Friday October 30, 2020
SNc Channels:



Mar-20-2012 15:12printcomments

Handguns and the Second Amendment

Republicans do not constitute “A well regulated Militia,” and armed individuals alone are not necessary to the security of our free State: the Military, National Guard, FBI, police departments and The Supreme Court have been assigned that role.


(PASO ROBLES, CA) - Hardly a day goes by that we don’t read of another killing and or wounding of family members, or others, by handguns.

In fact in Arizona, it is legal for anyone to carry a gun, and a year ago a deranged man killed several, including a judge and a child, and seriously wounded a Congresswoman who he shot in the head who has since resigned from Congress, and whose prognosis remains questionable if hopeful.

The situation is reminiscent of the wild west of yesteryear because Republican’s want to tie permissiveness to their misguided opinion of the meaning of the Second Amendment which reads, “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.”

Now, let’s be reasonable; Republicans do not constitute “A well regulated Militia,” and armed individuals alone are not necessary to the security of our free State: the Military, National Guard, FBI, police departments and The Supreme Court have been assigned that role.


Kenneth G. Ramey,'s Religion and Philosophy Writer, confronts the hard issues of politics and religion from a logical point of view that combines interesting insight with history into the truth, or lack thereof, that underlies the strengths and weaknesses of the Religious Right’s determination to use American politics for its own misguided, or selfish, interest. It’s rare for a writer to balance his writing between religious values and the secular guarantees of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with the knowledge that Ken possesses, and to do it so effectively.

Ken was born in Minnesota but was raised in California since 1932. He is the youngest of four boys raised by his mother alone during the dark years of the Great Depression. He Graduated from SFSU in the 1970s when in his mid-forties, majoring in Spanish North American History, and added three years of post-graduate study, much of it in Philosophy and Religion. We live at a critical time in history and believe Ken's views represent the view of many who are tired of the commercialism and false interpretations about religion today. Watch for Ken's articles on religion, philosophy, politics and history. View articles written by Kenneth G. Ramey You can email Ken at:

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Terry Wagar March 23, 2012 9:01 am (Pacific time)

This is in response to your comment on "
Handguns and the Second Amendment

I do not expect to be alive much longer and I have explained my situation as best as I can publicly, there is no way for me to summarize what happened to me since it is an ongoing situation started by the Portland police and Multnomah county sheriff's.

I am not just a victim of an incident I am a victim of a series of events that took place over several years of which has not let up.

I am badly disabled from being poison and I have been severely harassed by police in plain cloths the entire time they keep trying to provoke me into acting in self defense so they can justify shooting me!

Half the cops in this state don't wear uniforms they wear plain cloths and they use their under cover status to harass people and to stalk people and to frame people and to murder people.

My whole family joined into their murder conspiracy and I have them on video discussing their murder conspiracy so it is personal on their part!

The mer fact that I have them on a audio recorder, on video, and I have some of their own signed confessions to back me up means nothing to people, I have them bragging at Clackamas Walmart I am not their only victim, and I desperately tried warn people publicly in an attempt to save that persons life means nothing to people either.

I am not only a victim of a crime I am a victim of a series of crimes that took place over a few years, and I was being framed to take the blame for their crimes, they planted child porn and poison in my kitchen, and then they all drove straight to Clackamas Walmart and they bragged about it to Walmart employees, then they started printing out flyers giving me the blame, and they call this activity Pedofying, their word, their term, in use by them.

In private amounst themselves they admitted they were also framing me over a missing runaway and they named the runaway, and later that same day my wife asked her f@@k buddy the cop if he gets to be the one to kill her, they both were having sex at that pillow moment.

So I tried desperately to warn people, knowing I was not the only person in danger, and I was severely severely poisoned for my trouble.

It's after this the cops start putting audio death threats in my home bragging they covered it up at the hospital and that I cannot get help from 911 and that they pedofied me using flyers and telling me good luck!

Their death threat pretty much explains why some people in this world go postal because they sure as hell deserve it based on what their bragging about, and I have every reason to believe they wanted me to try that based on their harassment and bragging.

My wife and her sister and her daughters worked at Clackamas Walmart and they along with their f@@k buddy's in law enforcement recruited an entire store into helping them to frame me for their crimes and they all recorded an audio death threat that5 they put in my home and nobody recognizes my right to charge them with a crime.

I have just as much right to charge a cop with a crime as they do to charge someone else with a crime, I expect them to be charged formally in a criminal court of law no exceptions.

I am getting death threats and I am justified in acting in self defense and they are forcing me to do just that, this is not a matter that can be settled in a civil court of law, only a criminal court of law, and I am not taking no or silence for an answer.

I cannot do much of anything because I was poisoned so badly and I cannot explain my situation without going into a rage over it, it is a great effort to just type this email.

If there is no process that will force a cop to arrest another cop when I charge them with a felony then my only recourse is self defense, and since the cops brag I cannot get help from 911 then any action I take is self defense.

You want a simple concise explanation of other peoples crimes? OK here it is.

The Portland police and Multnomah county sheriff's recruited my wife and daughters into their sex crimes and into murders, they gave them permission to poison me off while I was a plasma donor, three other family members died within a three year period, they were framing me to take the blame for those crimes and they bragged about it at Clackamas Walmart.

They killed a missing runaway and they named the runaway and I was being framed for that as well and they printed out flyers giving me blame.

My wife's lover the cop changed his name after I discovered he was a cop and he was acting as a photo double to set me up.

M y wife and her lover the cop ran around telling people they know to lie for them about the cops new identity.

I was stuck at home too ill to go anywhere and my attempts to warn people over the internet went ignored.

They break into my home repeatedly and they poison my foods and they put death threats in my home stupidly thinking I will get scared, THEY ALREADY POISONED ME I WILL NOT LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS![

Hopefully that was summarized enough.

Terry Wagar

Terry Wagar March 22, 2012 8:09 pm (Pacific time)

The Portland police and Multnomah county sheriff's cover up victims 911 calls when authority's don't want them as witnesses and they brag on audio death threats to their victims!

I am being blackmailed by these so called authority's with death threats and my cries for help are covered up and suppressed by police and media!

I am reduced to the point of publicizing their crimes on blogs all over the internet just to prove I reported crimes commited by local authority's and to try and warn other victims!

All replys by local authority's are either threatening me or they are labeling me as mental to discredit me as a witness in others eyes to further isolate me from help!

People cannot accept the fact that authority's will flat out brag about their crimes to their victims and cover up all attempts by victims to get help!

911 is a joke when police can brag on audio death threats and my 911 calls are covered up by police!

Police can cover up any crime they want to by pretending it's not reported and they don't care if a few people figure this out!

I am denied emergency services because my wife was having an affair with a cop and my 911 calls were covered up because of their affair so it's personal on their part!

Editor: Terry, put together an article summarizing your situation, make it not too long, send it to me and I will consider publishing it as a guest contribution.  I have stated before to you that I am too undergunned to help everyone the way I would like to. .  Thanks, Tim King

COLLI March 22, 2012 8:05 pm (Pacific time)

Once again I see people trying to prove that they are smarter than the men who designed and wrote our constitution. "Let's all play pick and choose which rights we will defecate on today!” shall we? Remember as you sit back and ignore it when people attack rights and liberties you don't particularly agree with . . . that tomorrow, it may be one that you do agree with and want to take advantage of. This is a giant mistake folks. Stand-up for and protect ALL of your rights . . . not just your favorite ones or ones you use regularly! People sat idly by while Woodrow Wilson shut down newspapers who spoke against his directives and he used the war powers act to do so. We always seem to be able to rationalize why doing something wrong is oh so right and the current crop of corrupt vermin who populate the White House and Congress have honed that ability to a fine edge. Every piece of the Bill of Rights exists for a reason. Anyone who believes that forbidding arms to honest, law-abiding citizens will keep them out of the hands of criminals and lunatics needs to share what they are smoking with the rest of us!

Anonymous March 22, 2012 11:51 am (Pacific time)

here is a USA Today poll about the second ammendment..

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:55 pm (Pacific time)

Besides, if people were unsure, I am not, the editor responding is Ken himself. He has had the misfortune of being data whupped before and he dont like it!

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:53 pm (Pacific time)

We call all anti gun zealots rookies because in 8 years, even their uber god leaders have not been able to, or have refused to acknowledge the facts presented because as to do so in the anarchists play book, that mean the facts truly do exist. So until you refute the GOVERNMENT FACTS and all those NON NRA FACTS, you are the ROOKIE! Or would you prefer some other less sophisticated sarcasm or slang on the emotional drivel level as you have already demonstrated?

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:51 pm (Pacific time)

Hey, lets compare someone safe to all those cpl licensees, say a doctor, and we wont use a single NRA developed or managed data source, we will just use organizations who clearly are not pro gun. BATF Max 8 million CPL's US, approximately 186 million age 21 or older or 4.3% of the people licensed for CPL. Possible deaths from CPL holders in 3 year time span from Violence Policy Center report 2009, 137 or 45 per year equals .00000562 per concealed license holder. You can also review Florida's data on CCW at it says the same thing. JAMA 700,000 doctors in US kill 44,000 to 98,000 by medical malpractice every year .065 to .14 per physician. Physician is .065 or .14 /.00000562 = 12,000 to 25,000 times more likely to harm you than a CPL holder. So where is the risk from concealed carry holders and why aren't you antis crying to ban doctors?

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:48 pm (Pacific time)

In case we were not clear enough or put it into simple enough wording for your simple mind, the website referenced with all those links is



Get back to everyone when you prove they dont exist.

In fact, here is the link since you appear to be google illiterate!


Oh whats this, more evidence it is the government failing to enforce the existing gun conctrol laws. Bet you dont have the guts to post this or the last postings over the last 30 minutes? Its the only thing you have proven wrong in my referenced statements or government data! Lets see you prove us wrong and post this GOVERNMENT data! Undercover congressional investigators using fake IDs were able to skirt mandatory background checks and purchase guns in all of the five states where they tried, according to a report issued 2001. The General Accounting Office study concluded that the national background check system for purchasing guns "cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon." The system checks only whether the gun buyer had a criminal history but does not require any check to see whether the name or identification being used by the buyer is real. Funy how that study has been repeated multiple times, same result. 

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:39 pm (Pacific time)

Not a gun store owner, exposed BATF agents for their stupid sting campaigns at multiple gun shows (they hate being called out and identified to everyone). Though we did post ONE of the websites list of collated data for you to review.

But you being a dedicated anti gun extremist, you dont have the guts to go to the website and review the links to those actual instances and we are rather tired posting links you are too stubborn or stupid to review and like an adult admit you were wrong.

So go to the website noted, review and refute or as when most adults are proven wrong, admit it or shut up, we dont care which, as you are getting rather drole with your bloody pulpit of inferred lies!-

Editor: Easy Jarhead 1982, I told you I'm not even into gun control personally, but dealing with guys like you shows me how people end up that way.  Semper fi.

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:28 pm (Pacific time)

Here is some more data you cant refute. Of course we see from the USDOJ Background Check and Firearm transfer report 2008 Brady Check report that of the 99 million checks for purchases from licensed sources only, since 1994. We see a total of 1.67 million valid rejections, a 68% decrease in felons attempting to buy from a licensed source, and 58% of those rejected being felons. We see that between 2000-2008 only 13,024 were prosecuted, or less than 1%. We of course see how the anti gun lobby claims such effectiveness of this pathetically useless law with the hard data they can present that the 1.66 million plus who weren’t prosecuted then didn’t go and buy from an unlicensed source? We also see how the USDOJ survey in 1997 where felons identified purchasing their weapons from 80% street buys, 12% retail stores, 2% gun shows. Then that 68% reduction of attempted buys from licensed sources puts the street buys/theft at 95.52%, 3.64% retail stores, .64% gun shows in today’s numbers. Firearm Use by Offenders, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2001 Amazing how ineffective that poster child of futility is and this trend is similar with ALL gun control laws. Yet more laws will prevent criminals and terrorists from getting a firearm, ROTFLMFAO, uh yeah, and the moon is made of cheese and the sun rises in the west and sets in the east, right! Man the government really sucks at enforcing the existing laws.

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:26 pm (Pacific time)

Oh my, what is this, the government has ruled, over 43 years ago, that the majority of gun control laws dont apply to felons! Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85 1968 where the US Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in favor of Haynes that any law requiring a felon to self incriminate themselves and violate their 5th amendment rights was not enforceable as a charge for prosecution. Hence criminals don't have to follow 85% of the existing gun control laws that do so, e.g. your stolen weapons, registrations, etc.... Amazing how the criminals don't have to obey these laws yet only law-abiding citizens do? This just validates the hypocrisy that laws affect only the felons! After all, 20,000 gun laws and we see how effective a piece of legislation is at stopping violence because if it did, there wouldn't be ANY VIOLENT CRIME.

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 8:24 pm (Pacific time)

I sold my soul to defend this country, you sold yours to the devil, big difference! Aw poor widlle editor, ranting because they have nothing to refute the facts. Oh and exactly who is doing the killing, drum roll please! The government acknowledges in USDOJ National Gang Threat Assessment 2009 that 80% of all violent crimes committed in the US each year are committed by career criminals/gang members. Suicidal people kinda speak for themselves, and suicide is a felony! Shall we review police studies in Chicago and NYC where between 76-80% of those involved in shootings, both shooter and injured were both involved in criminal activity at the time of the incident.,, So when are you going to address those two groups responsible for over 92% of all deaths using a firearm as frankly it is rather stupid not to address the largest reason for a problem, then again, we are talking about progressives here.

Anonymous March 21, 2012 6:10 pm (Pacific time)

Ken Ramey's thesis exposes possibly the primary reason why the Founding Fathers created the 2nd Amendment to mean "individual rights." If you ever have the time read the personal papers/diaries of the Founders, and when they were writing about the Bill of Rights, the 2nd Amendment was always referenced as for the "individual." The U.S. Supreme Court's last two rulings in this matter, which dealt with Washingto DC and Chicago's onerous gun laws, admonished them for violating the individual's gun rights. These cities are still providing obstacles. It is interesting to note that these cities have been run by democrats for decades. They have restrictive gun laws along with some of the highest murder rates on the planet. Conversely, places like El Paso, a large city that issues CHL's, has a relatively low gun crime rate. Texas is a conservative state. All conservative states have much lower gun crimes than their opposite. Even Oregon, a drifting state trying to reconnect to it's conservative roots, has excellent laws to protect the individual gun owner. Only in democratically-controlled locations do you see high gun crimes, but that should change as more people are carrying lawfully. More guns, less crime. I buy several firearms monthly and provide them to people who cannot afford to buy a firearm. Always keep a shotgun at your residence, then build from there. Be security conscious at all times.

Douglas Benson March 21, 2012 4:48 pm (Pacific time)

So someone would like to determine the intent of the founders when they gave as the second amm. Thomas Jefferson And what country can preserve its liberties ,if the rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take up arms .The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms .The strongest reason for the people to retain the the right to bear arms is .as a last resort to protect themselves from tyranny in government." Patrick Henry "Gaurd with jealous attention the public liberty .Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel . Unfortunately ,nothing will preserve it but downright force.Whenever you give up that force you are ruined. The great object that every man be armed " Richard Henry Lee [pay attention to what is a militia ] "A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves and include all men capable of bearing arms. To preserve liberty it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms ." So it is clear that the right to bear arms while also for self protection ,was mainly put there so that the people themselves would always have the ability to resist tyranny . I would put it to you that now more than ever as our government is destoying our rights in every way in the name of substantial interest this right must be gaurded with zeal .

Anonymous March 21, 2012 3:05 pm (Pacific time)

A song comes to Paul Simon..There are 50 ways to leave your lover"... There are hundreds of ways to kill and create havoc without firearms..but only 50 ways to leave your lover :-) have fun...

ThomasR March 21, 2012 1:16 pm (Pacific time)

Yeah, Jarhead can be blunt, but really? "Loose data", come on editor! these are news paper stories, reported by "Authorized jounalists" in big city papers,all over the country, practically every day is another story of a successful defense with a gun, many times, multiple stories; you'll evidently eat up a story if it's a story of kid shooting up a school at face value,but if it's a citizen defending their life, "oh,that's just loose data" PLEASE! give me a break!
Why do you think people are getting fed up with your obvious bias against guns!

Editor: Well here is one for you, I am not into unreasonable gun control, I just had a friend get in big trouble in California for taking an AR15 down there, which is legal in Oregon.  My dad was an avid gun collector and I have personally, no problem with legal gun ownership.  Hell, I can take your side of the argument and run with that too, but the bottom line is that guns kill people, they make it too easy, and the vast majority of human beings just want the killing to stop.  They don't like people who celebrate guns and rally for guns, that is different from simply being a responsible gun owner, like night and day.  As for that stuff listed by Jarhead, it is insufficient to convince me, I'm sure even most of it is probably real, but the taco truck?  Anyway, this is Ken's article and he is a quality person and that is why I will not allow comments to go unheeded, thanks.  

ThomasR March 21, 2012 12:54 pm (Pacific time)

Hate to tell you Ken, but you really need to read and research more than the gun control web sites, they don't give accurate information, they lie in other words. Check out, they report stories printed in local papers from all over the country of successful defense by common citizens using a gun. Then go to research the number of citizens that lose their concealed carry license because of criminal behavior, the states publish the information on their government web sites, the average is a fraction of one percent, this means over 99 percent of law abiding citizens use their carry weapons responsibly! And in the end, according to the latest supreme court rulings, all nine of the justices did agree it is an individual right. Oops, who would of thunk it.

Editor March 21, 2012 12:43 pm (Pacific time)

Rookie? You're living to make sure people have an easy way to kill other people, that is not what a life's dedication should amount to. I hadn't caught your 'rookie' reference when approving that last comment of yours. You had to scour hard for that 'information' and read the details, you are citing one that says:

"shooting details emerge"

.. another that says, "• Armed Taco Truck Driver Shoots, Wounds 1 of 3 Armed Robbers (CA)".

Come on man, a taco truck driver?  You sound like your are pulling propaganda out of a hat and God only knows, if these are accurate, how long of a time span it took to accumulate such loose data.

You're what, a gun store owner? Any chance you're in the SW?  Any dealings with the ATF?

People really would sell their souls in this country, I think you and your cohorts need to get a hobby that doesn't involved fearmongering, you are the BIGGEST fearmongers in existence, you spend your time trying to scare old ladies into buying guns, good job... yeah right.  You're a worse lot at scaring people, than the mainstream media.   

Terry Wagar March 21, 2012 12:20 pm (Pacific time)

the Military, National Guard, FBI, police departments and The Supreme Court do nothing to protect me or my family and I lost three family members to a poisoner who was having an affair with a cop at the time. The poisoner was not arrested and my 911 calls were covered up by Portland police and FBI. I am currently crippled from being poisoned and I am being blackmailed by our very police force with death threats, and no one in our government cares.

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 12:17 pm (Pacific time)

Mr Editor, all these police incident reports, the oldest dated 1/26/12, from one website of many that collate such GOVERNMENT REPORTS, Keep and Bear Arms and you will no doubt not have the balls to post as it shows you to be wrong.

Others to review..

Armed Citizen
American Rifleman
Guns Save Lives..

all told average of 80 police incident reports per month, and that is just the ones reported.

Try again rookie!

• Las Vegas, NV Homeowner Shoots and Kills Burglary Suspect (NV)
• 78 Year Old Kentucky Man Shoots 1 of 2 Home Invaders with Antique Walther and Shotgun (KY)
• Store clerk fires shot, scares off would-be robber (IL)
• Montgomery County man kills alleged home invader (TX)
• Police: Attempted Robbery Suspect Shot By Shop Owner (CA)
• Robber killed, owner hurt in mini-mart heist (PA)
• Homeowner Shoots Sword Wielding Home Invader (FL)
• Police say witness shoots way out of encounter with suspects (FL)
• Homeowner Shoots Intruder in His Home (NM)
• Man shot, killed in St. Augustine (FL)
• Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Lucky to be Alive Edition (PA)
• Store Clerk Shoots and Wounds Would Be Robber Who is Then Captured (NC)
• Homeowner in AZ Confronts and Shoots Daytime Burglar (AZ)
• Check Cashing Business Owner Exchanges Fire With 2 Armed Robbers (CO)
• Store Owner Fires Warning Shot at Armed Robber Scares Him Away (MN)
• Father arrives home to hostage situation, is shot and still manages to return fire and stop his attacker (OH)
• Citizen Shoots and Wounds 1 of 2 Burglars (TX)
• Cleaning man fatally shoots burglar at Queens grocery store (NY)
• Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Vance West (MO)
• Homeowner Exchanges Gunfire With Truck Thief Who is Shot, Captured (TX)
• Rural IL Homeowner First 5 Shots At 2 Home Invaders (IL)
• Homeowner Shoots and Kills Daytime Intruder (SC)
• Defensive Gun Use of the Day: Parking Lot Edition (MI)
• Video: SC Convenience Store Owner Shoots, Kills Career Criminal During Armed Robbery (SC)
• Woman Shoots and Kills Home Invader (NC)
• Off-duty deputy shoots two dogs for allegedly attacking turkeys (UT)
• Homeowner Shoots Knife Wielding Burglar Several Times (AR)
• Auto Store Owner Uses Taurus Judge Pistol To Scare Off Armed Robber (PA)
• 71 Year Old PA Man Pistol Whips 29 Year Old Street Robber (PA)
• Homeowner Shoots Intruder Who Was In His Bedroom at 3AM Demanding Money (UT)
• Armed CO Doctor Helps Over 50 People Escape Deadly Hostage Situation (CO)
• 7-11 Owner Shoots At, Fights Off 2 Armed Robber (PA)
• Woman Shoots and Kills Home Invader (OK)
• 15 Year Old GA Resident, Shoots and Kills 1 of 2 Home Invaders Using .22 Rifle (GA)
• Man Holds Man Robbing Neighbor’s Home At Gunpoint Until Police Arrive (GA)
• Homeowner Holds Burglary Suspect At Gunpoint Until Police Arrive (CO)
• Video: AR 12 Year Boy Grabs Gun, Shoots, Stops Burglars At His Neighbors Home (AR)
• Video: CO Check Cashing Clerk Shot 1 of 2 Robbers After They Maced Him (CO)
• Father Fires At 2 Home Invaders As His Family Hides in Bathroom (FL)
• Cleveland homeowner wounds young intruder before gun jams (OH)
• Homeowner Shoots Home Invader In the Chest (OH)
• Store Clerk Draws Gun on Robber Who Was On Crime Spree (IN)
• SeaTac homeowner shoots would-be burglar (WA)
• House Guest Shoots and Kills Suspected Burglar (TX)
• Homeowner Shoots At Burglar Who Attacked Him While He Tended To His Horses (MO)
• Homeowner Shoots and Kills 1 of 2 Intruders During 3AM Home Invasion (IL)
• 66 Year Old Seattle, WA Homeowner Shoots Burglar with Shotgun, Intruder Flees on Bus (WA)
• Homeowner Shoots, Wounds 1 of 2 Daytime Home Invaders (TX)
• Drive Thru Owner Shoots, Wounds 1 of 2 Armed Robbers Who Shot At Him (OH)
• Homeowner Shoots Ex Boyfriend, Recently Released From Prison, Breaking Into Her Home (IL)
• Restaurant Owner Shoots At Armed Robber Who Shot Him In His Garage (VA)
• Couple Fight Off Armed Burglar Who Was Supposed to Be On House Arrest (KY)
• Homeowner Chases Off Burglar With Handgun (MO)
• Armed Teen Stops Intruder at Doggie Door (AZ)
• Police: Man with gun acted in self-defense at Walmart (FL)
• Homeowner says he shot man in self-defense (MI)
• Homeowner, Father Shoots One of Three Intruders, Captures Others (KY)
• Wife, Mother Shoots Her Abusive Husband Who Was Beating Their Son (SC)
• Homeowner Shoots Suspected Intruder Dead on 225th Pl. SW in Esperance (WA)
• Homeowner Shoots Suspected Burglar with Shotgun (TN)
• Hair Salon Owner Shot and Killed a Knife Wielding Intruder (AL)
• Armed Taco Truck Driver Shoots, Wounds 1 of 3 Armed Robbers (CA)
• Chicago DGU (IL)
• 62 Year Old Homeowner Shoots Intruder Twice With .45ACP Pistol (NM)
• Man Fatally Shot in Dog Dispute (FL)
• 9 Months Pregnant AZ Woman Shoots Intruder Who Tried To Break In Doggie Door (AZ)
• Intruder killed at Fayetteville Arkansas apartment (AR)
• Shooting details emerge (OR)
• Female Resident Barricades Herself in Bathroom And Shoots At, Scares Off Home Invader (SD)
• 64 Year Old Woman Holds Suspect At Gunpoint With Snub Nose Revolver (FL)
• 87-year-old 'sharpshooter' wounds suspected burglar (CA)
• Resident Shoots and Kills One of Two Armed Home Invaders (TX)
• Homeowner Shoots At, Wounds Burglar. Burglar was captured. (TX)
• Is This Wisconsin’s First Concealed Carry DGU? (WI)
• Homeowner Shoots at One of Two Burglars (WV)

Editor: Thanks for this effort.

Anonymous March 21, 2012 10:24 am (Pacific time)

Kenneth G. Ramey needs to learn how government actually operates. Every state supreme court has ruled that the police are under no obligation to protect individuals. Apparently, Mr. Ramey believes that an organization created in 1903 was referred to by a document written over 100 years earlier. He does not understand that the National Guard is part of the military and serves to implement the policies of government. Additionally, Mr. Ramey has not been paying attention to Supreme Court decisions in the past century that have allowed the Federal government to expand beyond its constitutionally defined limits. Just because several idiots in black dresses declare it to be so does not make the decision constitutional. Such decisions, in fact, are violations of original intent. Constitutions are not "living" documents; such a notion is merely tyranny since the law becomes what someone claims it is in the moment.

Dale Lawrence March 21, 2012 9:38 am (Pacific time)

Ken, Let me see. you came of age during the late 60's and early 70's and have spent most of your life in the most bankrupt state in the union (morally and fiscally). I guess it doesn;t surprise me that you are confused about the fact that rights are individual and not collective. I personally have a right to live,(I can defend myself with the most effective tool available)liberty and the persuit of happines(free to make my own decisions and live with the consequenses both good and bad). Do some research. Guns save lives.

Editor: Mr. Lawrence, we include bios for our staff writers for a reason, it would be good to fully evaluate the information before leaving a comment such as this.  Ken was raised during the Depression, he came of age at a critical time in this country's history.

BHirsh March 21, 2012 9:33 am (Pacific time)

Let's not be "reasonable" about this, at least, not according to your view of "reasonable". The SCOTUS defined (U.S. v. Miller, 1939) the type of small arms the keeping and bearing of which are protected by the Second Amendment, and handguns fall squiarely within that definition. The SCOTUS in 2008 (D.C. v. Heller) clearly held that after exhaustive analysis of the Second Amendment's history and plain meaning at the time of the Framing, that keeping and bearing small arms (the type that were defined in U.S. v. Miller) is an individual right. Furthere, while the holding centered narrowly on the question before the Court, i.e. keeping and bearing arms for self-defens in the home, the actual language of the holding went further - "...for traditionally lawful purposes, SUCH AS keeping and bearing arms for self defense within the home." This language does not confine the reading of the right to the home, but merely identifies bearing arms in the home AS ONE OF MULTIPLE LAWFUL PURPOSES. Keeing and bearing arms has been held to be a fundamental civil right of the people, and as such, it can't be denied.

Anonymous March 21, 2012 9:26 am (Pacific time)

Who is going to protect me? The Police? My worhless Government? You damn right i have my gun and the second amendment protects me. Your people are nothin else but s Ared of guns. A gun doesn't kill you, a person does. I will not give up my handgun while illegal criminals, criminals all together, gang bangers and all the other loosers have guns while I sit there quietly and have them assault me or even kill me.

Kevin March 21, 2012 9:16 am (Pacific time)

“Free societies exist where free men are armed”- Plato/ Besides that, its a basic understanding that an armed society is a polite society. Ken no doubt conservatives must be into guns, and more guns, because they are so "stupid?" As everyone knows, success follows mindless, stupid gunowner reactionaries like a plauge. So how many people out there get hired by gunless poor "smart" people? Have you ever noticed the highest gun crime rates are in those political "blue" areas where there are highly restrictive gun laws? Why is that? Then those conservative "red" political gun areas have very low gun crimes, wonder why that is, I mean with their low IQ's and high socio-economic greedy lifestyles? So the issuance of CHL's are up all over the country, and one cannot have a criminal record to have one. In fact people who are judges, lawyers and in law enforcement have higher crime rates (proportionately) than those with a CHL. The CHL possessor is significantly lower in urban areas, and they have the highest crime rates. Ummm. More [legal] guns less crime is a proven reality. The courts have ruled that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right, not a privilige. You may have noticed that the "Bill of Rights" is heavily focused on individual "rights" not a militia or groups that could be controlled by a political agenda.

Eric March 21, 2012 8:27 am (Pacific time)

The 2nd Amendment does not dictate who may own arms. It dictates that the government has no say in the matter. Hence, your entire premise is flawed. Learn a few facts before opening your mouth. It makes you look like less of an idiot.

Ed March 21, 2012 7:57 am (Pacific time)

Another example of the anti-gun cabal presenting their views as “common sense and reasonable”. One, not everyone who carries guns is a white Republican conservative. There are documented individuals and groups such as women, Democrats, gays, liberals, African-Americans, Jews, and so forth who routinely exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. Second, the notion that the 2nd Amendment addresses “the militia” such as the Reserves, National Guard, etc. Another example of today’s “thinkers” trying to explain a 18th/19th century thought process in terms of the 21st century. Read the writings of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and so on. The “militia” was in fact the people-all the people, banded together informally for mutual protection. There was organized military, but the Founders (by their very works) defined “militia” as the common citizens, not an organized military force. To close, it is NOT legal for just anyone to carry a handgun in Arizona. There are specific categories of citizens who will and are specifically banned from carrying or owing guns, not only in Arizona, but all across this country. It’s just too bad that the gun control industry routinely passes off their opinions as facts. Truly fair and reasonable people will examine an issue thoroughly before delivering their views.

Jack Burton March 21, 2012 7:07 am (Pacific time)

I completely agree with Kenneth (may I call you Kenneth?). Guns owners are disrespectful of authority. A failure to rely on authorities is an invariable sign of improper and overly independent attitudes. The mere fact that they gather together to talk about guns at gun shops, gun shows, shooting ranges, and on the internet means that they have some plot going against us normal people. A gun owner has no right to associate with another gun owner. Therefore, to help ensure our right to happiness and safety we must ban and seize all guns from private hands, and forbid NRA-based criticism towards people who are only trying to help. Searching the homes of all NRA members for any guns and pro-gun literature will go a long way towards reducing crime. Common sense requires only uniformed soldiers, police, and other agents of the state have access to firearms, and think of all the money we can save by just taking away the guns from private owners and giving them to the military and police. No person should be able to challenge this by writing to Congress or the President. If they do they should be forced in court to admit to it and then fined a hundred million dollars for each time. Subjecting them to torture will probably change their minds. Making it mandatory that church ministers preach against guns or else they can't get licensed will certainly force the church folk onto our side. People who don't like all this prove they are on the side of the killers with the guns and should be put in jail along side all the gangbangers and other gun nuts. Letting them sit in jail for a few years before they are charged will give the government plenty of time to find something wrong in their lives. Anything they say, write, or express should be held against them to prove their guilt. We should bring all of them here to Chicago to be tried by former Mayor Daly as judge, and we should allow only mothers who have lost children to gunfire to be on the juries. Any attorney who tries to defend them should be arrested also. If we don't get the right verdict the first time we can just keep trying them until we do. No woman needs to protect herself from rape, assault or murder and should just leave crime prevention to the Police who are properly equipped to investigate following the crime's completion. Women using a gun in self-defense interferes with and makes the attempted crime a "non-event," which unnecessarily complicates the Police investigation. Any woman who does this should be put in jail for interfering with an investigation. If someone still really, really thinks they have a need for a gun in their home for protection then the Army should just force them to host and feed some armed soldiers. Those who claim that the 2nd amendment was given to us because we might someday need guns to use against an oppressive government forget that Constitution has strong internal safeguards to protect our freedoms. So there! Long live our Constitution!

FrankInFL March 21, 2012 6:58 am (Pacific time)

Do I have a right to life? It's a simple yes-or-no question.

If I have a right to life, do I also have the right to defend that life from attack? Again, ASYONQ. If the answer is 'no', of what use is any 'right to life'?

If I have the right to defend, do I also have the right to an adequate means of defense? If, here, the answer is 'no', of what use is any 'right to defend' or that which it protects, my right to life?

Yes, evil people will do evil things and stupid people will do stupid things. Why is it the only 'solution' we can come up with is 'prevent good people doing good things'?

Editor: With respect to everyone's opinion, I covered news as a mainstream reporter and photographer for twenty years before even launching; in all of that time, thousands and thousands of stories, I covered one where a south Salem, Oregon homeowner found what he believed to be a burglar in his garage, so he took his gun and shot that invader.  That is the only story I have ever covered where a private citizen brandished a handgun and successfully used it.  Who was the culprit in that case?  A 16-year old neighbor kid who got drunk and entered the wrong home, the adjacent home's garage if I recall.  So there is my one example of a homeowner using a gun this way.  In all fairness, there must be many examples of the opposite having happened, but not one time was I ever sent to cover one.  

TSgt B March 21, 2012 6:31 am (Pacific time)

Gee, Ken, a little short on research, aren't you? Read the works of the Founders to discover who the "militia" is. And by the way, "well regulated", in the proper context of the time, means well trained in the military art of arms, not restricted, licensed, banned, rationed, etc., as you ignorant Freedom hating gungrabbers like to think.

Vermont Guy March 21, 2012 5:54 am (Pacific time)

Ken, the period is your friend.

E. Zach Lee-Wright March 21, 2012 5:00 am (Pacific time)

Dear Editor: Why did Washington DC have twenty seven times more murders in 2010 than El Paso, TX? Even people like Ken must admit that twenty seven times more murdering is a lot. Could you bring yourself to admit that it is because DC has the most extreme gun control laws of any American city and Texas is a place where all responsible adult citizens can carry concealed handguns? I bet Ken cannot.

Editor: Well do you think El Paso is the nation's capitol?  Maybe you could find a better comparison. 

RLEmerySGT March 21, 2012 4:11 am (Pacific time)

The second amendment as RATIFIED by the state’s. “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.” Maybe you can explain how for the entire history of English language, that the independent clause of a complex sentence, has always set the meaning of the complex sentence. (“the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”) Yet einstein now claims the dependent clause (A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State) is the determinator of the complex sentence meaning and history and English scholars have all been wrong throughout the history of written English. Have at it, but warn us when Hades will be freezing over for you actually having data to support your claim. Lets see, have you removed the 30 plus references from the congressional writings 1774-1789 and the federalist papers showing well regulated as to meaning well trained in the arts of war? Much less all those dictionaries that say the same thing? No, you haven’t. Reference Karpeles Museum, CA. Maybe you removed that original draft of what became the second amendment. You know, the one that was clearly written as a collective right, but then was changed to what exists today. Why did our founding fathers change the amendment draft if it was what they wanted? Oh that’s right, actions do speak louder than words. Ref Karpeles Museum, CA again. original proposed draft 
the right to keep and bear arms 
of the 
(17 TH of 20 amendments) on display at the Karpeles Manuscript Library 
Santa Ana, California "That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power." Then of course, here is the logic failure the anti’s always have. They always fail to prove, that the miltia existed before the armed individual. Funny how all that was before the 2008 rulings eh? Funny how in the 2008 Heller ruling all 9 justices agreed that bearing arms was an individual right. That 5-4 vote was on the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. gun ban, read it, you will see!

Jarhead1982 March 21, 2012 4:10 am (Pacific time)

Really, the Federal government, and all the states, have enacted legislation to rescind the existance of the unorganized militia which is not part of, nor ever has been a part of the police, national guard, army, navy, airforce, etc, etc, etc,? So lets see the legislation as we really dont care what an old communist hippie like you believes, only what you can prove, which is nothing!

Anonymous March 20, 2012 11:08 pm (Pacific time)

I have to agree with Brian, saying that the Military, National Guard, police, FBI, and Supreme Court are assigned to protect the security of our free state doesn't guarantee it will continue forever. Due to budget constraints the military is downgrading, with tens of thousands being forced to leave the services. The National Guard is simply a sub-group of the military controlled by the state, and they too are facing constraints financially. And unfortunately the police and FBI agents are human, they too make mistakes. They may carry the badge, but I hear many stories of cops from big cities like NYC, LA, and Chicago dealing with cops that cross the line (i.e. racism, corruption, domestic violence, etc.) Simply saying the government is assigned to protect our freedoms is not the way this country was founded. We have kept the peace through allowing the use of arms to citizens of this great state, and it is a useful deterrent. To sum it up in the words of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in WWII, "We cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." The Army didn't have as large a presence stateside as they had troops out in Europe and the Pacific, and he referred to the combined arms of state-side military forces, law enforcement, and the armed citizen. And to finally hit this home, I live in California, the place where the Brady Campaign says has the best and most effective gun control laws. Yet I still hear stories of people getting shot in the streets of LA and elsewhere and the legislators say to combat this they want more gun control. They've done it for over two decades and what has it done? Nothing but send a lot of money that the state could use to pull itself out of debt right down the tube. Target criminals and put them behind bars, not target the people that wish to express their right to responsibly and lawfully bear arms.

Brian D. Ritchie March 20, 2012 8:27 pm (Pacific time)

Removing the right to self defense is an open gateway to removing the very essence of freedom in the United States. You might not believe it, but a large part of what makes to country highly un-susceptible to a major attack or invasion is the presence of a highly armed Civilian populace. Not to mention, the Supreme Court can do nothing physical to protect this country, the Armed Forces are stretched way to thin, (and a surprising number of them Join Volunteer Militias when they come home from their service.) the Police are not required to protect anyone, they're there to help figure out what happened after a crime, rarely do they stop one. Nor do or should we want a Militarized Police force or FBI (Gestapo and S.S. comes to mind there)

Anonymous March 20, 2012 4:11 pm (Pacific time)

Dear Kenneth...The military takes orders from the corporate owned industrial complex, (actually, per obama, they take their orders from the corrupt U.N.) in fact they are guarding opium fields in Afghanistan right now, that is flooding the world with cheap and potent heroin, esp in the U.S. The FBI is shipping drugs and guns into south American countries, and raiding raw milk dairies that never had a complaint, while the FDA allows POISON to enter the country...They also raid medical marijuana facilities that are legal in their perspective state...GO to youtube and type in "police abuse" you will find thousands of videos.
I dont know what world you live in, but it certainly aint earth.
And no, I hardly ever hear of a shooting from a person who legally carries a firearm, I hear more often they prevent crime.
My research also confirms that most gun crimes are from people who are on legal anti-depressants. Drugs such as prozac and oxycotin concern me more than guns.
You really need to turn off your tv Ken.

Editor: We have reported many crimes where the shooter was legally armed, and your comment about turning off the TV is silly, this is; none of us trust TV news.

Matt Johnson March 20, 2012 3:47 pm (Pacific time)

When will we ever learn?  Thanks for an article direct and to the point.

[Return to Top]
©2020 All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of

Articles for March 19, 2012 | Articles for March 20, 2012 | Articles for March 21, 2012

Annual Hemp Festival & Event Calendar

Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.

Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.

The NAACP of the Willamette Valley