I wrote a piece yesterday where I compared the Brady Bunch’s report on the states with the most restrictive gun laws to the statistics on gun related fatalities. You can read about it here. I specifically mention that, while DC was not in the Brady’ Bunch’s list, it was both the most restrictive in terms of gun laws as well as the most dangerous in terms of gun related deaths. Well today Kay Baily Hutchinson penned an excellent piece in the Dallas Morning News which pretty much makes the same point.

In 1976, the Washington City Council passed the nation’s toughest gun control law, banning handguns completely and requiring rifles and shotguns to be registered, stored unloaded and locked or disassembled.

The D.C. murder rate was declining before this law; in the next 15 years it jumped 200 percent.

Not only that but, as of 2003, DC ranked the worst in the nation in gun deaths - scoring a whopping 26.9 deaths per 100,000 residents; a full 7 1/2 points above its nearest competitor. A shining testament to the effectiveness of gun control laws a real poster child for the Brady Bunch.

Next month, for the first time since 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court will rule on the issue of Second Amendment rights when it hears arguments in District of Columbia v. Heller. The court’s decision will have major implications for all Americans.

I have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court with my colleague Jon Tester from Montana – along with Vice President Dick Cheney as president of the Senate, 53 other U.S. senators and 250 members of the House – for the respondent, who simply wishes to exercise his constitutional right to protect himself. It has the most congressional signatures on any amicus brief to the Supreme Court.

When the Supreme Court hears this case in March it will be a make or break time for gun owners. Do we have the right to defend ourselves or will we be forced to rely on the governments ever increasing power in our homes, our schools, our workplaces, even our places of worship? Can we really expect that power in the hands of politicians to be wielded in our favor?

We have a right of self defense and the Second Amendment was put in place in the anticipation that we may even need to defend ourselves from our own government.

Lets just hope it doesn’t come to that.

You remember Ray Nagin, the mayor of New Orleans? The guy who coined it “The Chocolate City”.

Well get a load of this one:

Ok, so this is the guy who instigated the confiscation of the guns of law abiding citizens. Obviously he knows a think or two about gun safty.

Earlier this week Canada issued an ultimatum that it would pull its 2,500 tropps from Afghanistan effective January 2009 if NATO is unable to pony up additional troops.

From the AP:

In American military parlance, it’s gut-check time for NATO in Afghanistan, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy appears ready to answer allies’ calls for more forces to fight the Taliban and al-Qaida.

As early as Thursday, Sarkozy’s top brass is to present him with a variety of options, from sending special forces to more trainers for Afghan troops, a French military official told The Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity, because the decisions will ultimately rest with Sarkozy.

Sarkozy isn’t expected to announce a final decision until the NATO summit in Bucharest, Romania, in early April, which is shaping up as a litmus test of his commitment to the Atlantic alliance which has often had a rocky relationship with France.

The more I see about Sarkozy, the more I like him. Not just because he is pro-American. His previous stint as the French Minister of Interior have given him a keen understanding of the the significance of the War on Terror. He also has a very strong stance on Law and Order issues as seem from his stance on the Islamic Hoodlums that have been plaguing France for years.

The Global Mail in Canada has an interesting spin on this as well:

France’s decision will involve two larger strategic concerns: The ambition among French military leaders to establish a stronger European leadership role in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the desire to win U.S. support for a European military force that could some day rival the U.S. military.

Under Chirac, France’s only military ambitions seemed to involve white flags. Now, with Nicolas Sarkozy at the helm in France, it seems a much different picture is forming. I am not so confident on the European military “someday rivaling the US military”, but having ambitions that provide extra support for the war on Terror is good for me.

I may have to take back some of the things I have said about France.

Also Reporting:
Captains Quarters

A couple of interesting articles came out in the media this morning. It makes me wonder how serious America is about winning the War on Terror. Yes, we are still at war; and yes, there are still people out there trying to kills us. If you need recent examples, just check out Religion of Peace.com

The first bit of news has to do with a recent Senate approved ban on Waterboarding as port of the new intelligence bill.

The Senate voted yesterday to ban waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics used by the CIA, matching a previous House vote and putting Congress on a collision course with the White House over a pivotal national security issue.

In a 51 to 45 vote, the Senate approved an intelligence bill that limits the CIA to using 19 less-aggressive interrogation tactics outlined in a U.S. Army Field Manual. The measure would effectively ban the use of simulated drowning, temperature extremes and other harsh tactics that the CIA used on al-Qaeda prisoners after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

President Bush has vowed to veto the legislation, which the House approved in December, and Congress does not appear to have enough votes to override a veto.

The second bit of news has to do with with harsh and cruel conditions at Gitmo:

The admissions made by the men — who were given food whenever they were hungry as well as Starbucks coffee at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — played a key role in the government’s decision to proceed with the prosecutions, military and law enforcement officials said.

What do the people we have entrusted to run our country think they are playing at? This is very serious stuff, and yet they proceed as if this was a schoolyard disagreement, and seem determined to assume we have an honorable enemy. News flash — We Don’t!

Wish-washy politically inspired stances like this cost American lives. It handicaps the ability of our military and intelligence agencies to protect us. The impact and cost to America could easily be measured in the thousands and thousands of deaths when another 911 hits. This is not a game of chess, plaid with pieces who fell no pain. When the game is over we do not pick up our pieces and go home.

For the record, the following 51 Senators voted for the handcuffing Inteligence Bill. If you see yours on there, I urge you to send them a reminder of the stakes in this game they are playing:

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

Also Reporting:
Grid Skipper
American Pundit
Captain’s Quarters
Hot Air
Stop The ACLU
Michelle Malkin
Jammie Wearing Fool