This website is devoutly dedicated to all of Larry's friends and associates, both early and late, who have influenced and mentored him. However, it also should be noted that, being who they are, a majority of them have been late most of the time.

Thursday, February 28, 2013

From a State Police Troop Commander

Good afternoon Delegate Kump,

This is just a quick note to say thanks for your service in the West Virginia Legislature.

If you need anything from the Panhandle while you are away from home, please do not hesitate to call (feel free to share this invitation with all Panhandle representatives).

Also, thanks for your obvious strong support of our Constitution, more particularly our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms. I believe this amendment allows us to protect and secure all other rights given to us by our Creator.

Furthermore, I know you have always supported West Virginia State Police issues, and I appreciate your solid efforts on our behalf concerning future matters that will allow the West Virginia State Police to continue our longstanding service to the citizens of this great State.

Hope all is well in Charleston.

Montani Semper Liberi!


Captain Rob Blair
Troop 2 Commander
West Virginia State Police
Kearneysville, West Virginia 25430

Journal Legislative News #1

Click on the link below to read the entire news article:
Weekly Legislative Review - | News, sports, jobs, community information for Martinsburg - The Journal


Editor's Note: Each week during the 81st West Virginia Legislature, The Journal is providing space and inviting comments from all members of the...


Tuesday, February 26, 2013

2013 Eastern Panhandle News #3

Just So You Know:

Over my ongoing protests, the West Virginia Senators and Delegates in the bi-partisan Eastern Panhandle Legislative Meetings previously decided to revise our previous practice and keep a portion of our weekly Monday meetings closed to the public and confidential.

However, my position is and always has been that our Eastern Panhandle legislator meetings should be ever so transparent and consistently open to public scrutiny and participation.

*Friday, February 1st: the 2013 Session organizational meeting of the Eastern Panhandle Legislative Caucus, Holiday Inn, Martinsburg, West Virginia.

Postscript: "Vox Populi est Vox Dei!"

Monday, February 25, 2013

2013 Eastern Panhandle News #2

Meeting this morning in the State House, were Eastern Panhandle legislators were Delegates Paul Espinosa, Ruth Rowan, Larry D. Kump, Steven Skinner, Mike Folk, Jason Barrett, Gary Howell, John Overington, Daryl Cowles, and Eric Householder as well as Senators
Don Cookman, Craig Blair, John Unger, and Herb Snyder.

Issues discussed by the caucus, but not limited to, included:

* Education. Concern was expressed by some legislators about mandates from Charleston that restrict county school boards' autonomy. Higher education issues, as well as Board of Education elections (HB 2555), were included in the discussion.

* The possible impact of the recent State Supreme Court overturning of the mandate for the Kanawha County Board of Education to provide a specified amount of funding to their local libraries and how that would affect other county libraries, especially in Berkeley County.

* Problems with the tremendous differential between the cost of housing in the Eastern Panhandle and some other regions of West Virginia, especially in regard to the salaries of state employees and teachers.

* The possibility of another circuit and family judge for the Eastern Panhandle.

* The Common Interest Ownership Act (Homeowners' Associations) legislative proposal, which still is pending introduction but will be forthcoming.

* The possibility of a formal agreement with the Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) train which would give West Virginia a voice in the MARC operating decisions.

* Bar closing hours.

* Local home rule for cities and counties.

Thursday, February 21, 2013

From My Green Beret Friends

Dear Larry,
This is the humble letter that we put together. We Green Berets have seen many countries that have been dominated by tyranny by the lack of power of the people to defend themselves from despots. I'll let the letter speak for itself...

29 Jan 2013

Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned

We are current or former Army Reserve, National Guard, and active duty US Army Special Forces soldiers (Green Berets). We have all taken an oath to " and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.…" The Constitution of the United States is without a doubt the single greatest document in the history of mankind, codifying the fundamental principle of governmental power and authority being derived from and granted through the consent of the governed. Our Constitution established a system of governance that preserves, protects, and holds sacrosanct the individual rights and primacy of the governed as well as providing for the explicit protection of the governed from governmental tyranny and/or oppression. We have witnessed the insidious and iniquitous effects of tyranny and oppression on people all over the world. We and our forebears have embodied and personified our organizational motto, De Oppresso Liber [To Free the Oppressed], for more than a half century as we have fought, shed blood, and died in the pursuit of freedom for the oppressed.

Like you, we are also loving and caring fathers and grandfathers. Like you, we have been stunned, horrified, and angered by the tragedies of Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, Fort Hood, and Sandy Hook; and like you, we are searching for solutions to the problem of gun-related crimes in our society. Many of us are educators in our second careers and have a special interest to find a solution to this problem. However, unlike much of the current vox populi reactions to this tragedy, we offer a different perspective.

First, we need to set the record straight on a few things. The current debate is over so-called "assault weapons" and high capacity magazines. The terms "assault weapon" and "assault rifle" are often confused. According to Bruce H. Kobayashi and Joseph E. Olson, writing in the Stanford Law and Policy Review, "Prior to 1989, the term 'assault weapon' did not exist in the lexicon of firearms. It is a political term, developed by anti-gun publicists to expand the category of assault rifles."

The M4A1 carbine is a U.S. military service rifle - it is an assault rifle. The AR-15 is not an assault rifle. The "AR" in its name does not stand for "Assault Rifle" - it is the designation from the first two letters of the manufacturer's name – ArmaLite Corporation. The AR-15 is designed so that it cosmetically looks like the M4A1 carbine assault rifle, but it is impossible to configure the AR-15 to be a fully automatic assault rifle. It is a single shot semi-automatic rifle that can fire between 45 and 60 rounds per minute depending on the skill of the operator. The M4A1 can fire up to 950 rounds per minute. In 1986, the federal government banned the import or manufacture of new fully automatic firearms for sale to civilians. Therefore, the sale of assault rifles are already banned or heavily restricted!

The second part of the current debate is over "high capacity magazines" capable of holding more than 10 rounds in the magazine. As experts in military weapons of all types, it is our considered opinion that reducing magazine capacity from 30 rounds to 10 rounds will only require an additional 6 -8 seconds to change two empty 10 round magazines with full magazines. Would an increase of 6 –8 seconds make any real difference to the outcome in a mass shooting incident? In our opinion it would not. Outlawing such "high capacity magazines" would, however, outlaw a class of firearms that are "in common use". As such this would be in contravention to the opinion expressed by the U.S. Supreme Court recent decisions.

Moreover, when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban became law in 1994, manufacturers began retooling to produce firearms and magazines that were compliant. One of those ban-compliant firearms was the Hi-Point 995, which was sold with ten-round magazines. In 1999, five years into the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, the Columbine High School massacre occurred. One of the perpetrators, Eric Harris, was armed with a Hi-Point 995. Undeterred by the ten-round capacity of his magazines, Harris simply brought more of them: thirteen magazines would be found in the massacre's aftermath. Harris fired 96 rounds before killing himself.

Now that we have those facts straight, in our opinion, it is too easy to conclude that the problem is guns and that the solution to the problem is more and stricter gun control laws. For politicians, it is politically expedient to take that position and pass more gun control laws and then claim to constituents that they have done the right thing in the interest of protecting our children. Who can argue with that? Of course we all want to find a solution. But, is the problem really guns? Would increasing gun regulation solve the problem? Did we outlaw cars to combat drunk driving?

What can we learn from experiences with this issue elsewhere? We cite the experience in Great Britain. Despite the absence of a "gun culture", Great Britain, with one-fifth the population of the U.S., has experienced mass shootings that are eerily similar to those we have experienced in recent years. In 1987 a lone gunman killed 18 people in Hungerford. What followed was the Firearms Act of 1988 making registration mandatory and banning semi-automatic guns and pump-action shotguns. Despite this ban, on March 13, 1996 a disturbed 43-year old former scout leader, Thomas Hamilton, murdered 16 school children aged five and six and a teacher at a primary school in Dunblane, Scotland. Within a year and a half the Firearms Act was amended to ban all private ownership of hand guns. After both shootings there were amnesty periods resulting in the surrender of thousands of firearms and ammunition. Despite having the toughest gun control laws in the world, gun related crimes increased in 2003 by 35% over the previous year with firearms used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the preceding 12 months. Gun related homicides were up 32% over the same period. Overall, gun related crime had increased 65% since the Dunblane massacre and implementation of the toughest gun control laws in the developed world. In contrast, in 2009 (5 years after the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired) total firearm related homicides in the U.S. declined by 9% from the 2005 high (Source: "FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Master File, Table 310, Murder Victims – Circumstances and Weapons Used or Cause of Death: 2000-2009").

Are there unintended consequences to stricter gun control laws and the politically expedient path that we have started down?

In a recent op-ed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle, Brett Joshpe stated that "Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes."We agree with Kevin D. Williamson (National Review Online, December 28, 2012): "The problem with this argument is that there is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment right that excludes military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear."

"The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story": 'The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.'

The Second Amendment has been ruled to specifically extend to firearms "in common use" by the military by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v Miller (1939). In Printz v U.S. (1997) Justice Thomas wrote: "In Miller we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen's right to possess a sawed-off shot gun because that weapon had not been shown to be "ordinary military equipment" that could "could contribute to the common defense".

A citizen's right to keep and bear arms for personal defense unconnected with service in a militia has been reaffirmed in the U.S. Supreme Court decision (District of Columbia, et al. v Heller, 2008). The Court Justice Scalia wrote in the majority opinion: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.". Justice Scalia went on to define a militia as "… comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense …."

"The Anti-Federalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens' militia would be preserved." he explained.

On September 13, 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban went into effect. A Washington Post editorial published two days later was candid about the ban's real purpose:"[N]o one should have any illusions about what was accomplished [by the ban]. Assault weapons play a part in only a small percentage of crime. The provision is mainly symbolic; its virtue will be if it turns out to be, as hoped, a stepping stone to broader gun control."

In a challenge to the authority of the Federal government to require State and Local Law Enforcement to enforce Federal Law (Printz v United States) the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a decision in 1997. For the majority opinion Justice Scalia wrote: "…. this Court never has sanctioned explicitly a federal command to the States to promulgate and enforce laws and regulations When we were at last confronted squarely with a federal statute that unambiguously required the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program, our decision should have come as no surprise….. It is an essential attribute of the States' retained sovereignty that they remain independent and autonomous within their proper sphere of authority."

So why should non-gun owners, a majority of Americans, care about maintaining the 2nd Amendment right for citizens to bear arms of any kind?

The answer is "The Battle of Athens, TN". The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 "deputies" stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff's office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election. And this is precisely why all Americans should be concerned about protecting all of our right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment!

Throughout history, disarming the populace has always preceded tyrants' accession of power. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all disarmed their citizens prior to installing their murderous regimes. At the beginning of our own nation's revolution, one of the first moves made by the British government was an attempt to disarm our citizens. When our Founding Fathers ensured that the 2nd Amendment was made a part of our Constitution, they were not just wasting ink. They were acting to ensure our present security was never forcibly endangered by tyrants, foreign or domestic.

If there is a staggering legal precedent to protect our 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms and if stricter gun control laws are not likely to reduce gun related crime, why are we having this debate? Other than making us and our elected representatives feel better because we think that we are doing something to protect our children, these actions will have no effect and will only provide us with a false sense of security.

So, what do we believe will be effective? First, it is important that we recognize that this is not a gun control problem; it is a complex sociological problem. No single course of action will solve the problem. Therefore, it is our recommendation that a series of diverse steps be undertaken, the implementation of which will require patience and diligence to realize an effect. These are as follows:

1. First and foremost we support our Second Amendment right in that "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".

2. We support State and Local School Boards in their efforts to establish security protocols in whatever manner and form that they deem necessary and adequate. One of the great strengths of our Republic is that State and Local governments can be creative in solving problems. Things that work can be shared. Our point is that no one knows what will work and there is no one single solution, so let's allow the State and Local governments with the input of the citizens to make the decisions. Most recently the Cleburne Independent School District will become the first district in North Texas to consider allowing some teachers to carry concealed guns. We do not opine as to the appropriateness of this decision, but we do support their right to make this decision for themselves.

3. We recommend that Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) laws be passed in every State. AOT is formerly known as Involuntary Outpatient Commitment (IOC) and allows the courts to order certain individuals with mental disorders to comply with treatment while living in the community. In each of the mass shooting incidents the perpetrator was mentally unstable. We also believe that people who have been adjudicated as incompetent should be simultaneously examined to determine whether they should be allowed the right to retain/purchase firearms.

4. We support the return of firearm safety programs to schools along the lines of the successful "Eddie the Eagle" program, which can be taught in schools by Peace Officers or other trained professionals.

5. Recent social psychology research clearly indicates that there is a direct relationship between gratuitously violent movies/video games and desensitization to real violence and increased aggressive behavior particularly in children and young adults (See Nicholas L. Carnagey, et al. 2007. "The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence" and the references therein. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 43:489-496). Therefore, we strongly recommend that gratuitous violence in movies and video games be discouraged. War and war-like behavior should not be glorified. Hollywood and video game producers are exploiting something they know nothing about. General Sherman famously said "War is Hell!" Leave war to the Professionals. War is not a game and should not be "sold" as entertainment to our children.

6. We support repeal of the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990. This may sound counter-intuitive, but it obviously isn't working. It is our opinion that "Gun-Free Zones" anywhere are too tempting of an environment for the mentally disturbed individual to inflict their brand of horror with little fear of interference. While governmental and non-governmental organizations, businesses, and individuals should be free to implement a Gun-Free Zone if they so choose, they should also assume Tort liability for that decision.

7. We believe that border states should take responsibility for implementation of border control laws to prevent illegal shipments of firearms and drugs. Drugs have been illegal in this country for a long, long time yet the Federal Government manages to seize only an estimated 10% of this contraband at our borders. Given this dismal performance record that is misguided and inept ("Fast and Furious"), we believe that border States will be far more competent at this mission.

8. This is our country, these are our rights. We believe that it is time that we take personal responsibility for our choices and actions rather than abdicate that responsibility to someone else under the illusion that we have done something that will make us all safer. We have a responsibility to stand by our principles and act in accordance with them. Our children are watching and they will follow the example we set.

The undersigned Quiet Professionals hereby humbly stand ever present, ever ready, and ever vigilant.

1100 Green Berets Signed this *Letter

*We have a list of all their names and unlike any MSM outlets we can confirm that over 1100 Green Berets did sign. The list includes Special Forces Major Generals & Special Forces Command Sergeants Major down to the lowest ranking "Green Beret".

Links to other sources of the above letter:

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

2013 Legislative News #4

The following is a list of additional legislative proposals which I have sponsored or cosponsored in the West Virginia House of Delegates:

HJR 28 Taxpayer Bill of Rights (Constitutional Revision Committee) Would amend the West Virginia Constitution to require a two-thirds vote of the Legislature to increase the General Fund of the state budget and for excess taxes collected to be returned to the taxpayers.

HB 2489 Elected Officials Accountability (Judiciary Committee) Would provide that elected public officials or public employees found guilty of misconduct while in office or employed to forfeit their positions.

HB 2555 County School Board Elections (Political Subdivisions Committee) Would change the election of county school boards from Primary to General elections (ensuring more voter participation).

HB 2556 Reduction in Small Town Expenses (Political Subdivisions Committee) Would reduce newspaper printing expenses of financial statements for Class IV municipalities (Such as the Town of Hedgesville).

HB 2557 Whistle-Blowers (Energy, Industry and Labor, Economic Development and Small Business) Would give state employees, who "blow the whistle" on wrong-doing in government, the protection of a grievance procedure and also fine those who harass whistle-blowers.

HB 2560 Self-Defense Rights in Schools (Education) Would allow school administrators, who have proper permits, to carry a concealed weapon on school grounds.

HB 2565 Ballot Access (Judiciary) Would enhance the ability of minor political parties to get on election ballots.

HB 2568 Non-Partisan Election of Judicial Officials (Constitutional Revision) Would provide an "advisory only" voter referendum on whether or not judges and magistrates should be elected on a non-partisan basis.

HB 2872 Firearms while Hunting or Fishing (Judiciary) Would protect the rights of hunters and fishers to carry unloaded firearms.

HB 2575 Prevailing Wages Rates Reform (Energy, Industry and Labor, Economic Development and Small Business) Would require "prevailing wage" rates on public construction to be determined solely by wages within the county.

HB 2576 Eliminate Prevailing Wage Law (Energy, Industry and Labor, Economic Development and Small Business) Would eliminate the current West Virginia "prevailing wage" law.

The above are only a few of the bills that have been and will be introduced in the West Virginia Legislature (See other and future entries for more). All bills first must be heard and voted upon in their assigned legislative committees before receiving further legislative consideration (Committee assignments are listed after each bill number and title above). For information on other bills introduced and which legislators are assigned to which committees, click on the "WV State Legislature" link under "Links" on the right hand side of this webpage.

Monday, February 18, 2013

2013 Eastern Panhandle News #1

State legislators from the Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia met this morning at the State House to discuss legislative issues.

Participating were Senators Craig Blair and Herb Snyder, as well as Delegates John Overington, Jason Barrett, Paul Espinosa, Larry D. Kump, Larry Faircloth, Daryl Cowles, Steven Skinner, Mike Folk, Tiffany Lawrence, and Eric Householder.

A general discussion ensued about the range of possible future issues discussion.

These issues included, but were not limited to: bar closing times, home owners associations, education, workers compensation, home rule, Maryland Area Regional Commuter (MARC) train service, regional jails, and local state government salaries.

Delegate Kump announced that he will soon be introducing legislation to defray the public notification expenses of Class IV Municipalities and to make the non-partisan election of local school boards more friendly to voters by moving the elections of local school boards from the Primary to General elections.

Wednesday, February 13, 2013

2013 Legislative News #3

Today was the first day in the West Virginia Legislature for legislative proposals (bills) to be introduced.

Although a multitude of bills will continue to be introduced in the coming days, here are some of the bills that I introduced today as a sponsor or cosponsor (Committee assignments are listed after each bill number and title):

HB 2009 Voter Rights (Judiciary Committee) Provides the same privacy rights for signers of ballot petitions that are enjoyed by voters in elections.
HB 2010 Employee Freedom of Choice (Energy, Industry, Labor, Economic Development & Small Business Committee) Gives employees the right to join or to refrain from joining a union and provides penalties for harassing employees.
HB 2019 None of the Above (Judiciary) Puts "None of the Above" as a choice on the ballots for elections of state officials.
HB 2027 Non-Partisan Elections (Judiciary) Creates non-partisan elections for state officials, judges, and magistrates.
HB 2218 National Defense Authorization Act Protection (Government Organization Committee) Protects West Virginia citizens and agencies from actions by the United States Armed Forces which violate the United States or West Virginia constitutions.
HB 2374 Child Abuse (Judiciary) Eliminates parole eligibility for child abusers. (Note: This does not eliminate the right to appeal these sentences in court, which is a separate procedure from parole)
HB 2405 Election Reform (Judiciary) Provides for single member delegate districts in all West Virginia House of Delegate districts.

The above are only a few of the bills that have been and will be introduced. All bills must first be heard and voted upon in their assigned committee before receiving further legislative consideration. For information on other bills introduced and which legislators are assigned to which committees, click on the "WV State Legislature" link under "Links" on the right hand side of this webpage.

Monday, February 4, 2013

2013 Legislative News #2

Delegate Larry D. Kump, District #59 (Berkeley-Morgan Counties), makes it a point to consider the principles of economic freedom, individual liberty, and personal accountability as the basis of all his legislative proposals and votes.

He went on to further outline how these principles apply to education reform, substance abuse, the criminal justice system, and taxing the elderly.

Pointing out that elected county boards of education are the only school officials who are directly accountable to the voters, the Falling Waters Delegate proposes that West Virginia's highly centralized, overstaffed, and underperforming education system be revamped. He wants to give much more initiative and authority to local county school boards and to give teachers much more flexibility and say in the classroom. According to Kump, the proposal by some wags to create regional school authorities to determine salaries and other issues only would amount to another "Rube Goldberg" layer of ineffective bureaucracy. He also believes that voters will be much more involved with local school boards if their non-partisan election is moved from Primary to General elections, when more voters participate.

In regard to the growing Mountaineer substance abuse epidemic, Kump says that, in addition to substance abuse and drug addiction treatment programs as alternatives to prison sentences, state lawmakers also need to look at decriminalizing some offenses.

He said, "Why should taxpayers, and also state and local governments, be squeezed and squeezed and squeezed to provide lock-up welfare for prison inmates when there are much better ways to deal with these problems?".

Kump also is proposing legislation that would allow individuals, who have turned their lives around after a past drug related conviction, to have their criminal records expunged if they remain drug free for a period of time.

On the issue of taxation, Delegate Kump notes that thirty-six other states exempt social security benefits and all pensions from state taxes, and the time is long overdue for West Virginia to go and do likewise.

The Firearms Feeding Frenzy

The calumny and reflexive media hysteria since the monstrous mass murders in Connecticut and elsewhere continues with little pause for us to ponder.

Let's not allow the reactions of some panicked and pandering politicians to create even more of a frenetic feeding frenzy out of our heartfelt national sorrow and distress.

Let's absolutely not allow this and other terrible tragedies to be twisted to inadvertently further enable the despicable acts of the mentally ill and morally challenged, creating even more killing fields.

Let's certainly not forget that the previous (and now expired) federal assault weapons ban had no discernable impact to reduce violent crimes.

Let's also not forget that Connecticut already had and has some of the strictest firearms regulations in our nation.

Let's be cautious and consider the emotional bias and even the fallacious fear of firearms by some, which has led to woefully worrisome siege mentality proposals, to further barricade our schools and other public places.


Let's not fall victim to creating a false sense of security with ill-considered proposals.


Let's not continue to attempt to disarm responsible citizens.


Let's not make us and our children even more defenseless prey to  the depravity of more of the same evildoers.

Good grief!


A wise wag previously pointed out that violent crime is not caused by firearms, just as obesity is not caused by spoons.

After all, wasn't it Samuel Colt's invention that first was credited as being "the great equalizer"?

I don't own a personal firearm, but my next door and near neighbors do own them, and I know that the personal safety of all of us is enhanced when responsible citizens have the means of self defense.

A brave teacher was killed, while trying to shield the children.

For want of a defensive firearm, many died, and our nation weeps.