I think I may buy a some of these for each of my neighbors who don’t want guns in “their” neighborhood.
Test the resolve of those who don’t support the 2nd Amendment by asking them to post one of these stickers on their front door. Let them know that research has shown that almost all violent crime offenders choose victims who are least likely to own a gun to defend themselves. Non-gun-owning households depend on gun-owning households for their protection because criminals don’t know the difference — unless they put one of these on the door.
*Disclaimer: For novelty purposes only — please do not actually post this on a household door as the occupants may be subject to visits by all manner of criminal molesters and miscreants.
Related posts
About (0)
I did not think I would live long enough to see the day… (0)
Amicus brief from Congress McDonald v. City of Chicago (0)
U.S. Supreme Court Oral Arguments McDonald v. City of Chicago (0)
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
According to the folks over at Deseret News, Utah is considering a bill which would allow the brandishing of firearms in emergency situations.
SALT LAKE CITY — More guns may be making appearances in confrontations across Utah, adding intensity, for better or worse. Newly proposed legislation would be a green light for concealed-gun owners to openly carry firearms and, if threatened, draw or exhibit their weapons and verbally threaten deadly force. Depending on whom you ask, that gun-induced intensity could defuse confrontations more quickly, or it could lead to more deadly violence. The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Stephen Sandstrom, R-Orem, said HB78 clarifies existing law with “affirmative language” that would provide gun owners another option to defend themselves or others around them. “This allows a gun owner to not have to go all the way and actually fire his gun,” Sandstrom said. “This would still be the very last resort, however. It doesn’t give you the right to just flash a gun at anyone who makes you mad.”
More at: Legislation addresses brandishing of guns
Related posts
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
Heller yeah… (0)
Department of Interior Announces Final Firearms Policy Update (0)
CHL / CCW and Law Enforcement (0)
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: is whining again. This time it is about the people legally “open carrying” weapons in Starbucks stores. Oh my what shall we do now… legal citizens, carrying legal weapons in a business. I think everyone should buy 2 coffees a day from Starbucks (one for you and one for your gun), to show your support for their refusal to ban guns in the stores. Brady Campaign whining:
But Starbucks is refusing to prohibit the open carrying of firearms in its stores, despite protests from loyal customers. Because of Starbucks’ refusal, the Brady Campaign has teamed up with CREDO Action to tell Starbucks to keep guns out of its coffee shops. The practice of packing heat in places like Starbucks is intimidating and could be potentially dangerous to our families and communities – and it must be stopped. It’s everyone’s right to sit in a restaurant or coffee shop with their families without intimidation or fear of guns, either concealed or openly carried. Under the law, Starbucks has the right to adopt a gun-free policy, with an exception for uniformed police officers. Such a policy can easily be implemented in most cases by putting up signs at store entrances. We need to tell Starbucks to bar guns in its stores. These individuals who have been carrying guns into Starbucks have all the firepower of a SWAT team, and none of the law enforcement training.
More here: Tell Starbucks: Offer Espresso Shots, Not Gunshots.
Related posts
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Positive Gun Story… (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
CHL / CCW and Law Enforcement (0)
California attempts to create another felon (0)
Communist California LEO arrested this guy for transporting an assault weapon he had paperwork for…
So this begs the question: If you legally own an assult style weapon, and you have the proper paperwork are you not allowed to move the weapon to use it?
Also if I have to hear in a “Post 9/11 world” one more time I am going to kick someones butt.
Man with guns at airport says he’s law-abidingSunday, January 11, 2009LOS ANGELES The man arrested at Los Angeles International Airport with a trunk full of guns and nearly 1,000 rounds of ammunition said Saturday that he is a law-abiding weapons enthusiast who had no idea he might be breaking the law.
A day after he was arrested for suspicion of felony transportation of an assault rifle, Phillip Dominguez said he’s confident he’ll be exonerated.
“I’m a law-abiding, taxpaying gun enthusiast. I have no felonies up until now,” Dominguez said.
Airport police saw it a little differently.
“In the post-Sept. 11 (2001) environment, it is well-known by weapon owners that airports and weapons simply do not mix,” said Los Angeles Airport Police Chief George Centeno.
“He just made a very bad decision, and should not have been carrying those weapons,” airport police Sgt. Jim Holcomb said on Friday. A call to an airport police spokesman seeking further comment Saturday was not immediately returned.
Dominguez, 47, of Orange, said he went to the Los Angeles airport to pick up a friend from Baltimore on Friday. They intended to go target shooting at an outdoor range in San Bernardino County.
As Dominguez entered the airport’s ring road, his truck was pulled over for inspection. Dominguez says he knew police would want to look inside the locked cover of the truck bed so he got out, opened it and declared that he had firearms there.
Dominguez said he had 16 pistols, including an 1858 black-powder Army revolver. He also had five rifles one of them an assault rifle and nearly 1,000 rounds of ammunition.
Dominguez said he didn’t think he was breaking any laws since all the weapons and ammunition were in separate, locked boxes. At least half a dozen times since Thanksgiving, Dominguez said he made similar stops at the airport carrying his guns and never saw a police checkpoint.
He showed officials the paperwork proving the assault rifle was registered and gave them the keys and combinations of all the lockboxes, he said.
Dominguez said he was handcuffed, taken to a jail, and held for six hours before he was booked. He was released after his family posted $50,000 bail. But his guns and his truck were confiscated.
He faces a Feb. 6 arraignment.
Dominguez, who owns a construction company - as well as about 80 guns – says he doesn’t blame airport authorities for stopping his truck for inspection. But he believes security should be looking for ex-felons and bank robbers. And he intends to fight.
“I’m contacting their worst nightmare - an attorney,” he said.
Dominguez’ laywer, Bruce Colodny, said it’s true that carrying weapons at airports is a sensitive subject but “there’s nothing sinister about this. Despite the fact they’re controversial, assault weapons continue to be lawfully possessed.”
Related posts
Assault Weapons Ban Confusion (0)
Man arrested carrying weapons at hotel where Speaker Pelosi was staying. (0)
Assault Weapons Education (1)
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Positive Gun Story… (0)
This is great news for all of us who enjoy the outdoors.
U.S. Department of the Interior – Office of the Secretary – www.doi.gov – News Release
Date: December 5, 2008
Contact: Chris Paolino
202-208-6416WASHINGTON, D.C. – Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks Lyle Laverty today announced that the Department of the Interior has finalized updated regulations governing the possession of firearms in national parks and wildlife refuges. The final rule, which updates existing regulations, would allow an individual to carry a concealed weapon in national parks and wildlife refuges if, and only if, the individual is authorized to carry a concealed weapon under state law in the state in which the national park or refuge is located. The update has been submitted to the Federal Register for publication and is available to the public on www.doi.gov.
Existing regulations regarding the carrying of firearms remain otherwise unchanged, particularly limitations on poaching and target practice and prohibitions on carrying firearms in federal buildings.
“America was founded on the idea that the federal and state governments work together to serve the public and preserve our natural resources,” Laverty said. “The Department’s final regulation respects this tradition by allowing individuals to carry concealed firearms in federal park units and refuges to the extent that they could lawfully do so under state law. This is the same basic approach adopted by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (USFS), both of which allow visitors to carry weapons consistent with applicable federal and state laws.”
Related posts
This Day in History – December 15, 1791 (0)
The 5th Amendment rights vs. police investigations (0)
Positive Gun Story… (0)
Heller yeah… (0)
Christmas Reminder (0)
