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.2Asig.iqhost.net.  Almost all editions are on the web site.  It takes about two minutes to download each of the sixty editions using dial up.

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

DEC. 2003 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 -----

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

This concise, easy-to-read report by the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence explains why assault weapons are the guns of choice for criminals, and makes the case for renewing and strengthening the federal assault weapons ban. As a supplement to the report, the Educational Fund has produced a model assault weapons ban that advocates and policymakers can promote in their states and cities.

Read the Report...http://www.csgv.org/content/pdf/awb_report.pdf

Read the Model Law...http://www.csgv.org/content/pdf/awb_modellaw.pdf

Model Law Assault Weapons Ban

Section 1: Title. This Act shall be known as the Assault Weapons Ban of 2003.

Section 2: Findings.

The [insert appropriate law-making entity] finds the following:

a) Semiautomatic assault weapons are military-style guns designed to quickly kill a large numbers of people. The shooter can simply point - as opposed to carefully aim the weapon to quickly spray a wide area with a hail of bullets.

b) According to FBI data, between 1998 and 2001, one in five law enforcement officers slain in the line of duty was killed with an assault weapon.

c) Gun manufacturers have for many years made, marketed and sold to civilian semiautomatic versions of military assault weapons designed with features specifically intended to increase lethality for military applications.

d) Assault weapons have been used in America's most notorious massacres, including the 1999 massacre at Columbine High School (TEC-DC9 assault pistol and Hi-Point Carbine) and the 2002 Washington, DC-area sniper shootings (Bushmaster XM15 assault rifle). [Insert similar shootings, as appropriate, that have occurred within the jurisdiction]

e) The availability of military-style assault weapons poses a valid threat to the health and safety of the citizenry.

f) [Insert appropriate state specific findings here when applicable. For example, "According to state/local police, assault weapons are routinely recovered during police investigations of other crimes

8A"] Section 3: Definitions.

1) The term "assault weapon" shall mean:

a) Any semiautomatic pistol or semiautomatic or pump-action rifle that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine and that also possesses any of the following:

i) If the firearm is a rifle, a pistol grip located rear of the trigger; ii) If the firearm is a rifle, a stock in any configuration, including but not limited to a thumbhole stock, a folding stock or a telescoping stock, that allows the bearer of the firearm to grasp the firearm with the trigger hand such that the web of the trigger hand, between the thumb and forefinger, can be placed below the top of the external portion of the trigger during firing;

iii) If the firearm is a pistol, a shoulder stock of any type or configuration, including but not limited to a folding stock or a telescoping stock;

iv) A barrel shroud;

v) A muzzle brake or muzzle compensator;

vi)  Any feature capable of functioning as a protruding grip that can be held by the hand that is not the trigger hand;

b) Any pistol that is capable of accepting a detachable magazine at any location outside of the pistol grip;

c) Any semiautomatic pistol, or any semiautomatic, center-fire rifle with a fixed magazine that has the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition;

d) Any shotgun capable of accepting a detachable magazine;

e) Any shotgun with a revolving cylinder;

f) Any conversion kit or other combination of parts from which an assault weapon, as defined herein, can be assembled if the parts are in the possession or under the control of any person.

2) The term "detachable magazine" shall mean a magazine, the function of which is to deliver one or more ammunition cartridges into the firing chamber, which can be removed from the firearm without the use of any tool, including a bullet or ammunition cartridge.

3) The term "barrel shroud" shall mean a covering, other than a slide, that is attached to, or that substantially or completely encircles, the barrel of a firearm and that allows the bearer of the firearm to hold the barrel with the non-shooting hand while firing the firearm, without burning that hand, except that the term shall not include an extension of the stock along the bottom of the barrel that does not substantially or completely encircle the barrel.

4) The term "muzzle brake" shall mean a device attached to the muzzle of a weapon

that utilizes escaping gas to reduce recoil.

5) The term "muzzle compensator" shall mean a device attached to the muzzle of a weapon that utilizes escaping gas to control muzzle movement.

6) The term "conversion kit" shall mean any part or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a firearm into an assault weapon. Section 3: Prohibitions. a) No person in this State shall manufacture, possess, purchase, sell or otherwise transfer any assault weapon, or any assault weapon conversion kit, except as authorized by subsection (c) of this section. Any assault weapon or assault weapon conversion kit the manufacture, possession, purchase, sale or other transfer of which is prohibited under this Section is a public nuisance. b) No person in this State shall possess or have under his or her control at one time both of the following:

1) a semiautomatic or pump-action rifle or semiautomatic pistol capable of accepting a detachable magazine; and

2) any magazine capable of use with that firearm that contains more than 10 rounds of ammunition. c) Subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to any of the following:

1) The possession of an unloaded assault weapon for the purpose of permanently relinquishing it to a law enforcement agency in this State, pursuant to regulations adopted for such purpose by [insert appropriate state law enforcement agency]. Any assault weapon relinquished pursuant to this subsection shall be destroyed;

2) The transfer of any assault weapon by a licensed manufacturer or dealer to a law enforcement agency in this State for use by that agency or its employees for law enforcement purposes;

3) The possession of an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this act, if and only if the person legally possessing the assault weapon has complied with all of the requirements of subsection (e) of this section;

4) The possession of an assault weapon that has been permanently disabled so that it is incapable of discharging a projectile.

d) Subsection (b) of this section shall not apply to any person:

1) While lawfully engaged in shooting at a duly licensed, lawfully operated shooting range;

2) While lawfully participating in a sporting event officially sanctioned by a club or organization established in whole or in part for the purpose of sponsoring sport shooting events.

e) In order to continue to possess an assault weapon that was legally possessed on the effective date of this Act, the person possessing the assault weapon shall do all of the following:

1) Within 90 days following the effective date of this Act, submit to a background check identical to the background check conducted in connection with the purchase of a firearm from a licensed gun dealer.

2) Unless the person is prohibited by law from possessing a firearm, immediately register the assault weapon with the [insert appropriate law enforcement agency] pursuant to regulations adopted for such purpose by [insert appropriate law enforcement agency].

3) Safely and securely store the assault weapon pursuant to regulations adopted for such purpose by [insert appropriate law enforcement agency]. The [insert appropriate law enforcement agency] may, no more than once per year, conduct an inspection to ensure compliance with this subsection.

4) Annually renew both the registration and the background check.

5) Possess the assault weapon only on property owned or immediately controlled by the person, or while engaged in the legal use of the assault weapon at a duly licensed firing range, or while traveling to or from either of these locations for the purpose of engaging in the legal use of the assault weapon, provided that the assault weapon is stored unloaded and in a separate locked container during transport.

f) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, any person in this State who, after the effective date of this Act, acquires title to an assault weapon by inheritance, bequest, or succession, shall, within 30 days of acquiring title, do one of the following:

1) Comply with all of the requirements of subsection (e);

2) Dispose of the assault weapon pursuant to subsection (c)(1); or

3) Permanently disable the assault weapon so that it is incapable of discharging a projectile.

g) The [insert appropriate law enforcement agency] may charge a fee for each registration and for each registration renewal pursuant to section (e). However, such fee may not exceed the costs incurred by the [insert appropriate law enforcement agency] in administering the registration program established under subsection

(e). Section 4: Penalties

a) Any person convicted of violating subsection (a) or subsection (b) of section (3) of this Act shall be guilty of a felony.

b) Any person convicted of violating subsection (e) of section (3) of this Act shall be guilty of a felony. Any such violation shall also result in the immediate revocation of the registration of every assault weapon registered to such person.

Return-Path: <jrwent@earthlink.net

2003 09:53:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 2A: Concealed carry - two articles

Does anyone believe that the criminal element will obey the law?  The only ones who will be moving targets will be those who comply with the law and hand over our guns.  The NRA isn't going to protect us only we can do that.  I think *open carry* sends a signal and  *concealed carry* backs it up. Jackie Juntti WGEN  idzrus@earthlink.net

Gun Rights Advocates Take Aim at Concealed Carry Bans By Robert B. Bluey, Staff Writer

CNS News http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200310/NAT20031015b.html

October 15, 2003

After victories in five states already this year, concealed carry advocates are turning their attention to the handful of remaining states that continue to prohibit gun owners from carrying a concealed firearm.

Battles are brewing in the Ohio and Wisconsin legislatures, and Second Amendment supporters are hoping to soon end prohibitions in Kansas as well. Those states, along with Illinois and Nebraska, ban concealed firearms.

Four states - Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri and New Mexico enacted laws this year to become shall-issue states, meaning each has a set  of stipulations that gun owners must meet to be issued a permit.  Alaska eased its law to allow its citizens to carry concealed weapons without a permit.

Despite a court challenge to the Missouri law, which has delayed its enforcement, concealed carry advocates have been pleased with their success. The wave of activity has also given gun rights advocates a boost in states like Ohio and Wisconsin.

"People who thought this can't happen suddenly looked at our neighboring states and said, 'Yes it can.' That definitely added a lot of momentum to this," said Dick Baker, treasurer of the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association.

Even though the fight in Wisconsin is far from over, Baker said the tide started to turn when neighboring states Minnesota and Michigan passed similar laws. But before gun owners start carrying concealed firearms in Wisconsin, they must first win over a hostile governor.  A vote before the state Senate is expected next week.

In Missouri, it didn't matter that Democrat Gov. Bob Holden nixed the concealed carry bill because the lawmakers overrode his veto.  Baker said he was unsure how such a situation would play out in Wisconsin.

Concealed carry advocates in Ohio are facing a similar predicament.  Republican Gov. Bob Taft opposes a bill that passed the Republican-led state House of Representatives. Instead, the governor prefers a plan crafted by the Senate that includes restrictions on carrying a concealed firearm while in a vehicle. Republican Senate President Doug White has sided with Taft.

Gun owners are hoping to convince White to change his mind by holding a rally in his hometown. Because the state Supreme Court has allowed Ohioans to carry their firearms in plain view but not concealed, gun owners have marched at the rallies with firearms in their side or shoulder holsters.

"The limitations on what you can and can't do and the training requirements are some of the strictest in the country," said Jeff Garvas, president of Ohioans For Concealed Carry. "In all of the states that have passed concealed carry, there isn't a single state that has the restrictions the governor is trying to impose."

Gun control advocates in Ohio and Wisconsin are fighting to keep concealed carry illegal in their states. The Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence cites a poll taken in 2001 that shows 69 percent of Ohioans oppose a concealed carry law.

The organization's executive director, Toby Hoover, said a vocal minority was leading the effort. She questioned whether the pro-gun rallies would have any impact.

"They're trying to provoke people to object to them carrying  [firearms] openly," Hoover said. "Then from that, they can conclude that since they can't carry them openly, they have to carry them concealed. Our perspective is that if it's absolutely necessary for you to carry a gun, then carry it openly because I have a right to know."

In Wisconsin, Republicans in the state Senate tried to appease critics this week by amending the concealed carry bill to allow private businesses to prohibit citizens from carrying them on their premises. The bill, however, still faces a veto threat from Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle.

For opponents of the bill like Jeri Bonavia, executive director of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort, the idea that concealed carry will result in a reduction in crime is simply a flawed concept.

"This really is not a reflection of public sentiment," Bonavia said.  "This is a good business opportunity for the gun lobby and the gun industry."

Besides Ohio and Wisconsin, concealed carry advocates are looking at Kansas as a possible target. In Illinois and Nebraska, legislation has been met with resistance.

Kansas State Rifle Association President Phillip Journey said the state was close to having a concealed carry law in 1997, but the governor vetoed it. Journey said gun rights advocates have made some progress since then with other firearms-related concerns.

Ideally, Journey said he would like Kansas to enact a law similar to the one in neighboring Missouri. He said the recent activity could make a difference in his state. "I think it has been helpful in bringing the issue back to the public consciousness," Journey said. "The grassroots political activity that results from that should effectively help persuade some of the fence-sitters in the legislature. Stop the Invasion! (And outsourcing)

http://www.stoptheinvasion.com

Please sign the petition on behalf of Rick Stanley http://www.stanley2002.org/

After victories in five states already this year, concealed carry advocates are turning their attention to the handful of remaining states that continue to prohibit gun owners from carrying a concealed firearm.  Battles are brewing in the Ohio and Wisconsin legislatures, and Second Amendment supporters are hoping to soon end prohibitions in Kansas as well. Those states, along with Illinois and Nebraska, ban concealed firearms.  Four states - Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri and New Mexico - enacted laws this year to become shall-issue states, meaning each has a set of stipulations that gun owners must meet to be issued a permit. Alaska eased its law to allow its citizens to carry concealed weapons without a permit. 

</b Despite a court challenge to the Missouri law, which has delayed its enforcement, concealed carry advocates have been pleased with their success. The wave of activity has also given gun rights advocates a boost in states like Ohio and Wisconsin.  People who thought this can't happen suddenly looked at our neighboring states and said, 'Yes it can.' That definitely added a lot of momentum to this; said Dick Baker, treasurer of the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association.  Even though the fight in Wisconsin is far from over, Baker said the tide started to turn when neighboring states Minnesota and Michigan passed similar laws. But before gun owners start carrying concealed firearms in Wisconsin, they must first win over a hostile governor. A vote before the state Senate is expected next week.  In Missouri, it didn't matter that Democrat Gov. Bob Holden nixed the concealed carry bill because the lawmakers overrode his veto. Baker said he was unsure how such a situation would play out in Wisconsin.  Concealed carry advocates in Ohio are facing a similar predicament. Republican Gov. Bob Taft opposes a bill that passed the Republican-led state House of Representatives. Instead, the governor prefers a plan crafted by the Senate that includes restrictions on carrying a concealed firearm while in a vehicle. Republican Senate President Doug White has sided with Taft.  Gun owners are hoping to convince White to change his mind by holding a rally in his hometown. Because the state Supreme Court has allowed Ohioans to carry their firearms in plain view but not concealed, gun owners have marched at the rallies with firearms in their side or shoulder holsters.   ;The limitations on what you can and can't do and the training requirements are some of the strictest in the country, ; said Jeff Garvas, president of Ohioans For Concealed Carry.  In all of the states that have passed concealed carry, there isn't a single state that has the restrictions the governor is trying to impose. ;  Gun control advocates in Ohio and Wisconsin are fighting to keep concealed carry illegal in their states. The Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence cites a poll taken in 2001 that shows 69 percent of Ohioans oppose a concealed carry law The organization's executive director, Toby Hoover, said a vocal minority was leading the effort. She questioned whether the pro-gun rallies would have any impact  They're trying to provoke people to object to them carrying [firearms] openly, ; Hoover said.  ;Then from that, they can conclude that since they can't carry them openly, they have to carry them concealed. Our perspective is that if it's absolutely necessary for you to carry a gun, then carry it openly because I have a right to know. ;  In Wisconsin, Republicans in the state Senate tried to appease critics this week by amending the concealed carry bill to allow private businesses to prohibit citizens from carrying them on their premises. The bill, however, still faces a veto threat from Democrat Gov. Jim Doyle.  For opponents of the bill like Jeri Bonavia, executive director of the Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort, the idea that concealed carry will result in a reduction in crime is simply a flawed concept.   ;This really is not a reflection of public sentiment, ; Bonavia said. ; This is a good business opportunity for the gun lobby and the gun industry. ;  Besides Ohio and Wisconsin, concealed carry advocates are looking at Kansas as a possible target. In Illinois and Nebraska, legislation has been met with resistance.  Kansas State Rifle Association President Phillip Journey said the state was close to having a concealed carry law in 1997, but the governor vetoed it. Journey said gun rights advocates have made some progress since then with other firearms-related concerns.  Ideally, Journey said he would like Kansas to enact a law similar to the one in neighboring Missouri. He said the recent activity could make a difference in his state.  I think it has been helpful in bringing the issue back to the public consciousness, ; Journey said.; The grassroots political activity that results from that should effectively help persuade some of the fence-sitters in the legislature.

The Civil Liberties Defense Foundation filed a lawsuit today against the Houston Transit Authority in an effort TO PROTECT YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS!  (to see the press release, please visit our website at http://www.libertydefense.com/images/PDF/CLDFSuesHoustonMetro.pdf )

CLDF is representing Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson and several Houston area concealed handgun licensees in an effort to force Houston Metro to abandon its policy of prohibiting CHL holders from riding Metro buses. The Authority's actions are part of a larger effort by cities across Texas to control where you can and cannot carry a concealed handgun. As you know, the Texas Constitution gives sole authority for the regulation of firearms to the Legislature. If we allow the Transit Authority to establish this horrible precedent, it could eventually lead to a New York-style ban of firearm possession in all Texas cities with liberal leadership. Despite the recent passage of S.B. 501 - intended to solve this problem - most of these municipalities will not abandon their policies until we force them! In fact, a recent Texas State Rifle Association survey revealed that 40% of Texas municipalities have ordinances that violate the Texas Constitution's protection of the right to keep and bear arms. The lawsuit against Houston Metro is just the beginning of our efforts to protect your right to carry a concealed handgun in Texas and across the nation. Your support of this effort is desperately needed!

How You Can Help

"A year before Columbine, a search warrant was drawn up to search the house of the killers but was never executed. For two years the Sheriff's department denied that there had been a warrant. It has now been revealed in court that the cops were lying. Rohrbough suspects that one of the killers' parents was close to someone in the Sheriff's department."

NewsWithViews.com

Brian Rohrbough is the father of one of the victims at Columbine. In an interview I conducted with him for my talk show Live Fire, my listeners were informed of the continuing lawsuits pursued by Rohrbough to pry the information from the authorities who have engaged in a massive cover-up.  The killers were well known to the school and the police as very dangerous characters. After stealing equipment from a van, they were reported to have made death threats against a student. The Sheriff denied that any such report had been made, but unhappily for the Sheriff, the father had kept a copy of the report on the official form used for that purpose.

Rohrbough said that other death threats had been made, as well. The police had recovered from the killers pipe bombs which had been reported to them.

A year before Columbine, a search warrant was drawn up to search the house of the killers but was never executed. For two years the Sheriff's department denied that there had been a warrant. It has now been revealed in court that the cops were lying. Rohrbough suspects that one of the killers' parents was close to someone in the Sheriff's department.

One of the killers was being medicated on a psychotropic drug. There is a line at many of the county schools in the cafeteria where the drugs are handed out. The schools get $1000 per year from the federal government for handing out the drugs that the parents pay for.

The Sheriff's department covered up the records of the juvenile diversion program that the killers had attended. The parents had described in documents for the program that the kids were angry. One of the killers answered questions on a form saying that he wanted to kill someone, wanted to kill himself and hurt as many people as possible. They wrote essays in a creative writing class where they described the joys of murdering innocent people. The only negative comment by the teacher who graded the paper was that you should not swear at people before murdering them.

In a class they produced a video depicting the blowing up of the school. The killers had been on the Internet bragging about the bombs they built. They even put their names on the bombs.

Other video tapes were made by the killers bragging that they wanted to kill as many people as possible. They had a hit list, but that has not been released yet although Rohrbough is trying to get it in produced in court.

The school authorities reported concerns about the killers to the Sheriff department's school resource officer. The officer denied that he was ever told that information. This is one of the many lies that Rohrbough has uncovered in the over 30,000 pages of documents he has gotten out of the clutches of the authorities.

Rohrbough accuses the police of having been cowards. Most of the officers he hastens to add wanted to go in, but the first officers on the scene became cowards. They had a gun fight with the killers and ran to hide behind their cars instead of running into the school. Their cowardice soon became the orders from above, ultimately from the Sheriff himself.

There was about seven minutes before the killers killed anyone inside the school (two had been killed outside, including Rohrbough's son). Obviously, if the officers had gone into the building immediately, there is a great likelihood that many lives could have been saved.

It is now known that the police waited for three hours after they knew the killers were dead before they finally entered the building. This was the time during which a teacher bled to death in plain sight of the world.

Rohrbough has alleged that the county lied about 28 material facts. When he presented this in a case against the county, the judge said that the government is immune from criminal penalties when it lies. The county's defense, when they were caught lying, was to hide behind the doctrine of sovereign immunity, which protects bureaucrats from liability for their misdeeds. As a result, they actually argued in court that they were not responsible for protecting the victims or the dying teacher.

As a result, Rohrbough's litigation has focused on freedom of information suits to obtain the documents which have exposed the government's lies.

The Governor's commission to investigate Columbine was on the verge of issuing a report saying that everyone in authority had done all they could when Rohrbough dug up the non-executed search warrant. The commission never did hammer the police for allowing two killers to roam the halls while the cops cowered outside.

The commission recommended two improvements. One was to improve communication technology between police departments and the Sheriff's office in the county. But Rohrbough has learned that the difficulty was solved almost instantly. The other recommendation was that troubled students not go to their diversion programs in the same car. That was all the commission could come up with!  Rohrbough lamented that there were no teachers or other adults with a concealed firearm in the school. He pointed to the case of Israel where teachers have been encouraged to arm themselves. Certainly, if the police are going to insist that they have no responsibility to protect victims from criminals, then it is unconscionable for the police and politicians to oppose people protecting themselves, including legalizing firearms for self defense in schools.

Rohrbough is of the opinion that the killers' accomplice who legally bought the guns for the killers had advance knowledge of the crime. According to her, she told the killers when she gave them the guns, "You're not going to do anything stupid, are you?" She was not prosecuted for transferring firearms to persons ineligible to own them. Rohrbough suspects that she was not prosecuted because she played the politically correct game of testifying that if there had been a gun show background check she never would have bought the guns. One good thing that has resulted from the revelations of official misconduct was the defeat of the Sheriff in the next election.