Sept. 14, 15 & 16, 2001
Morgan County, Colorado 
(70 miles from downtown Denver, directions below , MAP)
Hosted by  Rocky Mountain Gun Owners &
Rocky Mountain Fifty Caliber Shooting Assoc.

Times of Shoot                     Fri. 3:00 pm - 9:00 pm  (Fire conditions permitting,  i.e. tracers, incendiary)                           
Sat. 8:00 am - 10:00 pm (Fire conditions permitting,  i.e. tracers, incendiary)                          
Sun. 8:00 am - 12:00 Noon                
Gate Opens 7:00 am  Saturday and Sunday to general public

Fees:  Spectators $5.00 each (RMGO members $3 each)       Children under 12 FREE
Shooter's Entry $75.00    Pre-Registered $65.00    Camping $15.00 (no hookups, no open fires)

ALL SPECTATORS MUST USE HEARING PROTECTION!
No alcoholic beverages allowed on the property!

Have your picture taken in a World War II Half-Track (to benefit the WW2 Memorial)

- DIRECTIONS -
From I-76 -- Exit at Hudson (30 miles from I-25) and go East on Highway 52 (though Hwy. 52 curves North to Wiggins, go straight East) for 37 miles on paved/dirt road to intersection of Road F & Road 14 (14 miles east of the Weld/Morgan county border).  Follow the .50 signs!

From I-70 -- Bennett exit go North on State Hwy. 79 for 23 miles to State Hwy. 52 at Prospect Valley; go East on Highway 52 (Hwy. 52 curves North to Wiggins, go straight East) to intersection of Road F & Road 14 (14 miles east of the Weld/Morgan county border).  Follow the .50 signs!

Pre-Registration Form

NUMBER OF SHOOTERS______                    NAME_______________________________________________

ADDRESS_______________________________________________________________________________

CAMPING  YES___  NO___             _____________________________________

TOTAL REMITTED  $________     PHONE #_____________________________

# OF POSITIONS REQUIRED_____                CHECK_____       MONEY ORDER_____

TYPE OF FIREARM_________________________

Payable to: RMGO

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GUN OWNERS - Release of Liability Contract.

This event is for the purpose of education, dispersing of information, and the enjoyment of the shooters and spectators.

I,_______________________________ at my own request, voluntarily make payment of event fees and request to participate in this event sanctioned by RMGO.  I have been advised of the rules of the event and my responsibilities during the event.  I am fully aware of the risks of my shooting in this event; in that an accident could cause injury and/or death to myself or to others.  I am fully aware that I am attending a live fire-shooting event and therefore understand the risks and inherent danger of injury and/or death to others or myself.  By signing this contract, I fully agree to release RMGO and all officers, agents, and representatives of RMGO from any type of legal action or lawsuit on behalf of myself or my family in the event of injury or death to others or myself.

SIGNED___________________________ Date: ________________

_______________________________________________OFFICIAL USE ONLY____________________________________________

Event Director:______________________  Date:  9/14/01

Location:   RMGO       Date:   9/14/15/16/01

Send Registration form, Shooter’s fee and Liability Contract to:
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, 
PO Box 3114
Denver, CO  80201
Phone & Fax: 303-432-3006

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------cut here----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Range rules:
Shooters meeting:  Friday 3pm and 7:30AM each morning
All shooters must have a signed release of liability contract on file and wear ID (provided by RMGO).
Shooters must wear eye & ear protection (Duh)
Shooters with NFA firearms must show paperwork.
All weapons removed or secured from firing line at night
Open chamber markers required and provided.
We run a Cold Firing Line
No rain checks -- we shoot rain or shine 
Targets at 600, 500, 400, 300, & 200 yards
Shooters: No benches, shelter or seating available -- bring your own.
Military surplus ammo will be for sale: ball, tracer, API, & APIT
Food & drink will be available on-site
Pre-Registration discount must be post marked by August 1, 2001 (due to limited firing positions)
The media could try to paint us in the “militia” corner, so we ask “No camos, please.”

Sponsored by Colorado’s Largest Gun Rights Organization

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners

&
Rocky Mountain Fifty Caliber Shooting Assoc.

A New – and Old – Plan to Repeal the Brady Instant Registration System

By Dudley Brown

With the recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court against the NRA’s suit to destroy Brady names, gun owners across America must reassess their views of the “Brady Check,” which is better termed the Brady Instant Registration Check system.  To do that, we have to remember how we got Brady in the first place.

When Congress first heard of the Brady Bill, most Republicans and many Democrats balked at the idea.  Gun owners in America weren't likely to accept de facto gun registration inherent in a bill that forced firearms purchasers to undergo a background check and created a database.  It was, rightfully so, labeled “registration.”

In fact, prior to 1995, support or opposition to Brady was the number one litmus test issue for every gun owner, organization, and even the NRA.  Anyone claiming to support the Second Amendment was literally required to oppose the Brady bill.  In Colorado, even noted moderate Sens. Ben Nighthorse Campbell and Hank Brown maintained opposition to the Brady bill.

Shortly before the 1994 General Election, Brady and Handgun Control, Inc. decided it was time to pass their scheme.  They only had one problem: the U.S. Senate did not have enough votes to shut down a hold (a threatened filibuster) from N.C. Senator Jesse Helms.  A cloture vote -- which shuts down debate and breaks a filibuster -- takes 60 Senators, meaning 41 Senators can stop the legislation.

The NRA knew these numbers quite well and was still publicly opposed to Brady, though many Beltway insiders suggest the NRA was ready to cave at any point.  And cave they did, when HCI essentially ran a lobbying program on the NRA, convincing the “gun lobby” that a Brady law was inevitable.

The bill was dead -- but the NRA cut the deal to resurrect it.

LaPierre's NRA-ILA contacted then-Minority Leader Bob Dole and signaled the NRA's surrender on the issue.  The NRA would accept the "Instant Check" system because Brady was inevitable, and the hold would be removed.  In the Congressional poker game, the NRA folded before anyone even had a chance to assess their hand.

Gun Owners of America (GOA) and a number of real pro-gun organizations told the NRA that this new “Instant Check” system would register gun owners by the millions, giving gun-banners the rope they needed to hang us.  The NRA touted the compromise language as a barrier to registration.  Their lawsuit is an admission that their compromises didn’t work.

Brady's “Instant Check” system, much touted by the NRA to this day, is the reason some states have other forms of gun control.  Virginia, long considered one of America's most pro-gun states, passed a "one-gun-a-month" law (or gun rationing) for one simple reason: the system set up by Brady, implemented in Virginia with NRA assistance, would handle the information.  One-gun-a-month had failed in Virginia in the past, primarily because it was too expensive to implement.  Once the NRA's Brady system was in place, one-gun-a-month was easy and relatively cheap.

With the Supreme Court ruling that the FBI can keep gun owners’ names, what will the NRA now tell us about Brady?  In October of 2000, Charlton Heston wrote in Outdoor Life magazine that the NRA supported expanding Brady to private sales at gun shows.  Wayne LaPierre recently confirmed this stand on a national morning news program.  If the past is any indication, the NRA will point to the Supreme Court ruling, shrug, and go about raising money to “fight gun control.”

Now that we all know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the federal government is keeping a database of gun owners and the prohibition on keeping the names carries no weight, we are back to square one: either repeal Brady, or live with the database it created -- and the inevitable consequences of a database of gun owners, confiscation.  Californians didn’t need us to name that consequence, nor did citizens of Canada, Great Britain, or Australia.

How do we repeal the Brady Instant Registration system?  The answer: the same way we could have stopped Brady in the first place.

First, starting today, every announced, potential, or even likely candidate from dogcatcher to President must be asked a simple question: if ever faced with a vote to repeal the Brady Instant Registration system, how will you vote?

No, there is not going to be a middle ground on this commitment.  And we won’t offer another slick system that supposedly protects the buyer’s identity.  There is no system that routinely checks backgrounds without the opportunity to log citizens’ names.  If the political will exists to put in a system that is better, it likely exists to repeal Brady in its entirety, and go back to prosecuting citizens for real crimes.

Many states have a prohibition of even questioning a citizens’ right.  In Colorado, our Constitution explicitly states “…the right of no person to keep and bear arms… shall be called into question.”  Clearly, the framers of Colorado’s Constitution knew what to tell those who want “reasonable” background checks.  No.

This method -- forcing politicians to take a stand – works, as long as groups like the NRA are not allowed to offer the Neville Chamberlain solution to gun control.  As Winston Churchill put it, “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”  Playing that inside game has gotten gun owners nothing, and given the gun banners virtually everything they wanted.  Appeasing – sometimes inaccurately called compromising, since compromise means both parties get something – doesn’t work.  Ask Poland.

This first step isn’t easy: individual activists will have to demand tougher criteria from the gun groups they support.  If your local grassroots circle of gun owners won’t ask that question of politicians – “We can’t make these elected officials uncomfortable or we will lose our access to them” is the usual stated reason to avoid conflict – then the burden falls on you individually.   In Colorado, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners will continue to use this issue as a litmus test for support, but there are few groups who will follow suit.  It is also advisable that you get this commitment in writing, as politicians are adept at denial.  RMGO sends out written surveys to candidates every election cycle, asking tough questions on every issue.  All returned surveys are public, unlike the NRA-ILA’s softball survey program.

Once we determine a politician’s views on the issue, what do we do?  We base our support on that position.

This might seem rather obvious, but consider our history: gun owners have repeatedly proven we will support the “lesser of two evils” every time, a tired cry raised by tyrants who know their position on issues isn’t linked to gun owners’ support.  What’s more upsetting is that the groups supposedly protecting our rights use the same cry to support spineless liberals they so readily protect.  Here’s a newsflash: politicians will never adhere to tough positions when they know it has no bearing on your support.  Pet the puppy after it pees on the carpet, and you’re training the dog to pee on the carpet.  Right now, gun owners have a very dirty carpet.

If gun owners fail to link our support to our public policy goals, we have no one else but ourselves to blame.  We can expect politicians to move away from our positions: as Colorado’s anti-gun Republican Governor Bill Owens said of gun owners, “What are they going to do, vote Democrat?”

How far can politicians go awry if we fail in these two simple, yet crucial tasks?  In the 2000 Colorado elections, a sitting State Representative, who lost his bid for the State Senate, wasn’t willing to sign a pledge to repeal Brady.  That State Representative, now a Republican, was the former Colorado state chairman of the Libertarian Party.

We’ve failed: the Brady Instant Registration system has created the gun owner registration system we all pledged to oppose to the death.  I suggest we re-learn how to draw the line in the sand, and recommit ourselves to battle.

April 2nd, 2001 -- This weekend, the state implemented Amendment 22, forcing all private sales at gun shows to undergo the Brady Registration check.

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners has commissioned our attorney to do a feasibility study on filing suit against the Brady Registration system based on these grounds: the Colorado Constitution bars "calling into question" a citizens right to keep and bear arms.

No, this would not be a lawsuit against just Amendment 22. There are other so-called "gun rights" organizations who whine and moan about specific provisions of Amendment 22, but they are rather transparent.

These groups cannot openly oppose "background checks" because they have openly supported them in the past. 10 months before the November 2000 elections, the NRA's Randy Kozuch was quoted as saying "We don't necessarily oppose background checks for all purchases at gun shows." One month before the November election, Charlton Heston, is his own writing (not edited by a leftist journalist) proclaimed the NRA's support for Brady checks for private sales at gun shows.

The real reason to oppose Amendment 22 is because it expands an already unconstitutional law. It calls into question your right to own a firearm, and it is the system our government -- with Bush, Gore, or Owens at the helm -- will use to shut down our gun rights and confiscate our firearms. The only question is "when," not "if."

We will force the Colorado Supreme Court into a decision: either the Constitution means something, or it means nothing. Ignoring the rule of law is no way to run a state, much less a country.   Groups, like the NRA, who privately tell gun owners how bad the Brady system is, then brag about creating the system on national news programs, are the reason we are in the pickle we are in now.  They have capitulated and appeased our enemies for so long, that politicians on the right side of the spectrum now openly defend background checks -- despite the fact that these checks are registering gun owners by the millions. They often use the NRA's support of background checks as their reasoning for doing the same.

Are Brady Background Checks a registration of gun owners?

This weekend brought a new twist to the question, affirming that it is registration. Reportedly, CBI was charging their normal fee for the Brady check, ALONG WITH requiring sales tax be paid on the transaction.

Much like purchasing a vehicle, when you purchase a firearm, government waits until the point of registration to stick you with the sales tax, whether it is a private sale or not. If registration was not required for motor vehicles, government would have no system to verify the sale, and couldn't charge you sales tax. When a firearm is sold, CBI is using the registration of that firearm -- the Brady Registration Check -- to force the payment of sales tax.  We are anxious to hear more about how CBI is using the system, but that is mere curiosity: to alter these details is to arrange the deckchairs on the titanic.

We are in the final decision making process for this lawsuit, but it is not an easy undertaking: to do it right (some suggest we find attorneys to do it for free, but we think this takes the issue too lightly) we will spend a large sum of money.

We do not think our war will ultimately be won in the courts. But we might be able to win a battle there, forcing our enemy to fight on another front.

We'll make certain to give you the news before we release it to the media.

Senate Bill 83 not a fix for Concealed Carry problem in Colorado

Thursday, Feb. 8, 2001 -- Once again, the Colorado legislature is debating a so-called “Concealed Carry” bill.  And like previous years, the bill offered is a disaster.

Senate Bill 83 is likely to be heard by the Colorado Senate’s Judiciary Committee in the next few days, where it will be made even worse than its current form.  With or without amendments, this bill is a huge step backward for Coloradans, especially those who already have a permit.

SB83 creates a number of Criminal Safezones, where even permit holders could not carry.  Though the current law allows permit holders to carry in these areas, SB83 would strip citizens of the right to carry in these areas:

• Schools (elementary, middle, junior or high school; public or private)

• Government buildings (any building with any state or local government office) such as a mall (some have drivers license offices or other government departments housed inside)

• Any high school, college, university or professional athletic event

• Anyplace where alcohol is served (current state law allows permit holders to carry concealed but not be intoxicated)

If you live in El Paso, Larimer, or any number of counties that are issuing permits, this bill is your worst nightmare: it gets rid of your permit and stops you from carrying in areas where you can carry now.

Rather than start from a position of strength, SB83 begins as a bill with most of the worst possible aspects.  Indeed, it might be a shorter list for SB83 to delineate where citizens can carry concealed, as the list of Criminal Safezones – where thugs and murderers like Klebold and Harris can operate with relative impunity – covers so many areas.

The bill also creates a new statewide database of permit holders administered by our friends at the CBI – you know, the organization responsible for the barrage of denials and long waits on Brady checks.

CBI has been trying to consolidate power for years: this bill gives Colorado’s version of the FBI a new list of gun owners to go along with their Brady purchasers list.  If you think that can’t happen here, ask an Australian, Canadian or English citizen: databases of gun owners are what government used to confiscate firearms in their countries.  We believe that to deny law enforcement these lists now will provide an almost insurmountable obstacle to gun-confiscators in the future.

Why not simply put the issuing department’s phone number on the permit so law enforcement can verify its validity?  Instead, we consolidate yet another piece of information in a State-level law enforcement bureaucrats’ hands.

The bill also incorporates into Colorado law the federal Lautenburg Gun Ban, where citizens convicted of so-called domestic violence charges – such as a wife yelling at her husband or a parent spanking a child – cannot obtain the permit.

Besides charging far more than is necessary to do the background checks for the permits – this bill allows sheriffs to charge more than $100 for the permit and fingerprints – it also sets up the NRA as the only private organization allowed to certify the government-mandated training required in the bill.  It should be little wonder why the NRA pushes  training requirements: they line the pockets of the NRA with money coerced from citizens who may or may not need the training to protect themselves but are required by law to get a piece of paper.  This also gives credence to the notion that the NRA is setting itself up to be the government-sanctioned rationing agency for our gun rights, a claim long held by many who are closely associated with NRA activities.

RMGO has never been opposed to voluntary training – in fact, we have offered to set up a voluntary program for CCW applicants.  Are citizens allowed to voice their political opinions without government-mandated training?  Why should exercising our Second Amendment rights be any different than our other God-given rights?

Finally, the bill gives sheriffs an “out.”  Sheriffs can deny permits to someone who they deem “presents a danger to himself or others,” which to many law enforcement means anyone not in their department.  This turns a “shall issue” bill back into a “may issue.

Chlouber, though often well-intentioned, is driven by “bill fever,” where politicians desperately want to pass bills regardless of the cost, a very common ailment of state legislators.  The bill is likely to get worse in committee, where Democrats hold a majority and can amend the bill into an even worse measure, all the time threatening to kill it without the amendments.  And you can be sure that any change for the worse is likely to be sold to gun owners as “what is needed to get a bill passed.”  Thanks, but we’ll take the current law rather than “solve” our problems with more gun control.

What you can do: Call these members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and urge them to defeat this sham of a concealed carry bill.  Let them know that we’d rather have the current law, which allows sheriffs to issue on their own terms, than create Criminal Safezones that leave citizens defenseless.

Be certain to call the Republican members, who might think they are doing the right thing by supporting a concealed carry bill; they need to know that this bill is not a solution to Colorado’s carrying concealed problems.

Chairman, Senator Ken Gordon (D – Denver)            303-866-4875
Vice Chair, Senator Doug Linkhart (D – Denver)      303-866-4861
Sen. Ken Arnold (R – Adams)                                    303-866-4876
Sen. Jim Dyer (R - Arapahoe)                                    303-866-4866
Sen. Rob Hernandez (D – Denver)                             303-866-4862
Sen. Mark Hillman (R - Burlington)                            303-866-6360
Sen. Sue Windels (D – Arvada)                                   303-866-4840

From outside the metro area, you can call toll free at 1-888-473-8136

Restrictive Carry Bill Invites Another Columbine

by Ari Armstrong, RMGO Research Director

The Colorado Senate will consider a bill (S01-083) that would create more "criminal safety zones," areas where law-abiding citizens are prevented from defending themselves and others with a firearm.

In particular, the bill states a "permit... does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun into... the real estate and all improvements erected thereon of any public or private elementary, middle, junior high or high school..."  

This means schools will remain the main target of deranged killers. At Columbine, the killers knew they would face at most one armed guard. That guard was assigned to Columbine because he was incompetent with a gun. If even a handful of anonymous responsible adults at the school had carried a concealed handgun, the killers would have hesitated to even enter the school. If they had gone ahead with their plans, the loss of life likely would have been much lower. In Mississippi and Pennsylvania, school shootings were stopped when armed adults intervened several minutes before police arrived.

Liberal concealed carry laws are the only types of gun laws proven to reduce mass public shootings and violent crime generally. Yale scholar John Lott found, "When different states passed right-to-carry laws... the number of multiple-victim public shootings declined by a whopping 84 percent" (More Guns, Less Crime, 2nd Ed., page 196).

Currently, local law officials may issue permits at their discretion. The Senate bill under consideration would restrict the rights of current permit holders in Colorado. Thus, it would be a step in the wrong direction.

The creation of "criminal safety" zones is not the only problem with this year's bill, however. It would also require a fee of up to $100. "For each $10 increase in fees, the percentage of the population with permits falls by one half of one percentage point," Lott found, which corresponds to an increase in violent crime rates relative to no fee (178-180). Notably, fees especially harm the poor. Because the poorest areas are also often high crime areas, the ability to carry a concealed handgun is especially effective at reducing violent crime.

To obtain a permit, the applicant must take a mandated training class with "instructors or curriculum certified by the National Rifle Association or by the Peace Officers Standards and Training Board." Of course every gun owner should train to use the firearm safely and effectively. The problem with mandated classes is that they add costs and time delays. Lott found that mandatory training does not increase the usefulness of concealed carry in reducing crime (86), though it does prevent some people from getting a permit and thus weaken the over-all benefits of concealed carry (176).

The bill does contain a provision for emergency permits: "[A] sheriff shall issue a temporary emergency permit to carry a concealed handgun to any person residing in a sheriff's jurisdiction who applies pursuant to this section and and who the sheriff has reason to believe may be in immediate danger." Unfortunately, this does little to protect a person in real danger. First, it's unlikely that a person would be able to quickly find the sheriff. Second, the phrase "reason to believe" is highly subjective and open to abuse.

In general, even though the bill is allegedly a "shall issue" law (rather than "may issue"), it gives sheriffs virtually unlimited discretion to deny permits. It states: "If the sheriff has a reasonable belief that documented previous behavior by the applicant will present a danger to self or others... the sheriff may deny the permit." The "documentation" is arbitrary, and again the phrase "reasonable belief" is subjective. Given the language, a sheriff could refuse practically anyone a permit. Politics is sure to play in many sheriffs' decisions. In addition, some non-felonies, such as decades-old drunk driving records, disqualify the applicant.

Another problem with the current bill is that it requires sheriffs to register concealed carry permit holders with the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, and, by extension, the national government. The explicit goal of the anti-gun lobby is to ban all semiautomatics and all handguns.

Several countries have already banned guns, such as England, where gun crime, burglary, and robbery are on the rise. Californians are learning right now that registered guns are at risk of confiscation.

If the bill is passed, it will probably come out looking even worse than it does now, especially with a Democrat-controlled Senate. If Colorado legislators were serious about reducing crime and saving lives, they would pass a real concealed carry law, one that simply repeals existing restrictions and allows lawful citizens to defend themselves and their loved ones.

A comment on this week's tragic events and the liberties assailed

by Dr. Sarah Thompson

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners joins with all Coloradans and all Americans in mourning the terrible tragedies that occurred yesterday.  Our thoughts and prayers go out to the dead, the injured, and their families - and to our elected leaders who will be making some difficult decisions in the days and months ahead.

While we feel obligated to point out that much of the carnage could have been prevented by armed citizens, law enforcement officers, or sky marshals, we also believe that there are no simplistic solutions to terrorism.  Remember that ordinary ammunition is hazardous on an airplane because it will penetrate the hull and lead to depressurization.  And firing a gun in an extremely cramped and  crowded plane also risks injury to innocent passengers.

More relevant is the fact that Americans have been indoctrinated to be good victims.  We're told over and over again that we should never resist criminals, that we should passively submit to being robbed, raped, mugged, or hijacked.  Women's centers teach women not to fight back, even though fighting back with a firearm is the most effective way to avoid injury.  Employers require their employees to be disarmed, and to agree to whatever a criminal demands.  Those of us who are willing to take responsibility for our own safety are shunned, persecuted, and generally made to feel like second class citizens who are not welcome in "civilized society".

The reason that a few hijackers armed only with knives and box cutters were able to murder tens of thousands of innocent people is less a problem of physically disarmed passengers, and more a problem of psychologically disarmed passengers.

Had the passengers been taught that fighting back is the honorable and appropriate response to thugs, things would likely have turned out differently.  It now appears that this is exactly what happened on the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania - the passengers attempted to subdue the hijackers.  They gave their lives, but prevented the deaths of countless others, and the possible destruction of Camp David, the White House or the Capitol.  They upheld our proud tradition of American heroism.

In a pinch, pocket knives, cell phones, pens, books, laptop computers, keys, etc. can all be used as weapons.  All that's needed is the will and courage to fight back.

We do not say this to dishonor the dead, who almost certainly had no idea of what the terrorists planned.  We're sure that had they known, they would have willingly sacrificed their lives to save thousands of others.  We will probably never know how many heroic people did exactly that.

But we must resolve - right here, right now - that we will stop our idolatrous worship of safety above all else, and return to the values of individual responsibility, community responsibility, courage, and resistance to evil that made our nation great.

In the days and months ahead, we expect to see unprecedented attacks on our G-d given rights - not just the right to keep and bear arms, but the rights of free speech, of assembly, of privacy, of travel, and of due process.  We expect to see calls for more gun control, more Carnivore type surveillance of the internet, more wiretaps and surveillance of cell phone traffic, more warrantless searches and seizures, more face recognition technology, more fingerprinting, more restrictions on peaceful assembly, and increasing demands for some sort of high-tech method to track everything each and every person does.

We must have the courage to oppose these attacks on our rights.  We cannot preserve our freedom by destroying it.  If we allow the acts of vicious criminals to turn the United States into a police state, they will have won, and we will lose everything.

Nearly 250 years ago, Benjamin Franklin wrote: "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".

Yesterday, President Bush said: "America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world.   And no one will keep that light from shining."

We pray he keeps his word.

Not only must we not give up our essential liberty for false promises of safety, we must ensure that our nation remains that "brightest beacon for freedom".

Rocky Mountain Gun Owners suggests the following:

Write to your Congressman, Senators, and state legislators and let them know that you are not willing to sacrifice your liberty for promises of safety, and that you expect them to protect and defend our Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Also let them know that so long as our government protects our liberties, we will support them 100% in the difficult days ahead.

Check your preparedness status.  Do you have adequate food, water, medical supplies, lighting, batteries, radios, and self defense equipment should you need them?  We're not trying to be alarmist here, but we think citizens have the obligation to be prepared to be useful and self sufficient in time of crisis, rather than becoming additional burdens on social services.

Fly your flag!  It's simple, free, shows your support for our country, and will encourage your neighbors to get into the patriotic spirit.

If you're in good enough health to donate blood, please give the gift of life.  Also consider donating to the religious and charitable organizations that are helping victims.  The American Red Cross web site has a lot of information at http://www.redcross.org

Don't stoop to hatred based on anyone's nationality, ethnicity or hatred.  Justice is the most noble of human endeavors.  Bigotry is not.

Don't let terrorists define our nation, and make sure that those who died did not die in vain!

Pray for wisdom, courage, and strength for the injured, the families of victims, President Bush, our Congress, and all Americans.

May G-d bless America, land of the FREE, home of the BRAVE.

Dr. Sarah Thompson is head of Utah Gun Owners Alliance, the only no compromise gun rights group in Utah, which frequently works in alliance with Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.