It is a good day for Liberty

Jerry Adams has an outdoor sports radio show on various stations in Missouri.  It broadcasts Mondays between 4-6 PM on KOKO 1450 AM out of Warrensburg, Wednesday between 7 and 9 PM on KMZU 100.7 FM and KAOL 1450 AM out of Carrolton, and Friday between 6-8 PM on KRMS 1150 AM out of Osage Beach.  He has been supportive of our movement.

Jim Talent has been sworn in as Senator.  Given the narrow margin of victory, it makes one glad we set out that last sign, made that last call, passed out those last leaflets, and contributed that last dollar.  It is the little things that add up.  Start putting your spare change, a daily dollar, your two bits worth into a coffee can each day.  By the time of the next election, it will be a substantial amount.  If we put all the coffee cans together, we can make a difference.

We are often told that the founders could not have anticipated advances in firearms.  THE MEASURE OF ALL THINGS by Ken Alder, The Free Press 2002 concerns the 1790 efforts at establishing the metric system.  George Washington and Thomas Jefferson investigated the adoption of the system, with some enthusiasm.  If these old surveyors saw the advantage in the new system, they surely did not believe that weapons science was frozen at flintlock muskets.

In point of fact, among the powers of Congress in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution is the power to issue patents to promote scientific progress.  If the founders were country rubes who thought science had frozen, they would not have placed such a provision in our fundamental law.

Bellesiles, the author of ARMING AMERICA, has been allowed to resign from his post in the history department of Emory University.  He has been stripped of the Bancroft prize for historical writing.  His book claimed that firearms were almost unknown in the colonial period, people did not hunt, and what guns existed largely belonged to the government and were locked in government arsenals.  The book was hailed by prohibitionists as refuting the historical right to own firearms.  His research was promoted as groundbreaking.  The problem was, he made it up.  Researchers went through his footnotes, and found massive misquotes, and made up quotations.  He claimed to have researched probate records, and that they proved few guns existed in private hands.  He was never able to satisfactorily explain where he saw many of these records.  Of the records he specifically cites, he misrepresented the number of guns and invented comments that these guns were old, rusty, and broken.  An investigatory panel of Emory University mildly called this slipshod and unprofessional research.  His book was a massive work of fraud.  Two years after publication, it is proved to be fraud; and we are back where we started.  The prohibitionists lie, footnote their lies in the apparent belief that no one will check, insist that their lies are the truth, and when finally “allowed to resign” continue to defend a work of fraud.  We are where we started.  Another team of prohibitionists claims to have conducted research “proving” that Professor Lott’s book MORE GUNS LESS CRIME is wrong, that more guns does not decrease crime.  They do not claim that more guns increases crime just that it has no effect, but their claim is that Lott is wrong.  I have not seen any details of their research.  In the press release promoting their “study”, they claim that Lott did not have the advantage of the last ten years of research.  Actually, Lott has incorporated new data into his study every year, and found nothing which shakes his thesis.  I remember a literacy program in Mexico called “Each One Teach One”.  Each person who knew how to read, taught another.  That is what we will have to do.  Each person who reads this newsletter, will have to teach another.  It will be slow going.  To teach an unwilling student, one must start with a single comment, and single sentence, a joke.  The next day, another single comment, a sentence, a joke.  It will take months to work up to a conversation on the subject.  We have months, we do not have years.  In less than two years there will be another election.  Congress, even the presidency may change.  By that time, we must have an educated electorate to resist attacks on our rights.

My oldest son, my treasure, my jewel, my joy, (one of them) has a job working as a screener at the airport.  I asked him if they use hand warmers before frisking people, or ice packs.  He said that was classified, and he would have to report me for asking.  That’s my boy.

Tom VanEyck, our chief firearms instructor and father of some wonderful, lovely children, is having a baby.  His wife, famous for her sense of humor, is assisting in this project.

I have a web site, www.KLJamisonLaw.com.  I intend to post updates of my book MISSOURI WEAPONS AND SELF-DEFENSE LAW on the site.  The book is quite long, about 340 pages; it could be much longer but for two things.  First, I was told it was too long; second, I had to stop writing.  New cases, new issues, and new materials cross my desk, and I do not have time to incorporate them into the book.   When I set out on the project, I wanted a work that would answer nearly all questions on the subject.  When you set out on a project like that, you wind up with a book that will fortify the homestead against all manner of intrusions.

I live in Gladstone, and my city sent me a letter to the effect that they had inspected my neighborhood, and the exterior of my house meets community standards.  Thank God they didn’t look inside.

Gladstone is taking measures to enforce its ordinance against having more than three garage sales per year.  Having serial garage sales is how one becomes a crime lord in Gladstone.

I’m reviewing POST CONFLICT JUSTICE, a weighty tome on the subject of peacekeeping in uncivil societies.  One contributor boasts that the peacekeeping force in Somalia banned weapons from Mogadishu, and that by 1 January, 1993, the streets were free of weapons.  This statement will come as a shock to the Rangers involved in the Black Hawk Down battle ten months later.  The truly bizarre thing is that the writer was in Mogadishu at the time of the battle, and continues to mistake policy for results.

“I thought the Constitution guaranteed the right to bear arms?” was the plaintive query of a New Jersey gun owner.  The legislature had just passed a law requiring “smart gun” technology on every handgun sold in the state, technology which does not exist; technology which shows no current promise of existing.  He is quite right, the Constitution does guarantee the right to bear arms.  However, rights only exist as long as we defend them.  At various times there have been laws against freedom of speech, they existed until people organized against them. 

Since the election of George W. Bush, and the opinion by the Justice Department that gun ownership is an individual right, there has been a feeling that we have won.  We have not.  The Justice Department opinion hedges that the right is subject to “reasonable” regulation.  There is a wide difference in what is believed reasonable.  Various states have passed anti-gun laws, and prohibitionists in Missouri are inspired to work them into the law here.  Unjust enforcement of existing laws creates further problems.  A man in southeast Missouri armed himself against a fellow who had threatened to kill him and had already tried to kill two women.  He was not charged for the act of self-defense, but was charged for carrying a concealed weapon.  The state that could not protect him, made him a criminal for protecting himself.  It is to prevent, and redress, these unjust laws and enforcement that we formed the Western Missouri Shooters Alliance, and that is why we need the help of every gun owner in the state.

Germany has joined Australia in banning pump-action shotguns, claiming that they have no “sporting use”. 

There is a famous professional beggar in Kansas City.  He challenged, with help, laws against panhandling, and won.  I do not object to this, a man should know his limits, and it appears that he has reached his.  What I find curious is that a local columnist was interested in the man’s political views.  These views consisted of which local political figure had given him a dollar.  On reflection, I think that many people’s political views amount to the same.

A Kansas City man has a website to transliterate dead and invented languages.  I understand the need for dead languages.  Archeologists must decipher the runes leading to the next grave they will rob.  And if Buffy the Vampire Slayer teaches us nothing else, it is that dead languages hold the key to our survival.  I am puzzled by the invention of languages for entertainment purposes, Klingon for Star Trek, and Elvish for the TwoTowers movies.  They serve no purpose but supply an aura of reality.  Some guns seem designed for the same reason.

I saw a reference that an Arizona Ranger carried a 10 gauge sawed-off shotgun for its utility and convenience in protection.  After his son’s kidnapping Charles Lindberg had a retired detective trail his remaining child with a sawed-off shotgun.  The dimensions of these guns are not mentioned, they may not be “sawed-off” as the law defines them.  The term is often used for any short barreled shotgun, and should not be.  If the owner has to use the gun, the “sawed-off” tag will follow him.  At the trial of his son’s kidnapper, Charles Lindberg carried a revolver into the courthouse.  No one stopped him, he was Lindberg.  He did nothing, although he was ten feet away from the defendant.

A local jeweler is lauded in the paper for driving off thieves.  When the robbers drew guns, the staff fled to the office and aimed their own guns at a pre-selected spot on the wall.  When TV monitors showed the robbers leaving, they opened fire.  The robbers dropped their loot and fled.  This plan was, to be charitable, stupid.  If they had hit one of the robbers, they could have been murder.  As it was, they could have been charged with attempted murder.  One cannot use deadly force to protect property.  One cannot shoot at retreating felons.  It is ironic that the only self-defense case of which the Star approves, is wrong.

Anti-crime activist John Walsh has a TV talk show.  On 27 December, 2002 he had on families who lost a child because of an accidental discharge.  They have let their grief do their thinking for them and now know how everyone should live their lives; without guns.  John Walsh said that he supports the right to own guns, has numerous concealed carry permits, etc, but parroted the “10 kids killed each day” factoid.  A gun safety instructor was allowed to speak, but from the audience, not the stage.  As he tried to explain self-defense and gun safety, a grieving mother was given a microphone and allowed to shout him down.  This sort of opponent is very dangerous.  They cannot be attacked, and the natural sympathy of the audience makes them believable.  The best come-back is to recall the children murdered in by a maniac with a pitchfork.  They died because a twelve-year old girl could not reach the guns she had trained with.  By California law they were locked up.  It is a matter of balancing competing threats; the need for self-defense and the maturity of the household.  I thought that I could rely on my children, but could not control who they brought over as friends.  I am in a safe neighborhood, so I chose to lock my guns up, although one is quickly reached if needed.  In reality, even if you live in a gun free home, and ask the neighbors if they have guns before the children are allowed to visit; children will find guns.  The more forbidden an object is, the more children want to play with it.  One child found a broken rifle at a dump, and shot his brother.  One of my clients showed me where robbers had thrown a pistol, a hundred yards from a trailer court.  Prepare kids for reality.

We Shall Overcome.

Kevin Jamison

email Kevin