NSSF Fact Sheet on Microstamping Ammunition

The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) has (I have just learned) published a fact sheet on "Ammunition Serialization", also known as Microstamping Ammunition.

This refers to the proposal to implement new technology to 'microstamp' (using laser technology) unique serial numbers on the base of each bullet, and on the inside of the cartridge case in which it is seated.

If you are living in Timbuktu and have never heard of the concept, it should only take you a few moments reflection to realize that, for all practical intents and purposes, it would make the cost of each round of ammunition prohibitively high. So high, in fact, it's not unreasonable to estimate that the cost increase would be on orders of magnitude: instead of costing pennies, a single round of ammunition would cost dollars. This is de facto denial of ammunition availability for all practical purposes, except to the few individuals with sufficient disposable income to afford it. And they are probably spending all of their time instead of hunting, plinking, competition and practicing.

Why would the costs be so high? Because of the cost of retooling and changing manufacturing processes, most manufacturers would be unable to support the process because they would have to charge their customers more than they could afford. They just couldn't sell it. See above paragraph.

The Fact Sheet brings up a number of objections which I had not, in the ten months that I have been writing about this phenomen, considered:

. No independent studies have been done to determine the safety implications of using high speed laser engravers in the presence of the ammunition components, i.e. primers, propellants, etc. For instance, flash photography is not permitted inside factories because of gunpowder ignition concerns

. Anti-gun legislators in the Mississippi State Senate have proposed legislation, SB 2286, that would mandate bullet serialization. If passed into law, the legislation would force the closure of the newly opened Winchester Ammunition factory in Oxford, Miss. -- a move which would result in hundreds of Mississippi workers losing their jobs and millions in tax revenue disappearing from the state. The legislation would also force law-abiding citizens and retailers to dispose of any ammunition they currently hold that is not serialized.

My own efforts, however, have also addressed other topics:

• Microstamping can typically be obliterated by impact on a hard surface
• Criminals, whom this technique is suppsedly intended to catch, would pick up the brass
• Criminals would simply steal the ammunition ...
• ... or they would use false/stolen identities to purchase ammunition

In fact, it's reasonable to assume that if this legislation were to be made Law, only criminals would own ammunition.

Here is a summary (with links) of the 23 articles I have so far written in this series on Microstamping Ammunition. Read the discussion following this list to understand the variations on proposed technology to "Serialize Ammunition", and the reasons why they are not practical, affordable, reasonable or effective.

02/12/08: Microstamping Ammunition: it isn't just for states any more!
02/13/08: Encoded Ammunition: Where We Are Now
02/13/08: Encoded Ammunition: Pennsylvania
02/13/08: Encoded Ammunition - Pro and Con
02/15/08: Encoded Ammunition: Ammunition Accountability dot Org
02/18/08: Encoded Ammunition: Maryland - They're Baaack!
02/25/08: Encoded Ammunition: Ammunition Coding Systems
02/27/08: Encoded Ammunition - Federal?
04/02/08: California AB2062: Permit to Buy Ammunition
04/08/08: Gun control bill's co-author helps kill it: History
04/09/08: Industrial Laser Solutions
04/13/08: Microstamping Ammunition
04/14/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Part 0 of Todd Lizette Interview
04/15/08: Microstamping Ammunition: New York Considering Bill
04/20/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Rhode Island
04/22/08: Todd Lizette Interview: Pre-Production
05/01/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Todd Lizotte Interview
05/01/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Todd Lizhtte Attachments
05/02/08: Microstamping: Reader Responses
05/05/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Letter from Lizotte, 05/02/08
05/05/08: Microstamping Ammunition: Replacement Parts
06/08/08: Microstamping: Rhode Island Measure Off Agenda
07/05/08: New York Microstamping Ammunition Bill Dies!



"Serializing Ammunition" = Encoding Ammunition and Microstamping Ammunition

Now that I have provided the entire list (with the exception of this article, which is the 24th in the series), I need to make clear that through out this I have actually been talking about TWO separate technological proposals, and TWO separate waves of ammunition-serialization bills.

THIS article started talking about the NSSF's Fact Sheet on "Ammunition Serialization", which requires unique serial numbers to be placed on both bullet and cartridge case during manufacturing. This is the process which started the series, and the articles referring to this process are identified by the then-in-vogue name "Encoded Ammunition". The objections to this are explained above and in the NSSF Fact Sheet.

However, shortly after the Brouhaha about "Encoded Ammunition" got going very strong, along came Todd Lizotte and his proposal; every firearm sold in the United States must have an unique serial number on the breech face, which would be pressure-stamped ("Microstamped" on the base of the cartridge during the recoil phrase of firing the firearm.

The original purchaser of the firearm would be identified and registered with the government of the state where the firearm was first sold. ( Whether plans were envisioned to register each subsequent purchaser of that firearm has not been made clear, but we can envision legislators drooling over the prospect of registering every firearm sale.)

The assumption was that any firearm used in a felony could be identified by the microstamped code on the empty cartridge case left behind at the scene of the crime.

Was this intended to definitively identify the culprit? Not at all. It was only intended to identify the original purchaser ... and the original seller ... of the firearm. The intent was to identify retailers who sold firearms which were later used in a crime, so 'bad dealers' could be dealt with. Or, if several firearms were traced to the original purchaser, this would help to identify "Straw Buyers".

Well, not necessarily, but at least by implication.

Of course, this process could take YEARS to provide sufficient body of evidence to implicate any individual, seller or buyer. And it's not necessarily fool-proof even then (for example, in the case of theft of a firearms collection, a buyer might seem to present the same characteristics as a Straw Buyer.

Most of the "Interview with Todd Lizotte" sub-series of articles dealt with his grandiose plans to Make America Safer From Rogue Guns, and my refutations of his assertions. For example ... what happens when the slide of a semi-automatic pistol splits; what kind of controls are in place to register the new serial number on the replacement slide, and how long would it take to get a (essentially custom-made) replacement, and how much more would that microstamping version cost than a non-microstamping version, and how likely is it that a replacement would be even possible without a frustrating and protracted bout of attempting to authenticate the legitimacy of the 'replacement' purchase?

Also, the goal was to microstamp EVERY firearm ... even single-shot and double-barrelled shotguns, and revolvers,. These firearms types are much less likely to leave behind brass, but the laws would require that they to would be subject to the law.

Further, what is to prevent a criminal from picking up brass left behind on a shooting range, reloading it, and using pre-stamped brass in a non-microstamping firearm?

Not to mention the dubious reliability of a technology which relies on microstamping a small serial number on the base of brass which is already an imperfect surface due to the headstamping which is embossed there during manufacturing.

Finally, and most egregiously, the legal machinations required to this system is de facto registration of every firearm sold in America.

And as we have learned from the lesson taught in California in 1997, Registration almost invariably leads to Confiscation. At the very least, it infringes on the privacy of the person who bought the encoded ammunition or the Microstamping firearm.

Summary:

1. There are two methods of Serializing Ammunition: Encoding (unique serial numbers embossed on each bullet/cartridge case combination during manufacture), and Microstamping (identifying serial numbers embossed on each cartridge case during the act of firing, which relate to the individual firearm).
2. These two techniques both rely on unproven, non-peer reviewed technology.
3. The technologies will add greatly to the cost of the ammunition, or of the firearm.
4. In the case of Microstamping, the added expense and frustration, and administrative overhead and complexity, compounds what would otherwise be a simple matter of buying a replacement part which is, itself, NOT typically identified by a serial number.
5. Microstamping sometimes/often also requires that the serial number be embossed on the firing pin, to microstamp on the unblemished primer. We can only imagine the legal stumbling blocks to buy a replacement microstamping firing pin, originally priced at about $2, to match that found on the breech of the firearm.
6. Both of these methods provide little or no help in catching criminals who have used illegal methods to acquire either the encoded ammunition or the Microstamping firearm.
   
7. Both of these methods do, however provide an excellent method for the criminal to lay a false trail, to the confusion of the law enforcement agencies who have been lead to believe that they only have to find the encoded brass to find the culprit.
   

This is, by no means, an exhaustive list of objections to either method of serializing ammunition. However, it does illustrate the paucity of usable evidence which they may be expected to provide to Law Enforcement Agencies ... and the great expense and inconvenience they will levy upon the honest private citizen (and military unit, and police department).

Conclusion:

Neither of these tecnologies offer a real, viable, reliable and practical method by which criminals may be brought to justice. However, they provide a great service to those who would seek to deny the honest citizen the practicable access to firearms and ammunition.



Or you can just review the entire list, in one huge page, by typing "microstamping" on the SEARCH bar at the top of this blog.
__________________________________
UPDATE: December 12, 2008
Tom Cox has a few words to say about this at "Center of Mass" TomCox.wordpress.com

USPSA Area 1 Elections

I recently received a [bulk] email from the Columbia Cascade Section, which covers the north-east section of Oregon. This was sent to announce a candidate for Area 1 (north-west are of USPSA Region) Director.

(As a courtesy to USPSA members in AREA 1, I include the email in the same general form in which I received it, except with certain deletions regarding a reluctance to include private information on an internet forum.)

The attached is from Tom Chambers who has decided to run for Area 1 Director. The board sends this out as a courtesy to Tom, a member of the Columbia-Cascade Section. Sending it is for the purpose of information only and does not constitute an endorsement of any kind.

xxx -- CCS Contact Name Deleted -- xxx

Columbia-Cascade Section Information Officer

Hello fellow Columbia-Cascade Shooters!

I’m Tom Chambers and I’ve decided to run for the position of Area 1 Director.

Bruce Gary, our current Director, has decided not to run for re-election and is stepping down at the end of his term in 2009.

Many of you have met me over the years but I would like to take a brief moment to let you know of some of the things I’ve done while participating in our sport.

I joined USPSA in 1996 in Oregon while at Dundee. I have competed locally, nationally, and internationally.

I am a National Range Officer Institute certified Range Master, having achieved that in 2001. I have been one of the organizers and the Range Master for 4 National Matches; the 2002 Race Gun Nationals and the 2003 Back to Back Nationals in Bend, Oregon, and the 2006 Multi-Gun Nationals held at Albany, Oregon. Over the years I have been a Chief Range Officer at numerous National Matches around the country.

I’ve been the Range Master for three Area 1 Pistol Championships and for at least five Area 1 Multi-Gun Championships. I have been the Range Master for many of our Section Championships. I helped put on the first Crazy Croc and was the Range Master/Match Director for that match for several years. I helped establish the first Level III IPSC Sanctioned Section Match in the USA right here at our Section in 2001.

I have been the Assistant Competition Director, the Competition Director, and Deputy Section Coordinator for our Section.

Bruce Gary has done an outstanding job as our Area Director for the last eight years. I want to build on his successful record and have our organization achieve new goals as the premier action shooting sport in the nation. We need to continue to grow and become the leader for other shooting disciplines both in our area and around the country.

I don’t want to take up any more of your time but feel free to contact me if you have questions or issues. I look forward to hearing from you!

Tom Chambers

xxx-- street address deleted --xxx

xxx -- phone number deleted --xxx

xxx -- email address deleted --- xxx

Out of respect for Mr. Chambers' privacy, I have declined to include his mailing address, phone number or email address. If you wish to contact Mr. Chambers directly, please address your inquiries to the Columbia Cascade Section Webmaster at http://www.columbia-cascade.org/

(I remain certain that CCS will resolve any conflicts between privacy rights and the need to contact a candidate.)

As in the policy of the Columbia Cascade Section, this notice does not express or imply an endorsement for this or any future candidate. It is provided here solely to inform voting members of Area 1 of the United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) of the fact of this candidacy.

On a personal note, however: This is the first I have been made aware that the current Area 1 Director, Bruce Gary, plans to leave the office in 2009.

Mister Gary has been, in my personal opinion, the best voice for Area 1 USPSA members in the 25 years (give or take the odd hiatus) during which I have been associated with this fine organization. He has been a responsible representative for the individual member; he has been among the primary authors of the 2008 USPSA Rule Book, which was a gargantuan effort ... and a successful one, I think ... to correct many unworkable ideas which have crept into the rules of competition during the past ten years; he has been among the Directors which spearheaded the improved relationship between USPSA and IPSC (the International Practical Shooting Confederation) to the mutual benefit of Practical Shooters in America; and he has performed admirably in resolving difficult competition questions as Match Director in Area 1 Tournaments over the years.

Besides which, he is a helluva nice guy, a hard worker, smart and tactful, and has been seen to exhibit a dedication to improvement of the Shooting Sports both before and during his tenure as a member of the USPSA Board of Directors.

I, for one, will miss his hand at the tiller. I thank him for his contributions and leadership, and wish him good luck in future ventures. Oh, and he usually beats me in matches which we both attend, although that may be mistakenly construed as damning him with faint praise.

His replacement will discover that he or she has to work hard to live up to the standards which Mr. Gary has established.

I sincerely wish Mr. Chambers good luck in his campaign.

NOTE: This is the first I have heard from a candidate for this office. As I learn of other candidates, I will attempt to provide their introductory comments and qualifications as well, when they are made available.

Combating Defamation of Religions

Don Feder, writing at "GrasstopsUSA.com" discusses the roots, causes and consequences of a recent United Nations measure (passed four days before the start of the Mumbai Massacres) which would make it an international crime to criticize a religion -- any religion. Any guesses as to which religion is pushing for passage of this measure?

Feder notes, in part:

Enactment of the Orwellian measure has been high on the agenda of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which maintains that “Islam is frequently associated with human rights violations and terrorism.”

Imagine the infidel dogs implying that there’s a connection between Islam and: honor killings, floggings for minor infractions of Sharia law, flying planes into buildings, bombings, rocket attacks and the murder of rabbis and their wives. Infamous!

My friend Robert Spencer – author of “Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs” and editor of the website Jihad Watch – warns that the U.N. enactment is “a veiled attempt to restrict speech that Islamic authorities find offensive or inconvenient, including honest discussion of the motives and goals of jihad terrorists and how they make use of Islamic texts to gain recruits and justify their actions.”

The measure will not be deployed against the imams who regularly call for the blood of Christians, Jews and Hindus, or the government of Egypt that condones church burnings, or the Saudi Religious Police who smash down doors in search of covert Christian services, or Holocaust-denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Syrian President-for-life Bashar Assad, who told Pope John Paul II that Jews “try to kill the principle of religions,” or the producers of the 2002 Egyptian television multi-series, “Horseman Without A Horse,” a dramatization of the anti-Semitic canard “The Protocols of The Elders of Zion,” or the U.N., whose 2001 Anti-Racism Conference in Durban turned into a hate-Zionism fest.

It will be used to silence the likes of Geert Wilders (the Dutch parliamentarian who produced “Fitna”), Brigitte Gabriel (the Lebanese-American journalist and author of “Because They Hate”), Bob Spencer, Ann Coulter and ex-Muslims who run websites like “Islam Watch.”

The genesis of Feder's comments is the reluctance of The New York Times to describe the authors of the Mumbai Massacre as "Muslims". Instead, they are described as "... “terrorists,” “gunmen,” “militants” and “assailants.” "

Well, they were certainly that. But what were they when they were at home?

This Site No Longer Active

As of November 29, 2008, Kim "A Nation of Riflemen" du Toit, will no longer be posting on his "The Front Page" blog. (Also known as "The Other Side of Kim".)

I understand the reason for this is that he has other plans for all those daily hours he has been spending on the blog since ... well, for at least the five (or more) years that I have been a faithful reader.

I'm sorry to see him go. I'll miss Kim's outspoken, often profane commentary on life, love, style and shooting. Kim has been on my increasingly shortened "Blogs I Read Every Day" list since I started writing online because of his consistently high quality and quantity of writing.

Some of the time I didn't agree with him. Occasionally I considered his reactions to the daily news a bit over-the-top. But I read him anyway, every day.

A couple of times I even wrote articles in direct opposition to his stance, most notably the day in 2005 that he and Masaad Ayoob agreed that "... you don’t have a God-given right to carry a loaded gun in shopping malls where there are kids walking around.".

Then earlier in 2008 '... The Estimable Kim acknowledges that "A Pennsylvania soccer mom who packs a pistol is getting her concealed weapon permit back ...", and went on to say that she must be "... [a] f**king idiot"'.

In the course of history, maniacal gunmen determined on suicide-by-cop started shooting up shopping malls, and it wasn't until an off-duty cop held one such idiot at bay until the SWAT team showed up at the Utah shopping mall on February 13, 2007, that the Conventional Wisdom began to wonder whether it really WAS a good idea for Malls to have "No Weapons Allowed" signs posted at every entrance.

This was very much emphasized in the Von Maur Mall shooting in Omaha, just under a year ago today. (December 5, 2008.)

And the Pennsylvania soccer mom? She has filed suit (for over $1,000,000) in Federal court against Lebanon County Sheriff Michael DeLeo, (who maintained she showed poor judgment wearing her gun to her daughter's soccer game), his office, and Lebanon County, Pennsylvania. She claims "... the sheriff's action violated her First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendment rights. "

Since she was stopped for Open Carry, and the Sheriff responded by jerking her Concealed Carry License (Open Carry is legal in Pennsylvania), there's a good chance she'll win the suit.

This does not, of course, contradict Kim's assertion that she must be "... [a] f**king idiot"'. To the extent that she could have carried concealed and thus avoided upsetting her fellow (?) soccer moms, her motivation is far from transparent.

Which only illustrates that even when I disagreed with Kim in the details, even when he was 'mistaken' (in my opinion), he was usually also 'right', at least in part.

Remember, Kim posted over two thousand PAGES of posts (several posts per page) and counted more than fifteen million visitors. And this was in just the past three or four years since he changed from his "A Nation of Riflemen" format to the "Other Side of Kim" ... because he lost an employment opportunity due to the strong opinions he had stated on the earlier blog.

The Blog world will not soon see a more controversial, outspoken, endearing and overwhelmingly popular gun-blogger. I salute the man who live up to every boast and assertion, worried himself sick and dumped himself and his family in the poor-house (so to speak) in defense of his right to hold strong opinions and to publically state them.

Kim du Toit, we who have been your faithful readers salute you.

We'll miss you, Man.
(Say, are you going to finish that beer? Can I have it?)

New Shooter Chronicles!

Two weeks ago I wrote about a local news organization which decided to 'out' (as in "publish the names and addresses") of CHL (Concealed Handgun License) holders in Benton County, Oregon.

In the strangest of coincidences, a couple of days later I had an unusual (and very private ... Politically Incorrect, y'know?) conversation with a Co-Worker who told me that he had qualified for a CHL five years before, and that he recently (for reasons entirely unconnected with the election of Barack Hussein Obama, for whom he had voted) decided that he would not only renew his CHL but planned to actually BUY A GUN!

That's right.

He had the license, but didn't own a gun. No, I do not know the background story. It would, I'm sure, be interesting; but it it is not germane to the point.

Anyway, this friend and co-worker (I'll call him "Harley") decided that since he had the license, he was seriously thinking about buying a gun to go with it. He asked me if there was a gunshop in town. I told him that the last two gunshops in this town had gone out of business due to lack of interest, but there was a gunshop in a close town where he might find what he needed. In fact, I had bought my last two pistols from them, at a gun show. Unfortunately, although we can often find the best deals at gunshows, the last local one was in September and the next one wasn't scheduled until March. So, he might wander over there and see what they have to offer.

I also mentioned the CHL Expose planned by a local news source (via a local law firm), and suggested that he protect his privacy by going to the links which I would email to him and submit an amended CHL application.

Which I did.

Today, "Harley" and I were (as usual) the last two people to leave the office, and as I walked the office to make sure the lights were off and the doors were locked, I found Harley at his desk, working diligently on esoterice Geek-stuff. After I told him that he was 'in charge', I asked about his progress in upgrading his CHL to 'Private Mode', and he informed me that the links that I had sent him allowed him to establish his CHL application as "a private Self-Defense issue" and therefore not part of Public Records.

When I asked him if he had found a handgun, he told me that he had found a "357 revolver ... you know, a short-barreled revolver that shot a .357 Magnum load, and boy oh boy if it didn't kick like a mule!"

We talked a bit about practicing with the .38 Special load to become accustomed to the way the revolver works, and then about using the Magnum load for familiarization, and to keep as the "standard load" because if he bought the Magnum version for defense, he should keep it in that mode.

We talked also about Practical Pistol ("IPSC"/"USPSA"), Race Guns, Dot Sights ("C-MORE"), point-of-aim vs point-of impact, Defensive Carry vs Competition, and various other arcana having to do with pistol shooting vis-a-vis the need to tailor the pistol to the designated purpose of buying a handgun.

And we finally got down to the nitty gritty:

"When you find the time" I said, "Let me know. I'll take you out to the range and let you get in some practice time with your new pistol. It's important that you know how to shoot it under various conditions, and you need to build confidence in how to handle your new gun safely, and efficiently."

And I left it at that.

Harley may never take me up on the offer, but I suspect that he will. He's a responsible guy, and I don't doubt his determination to master Safe Gun-Handling Skills just as he has mastered many Computer Skills. He is, after all, an Alpha Geek.

I've already told him about a co-worker who spent a couple of Saturday Hours at the range with me "Les and the New Gun"). Some time in the next couple of weeks, or months, we'll stop in the hall of the office, or say goodnight after everyone else has gone home at the end of the day, and we'll make an appointment to spend a Saturday Morning at the range. He'll bring his new Revolver, and I'll bring a few 'other' pistols, and we'll both bring fewer rounds of ammunition than we discover we want to shoot. We'll play with guns, he'll learn a few things and I'll learn a few things, and he will go home with the new-penny bright idea that shooting is fun.

That end of the office space has always been a Liberal Bastion. It will be interesting to watch the burgeoning interest of a man who has just realized that there IS a reason why a rational man would want to own a firearm.

One at a time. That's all we need to defend the Second Amendment.

And Harley has a son. Watch this space; in a year, we'll have two new shooters who not only decide to spend their disposable income on ammunition, but the line to the check-out counter at our local gun shop will be longer by two new shooters.

I love this job.

.

IPSC Stage Idea: Zombies!

Geek with a .45 has a great idea for a 'themed' match, or at least a stage or two.

Zombies!


I know that IPSC ... or at least USPSA, has gotten away from 'scenarios' in their stages.

My personal opinion is that this was a move toward the "Politically Correct" position which has never worked for IPSC and will never work for USPSA, either.

The original theory of "Scenarios" was that each stage of an IPSC match would represent a 'practical' exercise to justify the stage design.

This theory went astray, about the time stages described engaging a horde of marauding sharks through the screen door of a submarine. Well, perhaps that was a little unrealistic.

But the 800-pound Gorilla of Reality was that observers put the 'humanoid' looking targets together with the scenario, and decided that "IPSC IS TEACHING PEOPLE HOW TO KILL PEOPLE!"

Uh, well, IPSC ("The International Organization") rushed to the battlefront and declared that human-shaped targets don't REALLY depict humans, and anyone who thinks so is reading something into the competitive venue which just wasn't there.

That didn't work too well, because the IPSC "Metric" target is obviously designed to designate the shape and size of a human being, and the highest-scoring zones in a target depict the approximate "kill-zones" of the human body. (Don't forget, you heard it first here, folks.)

[IPSC and USPSA won't tell you this, but I will because I know and you know that IPSC was originally conceived as "Combat" Pistol and was intended to encourage the exercise of skills which will teach us how to defend ourselves against armed aggressors. That is, of course, not Politically Correct, but that is a theme for later ... and several earlier ... articles.]

But I digress.

The Link to GWA45 includes a friendly video of a match which pits well-armed mortal humans against a group of attacking Zombies ... The Undead. It allows scenarios where a single person (mortal) opposes aggressors (immortal Zombies) and hopefully prevails against The Bad Guys.

What can be badder than a Zombie? I don't know, but for people who don't believe in Zombies this should represent the epitome of Personal Protection scenarios without "teaching people to shoot people".

Are Zombies "people"? I don't think so Jose'.


As a bonus, there is also a link to a video which shows the Ultimate Zombie Killer": an electric chain-saw, mounted as a 'bayonet' on the lugs of an Evil Attack Rifle.

The video doesn't make a good case for the modification, nor does it demonstrate good Gun-Handling Techniques.

Still, it looks like fun.

Whaddya Mean, "Thanksgiving's Over"?

You may have noticed that I haven't been blogging for the past WEEK!

That's right. I took and un-announced week off. Between work, home, play, SWMBO and Family, I was exhausted. So, without even as much as an excuse from my doctor, I ... just ... quit ... writing.

I wish I could say that I'm refreshed and full of new ideas for exciting new articles, but I'm not. However, I am beginning to feel guilty about not writing, so the Blogging Hiatus is officially over.

Look for more articles in the near future, even though they may not be IPSC-related because I haven't competed in an IPSC match for quite a while.


SWMBO STATUS CHECK:
SWMBO completed her seventh of twelve weekly chemotherapy treatments, so she is over the hump and looking forward to being done done DONE with Chemo.

We spent Thursday, Thanksgiving Day, porking out on a traditional dinner of ... Spaghetti! That's right, the Geek Industrial Strength Spaghetti, which is less spicy than Nuclear Spaghetti and decidedly less fiery than Attack of the Killer Tomatoes Spaghetti.

Out of defference to SWMBO's three-month regimen of cancer-starving diet (no red meat, no starches, no wheat products, no sugars, no anything that tastes good) we indulged in ALL of the Forbidden Foods, including Haagen-Daaz Vanilla Bean Ice Cream, Meaty Spaghetti, Roast Beef and Potatoes, and Pumpkin Pie with Real Whippped Cream ($4.95 at the neighborhood Safeway store, which SWMBO pronounced as "The WORST Pumpking Pie, ever!".)

We spent four deliriously exciting days ... watching old movies on DVD, including westerns with Joel McCrea and John Wayne; Ben Hur; Adam and Ever with Tracey and Hepburn; and Man's Favorite Sport with Rock Hudson and Paula Prentis. (We had forgotten that Hudson was such a consumate actor that we never realized, back then, that he didn't actually like gurlz.)

We stayed up late, slept in late, and worked a lot of crossword puzzles, which only proves that two half-wits working together can emulate A Full Wit.

On Friday I took SWMBO to the Neville Center on Pill Hill, for her weekly infusion of heavy-metal poisons. This was the odd-numbered week, in which they added the chemical which takes her down from her chemically induced high fast. She was feeling great on Friday afternoon, and her voice was almost normal. Saturday she felt good, but not good enough to get out of the house. Sunday her voice began to climb octaves and the lung-cough came back, and she started to get nose-bleeds again. Today, Monday, her voice is again squeaky and thin, and she has already run out of the $45/bottle Cough Medicine which allows her to sleep without coughing. (She get's what is supposed to be a week's prescription, but the 250ml doesn't really last that long.)

So in a microcosm of five days, she has run the gamot of reactions from Z to A and back to M again ... so to speak. But she is discovering new signs of progress every week. Her Blood Oxygen count has dipped as low as 50%, but after her Friday infusion it was running at 97%, indicating that her lungs are working almost to full capacity.

And her blood pressure remains 'normal', and she can still sleep on her right side, which puts pressure on the lung that contains the tumor; another sterling indication that the treatment, however uncomfortable, is working.

Five more weeks of chemotherapy. Then her Oncologists will be able to tell whether she needs more treatment or can be considered a Cancer Survivor.

I vote for the second alternative. SWMBO is a strong, determined lady in the best of health except for the Cancer thing. I know she'll make it, and then we can start going to IPSC matches again because, darn it, she really misses our friends.

They're the best medicine.

Seattle Mayor Moves to Prohibit Gun Carry

A November 21, 2008 article in the Seattle Post Intelligencer announces that "Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels expects to introduce a city rule change in December that would ban all guns from city buildings and parks, despite objections from state officials and gun-rights advocates."

The article explains:

The administrative change, which would not come to a City Council vote, would ban concealed weapons from city-owned property. Roads, sidewalks and most parking areas would not be included.

In October, the state Attorney General's Office issued an opinion asserting the mayor's proposed restrictions would violate state law blocking cities from enacting gun rules. The move also caught the attention of gun-rights advocates, who see it as an attempt by Nickels to pave the way for additional prohibitions.

Regina LaBelle, legal counsel to the mayor, said the city believes it already has the legal authority to enforce the restriction, which could result in criminal trespass citations for those who repeatedly violate the rule. Still, she said, the city will be asking the Legislature to "clarify" state law during the next legislative session.

"There are a lot of other cities around the state that have demonstrated a desire for their safety in parks and buildings," LaBelle said. The rule, added, "is about trying to reduce the number of guns in circulation."

That seems clear enough.

The mayor's office is a gun-grabber organization, and damn the costs. He doesn't want to reduce crime, the mayor wants to "reduce the number of guns in circulation".

While the newspaper report pays a passing homage to "... a nonfatal shooting at the Northwest Folklife Festival in May", there is nothing in article to suggest that either the Mayor nor the notoriously liberal Seattle P.I. expect that this new local legislation will have a positive effect on the oft-quoted goal of 'reducing crime'.

The P.I. notes the Mayor's record on gun control:

Nickels has become something of a rising star in the gun-control movement, having joined in several initiatives through the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition and organized a 2007 statewide summit on gun violence. In May, he was recognized as Washington Ceasefire's civic leader of the year.

(Washington Ceasefire is a state-based anti-gun organization.)

CCRKBA (Citizen's Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, a pro-gun organization led by Alan Gottleib) has issued a press release stating that "[The] draft proposal issued Friday by Mayor Greg Nickels outlining his scheme to ignore state statute and state legislative authority over firearms regulation amounts to a slap in the face against more than 250,000 Washington state residents."

Unfortunately the mayor's Friday announcement may have been given some momentum in the eyes of Gun Control organizations by Sunday's double-shooting at the SouthCenter Mall in Tukwila, " ... leaving a 16-year-old boy dead and another teen wounded as shoppers scrambled for cover."

In what appears to have been an argument between two or three teenage boys ([t]he suspect is described as a black male in his late teens or early 20's ...") which escalated to violence, Tukwila police who responded to the call stated that "the shooting didn't appear to be random."

Even though this was a targeted shooting which did not occur on public property, it is likely that Mayor Nickles' office will use this fatal, if isolated, incident to obfuscate the issues.

The issue is, in fact, that Washington State Law, as Gottlieb said, "... clearly prohibits cities from pre-empting state gun law. Allowing cities to do so, [he said], would create a morass of confusing regulations."

Will this become an issue controlled by Nickles, who will likely use the unrelated incident to pump up his anti-gun venue? Or will it serve as an illustrative example of the toothless 'Gun-Free Zones' (as most shopping malls have historically been designated) which only keep law-abiding citizens from possessing the means to defend themselves in the event of otherwise-unstoppable violence?

At this point, it's impossible to tell which way this complex story will spin, or whether indeed the public opinion will shift toward the the monomaniacle extremes of an acknowledged "Gun Control" fanatic or a measured evaluation by a populace which is unaccustomed to unslanted news reporting.

The only sure thing is that emotions will be running high, and reason will be overshadowed by the authority of the Mayoral office and its support by one of the most Liberal, Anti-gun publications in the country.

Let's hope that the CCRKBA message will be heard by at least a few free citizens.

H/T: Stan

Xavier Thoughts: When Seconds Count

One of my favorite (and daily "must read") blogs is Xavier Thoughts ... the link will always be available on my sidebar under "Websites That I Read Every Day".

Today (yesterday, now ... it's very late) he presented a video link to a newscast which discussed "Gun Free Zones". Incredibally, WCPO Television in Ohio (not to be confused with WCRP in Cincinatti, which was a very funny late-1970's television show) seems to understand that the "Gun Free Zones" sign is the same as posting a sign saying: "I don't have a gun; please come kill me".

The WCPO piece (transcript available here, along with a link to the article on "Active Shooters") emphasizes that

"While it use to be considered 'suicide' for a lone officer to take on an Active Shooter, it's now considered 'statistical homicide' not to, because the longer officers wait for backup, the more people die".

This may be considered only common sense by some of you, but it has taken a long time for the Main Stream Media (MSM) to catch up with this "Common Sense Solution to Gun Violence".

(Another approach to the same topic may be found here., as defined by Roger Fulton - a retired New York State Police Captain, )

I watched the video the samy way many of you may; it was final acknowledgement that the difference between Gunman and Unarmed Citizen in a Gun-Free Zone is the same as the difference between Wolf and Sheep.

And I thought: "This could be good. It may not appeal to the authorities who declare shopping malls, schools and churches Gun Free Zones, but perhaps it will encourage our Law Enforcement Officers (LEOs) and their administrators to train the nation's police to more aggressively.

Then I went to read the comments by Xavier's readers, where I found this cheerful reinforcement of my faith in LEOs:

All I can ask is are any of the commentors [sic] so far LEOs. Are you? I ask because I am one. I would not place my life at unecessary [sic] extreme risk in such a situation where there are multiple shooters without back-up because I am not suicidal, nor am I an idiot. Sure I might try to stop such an incident from getting worse, but you can bet your bottom dolalr [sic] that no officer should be trained to seek out and engage multiple assailants in such a scenario without back-up. If you really think it is about time some dopey stuff like that is taught to officers, well all I can say is what has happened to all the talk about arming the students. Unbelieveable. [sic] Why not think long and hard about putting yourselves in one of the multiple attacker scenarios as described, or even in a one assailant situation when you have a 9MM pistol and the other guy has a rifle with large capacity magazines. There is such as thing as bravery, and such a thing as absolute foolishness, and another thing as absolute stupidity. I choose to avoid the later two, it keeps me alive. Mind you, I have been there and done that several times when it has come to dangerous duty, even when badly oputnumbered, [sic] and I have had the injuries and some scars to prove it - but I cannot call upon anyone to be an idiot when it comes to such things.

Remember that many of the readers of this site, and others like it, endorse arming all of the public, and endorse CCW, or open carry by anyone who wishes to do so - as do I. One of the biggest reasons has always been because of poor response time by police in bad situations. Now you suddenly want to depend upon a lone officer to save the day - ala a John Wayne type to come in shooting. Well this is no John Wayne movie, this is real life, so why not get real. When seconds count the people should be allowed to defend themselves. That way they can at least hold the bad guy at bay until the other good guys arrive. Expecting someone to go in on a suicide mission is not the right thing to do even if they, as I, would probably do.

Sincerely,
Glenn B

The good part is, he mentions "...well all I can say is what has happened to all the talk about arming the students". I presume the commenter, Glenn, is in favor of allowing student to carry firearms.

Well and good, I say, as far as it goes. That would be an excellent response to one of my personal favorite topics: allow students on College and University campuses, who have been licensed to Concealed Carry, to actually carry the firearms as they have been certified to responsibly do.

As far as it goes.

Unfortunately in the context it sounds as if Glenn is willing for College Students to defend themselves only to absolve Glenn from having to interpose his precious flesh in their defense. He offers no solution to the problems in other Gun Free Zones, such as K-12 schools, shopping malls, and other private business establishments.

Until K-12 administrators recognize their vulnerability (and there are many stories which demonstrate that vulnerability), and until Private Businesses recognize their vulnerability more stories), and other organizations and businesses follow suit to the point at which they allow their visitors to carry firearms for protective purposes ... they must necessarily rely on the police "The Protect and To Serve".

Let's go back to the responsibility of LEOs to perform their primary duties:

All quotes here taken from the Protect and Serve link just above: in chapter 6 "Protection and Prevention of Crime" (pp:170 +) [Note that the cited materials commonly are directed to discusion in the context of international conflict and civil war; however, there are individual statements which do seem to apply to internal policing of civilians, especially in the context of the responsibility of Local Police Forces to defend civilians against violations of their civil rights ... including the right NOT to be shot by some wanna-be gunslinger in a Mall in Utah.)

‘‘To catch criminals’’ is, in most cases, still the first priority for law enforcement officials and their organizations. Service to the community, protection of victims and the prevention of further victimization present challenges to law enforcement that appear to have less appeal than the traditional game of cops and robbers."

...
(pg. 171)

"It is common knowledge that the number of crimes solved through law enforcement activity stands in stark contrast to the number of crimes actually committed. Furthermore, the interests of victims of crime are — at least from their own point of view — much better served when their actual victimization can be effectively prevented."

...

"The responsibility for the prevention and detection of crime is assigned primarily to law enforcement agencies. The full discharge of that responsibility, however, requires more than law enforcement input alone.

The effective prevention and detection of crime are critically dependent upon the existing levels and quality of cooperation between a law enforcement agency and the community it serves, and are as much a private responsibility as a public one. Politicians, members of the judiciary, community groups, public and private business corporations and individuals need to join forces if the results of efforts towards the prevention and detection of crime are to be better than the inevitably unsatisfactory results of merely attempting to enforce criminal laws."

This document reads like a United Nations declaration of principles, in that it is much more concerned with the rights of citizens to be protected from the depredation of citizens from their police. However, as is illustrated above, the document is sprinkled with the occasional comments which describe the obligation of police to Protect the citizens of a state.


I think this is significant. "Glenn", however, seems not to agree. His priority is his own personal safety, and in defense of his position he calls upon several suggestions which have already been made elsewhere ... because the Citizens of the United States of America have already learned that they cannot always rely on Law Enforcement Officers "To Protect, and To Serve".

Here, taken out of context, are a few of the positions which he espouses and which I support:

• "... what has happened to all the talk about arming the students?" [Ed: I like the concept, but what about K-12 students, Glenn? Who is going to protect them? How about shoppers in a public mall which declares itself a "Gun Free Zone?]
  
• "Remember that many of the readers of this site, and others like it, endorse arming all of the public, and endorse CCW, or open carry by anyone who wishes to do so - as do I." [Ed: fine, Glenn, we can live with that. But until it happens, we are obligated to depend on LEOs like you to defend us. What happens to us when police are unwilling to do their duty? Answer: we die, sometimes by the dozens.]
  
• "One of the biggest reasons has always been because of poor response time by police in bad situations." [Ed: this is one of the reasons, Glenn, why we citizens want the right to defend ourselves in all public venues.]
  
• Now you suddenly want to depend upon a lone officer to save the day - ala a John Wayne type to come in shooting. Well this is no John Wayne movie, this is real life, so why not get real. When seconds count the people should be allowed to defend themselves. That way they can at least hold the bad guy at bay until the other good guys arrive. [Ed: no, Glenn, this is not what we want. This is what we have had shoved down our throats for decades, with no recourse. If the Government, as you represent, is unable or UNWILLING to protect us, we want the right to protect ourselves. ]
  

Here's the single most dis-enchanting thing that Glenn has to say:

Expecting someone to go in on a suicide mission is not the right thing to do even if they, as I, would probably do.

This is not encouraging. This is the statement of a man who had just spent 300+ words describing how, and why, he would not attempt to come to the aid of civilians who were threatened by a gunman. Yet here, he positively states that he WOULD do exactly the thing which he has so vociferously averred that he would not do because, in his words, "I am not an idiot." How can a man so directly contradict himself, and believe that assertion to be accepted?


You, sir, are in the wrong profession.


Your sworn duty is ...


To Protect, and To Serve.

ARPC Newsletter December 2008

Albany Rifle and Pistol Club has been putting out a monthly newsletter for several years now, and in the past year they have been making it available on-line as a large PDF. (You can see it here.)

The newsletter includes messages from the various disciplines, some commentary, a few advertisements, a "for sale" area for club members, contact information and a calendar of events.


In this issue, there was even a URL for a Microsoft "Live Search" Earth satellite picture of the range. (Click on this image for a larger image. Click on THAT for a full-size still image.) I thought that was particularly interesting, but it was a very long URL

http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=44.460827~-123.055238&style=h&lvl=18&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&cam=44.442938~-122.590279&scene=-1&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

so I loaded it into a TINYURL.COM form and shortened it to http://tinyurl.com/5wumku

Much easier to type.

One of the more interesting features this month was a series of photographs depicting recent range improvements. For example, they now have handicap-accessible bathrooms on the North Range. Also, they have improved the parking situation along the North Range access road by placing concrete parking curbs new the clubhouse. This allows the club to keep vehicles out of the equipment storage area.

There's also a free 'drawing' for "a gift certificate from Sierra Bullets for 5 boxes of bullets of your choice and a Techwell USA.com Magwell / Grip system for the 1911."

Hint for readers of this blog only: the two winning gate-card numbers are 1927* and 2609*. I won't give you the full numbers, I wouldn't want to deprive you of the fun of searching for them.

National Ammo Day, and other stuff

According to the inimitable Kim Du Tuit, today is National Ammo Day.

Unlike National Buy-A-Gun Day (which falls in the spring), N.A.D. falls in the ... uh ... Fall.

Today you're suppose to go buy 1000 rounds of rimless ammo (eg: .22 Long Rifle) or 100 rounds of Centerfire ammunition.

Well, that doesn't work for me. Most of the guns I shoot (10mm, .38 Super) regularly take ammo which is custom-built for IPSC competition. Sure, I still have The Beloved Kimber, but reloading .45ACP ammunition is easier to reload than the Prima Donna loads I prefer to shoot in competition.

It doesn't help that I haven't seen the front sight of the Kimber or the 10mm STI Edge for the past five years. Oh, I still shoot them from time to time; I just can't hit anything quickly and reliably, because mostly I'm counting on muscle-memory and instincts to get the gun pointed at the trget. Need I mention that this Game Plan ain't working for me so well lately?

I have plenty of .22, .45 and 10mm loaded up (most of the latter is loaded with really lame bullets, which don't feed reliably, and while I've had a case of Montana Gold 200gr bullets in 10mm I've not bothered to load them because .. I can't see the sights), what I really need to do is to load up some .38 Super for this weekend's match at Dundee.

So, instead of buying 100 rounds of ... whatever ... I'll go out to the garage Thursday night and load up 300 or 400 rounds of .38 Super, which I like to shoot and whose C-more sights I can see.

So much for buying ammunition. Instead, I already have the components, and I'll turn this into National Reload Ammunition day ... one day late.
_____________________________________

During the reign of King Bill the First, I was fond of saying "My President is Charleton Heston!"

That didn't help.

And now that Obama is the President Elect, I'm trying real hard to say "My President is Barack Hussein Obama!" This may take some getting use to.

Notice I mentioned last week that the only thing that conservatives have left to teach the country is how to lose? That's not working out too well, either. Now we see a number of private citizens trying to get Obama thrown out of office-elect on the grounds that he's not qualified ... that is, he's not able to prove that he's a Natural Citizen of the United States of America.

That's not going to work. He'll ignore them (as he should) and those folks will fall by the wayside while Obama, The Emperor Who Has No Clothes, marches into office next January 20.

I say again: I don't like him, I didn't vote for him, and I don't want him to be President.

But he is, so we have to learn to live with it.

Heck, I was prepared to hold my nose if McCain was elected, I can do no less for the guy who won the vote by a healthy margin.

Still, I don't have to like it.

I especially don't like the ominous loomings of signs that he is going to swat the Second Amendment like a fly at a picnic on a sultry day. He's packing his staff with Fellow Travelers, and their influence won't need to be much for Obama (I've never trusted a man whose name has more vowels than consonants, but that's just Me) to be influenced by the soft whisper in his ear that his fondest dreams can come true.

Second Amendment restrictions? Done deal. Go buy all the guns and ammo you can't afford, you'll lose it in the end.

Socialist Policies? Count on it. This is the guy whose plans for a National Health Service (similar to the failed health-care policeies of Canada and England) were even more extreme than those of The HillaryBeast.

Support for a strong military? Fuggedaboudit. Instead, he'll be drafting our boys and girls to three- to six-month terms of service in a National Somethingorother Organization which is as well funded as the Military. Guess where the money to support that will come from. Yup, think "Soldiers on welfare". Well, there's nothing new about that; although it has been, and will be again, a National Shame.

But Obama is My President.

The Economy? Never mind, there will be no Entrepreneurialism in America for the next four years. Taxed into morbidity, count on it. No new business start-ups, because there's no profit in it. Accumulated taxes, including a raised Social Security limit, will put the tax burden of successful entrepreneurs at over 90%. Good thing I'm just a Worker Bee; it's more profitable to make $50,000 a year for myself than to make $500,000 a year and in so doing create new jobs.
____________________________________

SIGNS OF THE TIMES:

From England: The Inmates are Taking Over The Asylum - Junior Division.

From Minnesota:The Soros Connection in the Minnesota Race Vote count.

From Poland (Global Summit): President Elect Obama promises a "new chapter in American leadership on climate change."

[Counterpoint: "The World Has Never Seen Such Freezing Heat!"]

California: "Scott Eckern, the Sacramento theater director whose political donation in support of California's Prop. 8 ban on same-sex marriage turned into a lightning rod in the debate over gay rights, resigned Wednesday, saying he wanted to protect the California Musical Theatre, his artistic home since 1984, from further controversy."

Egypt: "Female Egyptian Lawyer Promotes Sexual Harrassment Against Jews".

And finally, in Wisconsin, David Olofson's lawyer says "Malfunction Doesn't Make Firearm an Automatic".

Fat chance that will get past the Liberal Judges and the lawyers for BATFE.


Blogmeat.

We do the web-surfing that American's Won't Do.

Check Box To Conceal Weapons Permit - Oregon

Corvallis Gazette Times: Community News


I'm afraid I've quoted this article in its entirety, because I'm not confident that if I just linked to it (as above, which is my preference) it would remain available in detail as long as I would like for you to be able to read the entire thing.

Therefore I have quoted it (below) so you will have all of the information.

If I had been confident that the Corvallis Gazette Times would continue to make this article available, here's what I would have said:
__________________________________________

In America today, we are usually "allowed" to carry a concealed weapon in accordance to the Second Amendment. This is because we, and our Governmental agencies, generally acknowledge that we are constitutionally acknowledged to the right to carry a weapon (usually a firearm ... the right to carry a Knife, for example, is often more closely regulated) defend our persons, our loved ones, other persons, and property.

The vast majority of states in America have accepted that certifiably law-abiding citizens should be allowed license to Carry a Concealed Firearm to provide them the ability to so protect the People and Property which are important to them, and to aid Law-Enforcement Officers (who cannot possible be immediately available to thwart predators) in defense of The Law-abiding and The Law.

However, there are powerful forces ... most frequently, Journalists ... who have set themselves in a self-declared 'higher Moral Level' to identify those who have been vetted, qualified, and defined as legally qualified to Carry Concealed firearms. Their goal, they suggest, is to identify people who are legally permitted to arm themselves.

Or, as it is expressed in this article:

" ....the public has a right to know who has a concealed weapon."

(Jack Orchard, a lawyer on retainer with the Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association, says: “It’s not something you are entitled to keep confidential,” he said. “No one forced you to acquire a handgun.”)

Orchard, and Newspaper Publishers through-out the country, deny the right to keep confidential the list of people who are licensed to carry a defensive weapon. Again, they cite the right of the public to know who is armed.

They claim the "public right to know", but it seems to me that this a particularly Liberal point-of view.

Liberals love Gays. I wonder if they would be as quick to embrace the rights of the Public to know who is gay.

Then the quote may be:
“It’s not something you are entitled to keep confidential,” he said. “No one forced you to acquire a handgun be Gay.”

Is this a Public right, or a Liberal preference?

In either case, this journalistic drive to full disclosure for the 'public right', may not be as appealing for journalists when voiced in terms of a societal right which is more personally acceptable to them.

I reject their argument of "public right". This is a personal bias, and it is an effort to sell newspapers without regard to the possible detriment of the safety of the law-abiding individuals whom they would target.

To post a list of people who are licensed to carry a concealed handgun would be to pillory these individuals in the stocks of public opinion. Oregon is a Liberal state; generally speaking, most people here don't care about the Second Amendment. More important, they are afraid of guns. This wasn't the case two generations ago, when guns were widely accepted and a 'frontier' (in current terminology) attitude toward firearms was assumed and accepted. Two generations of Liberal education have changed the local attitudes.

The Journalists take an impersonal point of view. They don't own or carry guns, their friends and acquaintances don't own or carry guns; they don't see any reason why anyone should want to own, let alone carry, guns.

My friends almost always own guns; several of them carry guns. The people I work with, and my friends, ALL know that I own guns.

Only a few of them know that I have a CHL (Concealed Handgun License) and you may be surprised as a reader to learn that I very rarely carry a gun.

Well, I work on a College campus where it is worth my job to be caught carrying a gun ... even though it is legal. Show me a college campus in this state where the rules of employment (or attendance) do not restrict firearms carry? Answer: Nowhere in the Oregon University System is this acceptable whether you are faculty, staff or student.

Still, I have a CHL. Whether or not I carry on campus, if it became wide public knowledge that I had a CHL I would find myself under intense scrutiny by my employer, and general suspicion on the part of my co-workers, for fear that I was walking around with a gun in my waistband.

I don't, but my social and employment situation would become untenable if I were "outed" as a CHL owner.

What they decided I was Gay?

Nobody would even blink.

...

I had no idea, until this weekend, that I was subject to being"'outed" for my mere PERMISSION to carry a handgun.

Thanks to this article, I will immediately contact the Benton County Sheriff's Office and inform them that I definitely do NOT want to be identified as a CHL holder.

I could handle the stigma of being almost any kind of social pariah, except that of having exercised my Second Amendment Rights.


What if I were a Journalist, and I was outed as being determined to exercise my First Amendment Rights?


Oh, they would say; that's okay. You can carry a pen.

But not a Sword.

18-NOV-2008:

Benton County Sheriff Diana Simpson said people who carry concealed weapons for personal safety shouldn’t have to reveal their names. So she’s giving them the opportunity to remain anonymous.

I am indebted to Benton County Sheriff Diane Simpson for her bold stand for the privacy of her neighbors and constituents. I emailed her office immediately after writing this article; she personally replied with the information that I could find an online PDF of the updated application. She said that there was no fee for re-filing an updated application.

I downloaded and printed the application, filled in the blanks, and included a cover letter of explanation along with a both-sides picture of my CHL. That letter is sitting in my mailbox tonite, waiting for pickup tomorrow. I'll let you know how it turns out.

__________________________________________________

Check box to conceal weapons permit
By Tom Henderson
Corvallis Gazette-Times

Lawyers with the Portland firm of O’Donnell Clark & Crew want to know the names of Benton County residents who hold concealed weapons permits.

Benton County Sheriff Diana Simpson said people who carry concealed weapons for personal safety shouldn’t have to reveal their names. So she’s giving them the opportunity to remain anonymous.

Simpson has added a box to the county’s application form that people can check if they want a permit for personal protection. People who already have permits also can submit the revised form. Simpson said she won’t reveal the name of anyone who has checked the box.

Simpson issued a press release Thursday to inform the 2,000 Benton County residents who have concealed weapons permits that they have the option of keeping their permits secret.

Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller is revising his county’s application form, as well. So are a lot of other sheriffs across Oregon in response to an April court ruling that permits obtained for personal safety may not be subject to public record laws.

It is unknown how many counties’ permit information O’Donnell Clark & Crew is seeking. Three calls to the law firm were not returned.

Simpson said her office is complying with the law firm’s request, but because records are not automated, the process is very long and time-consuming. In the meantime, the sheriff’s office will accept amended applications requesting their information to kept confidential, she said.

“This is a difficult situation to be placed in,” she added. “On the one hand, I need to respect the public records law request. But on the other hand, I need to respect the expectation of privacy and confidentiality.”

Renewed concern over the confidentiality of concealed weapons permits began when Shirley Katz, a South Medford High School teacher, insisted she needed to carry a concealed weapon in her classroom to protect herself from her ex-husband.

Editors of the Mail Tribune newspaper in Medford wanted to know how many public school teachers already had concealed weapons permits. Jackson County Sheriff Mike Winters refused a public records request from the newspaper, although the county’s concealed weapons permit application form indicated that weapons permits are public records.

The Mail Tribune’s publishers took the county to court. Meanwhile, the forms were changed to omit the statement that permits are public records. Jackson County Circuit Court Judge G. Philip Arnold ruled April 25 that concealed weapons permit information may not always be protected under Oregon’s public record law. He said people who hold permits for personal safety could ask that the information be withheld from the public.

Jackson County officials are appealing the decision with the support of the Oregon Sheriffs’ Association.

At issue is whether or not permits can be altered retroactively.

John Haroldson said that they can. As Benton County District Attorney, he is the primary custodian of public records in the county. “What you have is a court ruling that recognizes the need for carrying concealed weapons for personal safety,” Haroldson said.

Laura Cooper, a Bend lawyer who specializes in public records, said changing existing records puts sheriffs in an ethical and legal gray area. “That seems to be the destruction of a public record,” Cooper said. “Basically, what you’re doing is amending a public record.”

Although the sheriffs’ decision raises questions, Cooper said she doesn’t have any definitive answers. “It sounds problematic, but I can’t say that with any authority.”

Jack Orchard, a lawyer on retainer with the Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association, is more definite. Orchard said the public has a right to know who has a concealed weapon.

“It’s not something you are entitled to keep confidential,” he said. “No one forced you to acquire a handgun.”

___________________________

UPDATE: 18-NOV-2008

I deleted the contents of my email, and added the comment about mailing an updated CHL application.

I also corrected the link address; the original article had been moved to the newspaper archive.

SWMBO Report: November

I haven't been writing much lately, because there's a lot of 'other stuff' going on in my life.

The most important part is, of course, the continuing efforts of her doctors to help cure SWMBO.

This is a very long, involved and technical discussion. If you are not intrinsically concerned about the background and current status of SWMBO's battle for survival, I urge you to stop reading now.

Okay, for the information of the few remaining readers, we'll continue with the description of the November SWMBO Report.

_______________________

To recap, on July 29, 2008, SWMBO was diagnosed with Lung Cancer. She doesn't smoke, but that is not a requirement for contracting this particular brand of Cancer. The good news, she doesn't smoke. Nor do I smoke in her presence, except incidentally outdoors where the smoke is carried away from her.

Being a non-smoker, her chances of survival are much better than the usual lung-cancer case. Her lungs are clean of tars and nicotine deposits, she is generally healthy and in good physical condition. She has ever been careful to observe a good regimen of healthy food and exercise.

She found the fest Oncologist within reasonable distance; in this case, it was the Seattle Cancer Center in Northern Washington State ... 300 miles, a five-hour drive away.

Her primary Oncologist, Dr. Cunningham, determined that she had a single tumor in the upper quadrant of her right lung. This is different from her local Oncologist who had determined (incorrectly) that she had two tumors, one in each lung (both considered "inoperable" because they are loath to cut out a tumor lest they miss something and, in the process, spread the infeection.) This simple correction in diagnosis moved her from the "Type Four" (no hope) to "Type One" (perhaps manageable) categorization.

Her Seattle doctor prescribed a new drug, Tarceva, which is "... a targeted Cancer treatment for second-line advanced for Non-Small Lung Cancer (NSCLC) ...". This medication had previously been prescribed after all other tratments had ceased working, but recently has been designated as the drug in choice for an otherwise-healthy Lung Cancer case, which perfectly described SEMBO's situation.

It worked for several weeks, until in mid-October SWMBO experienced sudden and dramatic mood-swings and an obvious decrease in energy and Oxygen acquisition.

A consultation with her doctor in Seattle resulted in the conclusion that the Tarceva was no longer working. Her Oncology team, in consultation, determined that she should immediatly dicontinue the Tarceva treatment and stat an intensive program of Chemotherapy.

SWMBO was required to take WEEKLY treatments of Chemotherapy, including (among other drugs) Benedryl ... an antihistimine (makes it easier for her to breath without coughing much), and a 'cocktail' of heavy-metal compounds such as Platinum which are deadly poisons, but intended to actually kill the tumor.

For the first few weeks there were a number of bad reactions, including extreme emesis (vomiting) which is generally acknowledged to be a common reaction to this kind of Chemotherapy.


SWMBO's drug treatment has been adjusted to treat various kinds of secondary side-effects of the primary drug treatment. She has been prescribed and anti-emesis drug called "EMEND", which has stopped the violent regurgitation commonly associated with anti-cancer chemotherapy.

Also, she has been severely debilitated by the drugs. She has no energy, is often unable to concentrate. She must sleep with a nasal oxygen feed, which causes irritation in the nasal passages and especially a slow-to-heal sore on her upper lip where the oxygen feed rests. She cannot move around without a portable oxygen source. She cannot go out shopping without cotton gloves and a filtration mask, because after the fourth treatment her immune system is severely debilitated and she is particularly subsceptible to secondary infections. If she catches a cold while shopping for food, it could quickly become a life-threatening illness.

I mentioned earlier that she is receiving infusions of these cancer-killing 'cocktails' on a weekly basis. Because she is (other than the Lung Cancer) so healthy and strong, her Oncologist has determined that she would respond well to a weekly infusion. This is notably different from the usual Chemotherapy schedule, which is one treatment every FOUR weeks.

The usual reaction to treatment is a first-day feeling of euphoria, caused by the supporting drugs. The second day is an almost 'normal' day; not euphoria, but a general sense of well-being. By the third day, the sense of well-being is gone; day-to-day sensation is one of sickness and no energy. By the sixth day, she is beginning to recover, and by the seventh day she may be able to get out of bed and move around with no great and particular sensation that she is unable to function.

In the usual case, the following three weeks until the next infusion are difficult, but endurable.

For SWMBO, there are no 'following three weeks'; she begins the cycle immediately, and the reaction to the chemotherapy is greater ... more extreme ... every week.

Which brings us to the current month.

Last week SWMBO took her second treatment in her home town. Three of the five weeks required an all-day drive to Seattle, which her sister (The Saint) was willing to accept as the driver. Bless her heart!

This Friday, SWMBO drove herself the five minutes from her home to the local hospital, and was able to drive herself back as well.

But there were problems, which weighed heavily on her mind.

After the previous Friday treatment, when she went to the pharmacist to pick up her current round of prescription refills, the pharmacist informed her that they could not fill the EMEND (anti-nausea) prescription because her insurance carrier refused to pay for a refill more frequently than once every 23 days. This was based on the usual once-in-four-weeks schedule of Cancer Chemotherapy treatments. They were either unaware of, or chose to ignore, the fact that she was receiving infusions every week rather than every four weeks.

Her Seattle Oncologist started negotiations with her Insurance Carrier to explain that the 4-times more frequent prescription was necessary, but the communications were slow and exclusive of the patient.

She couldn't really afford to just pay for the medication herself, because the cost is $220 for one week's medication.


And she couldn't do without it; before the new EMEND medication was available, she lost her voice due to dramatic and uncontrollable emesis.

We talked it over, and finally by Thursday we decided that we would have to pay for the vital medication ourselves, and hope that later we could try to submit a claim to her Insurance carrier after the (hoped-for) successful negotiation betweet Oncologist and Insurance Carrier.

In the meantime, last Monday SWMBO had all of her hair shaved off her head.

She was already pulling the hair off by the handsfull, and she decided that there was no reason why she should chance plugging up her bathtub drain with the hair. Her eyebrows were almost completely gone, too.

So she had her head shaved. I went to the store and bought her a handful of soft (non-scratchy), warm caps so she could keep her head warm. Also, "Spicy", the wife of The Hobo Brasser, knitted some wool-felt hats for her. These are soft, non-irritating, and stylish. Also, warm!

In the meantime, her Oxygen Supply Company installed a humidifier attachment to her overnight Oxygen Generator system, so her nasal passages wouldn't be irritated by the infusion of oxygen. They also provided a non-flammable lubricant so that she could protect the delicate nasal passages, and her Oncologist prescribed a steroid which would help prevent irritation.

When I picked up her prescription on Wednesday, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that the only bill was the $20 co-pay, rather than the $220 full-cost.


Saturday we picked up her two latest prescriptions, designed to help her resist the nasal irritation.

I watched her while she took all of the medications this morning. I couldn't count the number of pills she took. These are apart from the cough syrup needed to keep her from coughing every time she changed her position ... sitting down, lying down, standing up ... everything (including talking, and laughing) makes her cough.

The VERY good news is that before her Friday Infusion, she received another thorough check-up from her local Oncologist.

Her weight is the same as last week, if not a bit better. She's not losing weight, which is a good sign.

Her Blood Oxygen is up, which means that her lungs can supply oxygen to her blood better. Another very good sign.

The size of the cancer tumor in her lungs has not changed, which means it is not growing.

Her blood-pressure is 'Normal', always a good sign.

Indications that she is responding well to treatment include:

• We went shopping for groceries yesterday. She was gloved and taking oxygen from her portable tank, but she know what she wanted (stuff that I would starve rather than eat!) and was able to spend 40 minutes in a store without needing to stop for a rest;
• She is enjoying her surroundings, and we worked a crossword puzzle. She took phone calls from family an Spicy, and enjoyed them;
• A co-worker visited her at home today, they had a pleasant one-hour conversation. I didn't eaves-drop, but she reported that they had "a nice chat";
• She received a catalog of wigs and caps for chemotherapy patients during her last treatment .... we discussed what wigs and special caps she might purchase ... she was alert, vivacious and interested;
• We rented and watched the animated movie "Kung Fu Panda" ... one private vice is that we enjoy animated cartoons such as "Shrek" ... we both enjoyed the movie, and she /we laughed out loud all the way through.

There are a lot more indications that SWMBO is responding well to her treatment, as burdonsome and as uncomfortable as they are.

If you care at all, I hope you will join me in welcoming this very positive SWMBO Report.

Our girl is coming back.

I'm always said she was a fighter. I hope I've managed to convery that I also believe she is a Winner.

Next year, we'll see you in the Rifle Pitts at Dundee.

She's going to kick your ass.

From The Hobo Brasser, this email from the Washington County (Oregon) Sheriff "Concealed Handgun License Unit" (CHL).

This appears to be a public notice that there are local interests determined to force the County Sheriff to reveal a list of CHL owners for public consumption.

It also appears to be a plaintive cry from a responsible holder that he is being forced to do something which he is loath to accommodate.

I don't have a contact email address where you can write to offer your support to his resistance. But if you think, as I do, that this is is an egregious imposition on a conscientious public service, I encourage you to do your own research.

If you find a contact address, I hope you will share it.

Here is the link to the Washington County (Oregon) Sheriff's Concealed Handgun License Unit.
__________________________________________

Official Letterhead Notice to All Concealed Handgun License Holders

November 14, 2008

Dear Concealed Handgun License Holder,

There is currently a statewide issue regarding the disclosure of the names, addresses and other identifying information of people who have concealed handgun licenses that affects you. Essentially, the media and other groups are asking for lists of information about all the people who hold concealed handgun licenses.

As your sheriff, I refused to disclose that information because I believe many people obtain a concealed handgun license for personal security and would not want that information made public. I also resist disclosing personal information because of the continuing identity theft risks.

Despite my belief (shared by sheriffs across Oregon), an Oregon court recently decided that there is no evidence that people obtain concealed handgun licenses for security measures. The court ordered the Jackson County Sheriff to disclose a list of all the concealed handgun license holders in his county to the local newspaper. The case is now before the Oregon Court of Appeals.

While I believe you obtained your concealed handgun license as a security measure and that you do not want that information disclosed with your name, address and other personal information, I need to hear from you on this issue to help me defend your privacy in this matter.

Please answer the two questions at the bottom of this letter as soon as possible. If you want your name and other information to remain confidential, simply answer YES to both questions. Thank you for your cooperation.

Sincerely,
[signature gif omitted]
Rob Gordon
Washington County Sheriff

New FFL Form 4473 must-use date

Recently posted by Jim Shepherd of "The Shooting Wire":

Open Letter To All Federal Firearms Licensees

Recently, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) released the revised version of the Firearms Transaction Record (ATF Form 4473) with a revision date of August 2008. By open letter dated October 3, 2008, ATF advised that all FFLs must begin to use the new Form 4473 no later than November 15, 2008. ATF realizes that this date is during hunting season and that this is a very busy time of year for the firearms industry. As Federal firearms licensees (FFLs), you play a significant role in the transfer of firearms to consumers. ATF recognizes the shared obligation to ensure that persons ineligible under the law do not acquire firearms. Therefore, in an effort to prevent undue burden on you the FFL, and to allow for proper training of employees, ATF will extend the mandatory must-use date of the new Form 4473 to January 15, 2009.

This extension will allow you to review the entire revised Form 4473, including the definitions, instructions, and the Important Notices to the Transferor/Seller. This will ensure timely implementation of the Form 4473 and a better understanding of the significant changes.

The mandatory must-use date for all FFLs for ATF Form 4473 has been changed from November 15, 2008, to January 15, 2009. All FFLs may begin to use the revised Form 4473 upon receipt but by no later than January 15, 2009. You may no longer use the previous edition of the Form 4473 after January 15, 2009 or as soon as you begin using the revised edition.

[Ed: Emphasis added]

Please contact your local ATF office with any questions you may have about the revised Form 4473. If you need additional forms, please contact the ATF Distribution Center at (703) 445-7801 or, to order online, go to http://www.atf.gov/dcof/index.htm.

Carson W. Carroll
Assistant Director
Enforcement Program and Services

Shepherd and The Shooting Wire have always been reliable sources of important and timely news in the Shooting community. If you have not already done so, I urge you to subscribe to the three-times-a-week newsletter.