Author Archives: Bruce W. Krafft

I am a bit of a Johnny-come-lately to the civil rights (firearms flavor) movement, having not really gotten involved until after I hit 40. I am not really a "gun guy"; I can generally hit what I aim at, but I'm not a competitive shooter. I enjoy the craftsmanship of a fine pistol or rifle, but I am not particularly knowledgeable about firearms in general nor am I a Glock guy, or 1911 guy, I'm just a guy. What I am is passionate about civil rights, especially those of the firearm flavor.

DC Mulls an Insurance Requirement. Here, Let Me Help.

As if Our Nation’s Capitol doesn’t already place enough roadblocks in the way of the right to keep and bear arms, “a D.C. Councilwoman has introduced legislation that could make the District the nation’s first jurisdiction to require gun owners to buy liability insurance.” Given that the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility, I’m not sure an insurance requirement is really Constitutional. But just for the sake of argument, let’s say that it is. How are you going to figure the cost? Allow me . . .

continue reading

Alter(nate) Reality: The Inconvenience of Enumerated Rights

courtesy wikipedia.org

The anonymous commentators/opinionators over at the Montpelier, VT Times-Argus are ignoring, obfuscating and bloviating in the finest tradition of classical gun-grabbers. The T-A editorial board piece, titled On the altar of guns, features the perennial civilian disarmer’s question: How many lives must be sacrificed on the altar of the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States…? Of course, who but the most insanely fascist statist would ask, How many lives must be sacrificed on the altar of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States? Or . . .

continue reading

Finally, Some Common Sense School Safety Solutions

It’s unusual, if helpful, to have a columnist announce his lack of qualification to comment on a subject right off the bat. Don Murphy opens a piece he wrote on school safety for lohud.com by stating, “I’ll begin with the disclaimers … I’m not an educator, in law enforcement, in politics or a mental health professional nor a member of the National Rifle Association. I understand the Second Amendment but I am not a gun enthusiast. In fact I’ve never fired a gun.” Maybe you can see where this is going . . .

continue reading

Is Buying Guns a Sickness?

Political commentator Cynthia Tucker is sad. As she’s noticed, National Gun Fever Shows No Sign Of Breaking. Even worse, “Apparently, there will be no ban on assault weapons.” She apparently thinks that the way to attack these problems by encouraging future mass murderers; listing various mass casualty shootings including the names of the shooters in her articles. But, like so many wanna-be gun grabbers, she confuses reality with liberal fantasy land . . .

continue reading

BREAKING: NYT Discovers Bad People Do Bad Things

Reporter Michael Luo, of The New York Times reports that In Some States, Gun Rights Trump Orders of Protection. He sets things up by presenting a sympathetic victim and her horrifying story:

Early last year, after a series of frightening encounters with her former husband, Stephanie Holten went to court in Spokane, Wash., to obtain a temporary order for protection.

… In neat block letters she wrote, “ He owns guns, I am scared.” …

continue reading

Ernest Gets Schooled

Ernest Tews has written a letter to the editor of the Asbury Park [NJ] Press, demanding regulation of gun owners. Actually he seems to think that the Second Amendment makes such a demand. He starts out conventionally enough, quoting the Second Amendment and then making the usual plaint that’s it’s just so darned hard to understand. “The Second Amendment says, ‘A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.’ The Second Amendment is frustratingly non-specific, but let’s look at it as a product of the time it was written.” I think part of Ernest’s confusion here . . .

continue reading