Monthly Archives: June 2010


By Chuck Baldwin
June 15, 2010

In An Emergency, Could You Survive?

This column was initially released last December. Without a doubt, this has been one of my most requested columns. So, in response to the large number of readers who have asked me to re-release this column, I do so today. And in doing so, I have added some new material to the original column.

One does not have to be a prophet to know that we are on the precipice of some potentially catastrophic–or at the very least, challenging–days. In fact, most of us are already in challenging days, and some are already enduring catastrophic events. That is, if one would call being out of work, losing one’s home, facing life-threatening medical conditions without any prospect of medical insurance, several families being forced to live in one house due to homes being foreclosed, etc., catastrophic.

The potential for an escalation of cataclysmic events, however, is very real. Only a “blooming idiot” would call someone who attempts to prepare for “the day of adversity” a Chicken Little now. Anyone who does not see the storm clouds on the horizon isn’t paying attention.

For example, can one imagine what would happen if terrorists nuked a major American city or cities? (Once again, I encourage readers to go get the videos of the CBS TV series “Jericho” to get an idea of how quickly life, and even civilization, could change.) Imagine if there was another 9/11-type event. What would happen if some form of Zimbabwe-style inflation hit the US? What would happen if anything disrupted the distribution of Welfare checks, or food to local grocers? Imagine a Hurricane Katrina-style natural disaster in your town. I think people everywhere are beginning to awaken to just how vulnerable we all really are.

As a result, people from virtually every walk of life have recently been asking my thoughts on how they should prepare. Therefore, I will attempt to share with my readers some of the counsel I have given these folks.

First, a disclaimer. I am not an economist; I am not a survival expert; I am not a firearms expert; I am not an attorney; I am not a physician. In fact, I am not an expert in anything! For several years, however, I have tried to learn from others. I am an avid reader. My work has allowed me to travel extensively. I have had the privilege of sitting at the feet of–and learning from–many of America’s most learned, most trained, and most qualified “experts” in a variety of fields. What I write today, I have learned from others. I’ve formed my own opinions and priorities, of course, but everything I’m sharing has been said, or written about, before. But if I can share something in today’s column that will help someone be better prepared for the days to come, then my goal will have been achieved.


First, analyze your living conditions. Where do you live? Do you live in an urban or rural environment? Is it a big city or small town? Do you live in an apartment or condominium? How close are your neighbors? Do you even know your neighbors? Would you trust them if the electricity was off and they were hungry? Could you grow your own food, if you had to? How easily could you secure your home? If you live in a cold weather environment, how long could you stay warm without electricity? These are the kinds of questions you need to ask yourself now.

Over the past several decades, masses of people have migrated into large metropolitan areas. More people live in urban areas than at any time in American history. While this may be well and good for times of prosperity, it is an absolute nightmare in any kind of disaster. Does anyone remember what New Orleans looked like after Hurricane Katrina came through? Can anyone recall what happened in downtown Los Angeles during the 1992 riots? Needless to say, any inner-city environment could become a powder keg almost instantaneously, given the right (or wrong) circumstances. And the bigger the city, the bigger the potential problems.

If you live in the inner city, I suggest you consider moving to a more rural location. Obviously, now is a very good time to buy property (especially rural property), but the downside is, selling property is not as favorable. If you can afford it, now is a great time to buy a “safe house” outside the city. If you are fortunate enough to have family or some true friends nearby, you might want to put your heads–and some resources–together in preparation for serious upheaval. Obviously, a team of prepared people is much better than being alone.

If you must stay in your urban location, have some commonsense plans in hand in the event of a major disaster. Get to know your neighbors: find out whom you can trust and whom you can’t. Keep some extra gasoline on hand, in case you need to get in your car quickly and leave. Have several exit routes planned ahead of time, in case roads are blocked. Have a “bug-out” bag containing essential ingredients to live on for 3 or 4 days. If leaving is not an option, have a plan to secure your home as best you can. You’ll need to think about things such as food, water, medicine, warmth, self-defense, etc. But at this point, to do nothing is absolute lunacy!


During a major disaster, food will quickly disappear. Living for over 3 decades on the Gulf Coast, I can tell you with absolute certainty that whenever disaster strikes (usually an approaching hurricane, for us), food and provisions at the store sell completely out in a matter of a few hours. People panic, and within hours, you cannot find food, bottled water, ice, generators, batteries, candles, etc. In a matter of hours, every gas station in the area will be completely out of gas. Not days. Hours!

Furthermore, almost all disasters include a complete loss of electricity. The water supply is compromised. Bottled water becomes more valuable than bank accounts. Dehydration becomes a very real and present danger. I remember witnessing a man offer an ice vendor $100 for an extra bag of ice during Hurricane Ivan. My wife and I went 2 weeks (14 days) without electricity in the aftermath of that hurricane. Believe me, I got a taste of just how precious bottled water, ice, batteries, generators, fuel, etc., can become.

I suggest you have a supply of food and water to last at least 2 weeks. A month would be even better. Personally, I can live a long time on tuna fish or peanut butter. You can purchase MREs from a variety of sources, as well as “camp-style” packaged food from stores such as Academy Sports & Outdoors. Of course, bottled water is available everywhere during normal times. Stock up! Plus, I suggest you have some water purification tablets or a Katadyn water filter on hand. And, if you are able, prepare to grow your own food. Canning food is another very helpful hedge against deprivation. If your parents were like mine, this was standard operating procedure.

Get a generator. Keep a supply of fuel on hand. Stay stocked up on batteries, candles, portable lights, first aid supplies, and personal hygiene items–especially toilet paper. Trust me, during times of intense and prolonged disaster, toilet paper could become more valuable than money. I also suggest you never run out of lighters or matches. You never know when you’ll need to build a fire, and during a prolonged survival situation, fire could save your life. If you live in a cold weather climate, you probably already have some sort of wood stove or fireplace.

Obviously, you need to take stock of your clothing. Do you have clothes suitable for extended outdoor activity? What about boots? During a disaster, you would trade your best suit from Neiman Marcus for a good pair of boots. Do you have gloves? Insulated underwear? What about camouflage clothing? These could become essential outerwear in the right conditions. Plus, any “bug-out” bag will need to include spare clothing.

Communication and medical provisions are also a high priority in any kind of emergency. How will you communicate with your loved ones when the phones (including cell phones) go down? A preordained rally point (or safe house) might be something to think about. And what about medical supplies? Do you have enough to take care of routine (and not-so-routine) emergencies? What about your prescription drugs? How long could you function if you were cut off from your druggist for any length of time? Think about it now.

And one more suggestion, while we’re on this subject: the best resources in the world are of little use if one is physically incapable of making good use of them. In other words, GET IN SHAPE. During any kind of emergency situation, physical exertion and stamina become immensely important.


I suggest you have at least some cash on hand. Just about any and all disasters will result in banks being closed for extended periods of time. That also means credit card purchases being suspended. You need to have enough cash to be able to purchase essential goods (if they are even available) for an undetermined amount of time.

Of course, some survival gurus insist that during any cataclysmic climate, precious metals will become the only reliable currency. But when most of us are trying to feed our families and pay our bills, it is difficult to get excited about buying gold and silver. Obviously, I would never recommend that anyone jeopardize the present on the altar of the future. My parents made it through the Great Depression with canned goods and garden vegetables; gold and silver were certainly not a priority with them. On the other hand, a little gold and silver could go a long way in a prolonged emergency–if you can afford it without jeopardizing present needs.

In fact, in a disaster, what is considered a valuable commodity can change rather quickly, as the barter system takes a life of its own. What is valuable is determined by what you need and how badly you need it. In a prolonged disaster, simple things such as toilet paper, canned goods, ammunition, and clothing could become extremely valuable; while cars, video games, televisions, etc., could be reduced to junk status. In antiquity, wars were fought over things such as salt.

Speaking of cars, remember that during a prolonged “national emergency” that might involve some sort of nuclear attack or widespread civil unrest, an Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) might be employed; in which case, most every late model vehicle would be completely inoperable. Accordingly, if one can keep an older, pre-computer-age vehicle in good working order, he or she might be driving the only non-government vehicle capable of going anywhere.


Needless to say, during any kind of disaster, your safety and protection will be completely up to you. If you really think that the police are going to be able to protect you during an upheaval, you are living in a dreamworld.

In both the New Orleans and Los Angeles disasters, police protection was non-existent. Lawless gangs quickly took control of the streets, and people were left to either defend themselves or swiftly become the helpless prey of violent marauders. In fact, in New Orleans, some of the policemen actually abandoned their oaths to uphold the law and joined with the criminals, turning their weapons upon the public.

Face it, folks: in any kind of disaster, you must be able to defend yourself, or you and your family will be meat for these animals of society that will quickly descend without mercy upon the unprepared, unsuspecting souls around them. This requires that you be armed! It also requires that you be skilled enough to be able to efficiently use your arms.

Therefore, I strongly suggest that you purchase firearms sufficient to keep you and your family safe, and also that you practice sufficiently to know how to use them.

Now, when it comes to a discussion of which firearms are preferable for self-defense, the suggestions are as varied as the people who proffer them. These are my suggestions:

I believe every man (along with his wife and children of adequate age) should be proficient with the following weapons: a handgun in .38 caliber or above, a .22 rifle, a center-fire hunting rifle, a semi-automatic battle rifle, and a shotgun.

My personal preference for a self-defense handgun is either a .45 ACP 1911 (either Colt or Kimber) or a .40 S&W. In the .40 caliber, my favorite is a Glock 23. In the 1911, I like the Commander size configuration. I also like the Glock 21, 30, and 36 in .45 caliber. My wife prefers to carry a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver in the snub-nose, J-frame configuration. But this is primarily due to the reduced weight of these weapons for carry purposes. If needed, she could make a good accounting of herself with a Glock 19 in 9mm. If you are someone who has never owned and seldom fired a handgun, I recommend you buy a Glock. They are as simple as revolvers to operate, reliable, and almost indestructible. Plus, they provide increased magazine capacity, and are safe. They are also very easy to disassemble and clean. Of course, in dangerous game territory, you will need the power of a .45 Long Colt, .44 Magnum, or even a .454 Casull. These calibers are not for the limp-wristed, but when one is facing a brown bear or mountain lion, it is what one will need to survive. Plus, when your life is on the line, you’ll never feel the recoil.

For a .22 rifle, I really like the Ruger 10/22. For a hunting rifle, my suggestion is either a .270 or .30-06 caliber bolt-action rifle. I prefer the Remington Model 700 BDL or Browning X-Bolt, but there are several fine weapons in this configuration and caliber by numerous manufacturers. In dangerous game territory, a Marlin .45-70 could be a lifesaver. For a battle rifle, I suggest an AR-15-style weapon (I prefer Bushmaster) in .223 caliber or a .308 Springfield M1A. For a shotgun, I suggest a 12-gauge pump. Here I prefer a Winchester Model 1300, which is not made anymore. So, you’ll probably have to choose between Mossberg and Remington. For ladies, however, a 20-gauge shotgun is probably a better choice, and at “bad breath” range (where a shotgun shines, anyway), it is just as lethal.

Whatever you choose, practice with it to the point that you are able to use it proficiently. And be sure you stock up on ammunition. A gun without ammo is reduced to being either an expensive club or a cumbersome paperweight.

Go to your local independent sporting goods store (I don’t recommend the large national chain stores to do your firearms shopping) and get to know your hometown firearms dealer. Most of these people are kind and helpful folks who will be more than happy to assist you in finding exactly what type of firearm is suitable for you and your family. If you live in the Pensacola, Florida, area, a visit with Rick Bankston at Buck and Bass on Pine Forest Road is highly recommended. He is a fine Christian gentleman and very knowledgeable in all things gun. His phone number is 850-944-5692. Give him a call.

Spiritual Power:

I firmly believe that man is created to have fellowship with his Creator-God. I really don’t know how people can face the uncertain future that we currently face without the spiritual knowledge, wisdom, comfort, and power that is made available through Jesus Christ. I believe the maxim is true: “Wise men still seek Him.” I strongly suggest that you seek to possess a personal relationship with God’s only begotten Son. In truth, spiritual preparation is far and away the most important preparation of all. Accordingly, be sure to pack a copy of God’s Word in your survival gear.

That we are facing challenging days is a certainty. Exactly what that means is yet to be determined. I trust that some of my suggestions will help you be better prepared for what lies before us. Plus, here is an excellent online Survival Blog chock-full of great suggestions and resources for all things survival. Check it out here.

I am sure that I have left out several items that others more qualified than me would include. I welcome their suggestions, as I am always desirous to learn from those who are wiser and more experienced. In the meantime, remember your Boy Scout motto: “Be Prepared.”

P.S. It’s almost time to print THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS. To reserve (or pre-pay) your copies, click here.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link.

© 2010 Chuck Baldwin – All Rights Reserved


Supreme Court taking aim at the gun debate

By Kristin A. Goss

The Supreme Court is poised to forbid cities and states from banning handguns, bringing an anticlimactic end to a political firefight that petered out decades ago.

Court-watchers expect the ruling in McDonald vs. City of Chicago to have little immediate policy impact outside the Windy City. And the ruling is unlikely to alter the policy agenda of gun control advocates, who haven’t pushed handgun bans for 30 years.

But the ruling could open the door for a long-overdue public reckoning about the place of firearms in civil society. Such a debate is especially timely as gun rights advocates increasingly exert their political muscle by staging armed “musters” — or assemblies — in national parks and by openly carrying pistols to public meetings, to legislators’ offices, even to Whole Foods and Starbucks.

For decades, gun politics has been fought on two battlefields: a policy battlefield and a cultural one.

On the policy battlefield, gun control and gun rights advocates have sparred over issues such as background checks on gun purchases and protocols for granting permits to carry concealed weapons. Each side assembled favorable data, studies and analysis, all of which mattered very little because the real battle — the one that influenced political decisionmakers — was occurring on the cultural battlefield.

To date, gun rights forces, led by the 4-million-member National Rifle Association, have dominated that battle. Many base their civic identity on the belief they alone can save American democracy from the designs of power-mad politicians backed by an easily swayed populace.

The pistol-packing patriot narrative hinges on a core argument: that any gun regulation, no matter how modest, is one step down a “slippery slope” to inevitable tyranny. With unwitting help from early gun control supporters, who advocated handgun bans as the only sensible approach to spiraling crime rates, the slippery slope argument by the 1970s had become gun rights advocates’ political trump card.

Then and today, gun-control forces have countered the NRA’s cultural narrative with arguments rooted in crime data, moral outrage and seemingly self-evident truths about the connection between gun proliferation and lethal violence. But gun-control forces have not really engaged the pistol-packing patriot narrative with a counter-narrative rooted in civic values. They have tried to fight a culture war without a cultural identity.

Enter the Supreme Court. Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, the court invalidated Washington’s 33-year-old handgun ban. The court found it is an individual’s constitutional right to possess a gun in the home for self-defense — but left open the possibility that an array of existing gun regulations would be perfectly constitutional.

If in the McDonald case the justices follow the Heller reasoning, they will erect a constitutional wall halfway down the slippery slope. By protecting gun possession, the court will strip gun rights advocates of their road-to-tyranny narrative.

By endorsing a constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense, the court will have delivered a moral victory to gun rights advocates. But by leaving open the possibility for gun regulation in a free society, the court will also have created space for a values-based debate long precluded by the trump card of tyranny. Let’s have that discussion.

Kristin A. Goss is assistant professor of public policy and political science at Duke University and author of “Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America” (Princeton University Press, 2009).


The 3rd Annual West Coast SxS Fun Shoot

The 3rd Annual West Coast SxS Fun Shoot will be Saturday June 26th and is quickly approaching.

It will again be sponsored by New Era Ammunition, but there is a change in venue.

The last 2 years it has been at Seaway Gun Club.  This year the SxS Fun Shoot will be hosted by Pine Ridge Sporting Clays in Shelby, Michigan.  They just opened their doors and are eager to put on a first class shoot!  They are conveniently located between Muskegon and Ludington with US 131 only 30 minutes to the east.

You can visit their website at

The shoot will consist of 100 targets for $40 with lunch included.

Pine Ridge is going to set up a special 30 bird 5 stand course and 70 bird sporting clays course which will be SxS friendly with hunting type situation targets.

New Era Ammunition will again provide shotgun shells for door prize drawings.  You can visit their website at

Please RSVP by Monday June 14th to ensure we will have enough food for lunch and these special targets will be set.  To RSVP you can email me at or call (231) 301-1094.


Obama Moves to Silence Gun Groups and Other Political Opponents — Bill clears committee hurdle, going to the House floor soon

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

Tuesday, June 8, 2010

Fresh from his efforts to seize government control of the health services sector (ObamaCare) and the financial markets (“finance reform”), Barack Obama has a new priority:  silence his political opposition.

As satisfying as it was for Obama to seize control of one-sixth of the economy, he has had to suffer protest from the “little people” (like us).  So he is pushing the Orwellian “DISCLOSE” bill (HR 5175) to make sure gun groups and other pro-freedom forces cannot mobilize their members in the upcoming elections.

When Obama says “disclose,” what he really means is “disclose gun group membership lists”

Not surprisingly, these efforts to shut down free speech don’t apply to Obama allies, like Democratic-leaning labor unions.  They only apply to groups which are not reliable Obama allies, like Gun Owners of America.

But, for those groups whose free speech is targeted for Obama’s wrath under this bill, the consequences are severe:

* Under Title II of the bill, GOA (and other groups, as well as many bloggers) who merely mention public officials within 60 days of an election could be required to file onerous disclosures — potentially including their membership lists.

* Also under Title II, GOA could be required to spend as much as half of the time of a 30-second ad on government-written disclosures.

* In addition, Sections 201 through 203 would potentially put the government’s snooping eyes on any American who voices a political opinion, despite the fact that the Supreme Court, in Buckley v. Valeo, declared that Americans have a right to voice their opinion to an unlimited extent, if unconnected with a political campaign.

Here’s an idea:  If Obama is so irritated at the Supreme Court’s defense of political free speech by groups like GOA, why doesn’t he apply his sleazy new rules to his political allies, as well?

ACTION: Please urge your congressman to vote against the anti-gun HR 5175.  This bill has moved out of committee and has now been placed on the House calendar.

You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at to send a pre-written message to your Representative.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Representative:

I urge you to oppose HR 5175, a bill that will deny the free speech rights of all Americans.  Under Title II of this bill:

* Groups like Gun Owners of America (and other groups, as well as many bloggers) who merely mention public officials within 60 days of an election could be required to file onerous disclosures — potentially including their membership lists — even though the Supreme Court has previously ruled in NAACP v. Alabama that membership lists (like those of GOA’s) are off limits to government control.

* Also, groups like GOA and the NRA could be required to spend as much as half of the time of a 30-second ad on government-written disclosures.

* In addition, Sections 201 through 203 would potentially put the government’s snooping eyes on any American who voices a political opinion, despite the fact that the Supreme Court, in Buckley v. Valeo, declared that Americans have a right to voice their opinion to an unlimited extent, if unconnected with a political campaign.

Here’s an idea: If Obama is so irritated at the Supreme Court’s defense of political free speech by groups like GOA, why doesn’t he apply the new rules in HR 5175 to his political allies (like the labor unions), as well?

Suffice it to say, if you care anything about the First or Second Amendments, you will vote against HR 5175.  GOA will be scoring this vote on their rating of Congress.


Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable.

To subscribe to free, low-volume GOA alerts, go to: Change of e-mail address may also be made at that location.

To unsubscribe send a message to with the word unsubscribe in the subject line or click on the link at bottom.

Problems, questions or comments? Please visit or call 703-321-8585 during normal east coast business hours.


News Rifle Test Blamed for Nosler Bullet Plant Blast


Rifle Test Blamed for Nosler Bullet Plant Blast

See More News 6/7/2010

Comments (6)

A preliminary investigation has determined that a rifle fired in an underground test tunnel at a bullet plant in Bend sparked a fire that set off a large explosion earlier this week.
Delta Waterfowl CommitmentBEND, Ore. (AP) — A preliminary investigation has determined that a rifle fired in an underground test tunnel at a bullet plant in Bend sparked a fire that set off a large explosion earlier this week.

Fire officials told KTVZ-TV on Saturday the rifle was being tested at Nosler Inc. by an employee in a concrete underground firing range used for ballistics testing.

A host of local, state and federal agencies wrapped up their investigation at the scene on Saturday and the building was released to the company.

Nosler officials also released a revised estimated value of $2.8 million for the building and $12.9 million for the contents on Saturday but said its insurance company was not ready to release a damage estimate.

No serious injuries were reported in the Wednesday fire and explosion.





BELLEVUE, WA – Wednesday’s mass shooting in northwest England is more proof that restrictive gun laws do not prevent horrible criminal acts, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

Wire service and British news agency reports say 12 people are dead and 25 people are wounded, and suspected gunman Derrick Bird is among the fatalities. It appears he died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

“In 1996,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb, “the government cracked down on gun ownership, banning handguns and placing severe restrictions on long guns following the Dunblane Massacre of 16 school children by Thomas Hamilton. In 1987, with strict gun laws in place, Michael Ryan murdered 16 people in Hungerford.

“American gun prohibitionists have frequently held up the gun laws of Great Britain as their model,” he continued. “They have created the impression that English-style gun laws would prevent outrages in this country. Today’s shooting spree, which apparently left victims in 30 different locations, should forever put the lie to this argument.

“Like all victim disarmament laws and regulations,” Gottlieb explained, “the laws now in place in England only created a risk-free environment for the gunman to carry out his despicable act. America knows from experience what happens when such killers are confronted by determined armed citizens. A gunman was stopped by an off-duty police officer out of his jurisdiction at Salt Lake City’s Trolley Square in 2007. Another shooter was stopped in his tracks at a church in Colorado Springs that same year. An armed customer at a restaurant in Anniston, Alabama prevented a mass shooting in 1999. An armed high school vice principal stopped Pearl, Mississippi gunman Luke Woodham. Two armed students stopped a gunman at the Appalachian Law School in 2002.

When armed Americans fight back,” he stated, “shooting sprees are stopped. The architects of British gun laws, and those who would force such laws on the United States, should take a lesson from that.

“We don’t know why Derrick Bird opened fire,” Gottlieb concluded. “We may never know. What we do know is that restrictive gun laws did not prevent him from shooting. From our experience, an armed citizen might have stopped him cold.”

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States. The Citizens Committee can be reached by phone at (425) 454-4911, on the Internet at or by email to

Chicago shooting shows why Mayor Daley doesn’t ‘get it’

By Alan Gottlieb and Dave Workman

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley doesn’t get it about firearms and personal safety, and after the highly-publicized self-defense shooting in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side on Wednesday May 26, he should fold his tent, shut his mouth and go away.

The U.S. Supreme Court appears poised to nullify the city’s Draconian handgun ban, and nothing clarifies Daley’s dilemma with guns more dramatically than the slaying of would-be home invader Anthony “Big Ant” Nelson, a 29-year-old career thug who has, according to the Chicago Tribune, a “13-page rap sheet that includes a number of drug and weapons convictions dating to 1998, according to police and court records.” This neighborhood predator made what nationally-recognized self-defense expert Massad Ayoob calls “a fatal error in the victim selection process.”

Nelson reportedly fired a shot from a handgun – you know, they’re banned in Chicago, and convicted felons like “Big Ant” aren’t supposed to have them anyway; yet another failure of gun control – through the bedroom window of an 80-year-old Army veteran who served in the Korean War. Most likely to Nelson’s great, and terminal, surprise, the older man fired back, with his own handgun that almost certainly was not registered in the city. Had he followed the law, this gentleman, his wife, and possibly their 12-year-old grandson who was in the next room might all be dead right now.

Fortunately, thanks to the Illinois legislature’s override of Rod Blagojevich’s veto of SB 2165 in November 2004, the older gentleman will not face prosecution. That was the “Hale DeMar” act, which protects homeowners who shoot in self-defense even if there is a local ordinance against handgun possession. DeMar shot a burglar in his Wilmette home and was initially charged for violating that community’s handgun ban, but public outrage forced the Cook County prosecutor to drop the charge.

The question remains in this case whether the old gentleman will get his gun back from the police when the investigation is completed.

Mayor Daley wants his citizens, including elderly people, to remain disarmed while only someone living in monumental denial would believe that creeps like Nelson might be deterred from packing guns illegally. He has practiced anti-gun demagoguery for years, but that may soon come to a screeching halt, not only because of an affirmative high court ruling in the case of McDonald v. City of Chicago – the Second Amendment Foundation’s case currently being mulled by the Supreme Court – but also because public reaction to the Nelson shooting is decidedly in support of the man who shot him.

Chicago residents have grown weary of living in dangerous neighborhoods where, because of Daley’s anti-gun policies that defend the city’s ban, they have been stripped of the tools to fight back. It is their plight against armed criminals like Nelson that compelled SAF to join with the Illinois State Rifle Association and four Chicago residents to sue the city. Reaction among Chicago residents to Wednesday’s fatal shooting clearly demonstrates that the public supports this lawsuit.

While Daley appears at a press event and suggests he might like to poke a gun barrel into the rump of a reporter and fire a round, neighbors of the Army veteran who killed Nelson in self-defense, along with a columnist for the Chicago Sun Times are telling the mayor that he needs to “come up with a better solution (to crime) than just saying ‘turn in your guns’.”

Daley’s stubborn defense of his city’s handgun ban shows him to be so out of touch with the public, and with the reality of his city’s crime problem, that he may not even be jolted to good sense by a Supreme Court loss.

Well, here is the reality: Richard Daley’s policies are directly responsible for people like Nelson, because the Chicago gun ban has emboldened Windy City thugs to prey on good people they know will be disarmed. Tough luck for Nelson that one courageous older man – a man who had been robbed at gunpoint last year in his own home for $150 – had the fortitude and good sense to arm himself in spite of Daley’s ban, and now his neighborhood is “one short” of the kind of scum that the Chicago ban has essentially protected for more than a quarter-century.

Alan Gottlieb is executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation. Dave Workman is senior editor of Gun Week. They are co-authors of ‘America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age.’



BELLEVUE, WA – Yet another high-profile shooting this morning of a criminal by an armed Chicago homeowner further reinforces the Second Amendment Foundation’s justification for its lawsuit to overturn the city’s handgun ban.

SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb said the early-morning shooting in the city’s South Austin neighborhood involved a fleeing felon who had run from police with a large volume of narcotics, and crashed through the window of the gun owner’s home. The unidentified armed citizen reportedly has a valid Firearm Owner’s Identification Card, according to the Chicago Tribune.

“This is the second time in a week that an armed private citizen has fired in self-defense against a criminal who was storming into his residence,” Gottlieb noted. “Today’s incident only amplifies our justification for our lawsuit to strike down Chicago’s insidious handgun ban.”

The wounded suspect was identified as Aaron Marshall, whose criminal history includes felony convictions on drug and weapons charges.

Our lawsuit against the city was brought because people like Marshall roam the streets and neighborhoods of Chicago, and citizens are essentially defenseless unless they violate the handgun ban,” Gottlieb stated. “Police cannot be everywhere all of the time, and the policies of Mayor Richard Daley and his administration have done less than nothing to make citizens safe from these thugs. Chicago residents should have the same right of self-defense as any other American citizen, but they need the right tools for the job.

“The homeowner in this morning’s incident, just like the 80-year-old Korean War veteran who fatally shot another thug last week, did the city a favor,” he said, “and he apparently will not be charged, thanks to a state law that protects such people, even where handguns are banned.

“Armed citizens,” Gottlieb said, “are doing more to fight violent crime than Daley has done in his entire time in office.”

The Second Amendment Foundation ( is the nations oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.