Printed in the USA.
Second Amendment Foundation ISSN 1079-6169
The Gottlieb-Tartaro Report
Issue 038
February, 1998
Also in this issue: -- Court TV exonerates gun maker -- James Brady condemns Arizona sheriff's gun raffle -- Analysts give CCW laws good marks -- Big-money foundations pushing international gun control -- Mourning the loss of gun-rights friend Sonny Bono -- Swiss "gun control" in our Page Eight "Parting Shot"
Dear Subscriber,
It's shaping up as "The Shootout at the Commonwealth Corral." Gun manufacturers and sellers have filed a landmark lawsuit against SCOTT HARSHBARGER, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, challenging new handgun regulations. The Massachusetts AG prompted the legal action by issuing a series of handgun regulations with staggered effective dates through 1998, becoming increasingly restrictive to the point of ending handgun sales in the state.
The American Shooting Sports Council, Inc., (ASSC), a firearm industry trade association, filed the lawsuit against the Attorney General for exceeding his authority under the state’s consumer protection laws. The offending regulations were issued under the guise of consumer protection, according to the lawsuit, but the AG went beyond the scope of his consumer protection authority into the area of banning handguns. This regulatory ploy must be stopped before it spreads further.
The lawsuit, which seeks to have the court nullify the regulations and stop their enforcement, was a last resort after long negotiations. ASSC Executive Director RICHARD J. FELDMAN said, "Over the past year industry representatives have been meeting with the Attorney General's office in efforts to reach workable solutions regarding firearm safety and the criminal use of our products. Our offers and concerns were rejected and dismissed out of hand. It is clear that these regulations are not about consumer safety. They are not about reducing violence."
The first set of HARSCHBARGER's regulations recently went into effect, requiring "handgun purveyors" (manufacturers, distributors and retailers) to include with the firearm’s packaging a long warning notice propagandizing about the “dangers” of keeping a handgun in the home. Retail dealers are also required to demonstrate to their customers how to load, unload and safely store the handgun, and how to engage and disengage all safety devices. Dealers also must inform their customer whether or not the handgun has a load indicator, a magazine safety disconnect or an internal safety.
These regulations, said ASSC's FELDMAN, "are a back-door approach to gun prohibition by the bureaucratic expediency of regulatory fiat. They are about banning the sale of handguns. That is SCOTT HARSCHBARGER's obvious and ultimate goal, and he does not have the authority to impose a gun ban on the citizens of the Commonwealth."
The suit was filed in Superior Court, Suffolk, by former Assistant U.S. Attorney Frank Libby of the firm of Day, Berry & Howard. Plaintiffs in the case include the ASSC, which represents firearm manufactures, distributors and retailers, and handgun manufacturers Smith & Wesson of Springfield, Massachusetts, Glock, Inc., of Smyrna, Georgia, and Taurus International of Miami, Florida.
FELDMAN said, "Rather than properly pursuing the volatile issue of gun control through the forum of public debate, the Attorney General has usurped that process with the stroke of a pen."
The regulations will remain in force until the court rules.
COURT TV VICTORY FOR GUNMAKER
A recent Court TV product liability case involved a claim against gun manufacturer Sturm Ruger & Company, Inc. for the wrongful death of a man who dropped a Ruger revolver which accidentally discharged a bullet that killed him.
The civil suit originated in Montana, filed by the father of the man who died in the gun accident. ROGER SIBLERUD sued Sturm Ruger for the wrongful death of his son PATRICK, 25, who died in 1993 after he dropped a Ruger revolver which accidentally went off when it hit the ground. The bullet hit PATRICK SIBLERUD in the abdomen, which caused fatal internal injuries.
The suit sought compensation for ROGER SIBLERUD's son's estate and PATRICK's nine-year-old son from Sturm Ruger, the gun's manufacturer. The plaintiff claimed that the design of the Ruger revolver was defective and that Ruger revolvers are prone to fire unexpectedly when dropped or bumped. SIBLERUD also claimed that Sturm Ruger had known about its product's hazard since it began making the revolvers in 1953.
Sturm Ruger denied having any liability in PATRICK SIBLERUD's death, with the implication that PATRICK SIBLERUD may have been negligent in his handling of the revolver. The defendant claimed that SIBLERUD should have known about the potential dangers of the Ruger revolver. Sturm Ruger contended that anyone who handles a Ruger revolver knows that only five out of its six chambers should be loaded with bullets, with the hammer of the gun above the empty chamber, which would prevent an accidental shooting. Apparently the revolver was fully loaded at the time of PATRICK SIBLERUD's shooting.
The facts of the case showed that on June 19, 1993, PATRICK SIBLERUD and several friends went camping at the Spotted Bear Campground in Flathead County, Montana. He borrowed a Ruger Blackhawk Single Action .357-caliber revolver from a friend earlier that day and brought it with him for protection. While PATRICK was unloading his camping gear from the vehicle, the revolver fell to the ground and fired a bullet that penetrated PATRICK's abdomen and went deep into his chest.
PATRICK's friends and other campers applied first aid and called for a medical helicopter, which arrived at the campground about an hour after the victim sustained the gunshot wound. PATRICK was conscious and lucid the entire time, talking to the doctors about his injury. The medical team transported Patrick to the nearest hospital where hospital personnel treated him. Despite their efforts, PATRICK died from his injuries about 40 minutes after arriving at the hospital, survived by his parents, his ex-wife KIMBERLY and his son ANDREW.
A story in The Wall Street Journal stated that Ruger stopped manufacturing the Ruger Blackhawk Single Action .357-caliber revolvers in 1972. According to the Journal, more than 600 people have been in accidental shootings involving Ruger guns.
The jury took about five hours of deliberation to yield a 9 to 3 vote that Ruger did not produce a defective gun and was not liable in the death of PATRICK SIBLERUD. However, the plaintiffs and defendants had agreed on the way to the courthouse that Ruger would pay the SIBLERUD's $150,000 if Ruger won and $550,000 if they lost, so there was no issue of damages before the court. Both sides forfeited the right to appeal, saying they wanted to end the litigation.
Courtroom Television Network owns Court TV, a program in which actual cases are tried and parties are bound by the decision as in any other court.
DALLAS POLICE PROGRAM REDUCES RANDOM GUNFIRE
You hear it on New Year's Eve and it sounds like firecrackers. But it's random gunfire, a dangerous rite that breaks out mostly in holiday and weekend festivity but has the potential of causing injuries and even death.
Responsible gun owners know that bullets fired randomly into the air have to land somewhere, and that they fall at lethal speeds. Random gunfire is definitely not the act of a responsible gun owner.
The Dallas, Texas, Police Department began tracking reports of random gunfire in 1993, when they received 28,263 such calls. The department launched several initiatives to crack down on random gunfire and educate the public about its dangers. The campaign included posters in English and Spanish, as well as discussions during community meetings. The department also beefed up its holiday and weekend force by limiting employee leave during peak periods and placing patrol officers on special assignment to respond to random gunfire calls. Police also emphasized the legal penalties it can draw: up to a year in prison and a $4,000 fine. By 1996, the number of calls had fallen to 12,420.
This past New Year's, the department made seven arrests and received 500 calls about random gunfire. At least three people were injured -- shot in the neck, hand or leg -- by random gunfire.
The Dallas Police also joined a national pilot program in 1996 to install sensors on utility poles in the north Oak Cliff district to detect the sources of random gunfire. It identified 215 gunshots in two months. But police found that calls from residents were more accurate, and the department dropped out of the sensor program.
Dallas Police Chief BEN CLICK recently told the Dallas City Council's Public Safety Committee of their success in reducing random gunfire. "It's probably declining in a lot of other cities," he said, "because a lot of emphasis has been placed on it because of the danger it presents."
ARIZONA SHERIFF'S POSSE GUN RAFFLE ANNOYS JIM BRADY
Gun-control advocate JIM BRADY, former press secretary who was paralyzed by an assassin's bullet in the attempt on President RONALD REAGAN's life in 1980, sent a letter to Maricopa County Sheriff JOE ARPAIO condemning the posse's raffle of an AR-15 "assault" rifle.
BRADY wrote, "It is a disturbing twist of irony that the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Posse would, in an attempt to support your department, make available the exact same type of military weapon that has repeatedly been used to injure and kill law-enforcement officers."
Sheriff ARPAIO staunchly defended his posse's fund-raising effort after reading the four-paragraph letter. "I don't know what Mr. Brady is getting to here," the sheriff said. "We have .357s and .38s that kill law-enforcement officers, too, so do we ban all weapons because of that reason?"
Brady's letter contained two errors: One, the AR-15 is not a military weapon, it is a civilian version of the military M-16. Two, AR-15s have rarely been fired at law enforcement officers, and injuries or killings with the weapon are extremely rare.
The posse sold about 900 tickets for the raffle at $5 apiece or 5 for $20. The winner of the AR-15 was a responsible Scottsdale gun collector who wished to remain anonymous. He will have to go through the federal background check mandated by the Brady Act in order to keep the pre-ban AR-15.
Sheriff ARPAIO said of BRADY, "He's an honorable person, and he has his opinions, and he is trying to do what he feels is correct. I don't think he should go after the posse on this situation."
TWO TOP ANALYSTS DEFEND CONCEALED CARRY
MORGAN O. REYNOLDS and H. STERLING BURNETT have combined their talents to give us a clear vote of confidence in the effectiveness of concealed carry laws to reduce crime.
REYNOLDS is director of the National Center for Policy Analysis Criminal Justice Center and an economics professor at Texas A&M University. BURNETT is a policy analyst for the National Center for Policy Analysis. They recently wrote an article for the Investors Business Daily that pointed out the state-level victories being won by gun-rights advocates, despite being on the defensive at the national level.
The standard argument against "concealed carry" laws is that the average Joe has no good reason to carry a gun. But federal courts have ruled that police aren't obliged to protect individuals from crime. That means citizens are responsible for their own defense. That is a stark reality all must face.
Thirty-one states now let citizens carry concealed weapons compared to only nine states in 1986. REYNOLDS and BURNETT ask, "Have these new laws made the public safer or more at risk?"
Florida State University criminologist GARY KLECK found that criminals commit 10 million violent crimes a year, and that victims use handguns about 1.9 million times in self-defense. Research shows that robbery and rape victims who resist with a gun are only half as likely to be injured as those who don't.
A recent study by JOHN LOTT and DAVID MUSTARD of the University of Chicago published in the Journal of Legal Studies found that concealed carry handgun laws reduced murder by 8.5% and severe assault by 7% from 1977 to 1992.
Vermont citizens can carry a firearm concealed or unconcealed without a permit, and has among the lowest violent crime numbers in the country. In 1996, Vermont’s murder rate was 22% of the national average and its robbery rate was 15%. Dade County, Florida, kept detailed records for six years. Of 21,000 carry permit holders, there was no reported incident of a permit holder injuring an innocent person.
Virginia issued more than 50,000 permits since it passed a concealed carry law in 1995. In that time, not one permit holder has been convicted of a crime, and violent crime has dropped.
In all, the death rate from firearms accidents has dropped more than 19% in the last decade, and the number of gun-related accidents among children fell to an all-time low of 165 in 1994, down 64% since 1975.
REYNOLDS and BURNETT conclude, "Keeping honest, law-abiding people unarmed and at the mercy of armed and violent criminals was never a good idea. In the gun policy debate, gun-rights advocates can argue honestly that a general concealed-carry law is sound public policy."
ALASKA LAWMAKERS OVERTURN CONCEALED CARRY VETO
The Alaska legislature has overturned Governor TONY KNOWLES's veto of last year's Right To Carry Reform bill, Senate Bill 141.
A joint hearing of the Alaska State House and Senate was held recently to consider the override, which received 45 of 60 possible votes, or 75 percent of the total. Only 40 votes were required for the override. Thirty-one of 40 House members voted to override, while 14 of 20 Senators voted for the override. Six Democrats were reported to have voted against their governor.
S. B. 141, which is now the law in Alaska, reduces Concealed Carry of Weapons fees, reduces the number of restrictions on where a concealed weapon can and cannot be carried, reduces the categories of restricted or disqualified individuals, and grants limited ("R-3") reciprocity -- the type of reciprocity that tells other states, "we'll recognize your concealed carry law if it substantially meets our requirements."
This veto override is a significant milestone in the nationwide gun-rights effort to bring legal self-defense to every American.
NEW SENATE EFFORT TO STOP ANTI-GUN SURGEON GENERAL CONFIRMATION
Sen. JOHN ASHCROFT of Missouri is launching an all-out effort to stop the nomination of rabidly anti-gun Dr. DAVID SATCHER, current Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to be the next Surgeon General of the United States.
Sen. ASHCROFT, along with Majority Leader TRENT LOTT and others, have placed SATCHER's nomination on hold. The hold means that the Senate cannot proceed to consideration of the nomination without debate. This eliminates the possibility of a mere pro forma confirmation vote that raises no questions.
LOTT has been rumored to be ready to lift the hold, but if that happens, ASHCROFT will maintain his. ASHCROFT has publicly taken the position that President CLINTON should withdraw the nomination and that if the President does not, ASHCROFT will fight it tooth and nail.
According to a memo from JOHN M. SNYDER, Washington representative of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, ASHCROFT has said that if the nomination proceeds, he will make sure that the Senate is familiar with all of the facts regarding the nomination before proceeding to a vote. This could mean a filibuster, and that could mean a cloture attempt soon.
The gun-rights community is not the only segment of society to register its opposition to SATCHER. At a recent Human Events forum at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., ASHCROFT, former U.S. Rep. RANDY TATE, now Executive Director of the Christian Coalition, GARY BAUER, President of the Family Research Council, and TERENCE E. JEFFREY, Editor of Human Events, all denounced SATCHER's nomination on the grounds of moral issues.
GUN-FREE ZONE CASE VOLUNTARILY WITHDRAWN
Based on a statement in the Justice Department's reply brief that the Gun-Free School Zones Act does not apply to home schoolers, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. Michael Farris, president and chief counsel for the plaintiffs, Home School Legal Defense Association, characterized the outcome as a victory.
The language in the reply brief that ended the lawsuit reads: "The Department of Justice does not interpret the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1996 to apply ... to individuals who home school their own children and otherwise maintain a firearm in their residence."
Farris said, "With their interpretation, the Justice Department is saying that no home schooler can be charged with violation of this Act simply because they possess a gun in their own home. Our objective has been successfully achieved."
FIREARMS TRADE EXPO TO BE PARTICIPANT-OWNED
At the third annual Firearms Trade Expo this May 2 & 3 in Columbus, Ohio, the private company that got it going will begin giving legal ownership to participants.
In a closed stock offering, the firm, Firearms Trade Expo, will give each participant a voucher with a value equal to one share of FTE stock for each dollar spent on booth space. Transfer of the actual stock shares is set to begin shortly afterward.
FTE Director Andrew Molchan told us, "The idea behind the FTE was always to have an American firearms trade expo that was legally owned by American main-line firearms / hunting companies."
The Expo's low booth space charges will not change.
Participation in the first two FTE shows will be recognized by vouchers for one-half share in FTE for each dollar they spent for booth space.
Mr. Molchan emphasized that prospects for future FTE programs were excellent because "the owners of the Firearms Trade Expo will make those decisions."
Interested parties can contact Mr. Ed Conyers at 1-800-453-1643.
NATIONAL ISSUES
In Memoriam: SONNY BONO. Gun owners across the nation lost a good friend last month when Rep. SONNY BONO died in a skiing accident. Rep. BONO stood up to anti-gun pressure on many issues, including his vote to repeal the 1994 CLINTON Gun Ban during the 104th Congress. He had also signed on to the H.R. 339, the National Right to Carry Reciprocity Bill. We mourn his loss.
Ruby Ridge Trial. The United States Justice Department continues to pay the court defense costs for LON HORIUCHI, the FBI sniper who shot and killed VICKI WEAVER, wife of RANDY WEAVER, during the 1992 siege of Ruby Ridge, Idaho. HORIUCHI will stand trial in an Idaho court for involuntary manslaughter. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last September that a civil case against HORIUCHI could proceed. The court called the "shoot on sight" orders that were in place during the siege "a gross deviation from constitutional principles and a wholly unwarranted return to a lawless and arbitrary Wild West school of law enforcement."
WORLD GUN CONTROL GROUPS TOUT EFFORTS AS "ARMS CONTROL"
They came away from Ottawa with a treaty to ban land mines. They realized they could capitalize on their momentum (and please their funders) by going after guns next.
"They" are a bevy of nongovernmental organizations ("NGOs") you've never heard of, such as the "Monterey Institute of International Studies" in California and the "British American Security Information Council," with offices in London and Washington, D.C. And they're fronting for an array of ultra-wealthy foundations that want to make the world safe for big money -- which means taking guns away from everybody.
JOSEPH SMALDONE, a veteran of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, described the situation to the New York Times: "The land mines campaigners achieved great success. Now they are going to capitalize on that momentum. It is already well organized and deeply committed, and it brings together everyone from arms control types to humanitarian activists."
One week after the land mines treaty was signed in Ottawa recently, two big organizations sponsored a two-day conference on "Controlling the Global Trade in Light Weapons." The purpose: spur progress toward banning all guns everywhere, one step at a time, starting under the banner of "a campaign against small arms trafficking." Anti-gunners came from as far away as South Africa, India, and New Zealand, and predictably included CLINTON administration officials.
By stretching the cold-war concept of preventing the outbreak of global war by controlling the proliferation of nuclear and strategic weapons, this batch of activist organizations now proposes to legitimize gun bans by calling for a treaty banning the proliferation of "small arms" and "light weapons" (and they're not talking about Luke Skywalker's Star Wars light saber).
"Light weapons" are generally defined by these folks as a weapon that can be carried by an individual or fired by a small crew -- automatic rifles, submachine guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, small mortars and shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles.
[ The theory is that when wars end, the supply of such weapons on the market increases, the price drops dramatically, and they are bought by common criminals. Well, we've seen lots of crooks walk into banks with a Stinger anti-aircraft missile on their shoulder and say, "Stick 'em up," haven't we?
The trouble is, small arms can include ordinary pistols and revolvers as well as semi-automatic rifles and more impressive hardware. We have seen so many of these do-gooder groups engage in “mission creep,” ever reaching for an ever-flying goal, that we’re wise to their "incrementalism." They figure they can kill us by inches and we'll never notice until it's too late. Sorry. Gun owners aren't that naive.
And don't forget ammunition. NATALIE GOLDRING, director of the Project on Light Weapons at the British American Security Information Council, says the focus of the campaign must be on controlling the manufacture and sale of ammunition, since the world is awash in light weapons already. This is all tiresomely familiar.
So we now know we have a formidable enemy: the international gun grabber. If they can't take our guns by U.S. laws, they'll do it by international treaty.
Who pays these Mission Creeps to assault our liberties? Big money foundations are behind this whole scam with what they call "grant-driven projects." That means the big foundations design the overall project and then give money to batches of orchestrated groups with orders to perform.
The British American Security Information Council got $224,000 from the Ford Foundation in 1995 "For program on Controlling the Trade in Light Weapons: An International Field Development Project." The W. Alton Jones Foundation (the CitGo Oil fortune) gave them $175,000 in 1995. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation gave them $150,000 in 1995. They get dozens of other grants each year. Their total annual budget is astronomical.
The Monterey Institute of International Studies got $400,000 from the Ford Foundation in 1996 for "program development." W. Alton Jones Foundation gave them $300,000. The John Merck Fund (the pharmaceutical fortune) gave them $75,000. The Rockefeller Foundation gave them $25,000. And on and on. You get the picture.
A LOOK AT THE STATES
California: AB 1369, a bill to standardize the statewide issuance policies of concealed carry weapons, was voted down in the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Gun rights advocates in the Assembly, particularly Assemblyman RICO OLLER (R-Calaveras) will keep bringing the issue back up. OLLER stated, "California's time has come for CCW reform."
Florida: Anti-gunners are trying to shoot down Florida's firearms preemption law with a proposed constitutional amendment, CRC-167. This amendment is loaded with trouble: licensing and registration schemes, gun rationing plans, waiting periods, all by allowing counties to regulate guns and ammunition any way they wish, short of a total ban. CRC-167 has been reported out of committee and is waiting for consideration by the full commission, which could come at any time. If 22 of the 37 commission members approve the proposal, it could appear on the November 1998 ballot.
Indiana: Two bills are of concern: HB 1046, which would amend the state’s Right To Carry law by prohibiting 18- to 21-year-olds from obtaining carry permits. SB 111 would mandate trigger locks on all handguns, among other ill-considered requirements.
Nebraska: LB 465, a Right To Carry bill is pending before the legislature this session, furthering the CCW reform movement.
New Hampshire: HB 1199 would require Right to Carry applicants to complete an expensive training course with stiff requirements. HB 1200 would ban the manufacture, sale and transfer of all magazines capable to accepting over 10 rounds. Current owners of such magazines would have to turn them in. The bills have gone through a public hearing at which gun owners expressed their concerns, and now move to subcommittee for further consideration.
Pennsylvania: Philadelphia Mayor ED RENDELL has had his lawyers prepare a lawsuit contending that the gun industry has created "a public nuisance by saturating Philadelphia with firearms used by criminals." The suit seeks money payments from firearms manufacturers to reimburse the city for "millions of dollars ... stemming from guns." Legal experts feel the city has little if any chance of prevailing in such a bizarre legal action, but the gun manufacturers who have to defend themselves against it will face substantial legal fees and the usual drubbing in the media.
Texas: The state's Right To Carry law is under attack from the Violence Policy Center, which wants it repealed. No bill is under consideration, but a recent new conference in Austin by the violence group has many guessing that one may be in the drafting process. Any attempt to repeal the CCW law would likely fail. GLENN WHITE, President of the Dallas Police Association, tells a story like many in Texas law enforcement: 'I lobbied against the law in 1993 and 1995 because I thought it would lead to wholesale armed conflict. That hasn't happened. All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn't happen. No bogeyman. I think it's worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I'm a convert."
Parting Shot
GUN CONTROL, SWISS STYLESwitzerland has an interesting gun control law: you had better be able to control your gun well enough to hit a target at least 17 out of 20 tries in the annual test. The "gun" is actually the Fass 90 assault rifle that stays with every Swiss citizen-soldier until he dies.
The Fass 90 is the symbol of Switzerland's reserve soldier corps. It's as much a part of the national identity as the little red Swiss army knife and bomb shelters for every family.
And every year the citizen soldier oils its breach, cleans its magazine, then kisses the family good-bye to head to the local shooting range for the national "obligatory 20 shots." If he does not miss the target "more than three times" and scores at least 42 points, he can take his weapon back home and sling it over the fireplace until the same time next year.
If he fails the shooting test, he has to pay for his own ammunition until he makes the required score. When he passes, he gets an official stamp in his "military performance booklet."
After 20 years of this, or around the age of 40, the Swiss reserve soldier is no longer required to go through the annual shooting test. But he keeps his rifle, which does not leave his home until he dies.
The "obligatory shooting," as it is known, is a Swiss institution more than 100 years old. Today it is valued more as a ritual to cement social cohesion in this nation of 26 cantons and four languages than as meeting strategic requirements for the country's defense.
Every Swiss male must go through a 15-week military service at age 20. He is then registered with his local unit where, until age 40, he will be required to serve 10 military sessions of 19 days each.
In 1997, nearly 350,000 soldiers took part in this exercise officially aimed at "improving the soldiers handling of firearms in the interest of national defense," according to an official government document.
Almost no one refuses to fulfil their military duty in this small, land-locked Alpine nation that has maintained its neutrality since World War II. Anti-military demonstrations are rare. When, after the fall of the Berlin Wall in neighboring Germany, a 1989 referendum asked if the army should be dropped, two out of every three Swiss residents said "no."
And that Fass 90 assault rifle hangs over the mantle every day like a trophy in every home. Every adult Swiss male is in control of his rifle.
That's gun control. Swiss style.
Is there a lesson here?
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.