iOS app Android app More

Which Illinois Counties Have the Most Concealed Carry Permits?

Reboot Illinois   |   June 16, 2015    2:55 PM ET

Illinois became the last state in the union to legalized the carrying of concealed weapons nearly two years ago. The Illinois State Police began issuing concealed carry licenses to residents in the spring of 2014.

The Illinois State Police provided Reboot Illinois with the latest statistics on the number of concealed carry licenses that have been issued by county, including the number of active, denied, suspended and revoked licenses. As of June 6, 2015, there were a total of 113,732 active concealed carry licenses.

Here's a look at which counties have the most concealed carry license holders per 1,000 people, along with the total number of active, denied, revoked and suspended licenses.

Here are 10 counties with some of the most concealed carry licenses per 1,000:

25. Marion County - 16.85

  • Active - 650
  • Denied - 0
  • Revoked - 1
  • Suspended - 0

24. Crawford County - 17.33

  • Active - 336
  • Denied - 2
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 1

23. Douglas County - 17.35

  • Active - 345
  • Denied - 2
  • Revoked - 2
  • Suspended - 1

22. Tazewell County - 17.41

  • Active - 2,363
  • Denied - 11
  • Revoked - 7
  • Suspended - 1

21. Grundy County - 17.45

  • Active - 880
  • Denied - 9
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 0

20. Alexander County - 17.62

  • Active - 132
  • Denied - 0
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 0

19. Woodford County - 18.60

  • Active - 729
  • Denied - 2
  • Revoked - 1
  • Suspended - 1

18. Wabash County - 18.62

  • Active - 215
  • Denied - 0
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 0

17. Franklin County - 18.88

  • Active - 744
  • Denied - 2
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 0

16. Clark County - 19.16

  • Active - 310
  • Denied - 4
  • Revoked - 0
  • Suspended - 0

Check out Reboot Illinois to see which 15 counties have the most licenses and which 25 counties have the fewest concealed carry licenses per 1,000 people.

Sign up for our daily email to stay up to date with Illinois politics.

NEXT ARTICLE: 11 Most Endangered Historic Sites in Illinois in 2015

Why Gun Manufacturers Are in Serious Financial Trouble

John A. Tures   |   June 16, 2015   11:39 AM ET

If gun sales are supposedly "red hot," why are gun manufacturers struggling, even filing for bankruptcy? The answers include a gun glut and long-term trends in gun ownership in America.

There's a continuous media mantra that gun sales are going through the roof. Well, they may have had a little boomlet after the 2012 Newtown shootings. But with Colt filing for bankruptcy, and other gun manufacturers reporting huge declines in sales and falling stock, it's clear that Americans aren't going as gun crazy as people think.

On June 15, Political Scientist Robert Spitzer of SUNY Cortland wrote the column "Why assault rifle sales are booming." It wasn't a pro-gun essay. He used arguments such as fears of Obama, the temptation of "forbidden fruit" and even the old Freudian "male sexuality" pleasure of firing a gun.


I became a little suspicious when Spitzer didn't report or cite any statistics on the subject. I became a little more suspicious when I read the next day that Colt, the well-known gun manufacturer, is filing for bankruptcy, reporting losses of $500 million, equal to the value of all the company's assets. And the company had to get an emergency loan from Morgan Stanley last year, so this isn't just a 2015 thing.

Foreign Policy Magazine tried to pass this off as soldiers and cops not liking Colt guns. That may be the case, but "declining demand" was cited as another reason for Colt's woes.

And it's not just Colt that's going down the drain. Sturm, Ruger's sales are dropping dramatically. So are Smith & Wesson's (number two in the industry), which has falling sales which are leading to dropping stock prices. It's a similar story for gun stores, as one Georgia business reported difficulties with even giving an AR away.

What happened? In all cases, that short-lived spike in gun sales from the post-Newtown era was to blame. Gun companies kept producing and producing, while retailers mortgaged their future to meet a demand that, quite frankly, was not really a permanent feature of the landscape. And folks may be switching to handguns and preferences for concealed carry permits.

Of course, there are still background checks going on. But don't mistake that number for more households owning guns. In fact, as I showed earlier this year, the number of households owning a gun is far less than what it was in 1974.

Now there are some folks that are stockpiling all kinds of guns. After discussing this column with a colleague, he proceeded to show me pics of his eight guns. "Just got three more this week," he told me. And you can do that. In fact, with this massive gun glut, it's like Christmas for the gun collector (like this colleague). Preppers can get a little more prepped these days.

Yet, folks are starting to realize that Barack Obama is not going to organize Jade Helm 15 to lock all conservatives in FEMA Death Camps in the basement of Wal-Marts or in the Michigan or Arkansas countryside (and yes, I've received those emails too). Assault weapons are not about to be eliminated across this country. But gun manufacturers will have a lot to be concerned about because the firearms issue isn't just an ideology. It is, after all, a business as well.

John A. Tures is a professor of political science at LaGrange College in LaGrange, Ga. He can be reached at

What Are the Best Ways to Survive When Someone Is Shooting at You?

Quora   |   June 15, 2015    8:56 PM ET

What should I do if someone is chasing me and trying to shoot me?: originally appeared on Quora: The best answer to any question. Ask a question, get a great answer. Learn from experts and access insider knowledge. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+.


Answer by Justin Freeman, Former Patrol Officer

If you're on foot, you're obviously going to be running, but you need to do so smartly.

  • Your instinct will be to run directly away from the attacker, since a direct line is the shortest; however, you need to fight this tendency and make random cuts in your flight pattern. A moving target is fairly hard to hit, but if you're running in a straight line it's much easier, since you only have to correct one aspect of the aim if you miss.
  • Don't run in a simple zigzag pattern, or in any other predictable way. In order to hit a moving target, a shooter is going to have to "lead" you with the gun, swinging it ahead of where you are to where he or she thinks you'll be. If it's impossible to know this, you will be that much harder to hit.
  • Make use of concealment and cover as much as possible. Concealment is anything that obscures your body, but won't necessarily stop a bullet; cover is a barrier that is reasonably bullet resistant. If there are trees, shrubs, buildings, vehicles, or anything else around, work them into your flight pattern and get them between you and the shooter.
  • Try to head toward a place of safety. If there is any kind of police presence nearby, that's obviously your first choice. If not, any kind of governmental building, then any corporate or public center that might have security, then any accessible space you can access and secure behind you.
  • Failing all that, see if you can find cover just long enough to call 911 or your local equivalent. Stop just long enough to dial, then keep going. You're going to be long on panic and short on oxygen, but if your attacker has fired any shots there is a very short phrase you must get out clearly: "Active shooter at [your location]." If they're just armed and in pursuit of you, then "Man/Woman with a gun at [location]."
  • Addresses with numerics are best (5874 South Main), then intersections (Main and First), but any landmark you can get out will suffice. An active shooter call from an out of breath caller will get the cavalry rolling hot.
  • If you can find more cover, try to update dispatch - they're going to be ravenous for more information. Try to tell them your direction of travel, the type of gun involved (handgun, rifle, or shotgun at minimum, but more detail if you're certain of what you're talking about), and the suspect's description. If the suspect is wielding anything bigger than a pistol, please let dispatch know as soon as you can. Shotguns will change tactical response, and ballistic vests don't stop rifle rounds, so responding officers need to know about these before they get there.
  • Tied to the above, know your weapon. First, this is a shotgun; note the thumping report.

Then, a bolt action rifle. Most will have scopes as shown below, but you're frankly quite unlikely to be getting shot at with this - and if you are, the shooter is likely stationary, anyway:

Then, a pistol, which is by far the most likely weapon you'll be fleeing. Note the cracking report. This is a Glock 17 9mm, which is what I carried on the street:

And then, of course, we all know what automatic weapons look and sound like. If you're personally getting chased by someone with an automatic rifle, you probably don't need any advice from me.

  • As police arrive, try to find a place to keep your head down, and follow dispatch's directions regarding what to do from this point.

If you're in a vehicle, this is probably going to be an easier process:

  • In the case of an active shooter in their own car chasing you, drive as quickly as you safely can to a police station as you dial 911. I emphasize safely, because if you wreck out you're going to be stuck in an immobilized metal box while your attacker quickly closes distance.
  • Try to keep your head down as much as possible, but, again, safely - don't let the dashboard obstruct your vision.
  • Don't put effort into swerving like you would on foot. There are so many factors that make hitting you incredibly difficult (inability to fire down line of sight, lateral movement, divided attention, propensity of bullets to glance off of angled back glass, and on and on) that you don't need to risk losing control just to introduce one more.
  • If you don't know where a police station is, find a major highway and try to keep your distance. Whatever you do, don't wander into residential areas - you never know when you're going to hit a cul-de-sac or loop that's going to block you in or put you face to face with your assailant.
  • Like above, follow dispatch's instruction - they're going to put you on a path to be intercepted by responding officers.

Obviously, this will be a unique and dynamic situation. You're usually going to know, based on the situation, what you need to do to stay as safe as possible; if you can do this for 1-3 minutes (probably the top end of Code Three response time in a metropolitan area), you should have a police officer between you and your attacker.

More questions on Quora:

Ryan Grenoble   |   June 3, 2015    7:12 PM ET

A Georgia man openly carried a fully loaded AR-15 semiautomatic rifle into Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, the busiest in the world.

Jim Cooley was armed with the weapon -- complete with an extended capacity 100-round drum -- when he went to drop his daughter off for a flight last Friday. Following the enactment of new state legislation in 2014, it's actually legal to carry a rifle in the open in the airport, so long as the holder doesn't attempt to pass through airport security.

Multiple police officers approached Cooley while he was in the airport and asked about the weapon, after which he replied he was carrying it for safety. Officers can be heard talking with Cooley in videos of the interactions he later uploaded to YouTube.

"You have quite a few people afraid because calls are coming in left and right," an officer tells Cooley in one of the videos. "People's fears are not my responsibility," he replies. "If you're detaining me, then I'm going to have to file a lawsuit."

Cooley tells the same officer in another video that she "shouldn't even be talking" to him about the rifle.

In yet another video, Cooley accuses three officers who followed him outside of "harassment," telling them they "didn't even have the right to approach me." The officer responds by calmly encouraging him to contact an attorney if he feels slighted.

Asked by ABC affiliate WSBTV on Tuesday if people should do something just because they legally can, Cooley said he was just exercising his rights as a gun owner.

"If you don't exercise your rights," he said, "the government doesn't have any hesitation to take them away."

Taking Aim at Mindfulness

Arthur Rosenfeld   |   June 2, 2015   11:02 PM ET

As shocking as it may be to hear from a Taoist monk, I've loved target shooting since I was a boy. Well, perhaps given China's history of warrior monks, it's not all that shocking. Simplicity is inherent in target practice; a rifle or pistol manufactured to tight tolerances, an inanimate target, and a fascination with accuracy are all that's required.

Yet because I eschew the mainstream of American gun culture -- particularly that segment of it that is allied with acts of violence, fantasies about violence and a celebration of urban gang culture and of war -- I am presented with a conundrum of sorts. Is it okay to love shooting but hate killing? I think the answer is yes, and one of the ways I reconcile my feelings is to avoid any gun that is designed to do anything but punch paper. After all, weapons conceived and constructed for the purpose of taking life have no place in a Taoist home.

So, I treat my target pistols the way I treat the traditional Chinese edged weapons that are an essential part of my practice of the martial art of tai chi. When it comes to spears and swords and such, I re-purpose them to be the equivalent of plowshares, cultivating freedom from emotional bondage and behavioral limitations instead of cultivating crops, and helping my students to do the same. When it comes to my target pistols, I use them as meditation tools. This approach allows me to reconcile my actions with my beliefs. Once a week, I choose to be alone with my thoughts, the feel of my finger pad upon the trigger, the reassuring sound of my breathing, and the sight of the paper bullseye downrange.

The other day, I found myself with a few boxes of ammunition and a paper target replete with 16 tiny black circles with red centers. I set up the target downrange, and began shooting. I began putting ten shots inside each of the black circles, moving from left to right. When I finished a row, I began a new one. The type of target I use turns color when you hit it, so that it is possible to see the hole, with a little work, even at a distance. My goal was not only to hit the bullseye but also to group the bullets as close to each other as possible.

I was about halfway through the targets when I suddenly realized that my shooting had acquired a compulsive quality. Glancing from time to time at the bullets I had left, I had become more interested in working my way through what ammunition remained than in paying attention to the shot I was taking. In other words, instead of enjoying the moment of focus, breath, aim, and trigger press, I was thinking of the shot to come. In a sense, it was a consumer activity. I went out, bought the bullets, and then shot them. I was turning money into lead, and lead into waste, merely for the momentary gratification of repeatedly tensing and relaxing, all without deeper meaning.

This urge to constantly, and repeatedly, gratify ourselves is what drives our consumer economy and our emotional culture too. We mine the Earth for elements, we turn those into constructs, we consume the constructs, and then we excrete them. Shopping, spending, and acquiring, all address a deep emotional hunger, but offer only illusory sustenance, scratching an itch that arises from a failure of our philosophy.

While on-the-fly ordering trains us to expect the immediate gratification of next or same-day delivery, Internet surfing trains our brain to skim and jump. That's why more and more people find it difficult to sustain the concentration reading a book requires, while yearning for exactly the quietude and deeper focus such a read supplies. We are losing the ability to enjoy the moment, losing our ability to immerse ourselves in a story, and to critically examine what we're doing and what we are told. This makes us easy prey for those who would sway and manipulate us, a fact that has not been lost on media, politicians, and corporations.

So, I put down my pistol and took a long breath. Then I raised the gun again, and engaged the silent mantra, "there is no moment but this, there is no shot but this one." When I was ready, I pressed the trigger so gently that when the gun discharged, it surprised me. Then I repeated the performance, and again, and again, and again. When I drew my eye away from the sights and had a look at the target, I had put five bullets through a single hole.

How much of our time could have this be-here-now quality? Perhaps much more of it, if we make the effort to concentrate, meditate, slow down, and be honest with ourselves about our habits and our motivations. Achieving present-moment awareness -- trendily referred to as "mindfulness" these days -- is actually the key to contentment, and deeper awareness. It is also the antidote to apathy, and to the sort of environmentally and spiritually destructive consumerism that keeps us running and spending without ever feeling satisfied.

Does this mean you should take up target shooting? I suppose you could, but you can also train your attention using mind and body exercises like archery, yoga, or of course, tai chi. Take the time to think about this. Right now, in this very moment.

Gun Violence Awareness Day Shows NRA Is Losing the Culture War

Mike Weisser   |   June 1, 2015    1:01 PM ET

Right after the Sandy Hook massacre we were treated to a rant from Wayne-o in which the head of the NRA blamed gun violence, among other things, on "a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life." He then castigated "media conglomerates" for bringing murder and violence as entertainment motifs into every American home. In defending gun ownership following this horrendous event, the NRA found it expedient and effective to rally its troops around the idea that popular culture and gun culture don't mix.

I think that June 2, touted as Gun Violence Awareness Day, may mark a true turning-point in the argument about guns. The pro-gun community can lobby all it wants for laws that make it easier to own or carry guns, but fewer gun restrictions won't really matter if the country's dominant culture becomes anti-gun. And while the NRA has been promoting gun ownership as their response to the "culture wars," the millennial culture that is emerging and will define the country appears to be solidly anti-gun.

How can I say that when recent opinion polls indicate that a majority of Americans believe that guns make America a safer place? I'll tell you why. First, the surveys which ask Americans if guns make them safer also show that less than a majority actually own guns. Second, despite the Obama-driven spike in gun sales, the industry has not managed to penetrate new demographics such as women and minorities; most guns and ammunition sold in the last few years went to the same-old, same-old who bought those guns for the same reason that gun sales have spiked at other times, namely, the fear of losing their guns. Finally and most important, the social and political views of millennials are completely at odds with the socio-demographic profile of the gun-owning population, and as millennials become the dominant generation, this could have dire consequences for the health and even survival of the gun industry as a whole.

According to Pew, a majority of millennials support gay rights, less than a majority are patriotic, only one-third are religious and they voted Obama in 2012. As for Boomers, who buy and own most of the guns, they don't support gays, they are fiercely patriotic, a majority are religious and they split their vote evenly in 2012. What these numbers tell me is that over the next twenty years, the gun industry better come up with a wholly different argument for owning guns.

Gun Violence Awareness Day, as reported ruefully by Brietbart and other pro-gun blogs, garnered support from movie, song and media personalities like Russell Simmons, Aasif Mandvi, Padma Lakshmi, Amanda Peet, Tunde Adebimpe and many, many more. I'm actually a pre-boomer, and I don't have the faintest idea who any of these people are. But I do know the celebs who show up each year at the NRA shindig; guys like Chuck Norris and Ollie North. Wow -- talk about young, hip and cool.

Another master-stroke in planning this event was using orange to build identity and awareness for the folks who get involved. Orange, or blaze orange as it is known, has always been worn by hunters and many states require it for anyone goes out after game. Brady and Shannon's Moms, among other organizations, have lately moved into the safety space which was owned lock, stock and barrel by the NRA. Guess who now shares and could soon own that space?

Until recently, the playing field where gun violence arguments played out was controlled by the NRA. But right now the field is tilting the other way. And notice how millennial culture has no problem attaching the word 'violence' to the word 'guns.' This alone should make the NRA wonder if their message can win or even compete for hearts and minds. The NRA always assumed that gun owners would defend their guns while everyone else just sat by. After June 2, I wouldn't want to take that assumption to the bank.

Guns N' Roses

Renee Fisher   |   May 27, 2015   11:08 AM ET

Last week, the floodgates of listerv mayhem were unleashed when it became known that a gun shop was coming into Life in the Boomer Lane's quiet middle-class and decidedly liberal Democrat-majority neighborhood. Emails began flying back and forth with more speed than tiger-stripe mosquitoes exhibit when LBL is sitting on her front porch in the evening. Opinions were all over the map, with the extremes being, "I will throw my body across the threshold of the store to prevent anyone gaining entry," to, "Thank goodness our neighborhood will finally have a living example of what makes this country great."

The gun emporium will occupy the space vacated by a women's gym and will join several popular mom and pop businesses along the strip: a restaurant, a flower and gift shop, an art framing store and a hair and nail salon.

Life in the Boomer Lane has, for the most part, stayed away from this hotbed of controversy. But she admits that this recent reminder of the penchant for Americans to own and carry firearms calls for some explanation. She hereby gives it to you.

A note to readers: LBL writes satiric humor. She takes topics to their ridiculous extremes. While this blog is open to anyone who has nothing better to do than to read marginally amusing content, LBL requests that she not be subjected to comments with all of the reasons why gun ownership is the most important right we have ever had in the history of the planet. She has heard it all before. The NRA does a much better job than you do of promoting gun ownership in this country.

She hereby publicly states that your penchant for firearms doesn't mean that you don't love your children and grandchildren and pets. It doesn't mean that you aren't kind to your mother and remember her on Mother's Day. It doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt your heart when you have to kill insects in your home. It doesn't mean that you aren't a law-abiding, responsible person who gives money to those people who stand on medium strips with signs and money jars. In other words, LBL thinks you are probably a good, decent, caring person who she would be perfectly happy to have to dinner, but not to run into in a dark alley some evening.

When God created the United States with the help of a bunch of white dudes, he gave us the right to bear arms. This was because we didn't have a national army, so we had to depend on local militias of loyal citizens armed with squirrel guns. After awhile, when we beat the Brits, we didn't need a militia anymore, since we created a real army. That said, there were a lot of people living in places in which they actually needed rifles in order to put food on the table.

A national gun lobby was created shortly thereafter, to make sure that people got to keep their guns. Their original motto was "If It Was Good Enough for God, It's Good Enough For Us." Because Americans were chosen by God to have their own country, and because they are extremely plucky and creative, they took God's word at face value and started assembling arsenals of assault weapons in their homes. Soon, America became a country of loyal, gun-toting citizens, who justified their ownership of assault weapons as a natural and logical extension of owning a rifle to use during deer hunting season, or protecting their suburban homes from foreign marauders or anyone else of whom God didn't approve.

This all worked pretty well until people, including a popular Conservative President of the United States and a lot of school children, started to get shot at. A few misguided folks started making noises that maybe it wasn't such a great idea that there were so many guns around that were accessible to everyone at a moment's notice.

While all this was going on, gun ownership continued to rise, and loyal citizens started to pack heat. Gun manufacturers and gun distributors made a lot of money and had a lot of gun shows. Now, one-third of Americans have guns in their homes. One online gun emporium announces that they sell "finely-tuned fighting machines for use against all enemies foreign and domestic."

While LBL knows that the above is a corruption of the wording in the U.S. oath of office pledge "defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic," she isn't quite sure what this means in this case, since most people aren't allowed to toss their own finely-tuned fighting machines into a suitcase and fly to wherever it is that foreign enemies live. And the domestic variety, unless they are actively engaged in enemy-defining behavior, are pretty darn hard to recognize.

Depending on which source you read, we are either at the top of the international heap in gun ownership and pretty close to the top in murder rate (i.e.: more guns equals more violent crime) or we aren't. Research on the side of "we are" is abundant. Research on the other side is either endorsed by the NRA or funded by the Crime Prevention Research Center, an objective group founded by John Lott, a popular gun rights enthusiast.

The debate would have been quelled a long time ago, but it continues to rage, thanks to being funded by the gun lobby. LBL suspects that if there weren't a very large buck to be made (and shot at, on occasion), most gun sales would revert back to hunting rifles and whatever is used for target practice.

If the NRA were being honest, they would stop all this nonsense about second amendment rights and adopt the following motto: "Guns are probably really bad, but we sure do like them." (With slight modification, this tag line could also be used for industries selling cigarettes, sugar, bacon cheeseburgers and gasoline.)

The Republicans are for Smaller Government Except...

Gerry Myers   |   May 26, 2015    5:17 PM ET

While most Republicans think there is no role for government in job creation, some of our best Presidents have proven otherwise. FDR knew the importance of government when he created the New Deal that brought America out of a deep depression. Eisenhower's administration used the federal government to create the Interstate Highway System which employed thousands of people. During the Clinton administration, more than 22 million jobs were created and the economy flourished. In addition, Clinton raised education standards and lowered the crime rate. Government not only can have a role, it should have a role.

Republicans are continuously talking about the need for smaller government, yet their actions show otherwise...

In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled abortions a legal medical procedure. Since then, 73 abortions clinics have been closed in Republican led states. Because of court orders, a few were allowed to reopen.* Is this governance of women's bodies creating smaller government...or are our legislatures saying they know more about medical decisions than patients and their doctors?

These same Republicans who say they value life also desire to go to war with or without provocation, want to grow our prison system rather than reform it, and encourage the sale of larger, more powerful guns. Why do they only vote pro-life when women's rights are involved?

Republicans believe that smaller government means lower taxes on millionaires and fewer regulations on big corporations. The result: There wouldn't be enough money to fund social programs they want to dismantle like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

While Congress pushes for more tax breaks to benefit the wealthy and more funding for wars and military operations, they also feel compelled to tell others how to spend their money even though they can't balance their own budget. Governor Brownback signed a law that tells welfare recipients they can't get their nails done, go on a cruise, or go to the movies with the money received from the government. Ironically, there are no rules restricting the purchase of guns and ammunition to these welfare recipients.

When Denton, Texas citizens voted to ban fracking in their city, Governor Greg Abbott created a law prohibiting city's from banning fracking. Talk about government overreach.

Even though Florida is the state most in danger from global warming, officials at Florida's EPA were ordered not to use global warming or climate change in any official communications, emails, or reports, affecting 3,200 employees.** I thought in America we were guaranteed Freedom of Speech by our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Why are the rights in Florida different?

Our Founding Fathers were also very clear on two other points: Separation of church and state and everyone's right to practice their religious views as they wished. So why do Republicans want religion included in classroom core curriculum?

Mike Huckabee made it clear during his announcement for president in 2016 that he favors a theology over a democracy. He believes that schools should resemble churches delivering the gospel, rather than education and exchange of academic ideas. He opposes both women's rights and same sex marriage. His current book's title: God, Guns, Grits, and Gravy, communicates his beliefs and priorities.

Ted Cruz, who made his announcement for President at Liberty University, an evangelical school founded by Jerry Falwell, also believes that religion should be the basis for our government.

Voters need to look at each candidate's party platform, priorities, and the way they have voted in the past. Voters need to vote for what is best for them and the country, rather than following a party because of past loyalties and ideologies that were part of the 50s. We are in 2015, and our legislators need to pass laws that address our current issues and challenges, and prepare America for the future.

* 73 Abortion Facilities Shut Down in 2014, 75% of Abortion Clinics Closed Since 1991, Cheryl Sullenger,, Dec 29, 2014,
** In Florida, officials ban term 'climate change', Miami Herald- Florida Center for Investigative Reporting, Tristram Korten, March 8, 2015,

Twin Peaks Shootout Destroys NRA's 'Good Guys With Guns' Theory

Mike Weisser   |   May 26, 2015   12:16 PM ET

One thing we can say for sure about the parking lot in front of the Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco -- sure isn't a gun-free zone. When the fracas came to an end last Sunday, at least nine people were dead, another eighteen were injured and more than 150 biker gang members had either been arrested or detained for additional questioning, a number which kept changing as the cops ran out of usual spaces (read: jail cells) to stick all the guys who engaged in the rumble.

And if you think that it was only the parking lot that was an unfree gun zone, the Waco Police Department issued a list of all the weapons found in the restaurant before, during and after the gang members were being carted off to the hoosegow. Ready? Along with an AK-47, the cops found 118 handguns stuffed into potato chip sacks, flour bags, hidden on shelves in the restaurant's kitchen and simply lying around on the floor. And here's the best of all; someone actually tried to flush a handgun down a toilet.

I remember back in the 1980s when Glock first started promoting gun sales, the company ran a very clever advertisement called the Glock "torture test" which showed someone dropping a Glock from the roof of a building, then coming downstairs, picking up the gun and it still worked. The test was a riff on Timex watches and how they take a licking but keep on ticking. So I'm thinking that maybe someone in the Waco Twin Peaks restaurant wanted to update the Glock test by first trying to flush the pistol down the toilet. Dumber things with guns happen all the time in the Lone Star State.

In any case, the Waco mess apparently grew out of a fight that started inside the restaurant and then spilled outside. The melee evidently involved members of at least four biker gangs, including but not limited to members of the Scimitars, Vaqueros, Cossacks and Bandidos, the last-named bunch having been dubbed a "growing criminal threat" by the Department of Justice, even though their French subsidiary allegedly runs a Toys for Tots drive every year -- in France.

Biker gangs have been around almost as long as motorcycles have been around, but they achieved their unique counter-cultural status in the 1960s when they were rhapsodized and condemned by "gonzo" journalist Hunter Thompson, whose relationship with the bikers ended when he got the crap beaten out of him by several members after Thompson rebuked one of them for punching out his wife. Two years later the Angels and other biker gangs engaged in a slugfest at the Altamont rock festival, which both ruined the festival and stripped the biker gangs of any last vestige of romantic imagery in the media or the popular imagination.

Meanwhile back in Texas, a bill to allow open carry of handguns appears to be ready for passage which Governor Abbott has promised to sign. The bill's supporters, of course, claim that what happened in Waco shouldn't have anything to do with this law, but the mess outside of the Twin Peaks restaurant, it seems to me, does have something important to say about the NRA's most cherished project, namely, to get rid of all gun-free zones. Recall what Wayne-o said after Sandy Hook: "Only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun."

But think about this: There may have been more than 100 bikers at Twin Peaks, all of whom believed they were 'good guys' who needed to carry guns in case a 'bad guy' from another gang was also armed. So if everyone can decide for themselves who are the 'good guys' and who are the 'bad guys' and back up this decision by strapping on a gun, the incident in Waco won't be the last time that bullets and bodies go flying. Do people become 'good' because they walk around with a gun? The Bandidos and the NRA would definitely agree.

Do Stand Your Ground Laws Make ANY Sense?

David Pakman   |   May 21, 2015    5:46 PM ET

I recently interviewed Robert Spitzer, a professor at SUNY Cortland who has researched and written extensively about so-called "Stand Your Ground" laws, which eliminate the duty to retreat when safe and feasible within self-defense doctrine. Numerous states have enacted these laws, and the laws have been central to many notable criminal cases involving shootings around the country.

Professor Spitzer argues that the evidence on Stand Your Ground laws tells us that:

  • SYG laws hamper and limit law enforcement investigations into shootings
  • The chief beneficiaries of SYG laws are "those with records of crime and violence"
  • SYG claims were successful 67% of the time, but in 79% percent of cases, the shooter could have retreated to avoid the confrontation altogether, while in 68% the person killed was not even armed
  • There has been an increase in "justifiable homicides" in states with Florida-style SYG laws
  • There is NOT evidence the SYG laws reduce the number of crimes like burglary, robbery, and aggravated assault

Additionally, Spitzer argues that significant racial disparities exist with regard to the adjudication of SYG laws. He explains this disparity, and much more, in our interview:

What do you think? Do SYG laws serve any productive purpose in society today?

Fewer and Fewer Americans Own Guns

Josh Sugarmann   |   May 21, 2015    1:48 PM ET

Household gun ownership in America is on a steady, long-term decline.

That's according to data from the latest edition of the General Social Survey (GSS), which is conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago.

My organization, the Violence Policy Center, takes a look at this research in our new report, "A Shrinking Minority: The Continuing Decline of Gun Ownership in America."

The GSS has been surveying American households on gun ownership since 1972. As NORC notes, "Except for the U.S. Census, the GSS is the most frequently analyzed source of information in the social sciences." The NORC data shows that American household gun ownership hit its peak in 1977, when more than half of American households (53.7 percent) reported having any guns. By 2014, only 32.4 percent of American households had a gun in the home -- less than a third.


A similar trend can be seen in the decline in personal gun ownership. The GSS finds that the percentage of Americans who reported personally owning a gun dropped more than 26 percent from 1985 to 2014. In 1985, 30.5 percent of Americans said they personally owned a gun. The percentage is now down to 22.4 percent, or a little more than one in five.

Not surprisingly, most gun owners tend to be white men who live outside cities.

Drawing from data from 2010 to 2014, NORC found that 39 percent of white respondents said they lived in a household with a gun. During the same period, 18.1 percent of black respondents and 15.2 percent of Hispanic respondents said there was a gun in their household. NORC found that "households with firearms are concentrated in rural areas and in regions with more residents living in rural areas."

And as gun owners age and die off, the efforts of the NRA and its financial backers in the gun industry to find "young guns" have been less than successful.

In 1980, 23.5 percent of those under 35 owned a gun while 27.4 percent of those 65 years of age and older owned a gun, an age gap of 3.9 percentage points. By 2014, this gap had expanded to 16.4 percentage points, with gun ownership dropping to 14 percent among those under 35 and increasing to 30.4 percent for those 65 years of age and older.

And so far, the movement-wide effort to significantly increase gun ownership among women -- the NRA and gun industry's Holy Grail -- has failed.

According to NORC (emphasis mine):

Personal ownership of firearms has not appreciably change[d] for women from 1980 through 2014. Between nine percent and 14 percent of women personally owned a firearm during those years and there is no meaningful trend in the level of personal ownership.

In 2014, 11.7 percent of women personally owned a firearm.

And while gunmakers might initially take heart in NORC data showing that the gender gap in gun ownership is narrowing, any excitement is sure to be short-lived. The gender gap is narrowing not because significantly more women are owning guns but because far fewer men are. In 1980, 50.3 percent of men owned a firearm while 10.1 percent of women owned a gun, a gender gap of 40.2 percentage points. By 2014, gun ownership was 35.1 percent for men and 11.7 percent for women, a gender gap of 23.4 percentage points.

One of the key reasons cited for the steady drop in household gun ownership is the decline in the popularity of hunting.

The GSS data shows that in 1977, 31.6 percent of adults lived in a household where they, a spouse, or both were hunters. By 2014, this number had dropped to 15.4 percent.


Other generally accepted reasons for the diminishing number of gun-owning households include:

  • The end of military conscription. Fewer individuals with a military background means decreased exposure to firearms, hence fewer households with an interest in owning guns.
  • Restrictions on shooting ranges. Environmental issues (including the lead-poisoning threat to children posed by exposure to fired ammunition as well as the "hand loading" of ammunition), as well as zoning issues, have forced shooting ranges to close and limited construction of new ranges.
  • Land-use issues that limit hunting and other shooting activities. As our nation becomes increasingly urban and suburban, the land available for shooting activities continues to diminish.
  • Competition for leisure-time activities of children. From video games to organized sports activities, the competition for the leisure time of children -- the key age group targeted by the gun industry as "replacement shooters" for introduction into hunting and shooting -- is intense, and guns are losing out.
  • The increase in single-parent homes headed by women. The most common introduction to guns is through a male family member.

One of the greatest successes of the NRA and the gun industry has been their ability to act as if they represent a majority of Americans. This is in spite of the fact that the NRA represents only a tiny fraction of gun owners, let alone all Americans, and gunmakers are a relatively small industry compared with other manufacturers of consumer goods. Yet this mistaken belief in their own popularity -- based on nothing more than chest-thumping and false assertions -- is what drives the NRA and its financial backers in the gun industry as they push for policies and legislation that benefit only them, from one law after the next that expands concealed carry in public spaces to a militarized product line that facilitates public mayhem.

The facts are these. A clear majority -- two thirds -- of Americans don't have guns in their homes. Almost four out of five Americans don't personally own a gun. And as the gun-owning population continues to age and die off, fewer Americans are taking their place.

These numbers terrify the NRA and their "corporate partners" in the gun industry but should offer hope for the majority of Americans who are tired of being held hostage by the gun lobby and firearms industry.

9 Ways To Keep Your Teen Safe From Muggers

Sarah Maizes   |   May 20, 2015    1:20 PM ET

Last week, a group of my daughter's friends were mugged. At gunpoint.

When my daughter told me what happened, my heart froze. A group of teenagers were walking from a party at one friend's house to another friend's house in a very residential neighborhood. Thankfully (and that's not a big enough word for my gratitude), the perpetrators only took the kids' phones and nobody was hurt. But still, a friend of my daughter's had a gun in his chest.

I was ready to pack up, leave LA and move to a quiet neighborhood in Montana.

But would that even make a difference?

Crime is everywhere. I have no idea if it was always everywhere, but I know for sure it is now. At movie theaters in Denver and elementary schools in Sandy Hook, Connecticut. Violence has become a part of our daily existence no matter where you live.

A couple of weeks after the tragedy in Denver, I remember a couple of friends and I took our kids to a movie. We sat down in our seats and scanned for "weird" people. We checked for the exits. We looked around the floor, under seats, to see if we could fit in case of gunfire. Then we told the kids "If you see anyone you don't like or who you think looks or is acting weird -- ANYBODY AT ALL -- just leave. Quietly. Go out into the lobby and we'll follow you out. Don't even ask us. Just go." Even as the words were coming out of my mouth, I couldn't believe that the danger I was discussing was even a real possibility. But to me, it was.

I know the odds are with me when I open the door and let my kids out into the world, but I also know on some level that it's still a gamble. And it makes me sick. And scared. I can't help but constantly wonder, "what kind of world have we brought these kids into?"

As parents, all we want is a safe haven for our family and we try to find it. But whether it's in a quiet suburb or a big city, all of these places have one thing in common: They're in America. And Americans have guns. And Americans can get guns. And Americans will use guns. And for every person that points a gun, there's somebody else at the other end of it. And I hope it's not my kid. And you know what? I hope it's not your kid, either.

So what can we do?

I lived in NYC for almost 20 years and I know what it means to be street smart. I can tell you, most teenagers are not street smart.

We've done such a good job protecting them that they just aren't prepared for any possibility. I don't want to scare my kids, but I do want them to be prepared. It's the only way to help them stay safe.

Of course, the unfortunate truth is that nobody's ever completely safe, but there's no reason to look like an easy target. Life is a series of "What ifs" and each and every one of them is a real possibility (something I just learned the hard way.)

So, with the help of Sergeant Haefs of the Beverly Hills Police Department, I put together some tips you should share with your teens ASAP -- or at least before they walk out that door to that party:

1. Watch out for strangers: Duh! You've been taught this since birth. So why have you suddenly forgotten this golden rule we've practically beaten into you?! Because you're taller now? Look up the street, look behind you down the street. If you think you're being followed, keep walking in the direction of your destination and cross the street. Find a service station and wait until they pass. I say "safety comes before being polite to strangers." (Of course, you shouldn't be disrespectful or rude either -- it can start a fight -- but don't worry about being helpful. There's no reason to engage any strangers who talks to a kid. Even if it's just to ask for directions. YOU THINK SOMEBODY IS FOLLOWING YOU IN A CAR? Take a picture of the license plate and run to a well-lit, busy place ASAP.

2. Be smart: Please organize yourself and all of your stuff before get out of your car or walk down a street. Make sure you have EVERYTHING you need and have your keys where you can reach them (so you don't stand around looking for your Chapstick in the middle of a dark sidewalk, thank you very much!) Also, have your keys out and ready to use before you even get to your front door and check your surroundings to make sure nobody is near your door. Once you're in, close and lock the door behind you immediately.

3. Hide your stuff: Keep your phone, money, credit cards, jewelry -- anything of value -- out of sight.

4. Don't get distracted: If you're wearing headphones, keep the volume WAY down so you can hear everything going on around you. Better yet, go without music for a few minutes and put the headphones away. Is that so hard?

5. Take well-lit streets: Don't go down a dark street even if it's a route you know. Just because you walk it all the time doesn't mean it's safe at night. Take a busier, well-lit street and walk with friends. But EVEN if you ARE walking with friends, check out #6!

6. There isn't always safety in numbers: You think you're safe because you're with a group. But when a mugger sees a bunch of teens laughing, texting and oblivious to the world around them (and believe me, you ARE oblivious while you're filming that Snapchat of your friends), you're not safe -- you're fish in a bucket. Especially when the mugger has a gun. You're DESPERATE to send a text message? Be the ONLY one texting and make sure all of your friends are acting as a look-out.

7. Be aware of your surroundings: Avoid tall bushes, hedges, alleyways, empty lots, anywhere that's remote or where somebody could hide. Look around to make sure nobody is lurking in a bush or nook before using your key and providing an entry into your own home. If you think you're being followed CALL 911 and quickly run to a well-lit neighbor's house, service station, restaurant or shop.

8. Go from Point A to Point B: Stop leaving parties to go walk around the neighborhood. When you decide to leave a party (where we've just dropped you off), we don't know where you are. We can't come quickly to your aid. Please don't leave a party without letting us know you're leaving and exactly where you're going. And if you DO need to leave, go straight from where you are to where you are going -- quickly! Walking around aimlessly makes you a target.


9. Give the mugger what they ask for (as long as it's ONLY property): If they ask you to get into a car or go anywhere else, RUN! "Create distance," says Sergeant Haef. Yell "HELP! POLICE!" or "FIRE" -- just get away. But if someone is pointing a gun at you and asking for your phone, your money or your jewelry, just GIVE IT TO THEM. Nothing is more valuable than your life.

This may seem like a lot, but here's the most important thing to remember -- just teach your children to "think safe." Adults are exposed to the dangers of the world all the time but the truth is our kids live a more insulated existence. The Women's and Children's Health Network suggests reminding them that not everyone is always as nice as they seem. We live in a dangerous world and the best way to be safe is to think about staying safe!

For more tips on keeping your kid safe, read the full blog post at

"Wait, Mom, Are Those Police or Isis?"...

Elizabeth Lazar   |   May 19, 2015    7:01 PM ET

...asked my 9 year-old last month.

Otherwise absorbed in a rousing Fifa 15 match, he looked up from the iPad when the news upstaged Isco's corner kick.

To a kid raised on Ghandian entertainment and forbidden from all virtual things Call of Duty, the big screen offered a more exciting scene tonight: Masked and shielded warriors! Paramilitary counter attack weaponry! Military-grade style smoke grenades... and SWAT teams armed with assault rifles, shotguns with lead pellets! Barricade projectiles filled with tear gas! Even a bearcat...!

I answer,
"Um, no baby. That's the Baltimore Police Department."

Now thoroughly confused and doubting any of his prior won geopolitical swagger, my third-grader crinkled his nose at the smoldering screen and asks the next appalling question, "Wait, is Baltimore in Iraq?"

Elementary geography notwithstanding, let's hope the President's ban on police use of some military-style assault gear this week prevents this question from marking a new normal in the Canon of Scary and Confusing Things American Children Will Wonder.

"No, Baltimore is in America. Maryland. "

My nine year old, a little worried, "Well...Is there a war in America?"

Before I could answer that, Toya Graham, virally known as Baltimore's #MomOfTheYear , erupted in a yellow flash of maternal fury amid a backdrop of her embattled city.


He watched along with the rest of the world while the single mother of six "lost it," ambushing her masked 16 year-old son, berating him away from the fray and back to the nest...again and again on a pornographic loop, in case you missed money shot the first time.

Onto the next light quandary, "Mom, why is she hitting her son??"

I answer reflexively, "Because she's scared."

More child furrowing... "Of those Isis police guys?"

I clarify, "Honey. Not Isis! Police. Baltimore. Not Baghdad."

Kids, like our best filmmakers and comedians don't come ready-made with that cocktail repartee reflex that drops burning existential questions just to spare spineless adults an awkward moment.


My son presses on, "So then what is she scared of, mom?"

Just how do you explain this to a 9 year-old black child, who's been raised in a mixed income, multiracial community -- known by its self-congratulatory natives not as Evanston but as Heavenston, (an apt moniker for a city positioned on the glittering Chicago lakefront teeming with exceptional public schools, libraries, parks, cafes, relatively bored friendly cops and white people who pepper their Trader Joe aisle chatter with a cheerful mix of Yiddish-Ebonics-Spanglish for good measure)?


How do you, or do you even, tell this little boy, that every time Toya Graham's son walks out of the house and steps onto the heat of the block, that she has a genuine and statistically-substantiated horror that she may never, ever see him again?

That, in fact, there is 1 in 6 chance that her son will simply disappear, like 1.5 million other black prime-aged men gone missing... dead or behind bars...leaving their parents, kids, and siblings in the agonizing balance.

This is a true surreal moment... Big brother surprises his little brother after being released from prison.. WOW!!

Posted by Tyrese Gibson on Thursday, April 23, 2015

But then again how do you not say it and add him to the vulnerable ranks of black children between ages 5-11 who, courtesy of a shocking study published in the Times this week, are twice as likely to commit suicide as white children. (READ: For those of us prone to buffer this kind of data with auto-euphemism, there are twice as many little black American children under age 12 today who are so traumatized and depressed by their blighted circumstances that they actually feel there is nothing to live for. So they hang themselves or shoot themselves.)


You just don't say it and allow him to traverse blithely through a world rife with both real and fictionalized images of his own people as thugs and their feral mothers, caught in faux post-racial purgatory with their Polo pants down; without instilling in him an intellectual reflex that immediately traces this perversion to its Peculiar Institutional roots?



Do you just sit back and let his forming brain, in one Herculeuan twist of false consciousness, habituate to the sloppy empirical abandon that marks the minds of bigots and toddlers, both impervious to historical context or the rigors of critical thinking or even the laws of logic?

Given the first black President of the United States didn't feel he had the political space to get candid on racial and income inequality in neighborhoods such as the Chiraq that birthed his career until he was one foot out of office, it's clearly still not the easiest conversation to have these days.


But then, what if your child is in the wrong neighborhood buying Skittles and displaying garden variety teen angst while being brown...


So you level the gaze and say it:

"She's scared because she doesn't want to lose him."

My son, "Why would she lose him? Is he sick?"

While I rack my brain for the right response, Toya Graham tells CBS NEWS that she "shields" her son "in the house, just so he won't go outside" because "he's 16 years old and into the streets."

Next question was not "Who is Freddy Gray," but "Why can't he go outside by himself? He's big!"

I struggle to articulate why the cushy environs that sustain my free-range parenting style do not extend kindly to the South Side of Chicago or the West Side of Baltimore, but then enter my 11 year-old who collapses casually onto the couch and cuts to the chase:

"She's scared because they have guns in that neighborhood."

At which point, I sail into my best shot at an age-appropriate thematic recap of
The Wire, explaining that when people are left out of the formal economy, they're forced into a dangerous informal economy, which require guns, and that what the illegal substances themselves do not ravage, the demonizing warfare waged against them does and on and on...(a long way from these budding entrepreneurs....)

And once again, my clunky rambling is trumped by the eloquence from the mouths of babes.


The youngest sums it up: "So if you don't have a good school, you can't get a job. So then you have to make illegal money and you end up in jail or killed by other gangsters or by those Isis police. "

Bad optics will not win. I reiterate "Those aren't ISIS! They're police."

My older son, "Well I mean you could work at McDonald's but then you'd still be poor so what's the point."


Fearing the dark onset of cynicism will bank its legacy any minute now into the folds of dewy brows, (LA's new minimum wage victory aside,) I offer a lively exercise in the oldest American crucible: "So what should be done?"

My oldest corroborates basic intuition, not to mention a recent Harvard study, with: "The mom should move to a safer neighborhood with better schools. Duh."


After some thinking and snacking, my little one rhapsodizes, "But how will they move if the mom has no job? But if they don't move, the little kids will grow up with bad schools like the big kids then they won't get be able to get jobs either so they'll be gangsters then they'll be KILLED OR IN JAIL OR POOR TOO!!!! LIKE A CIRCLE!!!"

He draws furious circles in the air.

My eldest did not have his usual surefire response for little brother. He remained still, furrowing at a luxury car ad, then declared,

"They need money. For the schools. No way around it."

My youngest, "Well where will they get the money??"


More flailing arms.

Now there's a question for the 2016 presidential candidates, who, if they want to be relevant in a post Ferguson and Baltimore America, where ever-widening income inequality is the crisis of our time, they may want to start folding real plans to tackle abject poverty into economic campaign messages that have otherwise focused on middle and upper income America.

First Amendment Lawsuit Says Student Was Punished for Wearing a T-shirt Advocating Gun Rights

Student Press Law Center   |   May 18, 2015    1:13 PM ET

By Mark Keierleber

Near the entrance of Logan Middle School is a statue called "The Doughboy" — a World War I soldier carrying a firearm in one hand, and in the other a grenade.

The bronze figure is indicative of West Virginia's gun culture. As is the state flag — which features two firearms — and West Virginia University's mascot, the musket-toting Mountaineer.

But when an eighth-grade Logan Middle School student refused to remove his National Rifle Association T-shirt because a teacher said it violated the dress code, he was suspended. In response, the student's mother has filed a federal lawsuit against the Logan County Board of Education and 10 employees, arguing the punishment violated the student's First Amendment rights.

"People just don't take well to others that are from outside the area telling the community what's appropriate and what's not based upon thing that have happened in other areas," said Benjamin White, the attorney who represents the student and his mother. "In West Virginia, firearms are a way of life."

On April 18, 2013, student Jared Marcum, who was 14 at the time, wore a T-shirt with the NRA logo and a hunting rifle that said "PROTECT YOUR RIGHT." While waiting in the lunch line at the school's cafeteria, the school secretary said the shirt violated the school's dress code and instructed Marcum to turn it inside out or face suspension, according to the complaint filed last month in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. When two other teachers agreed the shirt violated the dress code, he was escorted to the principal's office.

At that point, the police had already been called, White said. With teachers and Marcum in the same room, White said the student kept speaking over teachers and administrators when they tried to tell police their side of the story. Because Marcum wouldn't be quiet, police charged him with obstructing an officer. He also received a one-day out-of-school suspension.

Although a Logan County Circuit Court judge dropped the criminal charges on June 27, 2013, White said the suspension remains on his disciplinary record. On April 25, White received a letter from the school district that says Marcum was suspended because of his "inappropriate behavior with educators in authority," not because of his T-shirt.

"This kid is a member of the NRA, he is passionate about his right to own firearms, and some person that has an opposite belief tells him to turn it inside out because it's against a rule that doesn't exist," White said, adding that Marcum hopes to join the military following graduation. "The whole issue here is the teacher didn't understand the rules."

Had school officials reacted differently, White said, the whole situation could have been avoided.

"Should have the eighth grader kept trying to tell his side of the story?" White said. "No, but how does he know he's going to be given a chance?"

Shana Thompson, the school board's attorney, was not available for comment Friday. Requests to speak with school officials about the case were not granted.

According to the complaint, Marcum's shirt complied with the school's student/parent handbook, which prohibited clothing that displayed profanity, violence, discriminatory messages or sexually suggestive phrases. The policy also banned clothing that advertised alcohol, tobacco or drug products.

"Unless it says 'bring this gun and kill somebody,' then that I think would fall under the language, but it's a Second Amendment 'protect your rights' [message] and it shows a hunting rifle," White said. "I can't imagine anybody believing this particular shirt would be against that policy."

In 2004, a Virginia middle school student settled a similar lawsuit against the Albemarle County School Board after his principal required him to wear his "NRA Sports Shooting Camp" T-shirt inside out.

Along with removing the suspension from Marcum's record, the lawsuit seeks $250,000 in punitive damages and $200,000 in damages for "embarrassment and humiliation, mental distress and for damages related to the indignities visited upon him." White said he hopes the suit will also force an apology.

"I'm not saying my client is innocent, but he's certainly not guilty of obstructing an officer, he's not guilty of wearing a shirt that's against the policy," White said. "I guess he's guilty of standing up for his freedom of speech and Second Amendment rights."

This post originally appeared on the SPLC blog.