|
|
AN AMERICAN WARNING
Because you should know!
October 2006 - Posts
-
A few days ago, a group of about 50 veterans and gun owners gathered in New Mexico to commemorate United Nations Day. You know how they did it? They burned the flag of the United Nations.
Of course, you didn't see it in the news. And no matter how you feel about burning the flag of the United Nations, you've got to agree the U.N. stands against a lot of what America stands for.
For more than a decade, we've documented the UN's global war on your gun rights.
For more than a decade, we've warned you about how hundreds of international gun-ban groups are working with dictatorships and terrorist states toward their goal of a disarmed, dependent and helpless human population.
We've told you how the U.N. gun bans are part of a much larger campaign funded in part by freedom-hating billionaire George Soros.
And we've told you how a U.N. gun-ban treaty would threaten your rights for decades to come.
The U.N. is not about people. It's about governments.
The U.S. rejects tyrants. But the U.N. protects tyrants.
So it's no wonder that the United Nations wants to disarm the subjects and peoples of the world. And they see the United States as the last obstacle in their way.
So when a bunch of American veterans and gun owners get together on United Nations Day and they want to burn the flag of the United Nations, I say to the media... cover the story and tell America why.
|
-
|
Remember a few years ago, when they said so-called campaign finance reform was going to "take the big money out of politics" and "level the playing field"?
How wrong they were.
So far this year, individual donors have given more than 11 million dollars to liberal 527 groups.
Republicans, on the other hand, have given conservative groups only about six million dollars ... and four million of that came from just one person.
Not only has campaign finance "reform" not taken the big money out of politics, it hasn't leveled the playing field, either.
Corporate political action committees have been hobbled, while union PACs and 527s are raking in millions. In fact, five of the 10 largest 527s this year are union-based.
The gulf between liberal and conservative 527s is enormous. As of June 30, left-leaning 527s had raised more than 104 million dollars, compared with just 20 million dollars raised by conservative 527s.
More money means more advertising and more chances to influence voters. Add in the impact of the anti-gun mainstream media, and gun owners are at a huge disadvantage in terms of the money we can raise and spend.
Politicians have succeeded in making it much harder for us to speak out during these election periods. But they can't stop us from getting out and voting on Election Day.
And trust me, on Election Day, we will make our voices hear.
|
-
|
I know this is hard to believe, but Congressman John Conyers is actually trying to fool people into thinking he doesn't really want to ban gun ownership in America.
Conyers must think he can hide his 30-year anti gun record as easily as putting on a cheap Halloween mask.
Here's what Conyers said last week:
"If I become chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I certainly will not support or forward to the House any legislation to ban handguns."
What he didn't say is that, during his entire political career, he's never met a gun ban or ammunition ban he didn't like. For years, John Conyers has been right up there with the likes of Schumer and Kennedy as a poster boy for the entire anti-gun, anti-freedom lobby.
And he's been proud of it. Until now.
So what changed?
The potential for Conyers to gain more political power. He knows that if his Democratic Party takes over the House, he'll become Chairman of the powerful Judiciary Committee. So right now, he'll say anything- anything- to reach that goal.
If he became Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Conyers said a few months ago, "It would become a new day."
Well I don't think the man who offended 4 million NRA members by calling us "merchants of death" deserves a new day.
I'll never forget that slur, and neither should you.
John Conyers isn't tricking anybody. Even on Halloween.
|
-
Two researchers in Australia just published a study they did on murder and suicide in the ten years since Australia banned all semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles in 1996. The verdict? According to the Australian Bureau of statistics and the Australian Institute of Criminology, murder rates in the country weren't affected by the gun ban at all. And gun-related suicide rates weren't affected by the gun ban, either. They stayed the same, with or without the gun ban. And you don't need to be a criminologist to predict what else the researchers found in their study: More than 90 percent of the firearms used to commit homicide were not registered... and their owners were not licensed. In other words, the criminals didn't obey Australia's laws! How much do you think it cost them to figure that one out? I bet you're not surprised. Who would be?Well, Simon Chapman, a university professor who says the research can't be taken seriously because it doesn't analyze the incidence of mass murder in Australia, which is what prompted the gun ban in the first place. But the fact is, a 2002 study already looked at that question. Just like other crime rates, they were the same before the gun ban as after the gun ban: about once per year. So, what does it all mean? It means Australia spent a half-billion dollars to confiscate and destroy 640,000 rifles and shotguns ... and didn't accomplish a thing. And it means the next time another Al Gore or John Kerry or Hillary Clinton offers you the false promise of safety in exchange for your freedom--their promises don't mean a thing.
|
-
It wasn't too long ago that the anti-gun Brady Campaign held a fundraiser at the French Embassy in our nation's capitol. You might remember that eventit's where Mike Wallace of CBS News made fun of former NRA president Charlton Heston and gun owners in general. At the time, I thought it was ironic that the Brady Campaign was raising money at the French Embassy, considering France's crime rate is higher than that of the United States. But now I know that in France, groups like the Brady Campaign have already won. France's election day is coming up soon, just like our own, and the conservative French candidate has come out with his position on gun control. Here's what he said:Remember, this is the conservative candidate: "In my vision of the French Republic, security is the responsibility of the state I am against private gun ownership, and I would like to make you think about it. If you are attacked by an armed man, he will be better than you with a gun and you will put yourself in jeopardy Private gun ownership is dangerous." And this is the conservative candidate! What's the position of the liberal? Send every gun owner to the guillotine? While the French politicians tell their countrymen to rely on the police, the police wish they could rely on the politicians. In one Paris suburb, robberies are up 23 percent over last year, and violent assaults are up 14 percent. In fact, in September alone there were 480 attacks against police reported throughout the country. A recent poll of French citizens found nearly 80 percent said the justice system isn't hard enough on criminals. Soft on crime plus tough on gun owners equals a society where the criminals have the upper hand. The Brady Bunch might say "Viva La France!", but I still say "God Bless the U.S.A.!"
|
-
|
This is a tale of two crimes, committed by the same two thugs on the same night. The story was told recently in the Washington Post, but in typical fashion, the Post didnt tell you the whole story.
Here's how the story goes...
On a dark, cold night last January, two cousins set out on a violent robbery spree. They drove to a nice neighborhood in Washington, D.C. and spotted a 63-year-old man taking his after-dinner walk. One of the thugs, Percy Jordan, jumped from the car and began beating the elderly gentleman with a heavy pipe.
"Give it up, old man, give it up, old man," Percy yelled.
As the old man crumpled to the ground, the other cousin, Michael Hamlin, ripped the wallet from the elderly man's pocket. The two men fled, leaving the old man brutally beaten and bleeding. He later died all for about 250 bucks.
But the violent cousins weren't done. They drove to another neighborhood and terrorized a defenseless woman in her 50s, robbing her of everything she had. Then they went on a shopping spree with the stolen money and credit cards.
Fortunately, they were caught, and last week, this tale of two crimes was told in court.
But what they didn't tell you was what NRA members and gun owners already know: That violent predators seek out and prey upon the most vulnerable the elderly gentleman or the defenseless woman.
And they didn't tell you that in Washington, D.C., everyone is defenseless. Because in our nation's capitol, you can't carry a firearm to protect yourself. You can't even own a gun in your home to protect your family.
Every criminal justice study on the topic proves that violent criminals avoid people they think may be armed. But Percy Jordan and Michael Hamlin had no fear attacking their two victims on that cold January night. Because in Washington, D.C., every potential victim is unarmed and defenseless.
|
-
|
A brand new Gallup poll on guns came out last week, and guess what it says Americans think about gun control?
Well, I bet you won't see the results in the media. Because the Gallup poll shows that Americans are on the side of gun owners, not the gun-control groups.
Gallup asked people whether a gun in the home made it safer or more dangerous. More Americans said a home with a firearm is a safer place than one without a gun. In fact, the number of Americans who replied that a home with a gun is a safer place has climbed 12 percent since 2000!
Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who say a gun in the home makes it more dangerous has dropped since 2000.
Gallup also asked whether we need to enforce our current laws or pass new gun-control laws. More than half of those surveyed said we need to enforce our current laws rather than pass new gun control laws. And two-thirds of Americans felt that handguns should not be banned.
You know, its sad to say, but the horrors of 9-11 and the shocking gun confiscations in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina have helped hundreds of thousands of Americans realize that they can't leave their security in the hands of the government. It's up to us to take care of ourselves. And every year, more of us get it.
The tragic thing is, you probably won't hear that fact anywhere but here.
|
-
As you know, Katie Couric is the new anchor of CBS Evening News, the job once held by Walter Cronkite, "the most trusted man in America." But she's not even close to filling Cronkite's shoes.
That's not just my opinion that's what the numbers say.
In her first six weeks as anchor, Katie Couric has fallen behind NBC and ABC in the Nielsen ratings, dropping from first place to last place among the big three networks. In fact, Katie has lost about 25 percent of her viewers since she took the helm after Labor Day.
Those numbers tell me that Americans may like Katie. But I'm not so sure Americans trust Katie.
I mean, she has always looked down her elitist nose at mainstream American values. Like gun ownership.
Gun owners remember how, after the tragedy at Columbine, Katie tried to bully and browbeat Charlton Heston over the need for more gun control laws.
Gun owners remember how she teamed up with President Bill Clinton to blame you and the NRA for gun crime in America.
Gun owners remember how, after President Reagan passed away, Katie brought Sarah Brady on her show to perpetuate the lie that President Reagan wasn't an NRA member.
He was an NRA member an NRA Life Member. But you'd never know that if you listened to Katie Couric.
Now, as anchor of CBS Evening News, Katie hosts a segment called "freeSpeech," where she supposedly opens the floor to dissenting opinions.
In a freeSpeech segment recently, a man whose son was murdered at Columbine said, "This country is in a moral free-fall. For over two generations, the public school system has taught in a moral vacuum We teach that there are no absolutes, no right or wrong."
Well, his opinion apparently offended Katie. She later wrote on her blog that she knew some viewers might even find it repugnant."
"Repugnant"? How could this man's opinion be "repugnant"? Because he didn't toe Katie's anti-gun line? Because he didn't blame gun owners and the NRA?
Now, don't get me wrong. Reasonable people can disagree.
But when you call an opinion "repugnant" just because you disagree that's pure arrogance, and pure elitism.
And it's a good reason to tune into someone else to report the news.
|
-
|
You know that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg talks tough on crime for the TV cameras.
And you may know that on the VH1 channel, the Mayor is crewing up with former rapper Ice-T to promote Hip-Hop Honors Week.
But I bet you didn't know this.
This the same Ice-T whose violent, profane rap CD "Cop Killer" tapped into rage over the Rodney King arrest and advocated murdering police.
America's law enforcement officers were rightfully outraged. But it was the NRA that publicly denounced Ice-T and the record company, Time-Warner, for profiteering on the fresh graves of police officers.
In fact, our own President Charlton Heston went to a Time-Warner stockholders in Los Angeles. I wish you could've seen the shocked faces when Chuck read out loud the filthy, repugnant lyrics of "Cop Killer" to that room full of investors.
Within days the album was pulled from shelves and Ice-T was out of a job.
So either Mayor Bloomberg doesn't know, or doesnt care, about Ice-Ts repugnant past.
Either way, the Mayors chummy attitude toward the likes of Ice-T should enrage Americas law enforcement officers.
If there's anything they deserve, it's leaders who distance themselves from hip-hop gangsters that cash in by promoting the murder of police officers.
If Mayor Bloomberg really cared about police, he'd spend less time strutting with thugs named Ice-T ....and spend more time putting violent criminals on ice.
|
-
I keep waiting for the Brady Campaign to issue a press release praising the new government of Somalia for enacting "common-sense gun laws." After all, the new government is planning to rid Somalia of illegal guns, according to one recent headline. But here's the real story: Every gun not in the hands of the new government is illegal, because they've decided only the government will have guns. The government is going house-by-house taking guns from the hands of citizens. The man in charge of the confiscations says, "Plans are underway to disarm people living in Mogadishu and the rest of the country." Yet in neighboring Sudan, which has also adopted the U.N. gun control policy, the guns doing the killing in Darfur are Sudanese government guns. These guns are being slipped to Arab gangs to kill dark skinned Muslims in Darfur who are left defenseless by the government's gun-ban policies. Back in Somalia, the Islamic Courts Union has been called "The African Taliban" because it's imposed strict Sharia law in the areas of the country it controls. Movie theaters have been shut down, radio stations no longer play love songs and men and women no longer attend parties together. The confiscation of firearms will ensure that the Taliban-style government doesn't have to fear a revolt from the populace. As we watch the freedoms we hold dear being stolen by the Islamist regime in Somalia, we should remember that there are people in this country who'd like to do the same here. Josh Sugarmann from the Violence Policy Center said a few years ago that any "rational regulator" would ban all handguns. The Coalition to Stop Handgun Violence has called for a ban on handguns and semi-automatic rifles. The founder of the Brady Campaign, back when it was called Handgun Control, Inc., said the group's goal is to "make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunitionexcept for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectorstotally illegal." It may sound ugly, but it's the truth: Some of these anti-gun groups in the United States seem to be more on the side of governments like Somalia's than in step with America's Founding Fathers.
|
-
Over the years, I've gotten used to the International Association of Chiefs of Police and their anti-gun rhetoric. This group takes hundreds of thousands of dollars from the anti-gun Joyce Foundation and is always quick to promote the latest gun control scheme. It's not a group of rank-and-file police, but the politically connected bigwigs. Many of the policies they support actually make the streets more dangerous by disarming everyday citizens while the criminals run free. The group was meeting in Boston this week, and we got to see firsthand how these fat cats treat the regular Joes on the police force. The Boston Herald reported that 10% of the Boston police force was assigned to be chauffeurs and bellhops for the chiefs, at a time when violent crime in Boston is on the rise. These officers went from being public servants to private serfs, at the beck and call of any of the chiefs. The Herald reported that some chiefs were given cell phones so they could call officers for a ride if they'd had too much to drink. Others used recent graduates of the Boston Police Academy as porters at the hotel where the convention was headquartered. And the worst part? Boston mayor Tom Menino, who's been blaming the rise in violent crime on gun owners in states like Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, had no problem pulling these cops off their beat. In the words of the Boston Herald, the mayor quote- declined to criticize the practice saying it is a courtesy extended to keep visitors safe -end quote. Officers are angry about this, and they should be. The local police union head said his office had heard from a lot of their members who were upset about the way they were being used. The Herald quoted him as saying, "We certainly shouldn't be using what little resources we have to drive chiefs and carry bags. He's right, Menino's wrong, and the people of Boston should be asking why the mayor cares more about providing around-the-clock security for a visiting police chief than providing protection for families in Roxbury and Dorchester.
|
-
|
The New York Times will never find it fit to print, but more Americans favor the National Rifle Association than they do The New York Times.
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll taken last July found that while most Americans have positive feelings about the NRA, only 30 percent have "positive feelings" about The New York Times.
But don't count on The Times to tell you that.
Nor will The Times tell you that in another poll conducted this past summer, the NRA's favorable rating was higher than the Republican or Democratic parties, even higher than that of the United States Congress.
That's worth repeating: Most Americans respect the NRA more than they do the Democratic party, the Republican party, or even the U.S. Congress.
And here's something else they won't tell you: It's been that way for years. For more than a decade, poll after poll says that more Americans favor the NRA than almost any other organization in the country. More than political parties, more than labor unions, more than the U.S. government itself.
Americans don't trust politicians and they don't trust The New York Times. They trust the NRA.
|
-
You may have seen the news recently that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has 109 mayors signed up with his Mayors Against Guns organization. Far from being a tough-on-crime group, this cabal wants to go after legal gun owners and legal gun sellers. That might sell in New York and Boston, but some of the mayors attached to the group are finding out their constituents aren't happy. In Knoxville, Tennessee, radio host Steve Gill asked Mayor Bill Haslam why he joined with this group. Haslam's response? "The U.S. Conference of Mayors sent a thing out back in the spring saying we want to have a statement of principles against illegal weapons. I'm not signing on to Mayor Bloomberg's weapons policy or anything. I can't even tell you what his is." Here's a suggestion for Mayor Haslam and the citizens of Knoxville. Ask Mike Bloomberg to take your name off his website and list. Tell Bloomberg that you don't want New York City style gun control laws in Tennessee!
|
-
This weekend, thousands of kids will take to the field to hunt with their dads, moms, cousins, and friends. They'll be safe, they'll be accurate, and they'll have fun. Thousands more will be at the range, practicing for an upcoming competition. And maybe, one of these kids will save a life.
Don't believe me? Then you haven't heard of the 14-year old in Corpus Christi, Texas. Back on October 9th, a career criminal named James Slaughter accosted a woman outside her home. Armed with a knife, he entered the home and tied up the woman and her 14-year old son in the master bedroom. Mom was able to loosen the knots and lock the door, but that didn't stop Slaughter. The woman retrieved her husband's revolver from the security box underneath the bed and handed it to her son. When Slaughter tried to burst through the door, the 14-year old fired. Slaughter went down, and didn't get back up.
It turns out Slaughter's no stranger to the legal system. He was sent away for 45 years back in 1984, but was paroled just 16-years later. Despite violating his parole later that year, he was soon back out on the streets, able to terrorize and victimize innocent people.
This was a 14-year old who'd been taught that guns aren't toys. His parents taught him gun safety, and he was an informed teenager when it came to firearms. I will never believe that keeping kids ignorant is the best way to go. Part of being a responsible gun owner is teaching your kids to be responsible around firearms. At a young age, that means stop, don't touch, leave the area, and tell and adult if you see a gun. But as kids get older, there's no reason they too can't be responsible users of a firearm, whether it's for a sporting clays match or a deer hunt. And maybe, if they're ever forced to defend the ones they love, they'll be prepared to do that too.
Don't get me wrong; I'm not happy that this young man had to do what he did. But it's not his fault. Place the blame on James Slaughter, who forced this teen to defend himself and his mother. James Slaughter's the one ultimately responsible for what happened to him.
|
-
I've been called a lot of names in my time at NRA, and for the most part, I've got a pretty thick skin. But there's one thing I don't like being called, and that's a liar. That's exactly what the Jim Doyle for Governor campaign is calling me, and all NRA members in Wisconsin.
The NRA's Political Victory Fund is running an ad in Wisconsin that talks about Doyle's record as Attorney General and Governor. There's nothing false in our advertising. In fact it's the Doyle's campaign that's lying, and I'm going to prove it to you.
The Doyle campaign says we're lying when we tell you that Doyle opposed Wisconsin's constitutional amendment to keep and bear arms. The Doyle campaign says "The Governor supported the constitutional amendment, and he continues to support the right to hunt, fish, and trap." This is a classic case of bait-and-switch. The state constitutional amendment to keep and bear arms and the state constitutional amendment to hunt, fish and trap are two different things. And when it came to the amendment guaranteeing the right to keep and bear arms, Doyle called it, "an extremely radical proposal" and had one of his Justice Department flunkies testify against it in a legislative hearing. Does that sound like support to you? Doyle's the one lying about his record, not us.
The Doyle campaign says we're lying when we tell you that Doyle twice vetoed shall-issue concealed carry. That's not a lie, and Doyle knows it. Instead, Doyle tries to deflect criticism by noting that big city police chiefs and other politically affiliated law enforcement groups supported the veto. He doesn't mention the dozens of law enforcement organizations, including the state troopers in Wisconsin, that support right-to-carry legislation. He doesn't mention that Wisconsin is one of just two states in the union without some form or fashion of concealed carry. Why doesn't Doyle trust Wisconsin residents? Maybe it's because he's not trustworthy himself. Doyle's the one lying about his record, not us.
The Doyle campaign says we're lying when we tell you that Doyle tried to get legislation passed that would have banned almost every firearm and all ammunition in Wisconsin. But here's the truth. Doyle asked a state senator to introduce a bill that would have done exactly that. Only when gun owners got wind and started contacting their legislators was the bill's language changed. Doyle's the one who requested this legislation, and now he's trying to claim it was all a mistake. Doyle's the one lying about his record, not us.
The papers in Wisconsin aren't going to tell you the truth, so it's up to you to get the word out. Be sure to tell your friends, neighbors and co-workers the real story.
|
-
|
Did you hear the news that John Kerry is thinking about running for president in 2008? Kerry says he hasn't made up his mind, but the Boston Globe reported a few days ago that friends of Kerry say a run is almost set in stone.
We've been down this road before, and as we said in 2004, That dog don't hunt. Gun owners were a big reason why John Kerry lost in 2004, and he knows it. It was then that the NRA taught him a lesson ... that one day of hunting doesn't erase 20 years of voting. In fact, Kerry had gone his entire Senate career I mean decades without casting a pro-gun vote even once ...
... until a few months ago, when it was time to vote on a bill that would stop law enforcement from confiscating firearms during a state of emergency. The vote was a slam-dunk win. In fact, 20 anti-gun senators voted in favor of it, including John Kerry.
But nobody told you that Senator Flip-Flop first voted against the bill. And just before the final count was taken, Kerry switched his vote to be in favor of the bill. John Kerry voted against your rights before he voted for them.
That doesn't make John Kerry a friend of gun owners. And my bet is that's the first and last pro-gun vote you'll see from John Kerry. So if he runs, it's still true: That dog don't hunt.
|
-
North Korea's detonated a nuke, but the United Nations doesn't seem willing to do anything about it. Oh sure, there's talk of sanctions or some other punishment, but you know as well as I do that there's little chance of the UN actually doing something. They've got bigger fish to fry. They're going after gun owners around the world. Back in July, we stopped the global anti-gun movement. A summit on small arms ended in failure, but we knew they'd be back. It looks like Rebecca Peters, leader of the gun ban movement at the UN, is going to sidestep all the red tape and try to get an Arms Trade Treaty passed by the General Assembly. We don't yet know what this treaty will ultimately look like, but we know what the global gun ban crowd wants. Take a look at these fifteen principles endorsed by the UN Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights. If these 15 principles were ever put into a treaty signed by the US government, the right to keep and bear arms as we know it would be gone. Instead, unless our government had the ability to deny your gun ownership on a whim, it would be guilty of a human rights violation. That's right. The United Nations believes that allowing gun ownership is a violation of human rights. The same UN that ignores genocidal slaughter and rogue nuclear testing is busy finding ways to make sure you can't own firearms to protect yourself and your family. And have you seen anything about this in the news? Of course not. And they didn't tell you that a vote to start the Arms Trade Treaty process is expected at the UN later this month. When that happens, you'll be the first to know, right here.
|
-
If you live in Kearney, Nebraska, you ought to be hopping mad today because your city council has left you defenseless against criminal attack. Council members defied the will of the state legislature, which gave lawful Nebraskans the right to carry a firearm for personal protection. City fathers banned that right in Kearney, giving Kearney residents LESS rights than everyone else in Nebraska. I'm outraged. And so are a lot of people in Kearney. The mayor, Galen Hadley, said that Kearney shouldn't pass a bad law just because "the state passed a bad law." A bad law? When did Mayor Hadley become the Cornhusker's Presiding Authority on Criminology? Every criminal justice study over the last two decades reports that violent felons say they'll steer clear of potential victims if they might be armed. What's more, states with right to carry provisions have lower rates of violent crime. So here we go again. The bad guys in Nebraska now know they'll have easier prey in Kearney than in the rest of the state. And while Kearney's arrogant city council members go home each night believing they've done something to make their village safer, criminals on the streets will have no fear of running into an armed citizen. Residents of Kearney, you should oust this city council and mayor at the earliest opportunity. They've declared you second-class citizens who don't deserve the same freedoms as everyone else. And to the rest of Nebraska, watch out. This could happen to you too, because Nebraska is one of just three states in the nation that do not have some form of firearm pre-emption laws. Until it does, your town may be the next to decide you're not trustworthy enough to protect yourself.
|
-
|
I'm glad Roscoe Parmley had a gun. How else could this 76-year-old man have defended himself, his wife and his employees when two bad guys strolled into his Indianapolis jewelry store and tried to rob him?
Corey and Nicholas Artry had apparently decided to do something together as brothers, but playing basketball or catching a movie would have been a better option than robbing a business. As they entered Rosco Jewelry, they flashed a knife and a pistol, and then Nicholas Artry jumped over the counter separating employees from customers. That's when Roscoe Parmley appeared.
Parmley, an Air Force veteran, had been in the back eating breakfast when he heard the noise of the robbery. When he came to the front of the store, he saw one man pointing a gun between his wife and one of his employees. The other robber had a knife at the throat of another employee.
Parmley knew he had to protect his wife and workers, so when the gunman turned his attention away from him, Parmley struck. Firing his .38, he hit Corey Artry five times. The robber took a few steps towards the front door, then turned and raised his pistol. That's when employee Michael Ross fired one shot from his .44. Corey Artry went down and did not get back up.
Knife-wielding Nicholas Artry had seen enough. He ran into a back room, but seeing no way out, pushed up a ceiling tile and hid until police arrived. In an interview with the Indianapolis Star, Artry said, "I knew they shot my brother, and I thought they were gonna shoot me. I had a better chance with the police."
Artry's going to have a long time to think about his actions. In addition to the robbery charges against him, he also faces felony murder charges for the death of his brother. Meanwhile, the community's rallied around Roscoe Parmley. A letter to the editor from two residents in a recent edition of the local paper said, "We want nothing more than for Roscoe to re-open his store and to continue to be a wonderful member of our Eastside community." It sounds like Roscoe Parmley's a lucky guy, but he was also prepared. We can all take a lesson from him.
|
-
|
They didn't tell you the truth about Castle Doctrine legislation. Theydidn't tell you the truth about the ATF Modernization and Reform Act.They didn't tell you that so-called assault weapons bans don't work,that Right to Carry does work, or that the United Nations is well onits way toward global gun control.
They didn't tell you thesethings because they don't want you to know. If they can't keepyou ignorant, they want to keep you misinformed. All that stops rightnow, right here. Because I'm going to make sure you know the truth.
Forexample, you won't hear about Sherri Brown on the nightly news. The bignetworks don't think it's newsworthy when a 110-pound woman is able toturn the table on two armed robbers. But Sherri, who lives in FayetteCounty, Pennsylvania, is alive today because she had a gun.
When masked men burst into her auto repair shop just after her husband left, she knew what to do.
Shehit one of the men over the head with a pole, then ran to the officewhere the couple kept their gun. As soon as the robbers saw her .357,they turned tail and ran away. It's another successful self-defensestory they'll never tell you, but I will.
If you're tired ofseeing the good news go unreported while there's anti-gun spin in everyedition of the paper if you're sick of politicians telling lies to passmore gun-control laws and nobody ever calling them out then you're inluck. There's a new blog in town where you'll get straight talk, thereal story and everything they left out.
I'm Wayne LaPierre, and that's what they didn't tell you today.
|
|
|
|