Life in the UK: First a push to ban knives, may be now a ban on BB guns

"Widow uses gun, instincts to fend off burgler"

Judith Kuntz, 64, hunkered down in her darkened bedroom late Sunday evening, arming herself with a revolver.

A burglar had just broken into her Indialantic home and, fearing for her life, she said she let her instincts take over. When the burglar, who had a flashlight, entered the room, Kuntz fired one round from her .38-caliber handgun. Hit squarely in the chest, the unidentified intruder ran outside, where he collapsed and died.

On Monday, Kuntz was still shaken, but she briefly recalled her ordeal. . . .

The Brevard County Sheriff's Office said she was justified in defending herself and will not face charges. The revolver was hers, inherited through her family, investigators said.

Agent Lou Heyn of the Sheriff's Office said the unidentified man entered Kuntz's home on Avenida del Mar by pulling the window off a back door.

Has anyone in the US ever been murdered by a 50 caliber rifle? Apparently, No

The one possible case of someone being murdered with a 50 caliber gun supposedly occurred about a decade ago. The initial story that I had seen was immediately after the crime occurred. Well, I was recently given this follow up article from jury testimony that indicates even in that one case the murder was not from the 50 caliber gun.

Jury hears grim inventory of Petrosky's rampage

Charlie Brennan; Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer
279 words
29 March 1996
Rocky Mountain News
(Copyright 1996)

Murder victim Terry Petrosky's body was riddled with 14 bullet holes when she was gunned down last year by her estranged husband.

Dr. Ben Galloway, the forensic pathologist who conducted autopsies on all three victims of the April 28, 1995, shooting rampage, testified Thursday.

His grim inventory of the human loss triggered no noticeable reaction from the relatives of the victims, although some bowed their heads to avoid seeing stark color photographs of their loved ones' remains.

Albert Petrosky, 36, is on trial for three counts of first-degree murder in the Jefferson County District Court case. He faces a possible death penalty if convicted.

Petrosky's lawyers admit he did the shootings but claim the episode was a crime of passion.

Galloway said Terry Petrosky, 37, was hit eight times from her torso down to her left leg, two shots to the chest proving fatal.

But counting exit wounds - one bullet entered and exited the same arm twice - he inventoried 14 wounds.

Albertson's store manager Dan Suazo, 37, was shot three times in the back, two of the wounds causing the fatal damage. Like Terry Petrosky, he was shot by a large-caliber handgun. It sent three bullets clear through his body.

Jefferson County Sheriff's Sgt. Timothy Mossbrucker, 36, shot in his patrol car in the parking lot as he arrived at the scene, was struck once in the face by one round from a .30-caliber SKS semiautomatic rifle.

Prosecutors expect to rest their case today, with the defense case then likely to last one week.


More judges carrying guns

This Fox News article is biased against judges carrying guns, but it still get the point across that there are judges who understand that they are ultimately responsible for their safety.

Concerned about increased violence, more judges are carrying guns into their courtrooms.

"It sits beside me in the chair," Judge Arch McGarity of Henry County, Ga., said of his pistol.


Minnesota restores Right-to-carry law

I thought that this story was an April Fools joke: "Doctors' kitchen knives ban call"

Proposed ban on 50 caliber guns in NJ


Texas going to let judges, attorneys to carry guns in court?

The Senate has passed a bill that would allow district and county attorneys and federal judges to carry concealed handguns inside the courthouse.

State Sen. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, who sponsored the House bill authored by State Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, said he was pleased all 31 senators voted for the bill Tuesday.

"I think it's a good piece of legislation, especially after the shooting at our courthouse," Eltife said.

In February, a man angry about being sued for unpaid child support opened fire with an AK-47 assault rifle outside a Tyler courthouse. David Hernandez Arroyo Sr. killed his ex-wife and a bystander. Arroyo's son and three officers were wounded. Arroyo was killed by police after fleeing the scene.

For the rest of the story on the Tyler attack and links at the bottom of the page to other discussions see here.


Unlike New York, Illinois House narrowly defeats so-called Assault Weapons Ban and .50 caliber ban

New York Assembly Passes Expanded Assault Weapons Ban

A wider range of semi-automatic rifles and pistols would become legally off-limits to gun buyers under legislation that passed the Democratic-controlled state Assembly yesterday.

Assemblyman John Lavelle (D-North Shore) sponsored the bill, arguing that "military-style guns" -- the kind used in several killings, including the executions of two undercover cops in Tompkinsville two years ago -- should not be sold legally. . . .

To become law, Lavelle's bill must pass the Republican-controlled state Senate and be approved by Gov. George Pataki. Based on history, it's not an impossible road.

Lavelle said his co-sponsor is Sen. Frank Padavan, a well-established Republican from Queens who, as a member of the majority party, could get a bill through the Senate.

Asked about the prospects for Lavelle's bill, state Sen. Diane Savino (D-North Shore/Brooklyn) said she would need to review it. A spokesman for Sen. John Marchi (R-Staten Island) said the same, but added that Marchi "feels nobody needs a combat weapon to go deer-hunting."

Do these guys even know what an a so-called "assault weapon" is?


Retired officers slowly allowed to carry concealed weapons

Clerks shoots suspected robber

A Peabody and Applause for Dan Rather?

Ending Gun registry or closing so-called gun show loophole: Illinois' choice

Reducing gun free zones in Ohio


"Misleading filibuster myths"

Donald Lambro goes through several of the myths about judicial filibusters. It is a nice summary of the debate from the Republican point of view.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison on keeping a gun at home to protect yourself

She may be able to hang a giant Lone Star flag outside her office, but Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison said today there's one part of her Texas culture she couldn't bring to the nation's capital — her handgun.

Hutchison said she didn't know when she arrived from Austin in 1993 that the District of Columbia prohibits keeping a fully assembled handgun in the home. The district's ban has been in place since 1975.

Hutchison, a Republican who is considering a 2006 run for Texas governor, introduced legislation today to lift the ban. If the bill passes she said she would keep a gun in her D.C. home. . . .

"I have always had a handgun in the drawer next to my bed, and I would certainly again have one if it were legal in D.C.," Hutchison said.

Her office said her handgun is a Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolver.

Hutchison said after she learned of the D.C. gun ban, she dismantled her gun, bought a travel case for it and took it back to Texas. She said she's complying with the law even though she thinks it's unconstitutional.

"I think every woman in the District of Columbia should have the ability to protect herself in her home," she said.

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership's website always makes for an interesting read.


Guns, Gays, Utah

From David Nelson:

SALT LAKE CITY -- With an expected attendance of almost 30,000 people, the state's annual gay- and lesbian-pride events planned for June 8 through 12 will continue to be one of the largest outdoor events organized in the capitol city. But, the leader of a group whose members own and use legally concealed firearms, and attend the events said that an events rule which would ban "weapons of any kind" is too broad, unenforceable and shouldn't discourage the members from attending the events with their firearms if they choose to do so.

Stonewall Shooting Sports of Utah founder and owner David Nelson said that the rule, which was published in May is a departure from the 2003 and 2004 pride events when their organizers agreed that people with legally concealed firearms could not be denied admission to the events and adopted no such rules. Nelson said that his requests to the organizers to revise the new rule remain unanswered.

"Previous organizers understood that people with Utah Concealed Firearm Permits have met every federal and state legal requirement to choose carrying legally concealed firearms, and welcomed us," Nelson said. "There were no complaints at the 2003 and 2004 events. The previous organizers didn't confuse the difference of legal and illegal firearms."


Confirmation process


Bill to overturn DC's gun laws introduced

Even Gov Rendell's own hand picked commission turns down his recommendations (PA)

Republican Congress Defeats string of gun control initiatives

Gary Mauser on The Failed Experiment

The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England & Wales, by Gary Mauser, professor at Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, Canada


This study examines crime trends in Commonwealth countries that have recently introduced firearm regulations: i.e., England, Australia, and Canada. The widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearms crime. The U.S. provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates because its criminal justice system differs so drastically from those in Europe and the Commonwealth. Perhaps the most striking difference is that qualified citizens in the U.S. can carry concealed handguns for self-defense. The upshot is that violent crime rates, and homicide rates in particular, have been falling in the U.S. The drop in the American crime rate is even more impressive when compared with the rest of the world.


Minnesota Legislature finishes passing new right-to-carry law

Edgar Sutter on Guns


Star Wars, Lucas, & Anti-war Commentary on Bush and Iraq?

John Fund at OpinionJournal.com corrects the record on claims that the latest Star Wars movie is commenting on Bush and Iraq

Nonsense, says Mr. Lucas. He told reporters that any analogies found in his latest effort are strictly historical. He noted he had read histories of how democracy had been subverted by the Romans under Caesar, the French under Napoleon, and the Germans under Hitler. He pointed out that the original 1977 Star Wars movie "was written during the Vietnam War and Nixon era, when the issue was how a democracy turns itself over to a dictator -- not how a dictator takes over a democracy." He said that parallels between the war depicted in the film and the Iraq conflict were also overblown: "When I wrote (the Star Wars treatment), Iraq didn't exist. We were just funding Saddam Hussein and giving him weapons of mass destruction."

Mr. Lucas' wish to distance himself from those who would exploit his latest Star Wars epic for political purposes is shared by Ian McDiarmid, the actor who plays the manipulative Supreme Chancellor Palpatine in the film. When asked if his character's preaching of peace while pursuing conflict involved any references to President Bush, he demurred. He says he modeled his character more along the lines of Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic, whom he described as "quite Sithian, actually" referring to the evil rivals of the virtuous Jedi Knights.

A Pulitzer Prize for this?

Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Connie Schultz was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for commentary that, among other things, bashed Ohio CHL-holders in 2004 as "Dirty Harry wannabe's".

Yesterday, the Associated Press Society of Ohio announced that The Plain Dealer won the First Amendment Award “for outstanding accomplishment in pursuing freedom of information on behalf of the public for its reporting on Ohio's concealed gun permits law.”

The Plain Dealer got more specific when bragging about the award, saying the AP specifically gave this award to the newspaper because it had abused the Media Access Loophole by publishing the private information of concealed handgun license-holders.

Of course, the Plain Dealer's actions endanger people's safety. Possibly this means that they will give Newsweek a Pulitzer for their inaccurate coverage of the Koran being flushed down the toilet.

On shipping wine

While it is a little outside my normal topics, Xrlq has an interesting discussion of the Supreme Court decision on shipping wine. The case is apparently much more narrowly decided that most people seem to realize. It is one of the more amusing discussions that I have come across recently and the debate at the end is also fun to read.

Gun Lock Rhetoric

"They are free, and they are safe, and they are making homes safe," said Terri Goodwin, a victim advocate with the Brevard County State Attorney's Office. "If the public doesn't take advantage of this, then they risk having something happen that will alter their lives forever."

The locks come courtesy of Project ChildSafe, a program funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and sponsored by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

It would be nice if that were the way that things worked out, but the evidence shown here indicates that more lives are lost from gun locks. Accidental deaths don't change, but unfortunately when guns are not available defensively criminals become emboldened and are more successful in their attacks.

Assault weapons ban going no place in Minnesota

Speaking of doing what feels right, it also looks like Minnesota's effort to pass its own assault-weapon ban — to replace the equally misguided federal law that thankfully expired in September — is going nowhere. Section 1 of SF1946 lists the usual litany of mean-looking weapons: the AK-47, MAC-10, Uzi and AR-15.

The AR-15 is my favorite because it perfectly illustrates the illogic of this legislation. The AR-15 fires the same bullet at the same muzzle velocity at the same rate of fire as the Ruger Mini-14. More important, a Ruger Mini-14 was used in the shooting of Edina police officer Michael Blood during a November 2000 bank robbery.

So why is the AR-15 on the list and the Ruger isn't? Because it looks scarier.

This lunacy is made clearer when you consider that assault weapons are used in a minuscule number of crimes. This is apparently news to Sen. Satveer Chaudhary, sponsor of the assault-weapon ban.

"Law enforcement often encounters these weapons," he told me. "Assault weapons in general are the gun of choice for criminals."

Sorry, Senator, but guns aren't the weapon of choice in assaults. According to 2003 Minnesota BCA statistics, guns were used in 1,140 urban aggravated assaults. Knives were used in 1,592, "other weapons" in 1,553, and hands and feet in 1,883. So if the Senate and the numerically challenged Million Moms — who wrote the Minnesota assault-weapon legislation — really want to make a difference, they'll start a movement to cut off the hands and feet of repeat violent offenders. Banning assault weapons will have little effect.

Which brings us to the other bit of foolishness proposed in the bill. It also takes on .50-caliber sniper rifles and the Fabrique Nationale Five-Seven pistol. The .50-cal, used by military snipers to disable armored personnel carriers and aircraft, is indeed a powerful weapon. But there's no record of one ever being used to commit a crime.

More on the cost of deer

More Georgia Judges are Carrying Guns after Atlanta Killings


The high risk strategy of gun control advocates

By making such extreme predictions, gun control advocates keep on losing credibility. Once they start losing some debates the losses help feed on each other because they affect their credibility later on. You would think that they would learn their lesson and not keep making such extreme claims.

Professional doomsayers are having something of a field day, fomenting hysteria over recent passage in Florida of a law that lets citizens defend themselves against criminal attack without first making an attempt to flee.

Lessons from Base Closings


"Swiss shooters target Schengen accord"


New Poll Shows Drop in Support for Canadian Liberals

Just what I predicted, Minnesota and Concealed Carry

It seems that after people get to see that all the horror stories aren't true there is not much opposition left to concealed handguns:

Minnesota's 2003 handgun law, which was struck down in court, took a giant step toward reenactment Friday with decisive approval in the state Senate, long a roadblock for that kind of gun-rights legislation.

The bill differs little in substance from the law that is in limbo. The 44-21 vote in favor of the bill could signal growing acceptance of the idea that adults who get training and pass a background check can choose to be armed in public.
"On balance, it has worked," said Majority Leader Dean Johnson, DFL-Willmar, one of eight senators who reversed their votes from nay in 2003 to aye on Friday. "Law enforcement has said the process has worked well and there did not seem to be a problem."

Interesting quote from the St. Paul Pioneer Press:

Opponents said they were stunned that senators defeated their attempts to change the bill.

Levitt and Dubner on Crime

From Tom Roeser's piece in today's Chicago Sun-Times

. . . Levitt makes it clear he is no cheerleader for abortion, declaring that he must go where the statistics lead. He's right. But do the statistics lead there? And does he persist in his theory when he's proved wrong?

John Lott, another U. of C.-trained economist and now resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, says in a letter in the Wall Street Journal that legalization doesn't explain ''75 percent of the drop in murder rates, and if anything the reverse is true. Their data had a serious error . . . incorrectly claim[ing] that when abortion was legalized during the late 1960s and early 1970s, states went from a complete ban to complete legalization, but abortions had been allowed before complete legalization when the life or health of the mother was endangered. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that before Roe vs. Wade, many states that had allowed abortions only when the life and health of the mother was endangered actually had higher abortion rates than states where it was completely 'legal.' If Messrs. Levitt and Dubner were correct, crime rates should have started falling among younger people who were first born after legalization. Only as they aged would you start seeing crime fall among older criminals. But in fact the precise opposite is true. Murder rates during the 1990s first started falling for the oldest criminals and very last for the youngest.''

Magazine writer and blog-meister Steve Sailer sails in with more data. Murder rates are now rising, says the FBI. From 1999 through 2002 (the latest data available), the murder rate jumped 17 percent among 25- to 34-year-olds born long after Roe. ''[T]he most obvious explanation for the ups and downs of the murder rate is the ups and downs of the crack business,'' he says. ''This generation, born right after legalization, is better behaved today in part because so many of its bad apples are now confined to prisons, wheelchairs and coffins.''

These are interesting challenges to a book that is causing Americans to debate its findings at office water coolers and at cocktail parties. It turns out that Sailer had debated Levitt on these facts before the book was published. Why weren't Sailer's facts taken into consideration when Levitt wrote the book? This he doesn't seem to do -- at least when confronted by Bill O'Reilly on Fox News the other night. It's a good book. Now, if Levitt would respond to Lott's and Sailer's challenge in our letters to the editor, it would be even better!.

Of course, they didn't just ignore Sailer's claims. I provided the corrected abortion data to Levitt and Donohue back in 1999, well before they had even published the first version of their abortion and crime research. Unfortunately, they didn't deal with it in their QJE piece. (My work with John Whitley shows how that this has a big impact on their results..) For the entire Wall Street J. letter see here. Note I have corrected an error that was in the op-ed's second paragraph above.


"Rice: Gun Rights Important As Free Speech"

Rice has been saying this for a while, and I even quoted something very similar by her in The Bias Against Guns. From the AP:

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, recalling how her father took up arms to defend fellow blacks from racist whites in the segregated South, said Wednesday the constitutional right of Americans to own guns is as important as their rights to free speech and religion.

In an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live," Rice said she came to that view from personal experience. She said her father, a black minister, and his friends armed themselves to defended the black community in Birmingham, Ala., against the White Knight Riders in 1962 and 1963. She said if local authorities had had lists of registered weapons, she did not think her father and other blacks would have been able to defend themselves.

Birmingham, where Rice was born in 1954, was a focal point of racial tension. Four black girls were killed when a bomb exploded at a Birmingham church in 1963, a galvanizing moment in the fight for civil rights.

Rice said she favored background checks and controls at gun shows. However, she added, "we have to be very careful when we start abridging rights that the Founding Fathers thought very important."

Rice said the Founding Fathers understood "there might be circumstances that people like my father experienced in Birmingham, Ala., when, in fact, the police weren't going to protect you." . . .

Bogus research on discrimination in NY Times

Of course it would be nice if they actually had some evidence

More on possible vote fraud in Milwaukee

From John Fund writing at OpinionJournal.com's Political Diary:

John Kerry won the swing state of Wisconsin by 11,000 votes out of some three million cast last November. Now many are wondering how solid that "win" was. An official inquiry into irregularities surrounding the Wisconsin election has just been finished by U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic, a Republican appointee, and Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael McCann, a Democrat. In Milwaukee County alone, 4,609 more ballots were cast than can be matched with actual voters. In addition, more than 200 felons were allowed to vote illegally, more than 100 people double-voted and 1,300 people voted on Election Day even though their same-day registration cards were missing names, addresses or other key data.


Election fraud in Milwaukee


Legislation to seize homes with illegal guns in them

"Friendly" pharmacist stops robber

John Donohue's inaccurate claims


My research on the Judicial Confirmation Process makes the front page of the Sunday Boston Globe

UPDATE: I am disappointed by the Boston Globe, though it seems as if their errors were a result of a series of unintentional mistakes. I had provided the Globe with numbers for the confirmation rates for both the District and Circuit court, but the newspaper only showed the numbers for the District court and accidentally labeled those as being for all Federal judicial nominees. Given that the confirmation rates move in opposite directions for the two courts and that the Circuit court is the more important, this created a fairly misleading impression. While the mistake made a big difference, I accept their explanation for what happened as an accident.

UPDATE 2: From the Boston Globe (Tuesday, May 17, 2005): "Because of a graphics editor's error, a chart accompanying a May 8 story on federal judicial nominations was incorrectly labeled. The chart showed the average number of days to confirm District Court nominees and the percentage of District Court nominees confirmed by presidential administration. A corrected version of the chart appears today on page A8." They still don't correct the point that they previously labeled District court judges as all judges, but this is a definite improvement and I am glad that they did this.

Original Post: I haven't seen it yet, but apparently the front page of yesterday's Sunday Boston Globe had a chart with my numbers on how the judicial confirmation process has changed over time. The article is here, but it doesn't contain the chart.

''Many perceive the judicial nomination process as broken," John R. Lott Jr. of the conservative American Enterprise Institute wrote in a study indicating that the success rate of nominations has fallen steadily over the past two decades. ''Neither Democrats nor Republicans have 'clean hands' in this debate and . . . the problem has been getting progressively worse over time."

The origins of the struggle trace back to the explosive growth of the power of the federal judiciary that began with the Supreme Court decision to end segregation in 1954 and climaxed with its 1973 declaration of a constitutional right to an abortion. A wave of class-action lawsuits and litigation over new environmental and antidiscrimination laws added to the expanded judicial scope.

I am not exactly sure what numbers the Boston Globe used because I haven't seen their chart(s) yet, but here are the general numbers that I gave them.

Appeals Court Nominees Days to confirmation (average number of days)
69.824 Carter
68.265 Reagan
92.462 Bush I
230.6462 Clinton
262.7576 Bush II

District Court Nominees Days to confirmation (average number of days)
70.715 Carter
68.0625 Reagan
102.0694 Bush I
132.2904 Clinton
157.3533 Bush II

DC Appeals Court Nominees Days to confirmation (average number of days)
86.25 Carter
70.077 Reagan
84.75 Bush I
242.143 Clinton
729 Bush II

Appeals Court Nominees confirmation rate in percent (average rate)
93.443 Carter
89.3617 Reagan
78 Bush I
74.157 Clinton
66.6667 Bush II

District Court Nominees confirmation rate in percent (average rate)
93.088 Carter
96.053 Reagan
78.075 Bush I
87.896 Clinton
96.610 Bush II

DC Appeals Court Nominees confirmation rate in percent (average rate)
100 Carter
81.25 Reagan
88.889 Bush I
77.778 Clinton
20 Bush II

Canada's failed gun registry program

It's not just the waste, although that's atrocious -- nearly $2-billion for a dysfunctional pile of uselessness. . . .

Still, the fact that 13,000 Canadians -- about one-half of one per cent of applicants -- have been refused a licence in the past seven years might be meaningful if gun-controllers could then point to lowered murder rates, or show that firearms suicides have declined faster than suicides by other methods, or demonstrate a significant reduction in spousal homicides (most of the 13,000 denials have stemmed from complaints by one partner against another).

But despite these thousands of licence refusals, government ministers and special interest groups who favour the registry can't even point to a reduction in armed robberies.

The registry is not keeping the unfit from getting guns, just licences. And licences don't kill people, guns do. Keeping licences out of the hands of people who shouldn't have guns is meaningless. . . .

The only meaningful gun control is taking firearms away from criminals. And since crooks, drug dealers and murderers don't register their weapons, the registry is useless in this task.

The battle over John Bolton

Given the battle over confirming John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations, one issue that hasn't been mentioned is the upcoming UN get together on regulating small arms (namely rifles and handguns). Bolton is widely seen as one tough guy and this is one issue that Americans who support people's ability to defend themselves would want someone such as Bolton there fighting this fight. I believe that Bolton's position is sympathetic to people's ability to defend themselves and that he is concerned about the overreaching of UN authority into national affairs.


Update on right-to-carry in Nebraska


Abortion and Crime "debate" at the University of Chicago Scheduled for May 25th

The University of Chicago Federalist Society has tried for a third time to set up a debate between myself and John Donohue. Since the last two debates on the issue of guns at the University of Chicago were canceled at the last moment with Donohue withdrawing from one debate with just 2 days to go, I thought that we might have more luck scheduling a debate on another topic that is getting a lot of attention these days: abortion and crime. Donohue and Steve Levitt were the coauthors on a paper that got a lot of attention on this issue and Levitt as also recently coauthored a book with Steve Dubner that again goes over the issue. All three were asked to pick a time to debate the issue, but even though Donohue is free on the 25th and despite all the attention currently being given to the abortion research, none of them were willing to debate their work on abortion with me. (I think that I know why.) I will still be presenting on the 25th with the hope that Donohue will change his mind and defend his research.

Further discussions about John Donohue, including his backing out of one of the two previously scheduled debates on guns, are here.

Labels: , , ,

"No graduation ceremony for student in toy gun incident"


Police SWAT team protects school from Burrito

Robbery foiled by a gun


More on the 129 Vote Gubernatorial Election in Washington State

From John Fund's Opinion Journal.com's Political Diary: "On Monday, Chelan County Judge John Bridges ruled in favor of a Republican motion on a proportional method of allocating dozens of illegal votes from felons and dead people that had previously been uncovered. GOP lawyers contend that since most of the illegal votes came from Democratic King County, Ms. Gregoire should have more votes subtracted from her total than Republican Dean Rossi. Democrats claim they will respond by producing their own evidence of voter irregularities in counties carried by Mr. Rossi. The final court ruling may turn on which statisticians Judge Bridges finds most credible."

Missouri finishes implementing their right-to-carry law

Finally, St. Louis And St. Louis County must begin issuing concealed handgun permits.

Thanks to Michael Gordinier for telling me about the change.


Is the Brady Campaign Violating Federal Tax Law?

Florida as a gun-law trendsetter

Predictions that ''Castle Doctrine" will spread to other states

The Florida measure says any person ''has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm."

Florida law already lets residents defend themselves against attackers if they can prove they could not have escaped. The new law would allow them to use deadly force even if they could have fled and says that prosecutors must automatically presume that would-be victims feared for their lives if attacked.

The overwhelming vote margins and bipartisan support for the Florida gun bill -- it passed unanimously in the state Senate and was approved 94 to 20 in the House, with nearly a dozen Democratic cosponsors -- have alarmed some national advocates of gun control who say a measure that made headlines in Florida slipped beneath their radar.

''I am in absolute shock," Sarah Brady, chair of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said in an interview. ''If I had known about it, I would have been down there."

Gun Use and One's Love Life


More on Affirmative Action for Police

Here are a couple of interesting articles: "How Racial P.C. Corrupted the LAPD" and "Q. How do you help criminals get away? A. Easy, recruit women officers". As I have done in my research and op-eds, I would have also mentioned the benefits from having minorities or women in the police force in the London Mail on Sunday piece, but overall it is a useful piece. On the other hand, it does have a very good title.

Polls in the UK


Useful info on Canadian Firearms regulations

If you are interested in Canada's firearms policy debate, this webpage is a good place to start. The site contains such interesting information as:


Review of Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's Constitutional Chaos

My son Roger has a review of Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's Constitutional Chaos. For a twelve year old who got absolutely no help from me, I think that he has put together an excellent review and it is well worth looking at. Of course, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano's Constitutional Chaos is well worth reading also.