*NRA Wins Big in California State Court of Appeals *

Fairfax, VA - The California State Court of Appeals announced today their decision to overturn one of the most restrictive gun bans in the country, following a legal battle by attorneys for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and a previous court order against the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

"Today's decision by the California State Court of Appeals is a big win for the law-abiding citizens and NRA Members of San Francisco," declared Chris W. Cox, NRA's chief lobbyist.

In 2005, NRA sought an injunction against the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to prevent them from enacting one of the nation's most restrictive gun bans. NRA won the injunction, but the City's mayor and Board of Supervisors ignored the court order and approved a set of penalties, including a $1,000 fine and a jail term of between 90 days and six months, for city residents who own firearms for lawful purposes in their own homes.

"We promised our California NRA members in 2005 that we would fight any gun ban instituted by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, and we haven't given up that fight," continued Cox. "Today we see our second win for the Second Amendment against the San Francisco gun ban. We beat them once in court and the City's attorney appealed based on his personal disagreement with the court's first decision to overturn the ban. Now we've beaten them again. The California State Court of Appeals has upheld the state preemption law."

Today's decision came in the form of a 3-0 opinion in favor of the lower court ruling overturning the gun ban.

"This decision is a thoughtful and well-reasoned legal opinion," concluded Cox. "I'd like to thank our approximately 4 million members, including the hundreds of thousands of members in California, for their continued commitment to protecting our cherished freedoms."

'Feel-good' laws need to be changed

Recently we saw two very public shootings.

The first, in an Omaha mall, ended as these often do these days — after taking a number of lives, the shooter took his own life. The police didn't arrive until six minutes after the first shot was fired.

The mall should have been safe. After all, there were "No Weapons" signs posted. Of course, only law-abiding citizens obey those signs.

The second shooting ended a bit differently. After taking two lives at one location, the shooter moved on to a second location. By all accounts, he was prepared to take many, many lives there. Once inside the church, things changed dramatically from the Omaha scenario. A legally armed citizen (a volunteer security guard) engaged the shooter and saved countless lives.

Sadly, in Ohio, we lean more toward Omaha in our treatment of this topic. Many malls post "No Weapons" signs. Should a CHL holder choose to enter armed anyway, he or she is now the criminal (albeit a misdemeanor). Further, carrying a firearm in a church in Ohio is illegal unless one has specific permission to do so, and it's a felony.

Won't it be a shame when more lives are lost because an armed citizen obeyed the law by disarming? We need to change these "feel-good" laws to something that works.

Kim D. Campbell

Wilmington

Mr. Campbell is coordinator of Ohioans For Concealed Carry.

Gunman used hunting skills at Omaha mall

The world was stunned by the senseless shootings at the Westroads Mall and we mourn for the families and friends of the victims. While nothing can ease the pain of the survivors, it is time for the firearms industry and Nebraska Game and Parks to take partial responsibility for these wanton acts of violence, since incidents such as these expose the fine line between violence against wildlife and violence against humans.

...

Sadly, the killing skills used by [the killer] are taught to Nebraska's children by the Game and Parks Commission under the guise of "Hunter Education." As long as state agencies conspire with the weapons industry in promoting violence as recreation, senseless killings will always take place.

...