Back in March before the Heller decision one of the local radio stations had the DC gun ban as one of their topics, and had a constitutional lawyer named Michael Gross on for commentary. In the interview (which can be found here, 3-18-08 hour 3) Mr. Gross stated that the second amendment is "clearly a collective right", and that the 8,400 handgun deaths since 1976 would be "even greater had there been no ban". I do not believe either statement is true, and while the host attempted to debate the points, Mr. Gross seemed more intent on screaming his theories and unsupported views. While interrupting and talking over the host he says of himself, "I'm very liberal, radical on this issue, because I want to keep people alive instead of shooting each other." Where he seems to totally go off the rails is when he states that there are no defensive uses for handguns in America.

"When have you ever seen, heard or read about somebody defending themselves with a handgun in their home...it is a dream, it doesn't occur".

Any rational person would understand that in our world this is impossible. Someone who makes a blanket statement such as this is either delusional or a liar. Mr. Gross clearly has an agenda, I imagine a great fear of firearms, and thus a fear for the truth.

Mr. Gross' objective of "keeping people alive" is a fine goal. But he overlooks easily obtainable facts that prove defensive uses of firearms in the hands of normal everyday citizens, which do a fine job of keeping people alive. Taking these firearms away, or preventing their defensive use (which they did in DC with the moronic rules of requiring the firearm to be disassembled and equipped with a trigger lock), only puts those citizens at risk, inevitably resulting in more death. A far cry from the goal of keeping people alive.

In my monthly issue of America's First Freedom they dedicate a page or two exclusively to defensive firearm use in a section called "Armed Citizen" that quotes excerpts from papers and journals across the country. In a post script they graciously allow, "Anyone is free to quote or reproduce these accounts condensed from individual newspaper clippings..." So, with their permission, I quote from a few choice instances:

According to authorities a homeowner in a gated community was awakened by noises and, to his horror, found an intruder choking his wife. The homeowner quickly ran for his gun and returned to discover two additional intruders. The men, at least one of them armed with a gun, held the home owner's wife hostage and demanded cash and jewelry. Fearing his wife would be killed, the homeowner opened fire and at least one of the intruders shot back. The suspects fled. Two were sought by police; one died in the backyard. (The Las Vegas Review-Journal, Las Vegas, NV, 08/15/07)

It was a terrifying night that refused to end. Edith and William Stevens, both in their 80's, had already scared away an intruder. According to the sheriff's department, deputies completed an investigation and left, but two hours later the couple heard gunshots outside their home and glass breaking. William got his handgun and investigated. Finding an intruder in the hallway, he opened fire and the intruder returned it. "Had Mr. Stevens not had a handgun, I don't know what could have happened," said Maury County, TN Chief Deputy Ashley Brown. The couple locked themselves in the bedroom and tried to phone police, but the lines were cut. The intruder, who police believe was after money for drugs, fired once more through a window. After discovering the intruder had fled, the couple phoned police from a neighbor's house. (The Daily Herald, Columbia, TN, 2/10/08)

Nathaniel Evans was leaving for work when two men confronted him with a gun and ordered him back inside. The men threatened Evans and another occupant, Evans' girlfriend. "[The suspects] kept yelling 'Where is it?'", said Sheriff Greg Champagne. "When they couldn't find what they were looking for, they shot [Evans]." That's when Evans' girlfriend, who'd been ordered into the bedroom and forced to the floor with her 5-year-old child, came out firing a .40-cal. pistol. One suspect died at the scene. The other was found nearby and will be charged after his release from the hospital. Evans is expected to recover. (The Times-Picayune, New Orleans, LA. 08/23/07)

Elwood Pickett just wanted to be a good neighbor, so when two young men asked to use the phone, he handed it out the door. Then he grew suspicious. "They used the phone and left, but when they came back the second time, I was ready for them in case there was trouble," the 80-year-old Pickett explained. He handed the phone out a second time, but he says one of the men "pushed through like an elephant and pounded me with a knife. He...stabbed me half to death, and I thought it was time." But it wasn't. Police say Pickett, a World War II vet and lifelong hunter, drew his .38 caliber pistol and fired three shots, striking one of the men and causing both to flee. One suspect went to the hospital; the other to jail. Pickett was badly injured but is recuperating. (Hood County News, Granbury, TX. 2/13/08)
.
.
.
"...it is a dream, it doesn't occur". What planet is this guy on anyway?

Via Kim DuToit I found a post at ACLU's blog from July 1st titled "Heller Decision and the Second Amendment". The gist of how the ACLU feels about the recent Heller decision being, "The ACLU interprets the Second Amendment as a collective right. Therefore, we disagree with the Supreme Court's decision..."

Their statement is completed with the tagline: "As always, we welcome your comments."
What follows is a firestorm of commentary that as of today reaches close to 900 comments. That's not a typo, it's nine-hundred.

What I found very interesting about the whole thing was the overwhelming number of pro-2A commentary, some of which appears to be from longtime ACLU membership ranks, and much of it expressing outrage at the ACLU's public stance on the Second Amendment after the Heller decision. It was not till entry #39 that there was even a comment that suggested the ACLU's stance was appropriate, and out of the first 100 (which was as far as I went), there were a grand total of 3. This is the sort of rare thing that makes me feel positive about the direction we're going. This many people acting out so vocally against that organizations bad policy has to be a good sign.

As a side note, although unconfirmed, it appears that our host Linoge logged in with comment #41. I would be surprised if there was another "Linoge" out there advocating Second Amendment rights, but I guess crazier things have happened.