Keep and Bear Arms
Home Members Login/Join About Us News/Editorials Archives Take Action Your Voice Web Services Free Email
You are 1 of 595 active visitors Saturday, October 01, 2022
Main Email List:

State Email Lists:
Click Here
Join/Renew Online
Join/Renew by Mail
Make a Donation
Magazine Subscriptions
KABA Memorial Fund
Advertise Here
Use KABA Free Email




Keep and Bear Arms - Vote In Our Polls
Do you oppose Biden's anti-gun executive orders?

Current results
Earlier poll results
2508 people voted



» U.S. Gun Laws
» AmeriPAC
» NoInternetTax
» Gun Show On The Net
» 2nd Amendment Show
» SEMPER FIrearms
» Colt Collectors Assoc.
» Personal Defense Solutions



Keep and Bear Arms


Archived Information

Top | Last 30 Days | Search | Add to Archives | Newsletter | Featured Item

"Individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever gun laws they want."

"Individual communities ought to have the power
to enact whatever gun laws they want."

by Angel Shamaya
Founder/Executive Director

October 31, 2002

On October 8, 2002, CNN Crossfire held a debate between Larry Pratt, Executive Director of Gun Owners of America and Dennis Henigan, Legal Director of the Brady Handgun Control, Inc. organization. As could be expected, Mr. Pratt trounced Dennis "Ban Handguns" Henigan. And also as could be expected, Mr. Henigan not only made numerous objectionable statements, but he revealed the depth of what he and his organization are really all about.

One brief section of their interview sparked this entire article. That section follows:

PRATT: Let me ask a question. You were saying that you don't support banning guns. Well, if so, did you disagree, or do you disagree that handgun control went to court to try to keep the D.C. gun ban?

HENIGAN: Look, we believe that individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever gun laws they want.

(See transcript here:

If "individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever gun laws they want," that opens the floodgates to enact laws that restrict the entire Bill of Rights. Local Bill of Rights Nullification Power, if accepted, can and will be applied to the entire Bill of Rights. Let's look at this idea, carried to its logical conclusion, one Amendment at a time.


If individual communities ought to have the power to ban firearms and imprison gun owners for mere possession -- "whatever gun laws they want" -- that same Mob Rule Theory applied to the First Amendment and carried to its logical conclusion could eradicate what's left of America as we know it. The First Amendment states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Imagine stiff penalties for speaking out on prohibited topics, or for assembling with friends of like mind, or for publishing banned ideas. Imagine being arrested and thrown in jail for petitioning the government publicly and offending the "wrong" official with your "devious, unpatriotic" grievances. Like China, where "American" flags and Little League baseballs are made -- where people are still to this day executed by the hundreds and even thousands, sometimes for what they say or how/where they say it.

What's your preferred religion? Strictly prohibited. And since the Eighth Amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment can also be banned by "individual communities [who] ought to have the power to enact whatever [protected right] laws they want," if you get caught exercising that religion, you will be crucified naked in town square in the middle of summer and forced to listen to a repeating loop of Janet Reno justifying having torched Waco's youngsters to a crisp. Hey, these individual communities are powerful now. "Whatever [protected right] laws they want."

For the rest of this message, be sure to remember that the ban on cruel and unusual punishment has been lifted.


"Look, we believe that individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever gun laws they want."

Hmmm. Gotcha:

"By order of the Mayor of New York City," said police chief Scarface, "anyone caught with a firearm without a permission slip personally signed by the Mayor and three of his approved staff members will be shot on sight and left to rot for 40 days. Before the day's end, all possessions left by the violent criminal will be confiscated and sold at public auction, and any debts left by the criminal will be repaid with hard labor exacted from no more than seven (7) surviving family members or known associates."

And don't even think about praying in prison when you get there -- the Warden in Henigan's "Any Gun Laws They Want" World makes the Mayor look like Snow White.


"No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law."

As soon as the law gets around the prescribing for post-jihad America, that Amendment is already ripe for abuse. But local communities don't have to worry about the very flimsy alleged protections it supposedly affords anyway, right? After some fellow named Mohammed Ramadan turns a beer keg into a dirty bomb and dumps it on a state legislator's front doorstep, you'd best not complain too much when Homeland Security Team Bravo Sierra needs a place to sleep and a television to shoot. Refusal to comply with their needs by sleeping at the neighbor's house is punishable by determination of the weary commanding officer who likes your landscaping enough to convince himself he'll get through the 60-day pseudo "cleanup" procedure outlined on Page 871 of the USA SUPERPATRIOT Act without blowing his own brains out.


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Henigan's World:

"No, officer, I didn't realize I was going 2 miles over the speed limit. I'm really sorry."

"Step out of the car, mister. Please remove your shoes, pants, shirt, jewelry and bend down and grab your ankles. If you sit still, this cavity search will only take a minute and you can get dressed while we rip your car apart."

Far fetched? Hardly. Prince George's County, Maryland's police department was exposed by the Washington Post a while back for many "unbelievable" things -- including multiple officers strip searching a man who'd been pulled over in his BMW, and doing a cavity search behind a gas station while, according to the successful businessman with a clean record who encountered these "law enforcement officers," they joked, laughed and intimidated him menacingly with clear and concise threats.

At the 2001 Gun Rights Policy Conference, an Ohio attorney informed the entire roomful of people that police officers who "catch you with a firearm" can order you to submit to a strip search -- "and you have to do what they tell you."

And that's with the alleged "Fourth Amendment" in place... supposedly.

In the Henigan "individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever [...] laws they want" world, your City Manager, County Supervisor or Mayor can demand that you submit DNA, hair, blood, stool and urine samples -- for each member of your family.

"Privacy? Shut your mouth, or that smile will be wiped off of your face with this nightstick. We'll be by from time to time -- any time we please -- to make sure you don't have any contraband in your house. We're watching you, and we think you are up to something."


"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

1) "Tell us the truth or we will do it to your other thumb. Confess!"

2) "By order of this court, I hereby dismiss this jury for failure to convict an obvious criminal and decree that the fourth jury selection for this trial will commence at noon on Monday."

3) "Hey. Yeah, it's me! Listen! The city is demanding that I vacate my family's home and land -- they are giving me one one-hundredth of what it's worth and said that if I didn't like it the Police Chief would like to settle this matter personally this evening behind the station! ... Whadya mean 'what am I gonna do', you idiot -- I'm packing! I want you to come help me so I get the most important stuff!"


"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense."

Prisoner Number One: Welcome to The Outhouse. What'd they put you in here for?

Prisoner Number Two: I got pulled over with my friend, and they found a flattened .22 shell casing in his trunk.

Prisoner Number One: Idiot. You should have picked smarter friends. What'd they do to him.

Prisoner Number Two: He's dead.

Prisoner Number One: Right.

Prisoner Number Two: How long did it take you to get to trial?

Prisoner Number One: I'm still "waiting." Every now and then the Warden calls me into his office to tell me the judge is still selecting my jury, but I stopped believing him after the fourth or fifth time.

Prisoner Number Two: How long have you been in this hellhole?

Prisoner Number One: What year is it?


"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

Newspaper Headlines:








"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

PORTLAND, Or. (AP) -- The high bails being set for prisoners have led to yet another execution today. A man accused of distributing flyers contesting high bails told the judge he "could stick his $500,000 bail where the sun don't shine." Funeral services have been waived by the family as they are all working in the newly renovated Portland Penal Colony -- to pay their late father's bail, which the judge said he still owes "even though he's lost his head."


"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Law Enforcement Officer One: "...and she tells me she wants me to turn off my cruiser while I interview her because she says she has a 'right to breathe clean air', I think she said!"

Law Enforcement Officer Two: "Yeah,.. and...?!"

Law Enforcement Officer One: "So I grab her by the neck and close off her windpipe until she faints and drop her on the ground -- then when she wakes up, I says, 'Are you sure about that, honey?!!"

In Unison: "Bwaaaa haaa haaa ha ha HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!"


"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

"Look, we believe that individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever [Bill of Rights] laws they want." --Dennis Henigan, legal director for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence, CNN's Crossfire Debate with Larry Pratt, Executive Director, Gun Owners of America, October 8, 2002, 19:00 ET


Anyone who chips away at one of the Amendments in the Bill of Rights is chipping away at all of them. Supporting local Bill of Rights Nullification Powers is an invitation for the kinds of abuses history has relegated to Totalitarian Dictatorships. Whether the Dictatorship is localized, regional, statewide or national matters little to people living and dying under such conditions.

Basic human rights were specifically enumerated as off limits by any government because the forethinking men who discerned them as innate to the human being had experienced gross dishonoring of these rights and the results such tyranny produced. If government could legitimately strip away one human right, they could strip them all. Thus the term "unalienable rights."

The US Constitution is the Law of the Land -- it says so in Article 6, Section 2, "anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding." It's not a buffet from which petty Dictator Wannabes can pick and choose. As long as each community and state is a part of this nation, the elected officials of that community must abide by The Law. They cannot choose which laws they want to obey any more than individuals are entitled to do. We are one nation, bound together by the contract that is the Constitution. This is what makes us the united States of America.

Anti-gun fanatics like Dennis Henigan are scary domestic enemies, a bane to a free society, and they are encouraged to carefully consider how much further they will be allowed to push lawful, peaceable gunowners before a backlash of epic proportions becomes unavoidable. When good men and women have no civil recourse for restoring their rights, the only path left is uncivil. There are somewhere in the neighborhood of 83,000,000 gunowners in this great nation, and many of them are increasingly feeling their backs against the wall -- as a direct result of people like Dennis Henigan who support, promote, endorse and consistently seek to build a long and growing string of "local community" dictatorships.

*** END ***

In case you'd like to read the section of the "debate" between Mr. Pratt and Mr. Henigan, here it is. First is the intro. Click here to go straight to the section where they were finally introduced. ...


Gun Control Advocates Claim Maryland Sniper Could Be Caught If Tracking System Was In Place; Some Claim Bush Politicizing Iraq Issue

Aired October 8, 2002 - 19:00 ET


ANNOUNCER: CROSSFIRE: On the left: James Carville and Paul Begala. On the right: Robert Novak and Tucker Carlson. In the CROSSFIRE: Anguish, anger and a sniper on the loose.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... to stop this insane killer.


ANNOUNCER: Tonight: Is the gun lobby fighting a tool that could find a killer?

Should the U.S. do it now? The use of force debate exposes political fault lines.


SEN. JOSEPH LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: Mr. President, we have decided Iraq is a danger.



SEN. ROBERT BYRD (D), WEST VIRGINIA: Put a sign on the statue of liberty up here. Put a sign: "Out of business."


ANNOUNCER: And who says he's only interested in Iraq?


GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There needs to be fiscal sanity in Washington, D.C.

Tonight on CROSSFIRE.

From the George Washington University: Paul Begala and Robert Novak.


Tonight, as lawmakers debate Iraq, how closely are the folks back home watching? Also, the anti-gun crowd spots a target of opportunity.

But first, a political briefing that really hits the bull's eye: our CROSSFIRE "Political Alert."


First in the CROSSFIRE tonight are Dennis Henigan, legal director for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence. And with him, Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America.

BEGALA: Gentlemen, good of you to join us. This is always a contentious topic: gun control and gun rights, but particularly now when there is a sniper on the loose.

Bob mentioned in the introduction a system that's being tried out in Maryland that would take a ballistic fingerprint from every barrel of every new gun produced. Manufacturers would keep that fingerprint on file, and then if we had a federal system, as many law enforcement folks have proposed, they would be able to track down that gun and maybe even find the killer.

Here is what a law enforcement official told "The New York Times" today. (UNINTELLIGIBLE) is the former chief the crime gun analysis section of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

He said this: "I definitely think that the technology is there. And it has been refined to the point where it's cost effective. It would not be an imposition on the manufacturers or law enforcement or citizens, so I'm all for it."

Mr. Pratt, why are you against it?

LARRY PRATT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA: Well, for one thing, he is wrong. The technology isn't so hot. They have had it for handguns in Maryland for casings, not the bullet itself. And they've run 17,000 runs on the system and they've not solved one crime with it.

And there's a number of reasons why I think that would be. In addition to not all the guns are in the database, they never will be. Because it's possible to buy guns with illegal false identification. The government accounting office actually did that about a year ago, and everywhere they went they made sure they had a false identification of a non-criminal, somebody who wasn't in the database. And, of course, they were sold a gun.

You can also change the barrel, change the firing pin, so that you change all the signatures. And actually just using the gun not even all that much will also change the characteristics of that fingerprint. So it all adds up to only one thing gets accomplished, a registration system of gun owners that's even more extensive than what we already suffer from.

NOVAK: Mr. Henigan, let me make a little scenario. We don't know who this murderous sniper is. But I'm going to make a little bet that he stole the weapon some place. Now, if he stole the weapon, and they had this system nationwide, that in itself would kill the system, wouldn't it?

DENNIS HENIGAN, LEGAL DIRECTOR, BRADY CAMPAIGN AGAINST GUN VIOLENCE: Well, first of all, Bob, you have no idea whether he stole the weapon.

NOVAK: Well let's just assume he did.

HENIGAN: But in fact, most of the guns used in crimes are not stolen at all. They're bought from gun dealers, they're bought by traffickers who sell them into the illegal market. The fact that such a system would not solve every crime does not mean it's not a very valuable system.

It makes absolutely no sense when we have the technology today, to not only be able to tell that the same gun was used in multiple shootings. We could tell which gun it was. And we could do that before we even confiscate the gun.

NOVAK: Then explain this to me, Mr. Henigan. Why it is that in Maryland, which has this system, they have spent $4 million on this system. I don't live in this crazy state anymore, I used to. But that's why the taxes are so high. And as a result, they have had no convictions, no arrests. What kind of efficiency is that?

HENIGAN: This is a complete distortion. The Maryland law is brand new. It's only been in existence for a year. It takes guns a certain amount of time after they're sold by a retail gun dealer to be used in crime. The law enforcement community says there is no question that this system can work.

How do you think we were able to establish that this same gun was responsible for multiple murders? Because we compared the markings on those casings. The one missing link is we don't have that national database to be able to tell exactly which gun that was, and then trace it to the first retail buyer, a tremendous law enforcement tool. The reason we are not doing this is because of the paranoia of people like Larry Pratt and the gun lobby who keep crying everything constructive we do about gun violence will lead ultimately to confiscation of guns.

PRATT: I'll point out that in New York City, after 25 years of being promised that the registration of long guns would not lead to confiscation, they changed the rules. And it did lead to confiscation. California tried to do the same thing. But when we found about it, that kind of backed them off at least for a while.

HENIGAN: Yes, but, Larry, you said the Brady bill was going to lead to registration, it was going to lead to confiscation.

PRATT: Well, it has, as a matter of fact. And the FBI has an illegal database of all the people that have been buying guns. So you have got a registration list from the instant background check. You are proposing that you get another one from this kind of a bullet signature system. And I frankly don't -- I'm not convinced that you want to do anything else, than someday use it to do what New York City did, because you're not going to catch crooks with it.

HENIGAN: Larry talks about what might happen some day. I'm talking about today. There's a sniper on the loose. People in this community are living in mortal fear right now. We could find this guy if we had the technology to do it. All you're talking about is...

PRATT: That is not at all an assumption. And every time your gun control buddies have gotten something into law, the crime rates go up. Whether it's D.C., or whether it's England, or whether it's Jamaica.

HENIGAN: The crime rate has plummeted since the Brady bill.

PRATT: Excuse me. It had nothing to do with any lowering of the crime rate. And one of your own research scientists said the same thing. But in England they are now the most dangerous place to live of the 18 industrial countries in the world. Jamaica...


HENIGAN: Compared to America?

PRATT: Yes, compared -- it's the U.N. study that was done last year. Sorry, pal, you are you the most dangerous guy loose.


PRATT: But you are you the most -- you produce the most violent society in the industrial world. And England and Jamaica is so dangerous that tour boats are stopping that as a port of call.

BEGALA: Because, Mr. Pratt, as you once said, gun control basically kills. Guns don't kill people, gun control does. Is that your philosophy?

PRATT: Well, of course. Because you leave the victims unable to protect themselves. And that's what you see in Washington, D.C. It's what you see in England.

BEGALA: So my 6-year-old should be packing heat?

PRATT: I think you should.

BEGALA: I own three guns and I don't mind -- I just said it on the air. John Ashcroft knows I own a gun. So what? They're not going to come get my gun, Larry.

PRATT: Kathy Wilson's (ph) kindergarten is a gun-free zone.

BEGALA: Thank god.

PRATT: Oh, yes. Well that's where one of the kids was hit. Apparently the murderer forgot that it was a gun-free zone.

BEGALA: OK. So Billy (ph) is going to be packing heat? (CROSSTALK)

HENIGAN: Larry wants teachers to have guns in the classroom.

PRATT: But in fact, the reality is you make people more exposed and put them in greater danger.

BEGALA: Mr. Pratt, we're going to break. Hold that thought, both of you. We've got a hot debate going and I hate to cool it off, but we're going to take a break.

In a minute we're going to ask our guests if there is any gun measure at all that Larry Pratt won't oppose. I doubt that there is.

Later, the fundraiser in chief talks about Iraq at another Republican rally. But of course he's not trying to make political hey (ph) from the war, certainly not.

And our quote of the day is from someone who had a lot of explaining to do today when he testified on what his FBI did or did not do to prevent September 11. Stay with us.


BEGALA: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

The sniper killings in the D.C. area raise questions about whether Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department ought to do more to stop gun violence. Of course Mr. Ashcroft is a busy man, what with covering up naked breasts on a statue at the Justice Department and arresting terminally ill people smoking marijuana and all.

In the CROSSFIRE tonight, Larry Pratt, the Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, and Dennis Henigan, Legal Director for the Brady Campaign Against Gun Violence.

NOVAK: Mr. Henigan, this wonderful law you have in Maryland, which cost $4 million, over a year, no arrests, no convictions. What it has done, is that nobody wants to ship guns into Maryland because of the inconvenience. And Colonel David Mitchell (ph), the Maryland State Police Superintendent said, "We did not, nor did we ever intend for this legislation to be a de facto gun ban. Nor did we intend this legislation to create an undue hardship on Maryland gun dealers."

That's Colonel Mitchell (ph) speaking. But you were not unhappy about the burden on gun dealers, were you?

HENIGAN: No. The point of this law is not to put unnecessary burdens on the gun industry. And this could be done much easier at the federal level, Bob. When a manufacturer sells a gun to a distributor, the manufacturer could test-fire that gun and those markings, that data, could go immediately into a federal computer.

We could do this nice and easy. It does cost money, Bob. It costs money to save lives; it costs money to fight crime. Just think of the costs to this community of the fear that grips us because of this sniper.

NOVAK: Mr. Henigan, I've been talking to people like you on this show for about 20 years. And some of them are very candid with me, and some are not. I'm going to give you the candor test. What you would really like to do is have national registration and severe restrictions on gun ownership, wouldn't you?

HENIGAN: No. What we want is...

NOVAK: You flunked the test.

HENIGAN: No, what we want is a system like we have with automobiles. We have record keeping of automobile transfers. We have licenses for automobile owners and drivers. People don't object to that. And yet guns are a product designed to kill.

And all we have is a limited background check on sales from gun dealers. We don't even have universal background checks so that if I sell you a gun as a private citizen, there's no background check.

BEGALA: Mr. Pratt, let me ask a question before you give an answer, because I want to give you my candor test. I know you've called for the repeal of the Brady bill, you've called for the repeal of the assault weapon ban. Candidly, what gun control would you support?

PRATT: If you could show that gun control was constitutional and actually hurt criminals rather than law-abiding people, I might be willing to talk to you about it. But until then I think we should get rid of what has impeded...

BEGALA: So flame throwers?

PRATT: No, we're talking about guns.

BEGALA: Those are arms. The Constitution (UNINTELLIGIBLE). A stinger missile is a shoulder-mounted arm.

PRATT: That's a wonderful red herring, but that's not where...

BEGALA: But you would ban flame throwers? Of course.

HENIGAN: Ask him about machine guns.


HENIGAN: You wouldn't ban machine guns?


BEGALA: Machine guns have been banned since the '30's.

PRATT: In Switzerland they have a country full of armed people with machine guns.

BEGALA: Well go move there. I like America.

PRATT: They have a murder rate lower than ours.


PRATT: Let me ask a question. You were saying that you don't support banning guns. Well, if so, did you disagree, or do you disagree that handgun control went to court to try to keep the D.C. gun ban?

HENIGAN: Look, we believe that individual communities ought to have the power to enact whatever gun laws they want.

NOVAK: All right. Mr. Henigan, let me just ask you a question.


PRATT: Virginia has a certain kind of law from the national government. You're being a hypocrite.

NOVAK: We don't have much time. I want to ask you one question. We're in the District of Columbia right now. Parts of this town I would not want you to walk in, because I wouldn't walk in. This is a dangerous place.

There's guns all over the place. Do you think banning of all firearms in the District of Columbia does anything but keep them out the hands of law-abiding citizens so only the criminals have guns?

HENIGAN: Bob, do you know where those guns come from? They don't come from the District of Columbia. They come from Virginia...

PRATT: And Virginia has a lower murder rate.

HENIGAN: The come from Florida. They come from states with much weaker gun laws. That's why we need a federal solution.

PRATT: The states with the weaker gun laws have lower murder rates.

BEGALA: Our attorney general said that the FBI will not be permitted to compare the names of suspected terrorists against federal gun purchase records . Attorney General Ashcroft told the Senate he offered no encouragement to senators who are trying to get the FBI the authority to do so. So the only apparently civil liberty that John Ashcroft supports is the right for terrorists to own guns. I guess you're with Ashcroft on this, aren't you?

PRATT: Well, you know Mohammed Atta seemed to be able to get a false ID without too much trouble. I don't think he's going to go in and say, Hi, I'm Mohammed Atta. I'm from Saudi Arabia. I'm here to kill you, will you sell me a gun? These guys are just a little smarter than that.

NOVAK: This debate will continue, but not tonight. Thank you very much, Larry Pratt, Dennis Henigan. Thank you so much.

Printer Version

Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms. Robert Heinlein

COPYRIGHT POLICY: The posting of copyrighted articles and other content, in whole or in part, is not allowed here. We have made an effort to educate our users about this policy and we are extremely serious about this. Users who are caught violating this rule will be warned and/or banned.
If you are the owner of content that you believe has been posted on this site without your permission, please contact our webmaster by following this link. Please include with your message: (1) the particulars of the infringement, including a description of the content, (2) a link to that content here and (3) information concerning where the content in question was originally posted/published. We will address your complaint as quickly as possible. Thank you.

NOTICE:  The information contained in this site is not to be considered as legal advice. In no way are Keep And Bear Arms .com or any of its agents responsible for the actions of our members or site visitors. Also, because this web site is a Free Speech Zone, opinions, ideas, beliefs, suggestions, practices and concepts throughout this site may or may not represent those of Keep And Bear Arms .com. All rights reserved. Articles that are original to this site may be redistributed provided they are left intact and a link to is given. Click here for Contact Information for representatives of is the leading provider of Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and digital certificate solutions used by enterprises, Web sites, and consumers to conduct secure communications and transactions over the Internet and private networks., Inc. © 1999-2022, All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy