Subscribe

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

Arizona Moves Good Gun Laws Ahead

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AzCDL – Protecting Your Freedom .

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

Media Hides Gun Business Milestone

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

NSSF.org picked up this announcement about massive economic growth, missed by the lamestream media for unknown reasons --

GUNBROKER.COM Celebrates Major Milestone:

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

Six years ago the company logged its one millionth registered user; that number now exceeds 3 million, a tripling of business and only one of several GunBroker.com milestones. http://www.gunbroker.com/User/Announce.aspx

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

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

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

The 111th U.S. Supreme Court Gun Case

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

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

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

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





About this case (Rosemund)--

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/11/11/1253580/--I-Didn-t-Know-the-Gun-SCOTUS-to-Hear-Rosemond-v-US#

http://blog.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/top-legal-news/scotus-rules-first-landmark-aiding-abetting-case-30-years/


The lamestream media told you:

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

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Autism Next To Ban Gun Rights?

The lamestream media told you:

http://news.yahoo.com/us-autism-estimate-rises-1-68-children-210849190.html

NEW YORK (AP) -- "The government's estimate of autism has moved up again to 1 in 68 U.S. children, a 30 percent increase in two years. But health officials say the new number may not mean autism is more common. Much of the increase is believed to be from a cultural and medical shift, with doctors diagnosing autism more frequently, especially in children with milder problems.

"The cause of autism is still not known. Without any blood test or other medical tests for autism, diagnosis is not an exact science. It's identified by making judgments about a child's behavior (emphasis added).

"The new CDC report focused on 8-year-olds because most autism is diagnosed by that age. The researchers checked health and school records to see which children met the criteria for autism, even if they hadn't been formally diagnosed. Then, the researchers calculated how common autism was in each place and overall.

"The CDC started using this method in 2007 when it came up with an estimate of 1 in 150 children. Two years later, it went to 1 in 110. In 2012, it went to 1 in 88. Experts aren't surprised by the growing numbers, and some say all it reflects is that doctors, teachers and parents are increasingly likely to say a child with learning and behavior problems is autistic." (!)

"'We cannot say what portion is from better diagnosis and improved understanding versus if there's a real change,' said Coleen Boyle, the CDC official overseeing research into children's developmental disabilities." [Note: Her "improved understanding" includes no known cause, no test for occurrence, and known racial and sexual bias in diagnosis.]

"For decades, autism meant kids with severe language, intellectual and social impairments and unusual, repetitious behaviors. But the definition has gradually expanded and now includes milder, related conditions."

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

As the Obama administration forges ahead with plans to ban the right to keep and bear arms based on poorly defined, fuzzy-logic mental-health "measurements" and "findings," the CDC has announced radically growing numbers of children now diagnosed with a potentially disabling condition. The "officials" admit they do not understand, cannot measure, lack a diagnostic test for, and cannot cure the condition, and they actually admit is growing because they simply declare more people to have it.

Criteria for measuring the condition whose definition keeps changing, which is diagnosed based on judgment calls by doctors, have been relaxed from severe abnormalities to mild childhood behaviors, according to "scientific" reports just released.

According to the AP report: "In the latest study, almost half of autistic kids had average or above average IQs. That's up from a third a decade ago and can be taken as an indication that the autism label is more commonly given to higher-functioning children, CDC officials acknowledged."

Racist and sexist prejudices have been acknowledged by the experts as well, and drive this field of "medicine," as noted in their report: "Autism and related disorders continue to be diagnosed far more often in boys than girls, and in whites than blacks or Hispanics. The racial and ethnic differences probably reflects white communities' greater focus on looking for autism and white parents' access to doctors, because there's no biological reason to believe whites get autism more than other people, CDC officials said at a press briefing Thursday."

With the practice of medicine proceeding this far from anything remotely scientific, and when even supposedly pro-gun-rights groups are pressing hard for mental-health bans on the right to keep and bear arms, serious gun-rights advocates are predictably worried.

"The idea that so-called experts constantly evolve this condition, change their standards, use judgment to declare a person guilty of the disease that has no known cause, and that the end result could be denial of your fundamental rights -- who wouldn't be terrified of government-run 'medicine' like that?" said one observer, who wishes to remain anonymous, for fear of being diagnosed as paranoid. (See separate story about widespread cultural paranoia setting in. Are Your Crazy? Denial is a symptom that you are...)

The American Academy of Pediatrics, a known anti-gun-rights advocacy group, issued a statement, saying the nation needs to step up screening for the condition and research into autism's causes. Experts say a diagnosis can now be made at age two or even earlier, though the CDC report says most kids are identified by age four. The AP report points out that: Autism support groups and advocates stand to benefit from increased diagnoses, as more patients equals more funding.

Continue reading "Autism Next To Ban Gun Rights?" »

"High Capacity" Magazines Are Insufficient

The lamestream media told you:

We have to do everything we can to ban high-capacity magazines. Nobody needs these things and they have no place in our society, as we have said hundreds of times already, with no luck so far.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

First of all, ownership of property is not based on need. That's the communist model.

No one is in charge of deciding what you need, or has legitimate power to tell you what you can or can't have in that sense. In this country, ownership of property is based on individual choice and ability to pay. You don't need 10 pairs of shoes, and no one is in a position to say otherwise (well, commies can, "to each according to his need").

The real question, if reporters were worth anything these days, isn't why does anyone need these, it's why would anyone wantthese. The entire "news" media can't answer that or even raise it when it comes up, yet tens of millions of people want and have them. The answer is simple: "For the same reason the police do."

--

The "news" media is actually referring to "normal capacity magazines," a term you should start using, "the same as police use." Changing your language helps deflate their assault on your rights. Normal or regular capacity magazines, the same as police use.

Experts are now marketing magazine carrying cases capable of holding multiple full-sized magazines neatly, because having only a few is insufficient when facing today's criminals and other miscreants (or tyrants, as we observe overseas).

"Leave it to the free market to come up with an appropriate solution," said one tactical expert who refused to be named for this report. "Running out of ammo is not an option when you're life is on the line, and you face criminals who do not obey 'infringed-size' magazine laws passed by idiots in legislatures." Experts want as many rounds of ammo to protect them as possible -- and in the hands of their armed forces, the police and the public at large.

What many people still don't realize is that police are second responders, another term you should start using, to upset the lie newscasters pound daily. The true first responders -- the crime victims targeted by criminals and terrorists, i.e., YOU -- must have at least equal means as the police. You face identical threats. It's just that you face them first.

____________________________

 

 

Typical product (this one marketed in American Cop magazine), offers easy transport and access of sufficient ammunition, pre-loaded into normal magazines, for ready use in an emergency. Police are professionals in self defense and the fight against crime, understand the need for (choose one:) full/normal/regular/factory/standard-capacity magazines. They sneer at ignorant legislative attempts to infringe on the public's right to have such crucial equipment, denying the public adequate protection.

"Prohibited Person" is now "Prohibited Household"

New wrinkle in rights-denial 


The lamestream media told you:

Nothing, except we want to get as many people into the background-check system as possible, to make everyone safer. 90% of the public supports this. (92%, according to a democrat's party mailer with Mr. Obama's name on it:)


__________________________________

 

__________________________________


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

First, let me repeat: 90% of the public doesn't support much of anything, especially gun stuff, so that number, like most "news" numbers these days, especially from advocates, politicians or government (unelected apparatchiks) is totally bogus (John Lott dissected their ludicrous math). Even so, try this "thought experiment" opinion poll: "The bill proposed for universal background-checks will create a government list of everyone in America who owns firearms, and makes a criminal out of anyone whose list of guns is inaccurate or incomplete. Do you support this?" Still 92% in favor? Not. I described the actual bill in plain English last year: http://www.gunlaws.com/Page9Folder100up/PageNine-122.htm

--

An insightful analysis of background checks, by Page Nine reader Bryan Potratz in Wyoming, and reviewed by the Uninvited Ombudsman and gun-rights attorney Dave Hardy, has received little attention before now. It makes it clear that if a Prohibited Possessor lives anywhere, no one else who lives there can have free access to firearms or ammunition. This has gone basically unreported, even though it is in effect.

If you can't prove that your security measures are satisfactory -- to BATFE's unwritten standards --  YOU become a felon for providing contraband to a prohibited person. Even if they never touch anything.

Even a single round of ammo out in the open would put the prohibited person in violation of 'proximity to guns or ammo' (a red-tape concoction that is a looonng stretch from the law as passed, which talks about "possession"). This is the same standard they use for drug busts, technically called "constructive possession," enabling them to arrest everyone in a house where drugs are found (or planted). Courts have backed up this method completely.

The government, as it always does, takes the most restrictive view it can take: If freedom is at stake, drive a stake through freedom, even if it's just a little. Mere presence in the same home meets their definition of possession, and creates the violation.

"If freedom is at stake,
drive a stake through freedom."
--government SOP


The real downside is that this now creates Prohibited Households -- entire private homes where you cannot have a readily available gun for emergencies, or even for cleaning or showing to friends. Everyone in the house is (technically) disarmed by the presence of one person on the NICS Index.

The anti-rights people probably don't mind a bit -- it's like a four-for-one sale on gun bans for an average-size family. And it's unlikely the antis actually worked this out ahead of time. It is a boost though for the forces of darkness, because for every person they can get on that NICS Index, that's a multiplier for people they've disarmed. Five people in NICS, figure 10 to 20 or more denied their rights at home.

Bryan goes on to predict that the NICS Index (the prohibited persons list) could be cross-referenced with hunting license, CCW, FOID or similar databases, to identify addresses where violations might be occurring. This sort of cross-checking is routine police work. He also suggests, "BATFE will be able to claim that such correlations are de-facto probable cause for a warrant to check for/arrest a 'prohibited person in possession of firearms or ammunition.' "  He continues, quite rationally, that, "We know how subtle BATFE can be when prosecuting such warrants."

This threat to the right to keep and bear arms has not hit the radar of any of the national gun-rights groups, at least not publicly. But millions of people nationwide are suffering under it right now.

ACTION ITEM:

The concept of "constructive possession" regarding firearms is an affront to freedom and The American Way,http://www.gunlaws.com/TheAmericanWay.htm and should be abandoned in favor of actual physical possession with deliberate mens rea (criminal intent). Prohibited Households is a miscarriage of justice, and anyone attempting to prosecute such a case should be brought up on charges themselves, in an overdue application of 18 USC §241 et. seq. (denial of civil rights under color of law, look it up).

Cold Dead Fingers -- Baloney!

The lamestream media told you:

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — Connecticut gun owners are rushing to register certain firearms and ammunition that will be considered illegal contraband this year. People have been lining up early in the morning at the state Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection's headquarters to turn in applications for "assault-weapons certificates" and high-capacity magazine declaration forms so they can legally keep the items they thought they currently legally own.

Under a wide-ranging gun-control law, passed in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School mass murder, gun owners have until Tuesday to submit the paperwork. The law expanded the definition of assault weapons in Connecticut to include more banned weapons. Existing magazines can be kept so long as they're registered with the state. "One thing is clear," Lawlor said. "If you haven't registered it, on the following day, it is completely illegal contraband" starting on Jan. 1.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/29/connecticut-gun-law_n_4516088.html


The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

You've probably seen this now-famous image of gun owners lined up to get their "papers."

Does this look like "cold dead fingers" to you? Or is this sheeple waiting politely in line

to bow to their government masters? Are they using the front end of their guns for the

intended purpose -- to stop tyranny in its tracks?

Online chatrooms are filled with bragging about all the people NOT on line. Are the "civil disobedients" being smart? What can they do with their unregistered guns, except wait to be arrested? They can't use them, or train with them, or transport them safely. Can't show them off to friends for fear of being turned in. Knowledge of possession is virtually complicity in the crime. "You knew he owned contraband and didn't report it? That makes you an accessory to a felony."

Can't bring it to a gunsmith for repair or modification. If agents turn up at your door and demand it, or search -- with or without a warrant -- and then arrest you, who you gonna call? You gonna use it to shoot the poor unfortunate rookie cop with a young wife and two young kids at home, so some sweet blonde reporterette on the nightly "news" can call you a vicious killer living in a compound? Are you going to turn yourself into a set of cold dead fingers then? Will you wish you had stood in line to get your papers? 

The Connecticut law -- and others like it have turned the people who disobeyed it into felons-in-waiting. They are in possession of contraband, a Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads, so the first time they have a fire, or a flood, or a home remodel, or a moving man, and the property becomes known, it serves no purpose but to have them scooped up -- and the Second Amendment means nothing but a way to make them submit to the will of an out-of-control government.

If you're not willing to use the front end of the gun for its intended purpose when the move to confiscate it comes around, then the right to keep and bear arms is meaningless pablum. Walter Mitty's Second Amendment is in full force. What's that? Read it and weep (it's short):

http://archive.lewrockwell.com/orig/snyder8.html

Terrifying. It will keep you up at night.

Western Conservative Conference (Trevor Loudon)

The lamestream media told you:

Nothing. It was only CPAC for the Western U.S. With more than 600 people including key leaders of the conservative movement, why cover that?

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Google it, there's news out there. I was emcee for the luncheon, with Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax Reform), Trent Franks (AZ Congressman), more.

Author and lecturer Trevor Louden from New Zealand, who fights global communist and socialist subversion, made more sense about our presidential election in 2016 than any other speaker I've heard lately.

If conservative, constitutional government is to win in the U.S., it needs a Dream Team that draws together all our different forces at once, so everyone is on board. It needs a leader who plans to bring together numerous champions onto one ticket when elected. What do you think?

Vice president: Alan West
Secretary of Treasury: Rand Paul
Secretary of Energy: Sarah Palin
Secretary of Labor: Scott Walker
Secy. of Commerce: Herman Cain
Secy. of State: John Bolton
Ambassador to the U.N.: No one
Secy. of Health and Human Services: Dr. Ben Carson
Attorney General: Mark Levin
Secretary of Education: David Barton
Everybody gets something.

You might make substitutions on the team, but you get the idea.
Everyone can't run for president, but the president can promote an inclusive team.
Some of those departments have to go? Sure. But deal with now.
Would you be motivated for a team like that?

Don't put all your eggs in one basket, Louden says, spread your risk,
get everybody involved, motivate the whole team. It's an interesting plan.

Get a big base of real conservatives, constitutionalists, libertarians, tea-party activists bubbling up, unhappy and ready to do something -- unify the whole base with those leaders folks and who's going to stop you? No one. So that's my advice from a Kiwi from the other side of the world folks.

Because I love this country. And more than that, this country has to survive for my country to survive. [He later pointed out that Communist China's huge army has plans for conquest of the entire Pacific Rim, leaked by a defecting officer; his tiny island nation and all the others, Australia included, are dangling by a thread protected only by America's dwindling might; and that our shrinking military, weakened deliberately by Obama, is the greatest threat the free world has ever faced; China knows this and is biding its time.]

I love what America has done for the world, and America has not yet seen its finest hour. But it can only happen if you unify and pick the right team; you cannot afford another weak candidate. Do not let the media pick your team or Carl Rove pick your candidate. You have to do it.

See him deliver this thought-provoking, rousing speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-rX5w7WJw4

"Insanity" Is Now Gun Control -- Are You Nuts?

The under-recognized threat of "you're a mental case."


"The National Institute of Mental Health reports
that 18% of American adults have some kind of
anxiety disorder."
--Psychology Today, Jan.-Feb. 2014, p. 25


America's largest national gun-rights groups are moving quickly to "normalize" mental health records -- however defined -- as a disqualifier for gun ownership. Names of disqualified people are typed by clerks into the NICS Index controlled by the FBI.

The Attorney General is working to change the definition of mental health and mental disability to cast a wider net around innocent people -- who used to be disqualified from gun ownership -- ONLY -- after a complete court hearing with lawyers, appeals, and due process. That is being erased. (See separate story below.)

It all sounds pretty, and normal, and easy to support.
Special insider details on the pro-gun effort to expand NICS and mental-records database:
http://fixnics.org/#&panel1-1

The NICS INDEX is now the standard gun ban for America.

Connect these two seemingly distant facts and you have a formula for expansive gun-rights infringement.

The Brady handgun bill, the bill that would ONLY require a waiting period for handguns, is now the tool for banning PEOPLE (not guns) from their rights. Forever.

It established the NICS check, and worse, the NICS Index, the list of banned PEOPLE.

The list grows and never shrinks.

It is managed by unelected bureaucrats, administered by low-wage functionaries who answered classified ads for jobs, and are now sitting in air-conditioned cubicles in offices in Clarksburg, West Virginia.

American citizens' gun rights are removed by typing their names into a computer, often with no advanced warning or practical means of rights restoration.

You aren't even notified in many cases. You don't even have a way to legally find out if you're in there.

If you innocently walk into a gun store to buy a firearm, and find out you are denied, the denial itself implies you have committed a felony. It's a good thing the authorities don't arrest all the criminals who attempt to by firearms at retail and are denied. (They say a denial is not sufficient grounds to send out a SWAT team, and the danger to customers in the store isn't worth it.) Read all about it:

Why aren't all NICS-check violators arrested?
http://www.gunlaws.com/BradyArrestsLacking.htm
(Answer: So few of them are actually guilty of anything.)

Reasons for typing your name into this nefarious, insidious, unconstitutional, inescapable rights-denying computer file are growing, with glowing support from people and groups supposedly dedicated to saving your right to keep and bear arms.

This could signal the virtual end of gun ownership, as it slips into the law books, administrative procedures, local state offices, and affects everyone who has ever: taken a pill, spoken the wrong words, or been "diagnosed" by -- a cop, judge, spouse, teacher, neighbor, or even a foot doctor or dermatologist (or even a shrink). Obama's executive-order directives seek to have doctors question patients about gun ownership, with control of that information about as well managed as the NSA or IRS handles their affairs.

This -- the slippery mental-health database entries as a gun-ban tool --
is a battleground for our rights we have not recognized yet.

The quiet "reasonable" drumbeat to find and lockup the crazies is not getting softer.

Everyone is afraid to speak out against mental health -- and the priesthood of head doctors running that crazy carnival. Eventually, the propagandists who are already attacking everything about gun ownership will slip into the obvious -- the very desire to even own a gun is practically proof that you must be nuts. What sane person would want to own a killing machine, right?

Someone must speak truth to this growing power that, like politically correct speech, threatens to overtake us.

Who will lead this charge? What form will it take?

The major gun-rights groups are pushing to get mental cases into the NICS system.

The authorities are pushing to get more people classified as crazy.

Put two and two together folks.

IMPORTANT:

In a report I plan to get to, but may not get to, U.S. Attorney General Holder, who is in Contempt of Congress but still holds office,  seeks to change the definition of who is mentally incompetent, for the purpose of denying the right to keep and bear arms.

In the Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 4, Tue., Jan. 7, 2014, Proposed Rules, he proposes an amended definition to "Adjudicated as a Mental Defective" and "Committed to a Mental Institution."

"Adjudicated" would include "determinations by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority..." (my emphasis). That strikes me as WAY too loosey goosey for this or any other government office to use to deny a fundamental right. A person who "lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs" falls into the net. Can you manage your own health-care affairs, or do you need a health-care navigator? Would that count?

But wait, it gets worse.

"Mental disease or defect" is not defined in the proposal, but the proposal assures us it, "would clarify, rather than alter, the current meaning of the term." It would however now apply the terms to "a court in a criminal case" so it would include "federal, state, local and military courts," the effect of which is unclear. Local courts typically cannot handle felonies (real criminal matters) -- only local ordinances, petty offenses and similar. Are they now included in issuing charges that can deny your right to keep and bear arms? Why else would they be included?

Diseases as you know are caused by pathogens, but mental disorders are psychological things that do not involve bacterial or viruses, leaving the whole field open to interpretation. Further, "committed to a mental institution" would now include both inpatient and outpatient treatment, which is currently undefined. Bottom line, mental conditions that would get people onto the NICS Index will expand dramatically, in unpredictable ways, under Contempt of Congress Holder's proposal.

I guess I now have reported on this, at least in summary fashion. My copy of the Register is covered with notes. This will have to do or I'll never get it released.

Lead Ammo Ban Fails... Again

The lamestream media told you:

Righteous, decent people organized into groups just want to fight the powerful gun lobby and save little children. They would never do anything to ban guns or ammunition or act outside the law. They would certainly never do such a thing repeatedly.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The National Shooting Sports Foundation reports that: "NSSF, the NRA, Safari Club International and the Association of Battery Recyclers have filed a joint brief supporting the Environmental Protection Agency's rejection of a second attempt by a Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)-led coalition of anti-hunting groups to ban traditional ammunition.

"The CBD's first attempt to ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting was denied by EPA in 2010 on the grounds the agency did not have the legal authority to regulate ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act. This decision was subsequently upheld by a Washington, D.C. federal court that dismissed CBD's challenge.

"In 2012, the CBD and 100 other organizations filed a second submission demanding that EPA regulate lead ammunition under TSCA. The EPA rejected CBD's 2012 petition concluding it was substantially the same as the one filed in 2010 and, therefore, did not require agency review. The CBD again sued EPA and again was dismissed by the same federal court that found the agency acted within its authority when it determined that the CBD's new "petition" was really a petition for reconsideration.

"In the brief, NSSF and the joint interveners agree with EPA that CBD should not be able to circumvent procedural and jurisdictional requirements by resubmitting virtually the same petition, with the addition of non-essential parties and irrelevant information, less than two years after the submission of its first petition. Clearly, the CBD's serial petitions and lawsuits constitute an abuse of administrative and judicial resources and serve none of the TSCA purposes intended by Congress."

Once the anti-rights minions have a ban on lead ammunition for one purpose, they will move on to ban ammunition for all purposes, despite their repeated and shallow denials. Repeated use of the courts, against expressed prohibitions not to, shows their true colors.

In other news, 

A package of anti-rights bills was recently introduced in Rhode Island covering a wide array of ineffective and disproven gun control schemes. State Rep. Joseph Almeida has introduced bills that would ban semi-automatic firearms, outlaw magazines over 10 rounds, and even advocate the confiscation of magazines greater than 10 rounds owned after Jan. 1, 2015. Almeida has been a long-time supporter of stripping away the rights of law-abiding citizens instead of focusing on criminal activity in the capital city of Providence. 

Fortunately, the Rhode Island Joint Behavioral Health and Firearms Safety Task Force, formed by NSSF-supported legislation in the last session of the state legislature, released its final report which focuses on allowing the state to submit mental-health records to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

Rhode Island was one of the states targeted in NSSF's nationwide FixNICS campaign that seeks to get the records of all prohibited individuals submitted to NICS. It is clear that task force members have agreed with the firearms industry on this important issue.

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!