At first, nothing seemed unusual about the man inquiring about a DVD player at a Bucks County, Pa., pawnshop and check-cashing business. But 10 minutes after he left, he returned with two accomplices, one of whom pointed a gun at the store owner. When a female employee sought refuge behind a steel door, the gun-toting man fired several shots at her. Outnumbered, the store owner drew his gun and fired, striking two of the intruders, including the man who was armed. One suspect lay injured on the floor until paramedics arrived, while his accomplices fled only to be apprehended by police. The store owner suffered a gunshot wound to his hand. "Certainly this should send a message to anyone who wants to carry out a crime in Bucks County that you can't go around terrorizing people. You may find yourself on the other end .... " said District Attorney Diane Gibbons. (Bucks County Courier Times, Levittown, PA, 08/26/05)
Following the burglary of her apartment, a Georgia woman refused to be victimized again. She purchased a firearm for protection, and it was not a moment too soon. Police say that a man began climbing into her bathroom window late one night, but she was able to fend him off with her gun by shooting him several times. He stumbled out of the apartment and forced his way into a nearby occupied BMW. The driver later told police that the suspect said, "I need a ride to the hospital because I've been shot. "Don't stop because I'm going to jail." Upon his release from the hospital, police planned to charge the alleged burglar, whom they also considered a suspect in the previous break-in at the woman's apartment. (Savannah Morning News, Savannah, GA, 08/25/05)
What sounded like an explosion outside a Michigan man's home set off a bizarre chain of events. According to police, when the homeowner looked out his window around 2 a.m., he saw that a Jeep had crashed into his garage. Armed with a handgun, he went outside and found a man trying to dislodge the vehicle. A yelling match ensued and the man drove off, but returned with his lights off. The homeowner, fearful that the driver was trying to hit him or run him over, hid behind a car, and the suspect accelerated and smashed into it twice. The homeowner then fired four shots at the Jeep, but his gun jammed, so he ran inside to retrieve another firearm while his wife and neighbors phoned police. When the homeowner returned, the driver of the Jeep accelerated toward him so he fired two more shots at the vehicle. The driver, whose vehicle was riddled with bullet holes, then left the subdivision and was apprehended by police. (Detroit Free Press, Detroit, MI, 09/13/05)
When an armed citizen confronted an alleged burglar inside his northern Virginia home early one morning, police say the intruder ran from the family room to the bedroom of the homeowner's teenage daughter. A struggle ensued and ended when the homeowner shot the intruder in the face. The suspect fled on foot, but was arrested at the hospital when he sought treatment. (Arlington Sun Gazette, Arlington, VA, 09/01/05)
Ice-cream vendor Christopher Sanders, who has a concealed carry permit, told police he was selling in his usual territory when a man flagged him down and asked for a ride. When Sanders told him no, the man allegedly tried to open the van's sliding door, which was locked, and then tried to reach in an open window on the passenger side. Sanders grabbed a handgun from behind a seat, pointed it at the alleged perpetrator and told him to get his hands out of the vehicle. The man uttered an expletive and left while Sanders phoned police. As Sanders waited for an officer to arrive, the man returned and walked toward him with his hands in his pockets. Police say Sanders yelled at the man to show his hands, and two witnesses saw the suspect throw a knife on the ground. The alleged criminal was found by police, arrested on suspicion of robbery and booked for a previously issued misdemeanor warrant. (The Columbian, Vancouver, WA, 09/07/05)
After an Idaho woman went outside her home to investigate a strange noise, she found a former co-worker hiding in the bushes. He told her his pickup truck had broken down and he needed a lift home. She reluctantly agreed and took a .380cal. handgun with her. Police say that when they reached the co-worker’s driveway, he began to assault her. "He grabbed her and physically attacked her and told her she was coming with him," said Sheriff's Capt. John Valdez. The woman drew her gun and shot the man in the abdomen, killing him. An autopsy of the assailant, who was a registered sex offender, showed he had a blood-alcohol content of 0.26 percent. Investigators say his truck was later found near the woman's home, and it appeared that its engine was intentionally disabled. (Associated Press, 09/17/05) |
PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, is the largest, wealthiest and most high profile group of animal "rights" extremists in the world. And it is linked to a growing network of embedded cells of dangerous people willing to achieve their ends through violence. If you look past all the puppies, propaganda and PR stunts, PETA's agenda won't improve animal welfare, but abolish it. If PETA has its way, there will be no hunting and therefore no wildlife conservation, no wetlands protection or habitat development. The subsequent disease, mass starvation and die-off of animals are unthinkable. And that's just the tip of the iceberg that should sink their titanic lunacy. Nobody invests more money in wildlife conservation than hunters. Yet we are the targets of these extremists, despite our unwavering commitment to land for wildlife research, habitat conservation, species protection and game law enforcement. In contrast, PETA's so-called "animal shelters" have become killing fields for dogs and cats. At its Norfolk, Va., headquarters, PETA has reportedly killed more than 10,000 dogs and cats since 1998. Yet many Americans don't know that PETA wants much more than to take a fishing pole from every child's hand, ban milk from their breakfasts and shut down all their circuses, zoos and aquariums. PETA wants much more than to take away seeing-eye dogs from the blind and to take away bomb-sniffing dogs from our airports. PETA wants to stop medical advancements that use animal research in any way. That would eliminate almost every major medical achievement in the 20th century. If PETA has its way, there will be no treatment for diabetes, heart disease, infection or chronic pain. There will be no vaccines, chemotherapy, organ transplants or bypass surgery. And if PETA has its way, there may never be a cure for AIDS, Alzheimer's, cancer, cystic fibrosis, multiple sclerosis or any other human suffering. This isn't theoretical stuff. These radicals have the money and spare time to devise ways to stop the world's miracle workers. That's how PETA's agenda against hunting is consistent with its agenda against medicine. The consequence of PETA's agenda would be staggering: no less than a die-off of human beings comparable to the aftermath of a thermo-nuclear war or a devastating asteroid strike. What's more, PETA's agenda is being forced upon society with acts of violence and terrorism. PETA has contributed to movements like the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and the Animal Liberation Front (ALP), which have committed a thousand firebomb attacks and caused more than $110 million in property damage. This eco-terrorism movement is so dangerous, the FBI has declared it America's No.1 domestic terrorist threat. They've upstaged al Qaeda as the greatest terrorist threat on American soil. Scientists, doctors and their families are having property destroyed and are getting hate mail, letters loaded with razor blades and rat poison, and death threats and bomb threats. The tragedy is that it's working. Medical research didn't budget for security against extremists. Our most promising labs are being shut down. Studies on the verge of medical breakthrough are screeching to a halt. We're losing some of our best minds to their madness. That madness is being packaged and pitched to our kids, too. One of PETA's handouts at elementary schools shows a wild-eyed mommy in her bloody apron hacking away at a live rabbit with a butcher knife. The headline reads: "YOUR MOMMY KILLS ANIMALS." Another PETA comic book called A Rat's Life encourages kids to pet rats. Its kids' website teaches kids how to be an "animal rights rebel," how to ridicule kids who drink milk and how to boycott classes. Animal "rights" extremism is a belief system based on 100 percent emotion and zero science, riddled with hypocrisy and roiling with contempt for humans. They're so consumed by self-righteousness that they rationalize intimidation, property destruction, assault, arson and bombing to meet their ends. We must expose these animal "rights" extremists and fight their dogma with the same strength and commitment we deploy to protecting the Second Amendment or we risk losing our hunting heritage for generations to come. |
If you think PETA is just a benign bunch of animal lovers, this column is a must read for you.
Every day we read in the newspaper about attacks on our Second Amendment rights. Many of those battles are fought, or will be fought, in courtrooms across America. NRA will be on the front lines leading the charge to protect your rights. But do you realize that the federal judges who hear these cases may have more effect on you and your rights than any politician we elect or any bill we pass? Look at what's been on the front page the past few months. In New Orleans, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, the rules of society that keep most criminal elements in check broke down. Bands of armed looters, robbers, rapists and killers roamed the streets. Local authorities, unable to stop them, instead confiscated lawfully owned firearms from peaceable citizens who simply wanted to stay in their homes and protect themselves, their families and their homes. Government officials who couldn’t protect innocent citizens instead trampled their civil rights by taking away their firearms in violation of the Second Amendment. At a gun show in Richmond, Va., this summer, hundreds of ATF agents and Virginia State Police conducted a campaign of harassment against lawful firearm purchasers deterring half the potential attendees from even entering the show. Folks who purchased a firearm discovered that agents took information off the federal form 4473s and went to purchasers' homes to conduct so-called "residency' checks" asking family members: "Did you know your husband is buying a gun?" and "How many guns does your husband own?" When no one was at home, they knocked on neighbors' doors and asked questions. Federal law didn't give them the authority to do this, but federal law apparently wasn't enough to stop them, either. In California, the City of San Francisco put a handgun ban on the ballot. By the time you read this, voters will have approved or rejected the measure. If approved, the ban will take effect Jan. 1,2006, and San Francisco gun owners will have 90 days to surrender their handguns or have them confiscated. New Orleans, Richmond, San Francisco ... When good peaceable people lose their right and ability to defend themselves and their families, something is terribly wrong. When good peaceable people are harassed and prevented from exercising their civil rights, something needs to be done. What does all this have to do with the federal judiciary? Well, the job of our federal courts, and of our Supreme Court, is to interpret and apply our laws as written. Any of these violations of gun owners' rights could end up as a lawsuit in federal court. And while it's clear to you and me that something is radically wrong in these situations, we're not the ones who decide. Judges make that call. That's why we need to have judges who respect the rule of law ... and we need to have judges who understand and uphold the original intent of the Constitution. When NRA filed a lawsuit in Louisiana federal court to stop the unconstitutional confiscation of lawfully owned firearms, U.S. District Judge Jay Zainey agreed with NRA. He granted a temporary restraining order halting further gun confiscations and ordering confiscated firearms returned. Judge Zainey was appointed in 2001 by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the Senate. You don't have to live in New Orleans to see the difference a good judge can make in our ability to exercise the most fundamental of our civil rights. There are many criteria and qualifications including intelligence, education, experience, character and integrity. One of the most important, however, is a judge's judicial philosophy. A federal judge should be either a strict constructionist or an originalist. While these terms are often used interchangeably, they don't mean the same thing. A strict constructionist interprets the plain meaning of the words of the Constitution and laws as they are written. That's good for us, because the Second Amendment clearly speaks of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms." An originalist, however, interprets the plain meaning of the Constitution or laws at the time they were written. So the Second Amendment, as well as the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights, would be construed according to its meaning in 1789. This brings the weight of history behind their interpretation and assures that they cannot change. It includes all the reasons the Framers wanted the Second Amendment to defend liberty against any threat, foreign or domestic. So a strict constructionist is good, and an originalist is even better. Either way, our core issue, the Second Amendment, is secured as an individual right. Any judge who does not embrace the Second Amendment as guaranteeing an individual right is not a strict constructionist or an originalist, and that judge is a threat to our fundamental liberties. This is of utmost importance when it comes to the U.S. Supreme Court. After all, any case arising out of the situations mentioned above could find its way to the Supreme Court very soon. While lower courts can be reversed, there is no appeal from the ruling of the nine justices of the Supreme Court. Therefore, we must insist with all our might that only strict constructionists or originalists be nominated and confirmed to the Court. Unfortunately, we cannot know everything about every nominee. But as confirmation hearings proceed on the most recent nominee, we as gun owners should pay close attention and encourage President Bush and the Senate to take their duties in this matter with deadly seriousness. Nothing less than our rights as a free people are at stake. |