Bullet Counter Points

Practice Makes Perfect

2009-12-21T06:30:00.000-08:00

A failed shooting attempt at the Woodbridge campus of Northern Virginia Community College (NVCC) suggests that there has been progress made in responding to “active shooter” incidents at our nation’s colleges and universities.

On December 8, student Jason Hamilton, 20, walked into a classroom at NVCC and fired two shots at his mathematics professor with a Marlin .30-06 bolt-action rifle he had bought the day before at Dick’s Sporting Goods. The teacher took cover under a desk after the first shot and was not injured. As Hamilton attempted to fire a third time, his gun jammed, and he discarded it. He then walked out of the classroom and sat down in a chair in the hallway.

It didn’t take long for authorities to find him. Prince William County police began arriving on the scene within two to three minutes of the shots. An emergency response team at NVCC’s offices in Annandale coordinated the response via phone and Internet and locked the Woodbridge campus down.

NVCC had created the job of Director of Emergency Planning a few months after the shooting tragedy at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007. Since that time, NVCC has trained faculty and staff in emergency response, purchased additional emergency notification equipment, and enhanced cooperation with local law enforcement. Just two days before the December 8 incident, NVCC’s campus police had conducted a mandatory, eight-hour training session where they practiced a scenario in which a student shot a teacher. “Everything that was done on Tuesday, we had practiced on Sunday,” said Cheryl Creed, NVCC’s acting Police Chief.

The county and campus police kept the campus locked down for approximately three hours after Hamilton was arrested in case there were other suspects still at large. “We erred on the side of caution and kept the lockdown until we could complete the search and evacuation,” said Prince William Police Chief Charlie T. Deane.

Not everything went smoothly. It was more than 30 minutes before an announcement was made over classroom speakers informing students and faculty to shelter in place due to an emergency. As a result, some rushed out of the building after shots were fired in violation of the school’s emergency policy. Interestingly, students made up for some of these communication mishaps by sharing information through text messages.

In any case, it was a vast improvement over the Virginia Tech response, where the administration never ordered a campus shutdown and delayed notifying students and faculty after the first two victims were shot and killed in West Ambler Johnston Hall.

Perhaps in part because of improving emergency preparedness, Colorado State University’s Board of Governors recently voted unanimously to overturn the school’s policy allowing concealed handguns on its two campuses. “This makes us fairly unusual,” said Pueblo Campus President Joe Garcia, “as most institutions of higher education have a complete concealed weapons ban.”

Garcia is right. Utah’s public colleges and universities and Blue Ridge Community College in Virginia are now the only schools in America (out or more than 4,300 colleges and universities in the United States) that allow concealed handguns on campus.

Colorado State University is also now aligned with the policy of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA), which has stated, “There is no credible evidence to suggest that the presence of students carrying concealed weapons would reduce violence on our college campuses” and called on public policy makers to “weigh heavily the…unintended consequences of any proposals to allow college students and any other persons to carry concealed weapons on campus.” IACLEA is instead “working with other campus public safety stakeholders to provide and promote campus crime prevention training programs, as well as to develop strategies and programs to enhance emergency preparedness.”

It is good to see that such efforts are bearing fruit. While the Woodbridge incident could have been far worse-particularly if Hamilton had used a more dangerous firearm like an assault rifle-law enforcement deserves credit for taking campus safety seriously and demonstrating results.

"That's not a civilized society."

2009-12-14T07:03:00.001-08:00

Earlier this year, an interesting study was published in the University of Miami Law Review by Zachary Weaver. Entitled “Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ Law: The Actual Effects and the Need for Clarification,” it raises some serious questions about the expanding parameters for the use of lethal force in our country.

On April 26, 2005, Florida Governor Jeb Bush signed “Stand Your Ground” (aka “Shoot First”) legislation into law. The law eliminated the state’s common law duty to use every reasonable means available to retreat prior to using deadly force, which the Florida Supreme Court had legitimized by explaining, “human life is precious, and deadly combat should be avoided if at all possible when imminent danger to oneself can be avoided.” The law states that any individual who is in a place where he/she has a legal right to be, and who is “not engaged in an unlawful activity ... 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 to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.” Individuals using lethal force in this manner are immune from criminal prosecution and civil lawsuits.

In his article, Weaver catalogues the opposition of prosecutors and law enforcement to the law, citing the National District Attorneys Association, the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, multiple State Attorneys, and police chiefs from cities like Miami and St. Petersburg. Palm Beach State Attorney Barry Krischer is quoted as saying, “I dislike the law because it encourages people to stand their ground…when they could just as easily walk away. To me, that’s not a civilized society.” Paul Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, points out that the law “give[s] citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review.”

Most troubling to Weaver is that the law creates a conclusive presumption that an individual had a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm if an he/she can prove that an intruder unlawfully entered (or attempted to unlawfully enter) the individual’s home or vehicle. As Weaver describes it, “If the presumption applies, then there can be no criminal or civil repercussions for the use of deadly force. When found to apply, the presumption’s practical effect is that a jury will no longer be able to decide the factual question of whether the defendant had the reasonable fear necessary to use deadly force ... According to the law, if an intoxicated teenager enters his neighbor’s home by mistaking it for his own, the homeowner can presumably use deadly force. Even if the State could prove that the homeowner knew the intruder was his neighbor’s teenager and that the teen meant no harm, the presumptions entitle him to use deadly force.”

As a result, the law is “causing cases to not be filed at all or to be filed with reduced charges,” according to Russell Smith, President of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. Duval County State Attorney Harry Shorstein has observed “a lesser sensitivity to gun violence and death” since the law was passed.

Weaver cites several disturbing incidents from the Sunshine State that highlight these problems, including the following:

On March 28, 2006, decorated Army veteran Michael Frazzini was shot and killed outside his house by neighbor Todd Rasmussen. Rasmussen stated that he shot Frazzini because he was “lunging” at his son Corey, who was armed with a knife (and who has a lengthy criminal record, including violent offenses). Frazzini was “armed” with only a small, souvenir baseball bat. No charges were brought against Todd Rasmussen.

On June 6, 2006, Jason Rosenbloom was shot by his neighbor in a dispute over trash collection. Rosenbloom, who was unarmed, went to Kenneth Allen’s home to talk about the issue and was shot twice outside the house. Bleeding profusely, he had to crawl home next door to his wife and young son to get medical attention. Allen was never arrested or charged with a crime.

On June 11, 2006, prostitute Jacqueline Galas of New Port Richey shot and killed longtime client Frank Labiento after he threatened to kill her. She made no attempt to escape from Labiento, shot him without any warning, and failed to call for medical help as he was dying. Second-degree murder charges against Galas were eventually dropped, despite the fact that she admitted to being involved in “unlawful activity” (prostitution).

Finally, Weaver draws attention to a curious passage in the law that lays out its rationale in part by stating, “WHEREAS, Section 8 of Article I of the State Constitution guarantees the right of the people to bear arms in defense of themselves...” Citing the “heavy influence and publicity by the NRA” that preceded the passage of the law, he asks: “What is the real purpose behind including the statement about the right to bear arms under the Florida Constitution? What message is the legislature sending to the citizens of Florida? Is the legislature encouraging the use of firearms when a person acts in self-defense? And if so, should it be?”

Weaver offers several recommendations for the Florida legislature to clarify the intent of the law and provide insight as to how it should function in practice. First, he advises the legislature to create a system to track self-defense claims—whether or not they result in indictments—so that Floridians can see the actual effects of the law. Second, he recommends that the legislature either eliminate the presumptions of reasonable fear and of an intruder’s malicious intent or make these presumptions rebuttable with other evidence. This would discourage a “shoot first mentality” by allowing a jury to determine if an individual’s use of lethal force was justified under the circumstances. Third, the permissible amount of force which can be used in confrontations should be defined; and it should be roughly equivalent to the force of the threat. Finally, the legislature should clearly define “unlawful activity” and “explain the extent to which the provision applies, including the precise time-framing and degree of unlawful activity that will exempt an individual using force from claiming the law’s benefits.”

With 23 other states having adopted versions of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, Weaver’s scholarship could not be more timely. Hopefully, it will help spur a new look at legislation that is at best confusing, and at worst, dangerous.

What's Going On (at Gun Shows): Free Trade

2009-11-23T09:47:00.000-08:00

Bullet Counter Points’ “What’s Going On (at Gun Shows)” series takes an inside look at what happens at the nation’s gun shows when no one’s looking. Our first blog highlighted a UC Davis researcher who photographed widespread illegal activity at gun shows in 19 different states. Next, we took a look at an undercover investigation by the city of New York that captured a host of illegal sales at gun shows on video.

Our latest entry involves two unconventional tales of free trade between the United States and Mexico.

On July 25, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents were conducting surveillance at a gun show at the Expo Center at Kansas City International Airport in Missouri. They spotted Myrna Guerra carrying a semiautomatic AR-15 assault rifle and taking a “circuitous route” to his car. After looking over his shoulder several times, Guerra placed the assault rifle in his trunk. He then re-entered the show and traded cash for another assault rifle with a second private seller. Guerra placed this weapon in his car and was stopped by Kansas City Police Department officers soon after he departed the show.

At this point, Guerra presented a fraudulent Missouri’s drivers license and social security number. After police confirmed this through a computer check, Guerra admitted that in fact he was not even an American citizen-but instead an illegal immigrant from Guatemala. He was immediately arrested, as his status as an undocumented person made it illegal for him to possess firearms under federal law. From his car, police confiscated the two AR-15 style rifles, two ammunition magazines, and gun show calendars from several states. After searching his home, authorities found an additional six ammunition magazines, nine handgun holders/cases, gun cleaning supplies, more gun show calendars, a western Union receipt for $4,000, and three Social Security Cards under a false identity.

In a recent plea agreement, Guerra admitted to buying and selling guns for the past six months at gun shows to earn extra money. He would purchase guns from private sellers at gun shows and sell them to an intermediary, who would then bring the guns into Mexico for resale to the country’s drug cartels. Private sellers were attractive to Guerra because they are not required by law to conduct background checks or maintain records of sale, a problem known as the Gun Show Loophole.

Guerra isn’t the only gun show visitor who saw the Mexican Drug War as a business opportunity, however.

On October 16, Alfred Dwight Watkins, a resident of Luling, Texas, was sentenced to ten months in federal prison for dealing firearms without a license. Watkins, formerly a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL), had been selling guns at gun shows in Austin and San Antonio despite the fact that his license expired in 2003. He told authorities that he would tell customers that no paperwork was required to do business with him in order to “flip” more firearms. In March of this year, ATF agents searched Watkins’ residence and recovered 65 firearms-including a dozen assault rifles-and 59,000 rounds of ammunition.

Watkins admitted knowingly selling a firearm to a prohibited purchaser. He also admitted straw purchasing a firearm that was recovered three weeks later from Los Zetas, a prominent Mexican drug cartel.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report in June which stated: “While it is impossible to know how many firearms are illegally smuggled into Mexico in a given year, about 87 percent of firearms seized by Mexican authorities and traced in the last 5 years originated in the United States, according to data from Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). According to U.S. and Mexican government officials, these firearms have been increasingly more powerful and lethal in recent years. Many of these firearms come from gun shops and gun shows in Southwest border states.”

Unfortunately, the total lack of paperwork involved in these sales makes them nearly impossible to trace. As ATF agent Steve Foreman recently pointed out: [An unscrupulous private seller will] sell to anybody and everybody, trade up or trade down, he doesn’t care ... It’s actually a great business, if you don’t get caught.”

Thankfully, the “entrepreneurs” described in this blog weren’t so lucky.

The Lessons of Fort Hood

2009-11-16T06:26:00.000-08:00

On November 5, Major Nidal Malik Hasan, a licensed Army psychiatrist, walked into the Soldier Readiness Processing Center on Fort Hood military base in Killeen, Texas. After yelling “Allahu akbar,” Hasan, 39, opened fired with a semiautomatic handgun, killing 13 people (12 of them Soldiers) and wounding 42 others before he was shot by military police. Hasan sustained multiple injuries and is currently hospitalized in stable condition at an Army hospital in San Antonio. He will face 13 charges of premeditated murder in a military court.

The Fort Hood shooting ranks as the nation's worst ever on a military installation. It also has raised new fears about terrorist attacks on the homeland, as Hasan had been in contact with a radical imam that has praised the killings.

The U.S. Congress is now preparing to investigate the shooting to determine what action they might take to prevent similar tragedies in the future. Later in the month, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, headed by Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), will begin hearings on the subject. As these inquiries commence, we would urge legislators to take several important actions concerning America’s gun laws:

1) Close the “Terror Gap” in Gun Purchasing Laws and Allow Federal Agencies to Share Critical Information
A May 2009 Government Accountability Office (GAO) study found that 865 individuals on the FBI’s Terrorist Watch List were allowed to purchase firearms from federally licensed gun dealers between February 2004 and February 2009. Amazingly, while individuals on the FBI’s list are prohibited from boarding planes, they can purchase as many guns as they want as long as they can pass an instant computer background check.

While there has been no indication from federal officials that Hasan was on the Terrorist Watch List, the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force had investigated Hasan after they discovered 10-20 email communications between him and Anwar al-Awlaki. Al-Awlaki, a radical imam now living in Yemen, was known to have associated with two of the 9/11 hijackers. Hasan worshipped at the Dar al-Hijrah mosque, led at the time by al-Alwaki, in Great Falls, Virginia, in 2001 along with the two hijackers.

When Hasan purchased his weapons in August 2009, the Joint Terrorism Task Force was not informed. An NRA-drafted provision in the “Tiahrt Amendments” attached to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) appropriations bill requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to destroy completed background check records within 24 hours. The NRA has also been able to enact restrictions that restrict federal agencies from sharing information about legal gun purchases.

"The piece of information about the gun could have been critical," said former FBI Special Agent Brad Garrett. "One of the problems is that the law sometimes restricts you in what you can do." "We need to be smarter about sharing information," added former 9/11 commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste. "It's very disturbing to see…that the FBI is precluded from sharing information."

There is no rational reason to allow potential terrorists to purchase firearms. The U.S. Congress should act immediately to pass S. 1317—sponsored by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)—and H.R. 2159, sponsored by Representative Peter King (R-NY). This legislation would give DOJ the discretion—subject to judicial review— to block gun sales to individuals on the Terrorist Watch List. Congress should also remove current information-sharing restrictions on federal agencies so that they can better monitor gun purchases.

2) Oppose and Defeat the “Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act”
In the U.S. Senate, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC) has offered a legislative proposal, the “Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act,” that would require that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to stop submitting the records of those found to “lack the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs” to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The immediate effect of this measure would be the removal of approximately 116,000 such records already in the system. These individuals would be free to purchase and own firearms even if the VA determined they are “mentally incapacitated,” “mentally incompetent,” or “experiencing an extended loss of consciousness.”

Senator Burr’s legislation would put veterans, their families, and the public in danger. Researchers are predicting that the rate of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) among veterans returning from Operation Iraqi Freedom could be as high as 35%. Furthermore, the Army suicide rate is at its highest level in three decades. The New York Times reported that “at least 128 soldiers killed themselves [in 2008], and the Army suicide rate surpassed that for civilians for the first time since the Vietnam War.” All told, 12,000 veterans under VA care attempt suicide each year. A 2007 study by researchers at Portland State University and Oregon Health & Science University found that male veterans are twice as likely to commit suicide as their civilian counterparts. The study also found that veterans are 58% more likely to use firearms to commit suicide than non-veterans.

The shooting at Fort Hood wasn’t the only recent tragedy to remind us of how lethal the combination of mental illness and guns can be. Just two days after Hasan’s attack, a 63 year-old veteran suffering from PTSD opened fire while being escorted out of a bar in Vail, Colorado, killing one and injuring three.

The “Veterans Second Amendment Protection Act” is an affront to common sense and the well-being of America’s veterans and should be rejected by Congress.

3) Enact Licensing Laws for Handgun Purchasers
Currently, only 11 states in the entire country require the licensing of handgun purchasers. Of these, nine states conduct a thorough background investigation on licensees that goes far beyond a simple instant computer check through the FBI’s National Instant Computer Background Check System (NICS).

The problem with NICS checks (like the one which Hasan passed at Guns Galore) is that they lack critical information from state and local authorities. According to a Third Way report entitled “Missing Records,” “91% of those adjudicated mentally ill or involuntarily committed cannot be stopped by a gun buyer background check” because their disqualifying records are not in the system. In addition, one out of four felony conviction records are not in NICS. Third Way’s overall assessment of the database is that it is “deeply flawed.”

Would a background investigation (as opposed to a computer check) have stopped Nidal Malik Hasan from purchasing a handgun? Possibly.

There were several red flags in Hasan’s background that suggested he might have been a threat to himself or others. He had been working with service members suffering from PTSD for more than six years at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and experienced problems that required counseling.. He had also begun openly opposing America’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and espousing extremist Islamic views. While a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed, Hasan gave a PowerPoint presentation to mental health staff members which concluded, “It’s getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims.” In the Spring of 2008 and again in the Spring of 2009, key officials from Walter Reed and the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences met and expressed concern about Hasan's behavior, which fellow students and faculty had described as "disconnected, aloof, paranoid, belligerent and schizoid."

Finally, as described above, Hasan was being monitored by the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force because of emails he had exchanged with the radical imam Anwar al-Awlaki. The FBI was also investigating whether he was behind violent anti-American comments left on a website under the screen name of "NidalHasan."

None of these warning signs were revealed by the NICS check that Hasan underwent at Guns Galore. But any or all of this information might have been uncovered by a background investigation if Hasan had had to obtain a license in order to purchase a handgun. Such investigations typically involve interviews with licensees’ family, friends, and co-workers/colleagues.

Because instant computer checks are imperfect, the U.S. Congress should adopt licensing standards for handgun purchasers similar to those enacted in New York and New Jersey. This would help ensure that dangerous individuals do not legally acquire handguns.

4) Regulate High-Powered Firearms on the Civilian Market
Hasan used a Belgian-made FN Herstal Five-seveN semi-automatic pistol during the shooting which he legally purchased at Guns Galore in Killeen. The weapon's name refers to its 5.7 mm bullet diameter. The Five-seveN is popular with U.S Secret Service agents and police SWAT teams because of its ability to penetrate body armor. It is also popular with the Mexican drug cartels, who call the Five-seveN the “Mata Policia” (“Cop Killer”).

The Legislative Director of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Steve Lenkhart, has called the Five-seveN "an assault rifle that fits in your pocket."

FN Herstal maintains that armor-piercing ammunition for the Five-seveN is only available to law enforcement and military personnel. However, when first launched for civilian sales, FN officials advertised that “enemy personnel, even wearing body armor can be effectively engaged up to 200 meters.” Additionally, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence tested the Five-seveN in January 2005 with commercially-available SS192 ammunition and found that it penetrated both Level IIA and Level IIIA body armor.

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence joined the Violence Policy Center, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Legal Community Against Violence, Freedom States Alliance, and States United to Prevent Gun Violence on a November 19 letter urging President Obama to use existing executive authority to prohibit the importation of the Five-seveN as well as 5.7X28mm ammunition with armor-piercing capabilities.

The Point of No Return

2009-11-02T08:02:00.000-08:00

Two recent undercover investigations, by the City of New York and a researcher at UC Davis, drew national attention by exposing widespread illegal activity at America’s gun shows. But however shocking these studies might have been, they contained no new revelations.

It has now been ten years since “The Gun Show Loophole” became a household term following the shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado. It is well-known that the shooters at Columbine obtained firearms through Denver-area gun shows, but two new books—Dave Cullen’s Columbine and Jeff Kass’ Columbine: A True Crime Story—have shed light on how weak federal and state gun laws were purposefully exploited in the tragedy.

A Tragedy of Epic Proportions
On April 20, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold drove to their high school in Columbine with an arsenal of bombs, guns and ammunition. Their subsequent rampage lasted approximately 45 minutes and left 13 dead (one teacher and 12 students) and 24 injured. Harris, armed with a Hi-Point 995 9mm carbine rifle (with thirteen 10-round magazines) and a Savage-Springfield 67H sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun, would fire a total of 124 rounds during the shooting. Klebold, armed with an Intratec Tec-9 semiautomatic assault pistol (with one 52-, one 32-, and one 28-round magazine) and a Stevens 311D double-barreled, sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun, would fire 64 rounds. Their final rounds were used to take their own lives.

The plans for the mass shooting had begun to take shape in the fall of 1997. On November 3, 1997, it was mentioned for the first time when Klebold wrote in his diary, “[Name blocked] will get me a gun. I’ll go on my killing spree against anyone I want.” What Klebold had in mind was a “straw purchase,” where a prohibited purchaser recruits another individual to buy guns on his behalf—a federal felony offense for both parties.

Both Klebold and Harris were intimately familiar with existing gun laws. On November 12, 1998, Harris referred to Jim Brady and the 1994 “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act” in his diary, writing, “Fuck you Brady! All I want is a couple of guns, and thanks to your fucking bill I will probably not get any! Come on, I’ll have a clean record and I only want them for personal protection. It’s not like I’m some psycho who would go on a shooting spree….fuckers. I’ll probably end up nuking everything and fucking robbing some gun collector’s house. Fuck, that’ll be hard. Oh well, just as long as I kill a lot of fucking people. Everyone is always making fun of me because of how I look, how fucking weak I am and shit, well I will get you all back, ultimate fucking revenge here ... Guns! I need guns! Give me some fucking firearms!”

Harris was being playful and sarcastic. He knew that getting guns would not be difficult, despite the fact that at age 17, he and Klebold were barred under federal law from buying both long guns (minimum age 18) and handguns (21). Harris had previously written an essay about the Brady Act for school. “The FBI just shot themselves in the foot,” he declared. “There are a few loopholes in the new Brady bill. The biggest gaping hole is that the background checks are only required for licensed dealers…not private dealers.”

Too Easy
Just ten days after Harris cursed Jim Brady in his diary, he and Klebold would exploit that loophole. On November 22, 1998, they brought Robyn Anderson, an 18 year-old friend of Klebold’s, to the Tanner Gun show in Denver. There, Anderson purchased three of the guns used in the shootings (the Hi-Point 9mm rifle and two shotguns) for Klebold and Harris through three different private sellers. As these sellers were (supposedly) “not engaged in the business” of dealing firearms, Anderson never had to undergo a background or fill out any paperwork. Only one of the three sellers checked her driver’s license to see if she was of legal age to purchase long guns. Klebold and Harris were able to buy ammunition at the show themselves. The entire process took only about an hour.

In a statement she released after the shootings, Anderson said, "I think it was clear to the sellers that the guns were for Eric and Dylan. They were the only ones asking all the questions and handling the guns ... It was too easy. I wish it would have been more difficult. I wouldn't have helped them buy the guns if I had faced a criminal background check." Of the private seller that sold him his Stevens shotgun through Anderson, Klebold wrote, “He knew I was fucking buying it.”

That night, Harris was ecstatic as he wrote in his journal: “Well folks, today was a very important day in the history of Reb [Harris’ nickname] today, along with Vodka [Klebold’s nickname] and someone else who I won’t name, we went downtown and purchased the following: a double barrel 12 ga. Shotgun, a pump action 12 ga. Shotgun, a 9mm carbine, 250 9mm rounds, 15 12 ga slugs, 40 shotgun shells, 2 switch blade knives, and a total of 4 10-round clips for the carbine. We ...... have ...... GUNS! we fucking got them you sons of bitches! HA! HA HA HA! Neener! Booga Booga. Heh. It’s all over now. This capped it off, the point of no return. You know what’s weird, I don’t feel like punching through a door...probably cause I am fucking armed. I feel more confident, stronger, more God-like.”

The purchases made Harris hungry for more firearms. On December 3, 1998, he wrote in his diary, “I’m gonna still try and get my calico 9mm. Just think, 100 rounds without reloading.... hell yeah! We actually may have a chance to get some machine pistols thanks to the Brady bill. If we can save up about $200 real quick and find someone who is 21+ we can go to the next gun show and find a private dealer and buy ourselves some bad-ass AB-10 machine pistols. Clips for those things can get really fucking [big] too.”

On December 18, 1998, Harris, paid for nine magazines of 9mm ammunition at Green Mountain Guns in Lakewood, Colorado. The store ordered the ammo for the 17 year-old, and Harris was able to pick it up on December 29.

The duo then got the assault pistol they were looking for. On January 23, 1999, Harris and Klebold met Blackjack Pizza co-worker Philip Duran, 22, and his friend Mark Manes, 21, at the same Denver gun show they attended with Robyn Anderson. They shopped around for Tec-9s before Manes agrees to sell Klebold and Harris one he owned for $500. Klebold gave him a down payment of $300 that night and took possession of the gun.

From February through March 1999, Harris, Klebold, Duran and Manes would hone their marksmanship together in a forested area outside Denver known as Rampart Range. On the third and last trip to the shooting range on March 6, Duran filmed the outing with a camera that Harris and Klebold had taken from Columbine High. In the video, Klebold and Harris can be seen gleefully firing their newly acquired firearms. Nine days later, Harris and Klebold would record the first of their “Basement Tape” videos and thank Duran and Manes. Klebold observes, “We used them, like you use a horse to carry shit.” And they add one final round of thanks: “Thanks to the gun show, and to Robyn. Robyn is very cool.”

One final purchase was made the day before the shootings. On April 19, 1999, Manes went to Kmart and bought 100 rounds of 9mm ammo for Harris. Harris picked it up from Manes’ house that evening.

A History of Violence
In the wake of the shootings, commentators focused on Klebold and Harris’ age (17) when discussing their illegal gun purchases. But even if the two had been of legal age to purchase firearms, there were numerous red flags in their background that are eerily similar to ones we continue to see today in school shooters like Seung-Hui Cho and Stephen Kazmierczak. These warning signs included:

August 7, 1997—Teenager Aaron Brown reports Eric Harris’ website to the Jefferson County Police. The website contains information about homemade bombs and acts of neighborhood vandalism. Police meet with the Brown family and are given seven printed pages of Harris' website.
Fall 1997—Harris and Klebold bring a pipe bomb to work at Blackjack Pizza (they plan to blow up a watermelon after work, they say) and are admonished by their boss.
October 2, 1997—Harris and Klebold are suspended for hacking into Columbine High School’s computer system to get student locker combinations.
December 10, 1997—For a classroom assignment, Harris writes a paper titled “Guns in Schools,” which affirms, “It is just as easy to bring a loaded handgun to school as it is to bring a calculator.”
January 30, 1998—Harris and Klebold break into a parked van and steal equipment they find inside (total value: $1,719). They are arrested that evening and placed in a juvenile diversion program. Both are released from the program early for good behavior.
February 15, 1998—A passerby finds a homemade pipe bomb in a suburban park near Harris' house. The bomb is reported to the Jefferson County Police and they recover it.
February/March 1998—Klebold is suspended again for scratching something threatening into a student’s locker.
Spring 1998—In September 1998, Harris writes an essay in school about a time when he had to “give away all my weapons to my parents.” “I paid good money or spent a lot of time making them,” he says. Months later, in the “Basement Tape” videos, Harris and Klebold confirm that Harris’ parents found a tackle box in his room with pipe bombs in it. Nate Dykeman and Zack Heckler, friends of the pair, tell authorities after the massacre that Harris’ father detonated a bomb that had been confiscated from Eric’s room in the spring of 1998. Dykeman also claims that he saw Harris and Klebold blow up things with bombs on several occasions.
March 18, 1998—The Brown family calls Jefferson County Police again after Harris updates his website and writes, “God I can’t wait till I can kill you people. I’ll just go to some downtown area in some big ass city and blow up and shoot everything I can ... I will rig up explosives all over a town and detonate each one of them at will after I mow down a whole fucking area full of you snotty ass rich mother fucking high strung godlike attitude having worthless pieces of shit whores. i don’t care if I live or die in the shootout, all I want to do is kill and injure as many of you pricks as I can, especially a few people. Like brooks brown [a fellow student of Harris’ at Columbine High School].” Although one detective begins to prepare a warrant to search the Harris home for bomb-making materials (the warrant mentions that a pipe bomb matching a description by Harris was recovered in February 1998 near his home), no concrete action is ever taken in regards to the complaint.
November 1998—Harris designs a business project for his Government and Economics class. The proposal, “Hitmen for Hire,” is for a business “basically to kill people who anger our clients.” “Several weapons, such as a sawed-off pump-action riot shotgun, an AB-10 machine pistol, homemade rocket launchers, swords and daggers were gathered to help our business,” Harris adds. In a video produced for the assignment, Harris and Klebold take money from a student who complains of being bullied. The pair then shoot and kill a “jock” with fake guns in an alleyway.
December 1998—Green Mountain Guns calls the Harris house to report that the 9mm magazines which were ordered (for Eric Harris) are ready for pick-up. Harris’ father answers the phone, says he did not place any such order, and hangs up. In his journal, Eric writes, "jesus Christ that was fucking close, fucking shitheads at the gunshop almost dropped the whole project. Oh well, thank god I can BS so fucking well."
February 1999—Klebold tells Zack Heckler that he and Harris recently bought shotguns.
February 1999—Klebold writes an essay for his Creative Writing class. It tells the story of a man who kills “preps.” The man is Dylan’s height, wears a trench coat (like both Klebold and Harris), and uses bombs, a knife and two guns. The essay uses inappropriate words like “pussy” and “prick.” Klebold’s teacher talks to his parents and later calls the essay, “the most vicious story I have ever read.”
February/March 1999—Harris requests Zack Heckler's assistance in making napalm and asks another friend, Chris Morris, to store the finished batches at his house.
March 1999—Harris approaches Chris Morris and suggests they rig a "trip bomb" behind Blackjack Pizza to target kids crawling through a hole in the fence behind the restaurant.

All told, Klebold and Harris had 15 confirmed contacts with law enforcement before the Columbine massacre. This is information that would have been readily turned up in any type of background investigation prior to a firearm purchase (as opposed to an instant computer check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System database maintained by the FBI). Only a handful of states in the U.S.(New Jersey being one example) license gun owners and conduct such investigations. Virtually every other industrialized democracy in the world has licensing and registration laws in place for gun owners and their weapons.

Criminal Neglect
What was done in the wake of the Columbine tragedy to eliminate the loopholes in America’s gun laws that Harris and Klebold so deftly exploited?

Not much.

To Colorado residents’ credit, they acted quickly to close the Gun Show Loophole at the state level. In 2000, 70% of Colorado voters approved Amendment 22, a referendum to require background checks for all firearm sales at gun shows. The “Robyn Anderson” bill was also passed to clarify state law and make it clear that no individual can legally transfer a long gun to a minor without the consent of that juvenile’s parent or guardian.

The U.S. Congress was a different story. On May 21, 1999, the U.S. Senate narrowly passed an amendment to close the Gun Show Loophole. Then-Vice President Al Gore had to use his constitutional power to break the 50-50 tie vote in favor of the amendment, which he dedicated “to all of the families that have suffered from gun violence.” Then the National Rifle Association (NRA) took over. They accused the White House of backing "a charade of lawmaking" and warned that they would "hold a mirror up to this dishonest process.” Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), an NRA board member who led the effort to defeat the amendment, was equally confident. "I haven't lost," he said with a smile, wagging his forefinger in the air. "It's not over yet." These were not idle threats. Within days, similar Gun Show Loophole legislation was defeated in the House of Representatives. The Senate bill eventually stalled in conference committee.

The NRA continues to oppose efforts to close the Gun Show Loophole to this day, portraying them as some secret scheme to confiscate all privately-held firearms in America. Their defiance is certainly not a reflection of the views of the American people. According to a recent national poll, 87% of Americans—including 83% of gun owners—support closing the Gun Show Loophole.

One decade after Columbine, only 17 states in the U.S. have taken some action to close the Gun Show Loophole. It remains wide open for future Klebolds and Harrises in the other 33. As for illegal straw purchases, the recent undercover investigations by New York City and UC Davis demonstrate that they are as commonplace at gun shows as ever.

The Cost of “Freedom”
When police searched Dylan Klebold’s 1982 Black BMW following his shooting rampage, they found a newsletter from the Firearms Coalition of Colorado. “Dear Firearms Activist,” it read. “The Firearms Coalition of Colorado is working for you!” And working they were, to: a) Prohibit local municipalities from enacting gun control ordinances; b) Prevent law enforcement from exercising discretion in issuing concealed handgun permits, and; c) Bar the state of Colorado from suing firearm manufacturers “like the tobacco companies have had to fight.”

Klebold and Harris would have been gratified to know that all three of these campaigns were ultimately successful. The pair was concerned about their legacy and hoped to kick-start a “revolution.” They even spoke directly to future students in the “Basement Tapes,” stating, “If you’re going to go fucking psycho and kill a bunch of people like us...do it right.” Those who have been inspired to kill by Klebold and Harris have had no problem in following their model—weak gun laws in this country continue to allow the obviously disturbed to acquire arsenals of firepower.

“Whoever said the cost of freedom was free?” asked the Firearms Coalition of Colorado newsletter found in Klebold’s car. Certainly not the victims of Columbine. They understand the price we continue to pay for gun “freedoms” better than anyone.

A Tale of Two Terrorists

2009-10-26T07:09:00.000-07:00

When most Americans think about gun control, they think about laws that are designed to stop street criminals from obtaining firearms. In the post-9/11 era, however, such laws are equally important in foiling the violent ambitions of terrorists. Because the gun lobby has successfully blocked federal efforts to prohibit those on the FBI’s Terrorist Watch List from buying guns, it is frequently up to individual states to provide the necessary safeguards to prevent such purchases.

Two recent arrests that made national headlines provide an interesting contrast in terms of states’ ability (or willingness) to handle this responsibility.

The first was made on September 25, when authorities apprehended 33-year-old Anes Subasic after a nine-hour search of his home in Holly Springs, North Carolina. Officials found counterterrorism literature, an empty sniper scope case, and ammunition in the house. Subasic is a Muslim who fled Bosnia during its civil war (later becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen). Along with Daniel Boyd, Zakaria Boyd, Hysen Sherifi, Dlyan Boyd, Ziyad Yaghi, and Mohammad Omar Aly Hassain; Subasic was charged with conspiring to provide material support to terrorists. The cell is accused of planning violent overseas operations and an attack on the Marine Corps base in Quantico, Virginia.

Not only was the cell able to acquire a substantial cache of firearms (Daniel Boyd was also charged with selling a Ruger mini 14 and ammunition to a convicted felon), but it has also been revealed that Subasic held a permit to carry a concealed handgun in North Carolina.

Not that there weren’t obvious red flags in his background... The Bosnian Serb Republic courts had issued four warrants for Subasic’s arrest, one of which was international. An official with the Bosnian Serb police stated that Subasic “is known to be part of a criminal gang that operated in the wider area of Bosnia and the region.” All told, Bosnian Serb police charged Subasic 11 times on 16 counts of attempted murder, extortion and robbery. A waitress in Banja Luka recalled Subasic entering a restaurant and spraying fire randomly with an automatic weapon. “Whoever knows Anes, they are not surprised [by his recent arrest],” she said.

Because North Carolina is a “shall-issue” state, authorities were required to issue Subasic a concealed carry permit after he passed a computerized background check (Subasic had only minor traffic offenses during his time in the U.S.). A simple background investigation should have turned up Subasic’s outstanding international warrants, but no such investigation is conducted either for firearm purchasers or concealed carry permit holders in North Carolina.

Another terrorist who was recently apprehended had a much harder time arming himself. On October 21, Tarek Mehanna, a 27 year-old resident of Sudbury, Massachusetts, was arrested and charged with providing material support to terrorists. Authorities say Mehanna was part of a cell that attempted to join terrorist groups in Iraq, Yemen and Pakistan. When they failed to gain admission, they began plotting attacks on U.S. soil.

Inspired by the 2002 sniper attacks in Washington, D.C., Mehanna and his co-plotters hatched a plan to commit a mass shooting in a shopping mall in Massachusetts. However, according to U.S. Attorney Michael Loucks, “Mehanna and his co-conspirators ultimately abandoned this plan, because they could not obtain the automatic weapons they thought necessary to effectively carry out such an assault.”

Massachusetts certainly does not make it easy for dangerous individuals to get assault weapons. Any resident seeking to obtain a "large capacity" weapon (including assault weapons capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition directly, or via a high-capacity magazine) must obtain a special Class A license. The screening requirements to obtain this license are extensive, and law enforcement is given the discretion to deny any applicant they believe is a potential threat to public safety.

Unregulated private sales of firearms are also closely regulated in Massachusetts. The state requires all private sellers to submit a written report documenting each firearm transfer to the executive director of the state’s Criminal History Systems Board. Purchasers of firearms from private sellers are also required to submit this information. Additionally, no more than four firearms may be transferred by a Massachusetts resident in this manner in a given calendar year.

The National Rifle Association loves to claim that criminals will always be able to obtain firearms, no matter what laws are passed. The case of Tarek Mehanna gives lie to this notion. Clearly, smart gun laws can deter dangerous individuals bent on arming themselves for violence. In a time when internal threats in our country are very real, state legislators should pay heed to the case of Mehanna and put public safety over the priorities of the gun lobby.

What's Going On (at Gun Shows): Caught on Video

2009-10-19T07:06:00.000-07:00

Last month, Bullet Counter Points reported on a new study by Dr. Garen Wintemute of UC Davis that uncovered widespread illegal activity at gun shows in 19 states. This month sees the release of an equally revealing—and disturbing—study about these largely unregulated events.

On October 7, the City of New York released “Gun Show Undercover: Report on Illegal Sales at Gun Shows.” The report details undercover investigations that took place at gun shows in three states–Tennessee, Nevada, and Ohio—between May and August of this year. Private investigators were hired by the Office of NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg to perform sting operations on federally licensed firearm dealers and unlicensed private sellers at 14 different shows in that time-frame.

The investigations expose the dangers of the “Gun Show Loophole,” which allows individuals who are “not engaged in the business of dealing firearms” to sell guns to others without conducting background checks or maintaining records of sale. Private investigators posing as purchasers approached 33 unlicensed sellers and told them that they “probably couldn’t pass a background check.” 22 (or 67%) of the private sellers responded with quips like “I don’t care” or “I couldn’t pass one either, bud” and sold a gun to them anyway. In these transactions, 20 semiautomatic handguns and two semiautomatic SKS assault rifles were sold illegally to investigators (it is against the law for private sellers to transfer a firearm if they have reason to believe the purchaser is prohibited under federal law from buying guns)

It also became apparent that many of these unregulated private sellers—despite not having a federal license—were indeed “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms, and therefore breaking the law. One seller in Sharonville, Ohio, told investigators that he had sold 348 assault rifles in “just under a year” for $174,000 in revenue.” Another seller had “over 100 guns on display in twelve professionally designed cases.” Others acknowledged that they sold firearms at gun shows on a regular basis.

Not that the record of licensed dealers was much better during the investigations... 17 licensed dealers at the shows were approached by investigators who simulated a “straw purchase.” In a straw purchase, a prohibited purchaser recruits an individual with a clean criminal record to fill out paperwork, pass the background check, and purchase firearms for him/her. Only one licensed dealer refused to sell investigators a gun in this manner, despite the fact that it constitutes a federal felony offense. In these sales, 16 semiautomatic handguns were sold illegally.

Undercover videos of several of these illegal sales can be viewed here.

The guns purchased in the NYC investigation were turned over to law enforcement authorities and did no harm in nearby communities. Two homicides that were recently reported in the media show the real-life damage that can be done by guns that are trafficked from gun shows, however.

A revolver sold by a private seller at a Reno gun show was recently found at the scene of a murder in Oakland. The seller informed authorities that the woman who purchased the gun suggested to him that she would not be able to pass a background check.

In Dayton, Ohio, a police officer who lost his wife tragically to gun violence in 2000 recalled that the murder weapon came from Bill Goodman’s Gun and Knife Show—one of the shows investigated by NYC authorities. “I’m a firm proponent of the Second Amendment,” said Officer John Beall, “but it is true that the subject who killed my wife walked into Bill Goodman’s gun show, no questions asked, while under indictment [and purchased the gun].”

As Mayor Bloomberg recently said, “This is an issue that has nothing to do with the Second Amendment; it’s about keeping guns from criminals, plain and simple.” That much is obvious—and we hope that President Obama and the ATF will pay heed to a paper recently sent to them by Mayors Against Illegal Guns (of which Mayor Bloomberg is a co-chair) entitled “Blueprint for Federal Action on Illegal Guns.” This document contains many important recommendations on how to better regulate gun shows—none of which require action from a U.S. Congress that lives in fear of the gun lobby.

"We cannot allow gun violence to take any more children's lives..."

2009-10-12T06:56:00.000-07:00

The Children’s Defense Fund (CDF), a member of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, has worked tirelessly during their 35 years of existence to better the lives of children. The driving force behind these efforts has been CDF President Marian Wright Edelman. Edelman was a longtime activist in the civil rights movement and later moved to the District of Columbia to found CDF.

Recently, CDF released its 2009 “Protect Children, Not Guns” report, which evaluates the impact of gun violence on America’s youth. According to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 3,184 children died from gunfire in the United States in 2006, a 6% increase from 2005. More preschoolers (63) were killed by firearms that year than law enforcement officers (48) in the line of duty. Since 1979, gun violence has ended the lives of 107,603 children and teens in the U.S. The data also reveals that black males ages 15 to 19 are almost five times as likely as their white peers and more than twice as likely as their Latino peers to be killed by firearms. Edelman firmly believes that “the United States does not provide a level playing field for all children, and our nation does not value and protect all children’s lives equally.”

Why does CDF continue to prioritize the issue of gun violence? Edelman says that “it is now more important than ever that we work to protect children from firearms in their homes, schools and communities.” In her mind, “we do not have a ‘child and youth problem,’” but a “profound adult problem.”

“It is up to every one of us,” Edelman states, “to let our elected officials know that we care deeply about controlling gun violence.” She feels that “stronger federal legislation could help protect more children” and outlines some key measures she would like legislators to act on.

First, she believes the “Gun Show Loophole” should be closed. While the Brady Law requires that federally licensed firearms dealers conduct background checks on every sale, the law allows private individuals to sell firearms without a license and avoid the required background checks, and these sellers frequent gun shows. One study estimated that 40% of all firearms in the U.S. are purchased without a background check. Edelman suggests that advocates push for passage of bipartisan bills to require background checks on all sales at gun shows, S.843 and H.R. 2324.

Edelman also believes that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) should be strengthened. “The system could be strengthened by requiring states to provide more information to the FBI’s national database on prohibited persons, extending background checks to cover all purchases of firearms, and closing the [Terrorist Watch List] Loophole,” she says.

Finally, Edelman emphasizes the need to reinstitute the Assault Weapons Ban. While the ban, signed into law in 1994, banned 19 types of semiautomatic military-style firearms and high-capacity ammunition magazines, it expired in 2004.

Legislation is not enough by itself, however. Edelman believes “America has a deadly, historic romance with guns and violence. Our culture frequently glamorizes guns and violence in movies, television, music, and on the internet.” This culture of violence is “desensitizing” us “to the value of life,” according to Edelman, and “individuals and communities must act to end [it].”

Edelman envisions hard work on the road to a safer, more peaceful society: “Like the black students and other civil rights activists during the 1960s, we cannot wait placidly for change. They took control of their own destinies and fought inequality and discrimination—and we must do the same. We cannot allow gun violence to take any more children’s lives because of our complacency. We must take action now to let Congress know it must enact sensible gun legislation to stop the senseless killing of children and teens.”

Call Heeded

2009-10-05T08:37:00.000-07:00

A remarkable victory was achieved by grassroots activists in Philadelphia last month when one of the most corrupt gun dealers in America was forced to permanently shutter his business. The activists’ campaign, known as “Heeding God’s Call,” relied on one very powerful “weapon”: faith.

The Heeding God’s Call campaign unites 39 churches, synagogues and mosques in the Philadelphia area that are frustrated with the high level of gun violence in the city and the refusal of Pennsylvania legislators to address the problem. "[We need] a reduction of violence, a reduction of homicides that are affecting Philadelphia," said Allen Bartlett, assisting bishop for the Episcopal Diocese of Philadelphia in 2008. "It's getting worse. Guns have to be acquired somewhere and so we're going to the source."

It turns out the primary source of Philadelphia’s crime guns was Colosimo’s, a prominent gun store in Philadelphia. 2003 data from the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives (ATF) data showed that from 1989 to 1996, Colosimo’s sold 425 guns traced to crime (10 homicides, 85 assaults, 30 robberies and 300 additional gun crimes). Colosimo’s ranked fifth among federally licensed dealers in the U.S. in terms of having the highest number of guns traced to crime. Additionally, ATF data showed that 20% of all the guns recovered at crime scenes in Philadelphia were originally purchased at Colosimo’s.

“Naturally, I have more traces,” said James Colosimo, the store’s owner. “I’m the oldest gun dealer in Pennsylvania. I’ve sold more guns.” Bryan Miller of Ceasefire New Jersey saw it differently. “All of the bad guys in Philadelphia and Camden know they can straw-purchase guns at Colosimo’s,” he said. “Colosimo’s values profits over the lives of others,” added Philadelphia Solicitor Shelley Smith.

The members of Heeding God’s Calls met with Colosimo in December 2008 and asked him to sign a Responsible Firearms Retailer Partnership 10-Point Voluntary Code to reduce the amount of straw purchases and “irresponsible” gun sales taking place at his store. The code was based on one that had been adopted by Wal-Mart at the request of Mayors Against Illegal Guns in April of that year.

After Colosimo refused to sign the document, members of Heeding God’s Call began a series of protests. Twice a week for nine months, they gathered in front of the gun shop to demonstrate and pray. On January 12, members of Heeding God’s Call were arrested after entering Colosimo’s and charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct. At their trial in May, their attorney argued that their behavior “was justified because they were trying to prevent a greater evil”—deadly shootings in Philadelphia. Defendant Kemah Washington, from the Church of the Advocate in Philadelphia, told the judge, “Being arrested in January was never my intention. I did not go to be a nuisance nor did go to engage in any tumultuous behavior, but I hear the cries from our children and knew I had to react to their cries, I knew I had to stand up and be a voice for those who have been killed or maimed by gun violence.” The 12 defendants were acquitted of all charges.

Probably not coincidentally, the store began to draw intense scrutiny from federal agents during the demonstrations and trial. On September 22, U.S. Attorney Michael Levy charged Colosimo’s with making false statements and failing to properly maintain firearm transaction records. The ATF found that Colosimo’s had sold at least 10 guns to three people in straw purchases between 2004 and 2007, including through “controlled buys” that had been set up by the agency. On September 28, James Colosimo pled guilty. His federal license to sell firearms has been revoked and as of October 1 a small sign appeared on the front door of his shop that said “Closed for inventory.”

After hearing that news, Cherie Ryans—a Philadelphia mother who spent Saturdays outside Colosimo’s in memory of a son she had lost to an illegal gun—said, “I will never find the person who took my son’s life, but another life will be spared because this shop has closed.”

The Philadelphia Inquirer opined: “Activism of the Heeding God's Call variety—as well as the increasingly vocal Mayors Against Illegal Guns campaign in Pennsylvania –is the best hope for pushing back against National Rifle Association opposition to commonsense trafficking safeguards.” We agree, and hope the efforts of these courageous activists will serve as a model—and a source of inspiration—for other Americans trying to save lives in their communities.

A Greater Priority

2009-09-28T04:42:00.000-07:00

The recent murder of a young woman in Kentucky has given legislators cause for concern about current laws regarding domestic violence and firearms. Despite the fact that approximately 1,800 women are murdered each year by men in single victim/single offender incidents, it remains surprisingly easy for known domestic abusers to obtain guns and hold onto them—even after engaging in violent acts.

On September 11, Amanda Ross, 29, was found shot and lying in the back corner of a parking lot outside her Lexington home. She was taken to the University of Kentucky Medical Center, where she died. Hours later, police found Ross’ ex- fiancée, former state Rep. Steve Nunn, in a cemetery near his parents’ graves with what appeared to be self-inflicted wrist wounds and a .38 revolver—the same caliber weapon used to kill Ross. Nunn fired the gun at police and was immediately arrested. After telling investigators that he was “at the end of his rope and wanted revenge,” he was charged with the murder of Ross and violation of a protective order.

Nunn had become the subject of the restraining order after he was accused of attacking Ross in February. In the complaint, Ross claimed that Nunn become violent during an argument at her home, hit her in the face four times, pushed her against a wall, broke a lamp, and threw a cup of bourbon at her. Nunn was put on administrative leave from his job as the Deputy Secretary of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and officially resigned from his position in March.

It is not known at this time where Nunn obtained the .38 revolver found in his possession. As the subject of an active restraining order, Nunn was prohibited under federal law from possessing firearms. Unfortunately, there are few state laws in this area (24 states have restrictions on access to firearms by persons under active restraining orders, 13 have restrictions on access to firearms by domestic violence misdemeanants, and 18 allow confiscation of firearms at a domestic violence scene) and state and local law enforcement authorities rarely confiscate firearms from domestic abusers. Typically, local law enforcement would rely on federal agents to confiscate these firearms, but the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) lacks the manpower to handle such requests. As Greg Vincent, the president of the Kentucky County Attorney Association, has noted, “For the average Joe who doesn't make it onto the front page or onto every TV station, the ATF doesn't come down.”

Only one county in Kentucky, Jefferson County, is currently removing guns from the homes of domestic violence offenders. The county’s Sheriff’s Department now holds 4,700 firearms in a vault that were confiscated from such individuals. The Operations Commander for the department, Chris Hancock, has said, “I most certainly think it saves lives.” Still, there are challenges in getting others to follow suit. Jefferson Family Court Judge Jerry Bowles, a national domestic violence expert who served on a statewide domestic violence task force with Steve Nunn in 1991, has stated that the effort to uphold the law on a state level is “a struggle because a lot of judges work to circumvent the laws because of their own personal views.”

Kentucky legislators, to their credit, have stepped up to address the problem. Reps. Joni Jenkins and Mary Lou Marzian of Louisville are drafting a state law to prevent those under protective orders from retaining their firearms. Jenkins has also proposed a measure that would extend Domestic Violence Orders (DVOs) to dating couples (currently, DVOs are available only to those who are married or living together). Finally, Kentucky House Speaker Greg Stumbo plans to offer legislation named for Ross that would allow judges to require those with protection orders against them to wear ankle bracelets that track their whereabouts.

In commenting on the murder of Amanda Ross, Brian Namey of the National Network to End Domestic Violence pointed out that “more than three times as many women are murdered with guns by their partners than are murdered by a stranger’s weapon.” Thankfully, even those who typically pay homage to the gun lobby are now taking note of that fact. In February, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the federal law that bars those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors from owning guns. And Kentucky Judge Bowles recently set the stage for action in his own state by declaring that “the priority to protect women’s lives is greater than the constitutional right to bear arms.”

Those will be welcome words to women across America who are suffering in abusive relationships.

Gunning for the President

2009-09-21T07:05:00.000-07:00

The nation, sadly, has become well acquainted with the phenomenon of individuals bringing loaded guns to town hall meetings, presidential speeches and other political events. Initially, these shows of force were headline news and covered nationally. Recently, however, two disturbing incidents occurred that barely made a blip on even the local media radar.

On the evening of September 9, President Barack Obama was at the U.S. Capitol preparing to address a joint session of Congress on the subject of health care reform. At approximately 8:00 p.m., Joshua Bowman, 28, of Falls Church, Virginia, attempted to drive his Honda Civic into a secure area near the Capitol. U.S. Capitol Police stopped him and, searching his car, found a rifle, a shotgun and 500 rounds of ammunition. Bowman was arrested on the spot and charged with two counts of possession of an unregistered firearm and one count of unlawful possession of ammunition. An Associated Press article noted that “Bowman’s intentions were unclear.”

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington has stated that they have decided against prosecuting Bowman on more serious charges. It is difficult to imagine, however, what legitimate reason there might have been for bringing that kind of firepower to the Capitol when so many important elected officials were gathered in one place.

Three days later, Josh Hendrickson of Rogers, Minnesota, traveled to a rally outside the Target Center in downtown Minneapolis, where President Obama was giving another speech on health care reform. Hendrickson, a concealed carry permit holder in Minnesota, was carrying a .40 caliber Glock 22 handgun in a holster on his hip, and a Kel Tec 380 in his pocket. “The Second Amendment isn’t suspended just because the president’s in town,” he explained. He was questioned by Minneapolis police and Secret Service agents, but no charges were pressed.

Hendrickson described himself as a “pretty laid-back guy,” a National Rifle Association member who always takes his keys, wallet and guns when he leaves the house. In reality, Hendrickson is a “Truther” with a violent criminal history. In fact, he was recently released after serving a 60-day stint in jail for pepper spraying a customer at the Cub Foods where he worked as a security guard. The woman had parked illegally, Hendrickson claims, and was being belligerent. “It didn’t cause a commotion,” though, he assured a reporter. Nonetheless, Hendrickson was fired, charged with fifth-degree assault, and convicted.

Nor was that his only contact with law enforcement. Hendrickson described two other incidents, one “a disorderly conduct charge involving a parking lot argument as his son’s school” and another “a dispute over a neighbor’s dog, in which police were called.” A search of the Minnesota Trial Court Public Access website reveals a total of 9 convictions for Joshua David Hendrickson, born in November 1976: 1 for 5^th degree assault, 1 for Disorderly Conduct—Brawling or Fighting, 3 for Disorderly Conduct, 1 for Reckless Driving, 2 for Driving While Intoxicated, and 1 for Interfering with an Emergency Call.

Sadly, Hendrickson was able to obtain a concealed handgun permit in Minnesota and hold on to it despite this extensive criminal record. Under Minnesota law, Hendrickson’s permit could have been revoked after his conviction for fifth-degree assault. And the law would have required law enforcement to revoke Hendrickson’s permit following his DWI convictions had he been armed during either one of these incidents. Although Minnesota is a “shall-issue” state, Minnesota sheriffs are also permitted to deny permits if they believe there is a “substantial likelihood that the applicant would be a danger to self or others.”

That Hendrickson was able to avoid all these hurdles and carry handguns near the president without being arrested is astonishing. “Now I’m going to be the guy with the assault record—the gun-carrying assaulter of people who’s outside the Obama rally,” Hendrickson predicted.

On that point, he was right. The natural question is now: How many other individuals carrying guns at political events (either openly or concealed) have disturbing criminal histories? And why is the media already losing interest in what should be headline news?

Few Volunteers for NRA Agenda

2009-09-14T05:54:00.000-07:00

In recent months, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has been pushing state legislatures across the country to legalize the carrying of concealed handguns in sensitive public places—an agenda that hasn’t sat well with the public itself. One key battleground concerning such legislation has been the state of Tennessee.

A new law in Tennessee that went into effect on September 1, SB 1518, allows concealed carry permit holders to take their handguns into parks, natural areas, campgrounds and “similar public places.” Cities and counties are allowed to opt out of the law by passing local legislation, however, and maintain their concealed handgun bans in parks. Approximately 70 municipalities have already exercised this option; ranging from major cities Memphis and Nashville to rural towns with populations under 2,000. Vice Mayor Steve Brown said of his city: "Hendersonville is a fairly conservative community, and I'm a fairly conservative alderman. Four of our aldermen have carry permits—I'm one of them—and all four of us opted out of that law." When told that the sponsor of SB 1518, Sen. Mae Beavers (R-Mt. Juliet), was considering offering new legislation to take away the opt-out provision for local governments, Brown said, "If you make a law that 70 percent of your people don't like, you'd be pretty foolish to bring it up again in an election year. I wouldn't touch that law with a 10-foot pole."

Recently, some Knoxville officials who expressed support for the ban have received threatening emails from concealed carry permit holders. Knoxville City Councilwoman Barbara Pelot received approximately 400 such emails, and said, "It made me think strongly about what kind of training do these permit holders have? ... These people don't have psychological testing. They don't go through what Knoxville Police Department officers and the Sheriff's Office do. The passion and the intensity of these e-mails made me think some very bad choices could be made by these people who have permits."

Another law that went into effect in Tennessee this year, SB 0575, allows “[any] person who has [a] handgun carry permit and is not consuming alcohol to possess [a] handgun in any restaurant that derives more than 60 percent of its revenue from the sale of food .” Tennessee does not differentiate between restaurants and night clubs for liquor licensing purposes, making the Volunteer State the first in the country to allow concealed handguns in bars (Arizona recently became the second). No mechanism has been specified to enforce the law—presumably restaurant owners would have to search everyone they serve alcohol to to see if they are carrying a firearm.

In July, a group of 10 Tennessee restaurant owners and workers filed a lawsuit which alleges that SB 0575 “creates unsafe workplaces, [and] violates federal occupational safety and health laws.” Adam Dread, attorney for the plaintiffs and an NRA member, stated, “How hard is it to have a common-sense awareness that guns and alcohol don’t mix? It’s a deadly mix. Two guys with fists, you have a fistfight. But if one has a gun, you have a tragedy.” The Tennessee Hospitality Association, Nashville Chamber of Commerce, and Nashville Visitors and Convention Bureau are supporting the lawsuit.

Proponents of the law, such as SB 0575 sponsor Sen. Doug Jackson (D-Centerville), claim that concealed carry permit holders are well-vetted and among the most responsible gun owners in America. Several recent developments, however, call these claims into question.

In late 2008, the Tennessee Department of Safety discovered that approximately 200 individuals who held concealed carry permits in the state had active restraining orders against them for domestic abuse. Although this was a clear violation of the law (subjects of restraining orders are prohibited under federal law from possessing or purchasing firearms), the Department of Safety did not notice this oversight until informed by a Nashville television station.

Then, in August of this year, the Tennessean discovered “a persistent group of Tennesseans with violent pasts who carry gun permits through loopholes, administrative mistakes, and the realities of a court system where charges based on violent incidents can be reduced or eliminated in plea bargains.” This group included convicted felons who illegally held permits and others who obtained their permits in accordance with the law despite long criminal histories. As a “shall-issue” state, Tennessee does not give local law enforcement any discretion over whether to issue a permit. If an applicant passes a basic computer background check, police must issue the permit, even if the individual is an obvious threat to public safety. "The circumstances of the cases…brought to our attention can certainly lead one to reasonably question the judgment and character of these individuals, and whether they should have permits to carry guns in public, including bars and restaurants," Nashville Metro Police Chief Ronal Serpas said in a statement. "But again, the law is the law."

In an even more recent incident that occurred in Knoxville on September 3, Luann Keller, 55, was charged with aggravated assault after she allegedly pulled her gun on an off-duty police lieutenant. Authorities say the incident may have been the result of road rage. “She started blowing her horn and then pulled up beside him and pulled a firearm,” says Knoxville Police Department Lt. Kenny Miller. Keller had a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun.

The NRA insists that allowing concealed handguns to be carried everywhere will make us safer. Opposition to their legislation in a “Red State” like Tennessee—hardly a liberal bastion—is convincing evidence that few Americans agree with them.

What's Going On (at Gun Shows): Sense of Impunity

2009-09-07T09:13:00.000-07:00

Last week, Dr. Garen Wintemute, the Director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at UC Davis, released a fascinating study that takes an inside look at America’s gun shows. Entitled “Inside Gun Shows: What Goes On When Everybody Thinks Nobody’s Watching,” it catalogues Wintemute’s observations at 78 gun shows that he attended in 19 states between 2005 and 2008. More importantly, it contains hundreds of color photographs that he took surreptitiously at these events. These photos document illegal straw purchases; anonymous, undocumented private party gun sales; the widespread availability of assault weapons; and the links between gun shows and the Neo-Nazi movement.

In the study, Wintemute describes the two systems of commerce that operate side-by-side at gun shows. On the one hand, you have dealers licensed by the federal government who are required to conduct background checks on gun purchasers. At the shows he attended, Wintemute found that those prohibited under federal law from purchasing firearms (i.e., convicted felons, domestic abusers, drug users, the mentally ill, etc.) would often evade this requirement by engaging in straw purchases. In a straw purchase, a prohibited purchaser recruits an individual(s) with a clean criminal record to pass a background check and purchase firearms for him/her (a straw purchase is a federal felony offense for both the straw purchaser and the ultimate possessor of the firearms). “The openness and sense of impunity with which straw purchases were sometimes conducted was striking,” Wintemute reports. Licensed dealers account for two-thirds of trafficked firearms that come from gun shows.

Private party sellers are also present at gun shows. These sellers are not licensed by the government and are not required to conduct background checks. A 1986 law exempted anyone who is “not engaged in the business” of dealing firearms from the background check requirement. Theoretically, these are individuals who make “occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who [sell] all or part of [their] collection of firearms.” The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), however, has noted that the effect of this law “has often been to frustrate the prosecution of unlicensed dealers masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons.” More than 85% of crime guns recovered by ATF have gone through at least one private party transaction following their initial sale by a licensed gun dealer.

Private gun sales don’t occur only at gun shows, Wintemute emphasizes. They can occur virtually anywhere—at flea markets, through classified ads in newspapers, over the Internet, in private homes, on the street, etc. Because they are anonymous and involve no paperwork, they are particularly attractive to prohibited purchasers.

At gun shows, the ATF estimates that 25 to 50% of all gun sellers who rent table space are unlicensed. Private sellers can also walk around freely at gun shows, selling firearms they’ve brought with them to other attendees. Private sales were common at the gun shows Wintemute attended. He even observed such sales occurring in states where they are illegal.

In terms of the wares that were available at gun shows, Wintemute observed that, “All types of guns are available at gun shows, but assault weapons, particularly civilian versions of AR and AK rifles, seem to figure more prominently at gun shows than in gun commerce generally.”

Little enforcement action was evident at these events. ATF has stated that “too often [gun] shows provide a ready supply of firearms to prohibited persons, gangs, violent criminals, and illegal firearms traffickers.” Yet, as Wintemute notes, the understaffed ATF has no proactive program of gun show enforcement and conducts investigations at only 3.3% of the approximately 2,300 gun shows that occur each year.

In terms of the social environment at gun shows, Wintemute observed three phenomena that have “significant potential to contribute to firearm violence. These concern: 1) promoting objectification and violence in relationships between men and women, 2) facilitating children’s access to firearms, and 3) endorsing violence as a tool for problem-solving.” Neo-Nazi and Neo-Confederate paraphernalia was common. The Turner Diaries is everywhere,” Wintemute notes, “and Mein Kaumpf can be found next to [John Lott’s] More Guns, Less Crime.”

At present, 17 states regulate gun shows in some manner. Six regulate all private party gun sales and nine more regulate private party sales of handguns only. Two states regulate private party sales at gun shows only.

In his study, Wintemute makes three key recommendations to improve existing regulation of firearm commerce. First, he says that law enforcement operations at gun shows must be expanded. “Ideally,” he says, “there would be an enforcement operation at every major event.” He cites California as an example of where such a program has worked, and well. Second, he calls for all private gun sales (not just those at gun shows) to be regulated to prevent prohibited persons from buying guns. “It appears that denial of gun purchases [through background checks] significantly lowers the risk of committing violent and gun-related crimes among the persons who are directly affected,” Wintemute notes. Finally, he calls for voluntary action by promoters and licensed dealers at gun shows to police potentially illegal sales. “Little goes on at a gun show that is not observed by those nearby,” he states.

You can view the full study along with photographs and videos here.

CSGV Mailbag

2009-08-10T05:22:00.000-07:00

In the wake of yet another mass shooting by an individual who legally purchased firearms (and obtained a permit to carry a concealed handgun) despite being clearly deranged, the need for sensible gun laws in the United States is more obvious than ever.

Thankfully, it is not only gun control supporters who are committed to preventing such unnecessary acts of violence. Here at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, we are blessed to receive inspiring emails from gun rights activists who are dedicated to ending the suffering that gun violence causes in our country. Over the past four months...

We heard from those who—thankfully—are taking care of their own hygiene...

From: Sinuhe Agrinzoni [sagrin@hotmail.com]
Subject: RE: Tell Congress: Don't Weaken Hidden Handgun Laws!
Date: July 9, 2009

you are an idiot. It is not the people legally carrying hand guns with proper permits that we have a problem with. It is the other wanna be gangsters roaming the streets with no clue or common sense that is the real threat. Get your facts straight and look up how many law abiding citizens are committing gun crimes. The number is staggeringly low. Take me off your ridiculously liberal mailing list. People like you are not qualified to wash my crotch.

Have a good day!

We heard from those who are arming themselves against dangerous practitioners of non-violence...

From: Randall 2 [randall2@randallcounty.org]
Subject: The truth
Date: July 5, 2009

You need to wake up and grow up. There have always been predators---individuals, governments, gangs, religions, in the world and always will be. People have the right, and if they have any family, they have a moral obligation to protect themselves and loved ones as well as their property. If you are too much of a coward to do this, you have no right to live here in America and enjoy the liberties we have. The question is : Why are you afraid of me having a gun? I am a law abiding, patriotic, God fearing, America and family loving citizen. I WILL have my gun to protect myself against YOU !

We heard from fans of CSGV President Mike Beard’s “Mondays With Mike” Blog...

From: lawrence mattera [lawrence.mattera@sbcglobal.net]
Subject: Mondays with fatass!
Date: June 4, 2009

Ted Nugents mental health ? What about your eating disorder,Mike? The fact is your previuos job as lobbyist shows what kind of person you are. Anything for a buck.That fact that you "feed your face" thru a anti gun group that has no "grassroots" support as you claim shows that desperation brings you earn any way you can. How do you live with yourself? From a "lobbyist" to a million mom moron. BRAVO Mike or shall I call you Munching Mike.

We heard from those with great concern for world hunger...

From: Bigdawgbob13@aol.com [Bigdawgbob13@aol.com]
Date: May 31, 2009

Try feeding some children instead of wasting your time on something you can't do. DUH

From: REBARDR1@aol.com [REBARDR1@aol.com]
Date: April 12, 2009

you people make me laugh you can not stop terrorist/ drugs/ drug dealers/ illegal gambling/prostitution/ and everything else in this country but you want to take guns from the ordinary citizen so the criminals will just get another valuable product meaning the fire arm to have in thier corrupt business's WAKE UP you people can not even feed the poor in this country

We heard from those who never explained how you’re supposed to know if someone’s a felon if you don’t run a background check on them; and who missed a recent 20/20 special...

From: slg1373
Subject: Get educated before you post
Date: May 10, 2009

Ther are no gun show loopholes. All sales @ gun shows go thru the same background check as a gun store. The only loophole is a private sale, and the person selling faces a felony if he knowing sales to a felon or someome not legally able to own a gun. Private sales go on everyday. You do not need a gun show. If Wal Mart sells a man a baseball bat and it is used to kill someone, Is Walmart responsible? More guns are used to protect and defend than used in crimes.more people die in car accidents than by guns. Wheres the legilation on banning cars. There are millons of illegal aliens driving without licenses that can't even read road signs, you would save more people by stopping that than banning guns. But doing that is not on the Liberal "feel good" agenda. If you don't beleive the loophole part go to the next gun show in your area and see for yourself.

We heard from those whose signatures stated the obvious...

From: Nathan Jack [nathan.jack95@yahoo.com]
Subject: BS
Date: April 8, 2009

You are all just a bunch of pathetic, wimpy, socialist, and nazi liberals. You think you can get rid of guns? 2nd amendment. Bad guys will always have guns even if you ban them.

A pissed off citizen

And finally, we heard from a heavily armed guy who would have attended that gun show anyway...

From: Rob Snyder [tango_1_alpha@yahoo.com]
Subject: Gun show Loop holes
Date: April 7, 2009

You poor folks are some of the most un-enlighten individuals I've ever come across. Your web site is so full of inaccuracies and false information, it's a wonder you have ever been taken seriously even by the mindless mass media. It's no wonder gun sales and the sale of ammunition are sky rocketing. You're web site might as well have a direct link to the NRA because you are so obviously biased even in the face of the truth. I want to thank you for directing me to attend a gun show. As a result of your "Loop hole" rhetoric, I decided to check it out for myself. I bought a couple of nice hand guns and an "assault rifle" at a great price! I was also able to shop and buy more accessories than I ever knew existed and all the ammo I could carry. The people have spoken, let freedom ring!

Northern Exposure

2009-08-03T06:48:00.000-07:00

Though gun control advocates typically focus on the harmful impact that weak laws have on American families, it is becoming increasingly clear that the ease of acquiring firearms in the U.S. has implications far outside our borders.

In June, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report which stated: “While it is impossible to know how many firearms are illegally smuggled into Mexico in a given year, about 87 percent of firearms seized by Mexican authorities and traced in the last 5 years originated in the United States, according to data from Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) … Many of these firearms come from gun shops and gun shows in Southwest border states.”

Understandably, this data has resulted in a national focus on Mexico as an example of how America’s loose laws lead to international firearms proliferation. A recent study in the journal Criminology and Criminal Justice, however, suggests that our neighbor to the north has also been profoundly affected by the trafficker-friendly environment in the United States. The findings of the study, entitled “The Illicit Firearms Trade in North America,” include the following:

181 handguns recovered in crime by the Toronto Police Service in 2006 were successfully traced to their first retail sale. Of those, 120 (two-thirds) were traced to the United States.
Out of 705 crime guns traced by the Firearms Tracing and Enforcement Program in Ontario in 2007, 69% were traced to the U.S.
In the first six months of 2008, the Tactical Analysis Unit of the Firearms Support Services Directorate of the Canadian Firearms Program seized 1,393 crime guns. For the less than half that could be traced, a large portion of the crime guns recovered in Canada can be traced to dealers in the U.S. (327 U.S. dealers versus 79 Canadian dealers). Of this U.S. total, Washington State had 45 dealers linked to a handgun, more than double that of any other state.

The study’s authors found, “among all data sources, the majority of the successfully traced handguns recovered in crime in Canada are found to originate in the United States and we know of no evidence that would lead one to believe that other countries are a major source of smuggled handguns.”

Criminals and traffickers look south because guns are not easy to come by in Canada. Since 1930, Canadians have been required to show “just cause” to own a handgun, and all firearms must be registered with the government. Guns are particularly easy to acquire in the United States (through straw purchases and unregulated private sales), however, and “long, undefended borders between Canada and the United States, in particular, present a challenge for customs officials who must balance the demands for free flow of goods and people with security needs.”

“The main mechanisms by which weapons are illegally trafficked from one country to another are concealment, false declaration and falsification of documents and mail order,” the study observes. “The networks for smuggling guns are diffuse and range from individuals concealing a few guns in their car to large-scale commercial operations … Mail is another means of illegal importation and one that is often difficult to detect.”

Not surprisingly, the study’s recommendations for curbing the flow of firearms into Canada begin with reforms in the United States. Such reforms would include, “improvements to regulations of firearms (for example regulating transactions at gun shows…as they do in California), better enforcement of existing regulations that prohibit straw purchases and illicit sales at gun shows, and enhanced investigations of smuggling operations.”

The authors also call for freer access to information about trafficked guns. “A firmer factual base...could be established if data from criminal investigations and gun tracing were released for research purposes,” the study finds. “A broader inquiry is warranted: the stakes are very high for developing effective strategies for limiting the illicit movements of guns.” The absence of this “factual base” has been aggravated by the Tiahrt Amendments, which restrict the ability of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to release crime gun trace data, as well as require the destruction of approved criminal background check records after 24 hours.

Toothless U.S. gun laws endanger not only Americans, but the entire continent. With all the recent concern about American guns feeding a war against the government in Mexico, it is long past time to consider the harm being done north of the border.

The Insurrectionists are Coming!

2009-07-27T06:51:00.000-07:00

Since the election of President Barack Obama in November of last year, there has been a marked increase in the promotion of “insurrectionism” in right wing circles in the United States. The insurrectionist idea holds that the Second Amendment gives individuals the "right," in the words of National Rifle Association (NRA) CEO Wayne LaPierre, "to take whatever measures necessary, including force, to abolish oppressive government." The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has argued that not only does insurrectionism degrade the democratic values and institutions that protect the freedoms that we enjoy as Americans; it also poses a direct threat to the very existence of our constitutional democracy.

Two recent examples provide disturbing evidence of this threat, and demonstrate that many individuals on the fringes of American politics—inspired by gun lobby rhetoric and FOX News commentators—feel that our democratically elected government has already lapsed into “tyranny.”

On two separate occasions in June, Hal Turner, a New Jersey resident and white supremacist blogger/radio host, was arrested for making threats against public officials. Turner first drew the attention of law enforcement by calling for the deaths of two Connecticut state legislators on his blog because they sponsored a bill that would have transferred financial power in Roman Catholic parishes from priests and bishops to lay members. “While filing a lawsuit is quaint and the 'decent' way to handle things,” he wrote, “we at TRN (Turner Radio Network) believe that being decent to a group of tyrannical scumbags is the wrong approach. It's too soft. Thankfully, the Founding Fathers gave us the tools necessary to resolve tyranny: The Second Amendment. TRN advocates Catholics in Connecticut take up arms and put down this tyranny by force ... If any state attorney, police department or court thinks they're going to get uppity with us about this, I suspect we have enough bullets to put them down, too.” Turner was soon arrested on charges of inciting injury.

Then, a few weeks after making bail on this charge, he shifted his attention outside of the tri-state area by asking his audience to kill three Republican-appointed jurists on the 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals. In response to a June 2 decision which upheld handgun restrictions in Chicago pending a review by the Supreme Court, Turner explicitly called for the murder of deciding judges Frank Easterbrook, Richard Posner and William Bauer. Turner wrote on his blog, “Let me be the first to say this plainly: these judges deserve to be killed,” and included photographs, phone numbers, work addresses, and room numbers of the judges, as well as a map of Chicago’s federal courthouse which pointed out its “anti-truck bomb” pylons. A search of his home by the FBI after his arrest revealed that he was in possession of three handguns, one shotgun, and 200 rounds of ammunition (including 150 hollow point bullets). Turner is currently in jail awaiting arraignment in Chicago.

Then there is Katherine Crabill, a Republican candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates in the state’s 99^th District. She recently made headlines by calling on Americans to resist the course President Obama has set for the country. Appearing at a “Tea Party” rally on July 15, Crabill quoted a 1775 speech by Patrick Henry and then went further, stating, “We have a chance to fight this battle at the ballot box before we have to resort to the bullet box. But that's the beauty of our Second Amendment right. I am glad for all of us who enjoy the use of firearms for hunting. But make no mistake. That was not the intent of the Founding Fathers. Our Second Amendment right was to guard against tyranny.” This thought is reinforced on Crabill’s campaign website, where she states the Second Amendment “was clearly intended for self defense as well as, and more specifically, to keep the government on notice of an armed citizenry.”

When the video of her remarks made the rounds across the Internet, Crabill told the Washington Post that she would not back down from her defense of the right to use bullets to address government grievances, citing the “domestic terrorism” and “Marxist agenda” of the Obama administration as legitimate threats. She later clarified this statement, stating, “I have no desire to see this country erupt in any kind of violent revolution. I don’t even own a gun.” She now claims her speech was “less a call to arms than a call for conservatives to mobilize for coming elections at all levels.”

This was not Crabill’s first public expression of support for insurrectionism, however. In the mid 1990’s, a time when right-wing extremism was similarly on the rise, she belonged to a militia group known as the New Mexico Citizens Action Association. An April 1995 article by the Washington Times quotes her as saying that the Oklahoma City bombing, in which Timothy McVeigh killed 168 innocent people, “was the work of our government, which will use it as an excuse to aggressively attack the growing militia movement across the country.”

Turner and Crabill are just the latest insurrectionists to make national headlines. From Wichita to Pittsburgh to Oklahoma City and beyond, 2009 has already been marred by real insurrectionist violence and other attacks that were narrowly averted. And with sales of handguns and assault weapons soaring amidst (unsubstantiated) fears of tougher gun laws under President Obama, those who view our current democracy as a “tyranny” are now better armed than ever.

McNair Shooting Puts Spotlight on Unregulated Gun Sales

2009-07-13T06:37:00.000-07:00

On July 4, former National Football League quarterback Steve McNair was asleep on a couch in his condominium in Nashville, Tennessee, when his life was abruptly taken. 20 year-old Sahel Kazemi—a woman that McNair was having an extramarital affair with—shot him four times at close range with a semiautomatic handgun, killing him. She then sat next to him on the couch and fired one shot into her temple, taking her own life.

Nashville Police report that Kazemi’s life was “spinning out of control” in the days before the shooting. Kazemi’s family has said she believed McNair was in the process of leaving his wife and four sons when they met at her job at Dave & Buster’s several months ago. No divorce papers were ever filed by the McNairs, however. Additionally, Kazemi saw McNair with another woman days before the shooting and became convinced he was seeing her. Kazemi was also concerned about making rent and car payments and had told friends and associates she “was going to end it all.”

Another warning sign came in the early morning hours of July 2, when Kazemi was arrested on a driving under the influence (DUI) charge while driving 54 miles per hour in a 30-mph zone. McNair, who was in the car with her at the time, was not arrested or charged. He bailed Kazemi out of jail the same day.

Hours later, Kazemi purchased the handgun she would use to kill McNair and herself. She did not purchase the handgun at a gun store. Under federal law, the minimum age to purchase a handgun from a federally licensed gun dealer (FFL) is 21. Being 20 years of age, Kazemi would have failed the required background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

Instead, she purchased a Bryco-Jennings 9mm handgun through a private sale from Adriam Gilliam, Jr., who she had previously met while trying to sell her car. On the evening of July 2—the same day she was bailed out of jail—Kazemi met Gilliam in the parking lot of Dave & Buster’s to complete the transaction. Because of a loophole in federal law created by the gun lobby, private individuals are permitted to sell guns without conducting background checks on purchasers or maintaining records of sale. Furthermore, private sellers, unlike FFLs, can sell handguns to persons between the ages of 18-20.

The sale by Gilliam was illegal, however, because he is prohibited under federal law from owning or purchasing firearms. In 1993, Gilliam was convicted in Florida of three counts of second-degree murder and attempted armed robbery and sentenced concurrently to 15 and 17 years in prison. Detectives traced the Bryco-Jennings pistol to a pawn shop, Household Pawn, in Nashville, where it was originally sold in 2002. The individual who originally purchased the handgun that year, who has not been identified by authorities, then sold it to Gilliam—a convicted felon—through an unregulated private sale a year and a half ago. The seller committed no crime; because he had no legal duty to perform a background check on Gilliam to verify his criminal history. The sale was cash and carry, $100 and no questions asked.

The death of Steve McNair is the latest in a series of gun-related incidents involving National Football League players. McNair’s involvement with guns and alcohol predated the July 4 tragedy. In 2003, he was arrested and charged with driving under the influence and carrying an illegal handgun. In 2007, he was charged with drunken driving again for letting his intoxicated brother-in-law drive his pickup truck. All the charges were later dropped, and McNair at some point obtained a permit to carry a concealed handgun in Tennessee (law enforcement authorities in Tennessee have no discretion and must issue a permit to anyone who passes a computerized background check).

The McNair shooting is the latest example of how unfettered access to firearms is prioritized over public safety in the United States. Multiple red flags indicated that Sahel Kazemi was a threat to herself and possibly to others. And yet weak federal laws allowed a convicted felon to obtain a handgun through an unregulated private sale; a firearm he would transfer to Kazemi without knowing anything about her; a firearm that she could not have legally purchased at a licensed gun store. Sadly, the Nashville community—and McNair admirers across the nation—are now grieving over a tragedy that was entirely preventable.

“Gun violence is…causing America to fall apart.”

2009-07-06T10:13:00.000-07:00

Here at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), we are fortunate to be able to work with talented and passionate interns from across the country. This summer, Marcellas Williams, a student at the César Chávez Public Charter School for Public Policy in Washington, D.C., spent three weeks interning at the Coalition. Marcellas was a great asset to CSGV during his time here and contributed the following blog about his views on gun violence:

Gun violence is slowly but surely causing America to fall apart.

I am an 11^th grader living in Ward 8 in Washington, D.C., where there is a high rate of death due to gun violence. I feel as though young people who try to be something in life are often those who die for no apparent reason. Some teenagers in my community try to take the “Fast Money” route and get attention for having flashy accessories. They want the “Lavish Life.” That is where their downfall begins. Many teens believe that selling drugs or being a thug is the easiest way in life, but we refuse to look beyond that and realize that there is a better road to take. It’s sad to say, but I believe that in a way I’m contributing to violence, because I’m the type of person who believes that certain people deserve what they have in store for them.

There are young people who set goals and become experts in their career fields, but we sometimes don’t see that education leads to bigger and better chances in life. That means that even when you’re doing right, you aren’t always going to be rewarded by the outside world. You need to feel a sense of pride and satisfaction for yourself. If you think you deserve recognition, you might go back to your old ways (and figure you’ll get more recognition on the streets).

Statistics show that 97% of the District of Columbia’s crime guns come from outside states. 25% come from Virginia, 25% come from Maryland, and the rest come mainly from states in the Southeast. Traffickers buy the guns in these states and then drive them across the border into D.C. and re-sell them to criminals and youths. Federal gun laws, and the laws in these outside states, are just not strong enough to protect D.C. from gun trafficking. For example, more than 40 states allow individuals to sell guns to others without putting them through a background check! Meanwhile, the District of Columbia still doesn’t have a vote in Congress, which means that our elected officials don’t have any ability to change federal gun laws to make our city safer.

All told, 1,000 people across the world die every day due to gun violence, and until people sit down and take the time to realize that, things will never change. Here in America, we need to put aside our differences and come to an understanding that guns are not the way to solve problems. Living in Southeast Washington, I’ve seen people die for senseless reasons, such as the neighborhood they’re from. I wish the people who are involved in gun violence would realize they are only showing others their ignorance. They need to realize what they've put people’s families through. It’s time to choose education over guns and the “Lavish Life.”

I’ve heard many complaints about gun violence, but when are people going to actually come together and confront those who can change America and our urban communities? The good news is that there are many things we can do to take action collectively. Build a coalition of groups and individuals against violence; organize protests to impact our laws; draft proposals and send them out to D.C. Council Members, Mayor Adrian Fenty, and President Barack Obama; create petitions; get more young people involved, etc. We need to ask legislators the following question: “If you were in my shoes, how would you feel?”

A problem won’t solve itself—it takes people who are willing to help make change in America. We can start to make that change this very second; all we need is involvement from people who are concerned and willing to make a difference.

The Myth of the "Black Market"

2009-06-22T07:17:00.000-07:00

The cities of Washington, D.C. and Chicago have been under siege in recent months by the National Rifle Association (NRA), which is attempting to overturn gun laws in both jurisdictions.

The NRA’s battle with Chicago has been in the courts, where the gun lobby is seeking to have the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment ruling in the case of D.C. V. Heller incorporated at the state level. This would have the practical effort of repealing Chicago’s handgun ban. After the 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the NRA’s lawsuit, it appears headed to the Supreme Court on appeal.

D.C. v. Heller, of course, already repealed the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, but the Supreme Court’s ruling did not go far enough for the NRA. They are now seeking to have the city’s new, constitutional gun laws repealed through an amendment that was initially attached to the “D.C. House Voting Rights Act” by Senator John Ensign (R-NV). That bill has yet to be considered by the House of Representatives, and the amendment’s next likely target is the D.C. appropriations bill, which Congress will likely take up this summer.

Time and time again, the NRA has blamed violence in the two cities on their tough laws, despite evidence that shows that criminals are totally unable to acquire firearms inside Chicago and Washington. So why is it so easy for criminals and gun traffickers to get firearms outside the borders of cities? A fascinating new essay by David Kairys, a professor of Law at Temple University, provides some answers.

The essay, entitled “Why are Handguns So Accessible on Urban Streets?” is a chapter in the new book Against the Wall: Poor, Young, Black and Male. Kairys argues that we need to avoid a “pervasive acceptance and strange sense that the extraordinary level of death and killing is a normal or inevitable aspect of life in urban America,” and that only after understanding why guns are so readily available in cities can we begin to correct the problem.

Kairys explains that “the market makes new handguns so easily available—often for less than one hundred dollars new, right out of the box—that it makes no sense to steal one.” In fact, “anyone who does not have a record can go to a licensed gun store in most states, legally buy as many handguns as he or she wants, and walk out the door with them.” Kairys also points out that there are no “meaningful limits on the resale of handguns,” because private individuals, unlike federally licensed gun dealers, are not required to run Brady background checks on purchasers.

In Kairys’ words: “The bottom line is this. Under federal law and the law of most states, any person so inclined can buy huge quantities of cheap, easily concealed handguns and sell them to others indiscriminately, often without violating any law and usually without having to worry about getting arrested, prosecuted or convicted. Nor are the identities of owners of handguns, or the persons to whom they transfer ownership, registered or maintained by government, unless state law so provides—and most do not.” Capitalizing on this weak regulation, gun manufacturers produce “more guns than could be sold to law-abiding people,” knowing full well their product will be distributed to criminals and other prohibited purchasers downstream.

So what can we do to address this problem? Kairys advocates for registering handguns and licensing handgun owners; adopting strong, clear and specific “straw purchase” laws that make all of the parties to a straw purpose criminally and civilly responsible; limiting multiple purchases of handguns in a given period; and providing large urban areas with the authority to regulate handguns within their borders. All of these measures would help to reduce the flow of handguns to criminals on America’s streets.

But most importantly, we must learn to overcome our own misconceptions of the problem. As Kairys writes, “the common image of an underground, illegal market is largely fictional.” The ability of dangerous people to easily obtain guns is the result of our weak gun laws, which do little to regulate the firearms industry. The good news? Significant progress can be made in reducing gun violence as soon as our elected officials are made to realize that “the loss of life, the economic and social costs, and the undermining of the safety and the quality of life in America are unacceptable.”

“Those types of weapons ... They’re pretty powerful.”

2009-06-15T07:27:00.000-07:00

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has long claimed that assault weapons are no more dangerous than any other type of rifle, stating: “In the mid-1980s, gun control groups invented the slang term ‘assault weapon’ and applied it to certain semi-automatic firearms which, though designed for civilian use, look like modern fully-automatic assault rifles used by the military.” That view contrasts sharply with that of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), which apparently speaks in slang: “Assault weapons were designed for rapid fire, close quarter shooting at human beings. That is why they were put together the way they were. You will not find these guns in a duck blind or at the Olympics. They are mass produced mayhem.”

The expiration of the federal Assault Weapons Ban in September 2004 has led to real violence in our country, as we have seen in a series of disturbing shootings this year. Sadly, it is our nation’s law enforcement officers who are often caught in the crosshairs of these weapons. Just ask Officer Sean Fleming of the Chesapeake Police Department.

On June 1, Fleming was on his way home from the Department’s third precinct when he responded to a call of shots fired near Interstate 64. He arrived at the scene in his green Jeep Wrangler and immediately met an onslaught of bullets fired by Christopher White, who hours earlier had assisted in the abduction of Tione Vincent, 30, off of East Liberty Street in Norfolk, Virginia.

White jumped out a van and opened fire on Fleming with a semiautomatic AK-47 assault rifle. In the resulting firefight, Fleming was shot four times. The gunfire also blew out two of the Jeep’s tires, shattered its front headlights and left 12 bullets holes in the front windshield. Police believe that two rounds went through the metal of Fleming’s car before piercing his bullet-proof vest—a demonstration of the power of the AK-47. All told, White fired approximately 30 rounds at the Jeep in a matter of seconds.

As Chesapeake Police Major T.D. Branch noted, “Those types of weapons, depending on what kind of rounds, typically penetrate metal. They’re pretty powerful.”

Additional officers arrived on the scene quickly and gave chase to White and his fellow captors, who fled the scene. In a firefight that ensued, White was killed and two other suspects were arrested. Sadly, Tione Vincent was found dead in the back of the van, apparently killed before police arrived.

Thankfully, Officer Fleming survived his injuries after being airlifted to Sentara Norfolk General Hospital and is now recovering. It is also a credit to law enforcement that no civilians were injured given that the shootout occurred in a busy intersection near rush hour.

As of June 11, the Chesapeake Police Department was still attempting to determine how White acquired the AK-47 used in the shooting. Before this incident, White was wanted in Norfolk on a series of charges including robbery, conspiracy and failure to appear in court—and as a fugitive from justice would have been banned under federal law from purchasing or owning firearms. It is possible that he acquired the weapon through an unregulated private sale in Virginia. Such sales do not require sellers to conduct background checks or maintain records of sale.

The NRA justifies its support for the legalization of assault weapons by stating that “self-defense is the primary purpose of the right to keep and bear arms.” After a series of assault weapon shootings this year targeting police, perhaps the best response to this question is: Defense against whom?

Anarchy and Vigilantism

2009-06-08T06:36:00.000-07:00

On May 31, Americans across the country were shocked to learn that Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider, had been shot and killed in the foyer of Reformation Lutheran Church in Wichita, Kansas. Just three hours after the shooting, authorities apprehended a suspect—Scott P. Roeder of Merriam, Kansas—on Interstate 35.

Initial reporting on the case linked the murder to Roeder’s extensive history as a pro-life activist. One Kansas City pro-life protestor, Regina Dinwiddie, commented that Roeder, “believed in justifiable homicide. I know he very strongly believed that abortion was murder and that you ought to defend the little ones, both born and unborn.” A September 3, 2007, post from a “Scott Roeder” on the website www.chargetiller.com reads as follows: “It seems as though what is happening in Kansas could be compared to the ‘lawlessness’ which is spoken of in the Bible. Tiller is the concentration camp ‘Mengele’ of our day and needs to be stopped before he and those who protect him bring judgment upon our nation.”

Subsequent investigation, however, revealed that Roeder’s ties to right wing extremist groups were far more extensive. In the words of Anti-Defamation League National Director Abraham Foxman, Roeder’s “extremism cross-pollinated between anti-government extremism and anti-abortion activism.”

In April 1996, Roeder was pulled over in Topeka, Kansas, for driving with a homemade license plate. Police found a military-style rifle, ammunition, a blasting cap, a fuse cord, a one-pound can of gunpowder, and two 9-volt batteries in his car. He was subsequently convicted on one count of criminal use of explosives and several driving-related misdemeanors, and ordered to stop associating with violent anti-government groups. The convictions were overturned on appeal a year later, however, after a court determined that the evidence was illegally gathered.

At the time, the FBI listed Roeder as a member of the Montana Freemen, a radical anti-government group. From March-June 1996, the group engaged in an armed standoff with FBI agents who were attempting to serve warrants at their compound. Federal prosecutors had alleged that Freemen members wrote worthless checks and money orders to pay taxes and to defraud banks and credit card companies. Though no shots were fired, the heavily-armed Freemen remained in their Jordan, Montana, compound for 81 days before allowing the FBI to enter. Several of the group’s members were subsequently convicted on a range of charges.

This information suggests that Roeder’s killing of Dr. Tiller could be the latest manifestation of the Department of Homeland Security’s warning that, “the combination of environmental factors that echo the 1990s, including heightened interest in legislation for tighter firearms restrictions and returning military veterans, as well as several new trends, including an uncertain economy and a perceived rising influence of other countries, may be invigorating rightwing extremist activity, specifically the white supremacist and militia movements.” One cannot ignore the parallels between Roeder and right-wing extremists like Neo-Nazi Richard Poplawski, who killed three police officers in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in April; Joshua Cartwright, who killed two police officers in the Florida panhandle in April; and Jim Adkisson, who killed two parishioners at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in July 2008.

It is unclear at this point what type of gun Roeder used in the shooting or how he acquired it. Because Roeder’s felony conviction for criminal use of explosives was thrown out in the late 1990s, that would not have stopped him from passing a criminal background check. During a custody battle over a girl Roeder claimed was his daughter, a 2005 court ruling noted that Roeder had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and did not take medication, "which may pose a clear and present danger to the minor child." Had Roeder been adjudicated “mentally defective” or involuntarily committed to a mental institution, he would have been prohibited under federal law from purchasing or owning firearms.

Though the shooting of Dr. Tiller has obvious religious overtones due to Roeder’s pro-life activism, it is also clear that Roeder felt that violence was an appropriate way to oppose what he viewed as an illegitimate government that refused to ban abortion. Such insurrectionist beliefs pose a direct threat to any constitutional democracy, a fact recently noted by conservative FOX commentator Bill O’Reilly, who said, “Anarchy and vigilantism will assure the collapse of any society. Once the rule of law breaks down, a country is finished. Thus, clear-thinking Americans should condemn the murder of late-term abortionist Tiller. Even though the man terminated thousands of pregnancies, what he did is within Kansas law.”

“One should ask, what do guns have to do with credit cards?”

2009-05-26T06:36:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives gave final approval to a dangerous, non-germane amendment that was attached to the "Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009" by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK). The amendment, drafted by the National Rifle Association (NRA), would allow individuals to carry loaded semiautomatic handguns, assault rifles and shotguns into America’s National Parks as long as the firearm is in compliance with state law. The House approved the amendment by a vote of 279-147 (with 105 Democrats voting for it). The amendment had previously passed in the Senate by a vote of 67-29 (with 27 Democrats voting for it).

The Coburn Amendment would override a regulation that was enacted by the Reagan Administration that requires visitors to keep guns stored and unloaded when traveling through National Park lands. It has been opposed by every living and former director of the National Park Service, ranger organizations, retired superintendents, and environmental groups. In a joint statement issued by the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees, the Association of National Park Rangers, and the U.S. Park Rangers Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police, NPCA Executive Vice President Theresa Pierno said of Congress and President Barack Obama: “By not taking a stand to prevent this change, they have sacrificed public safety and national park resources in favor of the political agenda of the National Rifle Association.” The amendment would create an enforcement nightmare for park rangers attempting to enforce gun laws in National Parks that straddle several different states.

Senator Coburn’s amendment is even more extreme than a last-minute rule issued by the Bush Administration that would have allowed individuals to carry concealed handguns in National Parks. The Bush administration moved forward with the rule despite the fact that 73% of the 140,000 people who voiced their opinions during a public comment period opposed it. In March of this year, the United States District Court issued an injunction against the implementation of the Bush rule. Judge Colleen Kollar-Ketally found that the Bush administration’s rulemaking process was “astoundingly flawed” because they “abdicated their [National Environmental Policy Act] obligations” and “ignored substantial information in the administrative record concerning environmental impacts.” Senator Coburn has also purposely avoided the environmental review process set up to protect the Parks.

Senator Coburn says his amendment “is about protecting every American’s Second Amendment rights” and he claims, “Whether it is meth labs hidden amid lush forests or car prowls at trailheads, park rangers and forest officers are seeing an increasing amount of criminal behavior.”

The senator is apparently not familiar with the Supreme Court’s June 2008 decision in the controversial Second Amendment case of District of Columbia v. Heller. Writing for the five conservative justices in the majority in the ruling, Justice Antonin Scalia stated:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

Senator Coburn also wildly exaggerated the threat of violence in our National Parks. The truth is—like other gun free zones—they are some of the safest places in the United States. According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, there were only 1.65 violent crimes per 100,000 National Park visitors in 2006. That can be contrasted with an overall national violent crime rate of 469.2 victims per 100,000 citizens in 2005.

The legislation has now moved to President Barack Obama’s desk. Concerned citizens can contact the White House at (202) 456-1111 to urge President Obama to veto H.R. 627 and demand a clean bill from Congress minus the Coburn Amendment. It was just last year that the president publicly stated, "I am not in favor of concealed weapons. I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations." Americans should hold him to his word and indicate that the safety of their families is not a political commodity to be sacrificed.

For additional information, read this statement from CSGV Executive Director Josh Horwitz and see NPCA’s “Keep Parks Safe” webpage.

“The academic environment is sacred…and students need to feel safe.”

2009-05-11T07:56:00.000-07:00

Here at Bullet Counter Points we like to highlight the exceptional work that everyday Americans are doing to prevent gun violence in their communities. Today we focus on a young man who is determined to keep America’s college campuses safe.

On April 16—the second anniversary of the Virginia Tech shooting tragedy—approximately 300 students staged a “walk-out” of their classes at the University of Texas to protest a bill in the state legislature that would allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on campus. The students made their way to the Texas Capitol building, where they chanted in protest and rang a bell 32 times for the victims lost at Virginia Tech.

At the head of the marching students was John Woods, a Campus Leader with the group Students for Gun Free Schools (SGFS) who organized the demonstration. John is currently a graduate student at the University of Texas, but was directly affected by the shootings at Virginia Tech. He was an undergraduate at the college on April 16, 2007, and lost his girlfriend and a number of other close friends that day.

“I didn't have a choice about becoming involved,” John says. “When the shootings happened at Virginia Tech, there was no purpose to them. The people I cared about—they didn't die defending their country or their beliefs. They died for nothing.”

“I needed for there to be a purpose,” he recalls, “so I started looking at prevention. Texas lawmakers, however, started using the Virginia Tech tragedy to market concealed carry on campus. ‘The death toll could have been reduced,’ they said. From talking to survivors, though, I knew this was extremely unlikely. I knew that what the authors of the concealed carry legislation were claiming was a Hollywood fantasy.”

John resolved to organize on campus to fight HB 1893, a bill sponsored by state Rep. Joe Driver (R-Garland), who claims that allowing students to carry concealed weapons on campus would help to prevent another Virginia Tech. John was already active in Student Government at the University of Texas and found out about the organization Students for Gun Free Schools. He quickly signed up as an SGFS Campus Leader.

“I organized the walk-out because I had been to a number of offices in the Capitol where they seemed completely shocked that students were against the bill,” says John. “We hoped the walk-out and rally would show them, in a very visible way, that students did not want guns on campus.” He is now organizing students to come back to the Capitol on May 11 when the Texas House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on HB 1893.

When John talks about “prevention,” he has something specific in mind: “I think gun laws in this country utterly lack common sense. Specifically, I think background checks [on gun purchasers] need to be universal.”

John also stresses that our nation’s college campuses are some of the safest places in the country, far safer than the communities that surround them. “When someone says guns on campus make faculty and students safer,” he says, “I tell them campuses are already about as safe as they can be. I tell them to talk to the survivors of the Virginia Tech shooting, who are experts on the issue. I also point out that the lack of guns on campus enables police to respond extraordinarily quickly to a crime, particularly in an active shooter situation.”

“I think it's important to note that guns are dangerous in certain circumstances. They're not allowed in football games or athletic events or in the gallery of the Texas Capitol. Why not? They can’t be carried by private citizens onto airplanes, even though the gun lobby would have us believe someone could stop a hijacking with one in the right place at the right time. Why not? And why is campus different?”

With the gun lobby pushing to force universities to allow guns on campus, John says now is the time for others to get involved. “To other students, I would say this: Get existing leaders on campus involved. Student government organizations are always looking for ways to get things done so they can say to students, ‘Look, we accomplish things for you.’ Hold them to it—show them that this issue is important. Recruit volunteers from among them. Or run for a position yourself if you have to.”

John also emphasizes public education about loopholes in our current gun laws. “Most people don't think about it,” he says. “When they do, they end up wanting common sense gun laws.” John makes reference to another bill in the Texas state legislature that would make Texas (for the first time) forward mental health information to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to prevent deranged individuals from acquiring guns through licensed firearms dealers.

Ultimately, John sees irony in his current activism. “My precise stance on guns on campus is much like [National Rifle Association CEO] Wayne LaPierre's ten years ago,” he notes. “Schools should have absolutely zero tolerance for weapons of any kind, except in the hands of law enforcement. The academic environment is sacred, and more importantly, it's safe, and students need to feel safe.”

"The WAR wWIL start on the stepes of the Oklahoma State Capitol."

2009-05-04T07:31:00.000-07:00

Last month, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence Executive Director Josh Horwitz examined the background of Pittsburgh cop killer Richard Poplawski in a blog at the Huffington Post. That piece, entitled “Insurrectionism Goes ‘Mainstream,’” noted that Poplawski feared "the Obama gun ban that’s on its way" and a tyrannical federal government. In the words of Poplawski’s best friend, “if anyone tried to take his firearms, he was gonna' stand by what his forefathers told him to do." Most disturbing was the revelation that Poplawski’s insurrectionist views were nurtured by several “mainstream” media commentators, political figures, and even jurists.

Now comes the news that another insurrectionist attack might have been narrowly averted on the day that blog was posted. On April 15, Daniel Knight Hayden, 52, was arrested by FBI agents after he stated on Twitter that he was going to turn the Oklahoma City “Tea Party” into a bloodbath. Four days earlier, he had tweeted a string of violent, threatening messages:

7:59 pm
The WAR wWIL start on the stepes of the Oklahoma State Capitol. I will cast the first stone. In the meantime, I await the police.

8:01 pm
START THE KILLING NOW! I am wiling to be the FIRST DEATH! I Await the police. They will kill me in my home.

8:06 pm
After I am killed on the Capitol Steps like a REAL man, the rest of you will REMEMBER ME!!!

8:17 pm
I really don’ give a shit anymore. Send the cops around. I will cut their heads off the heads and throw the on the State Capitol steps.

On the day of the Tea Party, he encouraged people to attend the event (“BE THERE! We need warm bodies.”) and issued this final tweet:

12:49 am
Locked AND loaded for the Oklahoma State Capitol. Let's see what happens.

Hayden even openly referred to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, writing “THE KILILNG HAS ALREADRDY STARTED BEGINIING WITH 168 Oklahoma on 4/1995! KILL THEM BACK!!!” Like McVeigh, Hayden believes that the U.S. Constitution (and the Second Amendment specifically) gives him the right to shoot and kill federal, state and local officials if/when our government becomes “tyrannical.” In a February 19 post on the “Jack Blood—Uncovering the News Behind the News” Forum, Hayden wrote the following:

The only thing that is keeping the New World Order from destroying this nation is the presence of over 100,000,000 guns in civilian hands. When guns are outlawed, only criminals will have guns.Since we are already criminals in the eyes of the New World Order, and they intend to enslave us all, and to kill those of us who will NOT submit to their slavery, I say to IGNORE gun "laws" and keep your guns (AND ammo) handy. You only have three options:

1) Submit to total spectrum domination i.e. total enslavement.
2) Be rounded up and sent to a FEMA camp where you will be killed.
3) Die at the hands of the New World Order oppressors by taking as many of them with you as you can.

I recommend option number three and to keep your powder dry.

Hayden talked openly about the “tyranny of the New World Order” and posted an image on his MySpace Page that depicts Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Tse-Tung with the caption, “MASS-MURDERERS AGREE: GUN CONTROL WORKS.” He was obsessed with delusions about being persecuted by the police and the courts, regularly photographed Oklahoma City police cars, and had “begun to think of killing people” as early as June 2003.

Like Richard Poplawski, Hayden was a big fan of conspiracy theorist/online talk show host Alex Jones, who openly supports—and even markets—insurrection. On Twitter, Hayden urged followers, in the wake of his attack, “no matter WHAT happens, to post it on the internet IMMEDIATELY, AND send it to Alex Jones!!!!!!!!!!!!” He was also a supporter of Oath Keepers, a “new patriotic organization” composed of “mostly current, and former military, police and emergency-service personnel” whose “Orders We Will Not Obey” blog includes the following statement:

We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people ... We affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Hayden was arraigned on April 16 and has been released to a halfway house pending trial. There is no word yet on what firearms (or other armaments) were found in his home when he was arrested, or on the extent to which he had planned his attack. Whatever the case, the people of Oklahoma City were well served by law enforcement officials in their state, who acted quickly and decisively in response to this threat.

In light of this latest incident, we hope the nation’s attention will now turn to the threat of insurrectionism and the fact that this dangerous philosophy has been endorsed not only by the National Rifle Association, but also by the Conservative Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Threat from Within

2009-04-27T07:10:00.000-07:00

On April 7, the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis released a disturbing assessment of right wing extremism in the United States. The Department noted that “the economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.” Recalling the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVeigh, the Department speculated, “The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

Of particular concern to the Department was the recent spike in gun sales nationally. The assessment stated that “the high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.”

Richard Poplawski, a Neo-Nazi gun enthusiast who recently murdered three police officers responding to a 911 call from his house, was also mentioned in the assessment. DHS cited Poplawski’s cold-blooded murders as an example of violent right wing extremism and noted, “The alleged gunman’s reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment conspiracy theories relating to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a Jewish-controlled ‘one world government.’”

The Department also voiced concerns about disgruntled military veterans who possess combat skills and experience that right wing extremist groups find attractive. “These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the capabilities of extremists,” said DHS. The assessment noted that Timothy McVeigh was an Iraq War veteran and referred to a 2008 FBI report that found that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan had joined extremist groups.

Unlike insurrectionist activity during the Clinton Administration, DHS was concerned that “the advent of the Internet and other information-age technologies since the 1990s has given domestic extremists greater access to information related to bomb-making, weapons training, and tactics, as well as targeting of individuals, organizations, and facilities, potentially making extremist individuals and groups more dangerous and the consequences of their violence more severe.”

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence recently addressed the increased threat of right wing extremism—and the promotion of anti-government violence through mainstream media news sources—in a Huffington Post blog entitled “Insurrectionism Goes ‘Mainstream.’”

Many other commentators are expressing their unease regarding current right wing paranoia and rhetoric. Eric Boehlert, in an article for Alternet entitled “Fox News' Unhinged, Irrational Obama Attacks Stir up Violent Right-Wing Militants,” states that “What Fox News is doing today is embracing the same kind of hate rhetoric and doomsday conspiratorial talk that flourished during the ‘90s, and Fox News is now dumping all that rancid stuff into the mainstream. It’s legitimizing accusatory hate speech in a way no other television outlet in America ever has before.” Boehlert writes that “the Oklahoma City bombing story broke 18 months before Fox News made its cable-news debut. But if [Fox owner Rupert] Murdoch’s team maintains its current course—if Beck and company insist on irresponsibly fanning the militia-type flames of distrust—there’s the danger Fox News might soon have to cover other episodic gestures of anti-government payback.”

In another article, “Glenn Beck and the Rise of Fox News’ Militia Media,” Boehlert correctly notes that Richard Poplawski is not the first American to be inspired to murder by extreme right wing rhetoric. On July 28 of last year, Jim Adkisson brought a sawed-off 12-gauge shotgun into the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee and opened fire on parishioners, killing two and wounding several others. He specifically targeted those on the Liberal end of the political spectrum, and made that painstakingly clear in a suicide note: “Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media. But I know those people were inaccessible to me. I couldn't get to the generals & high ranking officers of the Marxist movement so I went after the foot soldiers, the chickenshit liberals that vote in these traitorous people.” Investigators who searched Adkisson’s house discovered copies of Michael Savage’s Liberalism is a Mental Disorder, Sean Hannity’s Let Freedom Ring, and The O’Reilly Factor, by Bill O’Reilly.

In a post 9/11-era, where terrorist threats from abroad are taken very seriously by the public and law enforcement officials, the threat from within is quickly becoming equally—if not more—grave.