslim law, as told in the Koran, any person born to a Muslim father is a Muslim for life. Renouncing the faith is apostasy, punishable by death. Anyone who has a chance to carry out the sentence but does not, or interferes with carrying out the sentence, is also punishable by death.

Sara Obama, who was flown from her tiny home town of Kogelo near Uganda to Washington, D.C. for her grandson’s inauguration, is the woman who asserted that she witnessed her grandson’s birth in Mombasa, Kenya. If true, this would make him ineligible to be president. The president has so far refused to show a birth certificate to clear up the lingering doubts. It was unclear at press time why he has so adamantly refused.

If proven to be true, the ineligibility would create a constitutional crisis of unimagined proportions, aside from possibly inevitable racial-tainted riots. For one thing, the vice president might not be qualified to assume the presidency, having taken office under erroneous circumstances (voting is for the president, not the vice president, who ascends to office on the winner’s coattails). That would leave Nancy Pelosi the next in line. It would also invalidate all acts signed by Mr. Obama. It was unclear at press time how bailout and buyout refunds would be made.

Some experts have also questioned Obama’s race, since his mother was a white woman, making him not a black but a mulatto, a word now used even less frequently than the now discredited “terrorist” and “Muslim extremist.” Media experts say the word changes are not Orwellian revisionism, thought control, or word control (”you can’t think of a thing that has no word”), it is merely sensitivity.

——–

5- Tenth Amendment Smokescreen

The lamestream media told you:

Several states have passed resolutions demanding Tenth Amendment rights.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Several states have sanctimoniously passed resolutions that are worthless trash demanding nothing designed to placate a half-asleep public. They mean nothing, have no effect in law, the spineless “servants” who introduce them know this, and act just so they can say, Oh what a good boy am I. Let one, just one, introduce such a bill with backbone and teeth, that truly repulses federal government intrusions and attacks on the 10th Amendment, and I’ll change my tune.

I guess that would be Montana, which has enacted a 10th-Amendment-based statute called the Montana Firearms Freedom Act. A nice rumor sheet about the bill has blazed across the web. My first hand details on the bill are posted below.

You should personally take up this cause, and ask your reps why they didn’t actually stand up to stop the abuses and usurpations before now. Ask if they know their “joint resolutions” bills do nothing actual (they know this of course, so see what they tell you, it can be revealing). Ask if they would stand up to stop a single federal abuse — like Montana is doing.

Or just coast along and be happy they passed those non-binding feckless balderdash bills that makes you feel good provided you don’t look at them too hard.

——–

6- “The Montana Firearms Freedom Act” HB246

Montana’s new gun law kicks the feds in the gut.

In a nutshell: “Any gun made and kept in Montana is free of federal gun regulation.”

People have been writing asking me if this is real — it is. It is important enough to dedicate this entire Page Nine. Well, I’ve included some other juicy items too.

I have followed the development of this law since the outset, I am friendly with its instigator Gary Marbut, president of the Montana Shooting Sports Association. And we sell Gary’s Montana gun-law book, which will be re-released in several weeks, updated and with the new law included. I was honored to coax and coach Gary into writing that book, now in its third edition.

Gary dreamed up the concept of the Montana gun-freedom bill, drafted the language himself (”that’s why it’s in plain English, I’m not a lawyer,” he said) and guided it through his legislature to a 29 to 21 win in the Senate, and a stunning 85 to 14 romp in the House. It is a fabulous law. Imagine what it could do for economics in the state, wait, don’t imagine, check this out — Texas just introduced it too, where it could benefit more than 300 state-based manufacturers. It will, “invite new industry into Texas,” according to its sponsor there, Leo Berman.

That’s not all. Tennessee has introduced it as well. Alaska moved it through the Senate 32 to 7 but adjourned before the House could act. States actively considering it include Arizona, Idaho, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. While some people got excited about virtually worthless feckless non-binding resolutions demanding 10th Amendment protection from federal abuse, this new law puts teeth into the demand.

This is a perfect point of pushback against illegal federal encroachment and violation of our constitutional rights. You should pick this up where you are, like we are here in Arizona, get someone in your state to make the small changes needed to match the language to your state, and run with it.

If the federales have their way, reaction would likely be directed against the first manufacturer to operate under the law. Feds will obtain a firearm produced in Montana, probably from a small shop without big time resources to fight the feds, and the person will be arrested, property confiscated, and charges filed with all sorts of laws that do not apply except in the feds imagination.

But then of course they run the courts that will convict the person, and the courts, if precedent is any gauge, will deny constitutional defenses and work vigorously to do the bidding of their federal masters. It will be a 9th and 10th Amendment case, and a Commerce Clause case, and a Supremacy Clause case, not a Second Amendment case.

However, the feds are unlikely to get their way so easily. We freedom types are pretty clever too, and little of this will happen without a plan. First, an effort is underway to find and temper any wildcat basement tool shop operators who ignorantly blast ahead making guns thinking they are immune to the federal hand. That will be good for the wildcats and for the proper movement of this important law.

A test case will be developed, Gary says, most likely with a carefully designed bolt-action .22 caliber youth rifle. The wood stock will come from a Montana grown tree. Standard steel-supplier stock will turn into the basic barrel and parts, and the statute makes clear that interstate regulation (if any) of raw stock does not apply to the stock once it is in state and used strictly for intrastate purposes (a point the courts will examine).

The people involved will have squeaky-clean records, including a Marine, tool makers with no FFL license to complicate things, and a youngster whose parents seek to get him the firearm. Clearance to make it will be sought from the proper authorities ahead of time. If it is granted (don’t hold your breath) the deal is done. If it is not granted (a pretty sure bet), the parties will have grounds to sue in civil (not criminal) court. It’s pretty complicated, but it’s well thought out.

In a conference call between Marbut and six top-level attorneys, it became obvious that the legal fight is an uphill battle, because the feds run the courts. To date, the federal judicial system has treated the 10th Amendment as a dead letter, and this from an attorney who has fought such cases from the lowest ranks to the Supreme Court itself. If the federal government wants something, it doesn’t let a little thing like the Bill of Rights stand in its way. I know, it’s infuriating, but that’s the way it is.

Now there’s a political dimension to this as well. All the states are being abused and denied their rights under the 10th Amendment. The public is outraged at the lack of control on the federal behemoth. It’s time for something to give.

The Associated Press and USA Today have picked up on it, and FOX-TV’s Glenn Beck is negotiating to get Marbut on the show.

As more and more states get on the case, the pressure builds, and the ability of the system to resist a straightforward and righteous demand weakens. The Montana Firearms Freedom Act can be the straw that breaks the federal back. Once 10th Amendment hegemony is re-established, the floodgates of freedom are open.

The feds and their lapdog lackies in the lamestream media are likely to refer to this action as an attempt at “illicit manufacture and trafficking in firearms,” the words in the CIFTA treaty. The feds would love to raid a compound (an innocent owner’s small tool shop), confiscate an arsenal (more than one firearm and some parts), and sick their legal dogs on the poor soul. They’re not going to get such an easy shot. As many as five coordinated cases will be structured.

The bill does a good job of describing what Montana has accomplished, and because it’s in plain English, something I’ve always said can and should be done, it’s readable. Take some time. Read it, you’ll love it.

Alan’s Executive Summary

The bill opens with the state’s “Declarations of Authority.” This basically asserts Montana’s rights under the U.S. Constitution, Montana’s contract upon entering the union, and principles of federalism. Very juicy and enjoyable.

An easy-to-read set of definitions is followed by the core legal principle: “A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that those items have not traveled in interstate commerce.”

One legal landmine exists in the fact that firearms are regulated not only under the Commerce Clause, they are controlled by tax laws, and the outcome of that quagmire is uncertain.

The legal protections are piled higher with this and similar wordings: “It is declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and are not subject to congressional authority…”

To prevent side issues from interfering, full auto and large bore devices are excluded from this bill. Guns made under this law must be stamped “Made in Montana” and man oh man won’t that be a thing of pride.

The bill is easy reading, you should do it, then make sure your legislature gets on it.

———-

See the official Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics here. Compare it to the news you see every day.

Thanks for reading!
Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

---

Visit the PAGE NINE weblog.	Sign up for automatic RSS feeds
Contact Alan Korwin	Visit the Gunlaws.com website

 

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
Aug. 23, 2008

 

 

Contents:
(searchable by item number)

1- Not Much Ammo
1- BIDS v. NICS
3- Student Shotgun Programs
4- Gun Sales Rising
5- Islamist News Vacuum
6- ChiCom’s Muslims Active
7- Indians Screwed Again
8- Government Represses Economy
9- Shooting, Not Buying
10- China’s World Stage

STARTERS:

The Heller Case: Gun Rights Affirmed! is now on press and will be out in September 2008! Get yours now at a discounted pre-press price! This “first edition of history” captures the excitement of “The Case That Saved the Second Amendment.” Find out how the antis plan to use the case to eliminate your rights. Learn how you can use the case to strengthen gun rights for all Americans. Complete details now posted here.

MAJOR EVENT COMING UP:

Gun Rights Policy Conference
Sep. 26 – 28, 2008
Sheraton Crescent Hotel, Phoenix
2620 W. Dunlap (NE cor. I-17 and Dunlap)

– Registration, books, food and receptions are provided at no cost to you!
– A tremendous gun-rights event attended by the heavy hitters in the gun-rights movement, meet them all face-to-face. Mark your calendar now — not to be missed — in my own backyard, I plan to be there. For more info and to reserve your admission at no cost, go here.

Topics will include: city gun bans, youth violence, “smart” guns, concealed carry, federal legislation, legal actions, gun show regulation, state and local activity, presidential elections and the U.S. Supreme Court Heller Decision.

———-

1- Not Much Ammo

The lamestream media told you:

According to Curt Anderson of the Associated Press, a man was arrested after threatening to assassinate the President. In his car police found a loaded 9mm pistol and dozens of rounds of ammunition.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

A man was arrested after threatening to assassinate the President. In his car police found a loaded 9mm pistol and less than one box of ammunition.

———-

2- BIDS v. NICS

The lamestream media told you:

Both presidential candidates support reasonable gun-control laws, although the Democrat’s idea of “reasonable” does include total gun bans like the one in D.C. recently overturned by the Supreme Court.

That decision in the Heller case did allow for “imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms,” a direct reference to the NICS background check enacted under the Brady law.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The gun policy posted by Obama is, well, there isn’t one. His voting record on the subject earns an F-minus.

The gun policy posted by McCain is actually pretty good on its face, though confidence in such political posturing is less than robust — Protecting Second Amendment Rights.

But that’s not the point, the regulation of commercial sales is. The current NICS system cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build and run. It’s a fortune. But the big problem is that it keeps records of everyone who buys a firearm, which is specifically prohibited by federal law — it is a national firearms registry.

The FBI swears they destroy the records, eventually, but confidence in that is virtually nonexistent, and there is no way to confirm or deny their statement. When Janet Reno built the thing in 1994, she had the gall to say it was incapable of deleting a record. What is well documented is government use of gun registrations to disarm a public prior to tyranny, here and abroad. History is replete with monstrous examples.

Despite dreamlike hopes, eliminating background checks is not going to happen in the foreseeable future, and besides, there may be some value in keeping felons on the lam and other miscreants from buying guns at retail.

The BIDS system is the alternative to NICS. It costs little, works just as well in screening out bad apples, and cannot create a registry. Did I mention that instead of squandering hundreds of millions of our national fortune, it costs little?

America needs BIDS. Arguing for no background checks is just not going to carry the day. That used to work, but these times aren’t those times. BIDS is the answer. Low cost. Works fine. No registry. Take a look. Start talking about BIDS. Save the money. Read this — If we must have gun-buyer background checks to stop criminals, at least do it without compiling massive records on the innocent.

———-

3- Student Shotgun Programs

The lamestream media told you:

Guns and schools don’t mix. The federal ban on guns around schools is a good thing, even though we keep reporting on school shootings and fail to connect the dots. All sensible teachers are against guns in the hands of school kids, because guns are so dangerous. Any child who even mentions the word gun, sketches a gun, wears a gun t-shirt or points a finger in a gun-like manner, will be dealt with harshly, get a severe blemish in the record book forever, and be covered in national “news” reports.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

NEWTOWN, Conn. — In terms of sheer numbers of participants, the eight-year-old Scholastic Clay Target Program (SCTP) has been the most successful youth-oriented program in National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) history. Nearly 30,000 middle and high school students have participated in the program, which includes trap, skeet and sporting clays competitions. The competitions are held with real shotguns and live ammunition, safely.

With SCTP now of a size and scope beyond the NSSF’s mission parameters, responsibility for its continuation and development is being passed along to the newly formed Scholastic Shooting Sports Foundation (SSSF).

———-

4- Gun Sales Rising

The lamestream media told you:

The economy is in the doldrums, business is bad, people are hurting, spending is down, consumer confidence is down, unemployment is up, good jobs are scarce, foreclosures are up, the market is down, gasoline is expensive, food prices are up, blah, blah, blah.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Gun and ammunition sales are up 9.7% in the first quarter of 2008, according to a National Shooting Sports Foundation analysis.

Sales were led by a 17.3 percent increase in ammunition sales, a 5 percent rise in handgun sales and a 6.7 percent increase in long gun sales. The statistics come from the Pittman-Robertson federal excise tax collection report, calculated as a percentage of wholesale receipts, paid quarterly by firearm and ammunition manufacturers, and earmarked for state wildlife conservation and habitat restoration programs.

The stats reflect solely U.S. civilian sales and do not include sales to military, police, etc. During the quarter, $76.8 million was generated for conservation through excise tax collections, compared to $70.1 million in the same period in 2007. From January through March, $19.9 million was collected for pistols and revolvers, $30.3 million for long guns and $26.4 million for ammunition. The latest tax collections suggest overall sales of $716.4 million, not including retail markup or final retail sales.

In other news, ATK Armament Group sales were up 32 percent in the first quarter of 2008, to $442 million, compared to $336 million in the prior-year quarter. This division of ATK produces commercial and military ammunition and gun systems, propellants and advanced energetics. ATK’s overall first-quarter earnings rose 9 percent when compared to the same period the previous year, with sales for the quarter surpassing $1.1 billion. “ATK” trades on the NYSE and closed Friday at $105.90. (Source.)

———-

5- Islamist News Vacuum

The lamestream media told you:

Islam is the religion of peace. “Islamic terrorist” and “jihad” are words that no longer appear in lamestream reports, because the Society of Professional Journalists recommends against using them — it casts fundamentalist terrorists in a bad light. It’s part of their diversity guidelines, which are good.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Activities concerning the religion pf peace have virtually fallen off the radar in U.S. news reports, as “commentators” eat up endless hours with their empty opinions about the two U.S. presidential candidates, avoiding almost any real news on even that subject. Many people have forgotten about the culture war being vigorously pursued by Islam, now that it gets little mention. Britain though is suffering greatly under the culture attacks:

Can Britain survive Multiculturalism?

 

Commentator Pat Condell has a new scathing short video about Islamofascism, but he starts with an apology to members of the religion of peace who have sent him death threats lately. British TV recently suggested that Muslims are the victims of British intolerance, but in fact, Britain has recently tolerated the building of 1,600 ideologically-driven mosques in the country, funded by the Saudi Arabian Muslim dictatorship. The regime has declared all other religions “haram” and forbidden on the Arabian peninsula.

Islam is not a victim

 

Author Mark Steyn, being sued in Canada by Muslims, because he noted that many of them are waging holy war on the western civilization, clarified an important point recently.

“On the matter of Muslims being ’sheep-shaggers,’ this was not my assertion but that of the late Ayatollah Khomeini on the important question of whether one may eat, post-coitally, one’s sexual partner: ‘A man who has had sexual relations with an animal, such as a sheep, may not eat its meat. He would commit sin.’ Good to have that cleared up.”

During WWII, the U.S. press reported on the activities of our enemies. Times have changed, according to unnamed spokespeople. A noticeable reduction in Islamist attacks recently has been attributed to the fact that U.S. and allied forces have found and killed many of their leaders and followers.

———-

6- ChiCom’s Muslims Active

The lamestream media told you:

Chinese paramilitary police kicked and beat journalists who were covering a deadly assault by “Muslim separatists” on police that left 16 dead in a remote area of the vast nation.

Writing for the McClatchy news syndicate, reporter Tim Johnson says,

“A top Communist Party leader in this gas-rich region, meanwhile, said assailants had left literature at the scene of an attack a day earlier pledging ‘holy war’ in China.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It is unclear whether “holy war,” published in quotes, was actually “jihad,” a commonly used Muslim word the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) officially recommends not using in news reports.

According to knowledgeable Muslim sympathizers, “jihad” simply means “struggle,” and is a good word. The meaning gets confused however, because radical Muslim Islamofascists waging war on western civilization use the word as part of a campaign where women, men and children wrap themselves in nails and explosives and blow themselves up on public streets, killing innocent people, as part of their “struggle.” The actions give a bad name to Muslims, Islamofascism, and the word “jihad,” and SPJ seeks to avoid creating unfair stereotypes.

(From SPJ: “Avoid using terms such as ‘jihad’ unless you are certain of their precise meaning and include the context when they are used in quotations. The basic meaning of “jihad” is to exert oneself for the good of Islam and to better oneself.”)

The Turkic-speaking Uighur Muslims near the Pakistan/Russia frontier are distinct from the rest of Communist China in most respects.

In the interest of fairness, openness and clarifying any potential conflicts of interest, the Uninvited Ombudsman notes that he is a 20-year member of SPJ, which did not approve of this memo.

———-

7- Indians Screwed Again

The lamestream media told you:

American Indian plaintiffs, who had sued the U.S. government for unpaid back royalties on natural resources extracted from their lands, were awarded $455 million by a federal judge, a fraction of the $47 billion they sought, according to Mary Jalonick, writing for the AP.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Reporters and editors, who are known to have little command of math, recognized that the award to American Indians was a fraction. The fraction is less than one one-thousandth of the unpaid fees the tribes had sought. That’s a small fraction. The original demand had been for $100 billion.

American taxpayers needn’t worry however, because the court didn’t decide who should get the money, meaning it will not be paid for a long time, if ever. The back payments are as much as 121 years overdue. Taxpayers did however get the benefit of the oil, gas, timber grazing and other resources which they got by promising to pay, without actually paying.

The half million Indians in the class action suit would get $910 each, for the unpaid royalties since 1887, if the award is divided equally. Because this is a number that requires use of a calculator, it was not reported.

———-

8- Government Represses Economy

The lamestream media told you:

Most Americans believe the presidential candidates need to take a highly aggressive stance on the economy, the number one issue for most voters, which must be true because virtually every news outlet in America has reported the same thing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Smart Americans understand that the economy is a function of the private sector and not the government, and that most government involvement with the economy adds baggage, is costly and drains energy from the world of business that finances everything.

Understanding this, the nation’s Founders provided for very tiny government involvement in the business of the people. Those principles have evaporated, or been declared illegal by the government itself, according to industry experts.

Government produces no wealth at all, it merely saps wealth from the private sector that produces it. Every dollar spent by government is a dollar taken by force through taxes from the capitalist economy that produces the products, services and profits the government leaches off.

Government programs and regulations cost the people money, and redistribute wealth from those who earn it to those who use it in a generally parasitic way. Some uses are easy to justify when they are for the common good, such as road building. Others are a total bureaucratic drain on the economy, such as huge legal and accounting industries designed to manage the incomprehensible burden of 17,000 pages of federal tax rules. American bookkeeping, which used to be a management tool for running a business, is increasingly a tax management and accounting tool for government, to keep armed tax agents away from a business’ door.

For a candidate to truly have an aggressive stance on the economy, the platform would have to include massive reduction in government interference, regulation, redistribution, social management and general spending. No such candidate could be reached at press time.

The major-party candidates all propose gigantic increases in government spending, (with accompanying tax and debt increases), as a way to “boost” the economy, vigorously encouraged by sycophants who expect to get the money for themselves. The idea is so outlandish and regressive, our language lacks words to describe the insanity. No lamestream reports address the problem, preferring instead to promote aggressive presidential “action” on the economy.

———-

9- Shooting, Not Buying

The lamestream media told you:

The Heller case, which overturned D.C.’s 32-year-old gun ban, will lead to the Wild West days of Dodge City, with shootouts happening on a regular basis. “Eighty people a day die at the hands of guns,” said NYC Mayor Bloomberg. “It’s just completely befuddling that our Supreme Court would be in alliance with the gangbangers,” said Tom Barwin, village manager of Oak Park, Ill., which has a now-endangered gun ban in place.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Residents of Washington D.C. cannot legally buy guns, since there are no gun stores in the city, and direct sales across state lines have been banned by federal law since 1968. People lucky enough to already own guns in the District have not been involved in the much-feared public blood letting officials are now afraid of. How any of this will lead to shootouts was unclear at press time.

Mr. Barwin’s inane statement is very valuable, in showing how hopelessly ignorant some elected officials are. “Arguing with such vapid stupidity is less than worthless,” said an observer who refused to be named. “The man has no understanding of the good that guns do or the difference between criminals and the rest of the citizenry. He needs education along with well-deserved scorn.”

Someone needs to tell Mayor Bloomberg that guns do not have hands, and that people die at the hands of something known as criminals. Reporters failed to question the mayor about the obvious gaffe. More than half of all U.S. firearm-related deaths are suicides, many related to poor care for the destitute elderly infirm. Japan suffers a far higher rate of suicides, despite a near total ban on guns (people often throw themselves under trains).

Despite an inability to get guns, D.C. residents will be able to get gun training, thanks to the NSSF “First Shots” program that teaches newcomers how to use and enjoy firearms safely. Tom Gresham’s Gun Talk Radio Show featured an interview with NSSF President Steve Sanetti on the upcoming program for the district’s residents. (A podcast of the interview is available here.)

———-

10- China’s World Stage

The lamestream media told you:

China is on the world stage hosting the Olympic Games, and it wants to shine while on the world stage, having done all sorts of wonderful things for its time on the world stage.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

“The world stage” is an effete, self-serving, self-congratulatory invention of the “news” media that creates this highly managed stage and then blows its own horn about how wonderful it is.

The communist Chinese have brutally suppressed opposition to its plans, and forced the closure of industry and banned vehicle traffic, to falsely present a world stage where you can actually see through its grossly polluted air.

The Uninvited Ombudsman admits to watching and enjoying the games on some evenings, and marveling at the prowess of the athletes, while recognizing and steadfastly resenting the “news” distortions and omissions about the vicious ChiCom dictatorship hosts and the media’s sniveling gutless groveling pandering.

———-

Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 1943

“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution… A person cannot be compelled ‘to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the Constitution.”

“This does not apply to the Second Amendment,” said LawyerMan, because it has been “distinguished.” That means courts have decided the words only apply in some special context. “I vote for the words meaning what they mean,” said LaymanMan. No public rioting has been reported yet.

———-

See the official Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics here.
Compare it to the news you see every day.

Thanks for reading!
Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

---

Visit the PAGE NINE weblog.	Sign up for automatic RSS feeds
Contact Alan Korwin	Visit the Gunlaws.com website

 

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
June 19, 2008

 

 

Contents:
(searchable by item number)

  1- Heller Insider Info
  2- RKBA Escapes Recession
  3- Gun Intolerance Tolerated
  4- Prison For Misfire
  5- Unexpected Tax Cuts
  6- Journalists Advance Deception
  7- Accurate Lies Continue
  8- Different Flood Results
  9- Overwhelming Campaign Funding
10- Black Male Blackmail
11- Counterintuitive Man says:
       Lobbying and lobbyists are swell!

STARTERS:

Our brand new 32-page full-color catalog is hot off the press. Send a street address and we’ll send you one at no cost, full of cool new stuff — DVDs, books, even “Disarm Criminals First” buttons you can’t get elsewhere.

The Wall Street Journal online cites my research on gun-free zones in connection with B.H. Obama’s proposal to close every gun store within five miles of a school or park. That would close virtually every gun store in the nation. Though the Constitution doesn’t empower anyone to do such a thing, it shows how that man thinks, and reporters have naturally refused to question him about the lack of authority. No, he did not propose compensation for the confiscated property. An interesting article in one of the last news outlets that discusses guns with candor.

P.J. O’Rourke’s commencement address, with advice you won’t see elsewhere.

Medical journal mindlessly attacks John Lott and then ignores his well reasoned, documented rebuttal. Lott says:

Unfortunately, this shows what seems to pass for academic debate on guns these days. Note how they refuse to alter or explain any of their attacks but instead issue the simple statement that “We respectfully disagree with Dr. Lott’s comments and stand by our editorial.” Intellectual dishonesty rules.

CORRECTION:

The polar bear has been added to the U.S. threatened species list, not the endangered species list as I had reported. None of the other problems described are affected.

———-

1- Heller Insider Info

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

With thanks to deputy public information officer Estrada at the U.S. Supreme Court:

1. Heller does not have the highest number of amicus briefs in the Court’s history, it is third, at 66. The highest was 107 in the affirmative action case Grutter (539 U.S. 306 in 2003), followed by the abortion case Webster (492 U.S. 490 in 1989) at 78.

2. The Heller decision could actually come later than June 23, the widely anticipated last scheduled day of proceedings for the session. The Court can add days to its calendar for additional decisions if it needs to, but these would typically come before the end of the week (June 27). Absolutely no way to know for sure until they act.

3. Lead attorney Alan Gura pointed out in an email to me (6/19/08) that the Court still has ten decisions left to issue, including three biggies, so it’s highly likely they will add days to the calendar.

4. My conjecture: The decision must be signed and sealed now for at least days if not weeks, to allow for proofing, typesetting, printing, binding, pre-mail activity, web prep, syllabus draft, etc. My guess is they would rather release it at the end, so the national hub bub doesn’t impinge on other work they have. Requests for interviews, phone calls from friends and close associates, shouting in the press, a ton of activity can be expected, might as well finish off the term first, no?

5. The best site for immediate download of the decision will be the Slip Opinions page, and web-traffic overload has not been a problem in the past according to the PIO (but we shall see on this one, eh?)

Every “news” outlet on the planet will cover this story, where SOP is to a) read and partially understand only the Court’s summary, or b) copy “wire services” which are routinely spin machines on this subject, and then release a mixture of fact, hype and editorial where the news is supposed to go.

6. My book on the Heller case is already underway, will include summaries and background on all 96 gun cases the High Court has heard so far, and the most thorough coverage of Heller you’re likely to find anywhere. Many experts have agreed to contribute. Watch for the announcement when it goes on press.

———-

2- RKBA Escapes Recession

The lamestream media told you:

Recession raised its ugly head again, and global economy faces disaster, as oil hit a record high, unemployment rose, food prices are skyrocketing and the stock market dipped against a backdrop of a weak dollar, home foreclosures, growth in China and global warming.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Defying incessant gloomy reports proliferating from “news” outlets, and curiously missing from lamestream financial “news,” overall firearm sales increased by nearly 11% in the last quarter of 2007. Retail sales were up over 10% in May 2008.

Reported by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, growth was led by a 23.6 percent increase in ammunition sales, a 5.9 percent rise in handgun sales and a 4 percent increase in long gun sales, according to statistics from the latest federal excise tax collection report. (Source.)

The Pittman-Robertson excise taxes provide precise business measurements, and are earmarked solely for state wildlife conservation and habitat restoration programs. This makes gun-and-ammo sales one of the leading conservation forces in the nation, unreported by lamestream outlets for reasons that remain unclear.

During the quarter, $74.8 million was generated for conservation, compared to $67.4 million in the same period in 2006. From October through December, $16.2 million was collected for pistols and revolvers, $31.4 million for long guns and $27.1 million for ammunition. The latest tax collections suggest overall sales of $694.4 million, not including markups for final retail sales. For the entire calendar year, a total of $303.2 million was collected in excise taxes, up 21.2 percent from the $250.1 million in 2006. There are no current plans to end the taxes, and allow the businesses that generate the money to keep it.

In other news, also covered by NSSF but overlooked somehow by the networks and all other routine “news” outlets, the FBI’s NICS background checks show 886,183 checks were made in May, a 10.3 percent increase from 803,051 reported in May 2007. Adjusted state figures show checks up 8.8 percent during the month. Year-to-date figures show a total of 4,831,693 background checks reported by NICS, on track to reach 10 million for 2008.

———-

3- Gun Intolerance Tolerated

The lamestream media told you:

Little.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Empty Blank Shell Casing Gets Fourth-Grader Suspended: A Massachusetts fourth-grader was suspended from elementary school for bringing a souvenir to school — an empty shell casing from a blank used in a Memorial Day celebration.

A uniformed veteran gave the 10-year-old two empty rifle shell casings from blanks as a souvenir. He gave one to his grandfather, and kept the other. When he brought it to school, a teacher confiscated it, his mother was called in and he was suspended for five days. The school is resisting efforts to correct the egregious abuse and humiliation of the student, and has so far refused to return the valuable harmless private-property souvenir of Memorial Day. (Source.)

It’s unclear how government-run schools teach social sciences or history or civics, if the presence of even an empty shell casing is grounds for suspension. According to leading education experts, the unfortunate answer is that, in many cases, all students get these days is a whitewashed revisionist impression of history, minus truth.

———-

4- Prison For Misfire

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Efforts to rein in the frequently rogue Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives took a step backwards this month with the dedication of its mammoth new 400,000-square-foot headquarters in Washington D.C. The $207 million facility is the first to incorporate all the security design elements proposed after the Oklahoma City bombing. Although the agency doesn’t even regulate alcohol and tobacco anymore, it’s name remains the same, for reasons that remain unclear. The Dept. of Redundancy Dept. was unavailable was unavailable for comment.

The new BATFE building, “will inspire the men and women of BATFE as they carry out their mission to reduce violent crime and protect the nation,” said Acting Director Michael J. Sullivan in the agency’s press release, circulated by the high-priced PR Newswire press service, and paid for with tax dollars. (Source.)

It’s not clear how that goal recently led to the arrest of a man whose 20-year-old rifle malfunctioned and fired several shots at once. The man had given the firearm to an associate to try at a range, and when the accident happened 120 rounds later, the owner was found and charged with illegally transferring a machine gun. The man who fired the gun was not charged.

The judge in the case believed the defendant, Army Reservist David Olofson, knew about the gun’s condition, “or should have.” He got 30 months in prison, but is appealing. (Source.)

“It didn’t matter the government had repeatedly failed to replicate automatic fire until they replaced the ammunition with a softer primer type,” according to Guns Magazine. “It didn’t even matter that the prosecution admitted it was not important to prove the gun would do it again if the test were conducted today,” the magazine said. “What mattered was the government’s position that none of the above was relevant because ‘[T]here’s no indication it makes any difference under the statute.”

ATF lacks written standards and procedures for conducting tests, which are conducted in secret. WorldNetDaily’s story of the incident differs markedly with the lamestream report linked above from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

———-

5- Unexpected Tax Cuts

The lamestream media told you:

Green activists, environmental pundits, anti-foreign-oil interests and many in Congress and state legislatures have been clamoring for significant increases in gasoline taxes, to reduce use and force research into energy alternatives, renewable energy, higher mileage cars, and to disrupt our dependence on foreign oil.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Now that gasoline is at $4 per gallon and rising, all the green anti-growth fuelists are getting their wishes fulfilled, but unintended consequences are dogging them.

With gas prices high enough to slow consumption and encourage switching to low use vehicles like unsafe tiny cars and motorcycles, government revenue from gas taxes have dipped dramatically, causing politicians to sweat profusely.

Hard pressed for funds from gasoline taxes to build roads, infrastructure — and multiple uses that have nothing to do with gas or driving — cities, states and the feds are desperate for cash and not sure what they will do. Unalterable commitments to road building and various programs and entitlements were made and locked in before the revenues were generated, in typical government style.

Now that they can’t squeeze more dollars out of reluctant consumers, they’re in a bind and appear dissatisfied. Government generates no money of its own, forced by design to live off the backs of those who work and do produce goods and services.

The greens are thankful, though, that they can’t be blamed for the problem, since they were unsuccessful in artificially boosting prices to the point where it would have the “desired” effect.

———-

6- Journalists Advance Deception

The lamestream media told you:

Islam is the religion of peace.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

It’s not clear how or why America’s “news” media so uniformly jumped onto that promo line right after the 9/11 Muslim jihadi attacks on America, but the newspeak game has not gone away, and is being promoted anew from an unlikely quarter.

The Society of Professional Journalists, in their latest online newsletter, is promoting an Arab-backed website that helps journalists define words. SPJ reports that the website’s creator says, “madrassa” is “little more than the Arabic word for school.” (Source.) The newsletter goes to more than 10,000 journalists primarily in the U.S.

The typo laden site also notes that the word “jihad” has been hijacked by media extremists (and jihadis) to help promote hate. If SPJ keeps such dubious contacts coming it can quit wondering why the mainstream public no longer trusts the lamestream media.

Dozens of SPJ staffers and brass have been personally notified by The Uninvited Ombudsman of the questionable reference source. None have responded. Go figure.

———-

7- Accurate Lies Continue

The lamestream media told you:

In a bylined article, Mathew Benson writes:

Would Governor Leave Office For Job With Obama?

Gov. Janet Napolitano isn’t thinking about her chances at a spot on the Democratic presidential ticket, she assures.

She isn’t focused on scenarios under which she’d land a choice Cabinet spot in a Barack Obama administration… But… politicos are buzzing about the likelihood Napolitano will receive an offer she won’t want to refuse, enticing her to abandon the final two years of her term.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Abandoning any vestige of ethics and confirming fears of news consumers that the media will publish without question even the most outlandish nonsense as long as they quote it correctly, Gannett’s number two newspaper, The Arizona Republic, featured obvious, self-evident silliness on page one in its June 9 issue.

“The deceptive attribution ’she assures’ fools no one,” says one anonymous news-media observer, “except perhaps the lapdog reporter promoting the obvious lie.”

Even dull news readers recognize that a political animal like a governor, who was an early supporter of Obama, has given thought to the possibilities if the man is elected, especially with “politicos” all speculating on what post she might be offered.

“It’s like saying, ‘Don’t think of a zebra’ and then believing a zebra doesn’t come to mind. No, it’s worse than that,” the anonymous observer assures.

An ethical reporter might have said, “The governor doesn’t want to discuss the chance that she might get a tempting offer from Obama, or what offers they may have already discussed when she agreed to give him her endorsement.” Instead he chose intelligence-insulting balderdash, but the public is getting used to such bald affronts from lamestream reporters and their complicit editors.

———-

8- Different Flood Results

The lamestream media told you:

Dramatic images of homes flooded to their rooftops attest to the stunning extent of devastation caused by Mississippi River flooding in Iowa, Illinois, Missouri and elsewhere. Footage of local citizens aiding each other, filling sandbags, reinforcing levees, and calmly dealing with the disaster are a positive sign of the American spirit at work. The flooding is at least as bad and may be worse than the nation experienced during the Katrina episode in Louisiana.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Ray Nagin, Mayor of New Orleans, could not be reached for an opinion on why his self-proclaimed “Chocolate City” suffered endless looting and lawlessness after an epic flooding disaster, while entire states on the Mississippi River have only experienced cooperative efforts to ameliorate the disaster. It’s not clear whether FEMA, highly visible in the New Orleans event but remarkably low profile in the current flooding, played a role in the different outcomes. It could have been the wind, which the Gulf Coast endured, while the current flood states only have countless square miles of inundation and billions in property and industry damage.

———-

9- Overwhelming Campaign Funding

The lamestream media told you:

B. H. Obama continues to attract significantly more campaign funding than John McCain, leaving the GOP senator scrambling for general funds from his party, and giving the Democrat a significant advantage in the presidential contest.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

For unknown reasons, reporters have consistently failed to ask why McCain’s Campaign Finance Reform Act, specifically designed to remove massive funding that swings elections, has yielded little more than constant race reports on who’s winning the money collections for gaining office.

“It’s like campaign finance reform has been a stimulus package, pouring tens of millions monthly into the race with no brakes, no limits, an no reporting on why the supposed reform bill is such an abject failure,” says one financially savvy observer who prefers to remain anonymous. She has “maxed out” her personal contributions, so opened “527″ groups to collect additional millions for, surprisingly, both candidates. “Might as well back them both,” she said, “like the big boys do, so no matter who wins, I win.”

———-

10- Black Male Blackmail

The lamestream media told you:

Harriet Christian, a Hillary supporter, made national news when she spoke out publicly about the odd goings on within the Democrat party leadership in deciding to selectively admit and reject votes from Michigan and Florida. This was termed “punishment” for people making up their own minds about how to vote during caucuses. Her rant at the DNC received nearly a million hits on YouTube within 48 hours, and an exclusive interview on FOX-TV.

One of her claims, that people asked “Is the country ready for a woman as president,” but didn’t ask “Is the country ready for a black as president,” has led some to claim she is a racist, but she was only repeating what people everywhere were saying.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

As guest columnist Craig Cantoni made clear recently (Page Nine No. 46), “racist” and “racial” are not synonyms. Asking questions about race are racial questions, perfectly normal and legitimate in civilized conversation.

Harriet’s point, long avoided by lamestream outlets, points to blatant racism and support of that racism by some blacks and some other people “of color,” who effortlessly promote inequality and unequal treatment for themselves, self-imposed segregation, racial benefits and entitlements, and exclusionary practices that would receive fiery attacks if done by other groups, especially whites.

The racist hatred spewed from the pulpit of Obama’s church — and especially the wildly exuberant acceptance of it by the flock — is a prime example, and has received some attention, finally forcing Obama to withdraw from his church of 20 years.

The issue though has not yet reached the endemic racist nature of structures like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, The United Negro College Fund, The National Council for The Race (”La Raza,” a Hispanic group), Black History Month, Black Entertainment TV, or literally thousands of groups that place their race at the heart of their activities, instead of their activities at the heart of their activities.

People who examine these issues are traditionally attacked as racists, primarily by ethnic clusters of real racists, without examining the substance of the arguments.

———-

11- Counterintuitive Man says:

Lobbying and lobbyists are swell!

The candidates and the media whine non-stop about lobbyists, power brokers and bowing to special interests, but they don’t have their thinking caps turned on!

Politicians swear to uphold the Constitution, which says we the people have an absolute right to “petition Congress for a redress of grievances.” How do you think you do that, by writing a letter?

Every industry, every group and every person has the freedom and an inalienable right to lobby Congress directly themselves! And they should — it’s the American way!

If you want the elites in Congress to consider your wishes, what better way than to hire a pro to represent you! Or two pros!

If someone wants to cut off your access to Congress by outlawing your professional representatives, that makes them the enemy!

Lobbying is why America is better than a dictatorship! Well, it’s part of why.

If your mouth and brain don’ta worka so good, it’s great that you can hire extra brainpower and a mouthpiece to speaka for you!

If you can’t spend your time in that festering pesthole inside the Beltway, it’s great that you can hire some hired gun to stay there for you! They even like it!

If your Rolodex is already full, it’s great to bring in a specialist with an effective Rolodex in your stead!

People who love or hate any issue (take, for example, guns) have a protected right to lobby for their cause! What a great idea! Lobbying means you have a level playing field! It also means you don’t have to shoot at each other!

If your opponents are better organized, have more supporters, raise more money or can hire more lobbyists than you, tough noogies pal! That’s what majority rule is all about! Go get more supporters and more money, or recognize you’re just marginal flaky losers!

Knowing that legislators are often bottom-feeding maggots, it just makes sense to sic a barracuda on them to get their attention!

Your enemies are constantly buttonholing the influence peddlers, why shouldn’t you! It’s only fair!

The powerful drug-company lobbies face off against the powerful patient-and-doctor lobbies! It’s almost like a ball game, except ball players get paid more! Well, some do. It’s totally American!

Yes, lobbying upholds every great tradition we have — representative government, democratic principles, citizen participation, equal rights, free markets, great pay,
first amendment rights to free speech, assembly and petition, and so much more!

Now, will someone please tell this to the “news” media and the presidential candidates. Thank you. That is all.

–

Well, not quite all — this scene from Eddie Murphy’s film The Distinguished Gentlemen says it better than I can:

O’Connor (the lobbyist, over lunch): Listen, I’d like to do more money for you — I just need to know your positions on a few issues. [takes out a pen and leather notecard case.] For instance, where are you on sugar price supports?

Tommy (Eddie Murphy, as a new Congressman, pauses for thought): Sugar price supports. Where do you think I should be, Tommy?

O’Connor: Sh*t — makes no difference to me. If you’re for ‘em, I got money for you from my sugar producers in Louisiana and Hawaii. If you’re against ‘em, I got money for you from the candy manufacturers.

Tommy: You pick.

O’Connor: [writing] Let’s put you down as for. Now what about putting limits on malpractice awards?

Tommy: You tell me.

O’Connor: Well, if you’re for ‘em, I got money from the doctors and insurance companies. If you’re against ‘em, I got money from the trial lawyers. Tell you what, let’s say against. Now how about pizza?

Tommy: (indicating his plate) I’ll stick with the salad.

O’Connor: Not for lunch, shm*ck, for PAC money. A lot of the frozen pizzas use phony cheese. There’s a law pending requiring them to disclose it on their labels. Where do you stand?

Tommy: (Thinks for a moment) If I vote for the labels… then I get money from the dairy industry…

O’Connor: Good…

Tommy: And if I vote against the labels, I get money from the frozen food guys.

O’Connor: Excellent! And don’t forget the ranchers, because they get hurt if pepperoni sales go down!

Tommy: [laughing in admiration] A pepperoni lobby. I love this town.

O’Connor: So which is it?

Tommy: F*ck the cheese people. Thanks to them my office smelled like smelt for a week.

O’Connor: All right. For.

Tommy: So tell me — with all this money on every side, how does anything get done?

O’Connor: It doesn’t! That’s the genius of the system!

———-

See the official Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics here.
Compare it to the news you see every day.

Thanks for reading!
Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

---

Visit the PAGE NINE weblog.	Sign up for automatic RSS feeds
Contact Alan Korwin	Visit the Gunlaws.com website

 

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
May 1, 2008

 

 

Contents:
(searchable by item number)

1- Earth Day Follies
2- Olympic Shooting Champion
3- Media Range Day
4- College Shotgun Champions
5- Levy On Tour
6- Self Deportation Working
7- Gun Control Refresher
8- Columbine-Style Denials
9- Phony Gun Endorsement
10- Journalists Promote Segregation
11- Counterintutitve Man Says: What Me Polygamy
12- Special guest columnist Craig J. Cantoni
Government Harming not Global Warming

STARTERS:

New Mexico’s Gun Laws back in print (new edition too!) after a lengthy absence: here.

Seeking aid with links — our National Directory (blue button at gunlaws.com) is updated with new state gun-rights groups. Is yours there, or do you know of others? Please advise: here.

Our brand new 32-page full-color catalog is hot off the press. Send a street address and we’ll send you one free, full of cool new stuff. Even “Guns Save Lives” buttons you can’t get elsewhere.

Duquesne U. Handgun Violence Symposium on C-SPAN. To see Korwin at this link, drag their scroll knob just right of the five control buttons below their screen: here.

All indexes on the Heller gun-ban case: here.

Tuck In Your Shirt Policy designed to disarm students — I laughed out loud: here.

———-

1- Earth Day Follies

The lamestream media told you:

April 22 was Earth Day, when all reasonable people praised and worshipped Mother Earth, danced gaily with renewable organic flowers in their hair, adopted the deepest principles of self-sacrifice environmentalism — which has been proven to be a scientific fact — and conserve, reuse, recycle, reduce and lower their standard of living to save the planet and achieve equality through self sacrifice. If man-and-woman-kind weren’t inherently evil consumers of Earth’s bounty, led by the U.S. and industrialized oppressor nations with a high standard of greed, this wouldn’t be needed in the first place.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

An unknown number of people worldwide, suspecting hypocrisy in stories about Earth Day, have named April 22nd as “Exploit the Earth Day,” led by a clever band of merry men and one Craig Biddle, who The Uninvited Ombudsman does not know. According to Biddle:

” ‘Exploit the Earth or die. It’s not a threat. It’s a fact.’ Either man takes the Earth’s raw materials — such as trees, petroleum, aluminum, and atoms — and transforms them into the requirements of his life, or he dies. To live, man must produce the goods on which his life depends; he must produce homes, automobiles, computers, electricity, and the like; he must seize nature and use it to his advantage. There is no escaping this fact. Even the allegedly ‘noble’ savage must pick or perish. Indeed, even if a person produces nothing, insofar as he remains alive he indirectly exploits the Earth by parasitically surviving off the exploitative efforts of others.” (Source.)

During intensive questioning, Counterintuitive Man said, “Biddle’s right,” and added, “Atoms includes but is not limited to carbon atoms, and Biddle forgot to mention food — you need to exploit earth’s resources for food.” Too many people fail to exploit earth for food and starve, he notes, leading to calls for funding from nations that do exploit earth for food.

———-

2- Olympic Shooting Champion

The lamestream media told you:

Unruly demonstrators attacked the Olympic torch relay in this city, and in that city, and enroute to a ship, and it had to detour, and be hidden from view, and blah blah blah diplomats are upset.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Three-time Olympic athlete Lones W. Wigger, now 70, has been officially inducted into the U.S. Olympic Hall of Fame. Mr. Wigger competed in 1964 in Tokyo, 1968 in Mexico, and 1972 in Munich, where he took two gold medals and one silver medal in — rifle shooting. The induction ceremony is set for June 19 in Chicago. (Source.)

In a 25-year career, he won 13 gold medals and five silvers at the Pan American games, and 111 medals in total while setting 29 world records in international competition. His achievements are a great honor for America, the Olympics, the shooting sports in general, and are more newsworthy than a media circus over a torch. The lamestream media didn’t get the memo.

———

3- Media Range Day

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Bass Pro Shops will be the title sponsor for “Media Day at the Range” for the next three years.

The fourth annual Media Day at the Range, scheduled for the day before the SHOT Show, will be on Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2009, at the Orange County Sheriff’s Range in Orlando. This event gives outdoor journalists the opportunity to handle and shoot new products from leading manufacturers. The event benefits youth shooting organizations, including the Orange County 4-H Shooting Sports.

Although the SHOT Show is generally overrun with outdoor journalists, lamestream media are as scarce as gun-rights advocates in a Democrat’s party. In the past however, when journalists have been taken to a range, their gun-bigotry attitudes tend to soften, which is a good thing. Take a journalist to the range, if you can convince one to join you. How about that — you need to convince these people to go. Don’t that beat all.’

———-

4- College Shotgun Champions

The lamestream media told you:

Students and guns don’t mix. Schools are no place for guns, gun talk, gun history, gun training, gun safety, gun science, ballistics, marksmanship, gun drawings or pointed-finger make-believe guns. Any gun news coming from schools vill only deal viss crime und disaster.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The Intercollegiate Clay Target Championships in 2008 were the largest ever in the event’s 40-year history, reports the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a large professional organization blacked out by “news” groups for reasons that remain unclear.

Lindenwood University of St. Charles, Mo., has claimed its fifth straight national title, edging out Texas A&M, Kansas State and more than 30 other colleges. Men’s, women’s and other trophy winners are listed at the link below. The Top 20 teams overall, with targets hit (out of 1,600 thrown) were:

1. Lindenwood University, 1,528
2. Texas A&M University, 1,522
3. Kansas State University, 1,447
4. Colorado State University, 1,427
5. University of Missouri – Columbia, 1,427
6. Fort Hays State University, 1,415
7. George Mason University, 1,412
8. Virginia Tech University, 1,405
9. Trinity University, 1,404
10. Southeastern Illinois College, 1,341
11. Sam Houston State University, 1,284
12. Kansas State University, Team 2, 1,283
13. University of Wyoming, 1,261
14. Purdue University, 1,246
15. Lindenwood University, Team 2, 1,240
16. Radford University, 1,217
17. University of Louisiana – Lafayette, 1,178
18. University of Nebraska – Omaha, 1,171
19. Texas A&M – Corpus Christi, 1,170
20. Eastern Kentucky University, 1,152

Ivy League schools were busy booking Ward Churchill speeches and did not compete.
(Source.)

In other news, NICS background checks for firearms in March were 1,040,863, an increase of 6.7% over the same time last year. First quarter figures were 3,004,549. Predictions persist that sales will skyrocket on or about the next presidential election, regardless of who wins. Ammo prices are already rising.

———-

5- Levy On Tour

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Bob Levy, the man who financed and enabled the D.C. v. Heller gun-ban case has been touring nationally to promote his new book (The Dirty Dozen) on the 12 worst cases decided by the Supreme Court. He appeared at an Institute for Justice seminar last week, among many stops. (Source.)

If he had advanced notice on the release of the Heller decision he would go to D.C. for the news, but he says he doesn’t expect any. The Court will announce its announcement when it’s ready, that is all. Could be any day, must be by end of June.

The Justices are not influenced by outside forces between the hearing and the decision, in Levy’s opinion. The Uninvited Ombudsman has received similar remarks from other people in a position to know. State courts are not so insulated from dinner conversations. I’m unsure.

Levy will not be pursuing more gun cases, this was enough. More than enough. He had decided to get involved at the urging of trusted peers at the Cato Institute and in his private practice.

Of two main reasons for picking newcomer Gura as lead attorney, the man was totally dedicated to the issue and the cause, and worked independently to come up to speed beyond what payments could motivate; The fact that he was willing to work for pay that violated minimum wage laws was not overlooked by Levy who had to pay the bills, for nearly five years to get the case heard.

Gura took an enormous gamble in taking the assignment. Was it a career move or folly? What does his wife think? I’ve got a wife — I know how important that element is. Four-plus years of immersion in a crucial American history issue, with inadequate compensation, you have to imagine what his spouse and peers thought.

Levy had to resist enormous pressure to bring in a known heavyweight, like former Solicitor General Ted Olson, but Levy stayed true to his promise to Gura.

Gura is generally seen as a champion, praised widely for an excellent job. He has also been the subject of harsh criticism, for his perceived easy acceptance of “reasonable” gun-control measures, assessed here.

And he, along with Levy, the NRA and everyone else, will stand as villains in the annals of history, if the decision finally comes down that in some way allows the Bradys to claim victory, because the standard of review for “acceptable laws” is sufficiently lax to legislate the right to keep and bear arms out of existence.

Everyone’s speculating on what the decision will be. Like Bob, I’m waiting to see.

The lamestream will issue a verdict almost immediately. Most of them will not read the anticipated lengthy decision — they’ll just read the one-page “syllabus” or summary that accompanies decisions (written by clerks, not the Justices).

Or they will simply quote each other, led by the nose by the Associated Press, Washington Post and New York Times, the most gun-prejudiced organizations in the country. And then they’ll wonder why their credibility is in the toilet. Hint: It’s down there because they’ve earned it.

Counterintuitive Man believes most reporters who could actually read the decision would not be able to tell what it means. This could not be confirmed.

It will probably take me a week, maybe more after the pundits pronounce what the decision means, to issue an assessment. I’ll study it, actually look up the cross references (there will be many), and talk with experts nationwide to understand what the Court has done about our rights, before writing about it. Wait for it.

———-

6- Self Deportation Working

The lamestream media told you:

Xenophobic anti-immigration hardliners are proposing unworkable laws that target poor working people who just want to get ahead. The proposals, which won’t work, rely on racial profiling and can’t be fairly enforced.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Patriotic citizens resisting tidal waves of illegal immigration (called xenophobic anti-immigration hardliners by the “news” media) are celebrating the successes of recently enacted laws, especially in Arizona, where more people sneak into the country than anywhere else.

Top federal officials are calling the Arizona deportation policy “a model” and want other states to follow. Under this program, jailed non-violent illegal immigrants are released from prison and immediately deported. The state has sent 1,443 such prisoners to ICE, saving $18.6 million since 2005. (Source.)

In other news, five tax-funded Arizona schools are set for closing for lack of students. Officials blame a new state law that severely punishes businesses that hire illegal aliens, forcing the illegals to flee. More than 1,000 students did not re-enroll in January, when the new law took effect.

Since schools get money for every pupil attending, they claim this has “cost” them millions. Actually, this saves taxpaying citizens millions, a subtle difference missed by the “news” media for unknown reasons.

Spokesmen for the illegals say this is not entirely unexpected, as the illegals are moving to states without laws designed to block them. Arizona wishes these sanctuary locations well.

State representative Russell Pearce, a leading border-protection advocate characterized as an immigration hardliner in “news” reports, says “self deportation” works, comparing it to an amusement park. “Just stop the free rides and turn off the lights and everyone leaves.”

———-

7- Gun Control Refresher

The lamestream media told you:

The NICS Improvement Act, also known as the “Stop Nut Jobs From Buying Guns At Retail” bill, is the first federal gun-control law in many years, according to leading news outlets everywhere.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

For lists of more than 100 changes to federal gun-control laws in the past five years, visit this link.

Both the Bradys and the NRA claimed victory in this bill’s passage. Pro-rights lawyers rewrote the entire bill before enactment, changing serious infringements into legitimate bans on gun sales to certifiable mental cases. This infuriated the antis and was generally praised by pro-rights advocates. The unedited Brady version would have allowed arbitrary denial of rights to anyone, by “determination” by unnamed authorities, with no appeal process.

Many prior gun-control laws enacted to protect gun rights, which we can expect to be “re-managed” under an anti-rights administration or Congress, included:

• –Judiciary may not tax or add fees to the Brady NICS check;
• –NICS must destroy certain records related to retail gun sales;
• –Federal officers get limited funding for firearm competitions and awards;
• –Reiteration of ban on centralizing certain firearms records;
• –No changes allowed to Curios or Relics list;
• –Continuing denial of relief for people with federal firearms disability except for corporations;
• –No electronic retrieval allowed for out-of-business dealer records;
• –Safeguards on using dealer records in “fishing-expedition” police work;
• –$45 million for prosecutions to reduce gun violence;
• –A renewed ban against advocating or promoting gun control by the Centers for Disease Control
• –Expiration of arbitrary “named-weapons” ban, convincingly but inaccurately labeled “assault” weapons (assault is a type of behavior, not a type of hardware).

———-

8- Columbine-Style Denials

The lamestream media told you:

A 16-year-old South Bend, Indiana, teen boy has planned a “Columbine-style attack” on his high school, according to police who intervened and apprehended the suspect.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

“News reports do not encourage copycat behavior,” says every news media group in the nation. Yeah, right. A “Columbine-style attack.” Columbine was a single tragic event that occurred more than a decade ago but still makes headlines in lamestream reports. More people die in any given month from medical errors in any state, a news item perpetually suppressed by the “news” media.

———-

9- Phony Gun Endorsement

The lamestream media told you:

The American Hunters and Shooters Association, a mainstream gun-owner group, has endorsed Sen. Obama for his reasonable positions on gun control. The Senator has repeatedly said he supports the second amendment.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The American Hunters and Shooters Association, a Brady-endorsed anti-gun-rights group pretending to be a pro-rights group, wants people to believe gun owners are leaning toward Barack H. Obama. This is the man who, in a 1996 candidate questionnaire declared his support for a complete ban on the manufacturing, sale and possession of handguns and undefined “assault weapons.” In Pennsylvania recently he said, “I am not in favor of concealed weapons.” AHSA believes that would be “reasonable, common-sense” gun policy, just like D.C.’s supporters of a total ban on any working firearm in your own home. Why any gun owners in their right mind would support such positions was unexplained at press time.

———-

10- Journalists Promote Segregation

The lamestream media told you:

[Actually, they only told themselves, in the industry trade publication, The Quill] The Hispanic news excellence contest is coming, sign up now, the Black Journalists reporters meeting is coming, sign up now…

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The Uninvited Ombudsman does not participate in racially segregated events because it fosters racism, and such events are typically supported by racially oriented groups that deny their racism and are typically actively involved in accusing every one else of… racism.

Last month’s news media Ethics Week theme was, “Act Independently.” They just don’t get it.

———-

11- Counterintuitive Man says:

This polygamist thing confuses me — why would any rational man want more than one wife? And how is that anyone else’s business as long as the adults consent — as unlikely as that may seem? Our Man Flint had four women, and was revered, do we have our sensibilities screwed on right?

When the “news” calls your home a “compound” you’re screwed blued and tattooed, even if you call it a ranch (which reporters will ignore, there’s just no sensationalism there).

Remember — a compound has barracks, the polygamists lived in dormitories. Dormitories are found on a campus, which is what the aerial views looked like (but there’s even less zip in dormitory than ranch).

Polygamy is a religious choice, or at least used to be in the land of the free. A leading panel of experts could find no powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to regulate polygamy, or marriage in any form. The correct term, long forgotten, is “holy matrimony,” clearly implying no basis for government interference.

Abuse of minor children however is a separate issue, and a legitimate criminal matter.

At least, the obsession with these people is squeezing out any mention of the billions missing from other people in the Bear Sterns scandal, and the execs who cashed out just prior to the “unexpected” collapse and subsequent bailout with taxpayer money.

Speaking of polygamy dangers, whatever happened to the killer bee threat that was going to ruin life as we know it?

———-

12- Special guest columnist Craig J. Cantoni

What if government harming were covered as extensively as global warming?

A recent issue of Time magazine has a cover story about global warming. How original. It’s just one of hundreds of messages that drip on our heads and our children’s heads each day about global warming.

Drip-drip-drip.

Hundreds of other messages drip on us about Big Oil, evil corporations, rampant racism, rising income inequality, and the glories of diversity. The drops come from the media, K-12 schools, universities, and, amazingly, even from corporate advertising.

Drip-drip-drip.

The torrent contains some facts, but most of it is hyperbole and hysteria. I’d rather be water-boarded than endure this form of water torture.

Curiously, messages about government harming are as rare as rain in Death Valley. By “harming,” I mean the insidious and pervasive harm that government is inflicting on the economy and society.

For example, you won’t see this on the cover of Time: THE $800,000 INJUSTICE

The staggering sum of $800,000 is what the unfunded liabilities for entitlements and public pensions will come to — per child — if they are bequeathed to the 75 million children under the voting age of 18.

How many times a day do you hear about this coming travesty of justice from the establishment media, from our benevolent government, and from the presidential candidates (aka the Three Stooges)? Better yet, how many times have your children been told in government K-12 schools about the lives of servitude they face to pay off the $800,000 bill?

Oh, sorry. I showed my ignorance with the last question. Every time I’ve written that government schools are inherently statist and engage in propaganda, parents email nastygrams in response, calling me an ignoramus and other names too gross to repeat. Since I’m an ignoramus, it must be true that K-12 students are taught as often about the danger of the $800,000 as they are taught about the danger of global warming.

Right, parents?

Hello, are you there, parents? Knock-knock, anyone home? Can you hear me above the sound of the drips?

Funny thing, but when I told my kid about the $800,000, he was much more interested in that subject than he was in the subjects of global warming and diversity.

Did I break the law by telling him? Have Senators John McCain and Russ Feingold made it a crime for a father to give such facts to his son 60 days prior to an election?

For sure, you can count on President Barack “Bolshevik” Obama and First Lady Michelle “Fidel” Obama to increase the volume of drips. After all, both of them think that 13,000 hours spent with unionized teachers in government classrooms is not enough indoctrination during childhood. Drip-drip-drip.

Borrowing a page from the Third Reich and the Soviet Union, they also want young adults to join a government job corps after graduation to work for the good of society and the environment — and, of course, to learn more about the party line. Drip-drip-drip-drip-drip-drip.

You’d think that in 13,000 hours there would be time to teach children such apolitical facts as these:

• – that the government’s share of national income has doubled in the last 80 years;
• – that transfer payments, subsidies and handouts accounted for about five percent of federal spending 100 years ago, versus over half of spending today;
• – that the cost of government and government regulations is almost $30,000 a year per household, or about 65 percent of average household income;
• – that the government created today’s healthcare mess 66 years ago;
• – that many, if not most, socioeconomic problems are caused by out-of-wedlock births and single-parent families, both of which have been fueled by government policies and praised by media outlets and Hollywood;
• – that public education has failed miserably to achieve its goal of universal education, and that the productivity of public schools has plummeted, as measured by test scores and spending;
• – that government bookkeeping is fraudulent, and that the Social Security Trust Fund is an accounting fiction; and
• – that the government is covering its profligate spending by debasing the currency and punishing savers with inflation.

If children were to know such facts about government harming as well as they know half-truths about global warming, think of what would happen. They’d grow into adults who would turn off the dripping propaganda faucet.

Of course, that’s why the brainwashers will never teach children about government harming.

An author and columnist, Mr. Cantoni can be reached at via email.

——–

See the official Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics here.
Compare it to the news you see every day.

Thanks for reading!
Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

---

Visit the PAGE NINE weblog.	Sign up for automatic RSS feeds
Contact Alan Korwin	Visit the Gunlaws.com website

 

The Uninvited Ombudsman Report
by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
April 14, 2008

 

 

Contents:
(searchable by item number)

1- Sarah Brady Hospitalized
2- Nobody Minds Shootings
3- Candidates’ Positions Unknown
4- Holster Shoots Gun
5- Solarpanel Trumps Trees
6- Government Workers Superior
7- Preposterous Border Fencing
8- Campaign Finance Deform
9- Study Attacks Newspapers
10- It’s Not China
11- Decades of Trial
12- Special Guest Columnist Eric Cartridge — “Taking Gun Virgins for a Desert Shoot”

STARTERS:

Sarah Brady hospitalized, so husband Jim is a no-show at national “gun violence” symposium where Alan Korwin is flown in to face 10 gun-control advocates and provide “balance”; complete eyewitness report here.

D.C. v. Heller – Eyewitness Reports – Complete Postings are now up, linked from the Supreme Court Gun Cases blue button at gunlaws.com. Final observations, insider scoops, Gura v. Dellinger review, “news” media’s coverage assessed, plus the pre-game, post-game, on-site analysis and four photo galleries –

All the indexes: here.

The Heller Case Wrap-up: here.

The Photo Galleries: here.

Bob Levy, who funded and represented Heller in the case, will be in Phoenix for a Federalist Society debate on it, 4/16/08 (11 a.m. $5), and at the Goldwater Institute on 4/17/08 (5 p.m., free) to discuss his new book. I’ll be his debate partner on 4/16 (they couldn’t find a suitable anti to face him!), I plan to be at the 4/17 event as well –
RSVP Federalist Soc.: 480-558-8300
RSVP Goldwater Inst.: 602-462-5000 ext. 223

The best commentary on Islam’s increasing takeover of Western culture, Pat Condell has done it again, simply superb: here.

———-

1- Sarah Brady Hospitalized — Gun-violence symposium proceeds

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The National Symposium on Handgun Violence was held at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh on April 9, 2008. Ten of the leading gun-control advocates in the nation were scheduled for a coordinated review of “reasonable” limits on the right to keep and bear arms, led by Jim Brady himself, David Hemenway of Harvard and others. News of the event and its surprise ending (covered at the end of this report — Jim was a no-show because of his wife’s sudden medical emergency) has not made national headlines.

A courageous decision was made to provide “balance,” which meant the organizers eventually found me (thanks to a referral from Alan Gura, Dick Heller’s attorney in the D.C. gun-ban case). They got me last-minute non-stop tickets from Phoenix, a room, and 15 minutes at the podium. Ten against one. Hah. I had them outnumbered.

I’ve been studying persuasion skills for a long while and here was an acid test. Was it possible to address an audience like this and not get booed off stage? Could I manage civil discourse with the participants at the luncheon beforehand, maintain composure through the staging, and end up sociable at the afterglow dinner at a fine restaurant?

It’s my belief that the words exist in the universe to convince anyone of anything true, regardless of their predispositions. The trick is in finding those words, in the moment, and delivering them in a way that works, with the proper aplomb. You may not always find the words, but the words are always there. Think of it this way. What would Jesus say. The words are there. Could I find enough of them?

A full-length review of the event is posted at gunlaws.com: here.

———-

2- Nobody Minds Shootings

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

More than 26,000 people gathered at the world-class 1,600-acre Ben Avery Shooting Facility in Phoenix last month, for a family-oriented outdoor expo, and despite constant volleys of gunfire, no one fainted or was scared, no crimes were reported, no one was injured, and no deaths occurred. Lamestream media missed the event.

Crowds were biggest at the machine-gun range, where a small fee got you trigger time on a belt-fed tripod-mounted .30 caliber, hand-cranked authentic replica Gatling gun, and a shoulder fired AK-47, proving the long-known adage that you haven’t had fun till you’ve fired a machine gun. The lamestream media missed the event.

Well-dressed suburban soccer-Mom types strained to get photos of their precious little daughters learning to shoot a bolt-action .22 for the first time, under the watchful eye of well-trained professional instructors. Every type of upscale, downscale, fat, thin, tall, short, attractive, ugly, neat, unkempt, very young, young, old, very old, bright, dull, average, male, female and other type of person plunked down nominal fees to fire cowboy guns, high-power rifles, shotguns, scoped rifles, handguns, practical pistol, and new models from famous American firms like Ruger and Smith and Wesson. Many of the shooting opportunities were free. The lamestream media missed the event.

More than 100 vendors were hawking goods and services, closing sales and making new friends over the distant roar of constant gunfire. No injuries of any kind were reported. No guns went off by themselves. No crimes were committed. The lamestream media missed the event.

In other news, shooting sports outpaced golf in 2006 to capture the number two spot in consumer spending on sports equipment, second only to exercise gear. The lamestream media apparently didn’t get the memo.

———-

3- Candidates’ Positions Unknown

The lamestream media told you:

“Voters Unaware of Candidates Immigration Positions: New Poll” according to a report circulated by the Associated Press.

Guest Columnist Craig Cantoni notes however that:

The headline could have read: “Voters Unaware of Candidates’ Positions on Everything.”

Or: “Voters Unaware of History, Economics, Law, Foreign Policy, Math, Spelling and the Foundations of Our Classical Liberal Republic.”

Repeated calls for voter testing have been turned down by many of the same people who are calling for testing for gun possession.

———-

4- Holster Shoots Gun

The lamestream media told you:

The investigation into the cause of a gunshot on the flight deck of a US Airways plane is ongoing, will look at every possible facet of the incident, and may take a while.

“This is an extremely safe and reliable weapon,” said Greg Alter of the Federal Air Marshal Service. “It’s not going to discharge on its own, is the bottom line.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Someone needs to tell the expert quoted above by Mitch Weiss of the AP, and Weiss too who failed to question the expert, that no gun of any kind discharges on its own. If that’s where the investigation is going, taxpayers can brace for another multi-million dollar, 300-page study that is a waste of slain trees.

Saving taxpayers and government experts the time, everyone with a web connection has already seen my friend Paul Huebl’s video of the likely cause — hopelessly faulty design by bureaucrats doing everything they can to scuttle and impede the program.

Here’s the problem — the lock and holster design, required by TSA, and the rules for using it, are an accident waiting to happen. Here’s Paul (of crimefilenews.com) in Calif. with the FFDO rig, showing how it can fire when the lock is attached. Congrats, Paul, on the zillions of hits your simple video has garnered. See video here.

You can buy this holster yourself: “F.D.O. with lock hole”, model #31L.

———-

5- Solarpanel Trumps Trees

The lamestream media told you:

Richard Treanor and Carolynn Bissett of Sunnyvale, Calif., were criminally prosecuted because their redwood trees cast a shadow over their neighbor’s solar panels. They lost the case and had to have the trees chopped down, after the judge in the case ordered them removed. The trees had been planted before the solar panels were installed, but grew.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Just when it seems Californians cannot get any more bizarre, they prove me wrong. I apologize for being so naive.

———-

6- Government Workers Superior

The lamestream media told you:

“People turn out to pay last respects to deceased firefighter.” Civil servants and others line route as fire truck carries the casket of the fallen Captain. The color photo ran large, above the fold, on page one of the Local news section. Similar stories run in newspapers nationwide with some frequency. (Source.)

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

By glorifying the death of a single government worker, newspapers reinforce the idea that we are not all equal. Any death can be tragic, but a reason to promote one over another is hard to justify, unless unusual bravery and extenuating circumstances exist.

Merely publicizing a death because the person was an official on a government payroll, instead of an average citizen who pays those bills, violates several ethical principles. The employee in this case was waiting for a second kidney transplant, and died at his desk.

Reporters, who generally do not divulge this fact, are encouraged to use “official sources” in gathering, compiling and verifying “news” stories, believing they are somehow superior to other sources. This often leads to government pronouncements, edicts, and glorifications appearing where the news is supposed to go. Other funerals were reportedly held the same day. The obituary section was two pages long and packed with small type and small grayish photos.

———-

7- Preposterous Border Fencing

The lamestream media told you:

Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff is being attacked by critics for using his authority to bypass “37 environmental-, historic- and cultural-protection laws” that stand in the way of building a partial fence along the U.S.-Mexico border.

In other news, high-tech fencing planned by Boeing and others is a complete disaster, with extensive deployments failing to operate as promised. Spokespersons have indicated it will take another three years to make the system work and get it up. Sen. John McCain called it, “a disgrace.”

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Say what? There are how many laws interfering with the defense of our border? These laws were enacted by who exactly? It’s going to take how long to make a camera-and-sensor system work that physically blocks no one? What private business would tolerate a three-year delay in any project of any kind, let alone one that affects national security?

The reporter on the story above, Sean Holstege of Gannett’s Arizona Republic, reports two days later that the Minutemen are on the border for their April muster, and the two groups are relaying detailed accurate information to Border Patrol agents, using store-bought walkie-talkies, and a new technological marvel called a cell phone, a sort of phone that works entirely without wires.

“The small scale operations may seem quaint,” Holstege writes, “but the border groups maintain that their cameras, which transmit wirelessly to the web, have led to the arrest of hundreds of border crossers in recent months.” The Border Patrol welcomes the non-intrusive, non-confrontational assistance of the citizen volunteers, according to the story. Officially, the government doesn’t approve of actions it does not control, and which make it look bad.

“Federal officials said they haven’t seen the volunteer cameras and couldn’t comment,” two obvious lies, carefully reported by Holstege.

Anyone with a fast web connection can volunteer to work the remote cameras from their homes, anywhere in the country. A similar Homeland Security plan, “Project 28,” was delayed for eight months by technical glitches with satellite uplinks.

The lengthy story, full of interesting details, fails to identify how a person can volunteer, but does point out that a full Minuteman deployment on the 1,950-mile border could cost as little as $40 million, while the government system, which doesn’t work, is estimated at $1.2 billion, before cost overruns, additional delays and routine snafus.

The story is here.

To volunteer go here.

———-

8- Campaign Finance Deform

The lamestream media told you:

Barack H. Obama raised $40 million in March, as he “continued to display unrivaled prowess for fundraising,” according to unbylined wire-service reports. This is double the amount raised by Hillary Clinton, and lower than the $55 million raised by Obama in February. McCain raised $11 million in February, and “more” in March, with actual figures not yet available.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

No corrections have been issued concerning the Campaign Finance Reform Act, widely promoted in the “news” media for its ability to remove money from politics. Instead, “reporters” are covering money-raising like it’s some kind of horse race, leaving no room for questioning candidates on their positions. The source of the multi-millions was not disclosed.

———-

9- Study Attacks Newspapers

The lamestream media told you:

“Newspapers faulted for errors, dramatizing”

“To regain public trust, newspapers need to do a better job of editing out misspellings and misquotes, curb the use of unnamed sources, and resist the temptation to sensationalize, a study suggests,” reports Deb Reichmann of the AP.

The American Society of Newspaper Editors released its study on why newspaper credibility is on the decline. “We’ve got to cut down on the errors,” ASNE president Ed Seaton said. The study is part of a three-year project to find out why the public has lost confidence in newspapers.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

“It ain’t about spelling errors,” says one unidentifiable newsman. “And what’s a ‘misquote’? Is that where someone says something, and the paper says something different?”

The report, uncovered in a deep stack of clippings at the Uninvited Ombudsman’s office, is from Dec., 1998. Hmmm.

———-

10- It’s Not China

The lamestream media told you:

China is having a crisis over the Olympic games to be held in China this summer. Chinese officials denounced pro-Tibet demonstrators saying the internal affairs of China should not affect the games.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Communist China is having a crisis over the Olympic games to be held in Communist China this summer. Pro-Tibet demonstrators denounced Communist Chinese officials saying the brutal suppression of Tibet should directly affect the games.

———-

11- Decades of Trial

The lamestream media told you:

“Jury starts deliberating today in 1984 Tempe murder case.” Robert Ortloff is accused of bludgeoning and strangling the woman before burning the body. The case rests heavily on testimony of a “famous jailhouse snitch,” a former Atlanta prosecutor.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial…”

———-

12- Special Guest Columnist Eric “.44 Magnum” Cartridge on — “Taking Gun Virgins for a Desert Shoot”

My line of work as a producer of advertising, photo shoots and television commercials brings me in contact with people from all over the world. They come to Arizona all winter for our consistent sunshine and great natural beauty. Many of my clients are from New York, California, England, Canada and other places not known for their tolerance of guns and gun owners. The right to keep and bear arms is legendary in the American West but equally alien in less enlightened parts of the world, and often the subject of guns comes up in conversation while we are driving around the state looking at filming (shooting?) locations.

A couple of weeks ago I was working with a New York City-based client on a fashion catalog, and the photographer said, “Eric, what’s the deal with guns out here? I hear lots of people have guns in Arizona.” I replied, “Of course we do, don’t you have guns in New York?” (knowing full well that most New Yorkers of course don’t).

He responded that he didn’t have a gun. Then he carefully asked if I did.

“Well of course I own guns,” I said, feigning surprise at the question.

“How many guns do you have?” he asked, with eyebrows raised, and I nonchalantly told him I had about 30 or so, but I hadn’t exactly counted them in a while.

This got everyone’s attention, and he followed up with, “Why do you need 30 guns, Eric?” I responded by asking the photographer why he needed 30 shirts in his wardrobe — “Obviously, I don’t want to wear the same gun every day,” I responded somewhat sarcastically to his somewhat insulting question.

At this point, the wardrobe stylist (a nice woman from London) asked me if I had any handguns. I replied that of course, I had a half-dozen Glocks like the police carry, several revolvers like the police used to carry, and of course many rifles and even a couple shotguns.

She was amazed at this and correctly pointed out that in England, nobody has been able to own a handgun for as long as she could remember, and only a few old farmers had rifles and shotguns for hunting. She then asked me if it were legal to own all those guns, and I had to laugh. She got a belly laugh in the face at that question. I said, “If it were illegal for me to own all these guns, would I be admitting that to a carload of clients?”

I explained that all my guns were indeed legal, and that anyone except convicted felons and other serious malcontents could own and use firearms and go out shooting in the Arizona desert.

Everyone’s ears perked up, so I did what any intelligent pro-rights activist would do — I asked the obvious question, “Who would like to join me for some shooting out in the desert?”

I told them I could bring a variety of cool guns; I would insist on showing them how to handle them safely since they all but admitted abject ignorance, and we would have a blast shooting at cans in the desert. The gal from London was very interested, and squealed with delight that she had never even held a handgun, much less shot one. When people are availed the opportunity to act like free citizens, and shoot firearms, they accept the offer without hesitation. It’s a freedom thing. Some people just don’t understand.

In the end, I got four absolute “gun virgins” (three women and one man), none of whom had ever fired a gun before, to join me in the desert for a shoot. It’s so regular for free citizens, and so unfathomable for repressed ones. I brought four guns for them try: a Ruger .22 target pistol, a Glock 9mm like police carry, a Smith & Wesson .38/.357 revolver, and a semi-auto AK-style rifle.

When I took the guns out of their cases and we started setting up the tin cans, the questions started flying. “How many bullets does that gun hold?” “Is that the kind of gun the police use?” “Which one is the most powerful?” and the rather obvious question about whether the AK was a “machine gun.” Media propaganda had worked its work on these unsuspecting individuals, but it was easily dispelled by, well, simple reality.

I dutifully answered these and a hundred other questions about calibers, hollowpoint bullets, the difference between semi-auto and full-auto weapons, why citizens might need guns for self-defense and why nearly everything about guns they have seen in video (both on the news and in the movies) was completely wrong.

As I explained the safety rules and we began shooting (one shooter at a time, of course, and I stood next to each to ensure safety), I did my best to inspire confidence in them. The firearms I brought were nothing more than common household firearms which any man, woman, or child could handle safely with a modest amount of training.

We started on the .22, low power and easy, the right way to start virgins, and I pointed out that I had shot guns of this caliber when I was eight-years-old at summer camp. When we moved up to the 9mm Glock, I explained to everyone that this was my wife’s personal gun, and that if she could shoot it, so could any of them. “Your wife’s gun? Your wife has a gun?” “Well sure, doesn’t she need to be as safe as anyone else?” These people were so snowed under media propaganda it was hard to absorb. The .38 revolver was a hit with the smallest gal there because it had very little recoil. It’s heavy.

By the time we got to the AK dusk had descended upon the desert, and all my former “gun virgins” were both excited and confident. One gal expressed some concern that the semi-auto AK would be too powerful for her to handle, so I explained that it was the most popular rifle in the world (even though it wasn’t made by U.S. imperialists), and that it was the choice of peasant women and even young boys during the Vietnam War.

I put the sleek, natural wood, beautifully engineered rifle up to my shoulder and blasted off about ten quick shots just to demonstrate how truly cool this gun was. Since it was dusk, you could see a two-foot flame leapt out of the barrel. I could hear the oohs and aahs of my new shooters. All guns have flash. Only nighttime shooters get to enjoy that.

Everyone got a quick turn with the AK before it got too dark, and we packed up the guns and headed back to their elite, civilized, air-conditioned Scottsdale resort (that is, a normal room as most people experience on a trip). As we were packing up, I was showered with heartfelt thank yous and even some hugs from the gals. I could tell that I had given them an experience they would never forget. An experience it was sad they had never had before.

As soon as we got back in the car, one of my clients clicked text messages madly to her father and her brother about her first gun experience. She kept asking me about what guns and calibers we shot so she could be sure to tell all her friends every last detail. How differently the world would look if the “news” didn’t hide this reality so.

The gal from London was writing down which guns we shot on the back of one of my business cards so she could tell her friends and family in England later. Everyone asked for some spent brass as souvenirs, and I of course obliged. So typical of new shooters, “Can I have the empty casing?” I did warn them however, to please put the brass in their checked luggage when they returned to New York, as airport Fatherland Security might be concerned about the great dangers an empty shell casing could pose on an airplane. I forgot to tell them to wash their hands to get by the puffers.

Although my clients clearly had a “blast” with their first shooting experience, they didn’t have more fun than I did, proudly explaining America’s fine tradition of empowering the individual with firearms and standing up to “authorities” who were in reality elitist snobs bent on convincing them they were unworthy underlings.

I had instructed them in the safe and proper use of routine firearms. I was proud of my new students for their open mindedness and confidence in learning that “guns are good!”

Perhaps they will take the seed of this lesson and spread it to their little corners of the universe where the seeds of freedom are so sorely needed. I encourage you to do the same. Invite someone, especially someone fearful or ignorant of the noble and decent values of firearms, to go shoot some holes in some cans.

———-

See the official Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics here.
Compare it to the news you see every day.

Thanks for reading!
Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman

---

Visit the PAGE NINE weblog.	Sign up for automatic RSS feeds
Contact Alan Korwin	Visit the Gunlaws.com website