I would like to expand the Blogging pool here at Liberty1st so if you are a conservative / libertarian wanting to get a start in Blogging email me at "blog at liberty1st.org". Since Dave and I are both from the Great Lakes area it would be nice to keep a theme going but not necessary. Just let me know what part of the country you are from.

All that is necessary is a libertarian perspective with a Conservative / Right of Center slant. However, there is no political line you have to toe or political party you have to support. Any politician or act from a politician that infringes on liberty is fair game.

And my rules are very simple:

1. No making or spreading wild conspiracy theories.
2. No personal attacks on anyone ever.
3. Be prepared to back up everything you say.
4. Keep it clean.
5. 90% or more of the content should focus on Liberty, Freedom, Politics, etc.

So if you like what Dave and I do here and are interested in contributing just send and email to "blog at liberty1st.org"

More self defense goodness from the 2006 Michigan Congress.

First there is Senate Bill 1185, which bans lawsuits in cases of legitimate self defense and then on the CPL side of Self Defense there is House Bill 5217, which makes CPL applicant information confidential.

It seems as though the Michigan congress is on the verge of recognizing the People's absolute right to self defense. I wonder if Governor Grandholm will agree?

Titled:   UK TIMES SMEARS OUR MARINES (UPDATED WITH RESPONSE)

Michelle Malkin is doing a good job keeping on top of the latest press outrage.

Posted on June 1st in the UK Times:

Posted in the same paper, April 2005:

Yup, same picture - different story.

Using pictures of a terrorist execution to smear the Marines.

Shameless.

Titled:   For Heart Health, Liquor Is Quicker for Women and Slower for Men

An alcoholic drink a day can significantly reduce the risk for heart disease in men, a new study finds, but women get almost the same benefit with only one drink a week.

For men, the more they drank, the lower the risk. One drink a week lowered the risk by about 7 percent, two to four drinks by 22 percent and five or six drinks a week by 29 percent. Those who drank every day had a 41 percent lower risk of heart disease than those who did not drink at all. Even among men who had up to 35 drinks per week, the protection persisted.

With women, the trend was different. One drink a week lowered the risk by 36 percent, but daily drinking lowered it by 35 percent. In other words, for women, alcohol consumption had a significant protective effect, but the frequency of drinking had none.

Dr. Morten Gronbaek of the Danish National Institute of Public Health, the study's senior author, said he would not hesitate to recommend a drink a day to certain patients. "If I were talking to a patient, about 50 with a high coronary risk profile, who I knew wasn't at risk for alcohol abuse, and who didn't drink at all, I wouldn't hesitate to tell him that a glass of wine a day might be a good idea," he said. "But people who are light drinkers should certainly not be advised to drink more."

There is a caveat though:

"You shouldn't avoid exercise," he said, "and then try to compensate by drinking."

Apparently drinking is not exercise for more than your right arm...

Cheers!

Michigan's repeal of the Duty to Retreat is making its way though congress.

Senate Bill 1046

Introduced by Sen. Alan L. Cropsey on February 15, 2006, to create a new law establishing that a person who uses deadly force for self defense in his or her home, contiguous private property or occupied vehicle need not first flee from a threatening attacker, and that a person who unlawfully and forcibly enters one of these is presumed is to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence, with certain minor exceptions. This would place the “home is my castle” doctrine in statute. Also, to establish that a law-abiding person who is attacked in a place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat, and can “stand his or her ground” and meet force with force, including deadly force if necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.

Text and Analysis here.

House Bill 5142

Introduced by Rep. Tom Casperson on September 7, 2005, to establish in law that a person who uses deadly force for self defense in his or her home or contiguous private property need not first flee from a threatening attacker.

Text and Analysis here.

In an article a few months back, I wrote about colored guns.

I would imagine enterprising bank robbers will soon be sporting orange-tipped weapons to give them a few seconds edge on the police and concealed license holders. If they're willing to rob a bank armed, what makes you think they won't apply some orange paint?

"Just think about how sick it is," Bloomberg said. "What possible reason can you give to want to paint a gun so it looks like a child's toy gun, other than to put a police officer in one of those impossible positions?"

Although no painted guns have been recovered in connection with crimes, Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said, the proposed law is a pre-emptive move, intended to stop criminals from potentially tricking police officers with candy-colored weapons.

Titled: Gun buybacks make return to Boston

Boston officials said yesterday they have raised approximately $40,000 to resume a gun buyback program, which will offer $200 Target gift cards for each working gun that is turned in.

"We want guns that are on the street causing the violence and maiming and hurting and killing people."

Old guns, particularly dangerous ones, are now worth $200 in Boston, no questions asked...

That should attract a fair few into the area and provide much needed funds for the purchase of newer, more effective models.

I am honored and humbled by the hard work, dedication and sacrifice of those that have fought and died for this great country. Thank You.

Also may God bless those who have served or are currently serving as well as their families, who have sacrificed more then I can ever imagine. Thank you all.

Titled:    Smart gun' shows promise - and promises controversy

As police in Philadelphia struggle to stop a scourge of shootings, some New Jersey engineers say they are closing in on a "smart" solution: a gun that can be fired only by its owner.

The prototype, developed at the New Jersey Institute of Technology in Newark, has pressure sensors embedded in the gun handle that recognize a person's unique grip.

The team says a commercial model is up to five years away, but if it works, it will trigger a singular - and controversial - state law. Within three years, all handguns sold in New Jersey would have to be personalized, with this or some other recognition technology.

...

Various smart-gun efforts have flamed out in the past, amid vocal skepticism by the National Rifle Association. Many gun owners chafe at the notion of any restrictions on their Second Amendment right to bear arms, and warn that any such modifications would make guns more expensive.

Gun-control advocates, meanwhile, are split, with some warning that personalized firearms would give owners a false sense of security.

...

Once the shooter squeezes the trigger, the grip sensors spring into action, recording the pressure for one-tenth of a second. In that moment, the pressure applied by each finger varies enough that engineers can distinguish between shooters with a high degree of reliability. A grip's signature does not vary significantly from firing to firing, even in stressful situations, researchers have found.

A year and a half ago, a prototype recognized authorized users nine out of 10 times. Now, the rate lies between 95 and 99 percent, said Michael Cody, a computer science engineer on the team.

At the very least, the technology would cut down on violence committed with the 500,000 handguns that are stolen each year, said Stephen Teret, public health professor at Johns Hopkins University. "If all those guns had been personalized guns," Teret said, "they would be useless when they were stolen."

What the news article doesn't mention is that most of this violence is the result of street gangs, drug gangs, et al. Frankly, I wouldn't worry about the 28,000 legally licensed citizens concealed-carrying. I'd be more concerned about the thousands of criminals who haven't bothered (and never will) obtaining a permit. They're the ones commiting mayhem. Bust-up the mutant gangs, throw them in jail, and watch the violence decrease. Don't start leaving the haplass honest folk defenseless.

Titled: Losing Freedom, The UN Attacks the Second Amendment

July 4 is Independence Day. Many across America will celebrate the day that America declared itself a free and sovereign people. People will cook out on the grill, have family get togethers, and just celebrate freedom in general. However, the UN has plans for this day as well - and these plans are not at all celebrating freedom. These plans are sinister in character and threaten our sovereignty as a free nation.

The United Nations has decided to hosts it annual global gun ban conference called the 2006 Small Arms Review Conference or RevCon during the fourth of July holiday period right here on American soil. The UN ad its liberal allies in Canada, Australia and liberals right here in America would like nothing more than to erase the Second Amendment from the constitution and ban all firearms around the world.

This is a real threat to freedom and I encourage you as a free American to voice your opposition to the UN for its anti-American sentiments and its anti-gun stance. There is no way (under a conservative administration) that America will give in to the UN's demands that America disarm its citizens and destroy a vital part of the constitution. Having the Second Amendment ensures that every American is entitled to won a firearm for hunting, sport, collection, self-defense, or for whatever reason there may be to own one.

"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." -- Second Amendment, U.S. Constitution

Titled: Law-abiding residents should be able to protect themselves

Since the Michigan Legislature is currently considering legislation affecting self-defense measures, Dick DeVos issued the following statement regarding the package of legislation known as the "Home is Your Castle" doctrine:

"There have been and will continue to be many debates surrounding the rights given to us in the Second Amendment.  Let me be clear:  I support the rights granted to us by our Founding Fathers to keep and bear arms, and that is why I support the legislation known as the 'Home is Your Castle' doctrine.

"Protecting loved ones from danger is a natural response and people shouldn't be punished for protecting their family.  Every person should have the right to defend oneself and their family in the case of a forceful and unlawful break-in, without the fear of being sued for civil damages."

Yes indeed! Although he is wrong about one thing. Our rights were not granted to us by the founding fathers. And I quote. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Titled: Michigan "Castle Doctrine" Package Moving in the State Senate

The Michigan State Senate will hear the “Castle Doctrine” legislation as early as Tuesday, May 23.  This critically important legislation will help the citizens of Michigan in two ways:

• protects your right to self-defense, and ensures you do not have a “duty to retreat” from a violent attacker; and 
• gives immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force.

Lifted from the NRA-ILA Site

Titled:     Seven Indonesian Bird Flu Cases Linked to Patients

All seven people infected with bird flu in a cluster of Indonesian cases can be linked to other patients, according to disease trackers investigating possible human-to-human transmission of the H5N1 virus. A team of international experts has been unable to find animals that might have infected the people, the World Health Organization said in a statement today.

In one case, a 10-year- old boy who caught the virus from his aunt may have passed it to his father, the first time officials have seen evidence of a three-person chain of infection, an agency spokeswoman said. Six of the seven people have died.