Seattle gun owners can take much credit for the ouster of anti-gun Mayor Greg Nickels in this week’s primary election, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said this morning following what amounted to a concession speech at his press conference.

Nickels came in third in the city’s “Top Two” primary, signaling that voters in Seattle were fed up with his bully pulpit style, and perhaps more than anything, his arrogance, said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. No single episode has better underscored that haughtiness than the mayor’s open defiance of Washington State law that denied him the authority to set up the city’s own restrictive gun laws.

“When the mayor announced last year that he would ban legally-carried firearms from city property when he knew it would be contrary to the state’s preemption statute,” Gottlieb recalled, “it made tens of thousands of Seattle gun owners furious. Nickels insulted their intelligence by promising to ban guns by executive order, which is the height of municipal contempt for the rights of citizens under the state Constitution. He literally threw away their votes.”

CCRKBA Projects Director Thomas McKiddie, a West Seattle resident, said he and his gun-owning fellow Seattleites had simply had enough of the mayor’s condescension toward their rights to be safe on city streets, in parks and on other public property.

“I don’t know a single gun owner in Seattle who voted for Nickels,” McKiddie said. “After he threatened an executive order, he lost the nerve to actually issue one because he knew he would lose that fight in court. Instead, he included gun prohibitions in use contracts for the Seattle Center and other venues. He knew a citywide ban would be unenforceable, and his ouster demonstrates that Seattle gun owners were having none of it.”

“We hope this sends a signal to Nickels’ successor,” Gottlieb observed, “that stirring the wrath of gun owners is a mistake. This week’s primary result in Seattle should stand as a warning to other mayors who signed on with New York’s Michael Bloomberg to trample the firearms rights of their constituents.

“Mayors are not monarchs,” Gottlieb concluded. “They are not above the law. Greg Nickels is going to have a long time to think about that, as he watches this election season from the sidelines.”

With more than 650,000 members and support ers nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) 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.

Glen Wunderlich: “The arrogance of many of today’s politicians indicates they forget how they climbed the ladder in the first place. There are sure to be more of these paybacks for their socialist and left-leaning ways as Americans wake up and begin to stand their ground and defend core values.”

The Second Amendment Foundation today accused MSNBC of using deceptively-edited video from a Phoenix, Arizona anti-tax rally on Monday to invent a racial stereotype in its on-going effort to demonize and marginalize American firearms owners as “racists.”

The MSNBC video, narrated by reporter Contessa Brewer, appearing with “Morning Meeting” host Dylan Ratigan, shows an AR-15 rifle being carried over a man’s shoulder. The man is part of a crowd protesting near the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, where President Barack Obama spoke. Brewer notes on camera, “Yes, there are Second Amendment rights, for sure, but also there are questions about whether this has a racial overtone. I mean, here you have a man of color in the presidency and white people showing up with guns strapped to their waists.”

“What MSNBC purposely did not reveal with the deliberately doctored video is that the man carrying that sport-utility rifle was an African-American,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “MSNBC knows the man was black , yet all they showed in a brief film clip was a close-up of the rifle against the man’s neatly-pressed dress shirt. It was impossible to tell the man’s race.

“This is a detestable attempt to manipulate public sentiment,” he continued, “in MSNBC’s continuing effort to perpetuate a stereotype of gun owners as white racists. It was even suggested during the segment by MSNBC culture critic Toure that it would not be surprising ‘if we see somebody get a chance and take a chance and really try to hurt’ the president.

“By irresponsibly fomenting this kind of racial divisiveness through the use of carefully-edited video,” Gottlieb stated, “MSNBC is not simply reporting news, it is provoking a reaction. If any harm comes to the president, MSNBC’s hate-mongering should be blamed.

“I wonder,” Gottlieb conclude, “if Keith Olbermann is going to name MSNBC as the worst ne ws network in the world.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s 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

Michigan State Rep. Paul Opsommer announced today that he will be introducing a firearm ownership protection package, a group of bills designed to ensure that Michigan citizens who lawfully own firearms are not discriminated against in the hiring process or end up being fired because they are simply exercising their 2nd Amendment Rights.

“Unless firearm ownership is directly related to an established and bona fide occupational requirement for the job there is no reason for an employer to ask questions about whether a potential employee owns or knows how to use a gun”, said Opsommer. “We also need to ensure that employers can not create over-reaching company policies that violate the Constitution and provide an excuse to terminate employees whose political views differ from those of management. People who lawfully own firearms and are following appropriate storage laws should not lose the ability to transport them in privately owned vehicles.”

Such laws have been passed as recently as July in the case of Arizona, and have been passed in ten total states such as Florida and Oklahoma. The law was upheld there by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit after Oklahoma first passed it in response to a dozen employees being fired from their jobs at the Weyerhaeuser paper mill.

“A person who legally owns a firearm needs to have a way to store it as they are going to and from work, home, hunting, or any other lawful purpose”, said Opsommer. “People shouldn’t have to feel that their cars are going to be searched just because they told their boss they are going hunting after work.”

Rep. Opsommer expects the bills to be introduced this week.

By Glen Wunderlich
Outdoor Columnist
Member Professional Outdoor Media

Introduced August 11th, Michigan House bill 5232, cited as the Michigan Firearms Freedom Act, seeks to invoke the power of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution relative to looming federal gun regulations. As the federal government attempts to expand its reach into our daily lives more and more, some have come to realize it is time to make a stand. Town hall meetings are one thing, but when the politicians return to the security of the House and Senate chambers, they know they can spin the current vocal contempt into nothing more than bellyaching by a vocal minority. Sure they can be voted out of office, but in the meantime with their power-hungry liberal majority, they can do as they please. Not any more. Not in Michigan, if we stick by our guns!

The concept is simple: Declare big government’s reach into Michigan’s matters null and void. The bill was authored by Rep. Phillip Pavlov and has 44 co-sponsors. That’s a bunch! Here’s what it states: “A bill to create the Michigan firearms freedom act; to make certain findings regarding intrastate commerce; to prohibit federal regulation of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition involved purely in intrastate commerce in this state; to provide for certain exceptions to federal regulation; and to establish certain manufacturing requirements.

The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under amendments IX and X of the constitution of the United States, particularly if not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.”

Both Tennessee and Montana already have adopted Firearms Freedom acts and other states are following suit. However, the Federal Government’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) has already vilified states’ positions on this issue. In a written statement, BATF claims ‘Federal law supersedes the [Tennessee] Act’, and thus the ATF considers it without merit. Somebody’s got things backwards but it’s going to be difficult to weasel out of the U.S. Constitution’s clear language and intent. The shoe fits, boys, and it’s time to try it on for size.

I see this as an opportunity for sorely needed Michigan industry. If law-abiding Michigan citizens create enough demand by virtue of their refusal to go along with the federal programs relative to restrictive gun laws, then supply will follow demand. Michigan manufacturers will make Michigan guns and we’ll buy them here, too.

National health care can be handled in the same manner and is already being addressed in Arizona with a vote on the issue next year. Similarly, medical marijuana laws are in effect in 11 states and hinge on the same principle in spite of the U.S. Government’s position that marijuana is illegal anywhere. The power is vested in the people and the states. The Federal Government seems to be thumbing its nose at the U.S. Constitution when doing so is convenient to their schemes. Time has come to stand up, as written and ratified December 15, 1791.

And, this just in:

Michigan House Rep. Opsommer offered the following concurrent resolution:
House Concurrent Resolution No. 9.
A concurrent resolution to reaffirm the right to bear arms under the Michigan Constitution, the supremacy of the Second Amendment over the Commerce Clause, and the intent of the Michigan Legislature to not recognize or enforce unconstitutional firearm restrictions placed upon its citizens.
Whereas, Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, clearly affirms a right to bear arms. This provision prescribes that the primary purpose of the right to bear arms is not related solely to hunting but clearly allows Michigan citizen’s to be able to protect one’s self, family, and possessions from the private lawlessness of other persons or potential tyranny of governments; and
Whereas, There are also federalism provisions under the United States Constitution that prohibit the federal government from interfering with the right to bear arms within Michigan. The Tenth Amendment guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the United States Constitution; and
Whereas, Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provides the federal government with the power to regulate commerce. However, this provision only empowers the government to regulate commerce between states and cannot be used to impose regulations onto firearms beyond this scope or that are at cross-purposes with the Second Amendment; and
Whereas, Several new federal laws have been proposed that would overstep the bounds of both the Second Amendment, Michigan’s sovereign constitution, and its firearm laws; and
Whereas, It is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would mandate the use of “coded,” “serialized,” or “chipped” ammunition, to create databases of such ammunition, or to outlaw the ability of people to hand load otherwise lawful ammunition. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would mandate the use of so called “smart gun” technology that wirelessly or otherwise authenticates and enables a firearm to be used by only one person. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to allow for licensing schemes for the purchase of firearms that would mandate facial recognition, iris scans, fingerprinting, or other advanced biometric technology. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to regulate the private transfer or sale of firearms beyond what is currently required by law. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would make firearm ownership or use dependent upon the purchase of personal insurance policies or other similar risk instruments. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to prohibit firearm ownership to individuals based upon their reporting of the past use of pain killers or other medications for surgical recovery, dental procedures, and other legitimate medical purposes. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would infringe upon the ability of firearm owners to keep such weapons loaded and readily accessible within their homes, or that would allow for officials to inspect firearms within their homes without first obtaining a valid search warrant issued in conjunction with a lawful criminal investigation. It is however the intent of the Michigan Legislature to ensure that such firearm schemes are not imposed upon the citizens of Michigan by either the federal government or itself, and would view such infringements as violations of both the Second Amendment and the Michigan Constitution; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That we reaffirm the right to bear arms under the Michigan Constitution, the supremacy of the Second Amendment over the Commerce Clause, and the intent of the Michigan Legislature to not recognize or enforce unconstitutional firearm restrictions placed upon its citizens.
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, members of the Michigan congressional delegation, and the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.

Amen.

The new Winchester® Ammunition Ballistics Calculator is the most innovative program on the market, using cutting-edge technology to offer ballistics information for shooters and hunters.

The Winchester Ballistics Calculator allows users to choose their type of ammunition and compare up to five different Winchester products with easy-to-read, high-tech ballistic charts and graphs. You can customize shooting conditions by entering wind speed and outside temperature, adjust zero marks for sighting in – then print the ballistics for later reference on the range or in the field. The calculator is now live at www.winchester.com/ballistics.

“The Winchester Ballistics Calculator is the most interactive program on the market and is available to anyone who visits our site,” said Greg Kosteck, director of marketing for Winchester Ammunition. “The technology used in this program makes understanding ballistics and bullet performance easy; and it’s the ideal resource for shooters and hunters.”

Winchester teamed up with Quilogy, a St. Charles, Missouri-based IT and Marketing consulting company, to develop the state-of-the-art ballistics calculator. The ballistics calculator was built using Microsoft Silverlight, a cutting-edge technology that integrates seamlessly into a Web browser and allows the user to run highly advanced software applications over the Web.

For more information about Winchester Ammunition and its complete line of products visit www.winchester.com.

The 6th Annual Perry Youth Hunt Extravaganza is slated for September 26th and 27th this year and will be held at the Perry VFW, 601 N. Main, Perry. The event has grown to become a unique celebration of the special two-day, youth-only deer hunt for youngsters and rewards young men and young women for participating. There is no entry fee and no requirement to harvest deer; only a valid hunting license is needed. Simply stated, the goal has been to get kids out of the house and away from computers long enough to sample the thrill that awaits them afield.

Overflow crowds have been a testament to the success of the occasion and registering could not be easier. Those fortunate enough to harvest deer bring them in for photos beginning at 10 am September 26th and continue to do so throughout the following day, Sunday. Beginning at 8:30 pm Sunday the 27th, tickets are drawn for T-shirts and valuable prizes until everything is gone. All prizes are drawn randomly and are done so with no regard to hunters’ success – and, that’s what makes this celebration so unique!

Organizers of the Perry Sons of Amvets encourage everyone that supports the concept, and/or that has youngsters participating, to join us at the Perry VFW on Friday, August 28th from 5 pm to 8 pm for a New York strip steak dinner to help us raise necessary funding. The cost is a mere $8 for a quality, 12-ounce, Angus steak dinner grilled over an open flame to order. All proceeds go directly to purchase prizes for the youngsters.

Since the youth hunt began a few years ago, 283,000 new hunters have been added to the shrinking ranks of the national hunting fraternity in no small measure attributable to a program named Families Afield launched in 2004 by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF.org). Michigan is one of 28 states that has passed legislation lowering barriers to hunting and the effort has made a remarkable difference in hunter recruitment with over 30,000 young adults added to our hunting ranks.

Hunters contribute more than $30 billion annually into the American economy, much of it directed to rural areas such as ours. Approximately about a million jobs in America are supported by hunters. Over the past 40 years, hunters have spent $13.4 billion for hunting licenses, tags and permits, all funding wildlife conservation.

For every 100 adult hunters today, only 69 youth hunters are being recruited. Because of the declining numbers, economic projections indicate funding for wildlife conservation could drop commensurately.
Years ago, most hunters started hunting small game such as rabbits and squirrels; however, today it’s all about big game and there is no better way to experience such a thrilling hunt right in our own area.

So, bring the whole family for a top-quality steak dinner August 28th to the Perry VFW and help to promote the cause.

Salt Lake City – If the Archery Trade Association could be classified as barnstormers delivering both funding and a strong message to promote its Community Archery Program (CAP), then Michigan must be a fast-moving army as its leaders and foot soldiers boost archery participation statewide.

“We really have great momentum right now with a few standout states moving forward and making archery readily available to youths,” said Michelle Doerr, the ATA’s director of archery and bowhunting programs. “Michigan is among the states leading the way. They continue to make great investments in recruiting archers and bowhunters.”

Proof of this investment is the program’s progress: Since 2006, a Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) staff-person has been assigned fulltime to coordinating archery in the state, 10 more archery-focused, regional staff members are in the pipeline, and the $3.5 million Demmer Shooting Sports, Education and Training Center is set to open in September. The Michigan DNR partnered with Michigan State University in 2006 to develop the center, with a large contribution from the Demmer family. Archery became a viable part of the facility through contributions from the ATA and Easton Sports Development Foundation.

In 2008, the ATA provided the first $100,000 installment toward its $500,000 pledge to support the center and its outdoor Humphries Archery Park. Recently, the ATA contributed another $100,000 installment for 2009. The shooting center will serve as the hub of Michigan’s CAP, as well as the focal point for archery/bowhunting recruitment and retention efforts by the state’s wildlife agency. It includes a 30-meter, 12-lane indoor archery range and a 15-meter, 16-lane indoor firearms range, which can also be used for archery, and Michigan’s first outdoor archery park.

But an archery facility needs archers and bowhunters as much as archers and bowhunters need a shooting facility, which is why the ATA recently contributed $30,000 to Michigan’s state wildlife agency to help fund the 10 part-time, regional archery coordinator positions. Before this investment, the ATA invested $250,000 to fund the archery position filled in 2006, bringing total staff funding to $280,000.

The regional coordinators are now being hired to assist the agency’s Mary Emmons, who was hired in 2006 to promote archery and bowhunting statewide.

“As archery programs grew, we couldn’t keep up with demand,” said Emmons, the state’s full-time chief archery coordinator. “The regional coordinators allow us to put more instructors in the field, whether it’s for NASP, 4-H, Scouts or whatever. We’ve had a waiting list for archery classes. Now we can start filling those needs.”

In the 30-plus months since the MDNR designated a full-time position to archery, Michigan schools participating in National Archery in the Schools Program (NASP) have grown from 40 to 320, promoting the need for more staff to accommodate this growth.

“The deeper we grow archery across the state, the more important it becomes to provide staff support,” said Rebecca Humphries, MDNR director. “Mary is a dedicated, enthusiastic leader, but she can only train so many people herself to teach archery. These regional coordinators aren’t full-time positions, but they’ll help Mary carry out her work.”

To date, the ATA has contributed $595,000 to Michigan’s CAP. This doesn’t include future commitments, which will bring total contributions to more than $1 million. Nationally, the ATA has provided funding totaling about $900,000 – including grants provided through CAP – to initiate NASP in the United States, Canada and Australia since 2004. It has also contributed nearly $960,000 in CAP grants, equipment and direct aid to state wildlife agencies to grow archery and expand bowhunting opportunities.

For more information about the ATA’s efforts to grow archery and bowhunting, please contact Michelle Doerr at michelledoerr@archerytrade.org or call (320) 562-2680.

About CAP: The ATA created the Community Archery Program (CAP) in 2005 as a multi-pronged effort to grow archery and bowhunting participation by working with city, county and state agencies while also enlisting help from archery shops, clubs and organizations. As such, CAP promotes NASP as an introduction to archery in schools, and the After School Archery Program (ASAP) as a vital component of community recreation programs. CAP also includes shooting facilities for year-round practice and competitions. The ATA supports CAP efforts by providing expertise, equipment and targets as well as cost-sharing for staff and facilities. Leaders in local CAP initiatives are state wildlife agencies that work with communities to develop and manage archery parks, school and after-school programs.

About the ATA: Since 1953 ATA has been the trade association for manufacturers, retailers, distributors, sales representatives and others working in the archery and bowhunting industry. ATA is dedicated to making the industry profitable by decreasing business overhead, and reducing taxes and government regulation while increasing participation in archery and bowhunting. ATA owns and manages the ATA Trade Show, the archery and bowhunting industry’s largest and longest running trade show worldwide.

The U.S Senate recently voted on an amendment that would have allowed Right-to-Carry permit holders to carry in all other states that also grant carry permits. The amendment, sponsored by Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and David Vitter (R-La.), won a significant majority of votes, 58 to 39, but failed to reach the 60 votes needed to avoid a Senate filibuster.

Anti-gun senators have long argued that the majority of Americans do not support firearm freedoms. They made this erroneous claim once again during the debate on the Thune/Vitter amendment. Now, a new poll has proven them wrong.

Conducted by Zogby International and The O’Leary Report, the poll looked at Americans’ opinions on some key issues related to the Second Amendment. One of the questions asked: “Currently, 39 states have laws that allow residents to carry firearms to protect themselves, only if they pass a background check and pay a fee to cover administrative costs. Most of those states also require applicants to have firearms safety training. Do you support or oppose this law?”

BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation today filed a lawsuit on behalf of three residents of the District of Columbia and a New Hampshire resident, seeking to compel the city to issue carry permits to law-abiding citizens.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court on behalf of Tom Palmer, George Lyon and Amy McVey, all District residents, and Edward Raymond, a New Hampshire resident. SAF and the individual plaintiffs are being represented by attorney Alan Gura, who successfully argued the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case in 2008 that overturned the District’s handgun ban on the grounds that it was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

“Once again,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, “we’re heading back to court because the anti-gun city administration refuses to abide by the law. It is beginning to appear like residents of the District are up against a rogue city government that simply does not want to ease its stranglehold on the most important civil right of all, the right of self-preservation.”

“In most major American cities,” said attorney Gura, “where the right to bear arms is respected, licensed permit holders have proven themselves safe and effective. Washington, D.C. already requires handgun registrants to complete the background checks and training classes required of carry permit holders throughout the country. It is pointless to deny these individuals the right to bear arms.”

SAF previously sued the District over its restrictive handgun registration policies, leading the city to amend those policies. This time, SAF is alleging that the District previously had a city code under which the police chief could issue licenses to carry handguns to individuals, including citizens not residing in the District, though the city did not issue such licenses as a matter of policy for several years. That authority was revoked last December by the Mayor and City Council.

Plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction agai nst the continued ban on carrying handguns by law-abiding citizens for personal protection.

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s 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.

By Glen Wunderlich
Outdoor Columnist
Member Professional Outdoor Media Association

A challenge to individual First Amendment protections under the U.S. Constitution is headed for a showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court this fall in U.S. v Robert J. Stevens. Mr. Stevens of Virginia was convicted of criminal charges for producing and selling films about dogs. Stevens’ conviction was overturned as a result of a Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision that said the law relied upon to convict Stevens was unconstitutional. Stevens may still go to prison and your right to watch hunting and fishing shows on television, or to read about them in printed media may end, as well, if the government succeeds in its quest to skewer him.

Whether the case has been suppressed or ignored by the media is ironic in that the guarantees of the First Amendment form the basis of free speech no matter how much we, as Americans, may disagree with how the messages are being conveyed.

Of particular concern to those in the hunting and fishing industry is the fact Stevens’ prosecution rested on his film “Catch Dogs”, which showed how dogs are trained to help catch prey (wild boar, etc.).

There is no allegation that Stevens engaged in dog fighting or any acts of animal cruelty. Nor is it even alleged that the images depicted in his films were illegal when taken. Furthermore, he did not take the images himself, but edited together films taken by others — films that were recorded in Japan, where the conduct is perfectly legal, and from historic films from the 60s and 70s in rural America.

No doubt, the latter two films contain extensive images of dog fighting. But Stevens is not a dog fighter – he opposes dog fighting – but loves the qualities in Pit Bulls that make them fighters. The outcome of the verdict could be devastating to all journalists and specifically to the traditional outdoor sports of hunting, fishing and trapping.

The Third Circuit struck down a federal law banning “depictions of animal cruelty.” 18 USC 48. The statute does not ban acts of animal cruelty themselves (and so this case is not about such actions). It bans images of animals being hurt, wounded or killed if the depicted conduct is illegal under federal law or illegal under the state law either (i) where the creation of the depiction occurs, or (ii) where the depiction is sold or possessed.

That means that a picture taken of the killing of an animal during a hunt (perfectly lawful where it occurred) could be a federal felony crime if that picture is sold or possessed somewhere in the United States where hunting (or the particular type of hunting, i.e., crossbow) is prohibited.

As the court of appeals explained, the law now makes it a federal felony to buy a picture of deer hunting in Shiawassee County or an image shot by a journalist of a hunter or angler taking a shot at a legal game animal or catching a fish — if that action is unlawful anywhere in the U.S.

Of little consequence, the law creates an exception if a jury finds that the images have “serious” value. The government defined “serious” as “significant and of great import.” The result accordingly is that all depictions of animal killings that might be unlawful somewhere in the U.S. are now presumptively federal felonies, with the only hope of protection being that a jury in San Francisco (or wherever an eager prosecutor wants to go) agrees that the images are “significant and of great import” – whatever those weasel words mean.

The government and Humane Society, which is pushing this issue with all its might, are trying to portray this as a case about dog fighting, because of the emotional appeal it stirs in many. Hogwash! It’s about the First Amendment!

When it comes to legal hunting, I am a realist, knowing full well that wildlife must be managed; we have made it so with our ever-encroaching and irreversible lifestyles into their territories.

As long as hunting is legal, I will be a strong proponent of any activity that can manage game in a manner that is actually more humane than that of Mother Nature’s own cruel reality. Depicting it should not be a crime and that’s why I have signed on to an Amicus Curiae brief, along with fellow journalists, in opposition to our current government’s will.

The very fact that this matter has progressed to this stage is further evidence that our country continues on its path away from the virtuous nature of our Founding Fathers’ wisdom. If the government wins this one, free speech will cost plenty.