Chris's Blog

Missouri Highway Patrol Shifts to Reverse

Various news sources, including the Kansas City Star, and the local NBC affiliate are reporting that Missouri Highway Patrol Chief James Keathley has issued an order to stop distribution of a controversial report by the Missouri Information Analysis Center, a "Fusion Center " that provides intelligence and analysis for law enforcement.  Reactions to the report, which lumped libertarian, Christian, anti-abortion, and Constitutionalist activism with racist, neo-Nazi and other right-wing extremists, created a backlash across the political spectrum. 

Governor Jay Nixon, a Democrat, was quick to distance himself and his administration from the report after Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder, a Republican, held a press conference to denounce the report.  The report has quickly grown toxic with both Republicans and Democrats angling to score political points. The head of the Missouri Highway Patrol, Superintendent James F. Keathley denied having seen the report prior to its being publicized, but promised that MIAC reports would go through his office before being released.

The larger issue, which no one in authority has yet addressed, is what the "Fusion Centers" are, how they are overseen, and what kind of information they produce. I suspect that other "analyses" like the Missouri report have not come to light.  

Jeff's Blog

Fewer Guns in Cockpits?

Washington Times Going Off Halfcocked

     The Washington Times reported in a scathing editorial on Tuesday that the Obama administration has quietly diverted some 2 million dollars away from the armed pilot, Federal Flight Deck Officer program, and into a new program of inspectors to investigate existing FFDOs.  TSA says the criticism is unfounded as they have a strong commitment to the success and growth of the FFDO program and that the $2 million shift is to provide administrative support for the program which they say has outgrown the current structure.

    The real truth of the matter probably lies somewhere between the Times’ editorial and TSA’s claim.  While the program has been steadily growing and probably is becoming difficult to effectively supervise, any time a bureaucracy adds more bureaucracy to improve “oversight” of a program, the result is almost always going to be more red tape and less progress.  TSA has consistently drug their feet on the FFDO program; making the application and training process ridiculously complicated and intrusive and placing the only training facility in the most out of the way location possible.  There are also issues of pilots not being reimbursed for many of the expenses that they must pay out-of-pocket.  If ensuring adherence to the rules is becoming too difficult, rather than expanding the supervisory and compliance staff, the better solution would be to simply reduce the number of hoops FFDOs are required to jump through.

    Airline pilots are highly trained professionals.  Most of them have military experience and many continue service in the National Guard and Reserves.  As Neal Knox said when he proposed creating an armed pilot program back in 1988;  "If a captain can be entrusted with a $30-million aircraft and 300 passengers, he can be trusted with a firearm."  Unfortunately the politicians and "experts" didn’t listen to Neal in 1988 when he pointed out that without the "last resort" of an armed pilot to protect an aircraft, commercial airliners are "sitting ducks" because no ammount of screening is ever going to be perfect. Since the attacks of 9/11/01 the options have narrowed even further because if the pilot and crew can’t maintain control of their aircraft, the next alternative is a missile from a fighter jet – a fighter jet which is very likely to e piloted by a current or future airline pilot.  Does anyone question the wisdom of that pilot being armed?

Continue reading Fewer Guns in Cockpits? →

Special Report

No Brass, No Ammo!

DOD Reverses Policy on Destruction of Brass

The Department of Defense, under intense pressure from rights advocates, industry forces, and members of Congress – particularly Senators Baucus and Tester of Montana – has reversed its decision to require that all brass cases be destroyed and sold as scrap metal rather than sold as reloadable cases.

Much credit for the quick resolution of this issue goes to Gary Marbut of Montana Shooting Sports Association.  Gary was the first we saw alerting the public and calling on his Senators to take action, and his calls did not fall on deaf ears as Tester and Baucus responded quickly and helped to snuff the issue in short order.

Thanks Gary!

Our original story is below.

Goverment Orders Destruction of Fired Brass

    There are reports that the Defense Department has ordered that all fired brass from the military be "de-militarized" by crushing or otherwise making it unusable for reloading.

    The Firearms Coalition is looking into these reports and will keep you posted.  In the mean time, there is no harm in contacting Senators and Representatives to ask them to look into the matter.

    Scrap brass metal sells for only a few cents a pound while once-fired brass in popular calibers sells for a few dollars a pound.  Add to that the cost of physically mutilating the cases and the government moves from a net gain in disposing of their fired brass to a net loss.

    A policy calling for the destruction of otherwise usable and resalable brass would be right in line with what we have been expecting from the Obama administration.  We have been on the lookout for bans on importation of various guns and gun parts, bans on importation of ammunition, and expansion of the Attorney General’s lists of guns "not suitable for sporting purposes."

    No such actions or policies should be tolerated and they should be opposed with the strongest legal action possible.

The Knox Update

Mandatory Training?

The Knox Update

From the Firearms Coalition

The Myth of Mandatory Training

 (March 12, 2009) Rights activists are shooting themselves in the foot whenever they advocate for mandatory training for concealed carry, and they’re shooting themselves in the foot a lot lately.  There is absolutely no question that all gunowners, especially those who choose to carry in public, need to take their responsibilities seriously and seeking out quality training is just the beginning of the responsibility. 

But legislating training is a seriously bad idea. 

If it is reasonable and prudent to mandate training for concealed carry, why would it not be reasonable and prudent to mandate training for open carry?  If that is reasonable, what about mandating training for anyone wishing to even own a firearm, and mandatory training for anyone who lives in a home with a firearm?  If mandatory training makes sense, then what is the argument against mandatory storage requirements?  The bottom line is that firearm safety is a matter of personal responsibility and that responsibility can not and should not be legislated by government.  Personal responsibility is, by definition, personal.

The idea of mandatory training stems from the huge and disturbing assumption that the people have no common sense of their own and must be led to sensible behavior by the government.

Continue reading Mandatory Training? →

Chris's Blog

Missouri State Police Profiles “Modern Militia Movement”

1 Comment

 

Mo. State Police Report says You’re a Potential Terrorist:  Not Profiling, It’s An "Educational" Document…

A document from the Missouri Information Analysis Center, a division of the state police, conflates privately organized militia groups with libertarians, Ron Paul supporters, Constitutionalists, race separatists, and even some collectivists, who distrust the Federal Reserve.  The document, which we obtained last week, is marked "Unclassified, Law Enforcement Sensitive," indicating that the Missouri state patrol guys don’t want to talk about it.  We can confirm that last bit as they failed to return phone calls or email.  Before running the document I wanted to verify it.  The Associated Press has since picked the story up, so we’re running it now. 

You can see the document here.

The AP story quotes Lt. John Hotz of the Missouri State Highway Patrol who called the report "an educational thing."

"Troopers have been shot by members of groups, so it’s our job to let law enforcement officers know what the trends are in the modern militia movement."

The most encouraging thing I see in this story is that it leaked.  

We’ll be following this one.

March 16, 2009 Update.   The Missouri Libertarian Party issued a press release, available here. 

Additional Note from Jeff: This "analysis" by the Missouri Information Analysis Center has the fingerprints of the Southern Poverty Law Center all over it.  Morris Dees of SPLC has for years maintained a site for tracking "hate groups."  That’s fine and dandy, but Mr. Dees is very good at drawing connecting lines between organizations and individuals even when there is rather obviously very little or nothing to connect them.  Back in the mid 90’s I attended a presentation by an associate of the SPLC and sat in stunned disbelief as he drew circles on the board containing the names of organizations and individuals he said were connected.  Among these were connections between groups like the KKK, neo-Nazis, and such, and groups like NRA, the John Birch Society, and GOA. He drew other links between these groups, militia organizations, and individuals including Larry Pratt of GOA, and most shocking to me, Neal Knox, my own father.

Now I know a bit about the NRA and I know Larry Pratt to be a fine Christian man.  I also know that there is absolutely no truth to any allegation that Neal Knox was any more connected to these groups and their philosophies than Morris Dees himself is.  The "connections" were based on the simple fact that the individuals and many in the groups al espoused one or more similar beliefs such as belief in the Second Amendment as an individual right and that the federal government should be constrained by the US Constitution.

For Dees and his friends to make such links is simply outrageous.  For official government agencies – particularly law enforcement agencies – to use these bogus connections or draw connections of their own suggesting that millions of law-abiding,  patriotic Americans are "potential terrorists" because they object to excessive taxation or question the wisdom and constitutionality of the Federal Reserve system – or they believe that they have a God given right to the means necessary to defend their families and their nation – is beyond outrageous, it borders on criminal.

Barack Obama has much closer ties and connections to terrorists and subversive philosophies than do most tax protesters, gunowners, or Constitutionalists, yet asking questions about these connections is one of the indicators that the Missouri "analysis" suggests is an indication of being a dangerous extremist. 

Rather than paint with a broad brush anyone who questions government actions or motives, the government needs to be openly, and honestly answering questions, correcting procedures, and abiding by the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

Case in point: After the lunatic in Alabama’s recent killing spree, the streets of the small town where it happened were patrolled by armed soldiers from nearby fort Rucker.  While some would say that’s a reasonable response to such a violent event, especially in light of the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India recently, the fact of the matter is that armed military troops patrolling the streets of America is ILLEGAL.  The military is for fighting foreign enemies in wars, not enforcing laws in the US.  There are specific and clear proscriptions against military involvement in civil affairs.  Whether their use in this case was "harmless," or "reasonable," or "appropriate," the fact remains that it is absolutely ILLEGAL and must not be done.  If we the people wish to change that, we need to address it Constitutionally and legislatively, not just allow the government to ignore the law.

March 18 2009 update.  Rush Limbaugh reported on this story at the beginning of his broadcast today.

March 27 2009 update.  The entire Missouri state governmetn is running from the report as fast as they can.  It has been officially "withdrawn," as reported here.  

The Knox Update

NRA Director Endorsements

NRA Candidate Endorsements

 

(March 5, 2009) Every year about this time the NRA sends out ballots and voting information to all of their members eligible to vote (Lifetime and 5 consecutive year Annual Members.)  Each year we look at the candidates and offer our suggestions on which candidates we think will serve the best interests of the membership.  Here are those recommendations for this year in alphabetical order:

Scott Bach, John Burtt, Joe DeBergalis, Owen Mills, Don Saba, Bob Viden.

We recommend that members vote for no more than 6 or 7 candidates because the fewer candidates you vote for, the more weight your votes hold.

Here’s how we came up with these 6…

 

Continue reading NRA Director Endorsements →

Offers, The Knox Update, Uncategorized

CCW Courtesy Card

1 Comment

The Firearms Coalition Merchant Education Card

Leave this card with your local merchants who post “No Firearms” signs instead of your money!

 

It informs!

It educates!

It’s courteous!

It lets unfriendly merchants see money leave their pocket!

Merchant Card Front Merchant Card Back

(actual design may vary)

As more and larger areas are posted “No Firearms” our rights are being hedged, hemmed, maybe infringed? Here‘s a way to fight back. Let the pizza joint know that robbers probably won‘t read that sign anyway. Clue the dry cleaners in about creating a safe work environment for criminals. Let Costco know that you have bought a Sam‘s Club membership because of that sign on the door!

Pack of 100 is yours with a $10 donation!

 Simply click on the “Donate” button or send a check or money order to:

    The Firearms Coalition
PO Box 1761
Buckeye, AZ  85326

We sincerely thank you for your support.

Special Report

SCOTUS Backs Lautenberg

Supreme Court Accepts Broad Definition

    The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) today ruled that prohibiting firearms from those convicted of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence is OK even if the actual charge made no mention of a domestic relationship.

    In 1994 Randy Hayes was convicted of simple battery after an altercation with his wife.  The battery charge did not mention the domestic relationship.  In 2005 Hayes was prosecuted, and convicted, for being a "prohibited person" in possession of a firearm – police found a lever-action rifle under his bed.  Hayes fought that conviction based on the specific language of the notorious Lautenberg Amendment which added domestic violence misdemeanants to the list of "prohibited persons."  The argument was one of commas, syntax, and intent questioning whether the charge that a person was convicted of had to include something about a domestic relationship such as "Battery against a Spouse" or "Domestic Battery" as opposed to "Simple Battery" which does not address who the victim was.

    Hayes was initially found guilty of being a "prohibited person" in possession of a firearm, but that conviction was overturned by the Federal Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit which ruled that the actual language of the Lautenberg Amendment should be understood to require that the "domestic" component be included in the criminal charge.  In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court reversed the 4th Circuit and said that regardless of the actual charge, as long as the crime involved violence or threat of violence and the victim was domestically related to the perpetrator, the firearms prohibition applies.

    Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia dissented saying that such an interpretation would require authorities to research the details of any conviction for assault, battery, or threatening to determine if there was a domestic relationship between the perpetrator and the victim. 

    Even though there was some buzz about this case within the Second Amendment community and some hope that the Heller decision would cause the Justices to take a more conservative position on any law which arbitrarily abrogated Second Amendment rights, there was no mention of the Second Amendment during oral arguments and none in either the majority or minority opinions.

    Today’s Supreme Court decision means that anyone who has ever been convicted of any misdemeanor crime of violence – to include threats of violence – even if there was no possible way for the threat to be carried out and even if the punishment for the crime was only a $25 fine – is barred from ever possessing firearms or ammunition for the rest of their life if the victim of their crime was a person within the perpetrators household.  This leaves a large number of people at risk of committing unintentional felonies like Hayes did and it means that anyone with any record of battery or assault is likely to face drawn out delays whenever purchasing a firearm as NICS will have to determine the details of the case before approving the sale.

    And of course – as with all gun control legislation – the objective and result of this law is not to keep guns away from dangerous criminals, but rather to make criminals of regular citizens and make gun ownership more cumbersome and problematic.  The passage of the Lautenburg Amendment cost thousands of police and military personnel their careers and often their pensions because they could no longer be in positions that required them to possess firearms, and it has ruined the lives of countless others who, like Randy Hayes, had no idea that they were not supposed to possess firearms and were caught up and prosecuted for being a "prohibited person" on possession of a gun.

Jeff's Blog

Knox on Roth Show

Listen to Jeff Knox on the Dr. Laurie Roth Show

I spent an hour this evening speaking on the air with Dr. Laurie Roth on her syndicated radio program.  The discussion covered a lot of ground and the hour was gone before I knew it.  The show was done on short notice and while I don't think it was my best work, I think you'll find it interesting.  You can listen to the program by clicking here or go to www.theRothShow.com.

Jeff's Blog

Ammo Tax?

Two rumors keep popping up and making the rounds through the viral e-mail circuit:

1. Obama is planning a 500% tax on ammo

2. All the ammo you currently have is going to become illegal in July and only ammo with serial numbers will be legal.

Both of these rumors are bogus.

The ammo tax idea has been a fantasy of the gun banners for decades, but I have seen no recent attempt to implement any such thing.  Such a tax would require an act of Congress and while there has been a bill introduced which addresses gun and ammo excise tax issues, it is a pro-gun bill trying to fix some problems in the system.  There has not been a serious proposal put forward to dramatically increase taxes on ammunition.

Part of the source of the resurgence of the ammo tax rumor could be the ammo serialization rumor.  While ammo serialization is a real issue, it is not an imminent threat.  There is a company that built a machine that can engrave tiny serial numbers on bullets and cases and they have established a fake organization promoting the technology as a crime solving tool.  They have also convinced legislators in about 18 states to introduce model legislation they have written.  So far not even California or Massachusetts has come close to actually adopting the legislation.

So while the threat of mandating serialization and registration of all ammo – and the destruction of all non-serialized and registered ammo – is real, it is not gaining any traction and is unlikely to do so in the near future.  This idea should be carefully watched, but not panicked over.

There is another rumor that I'm a bit more concerned about.  Sources say that some in the State Department are moving to block the importation of "military caliber" ammunition.  While this is still just a rumor at this point, it is something I warned about during the effort to block the Holder nomination.  Hillary Clinton at State, Eric Holder at Justice, Rahm Emanuel as White House Chief of Staff, not to mention Obama himself… We definitely have enemies in high places and there are things which can be done to harass the firearms community without involving Congress.  Restricting, delaying, and generally interfering with imports of ammunition, guns, and gun parts are all very real possibilities.  It is also very possible that Eric Holder might change regulations on firearms manufacturers, dealers, and importers to make it much more difficult for them to do business and make them more vulnerable to criminal charges for technical errors.

None of these things is anything more than rumor and speculation at this point, but they are likely possibilities and require careful watching and an immediate response if any of them begins to come to life.  In the mean time, we all need to be careful about raising false alarms that could dull the response when a real alarm is sounded.

On that note, if you have not signed up for the Knox FC Alerts e-mail alert list, now would be a great time to rectify that.  We won't bury you in spam or fill up your in-box.  We only send alerts when there is something to report – or occasionally when things have been slow for a month or two I'll send out a little update just to remind you we're here and to make sure the system still works.

To sign up for the Knox FC Alert e-mail alerts list, just click here.

Ammunition for the grassroots gun rights movement