Shocked onlookers watched as a vehicle careened across a mall parking lot, nearly striking a tree. Inside, a man was savagely beating his girlfriend as she screamed for help. While others stood by and watched, a 27-year-old man with a concealed carry permit ran to the woman's aid, drew a Glock semi-automatic pistol and shouted at her boyfrien9 to end the assault. The boyfriend saw the gun and promptly complied. Police praised the armed citizen's actions. "For all we know, he could have saved her from serious injury, said Police Captain Norman Colyer. "I'm going to call him and tell him that when he gets ready to renew his [concealed carry] license, it's on me. (News-Telegram, Sulphur Springs, TX, 10/15/09)
Police say Peter Gilmore was enjoying a visit with his son, James McGlone, whim two armed men with stockings over their faces kicked open the front door. One of the suspects held a knife to Gilmore's throat and threatened to kill him. McGlone ran for the bedroom while the other suspect, armed with a tire iron, gave chase. The suspect may have assumed McGlone was running away, but he soon learned McGlone was arming himself. McGlone retrieved one of his father's pistols, aimed it at his assailant and told him to leave. Instead, the suspect struck him with the tire iron. McGlone fired a single shot, wounding the suspect, who fled with his accomplice. (Herald Tribune, Sarasota, FL, 10/26/09)
He may be only 13 years old, but police say two burglars proved no match for Josh Cichy. He had just arrived home to what should have been an unoccupied house, but something wasn't right. "I walked down the hall and I saw two guys at the door and window, Cichy explains. He took fast action, grabbing a powerful spotlight, an air pistol and a 20-ga. shotgun. First, he blinded the intruders with the spotlight and shot at them with the air gun, hitting one. "I think I got him right in the face, Cichy recalls. Then he fired the shotgun and the intruders fled the home. Cichy says he's familiar with firearms, thanks to his father. "I go hunting with my dad and friends, so I know what to do. I wasn't really scared, but at the end I was shaking because of the adrenalin, I guess. (Kalamazoo Gazette, Kalamazoo, MI, 10/02/09)
A Georgia woman was at home with her daughter and a visitor when she heard a commotion in the front room. To her horror, two men and a woman wearing masks had barged in and started robbing the visitor. Rather than panic, the woman grabbed her gun, cell phone and daughter and hurried into a closet. Meanwhile, according to police, the robbers took $1 00 from the visitor, tied him up and began searching for the woman. They opened the closet, but took one look at her gun and ran. They were in such a hurry that they had trouble opening a door and fired a couple of shots in desperation. The woman returned fire and the robbers fled the scene. (Associated Press, 10/19/09)
Three thieves apparently weren't aware of David Massey's successful track record of repelling burglars from his rural home. Massey has had several burglary attempts at his home, including one in 2008 when he fired at one suspect and held another for police. In the latest incident, police say Massey discovered two women and a man breaking into his home and confronted them with a handgun. The suspects leapt into an SUV and hurtled toward Massey. "They drove right across the center of the [driveway] circle towards me ... I was in fear of my life, Massey said. 'They wouldn't stop, so I shot. Massey fired six shots in the direction of the vehicle's radiator. The vehicle veered out of control, missing Massey by mere feet and rolling onto its side. The suspects fled the vehicle and were arrested by police nearby. "I moved out here for the serenity, said Massey, who's determined to keep the home despite the burglaries. "I don't know how serene it is today. (Appeal-Democrat, Marysville, CA, 09/29/09)
A great-grandmother and five of her relatives were enjoying a family trip when an armed robber stormed inside their motel room. Shouting orders, the robber forced the great grandmother to the floor, which actually positioned her closer to her .357 magnum revolver, a gun she inherited from her late husband and for which she had a permit to carry. As the robber threatened three generations of the woman's family and demanded money, she quietly got her gun. A shot rang out. "I thought I was shot, her son said. "I didn't realize my mother had shot him. It was mass chaos. The robber stumbled outside and died. "She said to me, 'God was with me tonight. You. know I couldn't have done that myself, her son recalled. (The Columbus Dispatch, Columbus, OH, 10/23/09)
"Gun Ownership As Disease"
With publication of a new and truly bizarre junk science "study"-c1aiming armed citizens are helpless against criminal violence-firearm ownership is once again being labeled as a "disease" only treatable as a "public health" menace. The cure? You guessed it. Gun control this time designed to tear down the remarkable progress made in expanding Right-to-Carry, Stand-Your-Ground and Castle Doctrine laws.
One of several "gun control" projects funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the taxpayer-funded "study" was intended to spark "intervention" by Congress or the federal bureaucracy. The University of Pennsylvania paper titled, "Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault, has caught the fancy of the national media and produced headlines declaring "Penn study: Carrying gun raises risk of getting shot, or "Carrying gun increases risk of getting shot and killed.
Presented as an article in the November 2009 issue of the American Journal of Public Health and written by five Ph.D.s headed by Dr. James C. Branas, an epidemiologist at the Firearms and Injury Center at Penn, the "study" itself is goofy.
There is no other word for it. Branas and his colleagues picked out 677 cases involving firearm assaults in Philadelphia and determined how many "victims" were armed. From that they concluded " ... individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. And, "On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault.
Where the headlines implied the study covered people with Right-to-Carry licenses, the plain truth is the findings have nothing to do with law abiding Americans. In fact, over half of Branas "subjects" had arrest records hardly making them typical of the normal American gun owners targeted by this study. More than 11 percent of subjects were listed as having "illicit drug involvement, a disqualifier that would make it a federal crime for them to possess guns.
And "possession" of a firearm included guns in nearby vehicles or buildings, rather than guns actually on the victims.
As I said, goofy.
But the gun-ban crowd loves it. Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign, crowed, "This research severely undermines the argument by gun pushers that carrying a gun automatically makes a person safer. Gun pushers? Try the Founding Fathers.
But Helmke-showing his true colors as a gun banner-didn't stop there.
"The study's findings show once again the risks of gun ownership and how having more guns correlates with more gun violence, Helmke claimed.
He's talking about all guns and all gun owners. And he is talking about the right of armed self-defense.
The whole question about armed self-protection should be considered moot-settled once and for all. But this is gun control-and no matter the camouflage, it is still a step-by-step march to total civil disarmament.
Such phony challenges to armed self defense were discredited long ago by the 1991 seminal work of professor Gary Kleck of Florida State University-Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America.
Kleck's exhaustive study demonstrated defensive uses of firearms by citizens occurred 2.5 million times per year, a figure far overshadowing criminal uses of guns.
As part of Bill Clinton's serial assaults on the Second Amendment, Attorney General Janet Reno's Justice Department set out to debunk the Kleck research and commissioned a 1994 survey by the antigun Police Foundation. The new study mirrored Kleck's findings and concluded, " ... guns are used far more often to defend against crime than to perpetrate crime. The study was so devastating to the gun ban cause it didn't see the light of day until 1997. Even then, it was ignored by the mainstream media.
It's been 13 years since Congress ended federal funding for what had become serial attacks on the Second Amendment. Radical social engineers at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) believed firearm ownership is a disease and the "cure" was all manner of harsh restrictions on firearm ownership and legal commerce. Today, the CDC has its nose under the gun control tent once again, claiming as long as the agency is not advocating overt "gun" control solutions, the restrictions are meaningless and can be ignored in the name of research.
But with NIH's entry into the anti Second Amendment arena, those congressional funding strictures do not apply. So here we are again, faced with public health junk science paid for with our tax dollars.
Not surprisingly, as a recipient of federal taxpayer funds from NIH, Penn's Branas agitated for such funding in 2005 as a way of circumventing the 1996 funding restrictions Congress placed on the Centers for Disease Control. He opened the campaign for "intervention" funding in Injury Prevention magazine with a letter headlined: "Getting past the 'f' word in federally funded public health research: "F" being firearms. It couldn't be plainer.
Never forget the notion of gun ownership as a "public health epidemic" has already been proven a grave danger to liberty in other parts of the world and is a major component of U.N. schemes to disarm Americans. The stripping of firearms from good citizens - under the guise of "public health" - was first successfully applied by billionaire George Soros' protg, Rebecca Peters, in Australia through a sweeping gun ban-euphemistically labeled a "buyback.
Peters-now Soros' U.N. gun ban power broker-won the "inaugural Public Health Impact Award from the [Australian] Public Health Association" for her work resulting in the confiscation and destruction of all registered semi-automatic rifles and self loading and pump shotguns taken from licensed owners in 1996-97. A second ban came in 2003 with the confiscation, and destruction of whole categories, of registered handguns from licensed owners.
It is remarkable. Here we are again, facing the same big lie, wrapped in the fish paper of pseudoscience, further embellished by biased twists and turns of ignorant and willing media fed and directed by the likes of the Brady Campaign.
The single lesson of my lifetime with the NRA is the threats to our rights will never go away. Every stealth tactic, every discredited lie-like "public health"-will reappear in time. And once again, we must fight back with the truth.
Help Make 2010 A Historic Year For Preserving Firearm Freedoms
Happy New Year!
Have you heard the news? Political pundits predict that 2010 could go down in history as a turning point.
Many of America's most fundamental ideas-from free speech and open debate, to your Right to Keep and Bear Arms-are being questioned, challenged and redefined in unprecedented ways.
That means the decisions we Americans make this year, about where we're going and what's worth fighting for will reverberate for generations.
So let me outline some of the challenges facing your Second Amendment rights this year and tell you how you can protect them.
Between now and June, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide, in a landmark case, whether the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments like Chicago, or merely to federal jurisdictions such as Washington, D.C.
As you know, the court ruled in 2008 the Second Amendment protects an individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms for self-defense in the home. But that case applied to Washington, D.C., which, unlike the 50 states, is a federal enclave.
So the day after the court issued that ruling, the NRA sued the city of Chicago-not just to overturn Chicago's gun ban, but <:llso to set a precedent to protect the Second Amendment against state and local government infringement nationwide.
The NRA is one of the parties in the case, and we're working closely with top attorneys and constitutional scholars to present our side.
Good or bad, whatever decision the court hands down will prove the enormous importance of your votes-for the presidents who nominate, and for the senators who confirm, the Supreme Court justices who rule for life on such history-making cases like this.
In that light, this year's elections will cast long, looming shadows far into the future. In November, Americans will elect 435 House members, 36 U.s. Senators, 37 state governors and countless state and local politicians. Firearm freedoms will be at stake in every race.
That's why the NRA's affiliate, the NRA Freedom Action Foundation, is working to identify, educate and register to vote every gun owner, every hunter and everyone who cares about Second Amendment freedom in America through TriggerTheVote.org.
Please join me to help muster and mobilize an Election Day army. Make a contribution to the NRA Freedom Action Foundation. Then, back it up by getting fellow gun owners and freedom-loving friends registered to vote.
In so doing, you can send the kind of message that shuts down big-city mayors who want to build national campaigns on "gun control:'
That's what New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his dwindling group of "Mayors Against Illegal Guns" are trying to do. They're pushing Congress to impose New York City-style gun bans on the entire United States.
What they don't mention are the laws they're pushing would do nothing to stop activity that's already illegal-but would raise prices and lower availability of firearms for lawful buyers like you.
The NRA has been working to get that truth to Congress and the American people, but it's hard to compete against Bloomberg's billions. We need your help.
Please go to www.nraila.org/mayors to find out if your mayor is part of Bloomberg's coalition. If so, alert him or her to the truth and urge him not to be a party to Bloomberg's schemes.
But the greatest danger facing firearm freedoms in 2010 may be from the United Nations, where foreign governments and gun-ban groups have worked quietly for more than 15 years to impose "global gun control" upon the U.S. through international treaties.
The Bush administration told U.N. gun grabbers to back off, warning the U.S. would never consider any agreement that infringed upon Americans' Second Amendment rights.
But now, everything has changed.
With Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announcing the U.S. is willing to negotiate-and the Obama administration deceptively blaming American gun owners for Mexico's drug war violence freedom-hating governments and gun ban groups are celebrating worldwide.
Worse, they know the makeup of the U.S. Senate, which ratifies or rejects international treaties, will probably change after this year's elections. So they're liable to 'act fast.
The NRA is one of just a handful of pro-gun groups working to stop this U.N. push. The other side has hundreds of groups.
So stay informed, stay involved with the NRA, spread the word and get others on board. Because 2010 could be the most challenging year for freedom ever.