February 21, 2005
Meridian (CT) Record-Journal
By Mike Roberts

Instead of legislators taking their time to try and take various firearms away from honest gun owners, why don't they use that time to insure proper measures that would prevent children from using video games and CDs that promote just about every type of gun violence and mayhem imaginable? Why don't they make more laws protecting children from pedophiles that destroy their lives forever? And better yet, why don't they enforce the existing laws? We have enough of them, including gun laws!

We don't have to look any further than the four major TV stations in our area to get one program or other that simply reeks of gun violence yet they are shown when kids can tune them in whenever they want.

Oh, sure, they play a warning on the tube before their gun-toting mobsters and terrorists come on the screen. Big deal. The only thing they are concerned with is the big advertising bucks these violent shows bring in and nothing more. They say the onus is on the parents if they do not want their kids watching some of the crap they provide for public viewing. Who is Juan Manuel Alvarez?

These same anti-gun legislators who claim they are trying to make my world (and yours) safer don't have a clue as to where the dangers lie. If they did, they and thousands of others would not be thundering down our highways while trying to answer a cell phone or dialing one. I have had to jump for my life while simply taking a walk in our fair city while some yahoo whizzed by so close if I hadn't jumped back they would have clipped me while they gabbed on their cell phones.

Yet I have never had a problem because of some honest gunowner taking a whack at me with a legal firearm. Still, I am told they are doing this (trying to outlaw various firearms) for my own safety. Thanks, but I'd rather take my chances with honest gunowners. Who is Juan Manuel Alvarez?

Click here to read the entire op-ed in the Meridian (CT) Record-Journal.

February 19, 2005
Washington Times

Congress is again attempting to shield the firearms industry from civil liability lawsuits filed by third parties seeking damages for the criminal use of a gun.

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is likely to pass the House much the same way it did when first introduced in 2003, on a bipartisan vote of 285-to-140. The bill never made it out of the Senate.

Democrats tacked on amendments to the bill that would have extended the assault weapons ban, required sellers at gun shows to conduct FBI criminal background checks, as well as made mandatory the inclusion of trigger locks with all handgun sales.

Extending the assault weapons ban is a deal breaker for a majority of Senate Republicans, said the bill's Senate sponsor, Sen. Larry E. Craig. "I don't think any of those amendments have value," the Idaho Republican said. "The industry, to protect themselves, is voluntarily including trigger locks already, so I don't see where that's necessary."

He said the argument to close the so-called gun show loophole is an attempt to undermine "a valuable commerce tool."

All federally licensed gun dealers are required to conduct criminal background checks on their customers, Mr. Craig said, but private citizens selling firearms at gun shows are not. He said such a requirement could push people out of the shows and into the streets, where the government loses all ability to track the sales.

Senate Democrats are expected to oppose the bill outright and introduce some of the same amendments with some alterations.

Click here for the entire article from the Washington Times.

Larry Pratt, executive director of the Virginia-based Gun Owners of America, has published an excellent opinion editorial at CNSNews.com.

Following are the opening paragraphs:

Criminals are as much a victim as those they have victimized, right? After all, they do what they do because of poverty, or bad parenting, or lousy peers, mental illness or the availability of a gun, right?

Well, no, says clinical psychologist Stanton Samenow, author of the book Inside the Criminal Mind. He says criminals are the way they are because that is what they choose to do.

From his experience, Samenow argues that even if criminals have a mental illness, they commit crimes because they want to do so. Lots of people have mental illness, but very few of them commit crimes.

Samenow warns that criminals are not stupid. If they score low on IQ tests, that is usually because they could not care less about learning the kinds of things in school that are measured by such tests. They are quite adept at picking up on what will help them -- the law being a favorite course of study behind bars.

Later in his op-ed, Pratt points out what Samenow's research reveals as to why criminals are undeterred by laws intended to deter them:

Criminals like the excitement of doing what is prohibited. It is a characteristic they demonstrate often very early in life. Normal living is boring. Breaking the law is fun.

One predator told Samenow: "If rape were made legal, I would find some other law to break." They lie not out of uncontrollable compulsion, but for the excitement of manipulating and controlling other people.

Finally, Pratt brings the results of this study home to gun ban extremists:

And, sorry gun control advocates -- criminals don't care about your gun control laws. They know that gun control is only for suckers (their word), not for them. What does that make those who support gun control laws? Aiding and abetting criminals is a term that comes to mind.

Click here to read Pratt's entire commentary at CNSNews.com.

The St. Petersburg (FL) Times is reporting that some Florida legislators want to give people the right to shoot an attacker in a public place.

It would be a dramatic departure from current law, notes the newspaper, but supporters say people should be able to defend themselves without fear of being sued or charged with a crime.

Click on the "Read More..." link below for more.