Christian Legal Society loses case

On the same day the Supreme Court handed down the McDonald decision, the Court issued the Christian Legal Society vs. Martinez (UC Hastings) decision that removed an important cultural and legal landmark. The Christian Legal Society encourages Christian law students to remain faithful to Christ. The pressure to conform to certain standards of “professionalism” can be intense in law school.

Clubs have always been defined by the ability to determine their own membership but the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law has policies that force the organization to accept officers and voting members who hold beliefs and engage in conduct that opposes CLS’s purpose of developing Christian character in law students and providing Christian outreach and witness on campus. Therefore, the law school, located in San Francisco, takes a position that is very unusual for most universities and thereby inhibits the group’s ability to define and express its message.

Justice Kennedy voted with the majority in eroding a strong legal principle.  The Court struck a blow to the principle in favor of putting all campus groups on an equal playing field (with each group deciding the criteria for determining membership qualifications) within state administered higher education. CLS sought special treatment, according to the majority. Does this mean that all clubs on state campuses must now allow members that are opposed to the fundamental principles for which the group stands? 

The Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution requires that similarly situated groups and individuals be treated equally.  Do Jewish campus groups have to let Hamas sympathizers join? Must socialist clubs allow members from Young Americans for Freedom?  It seems to depend on a state university’s perceptions of  which values shall be preeminent.

While some ask why some Americans use the harsh language of “partesian” warfare, citizens in nations that have lost their freedom are looking at what Americans will do next.

I first met Walt Schrader when I was a member of Federal Way Noon Kiwanis Club in the late 1990s.  He joined after me but had soon recruited most of the new members of the club.  My recollection is that the club’s membership doubled right after he joined. 

 Then he recruited me into the 30^th District Republican organization.  I had never been involved in any precinct (or political work of any kind).  I soon noticed that he was recruiting many other Kiwanians like me.  Before long our precinct organization membership seemed to double and, once again, Walt was the cause. 

 He became Chairman of the 30th District Republicans and worked tirelessly to keep the rest of us as motivated as he was.  He was shrewd in his political instincts and a real Conservative that never let ideology get in the way of accomplishing the organization’s goals.  He was also a true American with a sense of humor and a truly congenial personality.

 Walt even paid to take one of our Federal Way classes on firearms law but was always too busy to ever attend. 

 Lori Sotelo, Chairman of the King County Republican Party states that Walt was “a great friend and a great Republican … he passed away on Memorial Day May 31^st 2010.  Walt was a tireless worker for the King County Republican Party and a vocal advocate for Republican causes and Candidates alike.” 

 He passed away from a massive heart attack suffered in the early hours of May 31, 2010.  I will personally miss him and so will others in Federal Way!

I recently suggested in my column, The Firearms Lawyer (that I write for the FEDERAL WAY MIRROR), that violent crime has increased in Phoenix. Apparently it has actually gone down!  But Arizona’s violent crime rate is still well above the national average.

A recent Wall Street Journal story shows that crime has actually been going down over most of the U.S. “For the first quarter of 2010, violent crime was down 17% overall in the city (of Phoenix), while homicides were down 38% and robberies 27%, compared with the same period in 2009.”

Despite the fact that the violent crime rate has gone down in Phoenix, the murder rate was 2.4 times the national average in 2003. Phoenix has recently seen an eight percent increase in rapes, according to the statistics, while the murder rate from 2008 to 2009 has dropped 26.2 percent. In 2003, Phoenix was ranked number seventeen in the U.S for violent crime with Tucson number eighteen.  Thus, the benchmark for Phoenix was already fairly high!

Using statistics going back to 1985, Phoenix’s highest murder rate was in 1994, when there were 231 murders. The city had 1,076,108 people, and a murder rate of 21.5 murders per 100,000 residents. The highest total number of murders was in 2003, when there were 241 murders.

The Phoenix rate for murder probably still lags behind cities like Chicago and Detroit. According to the Washington Times, “The latest figures show that Chicago had racked up 122 homicides for the year, exceeding the 116 killings over the comparable period in 2009, a very bad year… It’s no coincidence that the Windy City is already the U.S. gun-control capital.”

Arizona, on the other hand, is a very gun friendly state. None of the above can tell us whether the murders are being committed by people that are in Arizona illegally.

Nor is there any way to know whether Arizona’s violent crime rate would be higher or lower if Arizona adopted a draconian prohibition on firearms such as the gun ban that exists within the Windy City’s boundaries.  Statistics cannot tell us whether immigration is good or bad for the United States. Even if it could be proven that more illegal immigrants would make the United States safer (or more economically viable or culturally rich) making it easier to come here illegally breeds contempt for the law! 

The argument that we should let people come across the border unchecked is particularly unfortunate in that it has now been substantiated that the U.S. government has detained many citizens of countries like Yemen, Somalia and other Asian and African nations that spawn terrorism while they were crossing into the U.S. at the border near Nogales.

It is absurd to imagine that outlawing guns would actually make the streets safer but even if a gun ban could make the streets safe, violating the Constitution is in itself lawless!  Governmental lawlessness threatens our way of life more than garden variety criminal activity or terrorism.  While some folks might actually propose to amend the Bill of Rights and do away with the Second Amendment, banning guns as Chicago has done, is a form of legalistic anarchy!

The perception is that illegal aliens in Phoenix are perpetrating a great deal of violent crime. Some folks in Arizona apparently believe that, despite the increase in federal personnel to patrol the border,  failure to police the border is threatening the social fabric of their state. I would be interested to know how violent crime rates for Seattle, Tacoma and Federal Way compare to Arizona cities like Phoenix and Tucson.

But well-documented evidence shows that the cartels are smuggling immigrants in from Mexico and warehousing people, often against their will in houses within Phoenix.  Kidnapping was very high in Phoenix in 2009 and widely predicted to spread beyond Phoenix.

But imagine no violent crime in King County or Pierce County for the previous ten years. Would I choose to stop wearing a pistol? 

The fact that journalists around the world are constantly targeted for violence suggests that even if the rate of violent crime were to plummet to zero percent, a blogger or journalist that discusses subjects like terrorism, Mexican cartels and active shooters could become a target for the kind of people about whom he or she writes. Or someone that writes about Scientology might be targeted- or in favor of or against abortion!  And criminals often target witnesses to their crimes.

In the U.S., we have seen a few isolated attacks against journalists such as the attack against Chauncey Bailey.  Bailey was allegedly gunned down by Black Muslims in Oakland, California after he exposed criminal activity by writing about it in an Oakland newspaper.  Mr. Bailey was an acclaimed civil rights advocate that has been honored by President Obama and recognized by others that appreciate his struggle for justice.

The statistics manufactured by pro-gun advocates can be just as questionable as those manufactured by the gun grabbers! Statistics are interesting and shed some light on most subjects but  you can always find some numbers that suit your purposes!  The principal of remaining prepared and ready to defend what we hold dear should preempt arguments about statistics!

Even though the violent crime rate is apparently going down all over the U.S., a violent predator may come looking for you just because you said something (or saw something) that someone doesn’t want other people to know about!   The First Amendment freedom to speak the truth as we see the truth becomes very hollow indeed when the sociopaths are looking for you- regardless of crime statistics!  Statistics will not protect you or me or our friends and loved ones from violent predators in Federal Way or Phoenix!

We presented our third class in Federal Way on Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at Federal Way City Hall. The City of Federal Way did not sponsor the class.  Nevertheless, the Patrick Maher Room is an excellent venue in which to hold a class.

We had approximately16 participants most of whom are volunteers with our local police department and/or volunteer emergency personnel. Some of these men and women are retired, some are former military personnel  and some of them virtually work  full time, serving our community without pay. 

Our class on Washington firearms law focuses on the use of lethal force to protect  home and family.  Last year the Noon Kiwanis Club formed an exploratory committee to create a community event honoring first reponders- law enforcement, firefighters, EMTs, etc.  We ran into some roadblocks, not the least of which is the reluctance that first response personnel have toward being in  the spotlight.

Another problem was that there are so many emergency response folks that work in our community as professionals and volunteers at the state, local and federal levels.  We have lawyers that are reservists in the JAG Corps, school personnel, chaplains, search and rescue groups and CERT volunteers- just to mention a few categories of personnel that don’t immediately come to mind when we contemplate all the folks out there that put in hours of their personnel time preparing for all kinds of emergencies.

There is an old American tradition of giving distinguished lawmen and military leaders a custom-made pistol commemorating notable achievement with engraved images and expressions of appreciation. 

If I had it in my power, we would give every volunteer and professional first responder in Federal Way such a gift engraved with the words, “Thank you for your commitment.”

Volunteers and other vigilant citizens are more important than ever before now that we are beginning to recognize that the most likely sources of terrorism may originate closer to home than most of us expect.  Experts tell us that many potential terrorists lack the training for large scale attacks like the attack on the World Trade Center and may go after smaller places of business and public places, including churches. 

Ironically, the fact that such attackers may be Lone Wolf terrorists operating without any apparent ties to groups like Al Qaeda makes them more difficult to detect.  All of us need to be more aware of  possible surveillance activities.  According to the experts, just the act of observing pre-operational surveillance may be enough to deter a potential attacker.

We brought up the subject of honoring first responders at a recent meeting of all the Federal Way service clubs and the idea of coming together this way  as a community is not dead.  Meanwhile there are all kinds of events occurring throughout the year to honor the men and women that keep us safe.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed article dated February 17, 2010 entitled “The United States: Debtor and Leader? Why Lech Walesa is right to worry about declining American influence”, Judy Shelton discusses the perfect storm that is coming to America:

 ”As Lech Walesa, the former president of Poland who confronted Soviet repression with demands for the right to self-govern, observed recently: ‘The world has no leadership. The U.S. was the last resort and hope for all the nations. Today, we have lost that hope.’ What has changed about America’s role in the world?”

 Walesa’s answer is, “They don’t lead morally and politically any more.”  Ms. Shelton states that American voters “need to elect new representatives who recognize that America’s greatness cannot be achieved in the absence of national solvency.”

 ”It’s not only the small concessions to China over “internal” matters, or the possibility of faltering in helping our allies at critical moments, that undermine our global claim to moral leadership. It’s the longer-term vulnerability to financial extortion. It’s the perception, at home and abroad, that American values may be subjugated to financial considerations due to America’s permanent state of indebtedness.”

 China holds more than one-fifth of foreign U.S. Treasury bonds and China is now the largest creditor nation to the United States.  Just recently, China sold a significant portion of its holdings in U.S. Treasury bonds- Japan now holds the largest amount of U.S. Treasury debt- and threatens to take further action if the U.S. government further damages “trust and cooperation between our two countries”; i.e., by doing anything to hold the Chinese government accountable in regard to its deplorable human rights record.

 The big question that often goes unasked is whether the leverage that China wields in U.S. financial markets can be used in order to further military objectives if push ever comes to shove.  In a 2008 article entitled Is China Preparing for War Against America? we explored the Chinese government’s motives and global strategies:

“Hasn’t China invested a great deal of money in the U.S. economy and would they want to risk their investments?  Financial manipulation and maneuvering for control of oil are additional weapons in an asymmetrical or conventional arsenal.  It is interesting to see how much aid China has received from Japan, the U.S. and Europe over the years even as China presently increases military spending and aid to countries which have gradually entered the Chinese sphere of international influence.”

Until relatively recent times, the Western nations have pumped huge amounts of capital into the Chinese economy.  The transfer of wealth from the West to the former Soviet Union and China during and after the Nixon years is a story that has never been completely told.  At a time that U.S. military personnel were being killed by Soviet materiel in Vietnam, the Nixon and Ford Administrations were making direct loans and guaranteeing private low-interest loans to Communist China and Russia during a time of runaway inflation.  The perfect storm is now on the horizon- our money is now worth almost nothing- and the interests that worked during the Vietnam War years to manipulate the currency and the American  people are still working now!  A nation gets the leaders that they deserve.  It is also often said that Americans deserve better than we are getting.  It is time to stop flattering the American people and see some real change.

What role will armed citizens play?

What will you do if you hear someone yelling “Allahu Akbar“ or just acting suspiciously.  Are you aware of your surroundings as you go about your daily activities .  Have you checked your First Aid supplies and stored some extra ammunition- just in case?

Many sources have been telling us that our schools will be attacked as happened in Russia.  The parents heard their sons and daughters screaming…these guys have no interest in getting away or getting out alive.  They are more interested in causing so much anguish that some Americans will retaliate by attacking innocent Islamic people, thus radicalizing American Muslims.  There is a great deal of evidence from terrorist chat rooms and interrogations that the goal will be to commit atrocities on young children at school.

You might consider carrying an unloaded shotgun and extra ammunition in the trunk of your vehicle.  But make sure that you only defend yourself and others.  Anyone that  retaliates by attacking innocent people is part of the problem and should be treated as a criminal by the courts.  Vigilantes are not really different from terrorists.

A terrorist attack may include guys armed with AKs and the police are going to be busy protecting communication centers, power grids, city hall.  For the first few hours, the people that are prepared mentally may be all the public has to protect neighborhoods, schools, churches, etc.  Expect snipers or additional explosions immediately following an initial terrorist event.  This means that parents and media gathered around a school where children are being held may be in at just as much risk as the children being held hostage.

There won’t be enough LEOs to protect homes and businesses.  And some of your neighbors who won’t work and have not prepared might loot if they see the opportunity.  Trouble never makes an appointment… be prepared.

We need men and women, armed with hand guns and proper training, including First Aid, that know how to work with professional First Responders in our communities. CERT classes are a good way to work on this. Civilian Police Academy programs are also a good choice. We now hear that some Washington cities include firearms training in their civilian training programs.  The government will rarely take the initiative to train you because “thinking outside the box” is the province of a few individuals- individuals that may lack the patience to wade through the bureaucratic gauntlets. And even the best military officers and LEOs normally listen to other credible leaders, usually only from within their own command.

http://firearmslawyer.net/blog/index…009/11/12/p119

Should there be five-day waiting periods in order to obtain background checks for unregistered journalists?  I was recently surprised to find that another amateur journalist labeled my Firearms Lawyer column as the “screaming mimi equivalent to the vile, contempatable (sic) and ignorant Glen Beck”. 

I confess that I often listen to Glen Beck, a self-professed recovering alcoholic that has, nevertheless, managed to disrupt the body politic by driving self-professed Communist and Green Jobs czar, Van Jones, out of federal employment and into the ranks of well-funded tax-exempt left-wing think tanks.

 I am alarmed that one of my colleagues would refer to me as “contempatable”.  The time has come to stop irresponsible hate speech once and for all; i.e., the kind of speech engaged in by people like Glen Beck.

Cass Sunstein is the Obama administration’s administrator of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).  Sunstein, in a groundbreaking book, DEMOCRACY AND THE PROBLEM OF FREE SPEECH, has called for a “New Deal” for public speech.  In the face of America’s traditional “marketplace of ideas” Sunstein has courageously redefined the First Amendment.

 In Sunstein’s conception of democracy, society would mandate free media time for political candidates, federal guidelines for the coverage of public issues, and curtailment of the ability of the wealthy to buy access to the media. Such proposals “would bring about significant changes in the legal treatment currently given to many free speech issues.”

 Unlicensed bloggers and laptop-toting cowboy “journalists” have little knowledge of complex societal problems.  While simplistically trumpeting their First Amendment “right” to demand vigilante-style opposition to progressive reform, such irresponsible citizen journalists ignore the fact that only those with extensive journalistic or legal experience should be able to criticize public policy initiatives like health care reform, proposed legislation to prevent gun violence and other common sense public initiatives proposed for the good of all.

 I propose that we consider registering pens and paper.  Some will accuse me of being opposed to the First Amendment.  Law enforcement officials like Mr. Sunstein need reasonable procedures, however, to track irresponsible reporting.  Don’t we require licenses for people to drive cars?  

 Fully automatic military-style rifles are already severely restricted under federal law- many states already prohibit them completely; other states even prohibit sex toys and vibrators.  Yet we have no way of keeping word processors away from the hands of criminals, children, the mentally defective and followers of despicable demagogues like Glen Beck that can spit out hundreds of misguided messages in a minute.  Stolen laptops presently are sold on the black market and even end up in the hands of terrorists and the Mexican cartels.

 The United Nations reports that there are countries like Venezuela, China and Iran that struggle in vain to block their own citizens from viewing counter-revolutionary messages in cyberspace that interfere with legitimate government policies.  The First Amendment was drafted in a different time under radically different circumstances than society faces today.  We did not even see the advent of the telegraph until the 1800s.  Mass communications with the potential to mislead millions of people did not exist until recently.

 Neanderthal “Tea Baggers” lacking a responsible value system may even take articles written by untrained “civilians” and then use their words and information against the very reforms that our government struggles to impose for the good of all of us!  Before we allow marginally trained hobbyists to introduce amateur journalistic bravado into public discussions, we need to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis.  We must weigh the cost of preventing unfiltered information to enter the airwaves and cyberspace against the unthinkable cost of allowing global programs impacting climate change to be sabotaged. 

Can we afford to relegate civilization to the influences of those with a primitive mindset and risk international catastrophes just because of an outmoded prejudice that encourages anyone to have access to such weapons of mass communication at any time and any place?  I believe in the First Amendment but I also believe in common sense and evolving community standards.  Unfortunately, the contemptible ”journalistic” attack against me by an amateur that cannot even spell  correctly (the attack that caused me to ponder the danger of unregulated media) should be the first message to be identified as aiding and abetting terrorist activity and banned from all publicly viewed news outlets.  Such views belong only on “FAUX”  news where those of us that can spell will not be subjected to such ignorant bigotry!

According to a recent Wall Street Journal article, Ciudad Juárez is ground zero in Mexico’s war against drug cartels.

After gunmen blasted away at a taxi and killed two men and a woman, the army and police were unable to obtain information from any of the witnesses:

Capt. Velásquez scrambled to the site of the killings, where the gunmen had already vanished. He and his men yelled questions at dozens of eyewitnesses: How many killers were there, what kind of car did they drive? “Not one person said a word. Not even what direction they had gone,” says Capt. Velásquez, 42. “Executions here happen at any time, at any place. That terrifies the population. They don’t trust anybody. And they don’t talk.”

Mexico’s powerful drug cartels and affiliated gangs are battling for control of the city and President Felipe Calderón has sent 7,000 soldiers and 2,000 federal police to stop the urban warfare.  The residents of Mexican war zones like Juarez are helpless as murder rates soar in Mexico, a nation where all guns are illegal:  

In 2008, 1,600 people were killed in drug-related hits. This year, more than 2,500 have died. By some estimates, Juárez’s approximately 165 deaths per 100,000 residents make it the murder capital of the world. That compares with 48 violent deaths per 100,000 residents of Baghdad.

In the Philippines, possession of guns is much more highly regulated than in the U.S.  Nevertheless, well-armed rebel groups, bandits, politicians and ordinary people obtain all kinds of weapons, including home-made military style weapons that are often just as effective as those possessed by police and military personnel anywhere in the world.

Last November, a Maguindanao politician’s son, Andal Ampatuan, Jr., allegedly participated in a massacre in Ampatuan township.  Local gunmen, allegedly including six officers and the Maguindanao provincial police chief and his deputy, diverted vehicles containing journalists and the wife, two sisters, an aunt and several supporters of Ampatuan’s rival.  The Ampatuan clan has previously provided heavy political support to Philippine President Arroyo.

Ampatuan’s political opponent, Vice Mayor Esmael Mangudadatu of Maguindanao’s Buluan township, sent several female family members along in the convoy in the belief they would not be harmed.  The Ampatuan henchmen allegedly forced the convoy to a secluded location where fifty-seven were hacked, raped and shot, then buried in a brave that had been prepared with earth moving equipment in advance.  At least thirty journalists were among the dead.

The point of these anecdotes is to show that an armed citizenry is always in a more powerful position when armed.  Keeping and bearing arms makes citizens disciplined, vigilant and alert to danger whether it is from domestic political factions, criminal organizations or foreign enemies.

 Mexico’s government has waged war with the drug cartels by militarily occupying many areas within Mexico:

 Mr. Calderón’s war on drug gangs has defined his presidency so far. Within months of his 2006 inauguration, he dispatched the army to states where drug-related violence was on the rise, calling powerful drug cartels a threat to national security. Three years later, some 45,000 troops—about a quarter of the army—patrol areas ranging from Ciudad Juárez to Mr. Calderón’s home state of Michoacán.

Jorge Tello, Mexico’s National Security adviser, stated that Mexico has done more to fight drugs and violence in Ciudad Juárez than any other place in Mexico. Many residents of Ciudad Juárez are demanding an end to the military occupation. Soldiers cover their faces with black balaclavas in order to conceal their identities from the narcotistas.  The government deploys .50 caliber machine guns during patrols.  The local Juárez Cartel, the Aztecas  and a cadre of corrupt cops and ex-cops called La Linea oppose gangs acting on behalf of Joaquin Guzman that aim to take over the drug trade in Juarez; i.e., the Artistic Assassins and the Mexicles.  The gangs simply observe the timing of the patrols and then change the time and locations of their attacks accordingly.

The drug gangs have diversified and extortion has provided a new motivation to increase the body counts:

The extortion wave has spread to funeral homes. Last month, an assassin and his driver parked in front of the Funeraria del Refugio, a squat, yellow building on a crowded street. The killer walked in, interrupting a funeral, and locked mourners in the bathroom, yelling that he had come to collect a protection payment. He then executed the funeral home’s manager, police and eyewitnesses say. The next day, the men returned and burned down the funeral home.

Former soldiers, known as “Zetas,” are the Gulf Cartel’s enforcers.  They decapitate rivals and law enforcement officers.  Another deserter from the Mexican army is Manuel Aponte.  A former lieutenant in the army, he deserted in 2004 and is now a top lieutenant for Joaquin Guzman, the cartel leader.

The UN is allegedly involved with joint military operations in the eastern Congo that have resulted in the deaths of  1,400 civilians.  The United Nations urgently needs “a new approach to protect civilians,” according to a Human Rights Watch report.

The presence of about 19,000 United Nations peacekeepers has not only failed to protect women and children from rape, torture and murder but actually may have aided and abetted the slaughter, according to a number of reports including the New York Times.

Human Rights Watch researchers describe “girls being summarily killed after being raped, and other victims being tied together before their throats were slit”.

 Many governments are working under the auspices of UN programs to disarm citizens.  Even some Western Washington politicians seem to look to a nebulous UN agenda in their attempts to violate state gun laws, ban assault weapons and create sanctuaries for illegal aliens.

In some under-developed countries, governments have virtually declared war on their own people in efforts to ban guns. Uganda is one example of extreme violence perpetrated by the Ugandan government against selected tribes that hold onto their guns as protection in the midst of appalling ethnic conflict that is all too often enmeshed with governmental policies.

Many of the worst human rights violators around the world sit on UN committees that condone violence against Israelis or those of other ethnic and national origins. You could almost say that the world has become a mirror image of Chicago in the days of Al Capone- or today for that matter! The dictators around the globe are like the aldermen that receive favors for keeping their neighborhoods in line. Every now and then, we hear about genocides (sometimes after the UN disarms the victims as it did in Rwanda) that remind us of the Valentine’s Day massacre, when gangsters dressed like cops gunned down Capone’s Irish rivals on the North Side.  The best antidote to the tyranny of crime-related violence or political gangsters is a disciplined, trained and well-armed citizenry.

Greetings Friends,

 I am moved as I watch the Memorial Service occurring at the Tacoma Dome.  We cannot, however, indulge our emotions for very long.  We are in the middle of a long, brutal war and many do not even realize the nature of the warfare.  We have been trying to get Federal Way and surrounding communities motivated to hold an event honoring First Responders.  Read the following Mirror article:

 http://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_king/fwm/opinion/73150282.html

What are your ideas for getting this organized?  Maybe you could discuss the proposed event with leaders at your local church?  One of the goals is to get churches focused on issues of emergency preparedness.  Many are already involved but not all.  We already have some community leaders like Ray Gross willing to serve on a committee.  We need volunteers to serve on the planning committees. 

We will form a steering committee as soon as possible.  Right now everyone is still in shock, grief and mourning from the Parkland shootings that occurred the day after the above referenced article was published in the Mirror.

 As we mourn, we should look at the slayings of the four officers as a call to action.  Keep in mind that an American from Chicago has now been identified as having helped to surveil the sites where the attacks took place in Mumbai, India.  The Mumbai attacks were, to a large extent, aimed at Indian security forces.  

 The Mumbai strategy was extremelysuccessful from the terrorists’ viewpoint and it is only a matter of time before similar attacks happen in the USA.  Even though Clemmons was to some extent a lone-wolf (or at least not afilliated with an organized terror network), he was still a terrorist.  An Islamicist organization even went to the Parkland site of the ambush and proclaimed that Maurice Clemmons is a fallen hero! 

Although Clemmons’ alleged commitment to radical Islam has not been substantiated, there is some evidence he may have converted in prison.  Additionally, frustration with the politicians expends energy uselessly unless we get motivated to organize ourselves to react before, during and after natural and man-made emergencies.

 The proposed community event will not only honor responders- it may help save lives by raising awareness pertaining to important emergency preparedness issues.  So help us to get the planned event organized! 

 We need a large facility; we are waiting to hear whether Christian Faith Center wants to provide the venue for honoring the men and women that stand at the walls of the city for just such a time as this.  They are very busy right now hosting the overflow from today’s Memorial Service. Be strong and of good courage.  You and I know this is a war!  Every war is different than the last one. 

All wars have spiritual, mental, physical and political components to varying degrees.  The spiritual, political and economic aspects of the present war have been a long time in the making. 

 Now we need to wake people up- starting with our own community!  The event we are proposing is more important than all the letter-writing you and I can ever do (but writing to your lelected officials is important!).  One reason that holding the event honoring the watchmen (and women) that stand guard is because there is some risk that multiple-officer slayings like the one in Parkland could cause a disconnect between “civilians” and police & military. 

 In honoring emergency responders, everyone should remember that we are all in the battle.  Anyone that is not preserving and protecting is on the side of chaos; we should be committed to protecting each other whether we wear a gun, a badge, a uniform or work at home or in a factory. 

Protecting our communities is often just encouraging our neighbors to store some extra food and water for an emergency.  Or participating in CERT training.  We all have abilities and moral persuasion.  

Your communities need you!  We hope to have an area outside the main event for governmental agencies, non-profits and for-profit businesses to educate folks about emergency preparedness issues.  The goal is to give organizations that contribute to the event an opportunity to reach out to the community.  We need to consider law enforcement, firefighters, emergency medical personnel, utility workers, chaplains, members of the armed forces, FBI and others at the federal, state and county level in our planning.  

Please forward this message to First Responder agencies, local churches, activists, etc. 

 Yours truly,

 Mark S. Knapp, Attorney

The Washington Times recently ran the following editorial:

Last week’s slaughter at Fort Hood Army base in Texas was no different (than massacres in “gun-free” zones like Columbine and Virginia Tech)- except that one man bears responsibility for the ugly reality that the men and women charged with defending America were deliberately left defenseless when a terrorist opened fire.

Among President Clinton’s first acts upon taking office in 1993 was to disarm U.S. soldiers on military bases. In March 1993, the Army imposed regulations forbidding military personnel from carrying their personal firearms and making it almost impossible for commanders to issue firearms to soldiers in the U.S. for personal protection. For the most part, only military police regularly carry firearms on base, and their presence is stretched thin by high demand for MPs in war zones.

After talking to veterans and reviewing some forums on such matters, it seemed that the assertions in the Washington Times article (and a recent Fox news report) may not bear up under scrutiny. For example:

“I spent 23 years in the military under about 6 presidents and I can’t recall anyone walking around US bases (been through many of them on my way here and there) armed unless they were MPs or DOD cops, or troops about to deploy (in which case they would be on their way somewhere, and ,,, the live ammo would still be in the crates until they reached wherever it was they were going to use it). I don’t recall anyone strutting around with side arms just for the hell of it.”

We have finally located Army Regulation 90-114, the 1993 regulation which limits carrying of weapons for law enforcement and security personnel within military installations. Despite the Clinton administration’s limitations upon MP’s and other LEOs on base, the regulation nevertheless provides for law enforcement personnel to carry weapons to:

(1) Conduct law enforcement activities including cases or investigations of espionage, sabotage, and other serious crimes in which DA programs, personnel, or property are involved and investigations conducted in hazardous areas or under hazardous circumstances.

(2) Protect classified information, systems, or equipment.

(3) Protect the President of the United States, high ranking Government officials, DOD personnel, or foreign dignitaries.

(4) Protect DOD assets and personnel.

(5) Guard prisoners.

d. DA military and civilian personnel may be authorized to carry firearms for personal protection when the responsible intelligence center identifies a credible and specific threat against DA personnel in that regional area. Firearms will not be issued indiscriminately for
that purpose. Before individuals are authorized to carry a firearm for personal protection under this regulation, the authorizing official must evaluate—

(1) The probability of the threat in a particular location.

(2) The adequacy of support by DA or DOD protective personnel.

(3) The adequacy of protection by U.S. or host nation authorities.

(4) The effectiveness of other means to avoid personal attacks.

Thus, officers of field grade rank or higher, or civilian equivalent of GS-12 or above may authorize the carrying of firearms and the Secretary of the Army has authority to authorize carrying for personal protection within the continental United States. And yes! It is hard to believe that we don’t trust soldiers with guns on an Army base when we trust these very same men in Iraq and Afghanistan:

“In states where legal concealed carry is an accepted practice, American service members need to be allowed to carry a gun for self-defense – on post and off – because the global war on terror has changed the risk level they live with each and every day.

The global war on terror has changed the way America fights our wars and has changed the risk level our service members are forced to endure. Letting soldiers have the same rights afforded to civilians when it comes to carrying a concealed handgun is a reform that is well past due.”

See also How Many Died Because of Ban?

The Washington Times article refers to research showing that when folks are armed the damage caused in active shooter situations will be more limited. This is because a “major factor in determining how many people are harmed by these killers is the time that elapses between the launch of an attack and when someone – soldier, civilian or law enforcement – arrives on the scene with a gun to end the attack.”

The article goes on to claim that all the public shootings in the United States in which more than three people have been killed have occurred in places where concealed handguns have been banned.

A 23 year old Islamic convert killed one soldier and wounded another outside a recruiting center in a jihad attack in Little Rock, Arkansas:

A 23-year-old man upset about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan opened fire from his truck at two soldiers standing outside a military recruiting station here on Monday morning, killing one private and wounding another, the police said. According to the New York Times (June 1, 2009):

The gunman, identified by the police as Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad of Little Rock, fled the scene and was arrested minutes later a short distance from the recruiting station, in a bustling suburban shopping center. The police confiscated a Russian-made SKS semiautomatic rifle, a .22-caliber rifle and a handgun from his black pickup truck.

The NYT article goes on to explain that bomb threats and vandalism against recruiting offices are not uncommon. For example, in 2008, a bomb exploded at a military recruitment center in Times Square. Thus, our troops are in as much risk at home as they are on foreign battlefields.

Rather than blame it on President Clinton, we should focus on enabling soldiers and sailors to carry weapons openly on base (and openly or concealed off base as permitted by local and state laws; i.e., with a Concealed Pistol License where and when required. It even makes sense to provide some special training that will qualify personnel to carry on base. By arming more qualified personnel (on and off base), the military will advance the objective of keeping our men and women safe while they protect us from our nation’s enemies.