Again, what part of "shall not be infringed" do they not get?

Gotta love the Brady Center to put their own spin on this loss!!
"Despite the perception that the decision was a setback for gun control advocates, Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Center and Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said in a statement that he was "pleased that the Court reaffirmed its language in District of Columbia v. Heller that the Second Amendment individual right to possess guns in the home for self-defense does not prevent our elected representatives from enacting common-sense gun laws to protect our communities from gun violence."

It is the opinion of this blogger that the Brady Center and other anti-gun advocates version of a "common-sense" gun law is an outright ban.

Please, you're grasping at straws here. Yes, the decision could still allow "reasonable" restrictions (like, no guns for felons, etc). An outright ban is not, by any means, "reasonable". You only have to look at Chicago, with it's current ban and high gun crime. And how come gun crime, which has been increasing in D.C. since their ban, is all of a sudden dropping since the ban was lifted?

What Part of "Shall not be Infinged" did Chicago think it could get away with??

In its second major ruling on gun rights in three years, the Supreme Court Monday extended the federally protected right to keep and bear arms to all 50 states. The decision will be hailed by gun rights advocates and comes over the opposition of gun control groups, the city of Chicago and four justices.




Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the five justice majority saying "the right to keep and bear arms must be regarded as a substantive guarantee, not a prohibition that could be ignored so long as the States legislated in an evenhanded manner."



The ruling builds upon the Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller that invalidated the handgun ban in the nation's capital. More importantly, that decision held that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was a right the Founders specifically delegated to individuals. The justices affirmed that decision and extended its reach to the 50 states. Today's ruling also invalidates Chicago's handgun ban.

When Guns are criminalized, only criminals will have guns

This excerpt is from an online article by John Lott, a Fox News Contributor and Research Scientist at the University of Maryland.

How often have we screamed about this!

Since banning handguns in 1974, Jamaica’s murder rate has become one of the highest in the world.
Do gun bans really stop criminals from getting guns? Americans need not look no further than the massive gun battle with armed gangs fighting police and soldiers that took place in Kingston, Jamaica today. At least 30 people were killed in the fighting. It is a huge number for a small island nation of fewer than 3 million people, but unfortunately murder is so common in Jamaica that these murders won't even be noticed in the annual crime numbers.

With Chicago's Mayor Daley again claiming that a gun ban is necessary to keep Chicagoans safe, Jamaica and other countries with gun bans might teach Americans a lesson.

Everyone wants to keep guns away from criminals, but the question is: who is most likely to obey the law? In the case of a ban, every instance we have data for shows that when a ban has been imposed, murder rates rise. In America, people are all to familiar with the increased murder rates in Chicago and Washington, D.C.. But supporters blame those gun control failures on the ease of getting guns in the rest of the country. Yet, even in island nations such as Ireland, the U.K., and Jamaica -- all of which have imposed bans -- their easily defendable borders and lack of obvious neighbors haven't stopped drug gangs from getting either drugs or the guns that they use to protect their valuable product.

Jamaica wasn't always the extremely violent country that it is today (see the figure here). Jamaica experienced large increases in murder rates since enacting a handgun bans in 1974. Since the gun ban, Jamaica’s murder rate has soared to become one of the highest in the world, currently at least double that of other Caribbean countries. Jamaica’s murder rate hasn’t sunk below 10 murders per 100,000 people since the gun ban went into effect.

Even before the recent rampage, Jamaica's murder rate was about six times higher than before the ban went into effect. Indeed, Jamaica's current murder rate is so high -- at about 60 per hundred thousand people -- that 30 additional deaths in one day will barely be noticeable: 30 deaths will only increase the murder rate from about 60 to 61.

Just as Mexico's President Calderon showed last week, it is always easy for politicians to blame crime on guns. The crime data in Jamaica shows the same thing as the crime data in Chicago and Washington have shown. It is the law-abiding, good citizens, not the criminals, who are disarmed by gun bans

Synopsis of Second Amendmend Bills in Louisiana Legislature

-HB9 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE WEAPONS/FIREARMS: Provides with respect to reciprocity agreements regarding concealed handgun permits

-HB16 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Provides for the certification of concealed handgun permit instructors

-HB42 HARDY ASSIGNED TO HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE WEAPONS/FIREARMS: Increases penalties for carrying a firearm or discharging a firearm during a parade (OR INCREASE GF EX See Note)

-HB60 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Amends concealed handgun permit laws

-HB68 H.BURNS ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Provides with respect to concealed handgun permits

-HB141 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/FIREARMS: Provides that applications to possess or transfer certain firearms may be filed on approved electronic forms (EG SEE FISC NOTE SD EX)

-HB158 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Provides with respect to the issuance of concealed handgun permits

-HB235 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B LAW ENFORCE/OFFICERS: Authorizes retired law enforcement officers to purchase their weapons (EG INCREASE LF EX See Note)

-HB255 WOOTON PENDING SENATE FINAL PASSAGE PAROLE: Provides for technical revision of parole statutes

-HB348 LORUSSO ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY C WEAPONS/FIREARMS: Amends penalties imposed for a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (EG INCREASE GF EX See Note)

-HB556 WOOTON ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Amends firearm-free zone provisions with respect to concealed handgun permit holders

-HB562 BALDONE ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY C LAW ENFORCE/OFFICERS: Expands the crime of disarming a peace officer to include the taking of all forms of law enforcement equipment

-HB609 WHITE ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY C CRIME: Provides with respect to the crime of home invasion (EG SEE FISC NOTE GF EX See Note)

-HB1260 HAZEL PENDING SENATE FINAL PASSAGE WEAPONS/FIREARMS: Provides with respect to the possession of a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon by a person convicted of certain felonies

-HB1272 H.BURNS ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY C WEAPONS/HANDGUNS: Provides with respect to concealed handgun permits

-HCR18 LEBAS FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE COMMENDATIONS: Commends the National Rifle Association for developing the Eddie Eagle Gun Safety Education Program in schools

-HCR19 HARDY ASSIGNED TO HOUSE & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS LEGISLATIVE OFFICERS: Authorizes an assistant sergeant at arms of the House of Representatives and Senate to carry an approved firearm following training

-HR9 HARDY ASSIGNED TO HOUSE & GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS LEGISLATIVE OFFICERS: Authorizes an assistant sergeant at arms of the House of Representatives to carry an approved firearm following training

-SB81 MARTINY PENDING HOUSE FINAL PASSAGE WEAPONS: Changes restrictions on statewide concealed handgun permits and adds an exception from criminal acts. (8/15/10)

-SB152 ADLEY ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B

WEAPONS: Enacts the Louisiana Firearms Freedom Act.

-SB174 J.R.SMITH ASSIGNED TO HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE WEAPONS: Provides for training course requirements for a concealed weapons permit for combat veterans. (8/15/10)

-SB175 CROWE ASSIGNED TO SENATE JUDICIARY B

WEAPONS: Enacts the Louisiana Firearms Freedom Act. (8/15/10)

-SB526 MURRAY PENDING SENATE FINAL PASSAGE PUBLIC BUILDINGS/GROUNDS: Prohibits firearms or other explosive devices on property belonging to the New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board. (gov sig)

-SB534 HEBERT PENDING HOUSE REFERRAL PUBLIC LANDS: Allows the possession of firearms on certain public lands. (8/15/10)

All Quiet on the Southern Front

It has been a quiet few months down here, as far as Second Amendment issues are going. We are anxiously waiting for the next Louisiana Legislative Season to begin in March (and the onslaught of pro and anti Second Amendment bills that come with it) and two Second Amendment items have already been pre-filed. More about that in a minute but I want to take time to reflect on some past events here in New Orleans that have kind of lifted the spirit of this city.
We've had a pretty exciting couple of months. I've started a new job in the IT field, Christmas and New Years blurred into the whole New Orleans Saints NFC Championship / Super Bowl / Mardi Gras blow out and I was glad to actually be a part of the celebration. I'm originally from the Boston area and I know how we felt when the Red Sox finally punched the big ticket. But I lived in the Big Easy then and was at least happy to have my own Red Sox celebration with a few friends here. To actually be a part of the whole Super Bowl celebration was magical. Not so much for me (ok, I admit, as a Patriot's fan, I had to leave my loyalties aside this year) but for the city and the residents. To go downtown and see people just having a great time with each other and NOT burning cars or rioting shows again that we now how to party with a purpose. Crime actually goes DOWN when the Saints are playing. To say nothing of the Saints parade! They figured over 1/2 a million people crammed downtown in cold, windy weather to say Thank You. Thank you to the Saints and the players for giving the Big Easy a big, collective boost. It's been a tough decade and somehow, all that, at least for a few weeks, made all that go away.
So thank you. Thanks Drew, thanks Tom B, thanks Sean Payton, and thanks Reggie and definitely thank you to Tracy Porter for the big 4th quarter interception. Thanks to all the Saints player for letting us know what it means to live in New Orleans

OK, tissue moment is over. On to the Legislature!!

Rep Wooton (R-Belle Chasse) has pre-filed legislation to make sure that CCW Instructors in Louisiana meet certain minimum criteria and to clarify reciprocity. For CCW instructors, the instructors certified by the National RifleAssociation shall be certified as an instructor in Basic Pistol Shooting, Personal Protection in theHome, or Personal Protection Outside the Home. I've got to agree that this is a great idea. The current law doesn't specify that they need to have training specific to this discipline and it is only right that they should be. After all, the type of training included in CCW instructions directly correlates to this type of discipline. Training specific in this area can only benefit the student.

The second pre-file contains to reciprocity in that a CCW Permittee from another state that has reciprocity with Louisiana be 21 years of age. Current law does not define that as some states allow CCW as young as 18. No problem here, I think 21 is a good age to start. I do not believe in that whole I'm 18 can vote and go to war but I can't drink or carry concealed. I know the Second Amendment is a right and not a privilege (like drinking) but the drinking age was raised because that experiment didn't work out too well. I can be 18 and got war, yes, after 3-5 months of dehumanizing, in your face training to leave the civilian life behind and become a soldier. CCW doesn't provide that much training.

So, all is Quiet on the Southern Front. Let's hope it stays that way for a while

Good Night, from the Who Dat? Nation

None but the Anonymous Brave

Back in September, the manager of the Firearms Store I teach classes at was interviewed by Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,554780,00.html). In the article about ammunition sales, Jason stated that he wanted to stock up on ammunition for each of his firearms. I do not see an issue with that as I have done the same. Now, fast forward to late September. Jason receives a letter in the mail from an ANONYMOUS person. The letter was not signed and there was not return address, although the postmark was from New Jersey. This anonymous sender proceeds to lambaste Jason on how he "fears having his precious guns taken away" and that "he is threatened to have an intelligent, articulate African-American man as President". As well as "how us good ole boys are still fighting the Civil War which we surrended in 1845 (that person's words, not a typo)". It was signed by "One Gun a Month is Plenty".

OK, "One Gun a Month is Plenty", how did you go from "It always happens when the Democrats get in office. It happened with Clinton and Obama is even stronger for gun control. Ammunition will be the first step, so I'm stocking up while I can." to "I understand it is threatening to have an intelligent, articulate, African-American man as President".

The article did not mention race as a reason. It did not mention the Chosen One as the cause, only the effect. It said that it always happens when Democrats get in office, and, by default, the current President is a Democrat.

Someone is grasping at straws and making it into something it is not, a race issue.
Now, this person also proceeded to call Jason an "armed domestic terrorist that is more dangerous than al-Queda". I've know Jason for a few years. He is an intelligent, highly respected person who works hard, loves his family and makes it a point to work safely in the firearms industry.

Oh, and he is also in the military. He has made a committment to DEFEND THIS COUNTRY without being asked to do the job or thanked for it (which some people, probably like you "One Gun a Month", do not do enough of).

So, "One Gun a Month", I have no respect for you. You decide to hide behind the shield of anonymity, piss and moan about how bad people are and contribute to the problem, not the solution. I parallel Jason's views. Guess what?? I'm from the New England (remember us, we won the Civil War?).

Grow some balls and show yourself. If you can't put up, shut up!

Does This Bother the Heck Out of You?

Do these images bother you?

OK, how about this image?

What do all of these images have in common? Well, depending on how you look at it, you may think there is no connection.

Ahhh, but there is. Each image represents a core value of our Constitution. Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of the Press and the Right to Bear Arms. Each of these is a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights.

The first three stir some, if little, debate. The last one can downright get ugly at times.

Well, I'm here to tell ya, that if we argued and debated as much about the other ones as we did the Second Amendment, this country would be a better place.

Recently, at several health care rallies, regular citizens carried their firearms in support of the Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms. They did so in States where "open carry" is LEGAL. Now, none of them were ever near the Chosen One. They were in designated Public Areas well outside the town hall meetings. Even the Secret Service said they were not worried.

But anti-gun proponents say they nut jobs by bringing a firearm. To me, that sounds nothing more than pure anti-Americanism if I've ever heard it. Imagine that, people are mad at me for exercising my CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT. I never see anyone yelling at me for reading the paper, or praying, or having an open debate or speech. If that is the case, no one was yelling about having a health care forum. Oh yes, they were yelling AT the forum about health care, but they were not yelling about the actual contstruct of having a forum. No one ever said, "you can go to the forum, but you cannot speak at all". That's what this country is built on. That would be completely un-American.

Oh, but wait, people are starting to call us nut jobs and Nazis and Brownshirts for talking out against health care. I do not hear that about anyone talking in favor of it. But I digress.

It's also a case of personal responsibility. People are running around screaming "He has a gun!!" Oh my God, the horror!! He could kill someone!!

Puhlleeeze, gimme a break. Nothing ever happened people!! These are responsible citizens carrying their firearms securely in a NON-THREATENING MANNER but for some reason people get the heebee jeebees.

Ahh, but something could happen. Yes, someone with NO personal responsibility could grab the gun. But of course, the gun owner would be blamed for having it, not the idiot who took it.

Personal responsibility is like my beloved 1968 Plymouth GTX.

A classic memory of my youth Out of reach for all but a few who choose to want to relive it again......