|
About: Major Shoot Reloading Cost
Calculator Gun Terms
Web Services For free coupons Contact your
Senator
|
ATA, about the Amateur Trapshooting Association
and Trapshooting
ATA is THE AMATEUR TRAPSHOOTING ASSOCIATION The Amateur Trapshooting Association serves as the faithful protector of the sport of trapshooting. As the largest clay target shooting organization in the world, the ATA governs the sport's rules and regulations and seeks ways to further enhance the sport and increase participation. The ATA was founded in 1900 as the American Trapshooting Association and later changed to the Amateur Trapshooting Association in 1923. A Board of Directors, composed of state and provincial delegates govern all ATA policy matters. The Executive Committee, which is comprised of one representative from each of the five Zones, provides stewardship for the association throughout the year. The organization's day-to-day business is guided by an Executive Director and a team of professionals at the national headquarters in Vandalia, Ohio. Last year, 54,208 members participated in some 6,275 registered tournaments throughout the North America. In total over 1,300 ATA affiliated gun clubs threw 82,480,480 clay targets. The ATA Homegrounds in Vandalia is also home to the Grand American World Trapshooting Championships each August. This annual event draws nearly 6,000 competitors and showcases some of the best shooting talent in the world.
Dismayed by the lack of marksmanship shown by their troops, Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis," according to a magazine editorial written by Church. After being granted a charter by the state of New York on November 17, 1871, the NRA was founded. Civil War Gen. Ambrose Burnside, who was also the former governor of Rhode Island and a U.S. Senator, became the fledgling NRA's first president. An important facet of the NRA's creation was the development of a practice ground. In 1872, with financial help from New York state, a site on Long Island, the Creed Farm, was purchased for the purpose of building a rifle range. Named Creedmoor, the range opened a year later, and it was there that the first annual matches were held. Political opposition to the promotion of marksmanship in New York forced the NRA to find a new home for its range. In 1892, Creedmoor was deeded back to the state and NRA's matches moved to Sea Girt, New Jersey. The NRA's interest in promoting the shooting sports among America's youth began in 1903 when NRA Secretary Albert S. Jones urged the establishment of rifle clubs at all major colleges, universities and military academies. By 1906, NRA's youth program was in full swing with more than 200 boys competing in matches at Sea Girt that summer. Today, youth programs are still a cornerstone of the NRA, with more than one million youth participating in NRA shooting sports events and affiliated programs with groups such as 4-H, the Boy Scouts of America, the American Legion, U.S. Jaycees and others. Due to the overwhelming growth of NRA's shooting programs, a new range was needed. Gen. Ammon B. Crichfield, Adjutant General of Ohio, had begun construction of a new shooting facility on the shores of Lake Erie, 45 miles east of Toledo, Ohio. Camp Perry became the home of the annual National Matches, which have been the benchmark for excellence in marksmanship ever since. With nearly 6,000 people competing annually in pistol, smallbore and highpower events, the National Matches are one of the biggest sporting events held in the country today. Through the association's magazine, The American Rifleman, members were kept abreast of new firearms bills, although the lag time in publishing often prevented the necessary information from going out quickly. In response to repeated attacks on the Second Amendment rights, NRA formed the Legislative Affairs Division in 1934. While NRA did not lobby directly at this time, it did mail out legislative facts and analyses to members, whereby they could take action on their own. In 1975, recognizing the critical need for political defense of the Second Amendment, NRA formed the Institute for Legislative Action, or ILA. Meanwhile, the NRA continued its commitment to training, education and marksmanship. During World War II, the association offered its ranges to the government, developed training materials, encouraged members to serve as plant and home guard members and developed training materials for industrial security. NRA members even reloaded ammunition for those guarding war plants. Incidentally, the NRA's call to help arm Britain in 1940 resulted in the collection of more than 7,000 firearms for Britain's defense against potential invasion by Germany (Britain had virtually disarmed itself with a series of gun control laws enacted between World War I and World War II). After the war, the NRA concentrated its efforts on another much-needed arena for education and training: the hunting community. In 1949, the NRA, in conjunction with the state of New York, established the first hunter education program. Hunter Education courses are now taught by state fish and game departments across the country and Canada and have helped make hunting one of the safest sports in existence. Due to increasing interest in hunting, NRA launched a new magazine in 1973, The American Hunter, dedicated solely to hunting issues year round. NRA continues its leadership role in hunting today with the Youth Hunter Education Challenge (YHEC), a program that allows youngsters to build on the skills they learned in basic hunter education courses. YHECs are now held in 43 states and three Canadian provinces, involving an estimated 40,000 young hunters. The American Hunter and The American Rifleman were the mainstays of NRA publications until the debut of The American Guardian in 1997. The Guardian was created to cater to a more mainstream audience, with less emphasis on the technicalities of firearms and a more general focus on self-defense and recreational use of firearms. Law enforcement training was next on the priority list for program development. Although a special police school had been reinstated at Camp Perry in 1956, NRA became the only national trainer of law enforcement officers with the introduction of its NRA Police Firearms Instructor certification program in 1960. Today, there are more than 10,000 NRA-certified police and security firearms instructors. Additionally, top law enforcement shooters compete each year in eight different pistol and shotgun matches at the National Police Shooting Championships held in Jackson, Mississippi. In civilian training, the NRA continues to be the leader in firearms education. Over 50,000 Certified Instructors now train about 750,000 gun owners a year. Courses are available in basic rifle, pistol, shotgun, muzzleloading firearms, personal protection, and even ammunition reloading. Additionally, nearly 1,000 Certified Coaches are specially trained to work with young competitive shooters. Since the establishment of the lifesaving Eddie Eagle® Gun Safety Program in 1988, more than 12 million pre-kindergarten to sixth grade children have learned that if they see a firearm in an unsupervised situation, they should "STOP. DON'T TOUCH. LEAVE THE AREA. TELL AN ADULT." Over the past seven years, Refuse To Be A Victim seminars have helped more than 15,000 men and women develop their own personal safety plan using common sense strategies. In 1990, NRA made a dramatic move to ensure that the financial support for firearms-related activities would be available now and for future generations. Establishing the NRA Foundation, a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt organization, provided a means to raise millions of dollars to fund gun safety and educational projects of benefit to the general public. Contributions to the Foundation are tax-deductible and benefit a variety of American constituencies, including youths, women, hunters, competitive shooters, gun collectors, law enforcement agents and persons with physical disabilities. While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the NRA has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly three million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs. As former Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos said, "Let me make one small vote for the NRA. They're good citizens. They call their Congressmen. They write. They vote. They contribute. And they get what they want over time." Back to Top NRA sees record growth
By Gary Fields WASHINGTON -- The National Rifle Association is more popular than ever, reaching an unprecedented membership of nearly 3.6 million people this month despite a resurgence in gun-control efforts fueled by the Columbine High School slayings last year. NRA officials say that more than 200,000 people have joined the gun-rights group in the past six weeks as a national debate heated up over proposals to license gun owners and require them to register each of the estimated 230 million guns in circulation in the USA. During that time, the NRA also has received about $10 million in contributions; the 129-year-old group received $25 million in all of 1999. The NRA's sudden growth comes even as it faces its most intense criticism in years. Gun-control advocates, tapping the nationwide anger over the slayings of more than a dozen students at Columbine and several other school shootings, have staged rallies such as the Million Mom March held here last weekend. Invariably, the rallies cast the NRA's opposition to even minor gun restrictions as a factor in the violence. The NRA, a lobbying powerhouse that opens its annual convention Friday in Charlotte, has countered with a media campaign featuring its celebrity president, Charlton Heston. In one commercial, Heston accuses the Clinton administration of pushing for licensing and registration to make it easier for the federal government to seize guns. In another spot, Heston essentially calls Clinton a liar. Such rhetoric has been typical this spring, as gun control has become prime fodder for the presidential campaign. Gun-control advocates have long been frustrated by the NRA's influence on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures. For years, the NRA stymied calls for background checks on gun buyers and bans on assault weapons, leading critics to accuse the group of being out of touch with most of America. Demonizing the NRA, however, can be risky. For three decades, polls have shown that roughly 50% of Americans back gun rights and have a favorable impression of the NRA. Back to Top
NSSA is THE NATIONAL SKEET SHOOTING ASSOCIATION Organized in 1946, the National Skeet Shooting Association (NSSA)was formed as the official governing body for this remarkable sport. As a nonprofit organization, NSSA is owned and operated by and for its members. It is the largest organization of its kind in the United States, with over 2 million shooters participating in skeet shooting activities each year at one of our more than 1,000 affiliated shooting facilities. Made up of people from all walks of life, the NSSA is dedicated to the development ot the sport as a means to create healthy competition and good fellowship among its members. Such outstanding sponsors as Buick, the official car of the NSSA, as well as the National Sporting Clays Association, support this effort throughout the nation. Whether it's the World Skeet Shooting Championships, Junior World, U.S. Open or a local fun shoot, you'll find mom, dad, the kids and even grandma and grandpa active and participating. Although everyone likes to win, the real goal of the NSSA is to promote safe gun handling and good clean outdoor fun for the family. We believe that in skeet you will find the finest fellowship of sportsmen in the world. This is a rewarding recreational adventure where the best of sportsmanship prevails. You are welcome to join this unique fraternity. History of Skeet In 1920 in the town of Andover, Massachusetts, a small group of upland game hunters took to shooting clay targets as a means of practicing their wing shooting. As friendly rivalries started to develop amongst the group, a uniform series of shots were developed to keep the competition fair and even for all. It was from this crude beginning that the modern day version of skeet shooting developed into what is now an international sport practiced by hunters and non-hunters alike. Skeet has developed into much more than just an aid to better wing shooting or a substitute for hunting. It is now a competitive sport equaled by few in universal appeal. Matches are conducted for all gun gauges, against others of like ability. Competition is held for four gauges of shotguns, 12, 20, 28 and .410, though many people never use more than one. Guns must be capable of firing two shots since four sets of doubles are included in the regulation 25-shot round. In addition, competitive Doubles events are offered at many tournaments. The gun may be a double barrel (side-by-side or over-and-under), a pump gun or a semi-automatic, depending on the shooter's preference. Major manufactures offer specially made skeet guns, and you should consult them or a good gunsmith before buying a shotgun for skeet. Details such as weight, choke, drop and pitch and fit of the gun vary with shooters. It is actually better to try out several guns, all types if possible, before buying. Back to Top Is Skeet Dead? by Todd Bender To some or even many, the future may not look bright. Everyday, the media seems focused on the misuse of guns. Given the onslaught of media attention to these negative instances, it would seem that society’s opinion of firearms and their use, whether recreational or otherwise, is at an all time low. Within our small segment of sport shooting, the National Skeet Shooting Association’s membership numbers are down. This trend seems troubling when the numbers of a sport that is hinged on the accessibility of discretionary funds is dropping, while the economy in turn prospers. Considering this fact, does this mean that the end is near? Is skeet dead? I was travelling not too long ago, and during my flight was asked by a woman what I did for a living. Upon hearing my response, she muttered an "ooh," seemingly appalled, as if I had at that moment become physically offensive. In response to one question I had labeled myself as a menace to society. I was instantly viewed as the one who should carry the weight and responsibility of all the wrongs done by society’s misfits, an enabler of all those who abuse firearms in less than acceptable ways. Fortunately, the other 99% of people who I speak to about my profession and hobby are intrigued. Most find it fascinating, and have either participated in our sport or some type of recreational shooting, or have longed to try their hand at it, given the opportunity. The point is, in my experience, in interacting with a large cross-section of the population, I am finding a lot of friends out there. The woman sitting in 4B, screaming bloody murder, is in the minority even though she may protest loudly. I don’t think society is as afraid of us as we may believe, even though we still have cause for concern. I see public opinion changing, and maybe for the better. In the early 1970s, when I began shooting, when not at the gun club with my father, I was watching TV on Saturday afternoons. Many of you may remember the show on ABC, "The American Sportsman," hosted by Curt Gowdy. Each week, Mr. Gowdy and a select celebrity would go out on an outdoor adventure. I particularly remember Redd Foxx hunting quail. Yes, Redd Foxx, quail, network television. But times change, and during the late 70s and for most if not all of the 80s, outdoor sporting programming was non-existent. It seemed to have been deemed unacceptable by the media as entertainment. But now, evolving from the mid-90s, a plethora of outdoor programming exists, and much of it dedicated to recreational and sport shooting. This summer ESPN will host and broadcast the first ever ESPN Outdoor Games, an "Olympics" if you will of hunting and fishing featuring competition between the world’s best in many outdoor sporting disciplines. From this event, to be held in Lake Placid, New York, in July, there will be over 17 hours of programming on ESPN and ESPN2. This much programming from networks like ESPN, TNN, The Outdoor Life Network, seems rather contradictory for a nation hell bent on the abolition of firearms. Think numbers in the shooting sports are down, try visiting a S.H.O.T. Show (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoors Trade Show). Its size increases annually. Ever been in a Bass Pro Shop Superstore? It’s a Wal-Mart for outdoorsman. There are a few around the country. They’re huge. They just don’t build those unless there are a lot of folks wanting to spend money in them. An industry’s market grows in direct relation to the amount of customers willing to spend money in that segment. It’s supply and demand. Broadcasters only program stuff that viewers watch. This encourages advertisers to buy airtime that will reach large numbers. The above trends seem to me to mean that there must be an awful lot of people purchasing these products and watching this type of programming. Which means an awful lot of people support sport shooting whether in the field or on target ranges, competitively or recreationally. I think we have a lot of friends out there. But what do these numbers mean for skeet shooting and to the NSSA? Does it mean that all of these millions of people will shoot registered skeet and like a phoenix bring the NSSA’s membership numbers up from the ashes? Probably not. But it also means the sport I love is not dead, nor will it be likely to be listed in the obits in the near future. Since I have been a member of the NSSA, starting in 1973, the membership levels have remained somewhat constant, hovering around the 18,000s. Some years the numbers are up, and in some they are down. Realize that shooters will float in and out of the NSSA based on their desire and ability to compete. However just because an individual phases out of competition, it is unlikely that he or she will disappear forever from sport shooting. Case in point. I recently worked with a gentleman who had just come back to the sport after a 30-year hiatus. He had competed in college, but after graduation and marriage and children, had no time to continue his pursuit of competitive shooting. Last year, he was reintroduced by a colleague and now is just as hooked as he was years ago. This is a frequently re-occurring scenario. Also realize that just because someone does not shoot registered skeet that they cannot be counted among our numbers. We are strong because of all of the participants who shoot skeet, trap and sporting, registered or not. Just because a pool player shoots pool at a local pub, does not mean he has to join the national tour to be counted as a pool player. Nor is the sport of billiards in trouble because a particular player or many like him choose to only enjoy the sport at a local neighborhood level. Some believe that it is the NSSA’s responsibility to promote and further the sport of skeet shooting. To some extent this is true. However much like a welfare recipient may sit back and blame the government for their woes, at some point we must get up out of the armchair and do something ourselves. A few years ago a National Shooting Sports Foundation survey found that a large percentage, an estimated 21 million, would like to try target shooting if asked. Unfortunately, those surveyed did not realize an avenue to test their wishes. It is up to people like us, the presently active, to introduce or re-introduce others to the sport. I believe that the key to our sport is at the local level, registered shooting or not. If we take care of our game at the local level, then the game will prosper at the national level. The key to the survival of our sport is you and I. Although the present social climate may seem negative, I see a tremendous upswing in the acceptance of recreational sporting activities. This includes sport shooting. It is up to the present day participants, who are the hosts to the presently inactive, to promote and propagate our sport. Is skeet dead? I do not think so. And as long I have shells in my pouch, and clays to shoot at, it won’t be. For information concerning the BenderShima Shooting Clinics call 800.438.7340. To work privately with Todd Bender, contact him at 678.296.5184. For Todd’s latest videos on skeet shooting call Sunrise Productions at 800.862.6399. Back to Top
Top 50 Breeds The following is a list of the top 50 breeds of dogs for 1999. The Number Column is the number of dogs in that particular breed that were registered in 1999. Top 50 Dogs registered January 1 - December 31, 1999
To save hunting in the 21st century... By James Jay BakerThere was a time not long ago when books by Robert Ruark full of wonderful hunting stories about a boy and his grandfather were in every bookstore, perhaps on the best-seller list. Or when ABC had one of the finest showcases for hunting and fishing ever produced on television, The American Sportsman; where every week we saw celebrities from all walks of life hunting everything from big game in Kenya to woodcock in Maine. This was a time when Ernest Hemingway, a masterful hunter living a legend, was the pride of America's cultural elite and was featured in national magazines for his pursuits. It was a time when major film and television stars were proud to identify themselves as hunters. Hunting was popular culture. The anti-hunting, anti-gun movement essentially did not exist, and when its beginnings seeped through the media cracks, it was treated as a weird sideshow. This was a time when virtually everyone in the nation had some connection to rural culture, whether directly or through extended family. People knew that chickens were birds, and that beef came from cattle--they were not just types of meat under plastic wrap in a supermarket. That was America when I was given my first gun and taken in hand by my father to become a hunter and to learn the ethics, lore, and kinship that is part of our heritage. That America is still out there, but for many it's hard to see. In recent years, that America has been overwhelmed by media fascination with self appointed social activists whose bizarre agendas dominate popular culture. There are still television and film stars who love to hunt. But America will never hear about it or see them talking about it, because the social movements that begin with the word "anti-" now dominate virtually all forms of mass communication. Today, any time these militants have something negative to say about our hunting heritage and our tradition of conservation--no matter how ignorant or wrong--it is thrust upon us as news, part entertainment and part cultural education. If 200 members of an anti-hunting group show up to protest a hunting day reserved for youth, it is treated as major news. It makes the networks. If one thousand people protest deer hunting, those people are called an army of protesters. Yet on a single day unique to each state, peaceable armed citizens gather in numbers that would dwarf the largest standing army in the world. Opening day of hunting seasons in America this past year saw nearly 12 million men, women, and children take to the nation's farms, fields, hills, and mountains in active participation in a heritage that is alive and well--hunting. But changes in our society threaten to give the "anti" culture the tools they need to extinguish our hunting and sport-shooting heritage entirely. In the East it's urban sprawl, as more and more rural land is gobbled up every day for development. As the farms and forests are bulldozed to make way for highways and homes and the people that follow, there is less land for hunting and hunters. And while in many cases game populations have never been larger or healthier, public attitudes about those who participate in their management have never been more polluted by media distortions than now. In the West, the threat is different but the result much the same. Environmental zealots have successfully lobbied the Clinton-Gore Administration to close off millions of acres of public land to hunting and sport shooting, or to severely limit access to those opportunities. And animal-rights extremists are pursuing a relentless campaign to eliminate hunting as a tool of wildlife management, one season or one method at a time. The future of hunting, as we enter this new century, can only be assured by those who live it and practice it. There are enough of us who share the passion for the real outdoors to make a difference, and we need only bear in mind that hunting requires four essentials: a place to hunt, well-managed wildlife resources, the tools to hunt with, and people who participate. At NRA-ILA we are doing everything we can to assure that there will be places to hunt. We work every day with federal and state agencies to keep public lands accessible for hunting, and we support programs to encourage landowners to open their property to hunters. In the East it's urban sprawl, as more and more rural land is gobbled up every day for development. As the farms and forests are bulldozed to make way for highways and homes and the people that follow, there is less land for hunting and hunters. And while in many cases game populations have never been larger or healthier, public attitudes about those who participate in their management have never been more polluted by media distortions than now. In the West, the threat is different but the result much the same. Environmental zealots have successfully lobbied the Clinton-Gore Administration to close off millions of acres of public land to hunting and sport shooting, or to severely limit access to those opportunities. And animal-rights extremists are pursuing a relentless campaign to eliminate hunting as a tool of wildlife management, one season or one method at a time. The future of hunting, as we enter this new century, can only be assured by those who live it and practice it. There are enough of us who share the passion for the real outdoors to make a difference, and we need only bear in mind that hunting requires four essentials: a place to hunt, well-managed wildlife resources, the tools to hunt with, and people who participate. At NRA-ILA we are doing everything we can to assure that there will be places to hunt. We work every day with federal and state agencies to keep public lands accessible for hunting, and we support programs to encourage landowners to open their property to hunters. We are the only group in America who willingly and proudly pay whatever is necessary in taxes to assure that our natural resources are protected and managed. In fact, roughly 10 percent of every dollar spent by hunters and sport shooters on firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment is a Federal excise tax used to fund the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act, more commonly known as Pittman-Robertson. Since 1937, the Pittman-Robertson program --funded exclusively with money collected from hunters and shooters--has provided more than three billion dollars for wildlife management, conservation, hunter education, and range development. Unfortunately the anti-hunting and anti-gun establishment and their allies in the White House would like nothing more than to raid these funds to bankroll their social agenda. In recent years, we have repeatedly fought legislation that would divert these funds, and we must also be constantly vigilant to ensure that Clinton-Gore political bureaucrats do not illegally divert these funds and sweep the evidence under the government rug. Our efforts have been critical in making sure that P-R funds earmarked for wildlife management and hunter education are well spent on their intended purposes, and we will fight to keep it that way. When it comes to the hardware we hunt with, nobody is doing more than we are doing collectively--NRA and NRA members--to preserve the tools of hunting. The war that has been declared on the Second Amendment since the outset of the Clinton Administration is also a war on hunting. Some may think that this is the same old line, the camel's nose under the tent, and that no one is going to take away our guns or our right to hunt. In fact, President Clinton has gone to great lengths to suggest that the anti-gun laws he advocates wouldn't prevent any hunter or sport shooter from a day spent in the field or on the local shooting range. But Clinton's rhetoric conceals a well-planned squeeze play. While he offers assurances that there will always be guns for hunting, his appointees are working to eliminate hunting wherever they can. At the same time, Clinton and his supporters are working to further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and use firearms whether for sport or self-defense. Clinton often brags that his gun bans have not taken a single gun away from hunters, but then he supports the deceptive efforts of his allies in Congress to ban deer rifles by calling them "sniper rifles," and efforts to ban virtually all center-fire rifle ammunition by calling it "cop-killer" ammunition. Make no mistake--our heritage faces an enormous threat from all sides. The stakes in this battle are nothing short of the hunter's way of life. Soon after the Littleton tragedy, President Clinton mocked hunters in a condescending attack on our beliefs. "The problem is, we have another culture in our country that I think has gotten confused about its objectives. We have a huge hunting and sport shooting culture in America . . .when there are no constituents for this movement, the movement will evaporate." In his war on the culture of hunting, Bill Clinton asked for the help of his friends in the media elite, saying, "You change the culture, we'll change the laws." And that gets me to the most important single thing we must do to preserve our hunting heritage for the future. It's something each of us does individually. We need to make sure that our culture survives among ourselves. We need to pass on the knowledge, the ethics, the pure enjoyment, the love for the outdoors, and the passion for hunting to someone else--especially to someone younger. There are countless ways to bring someone new into our way of life, and I'm sure we can all think of at least one we can try this season. Just as certainly, in the future we will all encounter other hunters who aren't members of the NRA, for whatever reason. Take a moment to explain the work we're doing to protect hunters' rights, and give them a membership application so they can help support our efforts. As we enter this new century, the future of our hunting heritage cannot be taken for granted. We--hunters and those who support hunting--must not fail. The stakes here are enormous. Bill Clinton said so himself when he stated, "the heart and soul of America is on the line." Indeed it is, and I plan to do my part. I hope you will join me. James Jay Baker is the Executive Director of the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action (ILA), where he directs all of the Association's political and legislative activities. ILA includes a Conservation, Wildlife and Natural Resources Division that defends hunters' rights in Congress, before federal regulatory agencies, and in all state capitals.An avid hunter, Baker was raised in Maryland, and was introduced by his father to the many hunting opportunities of Maryland's Eastern Shore and the Chesapeake Bay watershed, including a wide variety of waterfowl, upland birds, and larger game such as bear and whitetail deer. Baker has hunted in nearly every region of the United States, and recently took this brown bear in Alaska. Back to TopFIREARMS FACT-SHEET
|
City |
1997 Murder rate |
---|---|
Washington, DC | 56.9 per 100,00027 |
Arlington, VA | 1.6 per 100,00028 |
(Arlington is just across the river from D.C.) | |
Total VA metropolitan area | 7.9 per 100,00029 |
* Guns are not the problem. On the contrary, lax criminal penalties and laws that disarm the law-abiding are responsible for giving criminals a safer working environment.
* Dr. Gary Kleck. A criminologist at Florida State University, Kleck began his research as a firm believer in gun control. But in a speech delivered to the National Research Council, he said while he was once "a believer in the 'anti-gun' thesis," he has now moved "beyond even the skeptic position." Dr. Kleck now says the evidence "indicates that general gun availability does not measurably increase rates of homicide, suicide, robbery, assault, rape, or burglary in the U.S."30
* James Wright. Formerly a gun control advocate, Wright received a grant from President Carter's Justice Department to study the effectiveness of gun control laws. To his surprise, he found that waiting periods, background checks, and all other gun control laws were not effective in reducing violent crime.31
* Wright says at one time, "It seemed evident to me, we needed to mount a campaign to resolve the crisis of handgun proliferation." But he says, "I am now of the opinion that a compelling case for 'stricter gun control' cannot be made."32
* Every scholar who has "switched" has moved away from the anti-gun position. Dave Kopel, an expert in constitutional issues and firearms research, categorically states that, "Every scholar who has 'switched' has 'switched' to the side that is skeptical of controls. Indeed, most of the prominent academic voices who are gun control skeptics -- including law professor Sanford Levinson and criminologists Gary Kleck and James Wright -- are people who, when they began studying guns, were supporters of the gun control agenda."33
* Kopel continues: "I do not know of a single scholar who has published a pro-control article who started out as a skeptic of gun control. This suggests how heavily the weight of the evidence is distributed, once people begin studying the evidence."34
A. Waiting periods threaten the safety of people in imminent danger
* Bonnie Elmasri-- She inquired about getting a gun to protect herself from a husband who had repeatedly threatened to kill her. She was told there was a 48 hour waiting period to buy a handgun. But unfortunately, Bonnie was never able to pick up a gun. She and her two sons were killed the next day by an abusive husband of whom the police were well aware.35
* Marine Cpl. Rayna Ross -- she bought a gun (in a non-waiting period state) and used it to kill an attacker in self-defense two days later.36 Had a 5-day waiting period been in effect, Ms. Ross would have been defenseless against the man who was stalking her.
* Los Angeles riots -- USA Today reported that many of the people rushing to gun stores during the 1992 riots were "lifelong gun-control advocates, running to buy an item they thought they'd never need." Ironically, they were outraged to discover they had to wait 15 days to buy a gun for self-defense.37
* A Justice Department survey of felons showed that 93% of handgun predators had obtained their most recent guns "off-the-record."38
* Press reports show that the few criminals who get their guns from retail outlets can easily get fake IDs or use surrogate buyers, known as "straw purchasers," to buy their guns.39
1. Second Amendment protects an individual right
Report by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution (1982)
-- "The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."40
Supreme Court admits "the people" in the Second Amendment are the same "people" as in the rest of the Bill of Rights
-- In U.S. v. Verdugo- Urquidez the Court stated that "'the people" seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. . . . [and] it suggests that "the people" protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community."41
2. Courts agree that rights should be free from prior restraints
Near v. Minnesota
-- In this case, the Supreme Court stated that government officials should punish the abuse of a right and not place prior restraints on the exercise of the right.42
What about yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater?
-- The courts have stated that one cannot use his "freedom of speech" to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater. And yet, no one argues that officials should gag everyone who goes into the theater, thus placing a prior restraint on movie-goers. The proper response is to punish the person who does yell "Fire." Likewise, citizens should not be "gagged" before exercising their Second Amendment rights, rather they should be punished if they abuse that right.
* Justice Department report (1989). "Any system that requires a criminal history record check prior to purchase of a firearm creates the potential for the automated tracking of individuals who seek to purchase firearms."43
* Justice Department initiates registration (1994). The Justice Department gave a grant to the city of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University to create a sophisticated national gun registry using data compiled from states' background check programs. This attempt at registration was subsequently defeated in the courts.44
* More gun owner registration (1996). A new computer software distributed by the Justice Department allows police officials to easily (and unlawfully) register the names and addresses of gun buyers. This software -- known as FIST -- also keeps information such as the type of gun purchased, the make, model and caliber, the date of purchase, etc.45 The instant background check could be a key component in registering this information in the computer software.46
* Federal Bureau of Investigation registers gun owners (1998). Despite prohibitions in federal law, the FBI announced that it would begin keeping gun buyer's names for six months. FBI had originally wanted to keep the names for 18 months, but reduced the time period after groups like Gun Owners of America strongly challenged the legality of their actions. GOA submitted a formal protest to the FBI, calling their attempt at registration both "unlawful" and "unconstitutional."47
* California. State officials have used the state background check -- required during the waiting period -- to compile an illegal registry of handgun owners. These lists have been compiled without any statutory authority to do so.48
* Nationwide. Highly acclaimed civil rights attorney, researcher and author, David Kopel, has noted several states where either registration lists have been illegally compiled from background checks or where such registration lists have been abused by officials.49
General Accounting Office Study:
1. The Brady Law has failed to result in the incarceration of dangerous criminals. After the first year and a half, there were only seven successful prosecutions for making false statements on Brady handgun purchase forms -- and only three of them were actually incarcerated.50 With only three criminals sent to jail, one can hardly argue that the law is working to keep violent criminals from getting handguns on the street.
2. The Brady Law has ERRONEOUSLY denied firearms to thousands of applicants. Over fifty percent of denials under the Brady Law are for administrative snafus, traffic violations, or reasons other than felony convictions.51
3. Gun control advocates admit the Brady Law is not a panacea. According to a January, 1996 report by the General Accounting Office, "Proponents [of gun control] acknowledge that criminal records checks alone will not prevent felons from obtaining firearms."52
4. Criminals can easily evade the background checks by using straw purchasers: "Opponents of gun control note that criminals can easily circumvent the law by purchasing handguns on the secondary market or by having friends or spouses without a criminal record make the purchases from dealers."53
* Step One: Registration. In the mid-1960's officials in New York City began registering long guns. They promised they would never use such lists to take away firearms from honest citizens. But in 1991, the city banned (and soon began confiscating) many of those very guns.54
* Step Two: Confiscation. In 1992, a New York City paper reported that, "Police raided the home of a Staten Island man who refused to comply with the city's tough ban on assault weapons, and seized an arsenal of firearms. . . . Spot checks are planned [for other homes]."55
* Registration and Confiscation in California. The Golden State passed a ban on certain semi-automatic firearms in 1989. Banned guns could be legally possessed if they were registered prior to the ban. In the Spring of 1995, one man who wished to move to California asked the Attorney General whether his SKS Sporter rifle would be legal in the state. The citizen was assured the rifle was legal, and based on that information, he subsequently moved into the state. But in 1998, California officials reversed course and confiscated the firearm.56
* Foreign Countries. Gun registration has led to confiscation in several countries, including Greece, Ireland, Jamaica and Bermuda.57 And in an exhaustive study on this subject, Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership has researched and translated several gun control laws from foreign countries. Their publication, Lethal Laws: "Gun Control" is the Key to Genocide documents how gun control (and confiscation) has preceded the slaughter and genocide of millions of people in Turkey, the Soviet Union, Germany, China, Cambodia and others.58
* In 1983, Igor Hutorsky was murdered by two burglars who broke into his Brooklyn furniture store. The tragedy is that some time before the murder his business partner had applied for permission to keep a handgun at the store. Even four months after the murder, the former partner had still not heard from the police about the status of his gun permit.59
* Arbitrary Delays -- While New Jersey law requires applications to be responded to within thirty days, delays of ninety days are routine; sometimes, applications are delayed for several years for no readily apparent reason.60
* Arbitrary Denials -- Officials in New York City routinely deny gun permits for ordinary citizens and store owners because -- as the courts have ruled -- they have no greater need for protection than anyone else in the city. In fact, the authorities have even refused to issue permits when the courts have ordered them to do so.61
* Arbitrary Fee Increases -- In 1994, the Clinton administration pushed for a license fee increase of almost 1,000 percent on gun dealers. According to U.S. News & World Report, the administration was seeking the license fee increase "in hopes of driving many of America's 258,000 licensed gun dealers out of business."62
* The Supreme Court held in Lamont v. Postmaster General (1965) that the First Amendment prevents the government from registering purchasers of magazines and newspapers -- even if such material is "communist political propaganda."63
* According to one of the preeminent experts in the field of firearms, Dr. Edward Ezell,64 a key characteristic of a true assault weapon is that it must have the capability of "full automatic fire."65 Similarly, the U.S. Defense Department defines real assault weapons as "selective-fire weapons" -- meaning that these guns can fire either automatically or semi-automatically.66
* Anti-gun pundits in recent years have managed to define "assault weapons" as semi-automatic firearms which only externally resemble a military firearm.67 Dr. Edward Ezell notes that true assault weapons "were designed to produce roughly aimed bursts of full automatic fire"68 -- something which a semi-automatic firearm does not do.
* Officer William McGrath: "These [semi-automatic assault rifles] are little different than the semi-automatic hunting rifles that have been on the market since before World War II. The main difference between an assault rifle and a semi-automatic hunting rifle is that the assault rifle looks more 'military.'"69
* "The term 'assault' rifle is really a misnomer as a true assault rifle is a selective fire weapon capable of switching from fully automatic to semi automatic and back with the flip of a lever."70
* "The charge that the assault rifle holds more rounds than a 'legitimate' hunting rifle shows either a lack of knowledge or a deliberate twisting of the facts, as 10, 20 and 30 round magazines for 'legitimate' hunting rifles have been on the market for decades without the world coming to an end."71
(All of the following figures pre-date the "assault weapons" ban passed by Congress in 1994)
* Police View: Over 100,000 police officers delivered a message to Congress in 1990 stating that only 2% to 3% of crimes are committed using a so-called "assault weapon."72
* New Jersey: The New York Times reported that, "Although New Jersey's pioneering ban on military-style assault rifles was sold to the state as a crime-fighting measure, its impact on violence in the state . . . has been negligible, both sides agree."73 Moreover, New Jersey police statistics show that only .026 of 1 percent of all crimes involve "assault rifles."74
* Nationwide: The Bureau of Justice Statistics reported in 1993 that violent criminals only carry or use a "military-type gun" in about one percent of the crimes nationwide.75
* Knives more deadly: According to the FBI, people have a much greater chance of being killed by a knife or a blunt object than by any kind of rifle, including an "assault rifle."76 In Chicago, the chance is 67 times greater. That is, a person is 67 times more likely to be stabbed or beaten to death in Chicago than to be murdered by an "assault rifle."77
* Cops' own guns more deadly: So-called assault weapons are not menacing police officers nationwide. The FBI reports show that before the 1994 ban on semi-automatic "assault weapons," no more than three officers were killed in any one year by such guns.78 Contrastly, police officers were more than three times as likely to be killed by their own guns than by "assault weapons."79
* It would seem one can't have it both ways. If Congress wants to ban weapons that are dangerous to police, then it should begin by pushing for a ban on police officers' own weapons, since these guns kill far more often than "assault weapons." The same is true with knives and blunt objects. These instruments kill policemen more often than semi-automatic "assault weapons."80
* Sarah Brady's own figures show that so-called assault weapons are not the criminal's "weapon of choice." A study published by Handgun Control, Inc. in November of 1995 shows that the overwhelming majority of guns used to murder police officers are not "assault weapons."81 The irony is that HCI uses a very inflated definition of "assault weapon" and still can not demonstrate that they are used in over 50% of the crimes.82
* Does tracing of crime guns show that "assault weapons" are the weapons of choice for criminals? No. Gun control advocates will often make the claim that so-called assault weapons are frequently used in crime. To justify this claim, such advocates will cite as "evidence" the fact that law-enforcement run a high percentage of traces on these types of firearms. But this is a classic example of circular reasoning: law enforcement arbitrarily run a high percentage of trace requests on "assault weapons," and then this figure is used to justify the "fact" that these guns are frequently used in crime. Consider the following:
* Tracing requests are not representative of all guns used in crime.
The Congressional Research Service states that, "Firearms selected for tracing do not constitute a random sample and cannot be considered representative of the larger universe of all firearms used by criminals."83 (Emphasis added.) Moreover, BATF agents themselves have stated that, "ATF does not always know if a firearm being traced has been used in a crime."84
* Tracing requests are not random samples.
CRS notes that "ATF tracing data could be potentially biased because of screening conducted by local ATF agents prior to the submission of the tracing from."85 This means that police could, if they wanted, only trace so-called assault weapons. Would this mean that they are the only guns used in crime? No, it would just mean that law enforcement have a particular interest in tracing "assault weapons" over other guns.
* Tracing in L.A.
That tracing is an unreliable measure of a gun's use in crime is clear. For example, in 1989 in Los Angeles, "assault rifles" represented approximately only 3% of guns seized, but 19% of gun traces.86
* Police Capt. Massad Ayoob: "The likelihood of multiple opponents who move fast, often wear body armor, know how to take cover, and tend to ingest chemicals that make them resistant to pain and shock, are all good reasons for carrying guns that throw a whole lot more bullets than six-shooters do."87 (Emphasis added.)
* "All four of these factors make it likely that more of the Good Guys' bullets will be expended before the Bad Guys are neutralized. All of these factors, therefore, militate for a higher capacity handgun in the hands of the lawful defenders."88
1. Drugs and alcohol can make criminals resistant to pain
* Arkansas:
A drunk opened fire on an officer, who responded by firing 29 shots -- 15 of them striking the criminal. It was only the last bullet which finally killed the drunk and effectively stopped him from shooting.89
* Illinois:
Police shot a drug-induced criminal 33 times before the junkie finally dropped and was unable to shoot any longer.90
2. Hi-capacity semi-autos can help decent people to defend themselves
* Los Angeles riots:
Many of the guns targeted by so-called assault weapons bans are the very guns with which the Korean merchants used to defend themselves during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.91 Those firearms proved to be extremely useful to the Koreans. Their stores were left standing while other stores around them were burned to the ground.
* The Korean merchants would probably agree with Capt. Massad Ayoob. When one is facing mob violence and the police are nowhere to be found, one needs a gun that shoots more than just six bullets. A ban on large capacity semi-automatic firearms will only harm one's ability to defend himself and his family.
* Report by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution (1982) -- "In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a [military-style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. . . . There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard."92
* The Supreme Court -- In U.S. v. Miller, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense . . . [and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."93
Cause |
Number |
|
---|---|---|
Heart disease | 737,563 | |
Cancer | 538,455 | |
Stroke (cerebrovascular disease) | 157,991 | |
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 102,899 | |
Doctor's negligence | 93,329 | |
Motor-vehicle | 43,363 | |
Firearms (Total) Suicides Homicides Accidents |
18,503 15,551 1,125 |
35,673 |
Suicides (all kinds, including firearms) | 31,284 | |
Accidents (five causes) Falls Poison Drowning Fires, burns Firearms |
13,986 8,461 4,350 3,761 1,225 |
|
Homicides (all instruments) | 22,895 | |
Chronic liver disease, cirrhosis | 25,222 | |
Source: Except for the figure on doctor's negligence, the above information is for 1995 and is taken from National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 1998 Edition, at 10, 121. The number of yearly deaths attributed to doctor's negligence is based on the Harvard Medical Practice Study (1990) which is cited in Kleck, Point Blank, at 43. |
Cause | Number |
---|---|
Motor-vehicle | 3,059 |
Drowning | 1,060 |
Fires, burns | 833 |
Mechanical suffocation | 459 |
Ingestion of food, object | 213 |
Firearms | 181 |
Source: Figures are for 1995. National Safety Council, Accident Facts: 1998 Edition, at 10, 11, 18. |
* Fact: Accidental gun deaths among children have declined by over 50 % in 25 years, even though the population (and the gun stock) has continued to increase.94
* Fact: Despite the low number of gun accidents among children (see above), most of these fatalities are not truly "accidents." According to Dr. Gary Kleck, many such accidents are misnamed -- those "accidents" actually resulting from either suicides or extreme cases of child abuse.95
* Dr. Kleck also notes that, "Accidental shooters were significantly more likely to have been arrested, arrested for a violent act, arrested in connection with alcohol, involved in highway crashes, given traffic citations, and to have had their driver's license suspended or revoked."96
* Myth: One child is accidentally killed by a gun every day. Dr. Gary Kleck notes that to reach this figure, anti-gun authors must include "children" aged 18-24.97 As noted above, there were only 181 fatal gun accidents for children in 1995.
* Myth: 135,000 children take guns to school every day. This factoid was based on a survey that did not even ask children if they carried a weapon to school. The "take guns to school" statement is completely imputed into the survey results. With regard to the 135,000 figure, Dr. Gary Kleck has shown that this number is wildly inflated.98
* Myth: There are more guns in schools today because of lax gun control laws. To the contrary, two facts put this myth to rest:
* Fact:
Currently, there are strict laws that, with few exceptions, prevent adults from possessing a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school. These and other gun control laws have failed to keep guns off school grounds.
* Fact:
In the past, "guns in schools" were never a problem during the era when children had the greatest access to firearms. For example, even though there were far fewer gun control laws on the books in the 1950's, there was not a problem with illegal guns in schools. Rather, the top problems in American classrooms during that era were such (non-violent) activities as chewing gum, talking in class and running in the halls.
* More on guns in schools. So what has changed? Why do illegal guns make their way onto school grounds today, even though federal gun control laws have now grown to comprise more than 70,000 words of restrictions and requirements?99 There are several possible reasons, including:
a. Lax punishment of juvenile children. Several state studies have shown that juvenile offenders will make several journeys through the legal system before doing any time in a penal facility.100 This problem, of course, is not just limited to juveniles. A murderer of any age (in 1990) could expect to serve only 1.8 years in prison, after one considers the risk of apprehension and the length of the sentence.101
b. Imitation of T.V. violence. Before completing the sixth grade, the average American child sees 8,000 homicides and 100,000 acts of violence on television.102 Two surveys of young American males found that 22 to 34 percent had tried to perform crime techniques they had watched on television.103
c. Morality shift. "The kids have changed," says Judge Gaylord Finch, speaking with the help of a dozen years of observation from his bench, where he sits as chief judge of Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court. "The values have just become so relative, and it sometimes seems we have no values in common anymore."104
* At least 17 million women own firearms in the United States.105 And according to the National Research Opinion Center, 44 percent of adult women either own or have access to firearms.106
* As many as 561 times a day, women use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault.107
* In 89.6% of violent crimes directed against women, the offender does not have a gun; and only 10% of rapists carry a firearm.108 Thus, armed women will usually have a decided advantage against their attackers.
* A man can kill a woman with whatever he has at hand, but she can usually only resist him successfully with a gun. Don Kates, a civil rights attorney who specializes in firearms issues, cites a Detroit study showing that three-quarters of wives who killed their spouses were not even charged, since prosecutors found their acts necessary to protect their lives or their children's lives.109
1. Dr. Edgar Suter has pointed out that studies which make such claims are flawed because they fail to consider the number of lives saved by guns. That is, such claims ignore the vast number of non-lethal defensive uses with firearms.110
2. Criminologists have found that citizens use firearms as often as 2.5 million times every year in self-defense. In over 90% of these defensive uses, citizens merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off the attacker.111
1. While most murders do involve the killing of an acquaintance, it is fallacious to assume these are otherwise law-abiding people killing one another. In fact, sixty-one percent of murder victims themselves -- and an even greater majority of murderers -- have prior criminal records.112 This indicates that most murders occur between criminals who have already demonstrated a pattern of violence.
2. The problem? The criminal justice system is a revolving door which continues to throw violent offenders back onto the street. Nationwide, 70% of murderers (under sentence of death) have prior felony convictions.113 This number does not include criminals who have plea-bargained their felonies down to lesser charges.
1. England and Canada's murder rates were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates. 114
2. The murder rates in England, Canada and Japan have risen tremendously since passing their gun control laws.115 And most crime rates in England have now surpassed the rates in the U.S.:
* In 1998, a study conducted by a British professor and a U.S. statistician found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States. "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study that was published by the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ). "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's."116
* The murder rate in the United States is higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years."117
3. United States: Take away the guns, and there is still more murder. United States' NON-GUN murder rate is higher than the TOTAL murder rates in England, Canada or Japan.118 In other words, Americans kill each other more often with weapons other than guns -- such as with knives, fists and feet.
* It is absurd to claim that the U.S. has more murders because it has more guns. If one were to "magically" make every gun disappear in the U.S., the hard fact is that Americans would still kill each other-without guns-more often than the citizens of England, Canada or Japan kill each other will ALL types of weapons.
* The problem is not the type of weapons used, but rather, the failure in America to keep violent criminals off the street. (See point 2 under Myth #2 above.)
4. Violence by any other name is still violent
-- Many countries with strict gun control laws have higher violence rates than the United
States does. Consider the following rates:
High Gun
|
Low Gun
|
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Country |
Suicide |
Homicide |
Total* |
Country |
Suicide |
Homicide |
Total* |
Finland | 24.4 | 2.86 | 27.2 | Romania | 66.2 | n.a. | 66.2 |
Switzerland | 24.45 | 1.13 | 25.58 | France | 21.8 | 4.36 | 26.16 |
U.S. | 12.2 | 7.59 | 19.79 | W.Germany | 20.37 | 1.48 | 21.85 |
Israel ** | 6 | 2 | 8 | Japan | 20.3 | 0.9 | 21.2 |
* The figures listed in the table are the rates per 100,000 people.
** Israel's total violence rate is lower than the total rates in England/Wales or Canada.
Source for table: Don B. Kates, Jr., Guns, Murders, and the Constitution: A Realistic Assessment of Gun Control, (1990):42.
* Murder rate was already decreasing before Brady and semi-auto gun ban passed. Those who claim that the two gun control laws enacted in 1994 have reduced the murder rate ignore the fact that the U.S. murder rate has been decreasing from the high it reached in 1991.119 Thus, the murder rate had already begun decreasing two to three years before the Brady law and the semi-auto gun ban became law.
* Murder rate decrease results from fewer violent youths. The Democratic Judiciary Committee noted in 1991 that, "An analysis of the murder tolls since 1960 offers compelling evidence of the link -- the significant rise of murder in the late 1960's, and the slight decrease in murder in the early 1980's follows from an unusually large number of 18-24 year-olds in the general population. This age group is the most violent one, as well as the group most likely to be victimized -- and the murder figures ebb and flow with their ranks."120 (Emphasis added.)
1. U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982)
Courts have used the Second Amendment to strike down gun control:
Nunn v. State and in re Brickey are just two examples where the Courts have struck down gun control laws using the Second Amendment.121
An individual right protected:
"The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry firearms in a peaceful manner."122
2. U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990)
. "'The people' seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. . . . [and] it suggests that 'the people' protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community."
U.S. v. Lopez (1995)
. The Court struck down a federal law which prevented the possessing of firearms within 1,000 feet of a school. The Court argued that the Commerce Clause of the Constitution in no way grants Congress the authority to enact such gun control legislation.
Printz v. U.S. (1997)
. The Supreme Court ruled the federal government could not force state authorities to conduct so-called Brady background checks on gun buyers.
3. U.S. Congress:
Fourteenth Amendment (1868):
The framers of the 14th Amendment intended to protect an individual's Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms by striking down state laws that denied this right. As stated by a Senate subcommittee in 1982, "[During] the debates over the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress frequently referred to the Second Amendment as one of the rights which it intended to guarantee against state action."123
Firearm Owners' Protection Act (1986):
The 1986 Law affirms individual right to keep and bear arms: "The Congress finds that the right of citizens to keep and bear arms under the second amendment to the United States Constitution . . . require[s] additional legislation to correct existing firearms statutes and enforcement policies."124 [Emphasis added.]
4. Nothing in Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution authorizes Congress to pass gun control legislation (see U.S. v. Lopez, 1995). Since the adoption of the Constitution, courts have ruled on both sides of the issue, indicating that judges are just as political as the common man.
The Founding Fathers made it clear that the Militia was composed of the populace at large. Both the Congress and Supreme Court have affirmed this definition of the Militia.
1. Founding Fathers
* George Mason:
"I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."125* Virginia Constitution, Art. I, Sec. 13 (1776):
"That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty. . . ."* Richard Henry Lee:
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them . . . . The mind that aims at a select militia [like the National Guard], must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle."126
2. U.S. Congress
* The Militia Act of 1792.
One year after the Second Amendment was added to the Constitution, Congress passed a law defining the militia. The Militia Act of 1792 declared that all free male citizens between the ages of 18 and 44 were to be members of the militia. Furthermore, every citizen was to be armed. The Act stated:"Every citizen . . . [shall] provide himself with a good musket, or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints . . . ."127
The Militia Act of 1792 made no provision for any type of select militia such as the National Guard.
* U.S. Senate Subcommittee Report (1982).
"In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined 'militia of the United States' to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a [military-style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment. . . . There can be little doubt from this that when the Congress and the people spoke of the a 'militia,' they had reference to the traditional concept of the entire populace capable of bearing arms, and not to any formal group such as what is today called the National Guard." 128* Current Federal Law: 10 U.S.C. Sec. 311.
"The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States . . . ."129
3. Supreme Court: U.S. v. Miller (1939).
In this case, the Court stated that, "The Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense . . . [and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."130 Back to Top
Democrats? For the Second Amendment? Isn't that an oxymoron? While the modern Democratic Party leadership tends to be anti-gun, a growing number of people are realizing that gun ownership is an important right of all law-abiding Americans.
Democrat
- "Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government,no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.... The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible."
- -
Democrats for the 2nd Amendment takes the following positions on
the purchase and ownership of firearms:
We support:
The Democratic
Freedom Caucus is an organization for Democrats with Libertarian leanings.
They have a very strong platform, and are definately "our kind of
Democrats" :)
Jews for the
Preservation of Firearms Ownership have a unique perspective on the
effects of gun control. They have researched evidence that the U.S. Federal
Gun Control Act of 1968 was based on Nazi weapons laws.
Women Against Gun
Control have a web site which shows that women have as much, if not more,
at stake in the Gun Control fight as men. Be sure to read their guest
editorial by a woman who's daughter committed suicide by gun.
Many doctors and medical professionals are trying to influence
firearms policy by treating gun ownership as a public health problem. Doctors
for Responsible Gun Ownership is a group of doctors fighting this trend.
One of the organizations which works the hardest to protect gun
ownership is the Second Amendment
Foundation. They have an excellent selection of articles on their web
site.
If you need any background information on the legal issues
surrounding the 2nd Amendment, the 2nd
Amendment Law Library is the resource you've been looking for. This site
holds many articles relating to the second amendment, reprinted from the top
legal journals. Most articles are in both HTML for on-screen viewing and Adobe
PDF for easy printing.
source: http://www.d2a.org/ Back to Top
There are many kinds of money
options to choose from when you have progressed to the point where you
might want to play the money options. Remember, most clubs have their own
kinds of options. They change the percentages, cost and various methods of
payout. Ask the cashier to explain the option to you. Remember; don't play
any money that you can’t afford to lose. For beginning shooters, the
basic Lewis Class option is best suited for your skills. You can win money
with this option with a very low score.
Basic Lewis Class:
When all the shooting has been completed, the scores are listed in
numerical order from the highest to the lowest. They are then divided into
as many groups as there are classes. For example, if there were 30 entries
and 5 classes, there would be 6 scores in each class. The highest score in
each class would then be the winner.
High Gun System:
The high gun system is often used where money is to be divided among
several winners within a given class. For example the program may state
that there will be 4 classes with 3 monies in each class i.e. 50-30-20%
High Gun, 50% to the winner of first place in each class, 30% to second
and 20% to third. Typical scores in Class A are as follows: 99,99,98,98,
97, 96,95. Under this system, the 3 high guns or, in other words, the 3
high scores win the money. The two 99s take 1st and 2nd
monies, namely the 50% and 30%, or 40% each. The two 48s tie for 3rd
place and split the 20%, getting 10% each.
Percentage System:
This system is another method of distributing money within a class, or
where all scores are handled as one group. Here, if there are 3 monies,
all those breaking in the 3 top places participate in the money division.
Using the example above on a percentage basis, the 99s split 50%, or get
25% each, the two 98s split 30% or 15% each, and the one 97 gets 20%. Some
Program Purses might pay 40-30-20-10% (paying 4 places), or
25-15-10-25-15-10% (paying 6 places).
The Jack Rabbit
System:
In this system, each contestant pays a certain amount into the purse for
each target he is going to shoot. For example, he might pay in 10 cents
for each target in a 25-bird event making a total of $2.50. He will then
get back 10 cents for each target he breaks i.e. $1.50 for breaking 15X25,
$2.00 for breaking 20X25, etc. The amount which remains in the purse,
represented by the targets that are missed, is then divided among the high
guns, either according to the High Gun or Percentage System.
The Rose System:
Here each place is assigned a given number of points. The points may be
varied to suit local conditions such as 4,3,2,1; 5,3,2,1; 7,5,3,1; or may
run into five or six figures. This system maintains an equal ratio and
pays best to the top scores no matter whether one of the contestants has a
place by himself or not. As an example using the 5,3,2,1 distributions,
say there is $18 in the purse. There is 1 first at 5 points, 2 seconds at
3 points each, 3 thirds at 2 points each, and 1 fourth at 1 point. This is
a total of 18 points which, divided into the purse of $18, gives a point
value of $1. The 1 first then is paid $5, each of the 2 seconds $3 etc.
Options:
It is quite common to have Optionals in conjunction with the regular
events. As the name suggests, a shooter need not enter into this category
of money prizes in order to shoot the regular events. Optionals are
composed of additional money being placed in a side purse and distributed
among the winners by one of the money division systems such as the Lewis,
Percentage or Rose. Optionals are often played on parts of the program as
well as the whole. For example in a 100-target event, the program might
state that there will be $2 Optionals on the first 50 targets, $2 on the
second 50, $2 on the middle 50, and $4 on the total 100. A shooter may
play any one, or all, as he sees fit. Another version might be on the 25s.
Ford Purse:
Ford Purse Events can be added to any program with entry of $1 per event
i.e. on each 25 targets, on each 50 targets and on total score. As the
event progresses, ties on sub-events are automatically shot-off on next
subsequent events. Where ties exist on total score, the purse usually is
split among those tied, without shoot-off. At the Grand American the Ford
Purses are used on the doubles and handicap events, and pay liberally to
event winners.
Join our FREE Email Mailing List |
For your Free Newsletter... |
Shooting tips of the Century, below
The
Shooting tips of the Century... The most committed win! Yes... Go ahead risk it, say hello! There's always Today! "If you think you can, or if you think you can't... you're right!" Do it big, or stay in bed. Be anchored to some ideal, philosophy or cause that keeps you too excited to sleep. Practice being excited! Have the guts to go! More powerful than the will to win is the courage to begin Do one thing after another, one at a time. Never try to catch two frogs with one hand When one must, one can! Change your thoughts and you change your world. Your friend is the man who knows all about you, and still likes you. Shoot as if it is impossible to fail! When things go wrong, don't go with them! Forget tomorrow, today is the day! Don't fear what you want. He conquers who endures! Big shots are only little shots who keep shooting! The real sin is to persuade oneself that the second best is anything but second best. Success seems to be largely a matter of hanging on after others have let go. "To be what we are, and to become what
we are capable of becoming, is the only end of life" If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got! “Far
better it is to dare mighty things,
Gun control is not
about guns; Press on! Hit just one more target, why not! The squeaky wheel doesn't always get greased, it often gets replaced. From self alone expect applause. Some Brain food: |
Home /
About us /
Contact us /
Policy /
Advertise with us |