Gun Week News Items

Home

Bill To Stop Trap & Skeet Opening Tabled

by Michelle Pirraglia Suffolk Life Newspapers June 28 2006

A bill that calls for the county to cease its actions in reopening the Suffolk County Trap and Skeet facility in Yaphank was introduced last week by Legislator Kate Browning (WF-Shirley). While the legislation was tabled, the conflict behind it has continued to grow as the opening date of the facility nears.

“This is not the right location anymore to have a trap and skeet,” Browning said after the Legislature's Parks and Cultural Affairs Committee meeting last Wednesday. “Since I took office, I've met with local residents, and [found that] a lot of new homes have been built around that location.”

While the facility has been shut down since 2001, due to the poor maintenance and bad business practices of the prior owner, the county has moved to restore the site, with the opening currently slated for July 15. Suffolk officials say this push came about after a number of trap and skeet enthusiasts, over the past five years, petitioned the county to reopen the site. However, neighbors of the Trap and Skeet, including those who bought their homes after 2001, are now voicing their concerns.

“It's going to be like the Fourth of July every day,” said Joe Cavaliere, who lives in one of the 79 homes within the Pinewood Manor development, which was built around the time the Trap and Skeet range was closed. “It belongs in an industrial area, not in the middle of a multi-million-dollar housing development.”

The new owner of the Trap and Skeet, Mark Wroobel, said that while he is “going to do whatever is necessary to be a good neighbor to the community,” he believes the situation is being blown out of proportion. “It's gone through all the necessary testing, and they [the county] have answered every question fully,” he said. “I think everyone's voice should be heard, but you have to be fair. It should be everything from the last five years, not just the last five weeks. We're here because the overwhelming majority of the masses want us here.”

Community activist Doug Steigerwald, who moved into his home, which is approximately 300 feet from the Trap and Skeet, in 2005, said local neighbors and the Long Island Pine Barrens Society had led him to believe that the shooting range would remain closed. “I did my homework,” he said, noting that he also contacted a Brookhaven Town official he declined to name, who said there was a “slim chance” that the site would reopen. “The Long Island Pine Barrens Society is chartered to protect the Pine Barrens, so why would we, trusting in our laws, think it would reopen?”

Richard Amper, executive director of the LI Pine Barrens Society, stands by the claim that the Trap and Skeet facility, which is in a “core preservation area” of the Pine Barrens, cannot reopen under the 1993 New York State Pine Barrens Protection Act. “New development is not permitted in this core area,” Amper said, adding that the law states it is not permissible to “resume activity that has been discontinued for more than one year.”

However, county officials disagree with Amper's interpretation. “Our position is that the [New York State] Pine Barrens Commission has no jurisdiction over the reopening of the facility,” said Ron Foley, commissioner of the Suffolk County Department of Parks, Recreation and Conservation. “Our intention was always to reopen it, and that's what we're doing.”

At its last meeting, the NYS Pine Barrens Commission asked its legal council to review the law, with their next meeting slated for July 19. While the shooting range is scheduled to open four days prior to that meeting, Amper maintains that if the Trap and Skeet does reopen, the LI Pine Barrens Society will sue the county, pursuant to the 1993 law.

While the county has done several noise and environmental studies on the site, those issues are still of concern to Amper and some of the residents who leave near the facility. “I'm a hunter and I know how loud gunshots are,” said Bruce Karas, who bought a home approximately a half-mile from the shooting range in 2003. He also cited lead pollution concerns, in both the groundwater and the air. “When you shoot a gun, there's a certain amount of lead that goes into the air ... You're concentrating large amounts of lead in one location.”

Foley, who said the site is not in violation of any environmental standards, commented on concerns that lead could contaminate both the groundwater and the air. “If in 80 years it [lead] hasn't polluted the water, I don't expect that it will,” he said. As for worries about “lead dust,” he added, “That's an issue for indoor ranges, which are contained in a closed area. No one has shown it's an issue at outdoor ranges.”

The facility has also been exempt from the county's noise ordinance. While some residents claim the town of Brookhaven may have jurisdiction over sound that carries into the community, Foley does not believe it will be an issue. “We're not certain the town's ordinance applies to this place because [the Trap and Skeet] pre-exists the town law,” he said.

Browning, who said she is “not prepared to let [her] bill die,” criticized the amount of money the county is spending on the reopening. “Why are we spending tax dollars on a private venue when it's going to take about 20 years to recoup the money we put in?” she said, noting that the county has passed resolutions to spend up to $800,000 on refurbishing the site.

Foley, who said the county has spent $250,000 on the project thus far, and may spend up to $50,000 more before renovations are complete, explained that the “majority” of the $800,000 was being set aside for a noise wall. The plan for the noise wall fell through, as it was “too expensive,” according to Foley, who said the county is “not going to dip into the majority of those funds.”

Some residents, including Cavaliere, are looking into moving from the area, and are afraid the reopening of the site will negatively impact property values, as well. “I don't want my tax dollars going to this,” he said. “I'd rather they go to Smithtown to help their flooding situation.”

County Legislator Tom Barraga (R-West Islip) said that if Browning's bill comes before the Legislature, he would vote against it. “I will not be supporting her legislation for a number of reasons,” he said. “The people who bought their homes in that vicinity knew it [the Trap and Skeet range] was there. They knew what they were getting ... They should've dropped a quarter to find out from the local town or county. They're the ones that didn't do their due diligence.”

Wroobel, who said he will be able to operate the site “safely,” contends that taxpayers will reap the benefits in terms of local revenue. “This is going to be an amazing draw to the area,” he said.

Claiming that the more than 300 new homes in the area make the site too residential for a shooting range, Browning said part of her resolution addresses placing the facility elsewhere. “I am not an anti-gun person,” she said, noting that she still has environmental concerns. “If this site continues to be open, the question is, how much longer until it gets to the point where it [lead contamination] is going to be a concern?”

When Will NYT Reveal One of al Qaeda's Secret Programs?

by Ann Coulter Jun 28, 2006 Human Events Online

When is the New York Times going to get around to uncovering an al Qaeda secret program?

In the latest of a long list of formerly top-secret government anti-terrorism operations that have been revealed by the Times, last week the paper printed the details of a government program tracking terrorists' financial transactions that has already led to the capture of major terrorists and their handmaidens in the United States.

In response, the Bush Administration is sounding very cross—and doing nothing. Bush wouldn't want to get the press mad at him! Yeah, let's keep the media on our good side like they are now. Otherwise, they might do something crazy—like leak a classified government program monitoring terrorist financing.

National Review has boldly called for the revocation of the Times' White House press pass! If the Times starts publishing troop movements, National Review will go whole hog and demand that the paper's water cooler privileges be revoked. Then there's always the “nuclear option”: disinviting Maureen Dowd from the next White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Meanwhile, the one congressman who has called for any sort of criminal investigation is being treated like a nut. Don't get me wrong: Congressman Peter King is nuttier than squirrel droppings—but he's right on this.

Unless, that is, the country has simply abolished the concept of treason. We've got a lot of liberals who hate the country and are itching to aid the enemy, so what are you going to do? Indict the entire editorial board of the New York Times? (Actually, that wouldn't be a bad place to start, now that I ask.)

Maybe treason ended during the Vietnam War when Jane Fonda sat laughing and clapping on a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun used to shoot down American pilots. She came home and resumed her work as a big movie star without the slightest fear of facing any sort of legal sanction.

Fast forward to today, when New York Times publisher “Pinch” Sulzberger has just been named al Qaeda's “Employee of the Month” for the 12th straight month.

Before the Vietnam War, this country took treason seriously.

But now we're told newspapers have a right to commit treason because of “freedom of the press.” Liberals invoke “freedom of the press” like some talismanic formulation that requires us all to fall prostrate in religious ecstasy. On liberals' theory of the 1st Amendment, the safest place for Osama bin Laden isn't in Afghanistan or Pakistan; it's in the New York Times building.

Freedom of the press means the government generally cannot place a prior restraint on speech before publication.

But freedom of the press does not mean the government cannot prosecute reporters and editors for treason—or for any other crime. The 1st Amendment does not mean Times editor Bill Keller could kidnap a child and issue his ransom demands from the New York Times editorial page. He could not order a contract killing on the op-ed page. Nor can he take out a contract killing on Americans with a Page 1 story on a secret government program being used to track terrorists who are trying to kill Americans.

What if, instead of passing information from the government's secret nuclear program at Los Alamos directly to Soviet agents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg had printed those same secrets in a newsletter? Would they have skated away scot-free instead of being tried for espionage and sent to the death chamber?

Ezra Pound, Mildred Gillars (“Axis Sally”) and Iva Toguri D'Aquino (“Tokyo Rose”) were all charged with treason for radio broadcasts intended to demoralize the troops during World War II. Their broadcasts were sort of like Janeane Garofalo and Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio—except Tokyo Rose was actually witty, and Axis Sally is said to have used a fact-checker.

Tokyo Rose was convicted of treason for a single remark she made on air: “Orphans of the Pacific, you really are orphans now. How will you get home now that your ships are sunk?” For that statement alone, D'Aquino spent six years in prison and was fined $10,000 (more than $80,000 in today's dollars).

Axis Sally was convicted of treason for broadcasts from Germany and sentenced to 12 years in prison. Pound avoided a treason trial for his radio broadcasts by getting himself committed to an insane asylum instead (which I take it is Randi Rhodes' “Plan B” in the event that she ever acquires enough listeners to be charged with treason).

There was no evidence that in any of these cases the treasonable broadcasts ever put a single American life in danger. The law on treason doesn't require it.

The federal statute on treason, 18 USC 2381, provides in relevant part: “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States ... adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000.”

Thanks to the New York Times, the easiest job in the world right now is: “Head of Counterintelligence—al Qaeda.” You just have to read the New York Times over morning coffee, and you're done by 10 a.m.

The greatest threat to the war on terrorism isn't the Islamic insurgency—our military can handle the savages. It's traitorous liberals trying to lose the war at home. And the greatest threat at home isn't traitorous liberals—it's patriotic Americans, also known as “Republicans,” tut-tutting the quaint idea that we should take treason seriously.

Day three at the UN gun ban conference

Jun 29, 2006 by Cam Edwards TownHall.com

Hearing Angola and Cambodia detail their plans for rounding up all the guns owned by civilians is kind of like hearing that the Dixie Chicks are writing a song about America. You just know something bad's going to happen in the end. And yet, that's exactly what we heard on day 3 of the UN's summit on small arms (Angola and Cambodia, not the Dixie Chicks. They haven't been granted a seat on the Security Council… yet).

Angola, a country devastated by 24 years of civil war, is now in the process of making sure that citizens can never again revolt against the government. Minister of Justice Manuel Miguel da Costa Aragão told the assembled nations the, “disarmament process is being carried out in a systematic manner and on the basis of information provided by the population.” Even better, Angola wants other countries to help pay for the disarming of its citizens. The Justice Minister also said, “we seize this opportunity to ask for the support of the international community in the difficult task of disarming the civilian population.”

Yes, the civil war in Angola was devastating. An estimated 500,000 people lost their lives. But let's be honest here. If there were any “good guys” in the civil war, they didn't win. Our own State Department says in 2005 the country's human rights record “remained poor and serious problems remained.” What type of problems?

- The abridgement of the rights of citizens to elect officials at all levels.

- Arbitrary arrest and detention.

- Unlawful killings, disappearances, torture, beatings, and abuse of persons.

- Lack of due process.

- Restrictions on freedom of speech, the press, and assembly.

Sounds like a wonderful place. I'm sure the government confiscation of all civilian-owned firearms has nothing to do with the abuses listed above. It's purely a coincidence. And nothing bad will happen to the Angolans, I'm sure. I mean, it's not like Angola is Rwanda. Or Sudan. Right?

Also speaking on Wednesday morning was Cambodian Undersecretary of State Sieng Lapresse. Cambodia, where over a million civilians lost their lives in a genocide, has banned the civilian possession of firearms. The fact that the Khmer Rouge were able to rule the country with an iron fist in part because of the strict gun control laws in place has been lost on the United Nations. I'm pretty sure the Cambodian government understands, however.

The State Department says the Cambodian government's human rights record got worse in 2005, not better. “Contrary to past years,” it says, “there were no reports of politically motivated killings… however, extrajudicial killings occurred.” So the government killing civilians wasn't political in nature. Well, that's a relief.

The Cambodian genocide took place just a generation ago. Yet already the Cambodian government is disarming its citizens, with the approval and help of the United Nations and its disarmament program. In a perfect world, the United Nations would be holding an armament program for the people of Cambodia. It would understand the right of self-protection. It would understand that the State isn't always the good guy.

Then again, in a perfect world, I doubt the UN would exist at all. Since it does, I invite you to log on to www.NRAnews.com and get the news from the UN (and elsewhere) each and every weekday. Executive Editor Ginny Simone is reporting live from the United Nations throughout the two-week summit, and we'll be broadcasting the entire show live from New York for the summit's final three days.

Cam Edwards is the host of “Cam and Company” on www.nranews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. A veteran talk show host and political analyst, he blogs at www.camedwards.com in addition to his daily talk show. Cam lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and five children.

US Signals Support for Measures to Stem Illicit Small Arms Trade

by Peter Heinlein United Nations 28 June 2006

A senior U.S. diplomat has told a U.N. conference the United States supports principles designed to stem the illegal trade in small arms. But, the official made clear that Washington will not accept limits on individual gun possession.

Addressing a U.N. small arms review conference, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Robert Joseph said the United States will offer detailed proposals to keep assault rifles and other small arms out of the hands of rights abusers.

“My delegation is here today with a positive agenda—an agenda for effective action to address the illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons, covering military style arms such as shoulder-fired missiles and rocket systems, light mortars, machine guns and automatic rifles,” said Robert Joseph.

At the same time, the official said the United States would not accept measures to limit the constitutional right of Americans to keep and bear arms.

“The United States will not agree to any provisions restricting civilian possession, use or legal trade of firearms inconsistent with our laws and practices,” he said. “Many millions of American citizens enjoy hunting and the full range of firearm sports, and our work will not affect their rights and opportunities.”

The small arms conference has been clouded by fears of some U.S. gun owners that the world body was trying to enact a global gun ban. But in his opening statement to the conference Monday, Secretary-General Kofi Annan attempted to dispel those fears. He said the proposed program of action is aimed only at the illicit gun trade.

Undersecretary of State Joseph welcomed Mr. Annan's statement.

“We agree with the remarks made by the Secretary General to this conference yesterday, namely that the Program of Action is not ‘intended to deny law-abiding citizens their right to bear arms in accordance with their national traditions' and that our efforts should be ‘directed toward illegal weapons and not legal ones,' “ noted Robert Joseph.

The two-week small arms review is a follow-up to a 2001 meeting where the original program of action on the illicit arms was adopted.

An independent survey suggests one-fourth of the $4-billion a year global small arms trade is illicit, that is, not recorded as required by law.

Gun control activists are urging the world body to adopt a treaty aimed at preventing arms sales to human rights abusers or those affected by U.N. arms embargoes.

Guns offer feeling of security to seniors

By Michael Maresh, Roundup June 27, 2006

Jim Thomas refuses to be a “willing” victim of a random crime or attack at any age.

Thomas is one of the many seniors who carry a concealed weapon, which, he said, gives him a little security and protection.

At 66, he has thankfully never had to use it. He has never pointed a gun at anyone, but just knowing it's there makes all the difference.

Thomas is no stranger to having or owning a weapon he could lawfully conceal. He first took a

concealed weapon course when he was 21 years old while living in Indiana.

When he moved to Arizona, he had to get a permit for this state. In order to keep the permit, he must prove that he can still hit a target.

His renewal test was Monday morning.

Thomas carries a handgun at all times when out of the house. He keeps it secured in a holster that is covered by his shirt.

He carries the gun as he walks two to three miles a day, five days a week, in the forest where he has spotted mountain lions and black bears.

Recently, he said, an 82-year-old neighbor was attacked by a bobcat while out walking.

“I refuse to be a willing victim,” he repeated.

Thomas is not alone.

In 2004, according to the Department of Public Safety, more than 37,000 seniors or people older than 50 in Arizona carried concealed weapons.

While Thomas has never had to pull or point his gun at anyone, on three occasions he has told a person he was arguing with that he had a firearm in his possession.

“Three times I told a person I had a gun and the argument was over with,” he said. “I have never had to use one, don't want to use it, but the fact is I have one.”

He recalled a time when he thought two men were getting ready to rob him. He said all he had to do was flip up his shirt to show he was armed.

He said one of the men yelled, “He's got a gun,” and both took off running.

Getting trained

DPS offers an eight-hour concealed weapons basic class.

Hank Marquardt, a concealed weapons instructor for three years, said the average age of his students ranges from 50 to 59 years old.

“I think we all realize that when we reach a certain age we are not able to defend ourselves as easily,” he said.

He said seniors as well as others in his class want to know what the laws are and are willing to train in order to use their weapon safely.

The gun he carries

Thomas has four handguns. He normally carries a 357-magnum revolver, and his primary backup is .38 Plus P.

The 66-year-old senior said he is not in the same condition he was in 25 years ago when he was more able to defend himself.

He said 90 percent of the people he knows carry concealed weapons, and most of them, he added, are senior citizens.

Thomas said he competes in tournaments in competitions five times a month, and the majority of participants are also senior citizens.

In a recent competition in Winslow with 25 contestants, seven were older than 60-years-old, and another six were older than 50.

He said carrying a concealed weapon does not keep anyone safe because trouble can creep up on a person at any time. He said awareness of one's surroundings is still what people need to remember.

Thomas said if he ever came home to find someone in his house that he did not know, he would give him or her the opportunity to leave or lie down.

“If your name is not Jim Thomas, you better get out of here,” he would tell a burglar or trespasser.

“If it came down to it, I would give him a chance to get out. He does have a chance if he lies down on the floor.”

Thomas said he keeps a loaded shotgun by his bedside in case something were to happen at night.

Last resort

The firearm is a tool of last resort, Marquardt said. People need to be aware and, when possible, stay away from potential problems.

“You do have it as that last ditch measure if you have no other choice,” he said.

Dave Ross, a concealed weapons instructor in Payson for the past 10 years, said a normal class is 10 people, and more than 70 percent of the students in a class are seniors.

“I think they need a way to protect themselves,” Ross said.

Payson Police Commander Don Engler said he doesn't know the exact figure, but there are quite a few seniors in Payson who have concealed weapon permits.

“I think the goal of it is to give citizens the right to protect themselves,” he said.

ANDREW CUOMO CALLS FOR CLOSING LOOPHOLES IN NEW YORK STATE'S ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Andrew Cuomo, Assemblyman John W. Lavelle, Detectives Endowment Association (DEA), Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA) and New Yorkers Against Gun Violence Unite to Keep Cop-Killing Weapons Off New York's Streets

NEW YORK, NY (June 29, 2006)

Today, New York State Attorney General candidate Andrew Cuomo called for strengthening New York State's assault weapons ban by closing the loopholes in the current law. In highlighting the need for more comprehensive legislation to protect law enforcement and all New Yorkers, Cuomo was joined by Assemblyman John W. Lavelle, Michael J. Palladino, President, Detectives Endowment Association (DEA), Edward D. Mullins, Sergeants Benevolent Association (SBA), Pat Lynch, President, Patrolmen's Benevolent Association (PBA) and Jackie Kuhls, Executive Director, New Yorkers Against Gun Violence.

Earlier this year the New York State Assembly passed Assemblyman Lavelle's bill (A.2466) to expand the State's current ban on assault weapons (modeled after the federal ban which expired in 2004) to prohibit more of these deadly guns including guns that have been modified to bypass the ban while still functioning like military-style assault weapons. On June 7, 2006, Cuomo announced his support for strengthening the assault weapons ban as part of a five-point proposal to fight gun violence.

“I am proud to stand with Andrew Cuomo and the men and women who protect our streets as we fight to keep these needless battlefield weapons off our streets,” stated Assemblyman John W. Lavelle. “As HUD Secretary under President Clinton, Andrew stood up to the gun lobby and negotiated the historic Safe Guns Agreement on behalf of the administration to change the way guns were designed and distributed. With his record, integrity and commitment, there is no question that as Attorney General, Andrew will continue to be a tough advocate and leader in the fight to protect law enforcement and our families from these deadly weapons.”

“Andrew Cuomo truly understands that in this post-9/11 world, law enforcement need effective measures, protections and tools to help us keep New Yorkers safe,” stated Michael J. Palladino, President Detectives' Endowment Association. “We recently lost two of our undercover detectives—James Nemorin and Rodney Jay Andrews—while they were doing their jobs taking illegal weapons off the streets. They were both gunned down in cold blood. In their memory, the Detectives' Endowment Association (DEA) vows to continue our fight against the needless proliferation of non-sporting firearms and the easy access to deadly assault weapons. We are here to say that we need more assistance from Albany in tackling this critical issue and we believe Andrew will be there to help us.”

“No other candidate in this race has better credentials to protect New Yorkers than Andrew Cuomo,” stated Edward D. Mullins, President, Sergeants Benevolent Association. “Law enforcement can count on Andrew to stand strong and fight for common-sense legislation that saves cops lives by preventing criminals from out-arming us on the street.”

“Andrew Cuomo understands the challenges New York City police officers face each day protecting public safety and how critical it is to prevent these lethal weapons from making their way onto our streets and in our neighborhoods,” stated Pat Lynch, President, Patrolmen's Benevolent Association (PBA). “The sheer firepower of these weapons poses an especially critical danger to public safety. Failing to strengthen the current ban would be a major blow to law enforcement.”

“We must close the loopholes in the law that allows copycat assault weapons to be sold,” stated Jackie Kuhls, Executive Director, New Yorkers Against Gun Violence. “Law enforcement officials are most at risk from these weapons. These are weapons of war and they do not belong on the streets of New York.”

“We owe it to the brave men and women who risk their lives to protect us to prevent that military-style, cop-killing weapons are simply unavailable for civilian use,” stated Andrew Cuomo, New York State Attorney General candidate. “When New York was attacked by terrorists, President Bush came to this city and vowed to stand solidly behind our police. Since then he has allowed the most basic, life-saving, common-sense protection for cops to just lapse. It is up to us to stand up for police, where the federal government is ‘standing down.' I will stop at nothing to work with ensure that these lethal weapons never return to the streets of New York.”

Andrew Cuomo's Record Fighting Gun Violence

• Negotiated Landmark HUD Safe Gun Agreement with Smith & Wesson: In 2000, on behalf of the Clinton Administration, HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo negotiated the landmark Safe Gun Agreement with Smith & Wessonthe largest gun manufacturer in the nationsetting the stage for a potential global industry-wide settlement and providing the template for subsequent gun manufacturer and gun dealer codes of conduct. Under the historic settlement, the gun maker agreed to make sweeping and dramatic changes in the way it manufactures, distributes, and markets firearms to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. In return the mayors of the cities, the county executives, and Attorneys General (including New York's Eliot Spitzer), agreed to drop their claims against Smith & Wesson.

The HUD Safe Gun Agreement included critical enforcement and oversight mechanisms that specified Smith & Wesson would: 1) follow a gun manufacturer code of conduct prohibiting the company from doing business with dealers responsible for selling a disproportionate number of guns used in crimes; 2) bar gun sales without a background check of the buyer to prevent straw purchases and other suspect firearm sales; 3) require the inclusion of gun tracing data and mandate a comprehensive series of safety features including locking devices, “smart gun” technology, and other features to prevent accidental and criminal gun deaths; 4) limit the delivery of multiple handgun sales; and, 5) refrain from advertising in a manner that appeals to criminals.

The HUD Safe Gun Agreement, in response to pressure from the gun lobby, was voided.

• Created Nationwide Communities for Safer Guns Coalition: To promote the agreement's code of conduct and ensure its implementation nationwide, Cuomo launched the Communities for Safer Guns Coalition comprised of more than 400 state and local governments around the nation. Coalition members pledged to give favorable consideration in their purchase of firearms to gun manufacturers that adopted new gun safety and dealer responsibility standards.

Members of the Communities for Safer Guns Coalition in New York State included officials from: Akron, Albany, Amsterdam, Auburn, Babylon, Baldwinsville, Bethany, Binghamton, Brighton, Bronx, Brooklyn, Buffalo, Byron, Chateaugay, Chester, Chestnut Ridge, Chozy, Colonie, Constable, Coventry, Croton-on-Hudson, Cuba, Darien, East Hampton, Elmira, Erie County, Evans, Freeport, Geneseo, Glen Cove, Greenburgh, Green Island, Hempstead, Holley, Hornell, Ithaca, LaGrange, Le Roy, Liberty, Long Beach, Lyons, Madison County, Manhattan, Middletown, Manlius, Mount Morris, Mount Vernon, Nassau County, New Castle, New Paltz, New Rochelle, New Square, New York City, New York State, Niagara County, North Hempstead, North Tonawanda, Olive, Oneonta, Orangetown, Orchard Park, Ossining, Oyster Bay, Plattekill, Plattsburgh, Pomona, Queens, Ramapo, Rockville Center, Russia, Saratoga Springs, Schenectady, Southampton, Southold, Springfield, Spring Valley, Staten Island, Troy, Unionville, Utica, Westchester County, Wurtsboro, and Yorkshire.

• Launched Officer Next Door Program: To help keep neighborhoods safe and make community policing a reality, Cuomo launched the Officer Next Door Program which allowed police officers to purchase homes in the communities they policed for half the price.

• Organized Gun Buyback and Violence Reduction Initiative: As HUD Secretary Cuomo organized the Gun Buyback and Violence Reduction Initiative, the largest gun buyback program in the nation's history. This program helped to remove more than 10,000 guns from America's streets. The program enabled police departments around the country to buy guns from the public on a “no questions asked” basis.

Letter from Sarah Brady Endorsing Andrew Cuomo for Attorney General

May 26, 2006

Dear Andrew;

Jim and I are thrilled that you're seeking to serve the people of New York as Attorney General. We know that you'll do a wonderful job, as you have in every important position that you've served in during your career.

We will never forget how you stood up to the gun lobby when you served in President Clinton's cabinet, and we are eternally grateful. New Yorkers are hearing a great deal about the trafficking of illegal guns lately, and we're very grateful for the critical work that Mayor Bloomberg has been doing on focusing public attention on this subject. As Attorney General, you would bring a great deal of knowledge, experience and courage to that good fight.

While the organization we work for does not endorse in political primary elections, Jim and I as citizens are happy to say that for all the hard work you've done to combat gun violence over the years, we are firmly supportive of your candidacy, and will do everything that we can to help you to be elected to serve New Yorkers as Attorney General.

Sincerely,

Sarah Brady

http://www.andrewcuomo.com/

SAN FRANCISCO

3 suspects shot in robbery attempt

Jaxon Van Derbeken June 28, 2006 San Francisco Chronicle

Police are looking for a man who turned the tables on three would-be robbers and shot them early Tuesday in the Tenderloin.

Police say the three first tried to rob a man at 3:30 a.m. at Turk and Leavenworth streets, but he was able to escape. The man then watched as the suspects confronted a couple and tried to grab a backpack from them, police said.

The man with the backpack pulled a gun and shot the three, police said. One man was wounded in the leg and was quickly arrested, and a second man wounded in the arm and buttocks was found around the corner.

The third man, wounded in the buttocks and groin, went to the Tenderloin Task Force police station for help.

“You've got to go somewhere,” Inspector John Peterson said. “Where he was shot, he needed the help.”

The three men each were charged with two counts of attempted robbery. Their names were not immediately released.

“It's rare to have a victim be armed and use the weapon successfully on all three perpetrators,” Peterson said. “We would like to talk to that victim to hear the rest of the story.”

Gun control in city takes another shot

Philadelphia Daily News John Baer Jun 29 2006

YET ANOTHER effort to get Philly even modest help in stemming gun violence failed this week as a key state Senate committee declined to move a one-gun-a-month proposal, opting instead for an old, reliable political two-step—more study.

Just what the city needs.

The timing effectively kills the effort for months if not the rest of the year.

It comes as the Legislature rushes to adopt a budget and leave for the summer. That could happen by tomorrow.

And the likelihood that lawmakers will tackle anything controversial (and in Pennsylvania anything involving guns is controversial) between their return in September and re-election in November is, in my view, minimal.

That's a shame. It's another opportunity lost.

And it's lost as the city suffers increasing carnage: more than 800 shootings so far this year; more than 160 homicides so far; an overall homicide rate that's climbing even as rates in other large cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago) fall.

And, look, I'm not sure restricting the sale of handguns to one a month has great impact on the misery suffered by so many Philly families and neighborhoods. But if one less shooting, one less killing is the result, why not do it, why not try?

This try came from Philly freshman Sen. LeAnna Washington, D-Philadelphia, with an assist from veteran Sen. Vince Fumo, also a Democrat, who, as a life member of the NRA, drew fire from gun advocates and gun-control groups.

Washington wants the Senate Judiciary Committee to move the bill. Fumo offers help if it applies only to Philadelphia and carries a seven-year sunset, the theory being, while difficult, it's the only way there's even a chance it passes the gun-friendly Legislature.

Meanwhile, gunnies say it goes too far; anti-gunnies say Fumo wants to weaken it with the sunset provision. And pressure ensues. Washington tells me she's blasted by the gun-control group Ceasefire for “selling them out.” She and others say senators and committee members quickly hear from the NRA.

So the committee, chaired by Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery, tables the bill and includes it with other measures to be the subject of broad Senate hearings on urban violence later this summer.

In other words, a delay so politicians seeking re-election can put on tax-paid shows to make it look like they're doing something.

(Another one-gun-a-month bill sits in the House Judiciary Committee; it has for more than a year.)

And so it goes.

Efforts to reach Greenleaf yesterday were not successful. So I asked the committee's ranking Democrat, Sen. Jay Costa of Pittsburgh, a former deputy sheriff, if the bill would have been defeated in committee.

“I don't know that for a fact,” he says, adding he'd probably vote for it.

Washington says she wanted a vote and is disappointed there was none. “I'm disappointed in the people I serve with in the Senate. I'm disappointed in the whole process... this stuff is pathetic,” she says.

What strikes me is the inconsistency of the Legislature's attitude toward Philadelphia. When it comes to city requests for more funding for schools, human services or libraries, the answer is usually “no,” the city should do more for itself.

Yet when the city tries to do more for itself by seeking its own gun laws to deal with its own gun problems, the answer is just plain “no.”

Washington says she's pursuing the case. “Just because people say it can't happen doesn't mean you can't bring it to the table.”

I think anything, and I mean anything, that might help reduce gun violence is worth bringing to the table, voting on and trying.

And it doesn't take any more two-steps, public hearings or studies to do so.

House votes to overturn mandatory gun locks

Jun 28, 2006 WASHINGTON (Reuters)

The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to overturn a recently enacted law requiring safety trigger locks on all hand guns sold in the United States.

The Republican-controlled House handed a victory to opponents of gun control by a vote of 230-191.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, a Colorado Republican, argued that the added cost of the trigger locks is passed on to gun owners and that they “do not stop accidental shootings.”

Last fall, President George W. Bush signed legislation giving gun makers broad protections from civil lawsuits, but that law contained the mandatory trigger lock provision.

The amendment overturning the requirement for trigger locks was attached to a larger law enforcement spending bill for next year that has not yet been considered by the Senate.

House Votes to Kill Trigger Lock Law

By Susan Jones CNSNews.com June 30, 2006

The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to gut a law requiring gun dealers to provide trigger locks on all handguns sold in the United States. The House voted 230-191 in favor of an amendment barring the expenditure of federal funds to enforce the law, press reports said.

Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Col.), the author of the amendment, was quoted as saying that trigger locks boost the cost of guns and “do not stop accidental shootings.”

The mandatory trigger lock provision was included in a bill President Bush signed last fall. The larger bill shielded gun makers from agenda-driven lawsuits intended to bankrupt them.

The nation's leading gun control group called the vote a “disturbingly backwards move.”

“Last night, in a tragic display of how many Members of Congress will do anything the gun lobby tells them to do, a majority of the U.S. House voted to repeal the law,” said Sarah Brady of Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

“As someone who knows so many victims of unintentional shootings, and as a mother, this makes me ill,” she said in a press release.

“Americans should ask representatives who voted to repeal the safety lock law why they've lost their senses. And we must all urge the Senate to reject this irresponsible and shameful maneuver,” Brady said.

Some gun owners warn that trigger locks provide a false sense of security—and that no one should trust them to prevent a gun from firing. And some gun owners say trigger locks are an impediment to quick self-defense when it's needed.

The House amendment was attached to a law enforcement spending bill that the Senate has not yet taken up.

Hurtt: 1 in 5 Houston Murders Involve Evacuees

740 KTRH News Radio June 30, 2006

One in five murders committed in Houston so far this year has involved a hurricane evacuee, according to Police Chief Harold Hurtt.

Hurtt says that through June 27, there have been 43 killings in which evacuees were either the suspect or the victim. That's 21 percent of the city's 200 homicides recorded since January.

The statistics indicate the city is on pace to record more than 400 killings by the end of the year. If that happens, it would be the most murders in Houston since 1993.

Hurtt could not immediately provide a breakdown of how many of the 43 cases involved evacuee victims and how many involved suspects that were evacuees. He said he was only pointing out the numbers to show the impact Hurricanes Katrina and Rita have had on HPD's case load.

Houston will soon be dealing with another potential problem involving hurricane evacuees. Some 3,900 evacuee households now using FEMA vouchers to pay rent will see that source of funding dry up by July 31.

A recent study done in Harris County found some 14,000 people believed to be homeless. Assuming 3.5 people per evacuee household, the FEMA cutoff could effectively double the number of transients in the Houston area.

OSAMA AND THREE WOMEN

While escaping thru Pakistan, Osama Bin Laden found a bottle on the beach and picked it up. Suddenly, a female genie rose from the bottle and with a smile said, “Master, may I grant you one wish?”

Osama responded, “You ignorant, unworthy daughter-of-a-swine! Don't you know who I am? I don't need any common woman giving me anything.”

The shocked genie said, “Please, I must grant you a wish or I will be returned to that bottle forever.”

Osama thought a moment, then grumbled about the impertinence of the woman and said, “Very well. I want to awaken with three American women in my bed in the morning. So just do it and be off with you.”

The annoyed genie said, “So be it!” and disappeared.

The next morning Bin Laden woke up in bed with Lorena Bobbitt, Tonya Harding, and Hillary Clinton at his side. His penis was gone, his knees were broken, and he had no health insurance.

God is good.

Day four at the UN gun ban conference

Jun 30, 2006 by Cam Edwards TownHall.com

It seems to be getting quiet at the United Nations. Oh, the delegates are still speaking, but on Thursday much of the discussion moved behind closed doors. It's funny, actually. Every anti-gun delegate or activist talks about the need for “transparency” in firearms ownership, but those running the gun summit don't seem that interested in transparency for what they're doing.

A few more countries gave their opening statements on Thursday. The representative from the Solomon Islands said, “the commitment of the Government of Solomon Islands in implementing the Program of Action is so much so that it has even banned the selling of toys guns sold in shops including collecting licensed arms for the purposes of rooting out a gun culture from growing in a small country.” I suppose you can't blame the government of the island chain for being a little nervous. After all, the Bougainville Revolutionary Army fought a war for autonomy not too far away in Papua New Guinea, and there's been a lot of unrest in the Solomons as of late. Better take everyone's guns just to be safe.

The highlight of the fourth day of the conference took place outside of the General Assembly (and the working day). Last evening an art exhibition was held in the General Assembly Visitors Lobby. Nothing says “politically conscious artist” like being anti-gun, and plenty of artists were willing to make an anti-gun statement. Perhaps the most unique was Colombian musician Cesar Lopez, who played his “escopetarra”. What is an escopetarra? It's a guitar made out of an AK-47.

I don't know about you, but my first thought after hearing about this instrument was, “We've gotta get Ted Nugent one of those!” And therein lies the problem for the anti-gunners. Unwittingly, they've proven the point of gun owners that it's the owner, not the object that matters. In the hands of Cesar Lopez, the gun-guitar is an anti-gun statement, but if it was Uncle Ted playing the “Star Spangled Banner” with his escopetarra it would be a statement about the 2nd amendment protecting his right to speak (and sing) about whatever he wanted.

The same holds true for a gun itself. Many at the UN seem to think that arms in the hands of the State are fine, but arms in the hands of private citizens are uniformly bad. Luckily, the United States doesn't hold that position. As Undersecretary Robert Joseph told the assembled nations earlier this week, “we recognize the rights of the oppressed to defend themselves against tyrannical and genocidal regimes and oppose a blanket ban on non-state actors.” Or as UN Ambassador John Bolton (then the Undesecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs) put it back in 2001 at the first small arms summit, “Distinctions between governments and non-governments are irrelevant in determining responsible and irresponsible end-users of arms.” It's such a simple concept that you can't help but wonder if the various nations suffer from a deficiency of common sense, or if they're just willfully ignoring the truth.

Today is Non Governmental Organization day at the United Nations. Various anti-gun groups will speak, including the spokeswoman for the International Action Network on Small Arms, Rebecca Peters. This is the same woman who in her 2004 debate with NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said, “Yes, I believe that semiautomatic rifles and shotguns have no legitimate role in civilian hands. And not only that, handguns have no legitimate role in civilian hands.” Can't you just imagine what she'll say today?

Actually, there's no need to imagine. Tune in to “Cam and Company” on Sirius Patriot 144 or log onto www.NRAnews.com this afternoon at 3 p.m. Eastern for Executive Editor Ginny Simone's live reports from the UN Gun Summit.

Cam Edwards is the host of “Cam and Company” on www.nranews.com and Sirius Satellite Radio. A veteran talk show host and political analyst, he blogs at www.camedwards.com in addition to his daily talk show. Cam lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and five children

Teens Playing With Toy Guns Have Close Call With Officer's Real Gun

WJXT June 30, 2006

Three teens running around the empty campus of Mandarin High School carrying what were believed to be toy guns led to a close call with a real gun for one of the young men, according to police.

Officers said they believe the teens thought they were playing a game while they were trespassing on Mandarin High School property.

The problem was that the teens were playing with realistic-looking toy guns. Police officers said the toy guns looked like a real handgun and a real shotgun.

However, at about 11 p.m., an alarm sounded.

When a police officer came to investigate armed with a real gun, the sheriff's office said one of the boys threatened the officer by raising his fake weapon and pulling the trigger.

“When he responded to an alarm, he saw the individuals on the property. They appeared to have weapons,” said Lt. Joe Medlin of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. The officer called for backup, saying there were teens in the school who were possibly armed.

Police said in the courtyard one suspect pointed a gun at the officer and pulled the trigger, but nothing happened because the gun was not real.

“At that time of the night when you have people that appear to be adults, your first assumption is that the gun's going to be real and you're going to take actions,” Medlin said.

Police said when they approached the teens, it looked like they were carrying toy guns.

“It's very troubling because the officer could have taken some deadly force action in that incidence, if he felt his life in jeopardy,” Medlin said.

Police said the teens ran and escaped the scene. The school's cameras captured some of the incident. On that tape, it appears the teens were playing a game, police said.

“Possibly there were two groups that were playing with each other,” Medlin said.

Police said it was a game that was not worth playing.

“It's very dangerous, because you don't know who you're going to run up against,” Medlin said.

Police have not made any arrests in this incident, but they said they are reviewing the security tape to determine if they can come up with the identities of any of the teens.

Bill would require Houston police to enforce immigration laws

June 29, 2006 By MATT STILES Houston Chronicle

Local officials continued to debate police policy toward illegal immigrants today after the U.S. House passed a Houston lawmaker's measure that would cut off federal crime-fighting money to cities with sanctuary policies.

The House overwhelmingly approved a spending bill containing an amendment by U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, intended to force state and local authorities to get more involved with immigration enforcement—or risk losing millions in federal grants.

In a news release on his amendment, Culberson listed Houston among cities that “have adopted sanctuary policies which prevent law enforcement officers from inquiring about immigration status.”

Mayor Bill White, Police Chief Harold Hurtt and the top federal official charged with local immigration enforcement maintain the city doesn't have a sanctuary policy.

Responding to that assertion, Culberson said, “If they are in compliance with the law, and they can prove it to the Justice Department, then they don't have anything to worry about.”

The Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan research arm of the House and Senate, in 2004 included Houston among sanctuary cities.

Culberson said the amendment passed today, and others he has attached to unrelated spending bills, are necessary to combat the government's “widespread and systematic refusal to protect our border and enforce the immigration laws.”

The measure won't become law unless it is approved by the Senate, which is set to debate a similar bill later this summer, and signed by President Bush.

Culberson's amendment states that federal funding can't be granted to governments that defy a section in federal law stating that cities and states shouldn't prohibit or restrict their officials from exchanging information with federal immigration authorities.

Local officials say the police department doesn't have such restrictions, and some criticized Culberson's threat to cut off federal crime-fighting money.

“He is basically punishing people in his district and every congressional district in our city,” said Councilwoman Carol Alvarado. “He has misinterpreted what our policy is.”

Alvarado dismissed the measure as “election year” politics, playing to voters angry over illegal immigration.

She also pledged to “launch an all-out campaign” against an effort by a local group to put a city charter amendment on November's ballot that would permit police to ask the immigration status of people they encounter in routine situations.

Such inquiries now are prohibited under a 1992 Police Department general order.

White disputes the notion that the order constitutes a sanctuary policy, and said the city needs the money Culberson's amendment targets.

“Federal funding is essential for Houston's efforts to fight crimes, especially the war against drugs,” the mayor said in a written statement.

The House measure passed the same day Hurtt announced that the city had received $18 million from the Justice Department to help combat a spike in violent crimes and buy new equipment.

Hurtt repeatedly has denied the city has a sanctuary policy.

Bob Rutt, special agent in charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Houston, referred questions about the new legislation to ICE headquarters in Washington—where an answering system doesn't accept messages.

Last week, though, Rutt reinforced Hurtt's view, saying Houston police notify ICE when officers arrest people wanted by ICE. He said officers also call his agency when they suspect violent criminals might be in the country illegally, and they help out on some criminal operations.

The department also flags criminal cases involving illegal immigrants when they are sent to the Harris County District Attorney's office, so ICE agents can determine whether arrestees are in the country legally.

“Houston is not a sanctuary city, by the definition,” Rutt told the Chronicle on Saturday. “They do cooperate with us.”

Culberson attached the amendment to the nearly $60 billion Science, State, Justice and Commerce Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2007. The overall bill includes $2.7 billion in assistance to state and local law enforcement for a variety of purposes, from crime fighting to reimbursement for housing illegal immigrants.

“If a local or state law enforcement agency wants federal law enforcement dollars, they need to obey federal law,” Culberson said.

The spending bill, approved 393-23, also would pay for space exploration and for other federal agencies during the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

Guard to miss border deployment deadline

June 29, 2006 By AARON C. DAVIS AP SACRAMENTO, Calif

The Bush administration has been unable to muster even half of the 2,500 National Guardsmen it planned to have on the Mexican border by the end of June.

As of today, the next-to-last day of the month, fewer than 1,000 troops were in place, according to military officials in the four border states of Texas, California, New Mexico and Arizona.

President Bush's plan called for all 50 states to send troops. But only 10 states—including the four border states—have signed commitments.

Some state officials have argued that they cannot free up Guardsmen because of flooding in the East, wildfires in the West or the prospect of hurricanes in the South.

“It's not a combat priority. It is a volunteer mission,” said Kristine Munn, spokeswoman for the National Guard Bureau, an arm of the Pentagon, “so it's a question of balancing the needs of the Border Patrol with the needs of 54 states and territories, and all those balls roll in different directions.”

Bush's plan for stemming illegal immigration by using National Guardsmen in a support role called for 2,500 troops to be on the border by June 30, and 6,000 by the end of July.

But National Guard officials said today that they probably won't reach the 2,500 target until early to mid-July and won't make the 6,000 deadline, either. Also, they said the number of troops will fluctuate from week to week over the course of the two-year mission.

“We now anticipate major waves in our deployment. There won't always be 6,000. That will be the maximum,” Munn said.

South Carolina's adjutant general said Wednesday he wants to wait until after hurricane season to send 150 Guardsmen.

“South Carolina's hurricane plan requires 1,600 troops to work along the coast during an evacuation and we double that number” to be extra-careful, said South Carolina Guard spokesman Col. Pete Brooks. “If we have a storm like Katrina hit, we'd have every Guard member who's not in Iraq somewhere out on the street.”

White House spokesman Tony Snow said earlier this week that reports of problems with the border deployment were “overblown.”

Major problems began to appear last week when California, which has already committed to sending 1,000 troops, said it turned down an administration request for 1,500 more to cover expected shortfalls in the numbers sent by Arizona and New Mexico.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's spokesman, Adam Mendelsohn, said that the state is leading all others in contributing troops and that the shortfalls are not California's responsibility.

“The governor is prepared to do whatever it takes to secure California's border,” he said, “However, at the start of fire season, we cannot send troops to New Mexico and Arizona and other states when we already have 1,000 troops committed to this.”

UN Head Kofi Annan: We're Not Banning Guns, No Really, We're Not Doing a “Global Gun Ban”

By John Jalsevac NEW YORK, June 29, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com)

“Let me also note that this Review Conference is not negotiating a ‘global gun ban', nor do we wish to deny law-abiding citizens their right to bear arms in accordance with their national laws.” So said United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan on Monday in an address to the United Nations Small Arms Review Conference in New York.

The Secretary General added, “Mr. President, with your permission, I would want to repeat, because there are people around who either have not heard this, or do not want to hear. We are not negotiating a global ban, nor do we wish to deny law-abiding citizens their right to bear arms in accordance with their national laws.”

The added emphasis by way of repetition is not likely to impress Annan ideological foes on the issue.

The intent of the conference, claims Annan, is to put in place international measures that will stem the flow of illegal arms trade that has been problematic worldwide. “Our targets remain unscrupulous arms brokers, corrupt officials, drug trafficking syndicates, criminals and others who bring death and mayhem into our communities.”

The United States, however, is not convinced that the conference's true agenda stops there, and is approaching the proceedings with suspicion.

The United States' Undersecretary for Arms Control, Robert Joseph, yesterday offered his support for the more limited program of the conference: “My delegation is here today with a positive agenda—an agenda for effective action to address the illicit trafficking in small arms and light weapons, covering military style arms such as shoulder-fired missiles and rocket systems, light mortars, machine guns and automatic rifles.”

He added, however, “The United States will not agree to any provisions restricting civilian possession, use or legal trade of firearms inconsistent with our laws and practices.” “Many millions of American citizens enjoy hunting and the full range of firearm sports, and our work will not affect their rights and opportunities.”

Meanwhile, the Unites States' National Rifle Association (NRA) has strongly spoken out against the conference, and is expending an enormous amount of time and energy in lobbying at the conference to protect the United States 2nd Amendment Rights. The 2nd Amendment states that the right of private citizens to bear arms will not be infringed, and that that right is necessary for the security of the state.

In particular the NRA has criticized the idea that the nations currently involved in the effort to control small arms are at all qualified for the job. “What these countries and the U.N. will never acknowledge is that the vast majority of firearm atrocities around the world aren't committed by the individual criminals…the vast majority of wanton killings around the globe are committed by governments—the members of the United Nations themselves,” writes NRA vice-president Wayne LaPierre.

Despite accusations that the NRA is overreacting to the UN conference, the organization does appear to have some justification for their fears. In a debate between LaPierre and anti-gun activist Rebecca Peters, the director of International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA), it was gradually revealed that the highly influential Peters does indeed favor and was working towards the global banning of nearly all firearms, including all handguns, and any rifle with significant power, including nearly all hunting rifles.

The outright denial by Annan that the conference is attempting to remove the right of gun owners offers little comfort to conservatives who through experience have become well aware of UN double speak. Over and over again the United Nations says outright that it does not advocate for abortion, at least in countries where the practice is illegal. In reality however, United Nations organizations work to pressure a country to allow at least decriminalization of abortion and once that is accomplished, the push is on for the expansion of the so-called right to choose.

Concerns about the UN attempting to disarm private citizens come at a time when talk is widespread about arming the UN, so that the UN can, without ratification by members of the security council, use military force against nations that they deem are violating “human rights.” There are concerns such such human rights may eventually include access to abortion, contraception, and so-called homosexual “rights.”

Rangers get tough on picnic-stealing bears

29 June 2006 New Scientist

It may sound more like riot control than wildlife management, but at last there is now a scientifically backed method for dealing with “nuisance bears”.

Firing rubber bullets, backed up by chasing and yelling, can deter the animals from entering picnic sites and campgrounds in search of human food, say biologists with the US National Park Service.

Black bears (Ursus americanus) overcome their natural fear of people if they smell food, and have little trouble popping a car's window or ripping off a door if they see a picnic hamper, backpack or drinks can.

“They're very clever and they learn very quickly,” says Rachel Mazur, a biologist with the Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks in California.

Bear-proof chests

Visitors to national parks in the US are told to store their food in bear-proof metal chests, available at campsites, picnic areas and trailheads. Even so, it is difficult to keep people and bears apart.

And once a bear starts hanging around where people congregate, it usually has to be shot, or relocated to an unfamiliar area—which in most cases is also a death sentence.

Bears that are habituated to people also tend to get hit by cars. Sadly, the slogan “a fed bear is a dead bear” is all too true.

Early attempts to deter bears by adding foul-tasting chemicals to food baits, or rigging cars or picnic tables to deliver electric shocks, met with failure. Bears are too intent on filling their stomachs to care much about a nasty taste, says Mazur, and they soon learn to distinguish a picnic table that has been electrified from one that is not.

Aggressive tactics

So since 2002, rangers at Sequoia and Kings Canyon have been trying more aggressive tactics, responding to bears that encroach onto campgrounds and picnic sites by throwing rocks, firing rubber bullets, chasing the animals and yelling.

Mazur revealed the results for 36 different bears at the Society for Conservation Biology's meeting in San Jose, California this week. For those that were already known as nuisance bears, only the rubber bullets had any real effect.

And six of the 11 bears that had to be driven off more than 24 times proved recalcitrant and had to be shot or relocated.

But for bears with little previous experience with human food, the deterrent worked remarkably well. After a few encounters with aggressive rangers, most subsequently kept away from people.

This is the first evidence that nuisance behaviour can be changed in its early stages—which tend to occur around picnic sites, rather than the more densely populated camping sites.

“I was really surprised at how well it was working,” Mazur admits. So the programme is now being expanded, with more park staff being trained in the strong-arm tactics.

Boo bashes way to freedom, avoids neutering

Grizzly smashes 400-pound steel door, rips through two electric fences

AP June 28, 2006 MSNBC GOLDEN, British Columbia

A freedom-loving grizzly bear named Boo smashed a heavy steel door and barreled through two electric fences to escape a second time from a resort near this south-central British Columbia town.

Boo was recaptured Friday, two weeks after breaking out of an artificial den at the Kicking Horse Mountain Resort, but escaped from tighter confinement within a day, resort spokesman Michael Dalzell said Tuesday.

“It's unbelievable,” Dalzell said. “We thought there was no way, it was absolutely impossible, but he found a way. It was basically like breaking out of Fort Knox.”

He said the bear bashed a nearly 400-pound steel door off its four bolts, destroyed an electrical box while tearing through two electric fences and scrambled over a 12-foot fence anchored with 2 feet of steel below ground.

‘Everything was completely trashed'

“I think he just kept charging it (the door) and charging it until it broke off its bolts,” Dalzell said. “Everything was completely trashed. We are dealing with a pretty smart and determined bear.”

The search team that caught Boo on Friday went back to work Sunday morning but saw no sign of the grizzly after logging more than 50 hours in a helicopter.

Resort staff had planned to neuter Boo, but he got away first. Once he's located, authorities will decide whether to try to recapture him again, Dalzell said.

“Right now we are in the process of looking for him . . . we are not out to try to trap or tranquilize him,” he said. “We are looking at all options. Obviously, we need to just really look at our program and figure this one out.”

The bear has lived inside a 22-acre enclosure since his mother was illegally shot by a hunter in 2002. It's unclear if he could fend for himself and, being used to humans, would likely be a problem in the wild, experts said.

‘Lose-lose situation'

Boo is now in a “lose-lose situation,” said Tracey Henderson of the Grizzly Bear Alliance in Canmore, Alberta.

“The poor guy has now tasted freedom and he is going to be more motivated to keep getting out,” she said. “There is a side of me that's saying, `Way to go, Boo,' but there is another side of me that's really worried about this bear being in the wild near humans.”

Boo's first escape was blamed on hormones, June being the prime mating season for grizzlies, but Henderson said the second escape might indicate the bear no longer would tolerate confinement.

“It's just a sad situation,” she said. “He is clearly a bear that wants to be free, yet we've created a situation where it's not really safe for him to be free.”

‘Pathetic Sham,' Says CCRKBA About Jersey City Handgun Ordinance

Contact: Joe Waldron of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, 425-454-4911

BELLEVUE, Wash., June 29 /U.S. Newswire

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) today called the one-gun-a-month ordinance passed by the Jersey City, NJ city council “a pathetic sham” designed to give the public a false impression that this will address the city's violent crime problems.

“These one-gun-per-month measures will not prevent dangerous criminals from arming themselves,” said CCRKBA Executive Director Joe Waldron. “All these kinds of laws ever accomplish is to make it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to buy firearms. There is no evidence that any such law ever stopped a single crime. This is nothing more than a ‘feel-good' effort to deceive the good citizens of Jersey City that their council has struck a blow for law and order.

The council action came at the end of a debate involving supporters and opponents of the measure.

“Somebody in Jersey City, or any other community, is going to have to show me proof that a one-gun-a-month law has stopped a crime,” Waldron said. “Essentially, what you have with this vote is the Jersey City Council insulting the intelligence of its residents, and we're disappointed that some residents seem to not mind that. Law-abiding firearms owners, of course, are intelligent enough to realize they're being penalized for the illegal acts of people they don't know, and over whom they have no control.

“It clearly appears that this ordinance is in conflict with state law,” Waldron noted. “Not surprisingly, this measure won the blind support of CeaseFire New Jersey. They are the same extremists that supported the ‘smart gun' legislation, and they have never met a radical gun restriction that they did not immediately fall in love with.

“CeaseFire New Jersey is essentially a criminal support group,” Waldron added, “because they fight for laws that provide a safe working environment for criminals. You do not fight crime by disarming victims.”

Despite 900 Violations Feds Labored Years to Shut Down Maryland Gun Dealer; Legislation Would Make it Tougher to Punish Worst-Behaving Dealers

Contact: Peter Hamm of Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 202-898-0792

BALTIMORE, June 29 /U.S. Newswire

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence today released the following on gun dealer Sanford Abrams:

Gun dealer Sanford Abrams, a board member of the National Rifle Association, is a “serial violator” of federal gun laws, federal law enforcement officials say. His Valley Gun store in Baltimore has sold hundreds and hundreds of guns that were later linked to crimes and has racked up more than 900 legal violations in the years his business has been under scrutiny.

Mr. Abrams has friends in high places. Congress may pass a bill making it tougher for the Feds to shut down gun dealers who break the law and allowing dealers whose licenses have been revoked to keep selling guns through years of legal appeals. And the Bush Administration has told the courts that Abrams may sell his entire inventory of guns, despite the revocation of his shop's license. As a now unlicensed seller, he would even be permitted to sell rifles and shotguns without running Brady background checks on buyers.

A new Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence report, Death Valley, profiles this rogue firearms dealer, Valley Gun, one of the leading suppliers of crime guns in America. Law enforcement traced 483 crime guns to Valley Gun from 1996 to 2000 alone, ranking it 37 out of nearly 80,000 gun dealers nationwide in total crime guns traced to their stores. Valley Gun's firearms have been linked to at least 11 homicides, 41 assaults, 49 drug crimes, and 101 cases of illegal concealed carrying of guns.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has documented over 900 violations of federal law at Valley Gun, including illegal gun sales and the disappearance of more than 1/4 of the shop's entire inventory—at least 422 firearms “missing” from the store with no record of sale. The U.S. Department of Justice has called Abrams' shop a “serial violator” who has “endangered the public by failing to account for hundreds of weapons.”

But recently, the Federal government filed papers in court indicating it would not object to what Abrams wants to do: Sell his entire inventory as an individual “private seller,” which would mean he would be subject to fewer laws, as a “private seller” rather than a federally licensed dealer. And his cronies at the NRA have provided him with legal counsel and re-elected him to the NRA Board despite his shop's many legal violations.

The NRA is also lobbying Congress to pass H.R. 5092, which was introduced by Rep. Howard Coble (R-NC) within weeks of Abrams' latest lawsuit filing seeking to sell guns despite his shop's license revocation. The legislation would effectively gut ATF's ability to revoke corrupt gun dealers' firearms licenses and allow shops with revoked licenses to continue selling guns through years of legal appeals.

“It is disgraceful that Congress would coddle corrupt gun dealers,” said Daniel R. Vice, staff attorney at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Home