Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Monday, February 27, 2006
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Pro-gun bills signed by Governor – CCW in parks rule change to be decided next week
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Congratulations once again to all who took action in support of the Right to Self-defense and CCW in parks bills. Thanks to your hard work, they will both become law on July 1, 2006.
Governor Rounds signed the self-defense bill (HB 1134) on Friday, Feb. 17. As many will recall, HB 1134 strengthens South Dakota’s existing self-defense laws and explicitly states that you do not have a duty to retreat from any place you have the right to be.
The concealed carry in parks bill (HB 1173) was signed by the Governor on Tuesday, Feb. 21. This bill limits the authority of state agencies to promulgate rules restricting concealed carry by pistol permit holders.
(For background on both these issues, click here)
Under the current administrative rules, not even folks who have a permit are allowed to carry a handgun for self-defense in any state park, campground, lakeside or recreational area. A change that would partially remedy this situation has been proposed. The following language would be added to the South Dakota Administrative Rules, Uses of Parks and Public Lands, chapter 41:03:01:16:
(5) An Individual who possesses a valid concealed pistol permit pursuant to SDCL 23-7-7 may carry a concealed pistol at any time.
By requiring the individual to obtain a government license before he can exercise his right to bear arms, this language stops short of recognizing the Right to Carry. However, it is definitely a step in the right direction.
The rule change will be considered at the Game, Fish and Parks Commission meeting on Thursday, March 2, one week from today. If you would like to voice your support, please email Chuck Schlueter with the GFP at firstname.lastname@example.org. He has been compiling the public input on this issue and will present it at the Commission meeting.
Friday, February 24, 2006
U.S. law says you're innocent until proven guilty. One of the few cases where this doesn't apply is the use of lethal force. If you shoot someone (or use any other form of self-defense which causes injury or death), you're usually arrested and have to "prove" that the situation called for your use of force. Specifically, you have to show it was more probable than not that your use of force was necessary to prevent immediate serious bodily injury or death, that you weren't at fault for creating the situation, and that you had no avenue of retreat.
Hopefully the law will change to a focus of putting BAD GUYS in jail, not those trying to protect themselves or their family.
Criminals don't care about the law. That's what makes them criminals. Posting a sign to keep guns out won't keep out the bad guys or their guns. It'll only keep out the good guys who are able to stop the bad guys.
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Again, the anti-gun signs didn't stop these kids. Perhaps a parent with some guts could, though.
I guess the anti-CHL signs didn't stop him. He was, though carrying "unobstructed." Maybe he just took Ohio's motor vehicle carry BS too seriously...
Hopefully Ohio will go the way of many other states, where you can carry as long as YOU don't drink... and those damn signs that only keep out the good guys will go away.
I thought you would be happy to know that your 2/21/06 posting about the number of Clermont County permits has a mathematical error that is not in your favor. You claim that only 4% of Clermont County’s eligible population possesses a permit. However, because you divided 37000 by 9700 instead of the other way around, the 4% figure is incorrect. Instead, 9700 people make up 26.2% of the eligible population. Thus, for every 25 Clermont County eligible residents you line up there are at least 6 with a permit.* Hat tip to Brian for his math skills
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
I think this was made up. Everyone knows that guns are illegal in
* Hat tip to PD for the info
:February 21, 2006
: Amy Howton
: Sexual Assault Response Coordinator
: University of Cincinnati Women's Center
On Sunday, February 19, a UC student reported to the University of
Cincinnati Police that she had been raped at an on-campus housing
facility on Saturday, February 18. The alleged suspect in the case
is a male known to the female victim. The case is currently being investigated
by UC Police. Alcohol was involved in the incident. The Sexual Assault
Response Coordinator (SARC) is providing support to the victim.
This information is provided to you consistent with the University of
Cincinnati's Police Statement on Sexual Offenses and in compliance
with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Police and Campus Crime
*Hat tip to SW for the info
I do have a problem, however, when the media abuse access to the names. Case in point - the Dayton Daily News. They printed the names of EVERY permit holder in Dayton.
Now, exactly what journalistic purpose does that serve? The answer: NONE. It was to intimidate and anger permit holders, and discourage those on the fence about getting one from applying.
Media access is OK, media abuse is NOT. Find a way to stop the abuse and more people will be OK with access.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
According to the 2004 census estimate, there are 188,614 people in Clermont County. About 20% are above 21 yrs old (28% in 2000 above 18), and are therefore able to apply for a carry permit.
We'll have to still count felons and those with disqualifying issues (restraining orders, mental issues, etc.) because there is no data to reflect what percentage that would be.
Given these things, that means there are about 37,000 people in Clermont County able to apply for a permit. 37000 divided by 9700 means that approximately 4% of the population of Clermont County has a permit.
So for every 25 people you line up, at least one will have a permit.
Share that info with businesses in Clermont County who want to keep the "freaks" out by posting anti-CHL signs.
You're not alone for wanting a carry permit or carrying already. And this is after only two years of the law being in effect. Let's see what these numbers look like in 10 yrs....
The law allows everyone, even senior citizens, to be on even footing with the bad guys. As the saying goes, "God didn't make men equal. John Browning (inventor of the 45-ACP) did."
Anti-gunners claim that the 50-cal Barrett rifle can be used by terrorists to take down planes, helicopters, and wreak havoc generally.
A few problems. One, these rifles are VERY expensive and hard to get a hold of. It's not like the thug down the street has one in his trunk. These guys cost thousands of dollars - they aren't $300 AK-47s.
Second, you have to be good with this rifle to hit anything. That takes a lot of practice. Don't think these guys are spending a lot of hours at the range to get good.
Finally, no person has EVER been killed in the U.S. with a 50-cal rifle. So why make a gun illegal that has yet to take a life in the U.S.?
If the anti-gunners want to question the patriotism of gun guys (which is laughable) and limit terrorism, support concealed carry. If a bad guy walks into the mall strapped with explosives, a 45-cal bullet to the forehead will stop him in his tracks. Preventing his access to a rifle he'll never even get a hold of anyway isn't the way to reduce terrorism.
Monday, February 20, 2006
People are petitioning to change that. Check out this link to find out how you can participate.
What happened down there was a joke. Especially when the authorities began confiscating arms from people just trying to protect their lives and their property.
If the world around you collapses, you'd better be able to defend yourself. The government can't protect you at all times - you have to take care of your own when push comes to shove.
They say it's had "little effect" on crime, and that not many people are applying. Ignoring the fact that their claims of blood running in the streets hasn't come to fruition. And the fact that most encounters where someone protects his/herself with a gun isn't ever reported to the police (a gun is presented, bad guy runs off, end of story).
Anyway, be ready to see lots of articles like this in Ohio soon.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Pretty sad. Hopefully the call to get rid of those infringing on their rights will cause some change in Hawaii.
Anti-gunners will do anything to discourage gun ownership. Registration accomplishes this for a lot of people, and it eases confiscation when the time comes...
Friday, February 17, 2006
Not surprising, given the pain it is to carry in a vehicle and the ability for businesses and employers to post signs forbidding concealed carry.
The article even goes into the "no effect" it has seemed to have - there are no instances of people committing crimes who have a CHL (no shocker), and there are about five documented cases of people using permits to defend their lives.
Considering only about 80,000 Ohioans have permits, this isn't surprising.
If the law is loosened, I think the number would go up.
Even if it didn't, citizens should be given the freedom to protect themselves, regardless of how many want permits.
Registries are a way for anti-gunners to know who has the guns, so they can confiscate when they feel it's appropriate. Canadians are starting to realize this, and will hopefully nuke their failed registry soon.
Same is true in South Dakota, where they're trying to fix the problem.
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Goes to show... don't leave your piece at home, even while you're out running trivial errands... like getting your hair cut.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
First, the gun ban goes into effect. Then crime goes up. Anti-gunners scratch their heads, knowing that there's NO WAY crime would go UP if guns are made illegal, then they decide it must be someone or something else's fault that crime is rising.
They'll blame their neighbors. Or BB guns. Or swords (Australia made swords illegal, thinking this would help stop the rise in crime. It didn't work).
Here goes DC. Where guns are illegal and crime is rampant. They're trying to ban BB guns, figuring it can't be that people can't defend themselves - providing a risk-free utopia for criminals (afterall, they won't be proseucted. It's not their fault. Had a bad momma, drug problem, etc.) . Must be something or someone else's fault...
Monday, February 13, 2006
Anyone who questions the intent of media outlets demanding they know who has permits has to only look to the Dayton Daily News. This anti-gun rag printed the names of EVERY permit holder in Dayton.
Why would they waste their "valuable" pages with this info?
Because they oppose concealed carry, and want to wreak havoc on gun owners whenever possible.
Keep the lists private. From those who claim that government or the media shouldn't look in your bedroom - I say it's none of your business what's in my holster.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Fortuantely, we have the NRA in the U.S., so self-defense is still considered a priority (unless you live in DC, Chicago, NY, San Fran, and a few other cities).
South Dakota is pushing to rid themselves of the "duty to reatreat" portion of the use of lethal force rules, as Florida has done. So is Alabama, and Wyoming.
Colorado is trying to re-affirm the right to self defense, whether in your home or walking on the street, to make sure those that defend themselves aren't prosecuted.
Meanwhile, Idaho is trying to clean up their concealed carry law and forbid the government from taking away guns when a natural diseaster happens, as happend during Katrina.
Thursday, February 09, 2006
The man who raped the two realtors working in a model home recently might have gone into three neigborhoods, looking for victims.
And think submitting is the smart thing to do? That the rapist will receive justice when he's caught? Well this local serial rapist (has DNA evidence of raping in Mason, Montgomery, Colerain Township, etc.) might get off without any serious jail-time.
The NRA provides a nice summary on what happened and what's being done to prevent this in the future.
Don't know about you, but if the world around me was collapsing, I'd like to have a means to protect myself and my family.
Anti-CHL signs in parking lots are causing all kinds of problems for people trying to follow the law, only to have to park off-site when a sign is posted.
And many people (inlcluding myself) think it's unfair for people getting fired because they want to be able to protect themselves on the way to and from work.
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Here's an interesting op-ed on the topic.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Just note that the law says you must use an ACTUAL firearm for the range portion. A .22 is OK, but a BB-gun is not.
At Advanced Shooting, we're on top of the law, the requirements to get your permit, and have you use REAL guns on the range day (real guns are so much more fun, anyway).
Sunday, February 05, 2006
A good reason to carry if you're vulnerable, as these women were.
Also, there's no such thing as a "safe neigborhood." The bad guys are everywhere.
You have the right to have the means for self-defense in Ohio. Use it.
This also shows that submission won't get you off the hook. They gave the bad guy their purses, as he requested. He then sexually assulted them.
1) Keep it pointed in a safe direction (not at your friend's back in the front seat).
2) Keep your finger off the trigger (modern guns don't fire unless the trigger is squeezed).
3) Keep it unloaded until you're ready to use it (NOT while "playing with it").
Saturday, February 04, 2006
Guess what? She can't use her legal right to carry a gun to defend herself. Walking out of the hospital with a firearm is against Ohio law, since odds are the hospital has anti-CHL signs (I know every hospital I've been in since the law went into effect does).
Goes to show, the criminals don't care what's legal or not. That's what makes them criminals. And everyone else easy victims.
Most of the shooting vicitms he deals with are criminals themselves. Goes to show lots of times bad guys are shooting up other bad guys - it's when one of the bad guys tries to hurt/kill/whatever one of the good guys that concealed carry comes into play.
Would be nice if they'd just throw the bad guys in a cage. Then we wouldn't need to be so worried about safety...
Friday, February 03, 2006
A 23-yr old man shot to death in his apartment in Symmes Township. No reason for the killing, yet.
Another guy shot as he tries to run away from a robber. Anti-gunners will tell you retreat or submission is the best defense. I, and most likely this guy, disagree. Shows pretty bluntly the lunacy of the "duty to retreat" part of the use of lethal force rules.
Don't know about you, but stories like this reaffirm my belief in concealed carry, even when in my own home.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
These guys didn't have CHLs, so it was illegal for them to have loaded guns in their cars.
Once you get your CHL, you must have your firearm on your person in plain site or locked in a case in plain site. Questions? Look at your Ohio Attorney General book or visit his website.
This is why concealed carry exists. If the chain you're delivering for doesn't allow it, find another job. Otherwise, don't complain when the bad guys take advantage.
Meanwhile, Canadians are starting to realize their recently ousted anti-gun government has made their country much less safe, and Georgia is looking to get rid of the "duty to retreat," as Florida has done.
In the morning, a cop was sitting in a neighbor's driveway.
Turns out a group of four robbers had broken into several houses in the neighborhood, including one with a burglar alarm, and were caught about 4:15 a.m. a few hundred yards from my house.
My house was untouched, even though the bad-guys obviously came to check it out.
A word to the wise: a big dog will make burglars think twice. And if they would have broken in, the 357 magnum by my bed would have kept my family safe.
Whenever someone asks "Why do you need a gun?" there is a simple answer: bad stuff happens to innocent people, every single day. Even in quiet little neighborhoods in Ohio.