Seven Years for Murder, or the Demon Gun

I’m sitting here in prison.
I’m not worried.
No, not me!
I know that my parole board is about to set me free.

I’ve killed a dozen women.
Damn near two dozen men.
And several little children, but
I don’t number them.

You’d think I’d have to pay for
All the wrong I’ve done.
Liberals just don’t fault me.
They blame my Demon Gun!

I might kill with a crowbar.
I can always use a knife.
If you ever cross me,
You know I’ll take your life.

You’ve all seen the studies.
They prove I’m not to blame.
I was mistreated as a child.
That’s my claim to fame.

You see, it’s really your fault
For the course my life has run.
If you had been more caring,
I wouldn’t need a Demon Gun.

The Liberals want to take the guns
From the average Joe.
You want to know what I think?
I say, “Go, Man Go!”

I’ve mugged and robbed my way around.
I’ve surely had my fun.
It really isn’t my fault.
It’s all my Demon Gun!

And if another Hitler
Should give tyranny a go,
You know about my friends and me.
We’ll join the Gestapo.

So take away the Demon Guns
From sea to shining sea.
When the people are disarmed,
The Ruler will be me!

Feel free to pass along the poem for non-commercial use with attribution to this site. All other rights reserved. Let me be clear! If the Liberals succeed in turning this country into a prison, who will guard the guards?

Def Mech

The Philly  sample size of 675 isn’t as small as some other studies, but it pales in comparison to Dr. John Lott’s research, which looked at every single county in the United States.  Dr. Lott concluded that “shall issue” concealed carry permit regulations save lives.  See Dr. Lott’s Book, More Guns, Less Crime.

Unfortunately, the ScienceDaily.com press release trumpeting this research was echoed in the Philadelphia Daily News.  We can expect to see this “study” touted on all the usual anti-gun rights websites and raised to the level of holy writ by Left wing politicians.

See my Categories, “Media Bias,” and “Junk Science” for other examples of the Mainstream Media’s ready acceptance of any “study” that purports to bolster attacks against the fundamental rights of American Citizens to armed self-defense against crime, tyranny, and genocide.

Def Mech

The headline, “Actor to testify against killer,” appeared in The Denver Post on 01-27-09 on Page 14A.  The article described Mr. Grammer’s efforts to adequately punish one of his sister’s killers and save society from further outrages.

Bob Russel, a former Colorado Springs District Attorney, told The Denver Post Reporter that Mr. Grammer “felt guilty…because he didn’t protect…” his sister.  Of course, he couldn’t have kept her from harm, because it is impossible for good people to shield everyone they love from the evil actions of felons and sociopaths. Nevertheless, this sense of guilt is often psychologically transformed in the minds of relatives and other loved ones of crime victims into a visceral hatred for anything associated with the crime.

We frequently see this defense mechanism of displacement at work in cases where the weapon involved happened to be a firearm.  The displacement of feelings of guilt, anger, and overwhelming loss that accompanies  a fatal crime helps to ease the burden of the survivor by providing a scapegoat, a target for the negative emotions that are eating away at the grieving individual.  An unreasoning fear of weapons may also be described by the term hoplophobia.  (See my post “Displacement as a defense mechanism in the irrational fear of guns,” 08-17-2008, tagged “hoplophobia”)

To my knowledge, and I believe to his credit, Mr. Grammer has never advocated banning knives or imposing draconian restrictions on the people who own them.  Instead of displacing his anger, Mr. Grammer has appropriately directed it against the perpetrator of the horrible crime against his sister.  By his actions, Mr. Grammer is taking a positive step to insure that a dangerous felon is not released back into society to kill again.

It would be a good thing, if all relatives and other loved ones of crime victims were this rational and precise in their response to tragedy.  Sometimes, however, it is harder to target specific perpetrators. What happens if the criminals are out of reach of the survivors, because they have been killed, committed suicide, or evaded the law?  It would seem to make sense to direct blame against individuals in the criminal classes who commit violence, e.g., muggers, killers, and rapists, to name a few.

Unfortunately, in many cases, survivors’ anger is inappropriately directed at law-abiding citizens and heretofore-legal behaviors.  I am referring, of course, to legal gun ownership and the right of Americans to armed self-defense against crime, tyranny, and genocide recognized by the Second Amendment.

We, who struggle to preserve that right against all infringement, owe Mr. Grammer a vote of thanks for his courage and insight in opposing the parole of a triple murderer.  It makes sense to punish offenders. It does not make sense to disarm or hinder potential victims.

Def Mech

The U.S. Forest Service has closed the Rampart Range Shooting Area near Colorado Springs following a negligent discharge of a handgun that resulted in the death of a person using the range.  Please contact the U.S. Forest Service Regional Office at 202-275-5350 or E-mail at http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/contact/ , before Friday, if possible, to request that the range be reopened with supervision to prevent a recurrence of this tragedy.  See related articles at Colorado Gun Issues, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/COGunissues/.

Just a reminder, the anti-gunners are going to bludgeon us with every single accidental shooting death.  The negligent discharge of a firearm not only threatens to kill or injure someone and ruin your life, it threatens the right to armed self-defense against crime, tyranny and genocide of every American Citizen.  If you follow four simple rules originated by Colonel Jeff Cooper, you will be a safe shooter.  These rules should be taught in every school in America, but don’t hold your breath.

Treat every gun as a loaded gun.

Never point the muzzle of a gun at anything you aren’t willing to destroy.

Keep your finger out of the trigger guard until your target is in your sights.

Be aware of what is behind your target.  What happens if you miss?

There is a Tanner Gun Show August 1st and 2nd at the Merchandise Mart at 58th Avenue and I-25, if you are in the Denver Metro Area.

Def Mech

The anti-gunners are up in arms, so to speak, over this.  We need a good turnout.

Def Mech

Sometimes, when someone asks me why otherwise intelligent people hate and fear guns, I find myself talking about psychological defense mechanisms, such as  displacement, denial, and reaction formation, among others.  While these processes, in my opinion, play a definite role, I believe it is dangerous to overlook the active propaganda campaigns promulgated by TV and movie producers, directors, and others in the media to promote a fear of weapons.  This fear is known in some circles as hoplophobia.  (See my post, “Displacement as a defense mechanism in the irrational fear of guns, (08-17-08) tagged, “hoplophobia.”)

We must remember the role that the North Vietnamese Dich Van propaganda program, along with left-wing professors and college students, media pundits, and TV and movie producers played in destroying America’s will to resist the Communist aggression in Southeast Asia that resulted in the deaths of over two million people. (Read the book, Unheralded Victory, the defeat of the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army, 1961-1973, by Mark W. Woodruff, Presidio Press/Random House, NY,NY, 2005, pages 231-235.

MASH, Platoon, The Deer Hunter, and Apocalypse Now are examples of the Vietnam Era propaganda war and the revisionist historical view of that battle for the hearts and minds of the American People that the Communists ultimately won.  The fight for the hearts and minds of the American People continues with regard to liberty in this country.

It’s not as though we haven’t seen anti-gun messages embedded in TV and movies.  Spielberg took the guns out of ET and didn’t mention in Schindler’s List that Schindler armed “his” Jewish workers near the end of the war to give them a last ditch chance to defend themselves from the Final Solution.  Heinlein’s Starship Troopers was morphed from a story about human self-defense against alien aggression to an anti-war parable about human aggression directed toward an apparently otherwise peaceful race of beings that just happened to be naturally well-equipped for mayhem.

Picket Fences, Alf, MASH, All in the Family, and Carole Burnett’s Little Murders to a greater or lesser degree decried the “evil” of guns on TV.  Even Chuck Norris’ Walker, Texas Ranger often made a keen distinction between “anointed” law enforcement officers versus bumbling, common citizen “vigilantes.”

In the movie, Clear and Present Danger, Harrison Ford’s character, Jack Ryan, refuses to pick up a weapon to defend himself on at least three occasions, choosing a piece of firewood over a submachine gun in the climactic fight scene with the antagonist.  In the book, Jack Ryan operates a mini-gun from a helicopter, spraying hundreds of rounds of death and destruction at the minions of the drug cartel that had captured US special operations soldiers.

In the movie, Signs, we have aliens who can’t get out of locked pantries defeated worldwide by baseball bats and clubs.  Given the number of shotguns and hunting rifles in farmhouses, how long do you think that these aliens would terrorize the Midwest depicted in the movie?  “Hi! I’m an alien. I want to kill you. No I don’t have any weapons.  Yeah, I have to get really close to hurt you.  What’s that tube in your hands?”  Bang!  Bang!  Bang!  Bang!  Bang!  End of Alien. End of story.

And, who can forget Leslie Neilson’s Agent WD 40, who explicitly delivers a vitriolic diatribe against handguns during the climactic fight scene of the movie, Spy Hard?  Not that the lines had much to do with the plot, but you know, those handguns “kill” people.  (See my post, “Has your gun caused ‘personal injuries or property damage?’  (11-19-08) tagged, “Irrational fear of guns.”

I believe that it is useful to remember that everything in a movie or TV show is under the control of the director and producer.  If they don’t want it in the finished product, it isn’t there.  If something is in the show or movie, the people who produced and directed made it so.

Keep in mind that it is legal (and moral in the minds of the media folk) to bring out productions that promote civilian disarmament.  Look at the plethora of TV shows and movies that portray properly “blessed” police officials using guns to take out bad guys?”  How often do you see a movie that promotes the idea that ordinary citizens have a right to use armed force to defend themselves and their families without being horribly scarred by the soul searing knowledge that they had to kill or wound another human being in order to do so?

How often have you seen a portrayal of a family in a movie or on TV that goes to a range and spends an enjoyable afternoon punching holes in paper?  Not often, I’ll wager.  More often, we see a bias against guns and the people who own them.

The opening quotation by Rudyard Kipling seems somehow appropriate as we discuss the new series on the Sy Fy Channel, which supposedly changed its name to appeal to females, instead of its usual male “geek” audience. (See The Denver Post article, “New ‘Warehouse 13’ has promising twists in store,” by Joanne Ostrow in the 07-07-09 issue on page 4D.

Let’s discuss Kipling!  Of course, “There is nothing new under the Sun,” not even this Biblical adage.  There is no sin in paying homage to previous successful movies and TV series.  But, come on!

In my opinion, Warehouse 13 pretty shamelessly knocks off The Librarian, Raiders of the Lost Arc, National Treasure, Men in Black, and The X Files.  The idea of a national repository, a national “attic,” of valuable/magical objects smacks of The Librarian, Men in Black, and National Treasure.  Warehouse 13 is the Library.  As pointed out in the Post article, the agents are Mulder and Scully reprised.  The balcony scene, when the agents first see the warehouse is a ringer for the National Treasure balcony scene in the Treasure Room.  The warehouse is the Treasure Room or the government warehouse in Raiders…  The character of the “curator” of the warehouse, Artie, owes a lot to Zed in Men in Black and probably more to Newhart’s character in The Librarian.

The special effects, when the bad vibes, psychic energy, or whatever, are sucked into the containment vessel hark back to the scene in Raiders, when the Nazis open the Ark.  Come to think of it, the “neutralizer” in the containment vessel could be slime borrowed from Ghostbusters or possibly Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

Anti-gun propaganda in Warehouse 13 doesn’t take long to rear its head.  In about the first scene of the first show of the series, a little girl sees a gun in the waistband of the female agent protagonist.  Not understanding that the agent is chosen, anointed, special, and otherwise authorized by the proper authorities to be armed, the little girl glares angrily at the adult, because why?  Well, you know, because, guns are bad!  Anyone carrying a gun must be a bad person. We must hate and fear them and the guns they carry.

In the climax of the series opener, the male agent (Think Mulder.) takes his gun into a party dominated by the antagonist, a woman pretty much channeling Lucretia Borgia.  The agent is disarmed by one of her brainwashed minions and threatened with his own gun.  The magically deranged young man pulls the trigger of the semi-auto pistol. “Click!”

The agent (Think Mulder.) pulls the magazine of the empty pistol out of his pocket and says, “No one dies here tonight,” or words to that effect.

Sarcasm Alert!

For those of you recently educated in public schools dominated by teachers’ unions, the conscious explication of the message here is that even chosen, anointed, special, people authorized by the government to carry guns may have those guns taken away by bad people.  You see, bad people are so much faster, more dexterous, and more competent than the rest of us.  There is no use trying to defend yourself, because they will just take your gun.  (They probably wouldn’t try to hurt you, in the first place, if you didn’t threaten them with a gun.)

Sarcasm All Clear! (For now.)

Martial arts are OK, however, especially when practiced by women.  The female agent (Think Scully.) has some nifty moves, including a leg sweep take down that is almost literally to die for.  She also throws a mean punch.

Martial Arts Students, don’t get cocky! Most authoritarian regimes eventually get around to banning the civilian practice of effective unarmed methods of self-defense, once they have disarmed their populations.  The Japanese occupation of Korea comes to mind.

(Disclaimer!  The following statement is an example of hyperbole, sarcasm, exaggeration, and over-the-top humor.  Do not under any circumstances actually try to do this.  I assume no responsibility, if you get stopped by the police, arrested, maced, tasered, or shot.  It’s a joke.  Get it!  A joke!  Ha! Ha!  I just put it in here to make a point.  Excuse me. I have to call my lawyer.)

 If you don’t think that TV and movie propaganda is effective, try open carry in a major city in most states.  (No! Don’t! Don’t even think about it.  You will be fingered by an “alert” civilian, stopped by the police, and probably arrested.)  (We won’t even discuss taking a picture of a gun to a public school or university.  Zero Tolerance, you know!)

Having said all that.  I may actually tune into Warehouse 13 from time to time, even though that probably puts me in the male “geek” demographic apparently now despised by the Sy Fy Channel.  The danger inherent in propaganda embedded in “entertainment” is that the actors, directors, and producers are generally pretty good at creating a “willing suspension of disbelief” and getting the public involved with the characters and the plot lines.

Even though Warehouse 13 may be a kind of “Frankenstein’s Monster” made up of parts from other movies and series, who doesn’t empathize with Curator Artie, portly, middle-aged and woefully out of shape, when he zip lines down the rows of weird and dangerous treasures stored in the cavernous vault?  Who can’t relate to the female agent (Think Scully.) when she eats comfort food (No sugar!) to relieve stress? Details like these help flesh out characters and make us care about what happens to them as they expose themselves to danger to protect the public (us) in their fictional world.

The sad fact is, in my opinion, that these fictional characters are more real for most of us than our neighbors.  If you run into someone who hates guns and the people who own them, consider the possibility that the person has been brainwashed by, among other things, anti-gun messages carefully embedded in “entertainment.”

You can enjoy the shows.  Just be aware of the propaganda that is sent through the media of TV and movies.  Think about the backers who sponsor these shows and movies.  Do they sponsor them to make money in what’s left of the free market, or do they sponsor them, because hidden messages promote a Hard Left agenda.

“Eternal Vigilance…”

Def Mech

This equivocation by Judge Sotomayor is not surprising, given that she was nominated to the Supreme Court by Barack Obama, who has made numerous appointments of persons hostile to the Second Amendment, e.g., Biden, Emmanuel, Clinton, Sebilius, and Napolitano, to name a few.  (If you are a gun owner who voted for Obama, curse yourself and send a large contribution to a pro-gun organization.  Think of your donation as compensatory damages for a really dumb vote.)

If you have not already done so, please call your US Senators and ask them to oppose Judge Sotomayor’s nomination to the highest court in the land.  She will almost undoubtedly be confirmed over our objections, but we can at least let the Senate know that Americans are watching their actions and will hold them accountable during the next election and beyond.  (See my post, “Obama picks anti-gun Supreme Court nominee,” 05-28-09, tagged, “Sotomayor.”) 

Def Mech

The US Justice Department’s Project Safe Neighborhoods Program supported the project.  CU Professor Mark Pogrebin led the team of CU and CSU researchers, who surveyed prisoners in 2003, 2004.

We should keep in mind that 73 individuals constitute an extremely small sample size, totaling about four percent of the subjects of the landmark prison study done by Professors Wright and Rossi.  (See my post under the Category: “Research.”)

The Colorado study group may have been an available sample rather than a random sample, but we will have to wait for the book in July to look at their selection process.

Given these potential limitations, we can consider the self-reports of the prisoners to be representative to some degree of the Colorado population of convicted felons who have used firearms in the commission of a crime.  (We should keep in mind that it is illegal for a convicted felon to possess a firearm.)

It will be instructive to find out if the book goes into other crimes committed by the research subjects.  The book does apparently touch on the role of drugs, especially Meth, in increasing violent criminal behavior.  (It is also illegal for drug addicts to possess firearms.)

According to the article, the Colorado findings suggest that “gun-control laws would have had little effect on the study subjects’ criminal behavior.”  The impressive CDC Study and the even more massive NAS Study, which indicate that there is no substantial scientific evidence that gun control laws prevent crime, support this conclusion.  (See my posts under the Category: “Research.”)

Another interesting finding of the study in question is that some criminals would be deterred by liberal concealed carry laws.  Wright and Rossi found that criminals are risk averse and, in effect, do a kind of risk/benefit analysis when selecting victims.

Florida Scientist Gary Kleck found up to 2 million defensive uses of firearms every year in the United States.  Economist John Lott postulates that “shall issue” concealed carry laws save lives and reduce crime.  (See David Kopel’s review of John Lott’s book, More Guns, Less Crime, here.)

An interesting artifact of the Colorado Study is that “most inmates said that concealed weapons…” or “the perception” of concealed weapons in the hands of potential victims would lead to more violent behavior on the part of the criminals.  There are two possible problems with giving credence to this idea.

The first problem is that the criminals in the study group could have been motivated by bravado, attempting to convince the researchers (and themselves) that they were not intimidated by the idea of relatively widespread, spontaneous, armed opposition to their felonious acts.  The second, and more insidious possibility, is that the convicts knew that their responses might find their way into public policy debates on concealed weapons permits.  What better way for a career criminal to improve “business conditions” than to provide responses to researchers that might actually disarm potential victims?

Most criminals do not attack police officers in order to take their weapons.  Few criminals attempt armed robberies at gun stores or gun shows.  I personally give more weight to the much larger Wright and Rossi Study and the evidence of crime deterrence suggested by Dr. Kleck and Dr. Lott.

One convict’s remark that he would shoot people he thought were carrying concealed guns should make it abundantly clear that CCW permit holders’ names must be kept private to protect them and society as a whole.  Another implication of this individual’s attitude is that we should incarcerate dangerous felons for as long as possible to keep them from committing future criminal acts.

According to the Post article, this small Colorado study seems to agree with much of the research supporting the Second Amendment and the fundamental right of American Citizens to self-defense against crime.  Defense against tyranny and genocide appear to be beyond the scope of the study.  It will be interesting to check out the book.

Def Mech

David Kopel on the Volokh Conspiracy has blogged on this topic and the NRA has issued an alert.  WorldNetDaily story here.  There is some question about whether the 80% figure on knife sales refers to all knives or all folding knives.  In any case, we don’t need more restrictions.  Please write to:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of International Trade, Regulations and Rulings, Attention: Intellectual Property and Restricted Merchandise Branch, Mint Annex, 799 9th Street, N.W., Washington D.C. 20229.  Comments must be received on or before June 21st, 2009.  I didn’t see a way to E-mail them.  There might be one.  Snail mail must be sent immediately.

Pocket knives are certainly militia equipment that should be protected by the Second Amendment.  Knives that open with one hand are extremely useful as tools.  The Brits are collecting sharp pointed kitchen knives to prevent stabbings.  Where will it end?  Will we all live in rubber rooms to prevent injury to self or others?  Even then, would the Liberals really feel safe?

Def Mech

I’m not an attorney, but some people who are, take issue with the Seventh Circuit’s virtual dismissal of the “Due Process” Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment.  Constitutional scholar Eugene Volokh offers his opinion here.

For me, personally, as a non-lawyer, there are several quotations that bear strongly on the argument.  The first is from William Rawle, who was appointed U.S. Attorney for Pennsylvania by George Washington.  Rawle reportedly turned down Washington’s offer to name him Attorney General of the U.S.  In writing about the Second Amendment, Rawle asserted:

“The prohibition is general.  No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people.  Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature.  But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”

In the Supreme Court Decision, Presser v. State of Illinois, 116 U.S.253 (1886), the court cited U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542.  The Cruikshank opinion said that, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms ‘is not a right granted by the constitution.  Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.  The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by congress…”

Eugene Volokh points out in the above citation that 19^th Century cases do not cover arguments relating to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.  Due Process arguments are precisely those arguments that were later used to incorporate other amendments against the states, in many cases involving civil rights for Blacks.  Cruikshank also states that the right to keep and bear arms is independent of the Bill of Rights.  As such, in my opinion, it must be counted among the natural rights of free individuals.  The Seventh Circuit, in a truly amazing and terrifying hypothetical, postulates that even the right to self-defense could be “legally” criminalized.  See David Codrea’s post here.

Presser goes on to say: “It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the constitutional provision in question out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government.”

It would appear from this long statement that the Supreme Court in Presser made the critical distinction between the right of the people to keep and bear arms and the power of the states to raise and regulate militias.  The much more recent Heller Decision should have driven a final stake through the heart of the “Collectivist Right” argument.

Since the “Commerce Clause” has been used by the Federal Government to impose so many restrictions on state sovereignty, it would be interesting to see if this so-called “Elastic Clause” could be used to impose Second Amendment guarantees of freedom upon recalcitrant state governments.  (Just a thought.)

We can expect opponents of the individual right to armed self-defense from crime, tyranny, and genocide to grasp at every legal straw in their efforts to disarm the American People.  The Collectivist Argument is hopefully dead forever.  Now we will continue to fight the battle for freedom at both the state and federal levels.

Colorado and a number of other states have in their own constitutions an articulation of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.  This will help.  However, as I have said before, we can not rely upon the provisions of the law alone.  (See my Post, “S. 843-Gun registration bill threatens your rights,” April 27th, 2009, Category: “Registration.”)

We must make the political price of infringement of the Second Amendment so prohibitively high that, to paraphrase Patrick Henry, no one will dare approach the “jewel” of the public liberty with anything but reverence.  Eternal vigilance!

Def Mech