Heads up from Tony Cornish - Update from Author of Castle

[plblark]

On TCC, someone is making buttons or stickers. Bright yellow or something. "Self Defense is a Human Right"

It's important for the committee members to recognize how big our voice is.

You'll recognize me when we meet up to car pool

[tt3]

Anyone coming from Coon Rapids or area? I've been to St. Paul ... um... never, but Google Maps is my friend.
Kids both have colds, so I don't know how long we can stay, but we'll try and be there.
Thanks for the PM plblarkl!
t

[JohninMinnesota]

I am also printing up a couple of 8 1/2 by 11 signs -

Past Behavior is the Best Predictor of Future Behavior.

Law Abiding Citizens Deserve The Law on THEIR SIDE!


PLEASE SUPPORT HF498

Allow Law Abiding Citizens to PROTECT THEMSELVES!

AND:

YOU HAVE ONE SECOND TO DECIDE:
Is he going to commit "Great Bodily Harm"
Or just Assault With a Deadly Weapon...
PLEASE SUPPORT HF498

Allow Law Abiding Citizens to PROTECT THEMSELVES!

[TC95GT]

I am going to try and make it, but it doesn't look good.

Let me say thank you to all of you that are attending and making sure our side is being represented.

[plblark]

60 people there for us including 3 young children
Heather and 2 minions
Vote 9 to 9 with someone making an inopportune trip to the bathroom and not having to vote

It was PACKED, hot, and interesting. The bill does NOT pass out of committee and is Dead AFAIK.

We'll have to go don again later in the session when they hear the Gun registration bills.

[Tabsr]

The voters put these people in office and bet some of you voted for them.

[JohninMinnesota]

This is just one step further... we just need to keep pushing. I was encouraged that there were plenty of "professionals" there, but not a whole lot of passionate citizens who were against this legislation. This is because it make sense and is logical. Political organizations like the Minnesota County Attorney's Association, and the Police Depts. are motivated politically and are being PAID (by us by the way) to lobby for their interests.

WE WILL PREVAIL on this issue. Don't rest assured however... just know that if we can educate enough people who will actively lobby their representatives for it, we will get it passed.


Okay, so *now* we can begin our well planned education campaign to bring Minnesotan's up to speed on what this bill really means. With the right questions, facts, and figures, we can bring the truth home and sway enough people to get it passed.

I believe there is a lot of ignorance of the *need* for citizens to defend themselves in these split second violent encounters. I believe those legislators are voting the easy way out of this - they don't want their name on it, and aren't being punished for voting no. Plenty of other states have passed this legislation. How did they do it?

We really need to begin teaching people why it makes sense to have armed citizens, why guns are not evil, why certain people are called "criminals" and why legislation will NEVER change their behaviors. Only the certainty of being harshly punished (or met with excessive resistance by a victim) stops most criminals, and then there are those who have no brains and will not stop.

How do we do it? We use time, persistence and some effective, well placed messages to the public. We become educated on crime, punishment, and effective legislation. We learn how to create, market and close the sale on our ideas to everyone who can influence the outcome we want.

Easy!

First of all – We are NOT THE PROBLEM. We being Joe Q. Citizen. No criminal record. No history of violence. *We* deserve to have the law on our side. If we abuse it, we are not protected by this “doctrine”. So what’s the problem?

Gang members shooting it out? Do you think they will discuss the finer points of the law with their lawyer before they decide to “shoot it out” with that rival they hate so much? No? Me either. I think that the gang bangers are too busy being “bad azzed thugz” to even know that a law was passed.

People shooting kids for stealing beer from their garage? Cmon. It just isn’t happening out there now in all the states where these laws have been adopted. Why? Because *we* are not violent by nature and aren’t going to kill someone over a minor issue. It wouldn’t hold up as self defense, and *we* have brains that guide us by common sense and logic - *We Aren’t Stupid*. Are there extremists out there (like the guy in Texas who shot two illegals for robbing his neighbor’s home) – Yes, indeed there are and they deserve to have some consequences for their actions, just like others who abuse their privileges. It will no doubt be shown he was NOT at risk of substantial bodily harm by these two cockroaches, and should be prosecuted for murder. We are a society with freedoms after all, and freedom is a risky business.

Bullets will be flying on a regular basis, killing, wounding, maiming innocent bystanders. Again, this is hysteria. There are going to be incidents of people using guns to defend themselves, however, as has been proved in the states adopting this doctrine, innocent bystanders are not catching bullets with any alarming frequency at all.

What follows is an outtake from “Think Tank” interview: From: http://www.pbs.org/thinktank/transcript1121.html

Lonnie Athens, professor of criminal justice at Seton Hall University, author of The Creation of Dangerous Violent Criminals and co-editor of Violent Acts and Violentization

And Dr. Stanton Samenow. clinical psychologist in Alexandria, Virginia, and author of Inside the Criminal Mind.

… ….

WATTENBERG: So you believe there’s a bad gene?

SAMENOW: Ben, I don’t think that there is 'a' bad gene and I don’t know that there’s anybody that says there’s a criminal gene like a bad seed. I think the point is that there are many aspects of the human condition that we do not know to cause or causes of that indeed it is a - it should be an open subject of inquiry as to whether there are genetic or biological predispositions. But I’m saying even if there are such predispositions it doesn’t mean that one cannot intervene early and try to do something preventive.

ATHENS: But why do people make those choices?

SAMENOW: Well, let me quote two people. One man said to me, 'If you take my crime away, you take my world away.' Another said, 'Crime is like ice-cream. It’s delicious.' In both of these cases these individuals as far back as they or anyone else could remember, they rejected whatever forces were in their environment for obeying the law or living a responsible life. For them life had to be a series of searches for control, power, high-voltage excitement. They rejected the world of the responsible person. And this goes as far back as they or anybody else can remember. You ask me why, you ask me why. I’ll say I don’t know and you can get ten experts on your program and you’re going to get maybe ten opinions.

ATHENS: That begs the question we still have to ask and you know, answer the question of why people make the choices they make. You just can’t say they make that choice. And they don’t make those choices in a vacuum. Certain neighborhoods, the violent crime rate’s ten or twenty times um as great as another neighborhood. And you can’t attribute - how can you explain that? It’s just they - keep saying that people made the choices in their minds. It’s something that’s gotta be beyond their minds. Something influencing their minds.

SAMENOW: Well, you know, everything in the environment has been blamed for crime. I have a file that lists everything including cholesterol, dungeons and dragons, cycles of the moon, global warming. You know, in my field, the psychological field has promulgated this view that it’s forces outside the individual that propel them into crime. Look, you can approach this in one of two ways. You can put policemen on every street corner if you want to do that. In other words we’re talking about deterrence. Or you can start to work with trying to intervene, prevent early, because I’m telling you and I’m insisting that crime resides within the mind of the person..

… ….

Samenow’s position on criminals is “criminals think differently”, and creating legislation to try to prevent them from committing crimes is not effective because they aren’t thinking like we do (those of us who value our freedom and are responsible, law abiding citizens). While he points to intervention and early prevention, we still have violent criminals on the streets who are only interested in their own agenda. We aren’t solving crime with legislation; we are simply making more laws.

The police aren't there to protect us so that leaves us responsible for our own safety. How about a little support by our laws? Yes, we can already protect ourselves, but the penalties are very steep.


Let’s keep pushing this forward. We can use some of these same arguments for the gun registration bills as well. Damned ignorant do gooders.

[plblark]

Here's an e-mail I sent out to several talk radio shows. I spiced up the intro with text to let them know I listen (I told Jay that it would drive Willie nuts and to have Kenny and Ron R. on hand to counteract the hysteria )

I sent this to Jason Lewis' assistant, Jay Kolls, Kenny Olson, Bob Davis, Rookie and Joe Soucheray, and Dave Thompson.

I attended the Public Safety and Civil Justice Committee meeting yesterday to support Representative Tony Cornish(R)'s Castle Doctrine Bill (MF 498). To say I was disappointed with the 9-9 vote tabling outcome would be an understatement. I was even more disappointed with the opposition's testimony.

Audio of the committee hearing can be found at: http://ww2.house.leg.state.mn.us/audio/ ... 031308.mp3
HF498 occurs between 01:03:00 and 01:43:00 of the file.

The public NEEDS to hear about what this bill really does. While many who oppose this bill resort to hyperbole and absurdity, what the bill does is simple, straightforward, and reasonable: It clarifies when an innocent victim can resist a violent attack. The victim must still be a reluctant participant, not an aggressor.

When you're the victim of an imminent threat, this bill:

* Removes the duty to retreat from an imminent threat. Any conflict is best avoided, but once you're attacked, turning your back on your attacker is a poor choice.

* Allows self defense against "Serious Bodily Harm" as well as "Great Bodily Harm" as defined in statute. In the middle of a life-or-death attack, who has time to think of the legal hair-splitting between serious and great bodily harm?

* States that you're not contrained from resisting a violent attack because of where it takes place. If a criminal attacks you in your yard, how are you less at risk than in your house? You're not, except in court later. Minnesota has solid defense of dwelling laws with case law to back them. This is a logical extension of that right.

* Assumes that persons who enter by force or by stealth have ill intent. Criminals are the ones that force their way into your home or vehicle. Someone forcing their way into your car or house is probably not intending to sell you cookies. When was the last time a Girl scout broke in a door to sell cookies? Generally, they ring the doorbell.

* Codifies the idea that if you follow the law, you won't be prosecuted. This is covered in the immunity from prosecution and is nothing new, it's explicitly how the system works.

Bill info can be found here:
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/rev ... n=0&y=2007

I'd appreciate any help you can give in shedding light on the issue and educating your listeners to what this bill is REALLY about.

If you need references, guests, callers, or anything else in support of this bill, please don't hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

[Plblark]
[Town]
[Cell Phone]

Thanks to Andrew for some editing. Makes me sound smarter

[JohninMinnesota]

blah blah blah

[Andrew Rothman]

Very nicely said. Unfortunately, your message of individual empowerment is likely to sound like Martian to our elected officials, who never met a spending/controlling/limiting law they didn't like.

[deleted]

Very well articulated. From my chair, the power in your actions comes from offering remedies and not just complaints. Anyone can complain. Some people offer solutions to a given problem, but only a small handful will actually expend energy for the benefit of themselves and others. The percentage of people who will write government officials or have their ideas aired on pubic radio, or even march on the capitol is smaller still. You and the other activist should be commended. Hats off to all of you - good job!

[JohninMinnesota]

Very nicely said. Unfortunately, your message of individual empowerment is likely to sound like Martian to our elected officials, who never met a spending/controlling/limiting law they didn't like.

Andrew, I agree that elected officials don't hear much from citizens. I also agree that we have us a major problem when it comes to our government. It is an out of control train wreck at this point, a chaotic storm of legislators hell bent on getting their name and ego stamped on as many pieces of legislation as they can to justify their position at the trough. What I hope is that we can get riled up enough here to begin to stand up and speak to these elected officials and let them know that we want reform. Not just more legislation, but downright reform. I believe most politicians start out with the same hopeful agenda of making a difference - for the people, and end up getting sucked into the cesspool, ultimately just trying to prove their value through "measureable" means... legislation.

It would be easy to succumb to despair in this realm, but I know that change takes time and effort. Let's start articulating our views and sending them to these politicians - and don't stop engaging as many others as you can to do the same. Pick a couple of issues and focus on them. We are in a crisis in my opinion. Our government is out of control. The only way it will change is if we demand it, and keep demanding it through political action.

The socialists are on a roll, and they are coming after you and me! That ought to frighten everyone!