This article is also being featured United States Concealed Carry Association's website.

By Chad D. Baus

News of a man dressing up in a Santa suit and murdering nine people in Los Angeles on Christmas Eve dominated cable news headlines for days after the event. News reports suggest Bruce Pardo took as many as four handguns and a homemade flame-thrower to the home of his ex-wife's parents, where at least 25 people were enjoying a Christmas Eve party. Pardo shot at partygoers and burned down the house, murdering at least nine people before committing suicide hours later.

Damage from the flames has thus far prevented officials from determining how many of the victims were shot to death, but hasn't stopped the gun ban lobby from attempting to capitalize on the tragedy.

Less than 48 hours after the attack occurred, the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence issued a press release lamenting the "steady drumbeat of gun deaths and injuries that tears our families and communities apart," and suggesting that our nation's leaders "should do all that is within our power to find solutions to gun violence."

While the Brady press release could be considered somewhat distasteful, the truth is that both sides in the fight over gun rights and crime reduction have and will continue to use these tragedies as teachable moments. In fact, I find myself in agreement with the Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke's statement that "we should not despair and say this kind of violence is inevitable."

Indeed, there is much to be learned from this tragedy, which occurred in a state that has passed every conceivable form of gun control the gun grabbers have promoted, all in the name of reducing the violence.

By Stephen J. Feltoon

Recently, a handful of people forwarded me a letter that was sent from the President of GunFreeKids.org as well as Toby Hoover (Executive Director of the Ohio Coalition Against Gun Violence) and whose recipient is unknown because the address has been redacted. The content and context of the letter indicates that it was sent to a college in Ohio (more likely it was sent to ALL public colleges).

This letter warned of the gun lobby’s attempts to preempt public universities across the country, forcing their hands to allow concealed carry within their borders, and was laden with reasons why universities should oppose any legislation to allow this.

By Jeff Knox

Barack Obama’s nomination of Eric Holder to be the Attorney General demands an immediate and unequivocal response from gunowners and rights advocates and that response should be “Absolutely Not!”

Holder’s appointment to be AG must be approved by the Senate. While it is highly unlikely that opponents could muster the 51 votes needed to reject Holder’s appointment, a single Senator can place a “hold” on the confirmation and effectively lock up the system just as Democrats did with a number of President Bush’s judicial appointments and the appointment of John Bolton to be Ambassador to the UN. Once a “Hold” has been placed, a supermajority of 60 votes is required to break the hold. With enough vocal opposition to Holder’s confirmation, Obama could be forced to withdraw the nomination and select someone else to be his AG. Even if opponents cannot successfully block Holder’s appointment, a strong and concerted effort to do so will go far toward warning the Obama administration and the new Congress against trying to interfere with the rights of Americans to own guns.

Taken from the most recent “Page Nine” Alan Korwin’s “The Uninvited Ombudsman Report”

----------

OBAMA WANTS YOU
In an extraordinary outreach effort, the president-elect is actively soliciting input from special-interest groups with no holds barred. Shockingly, not a single firearms group has responded (there are 39 pages just listing groups that have filed reports). Have we become so set in our fears that we might fail to ask our president for those values and laws that more than half the country would want? Reach out to your local and national pro-rights groups and make your voice heard. The president-elect's website is loaded with opportunities, but they mean nothing if we don't use them. I'm working on a proposal, will release it soon. Go here to start yourself:
http://change.gov/open_government/yourseatatthetable

By Gabe Suarez

There has been a great deal of discussion about what to carry for an event like Mumbai. Gents, let's think about this. If you happen to be caught up in this at its conclusion, facing a dozen riflemen working together as a unit, and you with your Kel-Tec, what do you think your realistic chances of success are? Being real is not being defeatist, but come on.

Now, at the outset of the event, where there may be only one or two adversaries, it gets a little better in terms of odds. But only a little. You have one advantage and that is the advantage of surprise and one target. They, on the other hand have many avenues of danger to cover, only one which is yours. This will be a rapidly moving fluid situation.

One man was saying that using a cell phone to photograph the bad guys would be good. Pictures of the bad guys on your cell phone? Come on....seriously? If you have the ability to take their picture, you also have the ability to take their life, or GTFOT (get the f*** out of there) so get out of the evidence collecting mindset.

By Gabe Suarez

In 2001 the USA had the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. It has become vogue to call it the 9/11 Tragedy, as if it was a hurricane or an earthquake, but it was not. It was an act done by men, evil men. A few years later, both Spain and England faced similar events. And now India. I am not so schooled in geo-politics to try to draw strategic significance here. All I can do is to draw operational similarities in the hope of understanding my enemy better and thus be able to defeat him. Similarly, to be able to teach my students to defeat him.

Here is what we know thus far -

By Gerard Valentino

The sporting world is up in arms over the recent accidental self-inflicted shooting of New York Giants star Plaxico Burress.

Popular ESPN commentators Mike Greenburg and Mike Golic began the frenzy of bad gun-related information in their early morning radio talk show. Both repeatedly claimed they could never see a reason to go anywhere if they needed to carry a gun. I’m sure they’ve made their way to a McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Luby’s, a local school or university, mall or even a movie theater over the years.

All are places where spree killings have taken place in the past, and I bet many of the victims thought they didn’t need a gun if they were going to such a “safe” place. Many probably also wish they had a gun to fight back as they watched innocent people being brutally murdered, or as the gunman slowly lined them up in the sights.

Mike and Mike weren’t the only sports reporters to get the gun issue so horribly wrong in covering the Buress fiasco. The sports-related commentators making ignorant comments about the gun issue included the so-called best and brightest of the industry.

By Jim Irvine

On December 2, I attended an anti-gun advocacy lecture where Boston Mayor Thomas Menino joined Cleveland city council members and others to convince uneducated citizens that they need more gun control. They assert that making the current actions of law-abiding gun owners criminal would somehow aid them in catching real criminals.

Every person on the panel spoke of “illegal guns” and the need to get them off the street. Lori O’Neill of “Citizens for Safety” (who after Ohio's concealed handgun law was passed started a business to profit on fear - fear of law-abiding citizens which she had worked to generate) finally defined an illegal gun as being one that is in possession of a person who could not legally own the gun. It was refreshing to know that these “illegal guns” could be completely “rehabilitated” simply by placing them back in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

Curiously not one person talked about the illegal actions of individuals with guns. They repeatedly asked, “Where did the gun come from?” Of course the real question is “Where did the criminal come from?” Remember that this lecture was not about crime, it was about guns – your guns.

By Jeff Riley

In an editorial published on Sunday November 30th, 2008 the Columbus Dispatch agitates for "closing" private sales loophole for gun owners. Interesting timing, given a Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence-issued press release on the same date, addressing the same topic.

You can read the Dispatch editorial, which chides Congress as having "failed" to enforce background checks on "private sellers, who use gun shows, the Internet and other means to peddle their wares" here.

The Brady press release, which concludes by calling for "the Obama Administration and the new Congress to take effective action to improve public safety by requiring Brady criminal background checks for all gun sales" (emphasis added) is here.

The Editors at the Dispatch didn't have to do much work here - it's mostly cut and paste with absolutely no fact checking of the Brady statistics!

EDITOR'S NOTE: When reading the following op-ed, keep in mind Brady Campaign spokesman Peter Hamm's comment on Monday that gun owners who are purchasing firearms in advance of the Obama's inauguration are "stupid".

By Alan Korwin

Plenty of gun-ban speculation is flying.
I have this quote direct from Sarah Brady in a letter addressed to me:

"On Election Day, we helped deliver a strong victory for President-Elect Barack Obama and Vice-President-Elect Joe Biden. They will be two of the most powerful allies we have ever had."

This is what Obama meant when he told you to your face that he respects the Second Amendment. He is the acknowledged champion of the anti-rights gun-ban movement.