By State Representative Lynn Wachtmann

For years, governments have enacted laws that state one’s home is a place where one should be free of prying and violent attack. Known as “Castle Laws,” they are often based on English Common Law from the 1700s. However, over the years many of these laws, while acknowledging the safety and protections of the home, have placed a burden on a person to retreat before being permitted to use force to defend themselves.
Click ‘Read More’ for the entire column.

By John Longenecker

Grab a cup. This one’s about 2,000 words. [Dates reported in the following quotes were erroneous and have been corrected.]

Citizens For A Safer Minnesota have a most mistaken notion of that state’s adoption of the Stand Your Ground movement. In their May 4th, 2006 press release, Citizens For A Safer Minnesota referred to the Florida birthplace of that movement and cited three incidents where people died in the commission of a crime. The thrust of the position is that the law promotes murder as the recent experience with its new legislation.

For instance: “Let me be clear: People are dead because of this law elsewhere, and the people who killed them are using the law to try to get away with murder,” said Sarah Brady. “This law encourages the most aggressive people in society to act more aggressively than is necessary. I urge the Legislature to reject this.”

Mistaken again, Mrs. Brady announces that the people of Florida are somehow identical to the criminal shooters, the hot-heads, the aggressive who shouldn’t even be in possession of any weapon, madam. The acts Brady cites are likely criminal in nature, and not at all likely to meet a standard of self-defense. Her angle is that the Stand Your Ground doctrine is applied as a legal defense in indictment for criminal acts. Mrs. Brady conveniently – intentionally, I believe – ignores the facts that the law does not shield individuals who are part of a crime, or an ongoing altercation or shouldn’t even have a weapon – any weapon, Mrs. Brady – to begin with. The law is much more sensible than Mrs. Brady will admit.

The Stand Your Ground Movement is making its way across America.

In that same announcement, it’s touted that In numerous states including Florida, police leaders and prosecutors have urged that the bill be defeated. “We’re concerned that it will provide a defense to someone who uses force that doesn’t necessarily have to be done,” said Willie Meggs, president of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association. “The law isn’t age specific, it’s not intent- specific,” St. Petersburg, Florida Police Chief Chuck Harmon said. “Can a sixth-grader retaliate against a bully? If you’re in a bar and you’ve been drinking, maybe you think you’ve been threatened, but what about your judgment in those cases? I just think the citizenry could misinterpret this law.”

You know, this is getting obnoxious, as if they lack critical thinking skills, but certainly have no problem with arguing skills. One is more important than the other. Except when you’re making political rhetoric, I guess.

Let me explain.

Click 'Read More' for the entire article.

Buckeye Firearm Association's web site is seeing an amazing growth in visitors and new articles are being posted several times a week.

This week's "Friday Flashback" is....

The uncomfortable truth about school shootings

By: Ken Hanson

In a rare moment of straighforwardness, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a staunch gun control extremist, has acknowledged that stronger gun control laws could not have prevented the horrible shooting at the Amish school in his state.

During a press conference, Rendell stated, “I believe with all my heart that we need more gun control.” But he went on to acknowledge that tougher gun control laws would not have prevented Charles Carl Roberts IV from carrying out his deadly attack, admitting, “You can make all the changes you want, but you can never stop a random act of violence by someone intent on taking his own life.”

Despite this, due to the current rash of school shootings, America is going to be inundated with lists from media talking heads and/or government taskforces/hearings (including a taskforce called by President Bush for next week), each list itemizing steps that need to be taken to protect the children. Since we are a short attention span culture, these lists will typically be advertised as “X easy steps to prevent school shootings.”

The uncomfortable reality is that we CAN NEVER prevent school/workplace shootings, and I would venture to assert that this has already been conclusively proven. Anytime there is a workplace shooting involving multiple victims, you will have a 95%+ chance that it occurred at a workplace 1.) banning all guns, even in parking lots, and 2.) with some reasonable form of onsite security. Further, with all of the school shootings in the past decade, schools across the country have taken extraordinary “soft security” measures – metal detectors, cameras, resource officers etc. Yet shootings continue to occur.

Click on 'Read More' for the entire commentary.