More Gun Shows = Fewer Murders

World Net Daily

Jose Farah

P osted: December 29, 2008
1:00 am Eastern 

 

 

© 2008 

 

I’ll bet that’s a headline you’ve never seen before.

You will probably never see it, again.

But it’s the truth.

With a new Congress and a new president taking office next month, you are bound to hear more calls for closing the so-called “gun-show loophole,” that permits American citizens in many states to buy guns without ridiculous and counterproductive waiting periods.

There will be an all-out effort to renew the slow, plodding, incremental, long-term goal of banning and restricting the sale of as many firearms as possible. It will likely start with gun shows – one of the easiest targets of the gun-grabbers.

They will cite all kinds of bogus statistics to support their claims that gun shows spell nothing but death and destruction.

What they won’t cite, however, is a groundbreaking study of the impact of gun shows on homicides. They can’t – because it shows just the opposite of what they claim to be true.

Mark Duggan and Randi Hjalmarsson of the University of Maryland and Brian A. Jacob of the University of Michigan teamed up to examine the evidence in a scientific study of the impact of gun shows on murder and suicide and accidental deaths.

What they found is shocking because it supports the headline above.

They looked at 3,417 gun shows in two very different states – Texas and California – during an 11-year period. And they examined vital statistics data on suicides, homicides and accidental gun deaths in the weeks following them.

What were the results?

“We find a sharp decline in the number of gun homicides in the weeks immediately following a gun show,” they concluded. Furthermore, in Texas they found “gun shows reduce the number of gun homicides by 16 in the average year.”

Once again, here’s hard evidence of the theory that more guns equals less crime. And it shouldn’t shock us. It only does because we’ve been so conditioned to accepting the illogic of the gun-grabbers that states the opposite as fact – without any evidence to support it.

Think about it.

If you are a criminal, are you more likely to target someone who is armed or unarmed?

The answer is as obvious as the .45 on my desk.

(Story continues below)

Criminals seek out victims who are not going to fight back or offer resistance, let alone shoot them.

Guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens means they are less likely to become victims.

Anyone who disagrees with this simple, straightforward logic should be required to post a sign on the outside of their home or office that says: “Gun-free zone.”

So far, I have not seen even one private citizen invite criminals into their home with such a ridiculous sign. Instead, governments post them around schools!

But now you know the facts – as inconvenient as they might be to the incoming administration and the new Democrat-stacked Congress.

There’s only one thing that will prevent them from taking away your Second Amendment-guaranteed right to self-defense: the truth.

You will be hearing a lot of lies about firearms in the months ahead.

You need to be armed with the facts – as well as your trusty old firearms.

And you need to be prepared to fight back against attacks on what may well be your first freedom.

Remember, every totalitarian regime in the history of the world has succeeded in maintaining power by first disarming the citizenry.

Don’t let it happen in the USA. Don’t accede to any more efforts to ban classifications of firearms because they look like “assault weapons.” Don’t accept any more restrictions on gun shows, now that you know they actually reduce gun homicides. Don’t believe any statistics you hear from Barack Obama or the Democratic leaders in the House and Senate about the need to reduce the availability of firearms or to make them “safer.”

Get ready to protect your constitutional rights across the board, because they are about to come under fire from the worst assault weapon ever devised, a real weapon of Mass Destruction and Mass Distortion – Big Government.

Christians Called To Abandon Government Schools

---

BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS

Christians called to abandon public education

Children’s worldview determined by 14,000 hours in classrooms

---

Posted: December 28, 2008
9:15 pm Eastern

 © 2008 WorldNetDaily

 

You’ve heard all about the disputes: “Silent Night” banned at the “holiday” program, artistic references to the Bible censored and faith-inclusive children’s programs facing discrimination.

Now some people are fed up with public school treatment of Christianity and have launched a campaign calling for a rescue of kids from government education programs – a “Call to Dunkirk.”

The name Dunkirk is famous for the hundreds of thousands of World War II allies saved in May 1940 when a flotilla of pleasure boats, fishing craft and others rescued the soldiers from the beaches near Dunkirk, France, where they were trapped by an advancing German army.

Author David J. Knowles, who wrote a book on the rescue that British Prime Minister Winston Churchill called a miracle, said volunteers including boat owners, fishermen – ordinary people instead of trained soldiers and sailors – crossed the English Channel to effect the rescue of about 340,000 people.

Now, officials with Exodus Mandate have launched their “Call to Dunkirk” to advocate a departure from public schools.

Several officials have created a YouTube video on their plan, and it is embedded here:

Organization chief Chaplain E. Ray Moore, a retired military officer, said that at Dunkirk, “total disaster (was) averted by bold leadership and ordinary citizens answering the call.”

But he said in America, three-quarters or more of the Christian children, “are trapped in the state-run public schools.”

Bruce Shortt, the author of “The Harsh Truth about Public Schools,” said, “culture is shaped by how we’re educated.”

(Story continues below)

“Why should we be surprised we’re losing culturally and politically when we continue to offer up our children as living sacrifices to the Molech of government schools?” he said.

Get the book that exposes “The Harsh Truth About Public Schools” direct from WND’s online store!

Voddie Baucham, Jr., author of “Family Driven Faith,” noted children spend about 14,000 hours in public schools.

“Whoever controls those 14,000 hours controls our children’s worldview,” he said, citing Charles Francis Potter, a signer of the Humanist Manifesto. He wrote, “What can theistic Sunday school meeting for an hour once a week do to stem the tide of a five day program of humanist teaching?”

“The left knows that whoever controls the children owns the future. That’s why so many ’60s radicals like Bill Ayers went into education. Now they effectively control the government school system and its curriculum. But worse, we give them our children,” Shortt said.

Moore said his plan is simple:

“That all families, churches, pastors, major Christian ministries and organizations, concentrate for one year on extracting Christian children from the pagan, godless public schools.”

“State-run public schools have become destructive to our children’s Christian faith. They no longer educate but rather indoctrinate. Not only morally corrupt, public schools are unsafe because of the violence and crime that occurs in them on a regular basis,” the campaign says.

WND previously reported Moore’s estimate based on statistics that 70 to 80 percent of Christian children “will abandon the church and their faith in a public school career.”

U.S. Army Warns of Possible Riots, Disorder Within U.S.

Arizona Police Say They Are Prepared

 

Mike SunnucksPhoenix
Business Journal
December 19, 2008

A new report by the U.S. Army War College talks about the possibility of Pentagon resources and troops being used should the economic crisis lead to civil unrest, such as protests against businesses and government or runs on beleaguered banks.

“Widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security,” said the War College report.

The study says economic collapse, terrorism and loss of legal order are among possible domestic shocks that might require military action within the U.S.

International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn warned Wednesday of economy-related riots and unrest in various global markets if the financial crisis is not addressed and lower-income households are hurt by credit constraints and rising unemployment.

U.S. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and U.S. Rep. Brad Sherman, D-Calif., both said U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson brought up a worst-case scenario as he pushed for the Wall Street bailout in September. Paulson, former Goldman Sachs CEO, said that might even require a declaration of martial law, the two noted.

State and local police in Arizona say they have broad plans to deal with social unrest, including trouble resulting from economic distress. The security and police agencies declined to give specifics, but said they would employ existing and generalized emergency responses to civil unrest that arises for any reason.

“The Phoenix Police Department is not expecting any civil unrest at this time, but we always train to prepare for any civil unrest issue. We have a Tactical Response Unit that trains continually and has deployed on many occasions for any potential civil unrest issue,” said Phoenix Police spokesman Andy Hill.

“We have well established plans in place for such civil unrest,” said Scottsdale Police spokesman Mark Clark.

Clark, Hill and other local police officials said the region did plenty of planning and emergency management training for the Super Bowl in February in Glendale.

“We’re prepared,” said Maricopa County Sheriff Deputy Chief Dave Trombi citing his office’s past dealings with immigration marches and major events.

Super Bowl security efforts included personnel and resources from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. military’s Northern Command, which coordinated with Arizona officials. The Northern Command was created after 9/11 to have troops and Defense Department resources ready to respond to security problems, terrorism and natural disasters.

Northern Command spokesman Michael Kucharek and Arizona Army National Guard Major. Paul Aguirre said they are not aware of any new planning for domestic situations related to the economy.

Nick Dranias, director of constitutional government at the libertarian Goldwater Institute, said a declaration of marital law would be an extraordinary event and give military control over civilian authorities and institutions. Dranias said the Posse Comitatus Act restricts the U.S. military’s role in domestic law enforcement. But he points to a 1994 U.S. Defense Department Directive (DODD 3025) he says allows military commanders to take emergency actions in domestic situations to save lives, prevent suffering or mitigate great property damage.

Dranias said such an emergency declaration could worsen the economic situation and doubts extreme measures will been taken. “I don’t think it’s likely. But it’s not impossible,” he said.

The economy is in recession. Consumer spending is down, foreclosures are up and a host of businesses are laying off workers and struggling with tight credit and the troubled housing and financial markets. The U.S. Federal Reserve Bank and U.S. Treasury Department have pumped more than $8.5 trillion into the economy via equity purchases of bank stocks, liquidity infusions, Wall Street and bank bailouts and taxpayer rebates. U.S. automakers are seeking more than $14 billion in federal loans with fears they could fall into bankruptcy without a bailout. The U.S. housing and subprime lending-induced recession also has hit economies in Europe, Japan and China.

Gov. Janet Napolitano’s office declined comment on emergency planning and possible civil unrest. Napolitano is president-elect Barack Obama’s pick for secretary of Homeland Security, an agency that oversees airport security, disaster response, border security, customs and anti-terrorism efforts.

As governor, Napolitano sent National Guard troops to Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in 2003 in response to terrorism threats.

Glendale Police spokesman Jim Toomey said the West Valley suburb developed new emergency plans with the approach of Y2K computer changeovers leading up to the year 2000 and police have updated those plans several times including after 9/11. Toomey said strategies to deal with public unrest usually involve deploying personnel and equipment to deal with specific incidents while still providing usual services.

Obama Questions Keep Coming!

---

OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL

Investigator casts doubt on Obama’s birth residence

Neighbor believes family didn’t live at address in newspaper announcement

---

 

Posted: December 16, 2008
10:09 pm Eastern

 

 

 

 

 

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily

 

Barack Obama and his mother, Anne Dunham

A private investigator has released to WND an affidavit that casts doubt on whether Barack Obama’s family lived at the address listed in the published notice of his birth in 1961.

Jorge Baro was hired by WND to investigate issues related to Obama’s birth amid allegations the Democrat does not meet the Constitution’s requirement that a president be a “natural born citizen.”

Baro’s affidavit documents an interview his staff conducted with Beatrice Arakaki, who has lived at 6075 Kalanianaole Highway in Honolulu since before Obama was born.

The affadivit is at the center of a federal lawsuit filed prior to the Noveber election in Hattiesburg, Miss., before U.S. District Judge Keith Starrett. The suit is one of several yet to be adjudicated that calls for proof of Obama being a “natural born citizen” as required by the Constitution.

Baro is the in-house senior investigator for Elite Legal Services, LLC, in Royal Palm Beach, Fla.

(Story continues below)

In Hawaii, WND was able to locate at the Honolulu public library microfilm of a notice placed in the Sunday Advertiser Aug. 13, 1961. The announcement in the “Births, Marriages, Death” section read: “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug. 4.”

Arakaki told Baro’s investigators she had no recollection of Obama being born or of the family living next door having a black child born to a white mother.

Baro sent a team of investigators to Honolulu to explore records regarding current residents of Kalanianaole Highway and to track down residents back to 1961.

Baro’s investigators were unable to locate any current or past resident of Kalanianaole Highway who could recall Obama or his family living at the address listed in the Sunday Advertiser announcement.

Baro also sent investigators to the newspaper offices to examine files, but the Advertiser could not confirm who actually placed the ad.

According to Baro’s affidavit, Beatrice Arakaki affirmed she was a neighbor of the address listed. She has lived at her current residence of 6075 Kalanianaole Highway from before 1961 to the present.

Moreover, Arakaki said she believed that when Obama lived with the Dunhams, his grandparents, the family address was in Waikiki, not on Kalanianaole Highway.

Baro was able to determine the previous owners of the residence at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway – the alleged address of Obama’s parents when he was born – were Orland S. and Thelma S. (Young) Lefforge, both of whom are deceased.

Baro’s affidavit also documents that the Certification of Live Birth that Obama posted on his campaign website is not the original “long form” birth certificate issued in 1961 by the obstetrician or physician giving birth and the hospital where the baby was born.

Baro’s investigators learned that a “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Program” established in 1911 during the territorial era and terminated in 1972 during the statehood era allowed Hawaiian residents to apply for a “Late Birth Certificate,” called a “Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,” which appears identical to the “birth certificate” Obama posted on his campaign website.

“This raised the question in my mind as to whether the ‘Certification of Live Birth,’ which is the only document that has been produced and as previously stated solely handled by the representatives of factcheck.org outside Obama’s campaign, is a certification of a live birth or a late birth,” Baro stated in his affidavit.

“I am left with the conclusion that a simple request from Senator Barack Obama to produce the ‘long form’ (redacted if necessary) would end any speculation or question as to his birthplace,” Baro’s affidavit continued. “His continued denial to do so is suspect, in my professional opinion.”

Baro also pointed out that factcheck.org is funded by the Annenberg Foundation, which “is at the center of the ongoing Obama-Bill Ayers controversy – hardly an unbiased source for information in my view.”

Obama Citizenship Questions Go to Supreme Court

By Brian K. Lutes

 It is THE HARD TRUTH that millions of people do not want to face the fact that there are very serious and persistent questions about Barack Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to become President of these United States of America and the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States are being asked to review the matter.

 Most people have heard that a lawsuit asking that Obama be forced to produce  his birth certificate to prove he was born in the U.S. filed by Pennsylvania Attorney Philip J. Berg in Federal District Court in Pennsylvania was dismissed by the Judge in the case earlier this year. The Judge dismissed the action not because it didn’t have merit, but because the Judge declared that Berg didn’t have standing to bring the action. That is a huge difference.

 However, the “mainstream media” reported very little about the lawsuit and I have neither read, nor heard anything from those same media outlets about the fact that Attorney Berg has appealed the dismissal of the action to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 At issue in the case is Article 2, Section 1 of the United States Constitution which says: “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

 Many questions have come up about where Obama was born. Many of Obama’s extended family members such as Sarah Obama, his paternal grandmother for one, has said that she was in the delivery room in Mombosa, Kenya when Barack was born. Reportedly her statements have been tape recorded and she is available to testify if need be.

 Also, Barack attended school in Indonesia as a youth. At that time only Indonesian citizens were allowed to attend schools in that country. According to school attendance records on file there, Obama was registered as Barry Soetoro; his citizenship was listed as Indonesian; his religion was listed as Islam;  and his father was listed as lolo Soetoro, M.A.

 At the time of Obama’s attending the Indonesian school there was no dual citizenship allowed for Americans and if Obama was legally adopted  by his Indonesian step-father, Soetoro,  his U.S. citizenship, if he had any, would have been forfeited.

 Prior to the dismissal of the original legal action filed by Attorney Berg, Obama’s legal team produced, not in the court of law, but on the internet, a “Certificate of Live Birth” which is a non-hospital short form certificate, which is not the same thing as a birth certificate, from the state of Hawaii. At the time the “Certificate of Live Birth” was supposedly issued for Obama, Hawaii law allowed people to register the birth of children, without a doctor’s signature indicating where the doctor was registered or the name of a hospital,  born outside of Hawaii, which means the “Certificate”, even if genuine, proves nothing.

 Many experts who have examined the “Certificate of Live Birth” posted online by Obama have said the document is a forgery and Attorney Berg said “It’s clearly been altered” making it inadmissable in any legal action.

 What is at stake here is the very fabric of our Republic, our Constitutional form of government. Either we have a Constitution or we do not. Either the procedures, limits, and requirements set out in that most sacred document have meaning & are binding or they are not.

 If the court passes on reviewing the issues in this case we will basically be witnessing nothing short of a “De Facto” revolution completely overturning the very foundation of our country, our Constitution.

 To learn more about this case or to make a monetary donation to Attorney Berg please visit www.obamacrimes.com.

 To sign a petition urging the Supreme Court to review the issues in this most important case and to read more informative articles on this matter,  please visit www.worldnetdaily.com.