—–Original Message—–
From: Dave Kopel [mailto:[email protected]]

Second Amendment Project Newsletter, Aug. 11, 2000
The Second Amendment Project is based at the Independence
Institute, a free-market think tank in Golden, Colorado.

http://i2i.org

No issue next week.
====================================
Table of Contents for this issue

1. New op-eds from Dave Kopel & Ari Armstrong.
2. Rabbi Nachmanides on morality and weapons.
3. Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership: Alert regarding
violations of medical ethics.
4. H.L. Mencken on gun control.
5. How to become 500 times more powerful politically
6. Links.

=====================================
1. New Independence Institute articles. By Dave Kopel
Instant Check, Permanent Record. National Review Online.
Aug. 10, 2000.
With Drs. Paul Gallant & Joanne Eisen.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment081000a.shtml

Civil Disobedience in Canada. National Review Online. Aug.2,
2000. With Drs. Paul Gallant & Joanne Eisen.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment080200a.shtml

Cheney’s Cop-Killer Rap. If you can’t handle the truth, be
very afraid of W.’s running mate. National Review Online.
July 31, 2000.

http://www.nationalreview.com/convention/guest_comment/guest

_comment073100a.shtml

The Cheney Glock-n-Spiel. Bush’s Veep-in-waiting proved he
won’t be seduced by mindless gun lobbying. National Review
Online. July 27, 2000.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment072700a.html

“Baby Brady” Doesn’t Work Either. Gun shows. By Ari
Armstrong.

http://i2i.org/SuptDocs/Crime/Opeds/BabyBrady.htm

=========================================
2. Rabbi Nachmanides.
By Dr. David I. Caplan.

Over 700 years ago the famous Rabbi Nachmanides – also
spelled Nahmanides – wrote the following in his commentary
on Genesis 4:23.

Lamech, a descendant of Cain invented the art of casting of
iron and taught one of his sons this art, including how to
forge swords and spears. Lamech’s wives were fearful that
Lamech would be punished, because he had brought murder into
the world by inventing weapons, just as Cain had been
punished for murdering Abel albeit without weapons but with
fists and rocks. Lamech, however, reminded his wives, “well
saying, that not only with the sword or the spear can a man
kill but also with bruises or lacerations and in a much
worse death than with a sword, and the maker of the sword
does not bear sin, but the evil-doer does.”
=========================================
3. DRGO ALERT TO GUN OWNERS AND THEIR FAMILIES:

Do you own a gun? How many guns do you have? Do your
children have access to guns in your home? Did you know that
having a gun in your home triples your risk of becoming a
homicide victim?

These are questions your doctor may ask you or your children
as part of routine physical examinations or questionnaires.
All the gun-related questions you are likely to encounter in
doctors’ offices, especially pediatricians, are based on
doctor groups’ political movement against gun owners. That
movement is spearheaded by the American Academy of
Pediatrics, although the AMA and other physician groups have
launched similar efforts against gun owners.

With a few very rare exceptions, such questions about guns
do not reflect a physician’s concern about gun safety.
Rather, they are intended to intimidate or prejudice
impressionable and trusting children (and their parents)
into thinking that guns are somehow bad.

That political motive makes these questions ethically wrong.
This form of professional misconduct is known as a boundary
violation. Any doctor who asks these politically motivated
questions about your guns, either directly or on a
questionnaire, should be disciplined.

And who can discipline the physician? You, the almighty
consumer. That’s right. If you, the patient or parent, file
a formal written complaint with the offending doctor’s HMO
or medical group, your complaint will be taken seriously.
The doctor will be asked to respond to it. In any case, your
polite but firm protest will be a black mark on his or her
record that will likely make him or her think twice before
repeating the offense.

Patients not enrolled in a health plan (HMO) may see a
private practice doctor in a small group or solo practice.
Unethical behavior by such a doctor can be reported to your
county medical society, which is likely to have a public
service committee whose job it is to review complaints from
the public. Although federal anti-trust laws have mostly
stripped these committees of their enforcement powers, they
can still get an erring physician’s attention.

Medicine has become an extremely competitive service
industry. HMO’s and medical groups are trying harder than
ever to please consumers and not anger them. The last thing
a doctor wants these days, next to a malpractice suit, is a
health plan member complaint alleging unethical conduct.

If the doctor persists or is especially inappropriate, you
can send that formal complaint to the doctor’s state
licensing board. You can search your state government’s web
site to find your state’s medical licensing board. This site
should describe the procedure for formal consumer
complaints. Also you can look in your phone book under state
government for your state Medical board’s consumer hot line.
Boards generally accept only written complaints.

A consumer complaint to the medical licensing board is a
last resort, and it will be a definite blemish on the
doctor’s career. But it may be necessary for repeat
offenders. This step will apply enormous pressure on the
boundary-violating physician, even if the state board takes
no official action against his or her license.

To summarize: you don’t have to suffer in silence, and you
don’t have to disclose personal information about your gun
ownership to politically motivated doctors. And most
important, you can strike back at unethical doctors who
abuse your trust to advance a political agenda against
law-abiding gun owning families.

I discuss the ethical basis for all this in my article at
the Claremont Institute’s web site, “Boundary Violation: Gun
Politics In The Doctor’s Office.” You will find it at

http://www.claremont.org/publications/wheeler7.cfm

Please save this message and forward it to others you know
who have been the targets of anti-gun political activism in
the doctor’s office.
Best regards,
Timothy Wheeler, MD
Director
Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership
a Project of The Claremont Institute
www.claremont.org
=========================================================
4. H.L. Mencken. The Uplifters Try It Again.
The Evening Sun, Baltimore, MD, 1925

I
The eminent Nation [note: Mencken is referring to the
leftist magazine, "The Nation"] announces with relish “the
organization of a national committee of 100 to induce
Congress to prohibit the inter-State traffic in revolvers,”
and offers the pious judgement that it is “a step forward.”
“Crime statistics,” it appears, “show that 90% of the
murders that take place are committed by the use of the
pistol, and every year there are hundreds of cases of
accidental homicides because someone did not know that his
revolver was loaded.” The new law or is it to be a
constitutional
amendment? We’ll do away with all that. “It will not be
easy,” of course, “to draw a law that will permit exceptions
for public officers and bank guards” to say nothing of
Prohibition agents and other such legalized murderers. “But
soon even these officials may get on without revolvers.”

More than once in this place, I have lavished high praise
upon the Nation. All that praise has been deserved, and I am
by no means disposed to go back on it. The Nation is one of
the few honest and intelligent periodicals published in the
United States. It stands clear of official buncombe; it
prints every week a great mass of news that the newspapers
seem to miss; it interprets that news with a freedom and a
sagacity that few newspaper editors can even so much as
imagine. If it shut up shop then the country would plunge
almost unchallenged into the lowest depths of Coolidgism,
Rotarianism, Stantaquaism and other such bilge. It has been
for a decade past, the chief consolation of the small and
forlorn minority of civilized
Americans.

But the Nation, in its days, has been a Liberal organ, and
its old follies die hard. Ever and anon, in the midst of its
most eloquent and effective pleas for Liberty, its eye
wanders weakly toward Law. At such moments the old lust to
lift ‘em up overcomes it, and it makes a brilliant and
melodramatic ass of itself. Such a moment was upon it when
it printed the paragraph that I have quoted. Into that
paragraph of not over 200 words it packed as much maudlin
and nonsensical blather, as much idiotic reasoning and banal
moralizing, as Dr. Coolidge gets into a speech of two hours’
length.

II
The new law that it advocated, indeed, is one of the most
absurd specimens of jackass legislation ever heard of, even
in this paradise of legislative donkeyism. Its single and
sole effect would be to exaggerate enormously all of the
evils it proposes to put down. It would not take pistols out
of the hands of rogues and fools; it would simply take them
out of the hands of honest men. The gunman today has great
advantages everywhere. He has
artillery in his pocket, and he may assume that, in the
large cities, at least two-thirds of his prospective victims
are unarmed. But if the Nation’s proposed law (or amendment)
were passed and enforced, he could assume safely that all of
them were unarmed.

Here I do not indulge in theory. The hard facts are publicly
on display in New York State, where a law of exactly the
same tenor is already on the books the so-called Sullivan
Law. In order to get it there, of course, the Second
Amendment had to be severely strained, but the uplifters
advocated the straining unanimously, and to the tune of loud
hosannas, and the courts, as usual, were willing to sign on
the dotted line. It is now a dreadful
felony in New York to “have or possess” a pistol. Even if
one keeps it locked in a bureau drawer at home, one may be
sent to the hoosegow for ten years. More, men who have done
no more are frequently bumped off. The cops, suspecting a
man, say, of political heresy, raid his house and look for
copies of the Nation. They find none, and are thus baffled
but at the bottom of a trunk they do find a rusted and
battered revolver. So he goes to trial for violating the
Sullivan Law, and is presently being psycho-analyzed by the
uplifters at Sing Sing.

With what result? With the general result that New York,
even more than Chicago, is the heaven of footpads,
hijackers, gunmen and all other such armed thugs. Their
hands upon their pistols, they know they are safe. Not one
citizen out of a hundred that they tackle is armed for
getting a license to keep a revolver is a difficult
business, and carrying one without it is more dangerous than
submitting to robbery. So the gunmen flourish and give
humble thanks to God. Like the bootleggers, they are hot and
unanimous for Law Enforcement.

III
To all this, of course, the uplifters have a ready answer.
(At having ready answers, indeed, they always shine!) The
New York thugs, they say, are armed to the teeth because New
Jersey and Connecticut lack Sullivan Laws. When one of them
wants a revolver all he has to do is to cross the river or
take a short trolley trip. Or, to quote the Nation, he may
“simply remit to one of the large firms which advertise the
sale of their weapons by mail.” The remedy is the usual
dose: More law. Congress is besought to “prohibit the
inter-State traffic in revolvers, especially to bar them
from the mails.”

It is all very familiar, and very depressing. Find me a man
so vast an imbecile that he seriously believes that this
prohibition would work. What would become of the millions of
revolvers already in the hands of the American people if not
in New York, then at least everywhere else? (I own two and
my brother owns at least a dozen, though neither of us has
fired one since the close of the Liberty Loan drives.) Would
the cops at once confiscate this immense stock, or would it
tend to concentrate in the hands of the criminal classes? If
they attempted confiscation, how would they get my two
revolvers lawfully acquired and possessed without breaking
into my house? Would I wait for them docilely or would I
sell out, in anticipation, to the nearest pistol bootlegger?

The first effect of the enactment of such a law, obviously,
would be to make the market price of all small arms rise
sharply. A pistol which is now worth, second-hand, perhaps
$2, would quickly reach a value of $10 or even $20. This is
not theorizing; we have had plenty of experience with gin.
Well, imagining such prices to prevail, would the generality
of men surrender to the Polizei, or would they sell them to
the bootleggers? And if they sold them to the bootleggers,
what would become of them in the end: would they fall into
the hands of honest men or into the hands of rogues?

IV
But the gunmen, I take it, would not suffer from the high
cost of artillery for long. The moment the price got really
attractive, the cops themselves would begin to sell their
pistols, and with them the whole corps of Prohibition
blacklegs, private detectives, deputy sheriffs, and other
such scoundrels. And smuggling, as in the case of alcoholic
beverages, would become an organized industry, large in
scale and lordly in profits. Imagine the supplies that would
pour over the long Canadian and Mexican borders! And into
every port on every incoming ship!

Certainly, the history of the attempt to enforce Prohibition
should give even uplifters pause. A case of whisky is a
bulky object. It must be transported on a truck. It can not
be disguised. Yet in every American city today a case of
whisky may be bought almost as readily as a pair of shoes
despite all the armed guards along the Canadian border, and
all the guard ships off the ports, and all the raiding,
snooping and murdering everywhere else. Thus the camel gets
in and yet the proponents of the new anti-pistol law tell us
that they will catch the gnat! Go tell it to the Marines!

Such a law, indeed, would simply make gun-toting swagger and
fashionable, as Prohibition has made guzzling swagger and
fashionable. When I was a youngster there were no
Prohibition agents; hence I never so much as drank a glass
of beer until I was nearly 19. Today, Law Enforcement is the
eighth sacrament and the Methodist Board of Temperance,
Prohibition and Public Morals is itself the authority for
the sad news that the young of the land are full of gin. I
remember, in my youth, a time when the cops tried to
prohibit the game of catty. At once every boy in Baltimore
consecrated his whole time and energy to it. Finally, the
cops gave up their crusade. Almost instantly catty
disappeared.

V
The real victim of moral legislation is almost always the
honest, law-abiding, well-meaning citizen what the late
William Graham Summer called the Forgotten Man. Prohibition
makes it impossible for him to take a harmless drink,
cheaply and in a decent manner. In the same way the Harrison
Act puts heavy burdens upon the physician who has need of
prescribing narcotic drugs for a patient, honestly and for
good ends. But the drunkard still gets all the alcohol that
he can hold, and the drug addict is still full of morphine
and cocaine. By precisely the same route the Nation’s new
law would deprive the reputable citizen of the arms he needs
for protection, and hand them over to the rogues that he
needs protection against.

Ten or fifteen years ago there was an epidemic of suicide by
bichloride of mercury tablets. At once the uplifters
proposed laws forbidding their sale, and such laws are now
in force in many States, including New York. The
consequences are classical. A New Yorker, desiring to lay in
an antiseptic for household use, is deprived of the
cheapest, most convenient and most effective. And the
suicide rate in New York, as elsewhere, is still steadily
rising.

(Copyright, 1925, by The Evening Sun. Republication without
credit not permitted.)
===========================================================
5. How to become 500 times more powerful politically… than
the average voter. See below. Grant Noble. The Most Powerful
Office in the World is Not the Presidency of the United
States!!! (note: I have the “Most powerful Office” rules for
all 50 states—Grant Noble)

“I was a Precinct Committeeman for 16 years and I eagerly
encourage others to do likewise.” Phyllis Schlafly,
President, Eagle Forum

“I hope this (essay) gets wide distribution.” Hon. U.S. Rep.
Phillip M. Crane

Yes, I admit it. The title of this essay is a little
misleading. Bill Clinton (alas) is the most powerful man in
the world, so I guess, technically, the U.S. Presidency is
the “Most Powerful Office in the World.” But what if I told
you there is another public office that (ultimately) chooses
who will be President plus virtually every other elected
official in the United States? If that were true, wouldn’t
that office (ultimately) be the “Most Powerful Office in the
World?”

Conservatives take pride in their knowledge of the
Constitution and the outward forms of American Government.
Many can quote the Found Fathers “The least governed are the
best governed” (Jefferson), “Government is like fire, a
useful servant but a deadly master” (George Washington),
etc. We work hard electing a few tokens (like Reagan). But
the bottom line is, we know next to nothing about the real
system of American government, which isn’t the fairy tale
we’re taught in school.

That’s why, years after the “Reagan Revolution”, taxes (and
tax funded abortions) are up, the Federal debt (and crime)
continues to skyrocket, government regulations and mandates
multiply like rabbits. Public schools, the Second Amendment,
“gay rights”—I dare you to find one public policy issue
that isn’t worse from a conservative perspective!

If you are tired of seeing things continue to go down the
drain, you must understand how liberals dominate our
government. You must understand the seven laws of American
government:

1. If you want to change things, change the laws. Remember
all the nonsense we learned in school about “Coequal
Branches of Government”? Actually the Found Fathers made
Congress far and away the most powerful branch because it
was “closest to the people.”

The President can’t spend a dime unless Congress authorizes
it. Congress can reject treaties and Presidential
appointments, mandate programs the President doesn’t want
(by overriding vetoes) and even determine if the Supreme
Court can rule on a case (Article III, section 2, “…the
Supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction…with such
exceptions and under such Regulations as the Congress shall
make.”)!

Because our state constitutions are modeled after the
Federal Constitution, it’s the same story at the local
level. Governors and State Supreme Court
Justices have some influence, but ultimate power lies in the
same legislature that passes the laws and determines what
happen in our society. Unfortunately, most legislatures are
dominated by liberals.

2. To change laws, change the lawmakers. No citizens or
group can possibly keep up with the thousands of laws passed
each year by U.S. legislatures. Sure a big campaign (like
the recent one against the anti-private school provisions of
H.R. 6) can change a vote or two. But after all the shouting
is over, sometime down the road liberal legislators quietly
pass whatever they wanted in the first place. There’s really
no substitute for legislators we can count on whether our
eyes are on them or not.

3. Our people have to be on the ballot to get elected. When
was the last time you were really enthusiastic about a
candidate? How often do you vote for the “lesser of two
evils”? Ever wonder why, despite the rhetoric, both major
parties promote anti-conservative policies after they are
elected?

4. To get on the ballot, our people have to win a major
party primary. Except in very rare cases, everyone we elect
in the fall won a major party primary. In 90% of elections,
winning a major party primary is tantamount to winning the
fall election. Usually no more than 20% of the registered
voters bother to vote in these all important primaries. In
primaries that have multiple candidates (very common in
“open seat” dominant party primaries), often less than 7% of
the registered voters determine who goes to the legislature.
Since only half of the eligible population registers to
vote, I estimate about 4% of the voters are telling all the
rest of us what to do!

As this point, I should say something about third parties.
Some naove conservatives are falling for the third party
appeals of “conservative” leaders (who are more interested
in fundraising than results). The fact is our “winner take
all” system (like England and Canada) does not provide for
proportional representation. 10% of the voters in a general
election gets nothing. 10% of the voters in the primary of
the party that dominates an electoral district usually wins
a legislative seat.

5. Party endorsed candidates the primary. Sometimes
candidates endorsed by their party lose primaries, but it’s
rare. Endorsements mean you get party money plus party
workers who will pass out sample ballots with your name
prominently endorsed. Primary voters are no different than
anyone else. They don’t have a lot of time to study the
qualifications of primary candidates and their stands on the
issues. Usually they see the party endorsements, assume “the
Party knows best” and punch the appropriate holes.

There are state, ward and township party organizations, but
the basic unit of U.S. government is the county. In nearly
every case, the party endorsements the primary voter sees
are made by a county executive committee. This executive
committee is usually elected by the county’s precinct
committeemen. These committeemen are elected in the party
primary from every precinct (normally about 500 voters) in
the county.

In some states the office of precinct committeeman goes
under another name (in Michigan, they are called precinct
delegates; in Ohio, it is precinct
executive). Sometimes (as in Illinois’ Cook County), the
county executive committee is elected by primary voters from
an entire ward, township or county. But such widespread
voting for a major party’s county executive committee, is
the exception, not the rule. Normally it is the locally
elected precinct committeemen who ultimately control
endorsements.

Each state has slightly different rules for getting on the
primary ballot as a committeeman candidate. For example, in
Illinois (outside Cook County) you must file the signatures
of any 10 registered voters in your precinct 90 days before
the primary. In Ohio, you must file 5 signatures 75 days
before the primary from voters who either voted in you
party’s primary or didn’t vote in any primary in the last
two years. The rules (and the name of the office) may differ
slightly from state to state, but it’s usually easy to get
on the ballot to run as a committeeman.

6. It’s not necessary to have a majority of the county
committeemen to influence the endorsement process. Here’s
how it works in my home county,
Lake County, Illinois. Lake is overwhelmingly Republican. To
advance their agenda, liberals get elected as Republican
committeemen.

There are roughly 400 precincts in Lake County. About 100
are “vacant”, i.e., nobody ran for Republican committeeman
in the last primary. Of the 300 or so committeeman elected,
about 10% are conservatives, 15% are liberals and the rest
are “regulars” who are mainly interested in patronage and
power and usually could care less about issues like
abortion, “gay rights”, gun control, etc.

Say X and Y are running for Lake County’s executive
committee. Each has half of the “regulars”. Where are they
going to get the necessary voters
to get a majority? From 45 liberals or 30 conservatives? And
once elected, who do you think the winning candidate is
going to endorse in the next primary—a liberal Republican
or a conservative? That’s why most of Lake County’s
officials vote liberal, despite an overwhelming Republican
vote. That’s how 45 people in a county of 520,000 control
the endorsement process. In my county, it’s not 4% telling
all the rest us what to do, it’s less than one hundredth of
1%!!

Occasionally, some rich amateur will dump millions into a
campaign and become a senator or governor overnight. But
for the vast majority of politicians, it’s a long, slow
grind to the top. Each step of the ladder, they need a party
endorsement—endorsements which in both parties are
dominated by liberals. Is it any wonder why we get the
government we do?

In summary, to change things, we must change the laws. To
change the laws, we must change the people making them. To
get elected , our people must get on the ballot. To get on
the ballot, they must win a major party primary. To win the
primary, they should get endorsed by their party. To get a
party endorsements, we must find, train and elect precinct
committeemen who will in turn elect the people who make
party endorsements. Precinct committeeman is the most
powerful office in the world because committeemen ultimately
determine who goes to Washington and the state
capitol.

7. The Powerful Office in the World is Easy to get!! Lake is
typical among U.S. counties. 25% of the committeeman spots
of the dominant party are normally “vacant”. In these
precincts, if you get on the primary ballot with no primary
opponent, the only way you can lose is through an almost
impossible write-in campaign.

In the other 75% of precincts, you will probably have to
oust an incumbent committeeman (sometimes they withdraw
rather than fight). But most incumbent committeemen are
patronage hacks who do little besides drop off party
literature and endorsements. (When was the last time any
committeeman came to your door?). $50 for literature, a few
weekends visiting the hundred or so homes that might vote in
your party’s primary
and any dedicated conservative can win.

In my experience in Illinois, it’s very rare for a
conservative who follows the formula above to lose to a
“Regular” Republican committeeman—even a
“regular” who has had the office for decades. I’ve even seen
one issue zealots who insisted on converting everyone to
their cause (pro-life, gun rights, etc.) eke out wins.
Those who follow our advice and say “I’d like to represent
your views to the Republican Party. What do you think are
the
most important issues?” usually win 2 to 1.

Of course, being a conservative is harder in the Democratic
party. But there are many “Reagan Democrat” areas where
conservatives can win and the Democrat party is the only
game in town. As the 1992 Presidential election proved, it’s
a mistake to put all our conservative eggs in one party’s
rickety basket. Believe me, liberals never make that
mistake. They always join the dominant party of their area,
no matter which it is.

Voting for the Executive Committee and critical primary
endorsement is by far the most important power of precinct
committeeman. But there are
others:

1. Access to Neighbors. The media makes conservatives look
like kooks. No wonder conservative politicians have
problems. As the dominant party’s committeeman, you can
reach people who would never come to your church, social
club or home. Most voters are eager to know about their
government and the people they elect. Even the most
apathetic have some interest in an institution that is
taking about half their income in taxes, mandates and fees.

2. Respect from Politicians—Committeemen represent 500
voters and those key party endorsements. Any call or letter
from a committeeman is going to get a lot of attention form
elected officials of their own party.

3. Launching point for other offices—running for
committeeman is the best place to learn how to build winning
coalitions. One of the big problems among conservatives is
the notion that running for office is like running a
business. Levelheaded businessmen, who wouldn’t dream of
being their own lawyer in court, somehow think they can win
against experienced, entrenched liberals without any prior
political experience.

4. Control of party leaders and platforms—-Committeemen
influence or control most party matters. If the Republicans
dump pro-life and other conservative positions from their
party platform, it won’t be because of election results. It
will be due to handful of liberals who have patiently
wormed their way to high party positions, starting as a
precinct committeeman.

Now you know how our Government actually works, just like
the average liberal does. You can continue to picket, write
letters to the editor and your Congressman or work in
another losing, non endorsed primary campaign—all the
things that have gotten conservatives nowhere the last 60
years. Or you can stop wasting time, run for precinct
committeeman and start using the liberals’ secret weapon
against them!

Permission is granted to reprint or even sell this essay as
long as nothing is altered without the author’s permission.
Grant D. Noble, P.O. Box 146, Lake Forest, Il. 60045
847-234-3520 Fax: 615-0281 [email protected]
=====================================
6. Links

Australian Institute of Criminology finds licenced owners
largely NOT responsible for gun murders.

http://www.aic.gov.au/media/20000726.html

Lawsuit against Heckler & Koch thrown about Second District
Court of Appeals in California. Court rejects theory of
“ultrahazardous products liability” theory.

http://www.callaw.com/stories/edt0810b.shtml

THE TROUBLE WITH CANADIANS. By Scott Carpenter. July 15,
2000. Interesting article on a high-quality libertarian
website. http://www.libertyfreepress.com/voice0715.php3

The Second Amendment Police Department.
Pro-rights police.

http://www.2ampd.net/index.html

The Anti-Gun Bogeyman.
David Limbaugh.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_limbaugh/20000725_xcdli

_the_antigu.shtm
l

Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws

http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/DSGL

“County takes another shot at FBI sniper.”
Spokane.net.
County appeals decision finding that federal agents can
violate state homicide laws while on the job.

http://www.spokane.net/news-story-body.asp?Date=072600&ID=s8

30763&cat=
===========================================================
Some pages you may want to visit at the award-winning
Independence Institute website:

Criminal Justice and the Second Amendment:

http://i2i.org/crimjust.htm

Kopel short articles: http://i2i.org/kopel.htm.
The Columbine High School murders:

http://i2i.org/suptdocs/crime/columbine.htm

The Waco murders: http://i2i.org/Waco.htm
The Independence Institute’s on-line bookstore. Start your
browsing at the Second Amendment section:

http://i2i.org/book.htm#Second

That’s all folks!