ASKing for the Ridiculous

By Kellene Bishop

ASK Campaign

In yet another ridiculous move by the anti-self-defense camp, a national “ASK” day was established about ten years ago.  Its purpose was to remind parents to be proactive about protecting their children from firearm accidents simply by asking their friends and neighbors about the use of guns in their respective homes.  Its intent was to remind parents to inquire of friends and neighbors that their children are associating with whether or not they have firearms in the home and whether or not they are stored “properly.”

Here’s the huge problem with this campaign.  It’s putting the majority of the safety of your child in the hands of someone else.  Just because you ask if there is a firearm and the answer is “no” doesn’t mean that will remain the case perpetually.  Another adult could enter the home with a firearm.  Another child could bring a firearm to the home as well.  Are you planning on asking your neighbor this series of questions every time your child goes to visit, or even on a monthly basis?  Are you prepared to track down and research every other child that may also come to visit the same home?  How does this line of questioning completely protect your child from a firearm accident?

Photo c/o iacop.org

What if a mother was sending her child over to a policeman’s house?  Would it be acceptable that a law enforcement officer have a gun in the home?  If not, then are you teaching your child that police officers are bad or that they should be avoided?  The same goes for a concealed carry permit holder.  Several of the books I’ve read by Ayoob and Lott Jr. over the last year point out that fewer accidents occur among concealed carry permit holders than do police officers.  (just a little sampling: http://www.ktvu.com/news/5441146/detail.html)  In fact, a police officer’s gun is used against them in significantly more incidences than a private owner’s firearm.  What does your questioning do to protect your child in these circumstances? 

Additionally, you are relying on your questions being answered truthfully.  Don’t you think there might be some hesitation on the part of your neighbor when you ask someone if they have a firearm in their home?  Do they want to publish its existence to the world?  I know I don’t go around telling people what kinds of firearms and how many I own, under any circumstances.  Frankly, if you don’t know someone well enough to know about their stance on firearms and firearm safety, your child shouldn’t be spending time over there anyway, in my opinion.

Photo c/o blogs.chron.com

Ultimately, the only way to truly protect your children from a firearm accident is to educate them continually—not talk to them a little bit.  Every gun scene you see on television or in a movie is cause for education.  Every time you say “no” to particular video game, it’s an occasion to educate.  Ultimately your child’s education is their prime defense against any firearm accidents.  Properly educating your children on safety around firearms is not a one-time conversation.  It must be a consistent and congruent process of education.  Oh, and by the way.  Questioning your friends and neighbors about their beliefs in gun possession is no more effective in promoting the safety of your children than trying to do crowd control at a “Day After Thanksgiving Sale” at Wal-Mart.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.  You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Back Door CIFTA Threatens Firearm Freedom

“If you can’t beat ‘em, hide from them.”

 

The Obama Administration has unabashedly announced in several instances that they intend to bring in more gun control, even going so far as to taking away our firearms of self-defense.  However, the likelihood of our 2^nd Amendment being taken away from us is highly unlikely.  So what does Obama do?  He uses our apathy in international relations to try to accomplish the same end. 

 

Stage Left: Enter CIFTA  (read text here) 

 

CIFTA appears to remove ownership of any firearm manufactured for, or any based on a military design, OF ANY AGE, from 2nd amendment protection.  No exemptions for flintlocks, or pre-1899, either.

The treaty bans ‘“illicit” manufacturing’ of firearms, defined as:

the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials:

a. from components or parts illicitly trafficked; or

b. without a license from a competent governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly takes place; or

c. without marking the firearms that require marking at the time of manufacturing.

This would seem to require a government license for home building, assembling from parts, and quite likely many types of repairs and customizations.  And here’s the really scary part, it defines “other related materials” this way: “any component, part, or replacement part of a firearm, or an accessory which can be attached to a firearm.”  This would make all people who make accessories that attach to a firearm to have a license.  It would presumably also ban home manufacture of these items without a government license.  Do you own trigger jobs?  Reload your own ammunition?  Not anymore, not without a government license!

It defines illegal trafficking as “the import, export, acquisition, sale, delivery, movement, or transfer of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials from or across the territory of one State Party to that of another State Party, if any one of the States Parties concerned does not authorize it.”  This would not seem to affect any of these things happening exclusively within the domestic market.

It requires states to destroy seized firearms.  “States Parties shall adopt the necessary measures to ensure that all firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials seized, confiscated, or forfeited as the result of illicit manufacturing or trafficking do not fall into the hands of private individuals or businesses through auction, sale, or other disposal.”

It would seem to require some vague requirement for transport: “States Parties, in an effort to eliminate loss or diversion, undertake to adopt the necessary measures to ensure the security of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials imported into, exported from, or in transit through their respective territories.”

Here are the licensing requirements:

States Parties shall establish or maintain an effective system of export, import, and international transit licenses or authorizations for transfers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

States Parties shall not permit the transit of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials until the receiving State Party issues the corresponding license or authorization.

States Parties, before releasing shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials for export, shall ensure that the importing and in-transit countries have issued the necessary licenses or authorizations.

The importing State Party shall inform the exporting State Party, upon request, of the receipt of dispatched shipments of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials.

It’s hard to say how they expect this to be implemented.  It could, if interpreted strictly, make traveling internationally with a firearm impossible or next to impossible without expensive licenses.  We already have licenses required for commercial import or export, but personal import, export, or international transit has always been considered a separate matter.

It would seem to regulate carriage of weapons:

1. States Parties shall exchange among themselves, in conformity with their respective domestic laws and applicable treaties, relevant information on matters such as:

a. authorized producers, dealers, importers, exporters, and, whenever possible, carriers of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials;

This means your concealed carry records would be subject to being shared with foreign nations.  “Carriage” in this CIFTA sentence seems to imply carry permit information.  “To the extent possible” means that if the records exist, it must be delivered.  Registration leads to confiscation — in this case, confiscation by foreign criminals breaking into your house to steal the guns that they know you have.  Could this bring about gun-control through crime?  Do you trust the Mexican government with information about you?  I believe that that “list” would have about a 30 second life before some international enemy successfully bribed a Mexican official for it…”  hmmm… let’s see which Americans we take out first.”  And once it’s out, it’s out everywhere, so the threat of security doesn’t just lie in “official circles.”  It can easily make its way into the hands of our own neighbors.  

This treaty will clearly result in establishing national gun registration.  The treaty requires signatories to establish and maintain records of all firearms manufactured and transferred to allow participating nations to trace back a weapon found in their nation to its manufacturer and owners (Article XI).  This also addresses issues of extradition to other nations for “offenders” (think gun makers and dealers), and establishment of international oversight committees. 

The Washington Post article today clearly points out that Obama wants to push CIFTA through the Senate ASAP!  This is an end-run around our rights associated with the Second Amendment!  Entering into this treaty will make illegal the acts of hand loading your own ammunition, adding attachments to your own firearms, etc!  This is clearly a back door attempt all the way, to get serious gun control implemented in our nation.  Obama pushes the treaty like he’s fighting a wildfire.  The Senate then ratifies it based on the Democrat agenda.  The Dems then use treaty as an excuse to pass a variety of legislation to register and track arms.  All of which aids Heller et al…

 

This is the WP article about Obama’s discussion of CIFTA with Calderon while in Mexico.

 

We absolutely MUST make sure that our US Senate does not ratify and enter us into this treaty.

 

Silence is Concession, folks.

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Apparently Rape is a Spectator Sport in New York

Horrific news is coming in today from several sources.  A woman who was repeatedly raped in the presence of MTA employees at a train station in Queens, NY was told by a judge today that those who stood and watched her rape take place had no obligation to help the woman, other than inform their command center that police presence was needed at their location.  (Note: they are only obligated to call the command center, not 9-1-1) 

My thoughts on this issue are frankly all over the place.  I will always fight vehemently that our Constitutional freedoms are upheld.  Unfortunately, that means that I must tolerate the immoral way that others use their freedom.  However, we certainly need to be reminded that the U.S. Constitution was created for a moral and God-fearing people.  Clearly, as in the case of those who watched this heinous act take place in Queens, many have become numb to any thoughts of moral conscience.  While these onlookers will not have to answer to this particular judge, they will certainly have to answer to God and explain to Him why they simply allowed this to happen.  

See full story details at http://www.nypost.com/seven/04012009/news/regionalnews/subway_rapist_victims_shock_162317.htm and http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30105703/?GT1=43001  

But let’s move on.  I think it’s only a matter of fairness that I address the other obvious aspect of this crime.  Whenever an “accidental” (a.k.a. stupid disregard for gun safety) or criminal act with a handgun is committed in this nation, we are bombarded by the media and other anti-gunners telling us how awful guns are.  So isn’t it fair that when a person is attacked by a psychotic rapist and completely ignored by the citizens around her that we also hear the drum beat again and again about the need for us to take responsibility for protecting ourselves?  Clearly this judge didn’t feel that anyone was required to protect this woman.  And clearly the police didn’t have sufficient cause to protect her as they showed up at least 10 minutes after the call was made–the attacker was able to rape the woman twice during this time!   

So I ask you.  When are women going to learn that we simply cannot and should not count on anyone else to protect us?  We MUST take responsibility for this matter ourselves.  And we must make a wise decision as to the most effective way to defend ourselves.  With so much training available, much of it even for free, there’s no reason why a woman needs to endure this type of atrocity.  Fighting back is not a privilege.  It’s a RIGHT.  

I know, I may shock some of you with this statement, but I am 100% convinced that the best way for this woman to have defended herself would be with a handgun.  I don’t know how much the guy weighed, how tall he was, but frankly it doesn’t really matter.  When it comes to a clear need for self-defense, I say don’t mess around asking the guy to stop raping you.  Don’t mess around asking for others to defend you.  Defend yourself.  Two double taps to the chest, and it’s done, and it’s justified.  The horrors that this woman is going to have to live with over and over again, feeling not only betrayed by mankind, but by her own instincts, would not be an issue for her any longer if she had simply and matter-of-factly been able to stop this act by defending herself.  Yes, she would have to deal with the fact that she defended herself and as such took a life.  But psychologically that’s a lot easier to deal with than the unspeakable horrors she suffered while others simply watched.   

Her second best defense would have been an Asp, a telescoping metal baton that will indeed crush or break bones that it contacts with a forceful strike.  The third most effective would have been by leveraging her physical strengths—real physical strategies that help in a street fight such as this.  None of this “crouching tiger” baloney.  When he had her in a bear hug, if she had known how, she could have crushed his nose with her head, or she could have flipped him over into the tracks, the very same way that he threatened her, or she could have crushed his wind pipe with her hand, shoe, or cell phone. 

Here’s the rub though.  This woman is in New York, thus she has to show “cause” as to why she should legally possess a firearm.  An Asp would have been illegal in her state as well.  Adding insult to injury, if this had occurred in New York City, even IF she had a handgun WITH a license to carry, she would have been illegally in possession of it, as New York City does not recognize licenses from the State of New York.  How’s that for ridiculous?   

The sanctimonious positions of many who mistakenly believe the 2^nd Amendment is only for members of militia are clearly wrong in light of this set of circumstances.  Our Founding Fathers fully understood that others could not be compelled to defend us, except in a time of war, and still have our nation be built on freedom. However, they certainly would not have left us defenseless in the face of evil as this woman was either.  Thus every American in this nation was given the right—not privilege—to defend themselves with a gun.  This woman lost her civil lawsuit against the MTA.  Perhaps she should be suing the State of New York for making it difficult for her to defend herself with the most effective means possible!

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Children and Guns—Part 2

This is part of a four-part blog series addressing Children and Guns.  Part I – want to ensure your kid never commits a crime?  Give him a gun.  Part II addresses myths of gun safety – what you must know in order to truly protect your children.  Part III  addresses when it is safe to educate your child on firearms.  Part IV explores what’s really responsible for the death of our nation’s children.  If you enjoy what you read, please comment and share on your blog or Twitter.  Thank you. 

The Myth of Gun Safety

By Kellene Bishop

Wow! Our first installment in this series reaped the most feedback, e-mails, and responses than all of our other posts from Women of Caliber.  I hope that you will find this installment at least as equally beneficial.

In this piece I’m specifically addressing real gun safety. I’m referring to the avoidance of accidents, and putting the safety of guns around children in its proper perspective.  I’ve read far too many statistics which inflate the danger of guns around children.  My objection to this is not only that it’s false information, but that such information is the foundation for many women who would otherwise elect to possess a firearm and the accompanying self-defense skills.  So let’s provide the real facts so that we can make an educated decision, shall we?

Myth #1: “Children are constantly killed by accidental gun usage.”

The fact of the matter is that the reason why the media highlights the deaths of children via gun accidents is because they happen so rarely.  Obviously, it’s much more headline worthy when an innocent child is killed via a gun than a headline reading that a child is 6 times more likely to die in a car wreck than by a gun.  In fact, the likelihood of children dying via a car wreck is 14.5 times more likely than from a gun. 

There are approximately 300,000,000 guns owned legally by 94 million people in the U.S.  There are approximately 40 million children in America.  In 1999, the last year for which a detailed breakdown was available, 31 children younger than age 10 died from accidental shootings.  The Center for Disease Control only noted 4 children under the age of 10 dying from accidental gun deaths.  With 300 million guns and 40 million children, you would think that there would be a lot more deaths if the firearms in our homes were as dangerous as the media makes them out to be. 

Based on statistics in the same year, roughly 550 children ages 0-14 were run over by cars, 800 drowned, 660 were burned to death in fires, and 1,850 died inside cars.  Most of the 800 drowned were as a result of unattended children in a swimming pool, 93 drowned in bathtubs, and 36 died in 5-gallon buckets, yet we have no “mothers against bathtubs, buckets and swimming pools” organizations to speak of. 

Eight times as many children die from non-gun violence acts than from gun crimes.  (Kids and Guns, 2000, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquincy Prevention)

 

82% of homicides against children age 13 and under were committed without a gun. (1997, FBI Uniform Crime Statistics)

 

While less than 0.1% of all deaths for children between the ages 0-14 are from firearms, 0.6% are from motor vehicles, 5.3% are from being struck in beatings or bludgeoning, 6% from poisoning, and 42.6% from suffocation. (1997 National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics Report)

Why aren’t more children dying at the villainous hands of 94 million gun owners throughout all of America?  Because, with few exceptions, law-abiding gun owners are conscientious of educating children on gun safety and likewise practice it themselves.  And yet so many parents, and particularly women, relinquish their freedoms to defend themselves based on the warped reality spoon-fed to them by the media.

While one would think that enough has been said about the exaggerated accidents involving children and guns, I still feel it’s necessary to address this next myth.

Myth #2: “If I don’t have a gun, my children are safer and better protected.”

This concern is falsely founded for so many reasons.  For starters, if you are not familiar with the workings of a firearm, how are you able to appropriately stop an accident from happening?  Suppose you walk in on your child who’s holding a firearm in his hands.  What do you do?  Do you grab it from him?  Do you instruct him to put it down?  HOW do you grab it?  HOW would you instruct him to put it down?  Do you know when a firearm’s safety is actually engaged on every possible gun your child could get their hands on?  Do you know the proper manner to TAKE a firearm from an unauthorized child?  Why should you NOT holler at the child, even to “freeze” and put the gun down?  If you don’t know the answers to these questions then you could actually CAUSE a firearm accident by simply trying to prevent one.  (I’ll answer these questions specifically in a further post as the instructions for such an instance are an entirely separate piece.)  Additionally, is a child’s exposure to a gun solely relegated to your own home?  Not teaching your child (and yourself) about firearms doesn’t protect them, it exposes them.

If they don’t know what a gun really is, then how are they supposed to respect its deadly power or to even be an influence among their less educated friends who may possess a firearm in their presence?  Parents who choose to ignore the reality of a firearm in the midst of their children only promote a greater percentage of danger to them.  

If you are not in favor of possessing a firearm yourself and teaching the accompanying rules with such a responsibility, then at least teach your child these 4 simple rules when they come in contact with a gun.

STOP!
Don’t Touch.
Leave the Area.
Tell an Adult.

(Eddie Eagle Education Program sponsored by the NRA)

When the only exposure to guns that children have is on video games—where they “kill” people who get right back up to play some more—you are increasing the chance of them or their friends being injured in a gun accident whether you possess one or not.

Now, let’s address the last myth. I warn you in advance, this is going to get a bit dicey as it will address a topic that most parents do not want to even think about.

Myth # 3: “Waiting until my children are grown so that they can make their own decision on using a firearm is the best policy.”

First of all, let me ask you this question, when has your child EVER waited according to your time-frame to do anything?  They grow up too fast, date far too soon, get married when you swear they are still only 8-years-old, and make you a grandparent while you’re still feeling in your prime.  So let’s debunk the myth that they will actually wait until YOU are ready before deciding for themselves about firearm usage.  The best thing you can do is to give them proper knowledge and education early on so that when they do make that unprecedented decision for themselves, they do it fully informed. 

We communicate regularly with a lot of single moms on the topic of gun ownership so I’m going to create this scenario specifically for you, Super Moms.

Suppose a criminal enters your home just as you’re about to put your 3 children down for bed.  He’s got a knife and he’s holding it at you and making vile threats against you if you don’t give him money.  He’s also made it clear that he intends to fiercely violate your virtue in the presence of your children.  Sounds a bit melodramatic, you may think, but unfortunately this is exactly the situation that numerous children have faced throughout the nation (See examples below).  Of course as a mother you don’t want to ever have to think about your child needing to defend your life with a gun.  That’s a natural instinct.  But if this same scenario is thought out rationally, think about the alternative.  Would you rather that your children have to witness a heinous attack on their mother, then her death, and perhaps even be subjected to more violence to themselves afterwards?  That’s obviously an even more disturbing thought.

So what do you do?  You train your child not to be a victim and to handle a firearm properly.  Why a firearm?  Because out of all of the championship karate matches I’ve ever been to, I have yet to see a “power pint” who is truly capable of kicking the butt of a drug-enraged criminal intent on causing death and mayhem. 

If you do not prepare them mentally for such a situation now, they won’t be ready if such a horrific event does occur and you’ll risk more than one life being lost.  By preparing them for such an instance you are NOT emotionally scarring them.  You are preparing them to win with the best possible situation.  You’re not treating them to bully others.  You’re treating them to heroically defend the lives of those around them.  Such a mental fostering has a much more powerful effect on their lives than fearfully and helplessly reacting to a crisis.  If they don’t decide when they are young, they may not be able to make a decision when someone’s life depends on it.

See:

• Boy shoots home invader  http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/308864
• Son uses shotgun to defend mother against armed home invader http://www.cbs12.com/news/intruder_4709600___article.html/home_alleged.html
• 17-year-old disarms armed robber and shoots him saving his mother http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2007/06/17-year-old-disarms-shoots-robber.html
• Bank robbery and hostage situation thwarted by a teenager in 1915
  http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070702_1_A4_Kingo54280&breadcrumb=state
• 17-year-old thwarts home robbery with shotgun http://www.khou.com/news/local/stories/khou061228_ac_crosbyshooting.547846d3.html

In closing, I want to reiterate that the maximum way to ensure your children are safe is to be an involved parent.  We can’t control what they are exposed to, but we can have a great influence in what happens when they are exposed.  While I’m fully aware that parts of this article are quite uncomfortable to consider, I believe that even putting yourself mentally “there” goes a long way to assist you in your progress to be fully capable to defend yourself and your loved ones.  I simply don’t want you to NOT make that decision out of misguided information fed to you by the media.  As I’ve said before, I respect individuals who elect not to possess a firearm, so long as that decision is based on sound knowledge.  I hope this piece has assisted you in making wise decisions regarding your own self-defense as well as that of your children. 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Children and Guns—Part 1

This is part of a four-part blog series addressing Children and Guns.  Part I – want to ensure your kid never commits a crime?  Give him a gun.  Part II addresses myths of gun safety – what you must know in order to truly protect your children.  Part III  addresses when it is safe to educate your child on firearms.  Part IV explores what’s really responsible for the death of our nation’s children.  If you enjoy what you read, please comment and share on your blog or Twitter.  Thank you. 

I have been shooting firearms for about 8 years now.  As a woman who’s convinced this is the best method of self-defense, I regularly communicate with other women on this topic and frequently hear 3 primary reasons why women are fearful of owning a firearm.  The most common reason is the safety of their children.  Rather than seeing a firearm as a method of defending their children, they see it as a willful danger that they bring TO their children.  Rather than simply telling them that such wasn’t the case and they were simply falling for the mainstream media story of the day, I decided to do some very, very specific research on what really happens in this nation when it comes to children being around guns.  Frankly, my research astounded even me.  So much so that while I intended to write one article about it, I realized that there was far too much information to cover in just one.  So I’m breaking it up into a 4 part series as follows:

Part I—Want to Ensure Your Kid Never Commits a Gun Crime?  GIVE Him a Gun.

Part II—The Myth of Gun Safety.  What you must know in order to truly protect your children.

Part III—When is it Safe to Educate Your Children on Guns?

Part IV—What’s Really Responsible for the Deaths of Our Nation’s Children?

Part I—Ensure your child never commits a gun crime by actually giving him a gun?  Sounds crazy, but it’s true.  Of course you would NEVER hear the media spout off such a statement, but in a GOVERNMENT study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Juvenile and Delinquency Prevention revealed the following bit of valuable information. 

Fact: Children who get guns from their parents don’t commit gun
crimes (0 percent) while children who get guns illegally are quite
likely to do so (21 percent).

Fact: Children who get guns from parents are less likely to commit
any kind of street crime (14 percent) than children who have no gun
in the house (24 percent) – and are dramatically less likely to do so
than children who acquire an illegal gun (74 percent.)

Fact: Children who get guns from parents are less likely to use
banned drugs (13 percent) than children who get illegal guns
(41 percent.)

Fact: Boys who own legal firearms have much lower rates of
delinquency and drug use (than boys who own illegal guns) and are
even slightly less delinquent than non-owners of guns.

This study covered a period of 3 years (1993-1995).

When you take the mystery out of a gun, you take the
mischief out of the child. 

Presenting a firearm in an appropriate manner, as a tool of critical
self-defense, along with the appropriate safety rules, means that
you don’t have to worry so much about your life being turned upside
down by your child living a life of a gang-banger criminal.  Why?  
Legal gun owners tend to take their right of owning a gun very
seriously.  As such, they do not want to do anything that will
compromise that right.  They are typically a very law-abiding people. 
Bringing your child into that culture will enable them to associate
with other like-minded, law-abiding people that you can count on
being an example to them even when you’re not around.  
Now, let’s talk about the other aspect of gun ownership… a sound
knowledge of appropriate safety rules.  Whether your child has a
gun or not, this should be taught to them ad nauseam until they
truly get it.  Every single “accidental shooting” that has EVER
occurred has done so as a result of a violation of one of these gun
safety rules. 

First rule: Always keep your firearm pointed in a safe direction. 

Second Rule: Always keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot

Third Rule: Always treat a firearm as if it is loaded

Fourth Rule: Always protect your firearm from unauthorized use. 

Learn for yourself and teach these rules to the children in your life
to ensure their safety and to foster a respect for firearms.  It is also
important that you teach these rules in this particular order as well. 
One leads to the other.  

Stay tuned for Children and Guns – Part II.  

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Do You Have Enough Ammo to Last You 4 Years?

3/18/09 Update: While we’re ecstatic to hear that the NRA-ILA and a couple of good politicians have rectified this wrong, there’s still merit to this particular blog below in showing just how vulnerable we are to the minds and wills of a select few. 

I would suspect that there are very few readers who do.  And that’s a huge problem with the latest twist in the government soap opera.

As you may know, Obama previously proposed as a Senator that ammunition would receive a 500% tax hike.  He did so as a crafty way to essentially take away our guns.  Obviously, without ammunition, gun owners had better get good at throwing our firearms at an assailant or using them as batons without ammo.  You and I both know that with his penchant for taxing the American people worse than any president ever (even through the liability of his spending packages), he’s not likely to get past a deaf and moot Congress this proposal for a 500% tax hike on ammo.  So what does he do?  Nothing.  He doesn’t have to do anything because his Secretary of State is interpreting a Department of Defense directive to favor this new administration’s distaste for guns.  And it’s done without Congress having any say in it.  As of June 11, 2008, the Department of Defense is to no longer allow the military to sell fired casings to ammunition remanufacturers until they have been “mutilated”, aka shredded into scrap brass.

Let’s break this down a little bit.

In order for you to shoot, you have to have ammo.  Duh, right?  Bear with me here.  When you practice shooting, you will typically use remanufactured ammunition because it’s less expensive.  For example, 1,000 rounds of 9mm ammo (115 grain) which is remanufactured costs $207, while new ammo, 9mm (115 grain) costs $269 at a bargain price.  So the savings can be substantial.  The key to the pricing advantage of remanufactured ammunition is that the remanufacturers are able to buy their once-fired casings primarily from the military.  As you can imagine, the military uses a LOT of ammo and due to their rules they can only use new ammo.  This makes them an ideal source from which to purchase used casings.  However, now that the DOD has determined that they are only permitted to sell their ammo casings AFTER they have been shredded, this means a whole lot to your wallet.

1)     Yes, the “remanufactured” ammo will be more expensive (as if the past year of price increases haven’t been bad enough.)  The reason being is now there is an extra step in the process in order for the remanufacturers to have foundries turn the shredded brass (and other metals) into the casings they need. The reason why I put the “remanufactured” in quotation marks is that it’s doubtful to me that the new product should be called “remanufactured” as opposed to new since this additional process entails what new-ammo manufacturers have to do to produce their ammo.

2)     Your tax dollars now pay for the shredding of the casings which the military will now perform on all of their casings prior to selling it. 

3)     The remanufactured ammo represents approximately 65-75% of the ammunition market among civilians AND law enforcement.  Law enforcement regularly uses remanufactured ammo for their target practices.  Thus, now law enforcement is paying a higher price either for the remanufactured ammo, or a higher price to buy new ammo.  Guess whose tax dollars pay for that?

4)     Due to the interpretation of this DOD directive, there are a great deal of ammunition remanufacturers who will have to lay off a sizeable portion of their employees.  Hello, unemployment.  Hello, extra foreclosures.  Hello, extra bankruptcies. 

5)     This all presumes that since the casings are being shredded they will still be sold to the remanufacturers.  This is doubtful as China is the largest buyer of such metals from us in its shredded condition.  Don’t think for a second that they won’t get first crack at buying this shredded brass.  After all, we owe them for buying up so much of our debt, right?   This means that we may have put out of business ALL of the remanufacturers in the U.S. with this one strategic directive.  If the remanufacturers go out of business, then we have the small number of new-ammo manufacturers to provide all the rest of us with ammo.  And the military gets first shot in front of any buyer to obtain their ammo. 

Now think about this economically.  You have what used to represent about a third of the ammo sales in the U.S. and now they are the primary source to handle nearly all of the ammo manufacturing.  That’s called a serious supply-and-demand problem.  If you talk to anyone who buys ammo, you will undoubtedly hear stories of empty shelves, and hard-to-find ammo.  Are you starting to see why ammo is so hard to obtain now and why prices have increased substantially?  Expect an even greater supply-and-demand imbalance as the dominos continue to fall, folks.

So why do I ask if you have enough ammo for 4 years?  Because if you don’t, that situation is not likely to change unless this administration reigns-in how the directive is being interpreted, or an administration change occurs four years from now.  It won’t matter how much money you have.  You simply won’t be able to buy enough with the military standing in line in front of you.  NOW some of you may know why I predicted that there would come a time when a bucket of ammo would be worth more than a bucket of gold…on so many levels. (see www.preparednesspro.wordpress.com)

Clearly the economists who thought this one through are on the same team as those who are running Wall Street and are devoid of much in the form of patriotism or intellect. 

See the link below the draft of this directive. 

www.dla.mil/j-6/dlmso/Archives/JSACG/meetings/11Jun08/ADC_220_Small%20ArmsDefinition_DRAFT_JSACG_11June2008.doc

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Why We Fear Guns

If guns are good for us, then why are they so controversial?  Why are we afraid of them?

Well, the answer is short and sweet—manipulation.

Even in the movies we love, guns are typically portrayed in a negative light.  They are used by “bad guys” to commit unspeakable horror, and they are used by “law enforcement officers” to fight the bad guys, they are used in times of intense war, or they are used by decent people who mistakenly take the law into their own hands.

Additionally, the media in general has cast an ugly skewed shadow on the consequences of having a gun in the home, the stereotype of those who carry guns, and the supposed harm that such items cause to an otherwise civil society.  In fact, even the word “assault weapon” was created by the anti-gun individuals and the media as an accomplice to impose a derogatory and frightening mental picture associated with any firearm resembling a rifle (The phrase “assault weapon” is clearly one of many mischaracterizations of a firearm. The word “assault” denotes an act of aggressive proactive behavior. If that were really the case, perhaps we should call all fishing rods an “assault rod”).

In other words, the first reason why we’ve come to fear guns so badly is because the only education we receive typically is at the hands the media or the movie industry.  Now that I think about it, with the exception of the movie The Patriot, I don’t recall seeing any movie that promoted the right to keep and bear arms and the necessity of such to ensure a free country in an appropriate light.  In a movie we see and hear the big blast of a firearm, see the ensuing (and predictably obligatory) blood splatters, and that’s the picture we have training our mind about guns.  We never get to see and thus to better feel the relief one would have in truly being able to defend themselves from a violent crime on the big screen.  And rarely, if ever, do we hear in the media of all of the crimes that are prevented by the use of a firearm in the hands of a responsible and competent citizen.  Nope.  The only way you can find out about that is to join some kind of 2^nd Amendment activist group or purchase books which look like they were produced with a small budget. 

Do you have any idea of how hard I had to search just to find the FBI statistic which states that the mere presence of a firearm in the hands of our citizens prevents over 5,500 crimes PER DAY?  Nope.  You’ll never see a mainstream newspaper put that in their headlines. 

In other words, all of our firearm education is through the stunning special effects and loud professional voices of manipulation by those who would have us believe that the use of a firearm for self-defense is a barbaric tactic.

Not to say that your parents were wrong in the choices they made in raising you, but they have a great deal of responsibility in your feelings towards gun as well.  In their defense, they were fed the same “state of reality” growing up through the movies, media, etc.  I’m curious how far back in history I’d have to go to find a time when we actually taught about all of the components of the Constitution in elementary or middle school.  Regardless, your parents didn’t have such education.  AND they weren’t raised in a time where thousands of gangs roam our nation committed to wreaking terror and death throughout, periodic invasions from foreign terrorists, a stark imbalance between law enforcement protection and the citizens, record numbers of overcrowding in our jails, rampant substance abuse, the highest level of violent crime in the history of our nation and a laissez faire attitude and naïveté that opens us to even more crimes.  I could point out many more societal changes which may dictate that we have more reasons to take personal responsibility for our own effective self-defense today rather than yesterday, but I don’t really want this to appear too doom and gloom.  I guess I could have summed this part up by simply saying that your folks were raised in a different time of violence and crime and thus the likelihood that you were raised unaware and uneducated in matters of firearm defense is very likely.  They were subjected to the same glitzy, high-budget media and movie education that everyone else is. 

Now I don’t know about you, but when I find that I’m being manipulated, I tend to resist—fiercely.  In fact, when I’m listening to a professional speaker on a stage who is so predictably trying to get the audience to bob their heads in agreement or to contrive a laugh from the audience, I personally rebel and refuse to submit.  So, when I see that I’m being manipulated by one side of the topic, I make it a point to get the whole story…full education.  As a result, I’ve come to believe strongly in the necessity of learning how to use a firearm in self-defense AND ensure that such a right as a citizen of this nation is never threatened. 

The myths are that guns are symbols of violence, whereas I now see them as a symbol of enduring peace in a violent world around me.

The myth is that guns are used by insecure, mentally deranged people.  I find that my ability to competently use a firearm eliminates fear in my life and thus I’m able to replace that fear with confidence and unmask other positive attributes which I possess.

The myth is that guns kill lots of people every year.  The fact is they do, but typically in the hands of criminals.  The biggest killer of our American citizens is medical errors, followed by heart disease, and then cancer.  Seriously, statistically, doctors who cause death by dereliction are 9,000 times more dangerous than guns held by legal gun owners! And yet no one has ever run a news story that paints doctors and hospital staff in the same barbaric light as gun owners.

Additional consideration is the number of violent crimes that are committed by illegal immigrants in our country.  Illegal immigrants kill over 8,000 legal American citizens in our country every year, and are also responsible for sexually assaulting over 2,000 of our children every year and yet we can’t seem to lobby against them. 

Lastly, there’s the myth is that a gun in the house will result in a fatal accident among children or others. The fact is if you don’t know how to use and be safe with a firearm, your chances of an accident happening are sky-high – not just in your home, but in the home of your neighbors whom your children visit.  If you don’t know about firearms and their workings, how do you know you’ll act appropriately if you walk in on a child who has one in their hands?  Education is the key.  Curiosity and ignorance is a deadly combination and is what causes accidents.  Not guns.  Attempting to say as much is like saying that pencils cause spelling errors. 

I’m completely accepting of the fact that someone chooses not to have a firearm so long as that person makes the decision with full knowledge of the facts rather than the myths.  So please, get informed and then make your decision.  If you do choose to get educated on the USE of a firearm, Women of Caliber will be here for you with the most expert training available for women—by women. 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

Is California Ripe for a Wrongful Death Suit?

There’s a saying that I live by in nearly every situation of my life.  “There are no victims. Only volunteers.” While I am sincerely saddened by the death of a 22 year old male due to the blatant error of a law enforcement office for BART, I am also concerned for all of the passengers on the train who were fearful of their lives as a group of young men fought in their midst.  Given the dearth of true concealed carry rights in California, the majority of these passengers were left to their own abilities of self-defense (against a group of angry men) and without much of an equalizer in such an environment. 

As I read of the wrongful death lawsuit that the family is bringing against the officer who mistakenly shot the 22 year old man while he was resisting arrest, the thought occurred to me: How many citizens of California have been unnecessarily killed during the act of a violent crime because they do not have access to a concealed carry privilege?

For those of you who aren’t aware, California claims to have a concealed carry permit, however, it’s virtually impossible for a lay citizen to obtain.  However, if you’re a public official or law enforcement, you’ll likely get a green light.  But for the everyday Mr. and Mrs. Jones who foot the bills for such privileged persons, the privilege to conceal carry is denied.  California’s Concealed Carry Permit is arbitrary and backed by such ridiculous constraints and “fine print” that no other state in the U.S. will recognize it, as CA does not recognize the permit of any other state. 

Knowing what I know about the positive effect concealed carry permits can have in preventing crime and ultimately deaths, I’m curious how much longer the families and friends of the fallen victims over the years are going to tolerate not being granted access to defending themselves appropriately.  Are there grounds against the State of California for a wrongful death suit for deaths that have occurred as a result of the legislative apathy and ignorance of the State officials?  Perhaps this would be a stretch legally, although I’ve seen more unrealistic causes make their way through our court systems.  I’m no attorney, but when I read about the subsequent riots in Oakland as a result of this shooting, (however grossly wrong it may be) my thoughts of alarm are for those who are forced to subject themselves to the violence of lawless masses without any appropriate defense reinforced.  Violence and rage has no master except death in most cases.  And clearly this large group of protestors were wreaking mayhem, terror, and the ultimate in disrespect as business and personal property was destroyed, all because an officer made a serious error when attempting to deal with a person who was resisting arrest.  Keep in mind that the shooting victim had already proven himself to be obtuse to the law as he and his group continued to fight even in the presence of fully recognizable law enforcement. While this did not justify his shooting, clearly, the fact of the matter is, he would have never been in such a situation to be accidentally shot had he been respectful of persons around him, the law, and himself.

The shooting incident was unfortunate and may very well merit a $25 million wrongful death law suit. However, the needless deaths of everyday citizens in California that could have been avoided with basic training and a concealed carry permit are grosser acts of negligence in my opinion.  The citizens of California and America as a whole have got a lot of work to do to protect their own freedoms.  One voice can do very little when not backed by a multi-million dollar advertising budget.  And besides, freedoms are better kept and appreciated by those who are forced to work for them. 

Castle Defense and Women of Caliber travel regularly to California to give its residents the privilege of a Utah Concealed Firearm Permit. While this permit will do Californians little good within their own state, it will be the most significant step they can take in claiming some of their freedom as the permit is recognized in 28 other states that better value a person’s right to defend themselves.  The Utah CFP is ideal for travel, out of state emergencies, and also takes a step to show California’s officials what’s important to its citizens.

In addition to the Utah CFP, these two highly respected training entities have also demonstrated their willingness to ensure sound safety and use practices by including a bonus 2 hour course, Introduction to Handgun Self-Defense, immediately after the UT CFP course.  While this bonus course offered by Castle Defense and Women of Caliber is regularly sold for $300, their instructors are willing to offer it to California residents – in addition to the CFP training! – at no additional cost, in efforts to eliminate any excuse that may impede the citizens of California in competently defending themselves.  

For upcoming UT Concealed Firearm Permit Courses, women can go to http://womenofcaliber.com and experience being taught exclusively by women in a classroom of women.  Other Utah CFP courses are available through http://castledefense.com.

 

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.

 

My First Time…Shooting

People assume that as a self-defense and firearms instructor that I’m some kind of super bad “you know what” and have always been “fine” with guns, etc. Well, they would be dead wrong.

When I married my husband I was a city slicker from Columbus, OH. I had never been around guns. I was raised that they were super bad, super dangerous, etc.

As my brand new husband (a Utah mountain boy) and I were moving items into our new home just a week after our wedding, I found myself bringing in a couple of heavy black cases. The cases were small and I couldn’t fathom what in the world could be inside them that would be so heavy. Finally, curiosity got the better of me and I asked my husband what the heck they had in them. He sheepishly looked at me and said “Oh. I guessed we should have talked about that before we got married.” As it turned out, the cases had handguns in them and my husband was very adept at handling them and shooting them.

This began the long 12 + months of him trying to convince me, the city girl, that it would be perfectly OK for me to “allow” him to get his concealed carry permit. I just couldn’t stomach the thought of him carrying a gun around all the time though. To his great credit my husband was patient in educating me and waiting for me to be ok with him taking a more proactive stance in his 2nd Amendment rights. So finally I relented and “let” him get his concealed carry permit, with the understanding that I wasn’t yet ready for him to actually “carry.” And so his patience continued. Finally, I decided that he was perfectly capable and competent and this was important to him so I put aside my inhibitions and relented as a “birthday present.” But boy howdy did it make him happy!

Then, as a course of natural progression, he patiently attempted to get me to try and shoot a gun. So we finally went to a range. He taught me forEVER about safety, handling, etc. All the while I’m thinking “let’s just get this over with and let me shoot and get out of here, already!” He had me shoot a little Beretta Tomcat .32. (This is a little bigger kick than a .22 but less than a 9 mm.) Terrified, but trying to be brave, I shot it six times and then began crying, shaking inside, and informed my husband we were done with the shooting exercise.

After this I couldn’t watch action/adventure movies (my favorite genre up to this point) for several weeks. When I saw someone on screen shooting a gun, it suddenly felt much more real to me, no longer pretend. I no longer had the desire to cheer for the good guy and yell “Get ‘em!” Instead, I recalled what I felt were the heavy bass reverberations that I experienced shooting the first time and listening to my husband’s shooting. After shooting a firearm I felt just how real, instant, and deadly a gun was. And that kind of power in my hand initially scared the crud out of me and I certainly didn’t want to relive it in a movie.

Several weeks later my husband chose to make use of my competitive spirit and convinc ed me that I should try again and not let this fear get the better of me. So I did. This time he had me shoot a Glock 9 mm. I lasted an entire 20 minutes of shooting this, hitting the target occasionally, and then informed him that I had met my quota for the day. At least this time I didn’t cry.

So what transpired between the crying, the stress, and such and my now being a firearms and self-defense instructor to women?

First: Purpose.  I realized that as our world becomes more volatile, the more likely we will need to defend ourselves in such a manner someday, whether it be protecting our homestead, a family member, virtue, or other scenarios I won’t get into here.  And it’s naive of me to think that my “Rambo” of a husband will be there to save the day when I’m in trouble.  There is a great likelihood that when something does “go south” my husband will be the one out patrolling in the neighborhood, or coming to the aid of others.  I realized that I didn’t want to be a liability for him and wanted to be able to stand on my own when it may be necessary. 

Second: Vision. Then I realized that there were a lot of other women that are in the same shoes as me—their husband may be confident in defending himself physically or with a firearm, but their wives are not. I’m sure it would give a greater peace of mind to those who love their wives to know that their wives can be a protecting asset to the family too. Yet, I also know just how hard it was for me to overcome my stigmas about guns, protection, emergency preparedness, and self-defense. Frankly, in spite of my husband being an excellent and patient teacher with me, there are some things that a man would never think of when instructing a woman, things that I think would have made it easier for me to come around and be more confident in my ability to defend myself without hurting innocent bystanders. I think learning from a man is difficult for a woman…especially when it’s a husband or a boyfriend. There’s already an enormous amount of pressure in this new experience without stressing that you’re disappointing or not measuring up to someone you love as well.

Additionally I realized that there were also a lot of non-married women that aren’t sufficiently protected simply because of a lack of knowledge. When I was Marine-trained to learn physical self-defense (by a couple of men), I realized that there were better ways to communicate and thus properly train a woman in order for her to be effective and proactive, rather than reactive to fear or potential “what if” scenarios. I felt that it would be better to prevent those scenarios from ever happening than trying to educate someone traumatized after the fact.

Assault crimes have continued to rise in our nation.  Criminals are becoming more brazen in their efforts to win the “Oscar” for the biggest, boldest, most gruesome assault.  I realize that simply maintaining the status quo for women and their ability to truly defend themselves really was no longer an option.  And yet they didn’t have a lot of viable answers.

Third: Confidence. It’s one things to have a Concealed Firearm Permit.  It’s another to have the mindset that you will be able to use the firearm if necessary, and that you can do so without harming others.  I was very fortunate in that I was able to get some unique training that enabled me to hit exactly what I was aiming at, without the “fog of war” intruding, and in a quick-draw fashion.  This SKILL made me very competent and confident.  This made a HUGE difference in my acceptance of this new responsibility. I was ready to take it on.  This confidence made a significant impact on my view of circumstances around me.  I no longer seemed to worry as much about things which were out of my control, because I felt in control of the most vital matters, protecting myself and others. 

Fourth: Clarity. Martial arts and boxing training are great for physical activity, confidence, and discipline. But for the majority of ALL students, they are ineffective, and even dangerous (because of the false sense of competence they may invoke) in the heat of a real assault. I’m sorry to offend anyone when I say this, but reality can’t be subject to a popularity contest. The reality is it’s unrealistic to think that someone can get this kind of instruction and effectively defend themselves against a psychotic perpetrator in the heat of the moment. Unless you’re Chuck Norris or Jackie Chan, it’s not likely you’ve instinctively mastered the skills necessary to make these disciplines life-saving. There are too many “moves” to master. There’s too much thinking necessary. Additionally, it appeared that only “beautiful, skinny, and fit women” were capable of using these techniques in an attempt to protect themselves. Considering that I was over 200 pounds, only 5’ 2 ½” and overall out of shape, I didn’t like that idea very much. I didn’t care for the social insinuation that chubby women were ideal marks for perpetrators. That’s when I had an “Aha Moment.” My personal discovery was that the competent use of a firearm far surpasses the effectiveness of a “crouching tiger” or a “right cross” and it is no respecter of what you had for breakfast, lunch or dinner for the last decade! While the knocking someone unconscious may be a more compassionate approach to defending yourself, I had to come to a point where I no longer fostered compassion towards someone who would take me away from my family, cripple me, harm my children, or others that I loved or who were helpless to defend themselves. And whether one is scrawny, hefty, young or ancient, the competent use of a firearm coupled with some street smarts is a great equalizer between good and evil.

After commiserating with so many women over the years who were just like me in their fear and other inhibitions of defending themselves, I SO wanted to share my relatively newfound knowledge with as many women as I could. I wanted them to have the opportunity to learn from a very REAL woman who completely understood and overcame their same fears. To not just learn enough so that they can legally carry a firearm, but to learn enough so that they can skillfully use one when necessary, and can defend themselves when necessary. I also saw value in training women real street smarts with the proper use of other methods of self-defense in the event a firearm isn’t readily available, malfunctions, or could endanger others.

To this end I’ve spent years becoming the most certified female NRA instructor in the Western States as well as a certified Utah CFP Instructor (Concealed Firearm Permit). In addition I’ve endeavored to learn and master as much as my military, DEA, and other helpful experts have to teach me so that I can expertly pass on real life skills to women all over. I’ve also worked closely with my husband to create an exclusive technique that enables a shooter to consistently hit exactly what they are aiming at, with only a couple hours of instruction! So if you’re inclined in the least, begin your journey with me at http://www.womenofcaliber.com/

And that, is the rest of the story.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.

You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.