From Tahlequah Daily Press but not the New York Times or any other mainstream media outlook I could find.  I wonder why?  Maybe it’s because:

Experts say for self-defense, nothing beats a gun

By Eddie Glenn Press Staff Writer

This is one, hopefully, no one will have to observe. But January is
(along with Quality of Life Month, Wealth Mentality Month, Be
On-Purpose Month, and Get Organized Month) Self-Defense Awareness Month.

The event is sponsored by the National Self-Defense Institute to
promote their SAFE (Self-Defense Awareness and Familiarization
Exchange) program. The program has a two-fold purpose: To prevent
crimes of sexual violence through programs of education and training,
focusing primarily on awareness and prevention; and to educate women
about realistic options that will help them avoid, escape, and survive
assaults if they do occur.

…

Lawrence is also a black belt in Okinawan Karate, Kempo, Jeet Kune Do,
Ju Ji Tsu, and Aiki Jitsu (that’s five black belts under his belt).
Still, when it comes to self-defense – especially for women – he
suggests a firearm, and the knowledge of how to use it, is the most
effective weapon.

“A woman is at an obvious size and strength
disadvantage, and for her to protect herself against a man – who may be
carrying a weapon himself – would take years of practicing any martial
art,” said Lawrence. “Someone who is strong and athletic can probably
study any martial arts technique and make it effective, but if you
don’t meet those criteria, you need to consider what the best equalizer
is going to be.”

…

Still, his advise for the most practical and effective self-defense:
“Get a concealed carry permit, and know how to shoot your gun.”

Vote against Paul Warnett who said,

I believe in an outright ban on hand guns if nothing else then to reinforce that handguns are objects to be shunned. Of course criminals are not usually using registered guns but the concept of a gun registry is not a bad one the problem is that it ended up costing 2 billion instead of 2 million dollars.

Mr. Warnett forgot to mention that the gun registry hasn’t solved any crimes yet either.  Or was there one crime solution it was given credit for?  In any case whether it was zero or one the money would have been better “spent” shoveled into furnaces to keep the elderly warm than as a crime fighting tool.

There is this rumor going around that Bill Clinton will replace Steve Ballmer at Microsoft.

Unless the culture has drastically changed at Microsoft in the last few years I just can’t see the people at Microsoft even giving someone like Bill a job as an intern.  Although it does bring up some rather interesting images–imagine Bill being the intern to the president of the Microsoft Gun Club.  The MSGC president, being fond of “assault rifles” and also being the creative type, explores some alternatives to cigars for intern Bill to earn his keep.  Bill might wish he had banned the iron front sight as well as the flash suppressor and bayonet lug.

If it weren’t for the obvious and justified distress these people are in I would just roll my eyes at their insanity:

SOUTH PORTLAND, Me. – Kelly DeCambra made her way through a seven-inches-an-hour snowstorm to a dingy Maine State Police garage where, among the brake parts, transmissions and a flat-bed tow truck, she hoped to find a fragment of solace.

It would come in the form of a Ruger .44 Magnum Super Blackhawk revolver, caked with blood and the memory of Ms. DeCambra’s son, 21-year-old Lionel St. Hilaire, who was shot to death with it last year.

The mother had come to watch the gun that was used to kill her son be sawed into pieces in an acrid plume of white-hot sparks.

Ms. DeCambra’s act of witness was made possible by a law Maine enacted in 2001 that requires handguns used in homicides to be destroyed when they are no longer needed for evidence. Before that, guns were often sold or auctioned by police departments to raise money for other equipment.

…

Maine’s law came about because of Debbie O’Brien, a Kennebunk woman whose 20-year-old son, Devin, was shot to death in 1996. When she learned that the state police would probably sell the gun used to kill her son, Ms. O’Brien said her reaction was, “Oh, my God, the police are here to help you and the next thing you know they’re turning around and selling a gun, making money off my dead son.”

Ms. O’Brien lobbied for the proposed law, saying that she told the state police, “Look, if you need money, let’s do bake sales.”

“You’re in hell,” she said. “You’re just struggling to have a life, and then I realized that would include the gun.”

William Harwood, a gun control advocate in Maine, and Robert M. Schwartz, executive director of the Maine Chiefs of Police Association, said the original proposal was for all crime guns to be destroyed. But because of the state’s strong hunting lobby, they said, the final law included only handguns used in homicides.

“To be candid,” Mr. Harwood said, “the legislation had as much symbolic importance as it does deterrence.”

But the symbolism is powerful, said Ms. O’Brien, who watched the .22-caliber handgun used to kill her son be cut up six years after his death.

“It was just a very important day for my husband and I,” she said. “This was a weapon that changed our lives.”

Yes, their thinking is distorted by the grief they are experiencing but to think that a gun would go to Hell because it was used in a homicide (note, not necessarily a murder) assumes not only that there is a hell, but the gun has a soul, and it was the active agent in the homicide.  You don’t hear about people wanting cars, baseball bats, and kitchen knives used in homicides being destroyed where one would assume there is a similar amount of grief.  I think I see why this is important to them.  As Harwood, above says, this is about symbolism.  It’s about the demonization of firearms.  It’s about attributing motives and evil to a piece of metal as does O’Brien when she says, “This is a weapon that changed our lives.”  These people need grief counseling not laws that take money away from the police.