Sign up to receive Alan's newsletter by email.

Speaking engagements

  • Invite Alan Korwin to speak at your event! Thought-provoking, entertaining, freedom-oriented topics -- your guests will thank you for the excitement -- long after the applause ends!

Books

Attack On Gun Rights Takes New Shapes

Bureaucrats assume new roles—
testing waters for future administration?

Why use Congress when infringement works without representation?


Abuses skyrocket, but armed public remains quiescent

1. Gunsmiths (in theory at least), according to new "rules" put in place without Congress or public representation or approval, can't operate without international defense materiel qualifications and excessive fees and paperwork. This could force most of them out of business, into bankruptcy or into felony violation of the new "law" (actually, AECA and ITAR import/export regulations, even if you are a strictly domestic operation). Very clever attack on the part of the current administration -- it's another Hussein-Obama executive order.

2. A crucial gunpowder component (nitrocellulose, needed for smokeless powder which has been the key ingredient in what's commonly but inaccurately called gunpowder for decades) has been deemed an explosive by BATFE decree without notice or rationale. This virtually eliminates its transportation or storage by traditional means, by powder manufacturers and others in the manufacturing and distribution chain. Industry experts are (foolishly in my opinion) seeking a delay in implementation of the surprise ruling, instead of the identification of the people who invented this outrageous travesty, and demanding their ouster, with punishment, along with their superiors who facilitated this gross constitutional infringement. This sort of deliberate malfeasance should not go unpunished. Who gave the order? Who do these people think they are?

3. A medical marijuana CARD (not use) is now Second Amendment disqualification, according to a decision of the uber-liberal federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In a case with no parallels, a woman who obtained the card to show support for the medical-marijuana movement -- but who doesn't use pot -- has been disqualified from her constitutional rights, for possession of the plastic card. Wherever you may stand on the drug issue, even the statute itself requires drug use, not government permission-slip possession. In its decision, this Court introduced the idea that you might not be sufficiently mentally OK at times to bear arms, so summarily removing your rights is totally is fine. Whether this applies to beer, over-the-counter medicine that might cause drowsiness and any other mental evaluations was not addressed, but surely can't be far behind in the minds of those who can come up with a decision like this, would seek any means to control the public.


I have said for years:

1- Federal government lacks any legitimate delegated constitutional power to control vegetables (which describes cannabis). The power they assert here is usurped. They could attempt to gain the power legally, but haven't, understanding they might not succeed and the failed attempt would demonstrate they have no authority in the field.

2- Federal government lacks any legitimate delegated constitutional power to control drugs (which marijuana apparently is). The power they assert here is usurped, and has been for decades, even if the public likes the drug prescription system, the various bans, wild price supports, cartels, lack of access and all the rest that goes with usurped powers.

3- With this ruling it is now much more clearly dangerous to your rights to get marijuana from the government cartel than from the Mexican cartel. The government cartel can strip you of your freedom, with massive invasive forces behind them. The Mexican cartel just takes your money. Both can shoot you if they so choose. You can shoot back, of course, but you know where that gets you. If it's against the Mexican and related cartels, your story gets buried, along with you. If it's against the government cartel, you end up on page one, along with the compound you live in, for days.

Obama Nearly Doubles Commutations in Month

The lamestream media told you:

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/nation/2016/08/30/89602538/
USA Today, Gregory Korte -- President Obama announced another 111 commutations, adding on to the 214 he issued weeks ago. He has used his clemency power more times than the last ten presidents combined, according to the Department of Justice... part of the Obama administration's two-year old clemency initiative... About a third of Obama's 673 commutations to date have been for people serving life sentences.

"As successful as we’ve been in reducing crime in this country, the extraordinary rate of incarceration of nonviolent offenders has created its own set of problems that are devastating," he said. "Entire communities have been ravaged where largely men, but some women, are taken out of those communities. Kids are now growing up without parents. It perpetuates a cycle of poverty and disorder in their lives. It is disproportionately young men of color that are being arrested at higher rates, charged and convicted at higher rates, and imprisoned for longer sentences."

Those granted shorter sentences Tuesday were convicted of drug offenses for trafficking cocaine, heroin, marijuana and methamphetamine. But sixteen of the commutations granted Tuesday also included firearms offenses. In his August 4 press conference, he said he's tried to "screen out" inmates with a propensity for violence. 

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Obama of course hasn't doubled prison releases of criminals, or shortened sentences of criminals, he has a czar organizing this. The czar has hired an entire department of people to go over the records of criminals to select the criminals to be released. They are highly paid, sitting in well equipped high-security offices with access to everything they could want or need. They are white executives from the suburbs with 2.3 children in private schools and family vans, or since that would be racist, maybe they're not.

The point is, you don't know who is poring over the 11,477 records (as of Aug. 11), picking the criminals to be released, and the "news" media isn't looking, doesn't care, and isn't informing the public. You're lucky they're even telling you Obama is vastly increasing the numbers of criminals Obama is releasing back into the public, because their sentences are "too harsh." They didn't identify what those sentences are, or what the harsh crimes were. They "reported" it, because Obama announced it, and they are mimics, not reporters.

Apparently in a mental haze, Mr. Obama seems to believe black children are growing up without parents because black drug dealers are arrested in ghettos, overlooking the 70% out-of-wedlock birth rate in black communities, unmentioned in his "news" briefing about releasing criminals. "Kids ('young men of color') are now growing up without parents. It perpetuates a cycle of poverty and disorder in their lives," he said. The president of color is releasing young prisoners of color, issuing clemency at ten times the historic rate, and no one sees any racism in this?

Of Course U.S. Can Ban Alien Immigrants

The lamestream media told you:

Donald Trump is an out-of-control megalomaniac ready to turn the country into an unconstitutional anti-religious concentration camp with his announcement to keep muslim immigrants and visitors out just because there are tens of millions of unhappy ones who are confused about life and want in.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:


The most recent president to exercise U.S statute on the subject was democrat Jimmy Carter, who in 1972 used 8 USC §1182 to summarily block the entry of anyone from Iran. Previously it had been used to block anyone who might have been a communist. The statute grants power to the president in plain English:

8 USC §1182 (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
(Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, enacted June 27, 1952, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act.)


Some libertarian friends hold a utopian dream that we should live in a society without borders, admit anyone, and fail to notice that the nation-state system we do live in makes sense, and we need to defend borders for good reason -- to keep out people who would do us harm, take all our stuff and kill us if we didn't protect what's ours. This is why we need fine and robust border-enforcement laws like the one described here.

I started the list because I noticed, despite the blind ignorant media ranting about Trump wanting to keep out muslims and especially those from jihadi infested cesspools in the middle east who want us all dead, that's already law and has been exercised by their darlings, the democrats.

8 USC §1182 Inadmissible aliens
[List reduced and abbreviated from 100 pages of statute:] Multiple health-related grounds like communicable diseases without cure, criminal grounds, substance traffickers, prostitution and commercial vice, religiously oppressive government officials as defined, human traffickers, money launderers, national security grounds, known terrorists, potential terrorists, people affiliated with terrorism, totalitarians (aimed at communists), Nazis, participants in genocide, users of child soldiers, people likely to become a "public charge" (welfare case), certain job applicants depending on job and other conditions, certain athletes, unqualified physicians and health-care workers (quacks), aliens on parole, false claimants of citizenship, stowaways, smugglers, visa abusers, people without passports, draft evaders, illegal aliens already here, repeat offenders, practicing polygamists, child abductors, unlawful voters, renunciants, tax evaders, other subcategories, and exceptions throughout, this is a partial list.

IMMIGRATION ISN'T BROKEN -- ADVOCATES ARE

Media Distortions Distort Our Thinking

Our system is as good as any nation's


They're just not swamped with invaders like we are


The lamestream media told you:


America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken. America's immigration system is broken.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:


The going narrative is that our immigration system is "broken."

"Broken" is a code word used by agenda-driven interest groups when something is not working the way they want it to work. Nothing is broken. Nothing needs fixing. They just want to put in a fix. A corrupt fix. They want to fix what ain't broke. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

It's a common trick. A subtle but seductive error of logic. It's being used about our fine, well oiled, well planned excellent immigration system. Oh, it could use some adjustment -- what government-run system can't -- but for all intents and purposes it's fine.* What isn't fine, for the broken-advocates, is their inability to flood this nation with teeming humanity, without rational controls.

Continue reading "IMMIGRATION ISN'T BROKEN -- ADVOCATES ARE" »

Government Weather Forecast Tells Nothing, Carefully

The lamestream media told you:

Caleb Jones (Associated Press) Officials with the National Weather Service’s Central Pacific Hurricane Center said Thursday there is about a 40 percent chance the season will be above normal, a 40 percent chance it will be normal and a 20 percent chance it will be below normal. http://ktar.com/story/1091087/feds-say-2016-hurricane-season-in-pacific-will-be-average/


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:


Is it actually possible the AP reporter who reported this report couldn't tell this reports nothing? There is no way to tell if this report is accurate -- even after the fact. If storms are at, above or below average the report will be correct. It is framed so that it cannot be wroPublishng. It is probably the worst example of a report detail, or maybe best that is worthless ever created, tied with who knows how many other government reports. But this one stands out thanks to the math.

How much did this 40/40/20 result cost the tax payers, and how many "scientists" did it take to screw in this light bulb? In fairness, they did say Pacific hurricanes (technically cyclones) will be average, and predict between four and seven. Who's counting, who's accountable and is there any accounting if the count is off? Does it matter if a tax-funded bureau guesses there will be X storms and there aren't? How much does that cost?

"Don't Inspire Evil Initiative" for Journalists

Put an end to The Golden Age of Glorifying Mass Murderers

________ON LETTERHEAD________

BLOOMFIELD PRESS

The “Don’t Inspire Evil” Initiative

Bloomfield Press, in cooperation with a growing list
of nationally recognized institutions and individuals,
joins in support of The Don’t Inspire Evil Initiative:

“Refrain from gratuitous or repetitious portrayal of
mass murderers’ names and images.”


Accuracy In Media, Don Irvine, President

Lori Klein, President, Western Journalism Center

Sheriff Richard Mack, Founder, Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Assn.

Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform

Bloomfield Press, Alan Korwin, Publisher and CEO

Crime Prevention Research Center, John Lott, President

David Kopel, Columnist, The Washington Post

Second Amendment Foundation, Alan Gottlieb, President

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Rabbi Dovid Bendory

We join with FBI Director James Comey who refused to name the mass murderer in Orlando to avoid the “twisted notion” that “fame or glory” could come from carrying out the attack.

We join with Le Monde, La Croix, and CNN French TV affiliate BFMTV who will no longer publish photographs and names of terrorists “to avoid possible posthumous glorification effects.”

We stand with Douglas County Sheriff John Hanlin who became world news by refusing to name the perp in an Oregon college incident given saturation “coverage.”

We support the work of No Notoriety, a citizen effort to curtail glorification heaped upon the worst elements of society in perverse efforts to increase media revenues.

The well-established link between copycat crimes, and excessive exposure of criminal perpetrators by mass media, must finally be admitted and broken. We support adoption of the ethical guideline above to encourage responsible reporting, and discourage behavior by reporters, broadcasters and editors that tends to glorify, promote or encourage mass murderers, jihadis and related criminal activity.

Every journalist who fails to take steps to limit the publicity support these heinous villains seek is virtually complicit in their crimes against humanity. Adopt the new guideline in your heart even if the profession is slow to adopt it officially.

“We must starve terrorists of the oxygen of
publicity which they seek.” Margaret Thatcher


GunLaws.com

4848 E. Cactus #505-440 • Scottsdale, AZ 85254 • info@gunlaws.com
Office 602-996-4020 • Fax 602-494-0679 • Sales 1-800-707-4020
_______________________________________________________________

“Refrain from gratuitous or repetitious portrayal
of mass murderers’ names and images.”



Initial responses from journalists have been, for the most part, predictably resistant, with excuses that fail to recognize or ignore the problem and the actual elements of the ethical guideline. This is not a call for censorship, it is a call for rationale and temperment, and the same sensibility journalists use in deferring from publishing rape victims names. It seeks the same reasonable guidelines journalists use in not publishing troop movements during war time. It recognizes that gory dead bodies never appear in the news, because journalists understand the difference between news and yellow-journalism sensationalism designed for nothing more than revenue generation.

Some in the profession have refused to admit that the evidence between constantly promoting mass murderers by name and image, and copycat crimes is obvious, preferring to deny the obvious and the abundant research. Bloomfield Press is not alone in seeking to wake up the troglodytes who insist and persist in glorifying the most heinous criminals, by clothing themselves in First Amendment emperor's garb.

 

________ON LETTERHEAD________




_______________________________________________________________

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership (jpfo.org) will be issuing a supportive statement as well, in addition to support they have been issuing since March of this year, all coordinated with the timing of The Society of Professional Journalists (spj.org) Annual Conference and Ethics Committee meeting taking place in New Orleans, Sep. 20 - 22. That meeting will address media coverage of mass murder, with the citizens group No Notoriety as part of the panel discussion.

The outlook for adopting a new ethical guideline to dissuade the current practice of glorification and promotion of mass murderers and jihadis is unclear as we go to press.

Your Homework Assignment:

Tomorrow, Sep. 11, 2016 -- Count how many times the lamestream media "treats" you to glorified images of the mass murderer, now dead, who attacked America 15 years ago, destroying our greatest buildings, killing thousands of us, mobilizing his armies against us. That's not news. They do it for perverse, immoral reasons. They energize and excite our enemies with this. They should be ashamed. They are not. They perpetuate evil.The media are complicit in the evil by doing this propaganda for the other side. Count how many times they flood you personally with that image and name. Then report it to your local media -- and to Page Nine.

American Protection of Arms Declaration



Politicians are gung-ho to get elected -- to ban your guns

The democrats made it repeatedly clear:
When we get into office we're going to crush the NRA. (Cheers erupt!!)
We're coming after the assault weapons,
and high capacity clips. (Deafening cheers!)
The gun lobby is our enemy!

----

American Protection of Arms Declaration

Synopsis: “Making legal arms illegal is infringement.”


by Alan Korwin, Author
Gun Laws of America
The Uninvited Ombudsman

August 21, 2016

Scottsdale, Ariz. -- Certain candidates for Congress and the presidency have announced plans to act against the ownership, possession and use of arms and ammunition by the public.

Such acts are directly in opposition to centuries of American law, human rights and tradition, and though current "news" media personnel have fallen in line to support (in contrast to report) these developments, the proposals remain fully outside the law. The American Way.

Democrats in particular are campaigning wildly for a chance to get into office specifically so they can extinguish rights Americans have to keep and bear arms. This poses a danger to the nation beyond anything those misguided voters and candidates imagine.

THE AMERICAN PROTECTION OF ARMS DECLARATION

“People in the United States of America want it understood that designating arms, ammunition and related accessories, which are currently legal to make, keep or bear in any state, which may later be declared illegal to make, keep or bear, or encumbered in any way by any means and for any reason, constitutes Second Amendment infringement.

“Such actions are null and void, amount to prima facie violation of the oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, and are grounds for removal from office for failure to faithfully execute the duties of the office.

“Any action or attempt by any person to enforce such infringement on property possessed in our state will be a class four felony for a first offense, and a class three felony for second and subsequent offenses.

“County Sheriffs and law-enforcement agencies in this state will be authorized to enforce this Declaration and to deputize as many residents as may be necessary to enforce this Declaration.”

This Declaration, circulated widely by people who support it, is provided as a courtesy and notice of protected civil rights to candidates, politicians and people working in any capacity in government. It will be introduced as state legislation to authorize peaceful enforcement of those civil rights. Model legislation is in the draft stage and will be circulated soon.
----

Continue reading "American Protection of Arms Declaration" »

Korwin at American Handgunner

FYI, American Handgunner has a bunch of my articles posted in one convenient place here if you'd like to take a look.

The Helpless-Victim Myth

“If I Had A Gun The Crook Would Just Take It”

by Alan Korwin
The Uninvited Ombudsman (GunLaws.com)


Originally published in The Daily Caller, June, 2016


If this myth had any serious grain of truth we'd be in a world of hurt, because guns would be useless oxymorons and we'd be defenseless slaves by now. Everyone would be slaves, even the slave masters. This myth could never work. It's circular logic that never ends. Lookit:

If you had a gun to protect yourself, but the crook could just take it from you, you wouldn't need a gun. You could just take the crook's gun and use that.

Folks, guns just don't work that way. If they did, guards could never guard anyone, slaves could simply shoot their masters, the masters could then just shoot the slaves, it's absurd. The one with the gun gets things done son.

“The crook would just take it” myth has enormous value because it lights up the  scrambled eggs that pass for brains in the progressives and anti-rights bigots who offer up that silliness when the issue of self defense and guns is addressed.

So many of the people we battle over our gun rights are so terrified of guns they can only picture themselves like Don Knotts from the Andy Griffith show, fumbling and bumbling, doing themselves total harm and failing incompetently, with the crook masterfully overpowering them.

Guns Make You Strong

Anti-gun-rights advocates have no idea of the empowerment a firearm provides. They have no space in their psyche for true empowerment, the very idea is abhorrent and inconceivable. So they concoct this magic of a gun simply being wrested away, instead of fired and stopping an adversary cold. Isn't that what the gun is for?

The party of the teachers union (democrats), the people who consider themselves so much better educated and capable than the knuckle-dragging republicans who tout and laud guns -- how ironic that they are the ones who can't imagine having gone to a class and learning anything about a gun before venturing out with one and getting it snatched.

The idea that they might be trained, know how to hold onto the darned thing, grip it tightly, keep their distance, even know how to avoid the criminal in the first place... All their minds fill with is this notion that: “If I had a gun the criminal would take it and then I'd really be in trouble.”

Can you imagine living your life like that? Never feeling a sense of competence, ability, feeling like an adult who could handle and persevere in a difficult situation, especially given the overwhelming power a gun provides? God made us, Sam Colt made us equal. Not in their book.

Sure, it is possible to lose a firearm in a struggle. Police are shot with their own firearms. There are retention holsters and retention techniques and all sorts of steps a person can take to prevent that frightful awful experience from occurring. Shoot happens. But hinging your safety on the idea that a criminal might best you in an incident, and so deciding not to be able to respond, well, that's a choice you're free to make for yourself, but not for anyone else.

If a person doesn't want a gun because they harbor an internal terror that an attacker might get it (and I've met plenty of people like this) I counsel them in no uncertain terms, “You should NOT have a gun.” That puts their fears to rest. Sometimes. Takes the pressure off. Whew, I don't have to have a gun. No one ever really told them that in so many words. Release. I would never insist a person have a gun, and in fact I know people who I'm convinced should not have a gun, for all kind of reasons.

On the other hand, once some people hear that, especially “I think you should never have a gun,” some of them feel left out, a sort of, “What, you're special and I'm not?” kind of reverse psychology motivation, and suddenly the only thing they're interested in is owning a gun. Or three. They're not all too happy living with their recognized 'fraidy cat disability. Might maybe I should try that more often.

 

Hillary Campaigns With Thug's Mom. Media Oddly Silent


Media Lies About Trayvon Are Legendary

Black Community Has Been Misled Completely

"They've Been Harmed, Sure, But This Ain't Their Hero"



If you were ever suspended from school it would be a blot that would travel with you, a failing to make your parents livid, earn reprimands no youngster wants to face. At least that's the way it used to be.

Trayvon Martin was suspended three times. Caught with apparent burglary tools, and apparently stolen jewelry in his school bag (police released him without trial, so you have to say "apparently"). He was out in the rain looking for prescription drugs without a prescription (it's in his twitter feed, public record from the later trials). He wanted to make "purple drank" a street get-high cocktail.

Trayvon met his demise beating a community watchman to near unconsciousness, before being shot to death in self defense. That's a true statement. Read it again. Multiple trials and civil rights investigations confirmed the not guilty verdict, shooting this guy was justified.

The media flat out lied about this case constantly, from swapping an 8-year-old angelic baby picture for his gangster Facebook pose, to calling his watermelon juice ice tea. They still lie about that. Just like Hillary is doing in promoting the Trayvon Foundation for her campaign. Foundation? Puhleeze.

She is swindling black people into rallying around her with this dead criminal-type guy as her flag bearer. This is what they mean when they say the whites are still using blacks and keeping them in bondage. Pick a hero for a hero, don't canonize the thugs, where is your morality? Look at what Hillary is doing.

Trump calls the media sleaze and dishonest and the media can't believe it? They chastise him -- for speaking truth to power. Hillary for her part is hiding from the media -- and running for president?! Where is the outrage? Where is the consternation and explosions of tirade? Where are the newshounds?

The Uninvited Ombudsman noticed. The Associated Press could not be reached for comment. They were busy praising Hillary.

Read what people are saying about Page Nine, or tell Alan yourself.

See the archives below, or click through to an index of Page Nine posts at Gunlaws.com

About the Author

  • Freelance writer Alan Korwin is a founder and past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Here writing as "The Uninvited Ombudsman," Alan covers the day's stories as they ought to read. Read more.

Recent Comments

Read the last 100 comments on one handy page here!