Dispelling the myth of ‘The Wild West’

Posted on February 17, 2009 by John Pierce

These are interesting times in the fight to protect and enhance our rights as gun owners.  In Wisconsin, we stand on the eve of an historic court ruling regarding open carry.  In Texas, South Carolina, Oklahoma and Arkansas, local activists have succeeded in making their voices heard regarding restoring open carry to these otherwise gun-friendly states.  With all of this pro-gun activity, it should come as little surprise that the anti-gun forces are out in-force repeating their aged mantra … “This isn’t the wild west.”

And this rhetoric is not limited to anti-gunners.  Recently, I was quoted in a USA Today article about the open carry initiatives around the country and in that article, Texas Senator Jeff Wentworth (R), a supposedly pro-gun legislator denounced open carry saying “I think that’s harkening too far back to the Wild West.”

With all this talk of “The Wild West”, I thought it might be informative to look at the reality of crime in the “wild west” cattle towns and compare them to the peaceful streets of such eastern, gun-control paradises as DC, New York, Baltimore and Newark.

In his book, Frontier Violence: Another Look, author W. Eugene Hollon, provides us with these astonishing facts:

  • In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides.  This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.
  • In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

  • DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
  • New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
  • Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
  • Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)

It doesn’t take an advanced degree in statistics to see that a return to “wild west” levels of violent crime would be a huge improvement for the residents of these cities.

The truth of the matter is that the “wild west” wasn’t wild at all … not compared to a Saturday night in Newark.

Posted in Media Views on The Second Amendment, Myths & Misconceptions, The 'Wild West' Myth | Leave a comment

Wisconsin teacher fired for Facebook firearm picture

Posted on February 10, 2009 by John Pierce

The 'offending' Facebook picture

In an astonishing story of bureaucracy gone mad, Betsy Ramsdale, a Beaver Dam, WI Middle School teacher, has been suspended for the unspeakable act of actually displaying a photograph of herself handling a personally owned firearm on her Facebook page.  The photo was apparently brought to the attention of school officials by a “concerned staff member” of the school.

When you recover from the shock of a teacher actually being allowed to own and proudly display firearms in her private life, then consider the following.  If we establish the precedent of allowing teachers to be suspended (or worse) for doing nothing more than displaying photos of themselves engaging in perfectly legal behavior that a “concerned staff member” finds objectionable, then where does it end?  What if the teacher was openly lesbian and displayed a photograph of herself expressing affection with her partner and the “concerned staff member” was a homophobe?

The “what if” scenarios could go on and on, but they all ultimately distill down to the issue of whether or not we should allow the opinion of one person to override the rights of another.  Even the most anti-gun of citizens should fear such a precedent.

To their credit, the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin was quick to react to this blatant infringement of Ms. Ramsdale’s 1st Amendment rights.  In a statement issued by Executive Director Chris Ahmuty, they say “Absent any evidence that the teacher poses a threat, the district should not over-react to the sight of a gun in one of their employee’s hands.”  On their blog, they go on to say that “The context of the photo, which shows Ramsdale training the rifle toward the camera, involves the fact that her page is both personal and that she is a gun enthusiast. News reports haven’t detailed any other grounds for concern about the teacher’s behavior or any sinister intent.”

I couldn’t agree more and Mr. Ahmuty and the ACLU of Wisconsin are to be commended for recognizing the fact that, absent evil intent, a firearm in the hands of a citizen is not something to be feared.

With the hard work of dedicated activists like Mr. Ahmuty, I have every confidence that Wisconsin will come to see the error of their unconstitutional ways.

Posted in Guns at Work, Wisconsin | 1 Comment

When is it good to fail?

Posted on February 5, 2009 by John Pierce

ANSWER:  When it is the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Handgun Control, Inc.) who is grading you!

The Brady Campaign has just released their 2008 state scorecards and I am proud to say that Minnesota has failed miserably!  Scoring a mere 11 points out of a possible 100, Minnesota has once again failed to infringe enough of their citizens’ rights to satisfy the extremists at the Brady Campaign.

You see … the way it works is this.  The Brady Campaign awards points for each infringement that a state has enacted such as banning certain classes of firearms altogether, outlawing private sales and requiring as-yet non-existent personalization technology on firearms.  A score of 100 would, in their eyes, mean that you live in a utopia.  In practice, it probably means that you live in a dictatorship or under the rule of an authoritarian regime.

Despite the fact that Minnesotans are already burdened with a number of requirements that are more stringent than most states such as a 7 day waiting period on the purchase of handguns and so-called “assault” weapons, the Brady Campaign feels that Minnesota has not regulated their citizens nearly enough.

Once again, the Brady Campaign has missed the point and chosen to attack law-abiding hunters and gun owners rather than address the root causes of crime in our culture such as poverty, drug addiction, mental health treatment and social and economic hopelessness.  If Minnesota needs to improve its approach to crime prevention, then it should start by lifting up those in need and not by pushing down on law-abiding gun owners!

Posted in Brady Campaign, Gun Control, State Laws | Leave a comment

Out of the mouths of babes

Posted on January 1, 2009 by John Pierce

This is an article I wrote for the VCDL Defender Newsletter back in 2003.

“I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.” – J.R.R.Tolkien

On Monday, June 9th, in San Jose California, a 9-year-old girl was kidnapped and sexually assaulted.  During the kidnapping, her mother and brother were severely beaten in an unsuccessful effort to protect her.  Thankfully, she was eventually released and is now back with her family.

Even though CNN has been running the story non-stop for the last few days, by the time this is printed, the incident will, at best, be only a dim memory to most of you.  However, you can rest assured that those affected by this horror will never forget it.

I bring this up because it was this incident that was the catalyst for this article.  My wife and I had been watching CNN’s coverage without considering the young eyes and ears that were in the same room when suddenly we realized that our daughter was listening intently.  At 7, my daughter doesn’t really understand what sexual assault means, but she does know what kidnapping means and she could tell that something really bad had happened to the little girl by my wife’s reaction.

When they showed the mother with a massively bruised and swollen face describing her attempt to stop the kidnapping, my daughter turned to me and asked “Daddy … why didn’t she just use her gun to stop the bad man?”  Coming from a child who has, literally, never seen her parents without guns on, this is a perfectly understandable question.

She knows, of course, that not all the people she meets openly carry firearms, but I guess she had just assumed that they still had them close at hand.  When I told her that some parents didn’t carry guns at all and that the mother had tried with all her strength to stop the attacker but couldn’t, she became absolutely terrified.

She had never considered the idea that a child could be with their parents and still be helpless.  She was suddenly faced with the horrible thought that, even in her own home and surrounded by those she trusts to protect her, she might not be safe.  It truly broke my heart to see her standing there with doubt and fear on her face and her small arms wrapped around herself protectively as a little bit of the innocence of childhood was stripped away.

The rest of that day, she questioned me and my wife over-and-over again about whether or not such a thing could ever happen to her.  We explained to her that protecting her and our son was one of the most important reasons that we chose to carry self-defense firearms and that we would strive to always be able to defend and protect them.

Thankfully, in the way of children everywhere, her fears were largely forgotten by the next day.  But I found myself thinking about what she had asked.  What if the mother in this case had been armed?  While a firearm is no absolute guarantee of safety, it would have given a tremendous advantage to a mother whose courage and willingness to fight for her children cannot be questioned.  I cannot help but believe that if she had been properly armed, she would have prevailed instead of being forced to watch bleeding and helpless as her child was dragged away by a predator.

The more that I thought about this, the angrier I became.  I cannot speak for this mother specifically, but I do know that there are literally thousands of families that have chosen not to have self-defense firearms in their homes because of the lies and deceptions of the gun control movement.  This incident should serve as a grim reminder that you can count on no one but yourself to defend your family. 

The oft-repeated motto of the police is “To Protect and Serve”, but this is misleading.  I have immense respect for law enforcement and have no doubt that, if they could, they would stand between us and any danger.  But, they cannot.  They are not omniscient.  They do not know where or when the predators will attack.  They can only find and hopefully punish them after the fact.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I personally refuse to face one of my children who has been forced to endure such an ordeal and offer them this hollow consolation.  “It’s ok honey.  The police have caught the bad man.  Now, we just have to go to court and see him again and then tell exactly what he did to you in great detail while the defense attorney twists your words and mocks your tears.”

The anti-self-defense crowd are right about one thing though.  Children’s lives are special and it is a parent’s responsibility to protect their children.  Children depend upon their parents to be their guardians and protectors in an uncertain and often harsh world.  After all, is this not the very essence of what it means to be a parent?

Sadly, those who oppose us have forgotten one simple fact.  Those who are defenseless themselves can never hope to be the protector of their children.

 

Posted in Self Defense | 1 Comment

Open Carry: A place of honor with all that is good

Posted on January 1, 2009 by John Pierce

This is an article I wrote for the VCDL Defender Newsletter back in 2002.

“The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good.” – George Washington

Over the last several issues, The Defender has been the forum for a heated debate between those who advocate open carry and those who consider it dangerous and irresponsible.

In my opinion, the origin of the debate lies in a basic misunderstanding of the true benefits of open carry and I plan on joining the debate in the finest tradition of politicians everywhere … I will share MY opinion and then declare it gospel.

Right Answer … Wrong Question

The argument thus far has largely revolved around the tactical aspects of open carry vs. concealed carry.  If this were the actual argument, then those of us who are proponents of open carry would lose quite handily.

However, this is not the actual argument.  The reason that it has appeared to be so is that Mr.’s Mulvena and O’Connor both made passing remarks in their articles about tactical issues and opened the door to Mr. Kelly’s well-written and thorough rebuttal.

Now would be a good time for me to go on record as saying that there is very little to disagree with in Mr. Kelly’s article.  His level of training and dedication to concealed carry issues give him an enviable and unique insight and he has the ability to present what he knows concisely and convincingly.

Having said that … the question he was answering was not the question that we should be asking.  He was answering the question “Is open carry more or less tactically defensible than concealed carry?”  I will join with Mr. Kelly in answering that question by saying “less”.  Suffice it to say that if your primary concern is tactical superiority, then you should carry concealed.

The Right Question

The question that we, as VCDL members and pro-gun activists, should be asking is “What are the benefits to the gun-rights movement of my carrying openly?”

Mr. Kelly stated the problem quite eloquently in his article; “I know bankers, attorneys, businessmen, reporters, and clergymen who consider a sidearm as much a part of their daily apparel as their wallet.  But to non-gun-owners, it seems a somehow unwholesome practice, associated with criminals and paranoiacs.  To them, a man who carries a gun for no immediate reason is … strange.  They regard such a person as they would one who talked to himself.”

The reason for this is readily apparent.  We are bombarded, almost daily, by a variety of subtle and not-so-subtle anti-gun media messages.  It is amazing how effective this bombardment is, even for those of us with deeply held pro-gun beliefs.  It is a dangerous mistake to assume that societal influences do not make an impact.  They do!  Mr. Kelly is a prime example of the fact that even we can be influenced to treat firearms as something “somehow unwholesome.”

At the risk of sounding like a sociology professor, what we are dealing with is a general populace that has had their perceptions about firearms turned into prejudices by societal pressures.  Most people are not anti-gun in the traditional sense of the word, but they can be counted upon to swallow whatever drivel is presented by the true anti-gun movement.

Make no mistake about it; if we do nothing to counter these negative stereotypes about gun owners, then our rights will be slowly taken away.  Open carry is a very easy way to begin to counter these stereotypes.

To put it simply, open carry forces those you meet, be they friends, relatives or neighbors, to reconcile their preconceived notions and prejudices regarding firearms with the fact that you are exercising this right in a safe and responsible manner.

Prejudice thrives on ignorance.  By openly carrying, we are showing the public what gun owners are really like.  More importantly, we are showing them who we are.  I cannot tell you the number of times that I have heard people say that they do not know any gun owners.  They do, of course, but they are not aware that they do.  This allows them to buy into the idea that gun owners are different; and people fear and distrust that which is different.  Seeing you or I openly carrying a firearm forces them to confront the object of their prejudice.

Conclusion

We are not just a collection of people who are interested solely in self-defense and personal protection tactics.  We are also political activists!  The anti’s understand this and factor it into all of their public contact, but often we do not.

You and I are the spokesmen for responsible gun ownership and use in our communities.  Charleton Heston and Sarah Brady are, at best, distant figures to John and Jane Citizen, but you and I are their relatives, friends, neighbors and fellow travelers.

Open carry is our chance to show our friends and neighbors that we are normal people.  We have families, homes, children and bills just like they do.   We have simply chosen to exercise our right of self-defense and I, for one, find this very wholesome.

Posted in Open Carry | 1 Comment

I have made my decision!

Posted on March 17, 2008 by John Pierce

And the winner is …. Hamline University School of Law in St Paul, Minnesota!

I attended the Accepted Applicant Program over the last weekend and it really impressed me.  Both the administrative staff and the faculty did an incredible job.  I honestly had already made my decision before I got on the plane to leave Minnesota.  The combination of the weekend program and the full scholarship they are offering is simply too good to pass up.

I know that many of my fellow applicants will consider my decision foolish given the fact that I have been accepted into George Washington’s part-time program.  But the difference in price is significant whereas from my position as an already employed professional, I do not believe the quality of the experience will be all that different between the two.

In short … I have sent in my deposit check and will be attending Hamline in the fall.

Wish me luck!

Posted in Law School | Leave a comment

Accepted at Temple (Beasley School of Law)

Posted on January 12, 2008 by John Pierce

Today I received a large white envelope from Temple University Beasley School of Law. I was encouraged by the size of the envelope since the “small, white, angry” envelope that had come earlier in the the week from George Mason had been just that … “small”.

Sure enough, it was a very nice acceptance letter and packet of information for accepted students. However, there was no mention of scholarship dollars. This is hardly surprising given the lack of budget for part time scholarships I had talked about in my “Part-Time … Full Tuition” post, but it was still disappointing. I will give them a call on Monday to see if this is negotiable, but as I have mentioned before, part-time students have little or no leverage with schools.

I plan on being in Philadelphia in a few weeks and I will make time to swing by the Temple University campus to get a feel for the neighborhood. The safety of the campus and the immediate neighborhood are of particular interest to me since I will not be living on campus and will be attending evening classes. I need to be sure that I would feel comfortable leaving class or the law library at 10:00 PM at night and taking the subway.

You know … reading back over my Thanksgiving post, I had called Temple my second choice, so I should be ecstatic that my second choice has accepted me. But I find that I can muster little enthusiasm for borrowing over $100,000 for a degree from a Tier 2 school (and pay over $1,000 a month for an apartment while there) when I can go to a T3 with no debt and live quite comfortably on $500 to $700 a month while there and feel safer while doing so. As I continue to reconcile myself to my George Mason rejection, I will probably revisit this line of thought.

I would never have believed this before I began, but even the selection process is an anvil on which law school applicants are hammered and forged. I have decided that the key is to try and embrace the process and learn from everything, even the disappointments … no … especially the disappointments.

As I share my musings with you over the next few weeks as other decisions come in, I may flip-flop repeatedly about which acceptance I am favoring and why. And I will try to share those with you so that others who are experiencing the same thing will not feel that they are alone. In the meantime it would be very rude of me not to say “Thank you very much Temple! It is an honor to be accepted to your fine school! I do not know where I will end up, but if I do end up at Temple, I do not doubt for a moment that I will be proud of my school!”

Monachus Lex … Out

Posted in Law School | Leave a comment

Small, white, angry envelope

Posted on January 9, 2008 by John Pierce

Alas, I am undone!!

I have received the first rejection of the cycle and it is from the institution I most wanted to attend … George Mason University.

The rejection arrived in what another user on LawSchoolNumbers.com (LSN) called a “Small, White, Angry Envelope”.  As soon as I saw the envelope from Mason in the mailbox, I knew that it was a rejection. Those who had received the acceptance packet described it as a large packet and it was always prefaced by a phone call. I had not received the phone call and this was not a large packet. My heart sank … and stayed there.

I am, I must say, flabbergasted by the rejection. The two data points that bother me the most are:

  • According to LSN, I have the highest index score of any rejected applicant including full time applicants.
  • Also according to LSN, I had the second highest index score of ANY part time applicant and many with substantially lower scores have already been admitted and these were not Under Represented Minorities (URMs).

Oh well … such is the way of things and there is no profit in complaining. Now I have to revisit the acceptances I have already received, look at the applications I still have outstanding and perhaps rush to get a few more in that I had failed to send in my hubris.

Mason … we would have been good together !!!

Posted in Law School | Leave a comment

Accepted to Hamline University School of Law

Posted on December 26, 2007 by John Pierce

Today there was another acceptance letter in the mail.  This one was from Hamline University in St Paul, Minnesota.

The interesting thing about Hamline is the fact that they are one of only two ABA accredited law schools in the United States that has a weekend program.  As a part-time student who will be working full-time, a weekend program is very attractive.

They noted in the letter that scholarships are awarded in January.  I am still hoping that I will be accepted to George Mason but Hamline is a definite contender, especially if they offer scholarship dollars.

Stay tuned …

Posted in Law School | Leave a comment

Thanksgiving

Posted on November 22, 2007 by John Pierce

Happy Thanksgiving to all my fellow law school applicants! On this day, We can all take a break from incessantly checking our email and running to the mailbox every five minutes. Instead, we can all relax and spend time with our families and remember all of the things for which we are thankful.

What am I personally thankful for? I am most thankful for my family. My wife is supporting my law school aspirations completely and without this support, attending law school would not even be remotely possible. I am also thankful for living in the United States of America; Earth’s last great hope for individual liberty. In the same vein, I am thankful for living in the great Commonwealth of Virginia, where the tradition of Thanksgiving originated over 400 years ago. And finally, I am thankful that I have submitted all of my first round of applications before Thanksgiving! There are a few that haven’t gone complete yet, but at least they are submitted.

I would like to offer congratulations to all of my fellow applicants who have already received acceptances. That must be a great feeling. I think that several of the safety schools to which I have applied will be sending out acceptances over the next few weeks, but the earliest that I can reasonably expect to hear from George Mason (which as you may recall is my hands-down first choice) is the end of December if the reports on the lawschoolnumbers.com website are to be believed. The self-reported data on LSN indicates that last cycle George Mason made their first acceptance phone calls on December 22nd. This cycle, the application made a big deal about the fact that all communication would be handled by postal mail but I hope that they will still make the calls. Talk about a wonderful Christmas present!!!

If for some horrible, heart-breaking reason I am not accepted to George Mason, then at least the end of December also appears to be when Temple (my current second choice) begins to make their acceptance calls. I hope to start the new year knowing where I will be matriculating so that I can begin planning for 1L.

Until next time, this is Monachus Lex wishing you a very Happy Thanksgiving! …

Posted in Law School | Leave a comment