Bonzer Wolf Today™


Pennsylvania Concealed Carry HB 2398

Kim Stolfer, President, Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Against Crime needs your help defending Second Amendment civil rights in PA.

PA Attorney General, Kathleen Kane, holds the ‘right to carry a firearm’ for self-defense in low regard. She ran for office on a gun control platform (see it here:

Her conduct demonstrates an ideologue mentality regarding firearm ownership by her policies in limiting, modifying and/or outright eliminating reciprocity & recognition agreements with other states. These policies have greatly impacted not only residents of PA but also non-residents from a growing number of states.

There is now a solution to this problem – HB 2398 —- (introduced by state Rep. Rick Saccone) which is currently in the PA House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.

This legislation will close the bureaucratic loophole that the Attorney General is using to modify these interstate agreements. So far she has modified or cancelled agreements with 5 states - Florida, Arizona, Virginia, Idaho and Utah.

We need your help in reaching out to PA House members to solicit their support, co-sponsorship and direct intervention in seeing this legislation moved out of committee and to the floor of the House for a full vote!

We are asking YOU to go to the USRKBA Action Center and take a moment to send an email (through the site below) to your Pro-Gun PA State House Representative urging him/her to rein in this rogue Attorney General. Completing this action will send your message to EVERY Pro-Gun House member in the PA Legislature.

USRKBA Action Center

Please help us with this effort to see this legislation is pushed through the Judiciary Committee and to the House floor for a vote and then to the Senate for a vote and passed.

For an elected state official, AG Kathleen Kane, to so brazenly toy with the right of citizens to defend themselves and their loved ones is a betrayal of the public trust.

If you can’t get the USRKBA site to validate, please contact your rep through other means. Click this link:

The life you save with this action may just be your own. Thank you SO MUCH for your help.


Dirty Harry Campaign to Demonize Koch Brothers is a Failure

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s scorched-earth campaign to “demonize” the libertarian-minded Koch brothers hasn’t hurt them, Tim Phillips, the president of the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity, said Tuesday.

“I don’t think most Americans can agree with the supposed leader of the Senate,” Phillips said in an interview with the Review-Journal when asked about Reid charges the Kochs are manipulating politics for their own benefit. “It may whip up some of their (Democrats’) hard, hard liberal base … reaching for a villain. We haven’t seen this working so far.”

Philips is heading to Las Vegas to participate in FreedomFest, an annual gathering starting Wednesday of free thinkers, entrepreneurs and folks who think author George Orwell was right about the dangers of “Big Brother” government. The meeting attracts about 2,500 people and will be held through Saturday at Planet Hollywood on the Strip.

Americans for Prosperity plans to spend $100 million this year, according to the Washington Post, partly to back GOP efforts in the 2014 elections to take control of the U.S. Senate where Reid, D-Nev., reigns. But the organization that promotes free markets and less government regulation and taxes to spur the economy also is expanding operations in states such as Nevada, a must-win battleground in White House races. It is operating in 32 states so far, Phillips said.

“We simply do not think in terms of election cycles,” Phillips said. “Our goal is to build a long-term infrastructure that will be able to push forward prosperity for a maximum number of Americans who believe in economic freedom policies.”

Phillips said the organization might not open offices in every state, but will focus on both battleground states as well as those that lean heavily Republican (such as Oklahoma) or Democratic (such as Illinois) where they’re operating now and “where we can make a difference in the long term” on the federal, state and local levels.

Continue reading here




Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act Faces Crucial Senate Vote Today

U.S. SENATE EXPECTED TO VOTE ON LIMITING DEBATE ON MOTION TO PROCEED … The “Bipartisan Sportsmen’s Act,” S. 2363, with 45 co-sponsors and the support of the nation’s leading sportsmen’s and traditional conservation groups, faces a key procedural vote later today that will allow Senators to take up the historic package of legislation to expand hunting, fishing and shooting opportunities on public lands. Today, a letter to all Senators was sent on behalf of more than 40 organizations representing millions of hunters, target shooters, anglers and wildlife enthusiasts expressing appreciation for the Senate’s strong bipartisan work on S.2363 and urging passage of this historic package of legislation this week. Anti-hunting and extremist environmental groups are working to derail the most important piece of pro-sportsmen’s bills in a generation. To protect your hunting and shooting heritage, call 202-224-3121 and ask your senators to vote to move forward. You can also send emails to your senatorsGet NSSF’s fact sheet on S.2363.  


Good Guy with Concealed Carry Permit Fights Back in Chicago 

One of the spate of shootings that took place in Chicago, Ill. over the July 4th holiday weekend involved a veteran with a concealed carry permit who was forced to a shoot a man who began firing on him and a group of friends.

The incident occurred Friday night, the Chicago Tribune reports.


The veteran and three of his friends were leaving a party on the city’s south side. When the group reached their vehicle, a container with liquor was sitting on top of it. A woman from the group asked another group gathered next door who the liquor belonged to and removed it.

The move angered 22 year-old Denzel Mickiel, who approached the veteran and his friends shouting obscenities. The man then went into his residence and returned with a gun.

As Mickiel opened fire on the group, the veteran took cover near the vehicle’s front fender, according to assistant state attorney Mary Hain, the Chicago Tribune reports.

The veteran fired two shots, hitting Mickiel both times.

Two of Mickiel’s friends also began shooting at the group, which was able to flee the scene in their vehicle.

Mickiel was transported to the hospital and is in critical condition. A woman in the veteran’s group was hit twice – once in the arm and once in the back – but was stabilized and taken to the hospital.

Mickiel is charged with attempted murder and will be held on $950,000 bond.

Had Friday’s shooting occurred a little more than a year ago, the veteran would not have been legally permitted to conceal carry his firearm.

Illinois was the last U.S. state to allow citizens to carry concealed weapons with a permit, finally passing a law on July 9, 2013. The state began issuing conceal carry permits in February.

Seven people died and approximately 50 were injured in shootings that took place in Chicago over the weekend. The city has among the highest violent crime rates among major U.S. cities.



That’s the headline you should be seeing, but won’t. Instead, you will see headlines like this one, on CNN: “Study links gun laws and lower gun mortality.” Or this one, from the Chicago Tribune: “States with strict gun laws found to have fewer shooting deaths.”

The study they are talking about was conducted by Dr. Eric Fleegler of Boston and published in JAMA Internal Medicine. You can read it here. Dr. Fleegler is an anti-gun activist who reportedly has signed a petition calling on the federal government to enact stricter gun control measures. His study, one surmises, was timed to try to influence the current Congressional debate over gun control. But what does it actually show?

Fleegler classified the 50 states according to how many gun laws they have. Using an alternative measure, he classified them according to the effectiveness of their gun laws as rated by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. He then looked at gun-related fatalities on a state by state basis, including both homicides and suicides, from 2007 through 2010. The key data are summarized in Table 2, which shows how the 50 states are ranked and the suicide and homicide statistics that Fleegler used. In making his findings, Fleegler purports to have controlled for a wide array of other variables. It will take some time for those with expertise in statistics and access to Fleegler’s data to determine whether there are technical flaws in his analysis.

But what jumps out at you when you read Fleegler’s article is that the decrease in fatalities that he documents relates almost exclusively to suicides. What his study really shows is that strict gun laws have little or no impact on gun homicides:

Compared with the quartile of states with the fewest laws, the quartile with the most laws had a lower firearm suicide rate (absolute rate difference, 6.25 deaths/100 000/y; IRR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.48-0.83) and a lower firearm homicide rate (absolute rate difference, 0.40 deaths/100 000/y; IRR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38-0.95).

Elsewhere in the article, Fleegler states that he did not get any statistically significant correlations except when he compared the “top” group–the states with the strictest gun laws–against the “bottom” group, those with the fewest regulations. In this comparison, Fleegler found a lower gun-mortality rate in the strict states of 6.65 deaths per 100,000 population. But virtually all of this difference was in the suicide rate–6.25 deaths. Almost none was in homicides–0.40 deaths per 100,000.

If you do the math, the ten “top” states, i.e., those with the most controls on guns, averaged 3.2 gun homicides per 100,000 population, while the ten “bottom” states averaged 3.5 gun homicides per 100,000. So the rate was slightly higher in the least regulated states. But that is only because Louisiana is an outlier–it has the highest homicide rate of any state, while it also has relatively few gun statutes. 

You can see what an anomaly Louisiana is. If you take Louisiana out of the equation, the remaining nine lowest-regulation states have an average gun homicide rate of 2.8 per 100,000, which is 12.5% less than the average of the ten states with the strictest gun control laws. There is another irony, too: North Dakota is one of Fleegler’s bottom quartile of lax states, but its gun homicide rate is so low that it is entered on the chart as “Not available.” It seems rather obvious that the strictness of a state’s gun laws has little or nothing to do with its homicide rate.

But there is more: note that Fleegler’s study covers all 50 states, but leaves out the District of Columbia. Why do you suppose he chose to do that? Because the District has 1) some of the nation’s most draconian gun laws, and 2) the highest murder rate in the country, higher even than Louisiana’s. In 2011, the District had a firearms homicide rate of 12.46 per 100,000. Now let’s redo Fleegler’s math, with the District counted as one of the ten strictest jurisdictions. We now have an average rate of 4.0 gun homicides per 100,000 in the ten most anti-gun jurisdictions, and a gun homicide rate of 3.5 per 100,000 in the ten jurisdictions with the fewest gun regulations, even if we include the outlier, Louisiana.

Based on those numbers, you could argue that strict gun laws cause more gun violence. I wouldn’t necessarily go that far; I think it is fairer to say that Fleegler’s study doesn’t prove anything at all, but suggests, at least, that draconian gun laws are ineffective when it comes to homicide–which, after all, is what those laws are primarily intended to prevent.

Suicide is a different matter. When we look at the data we see that the large, urbanized, mostly eastern and Great Lakes states that have lots of gun laws also tend to have low suicide rates. The nation’s highest suicide rates, on the other hand, are found in thinly populated Western states that also have lots of firearms and not a lot of gun regulation–Alaska, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Nevada. Why do more people commit suicide in those states? In Alaska, I think it is because the state is cold and dark for six months out of the year. This is a subject which mental health professionals should address, and no doubt have.

But from the standpoint of gun legislation, it is ambiguous at best. Progresives should say that a person has a right to commit suicide. You know the, RIGHT TO CHOOSE, which is at the top of evert liberal’s list.

If guns are the suicide weapon of choice, and it is easy to see why they are for most people, why should the state try to make its citizens use other, more difficult or painful means? On the other hand, some people undoubtedly do commit suicide on impulse who, if they had not had access to a gun or other effective means, may have gone on to live a happy or at least normal life. This is an argument for keeping guns away from those who are suicidally depressed, locking them up in your home, and so on. But those mental health issues are very different from the scare headlines on the basis of which activists like Dr. Fleegler are trying to sell unconstitutional gun measures to the voters.