ARMED-M

__________________________________________________________________________________________

The Armed M is a publication of the 2nd Amendment SIG, a special interest group of American Mensa Ltd. Opinions expressed herein are the opinions of the writers, and not of American Mensa, Ltd., which has no opinions. This newsletter is linked to the Mensa web page WWW.Mensa.org as WWW.webcatt.com/2ndAmend_SIG

===============================================================================

Dec. 2002 I have moved and am now in Wilmington North Carolina. My E-Mail address is Smith705@Juno.com. I can always use contributions to the newsletter. If you write something or find something e-mail it to me I'll put it in the newsletter as space and theme allows. Bob Smith -----

__________________________________________________________________________________________

2A: Appeals Court Upholds Calif. Weapons Ban       LOS ANGELES - A federal appeals court upheld California's assault weapons control act on Thursday, ruling that there is no constitutional right for individuals to keep and bear arms, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday.

The 3-0 decisions, declaring that the 2nd Amendment protects only the right of states to organize and maintain militias, is at odds with the position of the Bush administration and a decision last year by a federal appeals court in New Orleans.

California adopted the nation's most sweeping assault weapons ban in 1999.  It prohibits the manufacture, sale or import of weapons including grenade launchers, semiautomatic pistols with a capacity of more than 10 rounds, semiautomatic rifles that use detachable magazines and guns with barrels that can be fitted with silencers.

In February 2000, a month after the law took effect, a group of individuals who either own assault weapons or want to buy them challenged the law in U.S. District Court in Sacramento, contending that it violated the 2nd Amendment, the equal protection clause and other constitutional provisions.

U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb dismissed all of the plaintiffs' claims last year. Thursday's decision by the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Shubb's ruling on the 2nd Amendment and one granting an exemption to the law for off-duty police officers. The appellate court overruled Shubb on another point, declaring that there was no rational basis for retired police officers to be exempt from the law.

California Atty. Gen. Bill Lockyer, whose office defended the state law in court, applauded the decision, which was also praised by attorneys for gun control organizations and denounced by leading gun owner associations, the Times said.   The plaintiffs could ask the full 9th Circuit to rehear the case or could directly appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has not ruled on the issue for more than 60 years.

  The U.S. Justice Department under Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft has taken the position that individuals have a constitutional right to bear arms.

At issue is the meaning of the 2nd Amendment, which states: "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: 2A: FBI Agents 'Miffed' that Gun Owner Contacted Media & 40 Reasons

Capitol Hill (CNSNews.com) - Prior to the capture of "Beltway Sniper" suspects John Allen Muhammad and John Lee Malvo, an unconfirmed number of Maryland gun owners received surprise visits from the FBI as part of the investigation. One such gun owner had a surprise of his own for the agents when they arrived at his home.

Jeff Brown of Gaithersburg, Md., was "a little nervous" when he heard the voicemail message from an FBI agent on the sniper task force who wanted to "visit" Brown at his home to check a .223 caliber semi-automatic rifle Brown purchased in 1993. Adding to that apprehension was the fact that Brown owns and drives a full-sized white panel van, the type of vehicle investigators believed the sniper was driving.

"I expected, actually, to be pulled over and spread-eagle on the street at some point," Brown told CNSNews.com Monday. "When he called, I knew their database had had a double hit. A white van and a .223 rifle? I knew they were coming."

In a subsequent telephone conversation, Metzger reportedly told Brown that agents merely wanted to verify the serial number of the rifle and confirm that it was, in fact, still physically in Brown's possession. The two scheduled an appointment to accomplish those goals.

But Brown later learned that the agents had tried at least once to make an unannounced visit, and only called because they were unable to catch him at home.

"Once I told some of my friends in the pro-gun community what was happening, they began to relate some stories to me about guys having their guns confiscated, for so-called 'ballistic fingerprinting,' and not getting their guns back," Brown explained. "I became alarmed."

Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, said the attitude of the federal agents comes as a result of "years of accepting gun control as somehow useful for solving crimes."

"The [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms] went to the stores and got the lists of gun owners that had something that could fire a .223. But, it didn't solve the crime," Pratt noted. "The only reason we find that gun registration is 'useful' is for confiscation."

FBI Agents 'Were Not Happy'

Brown's apprehension prompted him to contact an attorney, who instructed him on preparing for the visit. So, when FBI Special Agent Greg Metzger and his partner arrived at Brown's home for their scheduled meeting, they were greeted by Brown and his wife, Mary, along with reporters and photographers from various media outlets.

As Brown described the situation, the agents were "a little bit miffed."  "They were not happy," he observed. "They just were not interested in being around any cameras."

The agents asked Brown to step outside the home, away from the television crew, to talk.

"Can we, uh ... come here," one of the agents said to Brown. Obliging, Brown stepped away from the door to speak with the agents, but still within view of the camera.

Brown began recapping the agreement he had made with Special Agent Metzger. But when one of the agents realized Brown was wearing a wireless microphone, he stopped the conversation short.

"Do you have a microphone on?" the agent asked as he reached toward the microphone clipped to Brown's shirt. Brown backed away and continued talking, but the agent interrupted him again.

"Can you do me a favor?" the agent asked. "Can you take the apparatus off that you have on? I'd like to speak to you privately."

Brown complied, but only after summoning his wife to serve as a witness to the conversation with the agents. Out of the camera's view, and believing they could not be heard, the agents challenged Brown about the presence of the media.

"They were belligerent, at that point, with me. They weren't threatening me or pushing me around or touching me or anything like that, but their mannerisms and attitude quickly became offended and belligerent," Brown recalled. "I was thinking to myself, 'See, this is what I was afraid would happen if you guys came into my house, especially if I was alone.'"

'Don't You Know People Are Dying?'

Parts of the conversation picked up by the camera's long-range microphone confirm Brown's account of what happened next.

"Why didn't you give us a chance to do what we said we were going to do instead of ambushing us with the media?  Why didn't you trust us?" one agent asked.

Brown said it was not so much the words the agents used, as their attitude and body language that made him uncomfortable.

"There was some lecturing about it," he said recalling one comment that did unnerve him.

"One thing they said was, 'Don't you know people are dying and we're just trying to do our job?'" Brown recalled, "Of course, the inference was that I didn't care that there were people dying and I was trying to interfere with them doing their job."

During that conversation, the agents reportedly admitted that they had seized other rifles, allegedly with permission, to compare them to the ballistic evidence gathered from the crime scenes.

“They said, from some people, they do 'request' to take the gun with them and do 'ballistic fingerprinting,' as they call it," Brown recalled. "I just did not want to have my gun disappear."

Pratt believes the agents "developed an attitude," because Brown challenged their attempts to violate his constitutional rights.

"The FBI is trying to put this guy on a guilt trip because he's 'not cooperating' with the system but it's a totally useless system," Pratt argued. "They just assume that gun owners [are] all a bunch of suspects just for being gun owners and they should behave accordingly."

'They Were Doing It On Purpose'

At the request of Special Agent Metzger, Brown instructed the media to stay outside his home, where they could see what was happening through a plate glass window. Brown had the unloaded weapon displayed in plain sight for the inspection.

The agents followed Brown and his wife inside and confirmed the serial number on the rifle as they had said they wanted to do. But that was not the end of the encounter.

"After they checked, they started [questioning Brown again], and that's when my wife stepped in and told them to leave," Brown said, noting that his wife formerly worked in law enforcement.

Mary Brown believed the agents were attempting to agitate her husband, hoping he would say or do something to justify their confiscation of his rifle.

"I could tell that they were doing it on purpose and I didn't like what they were doing to you," she told her husband. "So, I decided to just jump right in."

The agents left the couple's property, as they were ordered to do.  Jeff Brown does not believe the agents' reaction to the presence of the media, or their "brow-beating" tactics were justified.

"I'm not here to make them feel happy. I have to make sure my rights are not violated. I wanted to help, but this is not Nazi Germany," he explained. "I looked [Metzger] right in the eye and said ... 'I don't care whether you're upset about being ambushed by the media. I felt I needed some witnesses here with me.'"

Brown, a member of the National Rifle Association and former candidate for public office in Maryland, was also upset by what he perceived as a lack of honesty on the part of the FBI.

"[Metzger] wasn't upfront with me, and I didn't have any guilty feelings about [contacting the media]," Brown said. "They weren't truthful with me. They didn't tell me all the truth. They only told me the part they wanted to hear."

A Message to Gun Owners?

Debbie Weierman, a spokeswoman for the FBI, said the bureau would not respond to any questions about the encounter, because the probe into the multiple murders was still in progress.

"We're not going to be able to get into any kind of a dialogue with you regarding any aspect of our investigation," she said.

Pratt believes the response of the agents to the presence of the media shows that their main focus was not on finding the "Beltway Sniper," but rather on sending a message to gun owners.

"They know it's not about crime control because, if they were really interested in finding the perpetrator they would have kept moving. Obviously this guy wasn't the guy," Pratt concluded. "What it's really all about is showing that the feds are in control in a very totalitarian sense of the word."

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

40 Reasons for Gun Control (And Voting Democratic In the Next Election)

1. Banning guns works, which is why New York, DC, & Chicago cops need guns.

2. Washington DC's low murder rate of 69 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, and Indianapolis' high murder rate of 9 per 100,000 is due to the lack of gun control.

3. Statistics showing high murder rates justify gun control but statistics showing increasing murder rates after gun control are "just statistics."

4. The Brady Bill and the Assault Weapons Ban, both of which went into effect in 1994 are responsible for the decrease in violent crime rates, which have been declining since 1991.

5. We must get rid of guns because a deranged lunatic may go on a shooting spree at any time and anyone who would own a gun out of fear of such a lunatic is paranoid.

6. The more helpless you are the safer you are from criminals.

  7. An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 Magnum will get angry and kill you.

8. A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

9. When confronted by violent criminals, you should "put up no defense - give them what they want, or run" (Handgun Control Inc. Chairman Pete Shields, Guns Don't Die - People Do, 1981, p. 125).

10. The New England Journal of Medicine is filled with expert advice about guns; just like Guns & Ammo has some excellent treatises on heart surgery.

11. One should consult an automotive engineer for safer seatbelts, a civil engineer for a better bridge, a surgeon for internal medicine, a computer programmer for hard drive problems, and Sarah Brady for firearms expertise.

12. The 2nd Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which was created 130 years later, in 1917.

13. The National Guard, federally funded, with bases on federal land, using federally-owned weapons vehicles buildings and uniforms, punishing trespassers under federal law, is a "state" militia.

14. These phrases: "right of the people peaceably to assemble," "right of the people to be secure in their homes," "enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people," and "The powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people" all refer to individuals, but "the right of the people to keep and bear arm" refers to the state.

15. "The Constitution is strong and will never change." But we should ban and seize all guns thereby violating the 2nd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to that Constitution.

16. Rifles and handguns aren't necessary to national defense! Of course, the army has hundreds of thousands of them.

17. Private citizens shouldn't have handguns, because they aren't "military weapons", but private citizens shouldn't have "assault rifles", because they are military weapons.

18. In spite of waiting periods, background checks, fingerprinting, government forms, etc., guns today are too readily available, which is responsible for recent school shootings. In the 1940's, 1950's and 1960's, anyone could buy guns at hardware stores, army surplus stores, gas stations, variety stores, Sears mail order, no waiting, no background check, no fingerprints, no government forms and there were no school shootings.

19. The NRA's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign about kids handling guns is propaganda, but the anti-gun lobby's attempt to run a "don't touch" campaign is responsible social activity.

20. Guns are so complex that special training is necessary to use them properly, and so simple to use that they make murder easy.

21. A handgun, with up to 4 controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to learn to use, as opposed to an automobile that only has 20.

22. Women are just as intelligent and capable as men but a woman with a gun is "an accident waiting to happen" and gun makers' advertisements aimed at women are "preying on their fears."

23. Ordinary people in the presence of guns turn into slaughtering butchers but revert to normal when the weapon is removed.

24. Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

25. A majority of the population supports gun control, just like a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

26. Any self-loading small arm can legitimately be considered to be a "weapon of mass destruction" or an "assault weapon."

27. Most people can't be trusted, so we should have laws against guns, which most people will abide by because they can be trusted.

28. The right of Internet pornographers to exist cannot be questioned because it is constitutionally protected by the Bill of Rights, but the use of handguns for self defense is not really protected by the Bill of Rights.

29. Free speech entitles one to own newspapers, transmitters, computers, and typewriters, but self- defense only justifies bare hands.

30. The ACLU is good because it uncompromisingly defends certain parts of the Constitution, and the NRA is bad, because it defends other parts of the Constitution.

31. Charlton Heston, a movie actor as president of the NRA is a cheap lunatic who should be ignored, but Michael Douglas, a movie actor as a representative of Handgun Control, Inc. is an ambassador for peace who is entitled to an audience at the UN arms control summit.

32. Police operate with backup within groups, which is why they need larger capacity pistol magazines than do "civilians" who must face criminals alone and therefore need less ammunition.

33. We should ban "Saturday Night Specials" and other inexpensive guns because it's not fair that poor people have access to guns too.

34. Police officers have some special Jedi-like mastery over handguns that private citizens can never hope to obtain.

35. Private citizens don't need a gun for self- protection because the police are there to protect them even though the Supreme Court says the police are not responsible for their protection.

36. Citizens don't need to carry a gun for personal protection but police chiefs, who are desk-bound administrators who work in a building filled with cops, need a gun.

37. "Assault weapons" have no purpose other than to kill large numbers of people. The police need assault weapons. You do not.

38. When Microsoft pressures its distributors to give Microsoft preferential promotion, that's bad; but when the Federal government pressures cities to buy guns only from Smith & Wesson, that's good.

39. Trigger locks do not interfere with the ability to use a gun for defensive purposes, which is why you never see police officers with one on their duty weapon.

40. Handgun Control, Inc., says they want to "keep guns out of the wrong hands." Guess what? You have the wrong hands.

Supreme Court Rules Against Texas Gun Dealer

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Convicted felons must ask a federal agency whether they can regain their right to own a gun before asking a judge to review their case, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday.Felons are barred from carrying a gun after their release from prison, but they can ask the government for an exception. The ruling clarified how the procedures work in such cases.Gun-control advocates hailed the ruling. Mathew Nosanchuk, litigation director of the Violence Policy Center, called the decision "a resounding victory for public safety.""The unanimous opinion decisively rebuffs claims by the National Rifle Association and other pro-gun advocates that felons should be able to use the federal courts to have their gun privileges restored," he said.

The case involved Texas gun dealer Thomas Bean, who was convicted in a Mexican court of importing ammunition into Mexico. As a result, he was barred from possessing firearms or ammunition, losing his livelihood.Bean applied to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for relief. The federal agency returned the application unprocessed, saying it was barred from spending any funds to investigate or act on such applications.A 1992 law stopped funding of ATF investigations of whether felons' gun ownership rights should be reinstated. It was passed after an outcry over a study showing the agency had granted thousands of applications from convicted felons, at a cost of millions of dollars.

Bean had sued, asking a federal judge to conduct an inquiry into his fitness to possess a gun and issue a judicial order granting him relief. The judge ruled for Bean, a decision upheld by a U.S. appeals court.

The Bush administration then appealed to the Supreme Court.In the ruling, Justice Clarence Thomas said the appeals court was wrong. Under the law, judicial review was allowed only after an actual denial by the ATF, Thomas said.He said judicial review cannot occur without a decision by the agency. Thomas rejected Bean's argument that the government's inability to act amounted to a denial of his request.Nosanchuk said in a statement, "The court recognized that there is nothing in the law that would allow activist federal judges to deputize themselves as surrogate ATF agents and spend time and resources restoring gun privileges to convicted felons."

Guess our national leaders didn't expect this, hmm? On Thursday, Darrell Scott, the father of Rachel Scott, a victim of the Columbine High School shootings in Littleton, Colorado, was invited to address the House Judiciary Committee's sub-committee. What he said to our national leaders during this special session of Congress was painfully truthful. They were not prepared for what he had to say, nor was it received well.

It needs to be heard by every parent, every teacher, every politician, every sociologist, every psychologist, and every so-called expert! These courageous words spoken by Darrell Scott are powerful, penetrating, and deeply personal. There is no doubt that God sent this man as a voice crying in the wilderness. The following is a portion of the transcript:

"Since the dawn of creation there has been both good & evil in the hearts of men and women. We all contain the seeds of kindness or the seeds of violence. The death of my wonderful daughter, Rachel Joy Scott, and the deaths of that heroic teacher, and the other eleven children who died must not be in vain. Their blood cries out for answers."

"The first recorded act of violence was when Cain slew his brother Abel out in the field. The villain was not the club he used. Neither was it the NCA, the National Club Association. The true killer was Cain, and the reason for the murder could only be found in Cain's heart."

"In the days that followed the Columbine tragedy, I was amazed at how quickly fingers began to be pointed at groups such as the NRA. I am not a member of the NRA. I am not a hunter. I do not even own a gun. I am not here to represent or defend the NRA - because I don't believe that they are responsible for my daughter's death. Therefore I do not believe that they need to be defended. If I believed they had anything to do with Rachel's murder I would be their strongest opponent."

"I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy-it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room. Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. "I wrote a poem just four nights ago that expresses my feelings best. This was written way before I knew I would be speaking here today":

Your laws ignore our deepest needs, Your words are empty air.  You've stripped away our heritage, You've outlawed simple prayer.  Now gunshots fill our classrooms, And precious children die.  You seek for answers everywhere, And ask the question "Why?"  You regulate restrictive laws, Through legislative creed.  And yet you fail to understand, That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, soul, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and wreak havoc. Spiritual presences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact.

What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs - politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties. We do not need more restrictive laws.

"Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts. Political posturing and restrictive legislation are not the answers. The young people of our nation hold the key.

There is a spiritual awakening taking place that will not be squelched! We do not need more religion. We do not need more gaudy television evangelists spewing out verbal religious garbage. We do not need more million dollar church buildings built while people with basic needs are being ignored. We do need a change of heart and a humble acknowledgment that this nation was founded on the principle of simple trust in God!"

"As my son Craig lay under that table in the school library and saw his two friends murdered before his very eyes-He did not hesitate to pray in school. I defy any law or politician to deny him that right! I challenge every young person in America, and around the world, to realize that on April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School prayer was brought back to our schools. Do not let the many prayers offered by those students be in vain. Dare to move into the new millennium with a sacred disregard for legislation that violates your God-given right to communicate with Him.

To those of you who would point your finger at the NRA - I give to you a sincere challenge. Dare to examine your own heart before casting the first stone!  My daughter's death will not be in vain! The young people of this country will not allow that to happen!"