Printed in the USA.
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report
Issue 036
December, 1997
THE ASSAULT ON EDDIE EAGLE
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report is brought to you electronically about one month after publication. To help support the Report, and to receive it when it is current, subscribe by calling 425-454-7012 (and make sure you mention that you heard about it on the Internet!). More information on how to subscribe is available at the end of this page.
Subscribe Electronically to the printed edition of the report, and receive the news when its most current! Our online subscription for the Glottlieb-Tartaro report is available 24-Hours a day.Dear Subscriber,
The gun control lobby has launched a bizarre campaign against Eddie Eagle, the NRA’s gun safety cartoon character for kids.
The extremist anti-gun Violence Policy Center, based in Washington, D.C., recently released a 144-page analysis condemning the Eddie Eagle gun safety program as just a greedy attempt “to cultivate a new generation of gun owners by using some of the same strategies to hook children on guns that the tobacco industry has used to hook them on cigarettes,” referring to the “Joe Camel” cartoon character.
That’s quite a reach, comparing a cartoon character promoting a nicotine product to one promoting child safety, but the anti-gun group did it with a straight face.
New York Times reporter KATHARINE Q. SEELYE wrote that the Violence Policy Center report ”asserts that the decade-old program puts a friendly face on a hazardous product that cannot legally be sold to children and is designed to draw children into the gun culture.”
The real goal, the violence group claimed, “is to protect the financial future of the gun industry.”
Whoa! Have we entered a reality-free zone?
The Eddie Eagle program uses many cartoon characters to teach children to handle guns safely. The Eddie Eagle videos are shown in thousands of school districts in pre-school through sixth grade. The feathered character urges children not to touch a gun if they find one and to report it to an adult.
The violence group says that the firearms industry underwrites the educational programs and that the gun rights lobby uses those programs to deflect the need for laws that would require trigger locks on firearms and require gun owners to make their firearms inaccessible to children.
The violence group also asserted that the Eddie Eagle programs “stem from an industrywide sales slump that hit the firearms industry in the mid-1980s as the result of saturation of the primary market of white males.”
Then too, the report claims, the firearms industry has come under attack from lawmakers in bans of “assault weapons.”
As a result, the violence group’s study says, “the NRA has begun a new and expanding partnership with the firearms industry to lift it out of its doldrums and reach out to a new generation of customers. In doing so, it has followed the trail blazed by America’s tobacco industry.”
Marion Hammer, the NRA’s president, retorted that the Violence Policy Center study was so “ludicrous” that the organization intended to sue the violence group for defamation.
The NRA has spent $10 million to teach gun safety to more than 10 million children. Clearly, anti-gunners merely want to ban all guns, not make them safe.
NEW ANTI-GUN MEDIA BLITZ
While the Violence Policy Center takes aim against Eddie Eagle, some big guns in the media are taking aim against gun owners — period.
Turn on your TV these days and you’re likely to see it. The ad starts with a curious youngster piling books on a chair, determined to reach something high on the top shelf of a bedroom closet. The background music is happy and expectant, like a Hollywood movie with a child about to discover a cute and friendly alien, perhaps “E.T.” But when the little boy reaches up on tiptoe and feels in the shadows of the high shelf, his tiny hand comes back with a handgun. Shockeroo! Fascinated, the sweet little kid points it toward his face. The screen goes black and we hear the sound of a gunshot.
Then the black screen fills with this horror-movie message: “10 children are killed by a handgun every day.”
Wow!
This shameless jolt of adrenaline is part of the nationwide media blitz on TV networks, local stations, magazines and billboards. Its sponsor is Cease Fire, the notorious anti-gun project of Jann Wenner, publisher of Rolling Stone magazine. And to make sure that his campaign gets wide exposure, Mr. Wenner has mobilized a regiment of media storm troopers.
Mr. WENNER has loaded Cease Fire’s advisory board with media notables including Walter Cronkite, Barry Diller, Michael Eisner, Paul Newman and Michael Douglas, who in turn “round up the media,” as Mr. Wenner puts it. Michael Douglas narrated the ads, for starters.
It took a well orchestrated campaign to get the ads broadcast. Michael Douglas called officials at CBS. Time Warner chief executive Gerald Levin advised all of the company’s cable systems to run the ads. Tom Preston, chief executive of Viacom’s MTV unit, not only agreed to carry the ads on MTV networks, but also helped obtain commitments from cable networks A&E and Lifetime. HSN chairman BARRY DILLER called executives at News Corp.’s Fox, and Tele-Communications, Inc., and HELEN LEVINE, the editor of Good Housekeeping, agreed to carry ads in her magazine and helped to win pages from several other Hearst publications.
Mr. WENNER says, “We’re trying to change perceptions,” rather than send a political message pushing legislation. “The reason most men by handguns is because they think they can protect their family. But it doesn’t work. Handguns are much more likely to bring harm.”
Of course, WENNER’s campaign makes no mention of the thousands of times each year that a handgun prevents death, injury or property loss. However, it’s true enough that ten young people are killed by handguns every day. But most of them are the result of suicides and homicides rather than accidents. Only 181 children died in gun accidents in 1995 — the latest year for which statistics are available — and the number has been declining.
Cease Fire acknowledges that its handgun death figures include murders and suicides, but argues back that homicides are three times more likely to occur in homes with guns than without, while the risk of suicide is nearly five times greater.
Mr. Wenner, the 51 year old publisher, says he’s been looking for ways to promote gun control since the shooting murder of his friend John Lennon. Cease Fire’s primary function is to produce anti-gun advertising. It has raised $1.2 million since it was founded in 1994, $200,000 of it from Mr. Wenner.
Several advertising agencies were willing to work on the campaign pro bono. Mr. Wenner’s latest campaign began when he hired pollster Peter Hart to explore American attitudes about handguns. The polling made clear that most people buy handguns to protect their families. Adults often delude themselves that these guns are safely hidden from their children, Mr. WENNER says. He recalls that when he was growing up in California’s Marin County, he always knew about the loaded pistol his father kept hidden in a nightstand drawer. He says nothing about guns successfully protecting families.
Mr. WENNER picked BBDO, the agency that does PepsiCo’s television ads. Giving them Mr. HART’s research, he told BBDO that his goal was to eradicate the widespread notion that guns promote security. “We wanted to evoke what is so good about America — and then shatter it,” he says. “We didn’t want to be argumentative or political.” Perhaps a more honest statement would be that he wanted to take the truth that guns promote security and then shatter it.
This campaign of JANN WENNER’s poses a dangerous threat to the rights of gun owners because it may indeed change public perceptions toward WENNER’s warped view of the value of guns.
The ads are already getting high marks for effectiveness from some Madison Avenue firms, according to the Wall Street Journal. “Public service announcements have to be shocking to get people’s attention, and the spots do the job,” says Richard Kirschenbaum, chief creative officer of Kirschenbaum, Bond & Partners. Because PSAs are aired relatively infrequently, they “have to work harder than ads that people might see three times a week,” he said.
Cease Fire is organizing groups of local officials at several major cities to make direct appeals to local TV station owners for free time. In Massachusetts, the state medical association has agreed to spend more than $100,000 to purchase air time for the Cease Fire spots.
This is a well thought-out and well-backed campaign to take your rights away from you. It has to be countered with an equally intelligent and influential pro-gun campaign to preserve the dominant public opinion that guns promote security.
We’ll be watching to see what gun rights advocates do about this.
GUN RULING UPSETS ABUSE ACTIVISTS
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has recently determined that Alex Woods Jr. can still carry a gun because he was convicted of assaulting his girlfriend and not his wife.
The Denver police officer who beat up his girlfriend in 1995 will be allowed to keep his gun and his position on the police force under the 1996 law, which prohibits all domestic violence offenders from owning or carrying firearms.
The ruling, made by lawyers of the BATF, only applies to officers convicted of abusing their spouses, people they live with or the mothers of their children.
New Jersey’s Sen. Frank Lautenberg, who wrote the law, said the BATF reading is flawed. Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado said, “The BATF ruling could remove protection from thousands of domestic violence victims, not just Mr. Woods’ girlfriend.”
DeGette’s office was trying to determine whether the BATF’s interpretation in the Woods case would be expanded to apply to offenders outside of law enforcement.
BATF spokesman Steve Steele in Dallas refused to say whether the agency intended to apply the Woods ruling to all domestic violence offenders.
GUN MAKER SETS RECORD STRAIGHT
As an insider newsletter, the Gottlieb-Tartaro Report receives a great deal of insider comment. Here is a fascinating response from Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. We reprint several letters to us from the company’s general counsel:
“We noted your piece on “Gun Makers and Trigger Locks: an Industry Coup” in the November, 1997 issue of the Gottlieb-Tartaro Report. Not you guys, too?!
“The White House press release apparently stated that 8 gun manufacturers had committed to provide child-proof locks with all of their handguns “earlier this year.” Your article repeated that Sturm, Ruger “made similar commitments earlier this year.”
“I hope that at least one of you insatiable firearms consumers has purchased one of our pistols since 1987, or at the very least has examined a Ruger catalog since the late 1980s. You probably would have noticed our now-universal lockable box accompanied by a padlock and two keys, which we introduced 10 years ago starting with our P85 pistol.
“I’m taking the liberty of sending you some letters we have sent to customers, newspapers, gun magazines, and some rather shameless self promoters wishing to capitalize on this situation and peddle their gizmos. I hope you can see that we did, and have done, absolutely nothing differently that we have been doing entirely on our own accord for about a decade, and certainly did not join the President in the Rose Garden. It was gratifying to see our successful ongoing safety efforts recognized by the media and the Administration, even if they got the details wrong.
“Many thanks for your help in correcting this erroneous impression about our long-standing lock box program. Best regards.”
Sincerely, Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc.
STEPHEN L. SANETTI, Vice President, General CounselMr. Sanetti included for our edification one of his letters to a purveyor of gizmos, who shall remain nameless:
“Dear “X”:
“As you may know, Sturm, Ruger & Company, Inc. has voluntarily shipped its pistols and revolvers in lock boxes with a padlock since 1987. After careful study of many of the devices touted as “gun safety devices,” we have concluded that our approach offers the required degree of security without many of the safety and reliability concerns we have with other products.
“President Clinton recently recognized our company as one of the firearms companies that voluntarily equip their handguns with appropriate safety locking devices. While it was gratifying that our ongoing voluntary safety program was so acknowledged, much of the media coverage erroneously stated or implied that we were one of the companies that either “agreed with the President” to “begin” shipping guns with locks, or “promised to equip” our pistols and revolvers with locks “in the future.”
“Please be advised that we simply intend to keep on doing exactly what we began in 1987, which has withstood the test of a decade’s use. The Company’s efforts, along with those of thousands of volunteer firearms safety instructors, have resulted in the number of firearms accidents declining dramatically to a century-long low; in fact, decreasing 64 percent in the last 20 years despite a significant increase in the population and the number of firearms in circulation.
“Consequently, while we appreciate your interest in the Company, please be advised that we have no need to incorporate your device into our product line. We are already there.”
And the following item stated Sturm, Ruger’s position most emphatically:
“Dear friend:
“Recent media coverage of the President’s news conference on Oct. 9, 1997, either erroneously stated or implied that Sturm, Ruger will begin utilizing “trigger locks” on its pistols and revolvers.
“Actually, the company is only continuing to do what it has done since 1987. At that time, it began voluntarily shipping its pistols in lock boxes with a padlock. We expanded this practice so that by 1994, virtually all our pistols and revolvers were so equipped. The few remaining specialty models with very long barrels were added this year; once again, completely on our own.
“No “deal” to do this was made with anyone, including the President. We were mentioned by the President as an example of a major firearms manufacturer that has already included a locking device with its handguns. The press coverage of the President’s announcement generally implied that we were joining in the Administration’s effort to equip guns with trigger locks, which is emphatically untrue. We have serious safety reservations about trigger locks and the “one size fits all” approach to gun safety and personal protection which their use implies, and which our lockable boxes avoid.
“Actually, it was the President who finally recognized our efforts and those of many thousands of volunteer firearm safety instructors — not the other way around. These voluntary safety programs have resulted in the lowest number of annual firearms accidents this century.
“We intend to continue our successful safety efforts exactly as we have been doing for many years and have no plans to change any of our policies.”
Sincerely....
Well, thanks to Mr. Stephen Sanetti, I think we all now know exactly what Sturm, Ruger & Company has really been doing about gun safety for all these years.
When we get it wrong, we’ll always let you know what’s right — the Gottlieb-Tartaro Report’s pledge of responsible reporting.
ANTI-GUN REP. CHARLES SCHUMER STARTS HIS CAMPAIGN FOR SENATE
Three days after the last election Rep. CHARLES E. SCHUMER, the Brooklyn-Queens Democrat, began an upstate television and media blitz to kick off his campaign for the U.S. Senate. SCHUMER’s first TV ad ran in western New York, where Mr. SCHUMER’s advisers say he is not well-known.
SCHUMER’s commercials began with the claim that “he stood up to the NRA.” This was followed with claims that he banned “assault weapons,” and “helped put 100,000 new police on the streets — 100 of them in Buffalo alone.” The commercial then turned to other issues, showing SCHUMER promising to neutralize NEWT GINGRICH and replace ALFONSE D’AMATO.
The commercial describes Mr. SCHUMER as saying he is running for the Senate, among other reasons, “to stop AL D’AMATO.” That is the only mention of Sen. D’AMATO by name. However, Mr. SCHUMER has to run against several other Democrats before he gets to run against Sen. D’AMATO. Mr. SCHUMER’s likely opponents in the Democratic primary include MARK GREEN, the New York City Public Advocate, and GERALDINE FERRARO, a former vice-presidential candidate and Congresswoman from Queens.
SCHUMER is a nine term congressman. He had been making methodical plans to run for governor of New York next year but decided in April that the political strength of Gov. GEORGE E. PATAKI was too great, and then aimed for the Senate.
Opinion polls earlier this year indicated that FERRARO would beat D’AMATO if the election had been held at the time of the survey. The same polls showed SCHUMER running just slightly behind D’AMATO. The most significant finding from the poll was that SCHUMER had the least name recognition upstate among the likely Democrat candidates.
Thus, Schumer dipped into his huge campaign warchest estimated to be in excess of $1 million and launched his campaign with television and radio spots on major Buffalo-Niagara Falls area stations.
Michael Bragman, majority leader of the New York assembly, has endorsed Schumer for the Senate nomination. Bragman’s endorsement of Schumer left many gun owners and sportsmen in the state opened-mouthed. Bragman has continually claimed to be pro-gun, pro-hunting and pro-sportsmen, and has been a major force on the little pro-gun, pro-sportsmen legislation that passes in the lower house of the New York Legislature, an assembly dominated by anti-gun Democrats from the New York City area.
Bragman said “let me underscore a key point: I think it would be a major strategic mistake for sportsmen to engage in inflammatory rhetoric that establishes gun ownership as a major issue in this contest.” SCHUMER has already done that.
The Shooters Committee on Political Education (SCOPE Inc.) has ordered thousands of buttons featuring “Schumer” overprinted with the red universal negative symbol.
MEXICAN CRIME WAVE SPURS VIGILANTES
Mexico is suffering such a huge crime wave that law-abiding citizens have lost confidence in their government and are taking the law into their own hands. What’s worse, the Mexican law-enforcement system, in which the police have often been inefficient and corrupt, is now seen as a dangerous enemy.
A September 1997 episode convinced the public that the police have become dangerously careless and brutal. In a rowdy Mexico City neighborhood called Buenos Aires, infamous for its busy market in stolen car parts, a shootout between police and bandits left one policeman and a bystander dead. Afterward six local youths, several of whom were passersby, were reported missing. During the following week, the youths’ bodies turned up in woods and sand pits. Autopsies showed they had been executed with pistols at point-blank range.
Transcripts of police radio traffic published by Mexico City newspapers showed that top commanders under the Mexico City police chief issued orders to officers on the scene during the shootout. A police officer was arrested and charged with involvement in three executions and the murder of the bystander killed in the September shootout. Another 18 officers were accused of involvement in a cover-up.
To protect themselves, Mexicans are rejecting government agencies and changing their views of how to fight crime. Even though Mexico, which is a majority Roman Catholic country, has long opposed the death penalty, radio and television talk shows have recently been deluged with callers demanding capital punishment for crimes such as murder, rape and aggravated assault.
More troublesome, lynchings and vigilante killings are increasing. In Mexico City, one unidentified vigilante who has been labeled “The Anonymous Avenger” is being linked to five shooting murders of muggers who were holding up passengers on public buses.
Urban residents are quietly arming themselves, mainly by purchasing handguns from the black market, since registering weapons legally is nearly impossible.
A few blocks from the headquarters of the Federal Judicial Police in Mexico City, a black market gun dealer in a natty white suit and costly dark glasses took time out from his bustling trade to talk to a New York Times reporter about his customers.
“My business has grown a lot because of a lack of public safety,” said the dealer, identified only by his street name, The Egyptian.
“It’s a vicious circle. Criminals need more and better weapons to work, and the number of private citizens who buy from me is growing, too.
“Even housewives who’ve been assaulted buy from me,” the dealer continued. He appeared relaxed despite the police patrol cars that passed by on their way to headquarters. “To tell you the truth, they are my best customers. I can sell them a good weapon at a good price. But thieves and people with higher debts to justice are tough to deal with. They want good weapons with no criminal record at a cheap price.”
A Mexican woman named Julieta Treviño Martínez formed a defense group for assault victims two years ago after she was attacked by two armed robbers in a crowded department store at noon. Because of the crime wave, almost everyone in Mexico has had or knows someone who has had such an experience. The victims’ group now has about 600 members.
The implications for the future of Mexico are grim.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BIGGER CLINTON GUN BAN
The Clinton Gun Ban of 1994, as is now clear, was only a prelude to a bid for more bans encompassing more guns than ever before.
President Clinton recently announced his anticipated “Bigger Clinton Gun Ban” on one of his Saturday radio addresses. It is yet another prohibition that bans more guns and shows more hypocrisy and deception than ever before.
The truth is that the guns Clinton wishes to ban from importation conform in every way to the law Clinton touted in 1994. These guns lack the features that the Clinton Administration once claimed meant everything.
The real question we should be asking is, “if the firearms Clinton banned from importation conform in every way to the President’s own Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, why are they being banned?”
INJUNCTION HEARINGS IN LAWSUIT CHALLENGING L. A. CITY GUN ORDINANCE
A coalition of UCLA professors, firearms dealers and entertainment industry supply companies recently asked a judge to stop the City of Los Angeles from implementing the city’s recently enacted and highly publicized gun control ordinance.
The ordinance bans the “sale or transfer” (including rentals and loans) of any “magazine, belt, drum, feed strip or similar device which has a capacity of, or which can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition.”
The ordinance exempts law enforcement and military, but does not exempt state licensed fully automatic firearm or “assault weapon” dealers. There are several such dealers in Los Angeles who rent thousands of these firearms, which cannot function without the prohibited magazines, to film and television production companies.
“This ordinance makes it impossible to film an action movie in the city of Los Angeles,” said civil rights attorney Chuck Michel, who is representing the plaintiffs. “The anti-self-defense politicians who drafted this ordinance are so ignorant of firearm technology, and of the firearms business, that they made a mistake that will cost the city millions of dollars in lost business from the film industry.”
Along with effectively banning the use of certain firearms in film productions, the ordinance also effectively prohibits the sale or loan of hundreds of collectors’ item firearms for which non-prohibited magazines are not available. Gun and antique collectors and historical museums are also affected by the oversight. Additionally, the law prohibits the sale of thousands of low-powered .22-caliber target rifles with “tubular” magazines that are permanently attached to the rifle.
The lawsuit alleges that the city lacks the authority to supersede the California Department of Justice licenses, and that cities do not have the power to regulate gun sales.
Plaintiffs in the case includes several UCLA medical and law school professors, EFX Film & Television, Inc. and B&B sales, the sporting goods store that loaned guns to the LAPD to fight the North Hollywood bank robbers. B&B recently auctioned off those guns, which became instant collectors items, and donated the proceeds to the L.A. Police Memorial Fund.
KIDS ARE LOADED FOR FUN AND GAMES
There’s no way to censor the imagination.
The sign at the Westminster Children’s Center child care facility entrance reads: “No toy guns zone.” But forbidding children to bring toy weapons to the center hasn’t seemed to deter them from participating in “shootouts” or other gun related games.
No matter how many rules are imposed, it seems impossible to diminish youngsters’ fascination with guns.
“Bang bang, you’re dead!” remains an oft-repeated refrain as children play, said Lisa Smith, who oversees a class of four-year olds at the center in Beaumont, Texas. “They actually don’t bring toy guns to school. But they make guns from other things in the classrooms,” Smith explained with a sigh.
Even when they can’t make guns out of something, kids point their fingers and go, “bang, bang!”
Many of the youngsters at the center have been thoroughly instructed on gun safety. They’ve completed children’s work books and watched videotapes, featuring Eddie Eagle swooping down from the sky to lecture children about the dangers of picking up Mom’s or Dad’s guns.
WITH VIOLENT CRIME ON RISE, RUSSIA UNLOCKS GUN CABINET
Responding to an emergency call, police arrived outside an apartment building on Moscow’s northwest side to a chillingly familiar scene: three bullet-sprayed bodies, pools of blood and an AK-47 assault rifle on the pavement.
The bodies belonged to prominent Moscow businessman Boris Gryaznov, his driver and a bodyguard. They joined the grim ranks of hundreds of suspected contract killings in Russia this year. It all, Russia has seen tens of thousands of gun-related crimes in 1997. In response, the government in July enacted a desperate attempt at comprehensive gun control - a measure that allows widespread ownership of guns for the first time since before the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution but restricts what types of weapon citizens can own.
PARTING SHOT
CALIFORNIA GOES GUN CONTROL
Our most populous state may seem like a stronghold of gun owners, but the following article by Thomas D. Elias in a recent edition of The Washington Times bears serious thought.
“With at least 300,000 National Rifle Association members and a governor who last month vetoed a bill designed to halt in-state production and sales of cheap handguns, California has acquired a reputation as a bastion of the national gun lobby.
“Actually, the state has become a national leader in innovative gun control. While drawing major national attention for his Saturday night special veto, Republican Gov. Pete Wilson signed four new bills this fall toughening state controls on guns.
“Indeed, the NRA describes California as “near the top in gun control, considering the depth and breadth of its laws.”
“Among the bills Mr. Wilson signed is one requiring handgun owners who move to California to register their firearms with the state within sixty days. Another subjects of gun owner to prosecution if he keeps a loaded weapon and a child age 16 or younger wounds or kills someone with it. The third makes it a crime to sell handgun ammunition to anyone under 21.
“All those laws were written by Democrats in the state legislature, yet they still describe themselves as frustrated by Mr. Wilson’s veto and by their own failure to pass broad additions to the state’s assault weapon controls, which now ban sales of 75 specific types and brands of guns....
“While gun advocates so far have reacted with scorn to the new state laws, insisting they do not change much, they are responding with lawsuits to some of the local measures passed in the past year or so.
“So far, 33 cities and counties — including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose — have adopted bans on sales of Saturday Night Special. 39 have passed limits on ammunition sales, with most similar to the pending Los Angeles ordinance requiring background checks and purchase of permits before anyone can buy bullets for handguns.
“Buyers must also leave a thumbprint at any stores where they buy ammunition. “By making it harder to get ammo, we’re making it more likely that some crimes that would have been committed won’t be,” said Los Angeles City Councilman Michael Feuer.
Handgun control advocates say the fact that so many localities have passed similar laws will make them all more effective.
“If it was one city by itself, and nobody else was doing it, it would be very easy to evade,” said Luis Tolley of Handgun Control Inc. “Really, ultimately, we need it on a federal basis. But you start locally.”
Are we listening?
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report: An Insiders Guide for Gun Owners
$30 for a full year of 12 great issues
This publication is available to be ordered online! Find out how, and start your subscription today!
Printed in the USA.
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report (ISSN 1079-6169) is published monthly by the:
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005
Phone (425) 454-7012. FAX (425) 451-3959Please call or write if you have a question regarding your subscription.
Subscriptions $30 per year anywhere in the USA, $35 elsewhere. Single issues $5.00.Send address changes to:
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report
12500 N.E. 10th Place
Bellevue, WA 98005Publishers: Alan M. Gottlieb and Joseph P. Tartaro
Editor: Ron Arnold
Design: Northwoods Studio
Production: Janet Arnold
Subscriptions: Susan Elings
Published by: Second Amendment FoundationCopyright 1999-2002 by Alan M. Gottlieb and Joseph P. Tartaro.
Photocopying, reproduction or quotation strictly prohibited without written permission of the publishers.
Bulk rates on request. Postage paid at Bellevue, WA.