Response to kidnapping in Pakistan
Issue the victim a bunch of AK-47s. Sounds like a worthwhile approach under the conditions.
Hat tip to reader John H....
Permalink · non-US · Comments (0)
Debate between Prof. Volokh & Chas. Blek of Brady Campaign
Podcast here. BTW, it was hosted by the Los Angeles chapter of Federalist Society and the Libertarian Law Society. Their next event involves a presentation by Judge Alex Kozinski and David Lat (of the Above the Law blog) on Jan. 13. RSVP to la.fedsoc@gmail.com.
San Francisco backing down
In the wake of Heller, Chuck Michel and others filed an action against San Francisco Housing Authority, over its ban on firearms in public housing. It looks as if San Francisco is surrendering.
Permalink · Heller aftermath · Comments (3)
New Obama picks for DoJ
For Deputy AG: David W. Ogden -- his background: under the Clinton Admin, was Ass't Atty General for Civil Division, and Chief of Staff to the Attorney General.
For Solicitor General: Elena Kagan. Her background: dean of Harvard law, taught at Chicago, clerked for Abner Mikva on DC Circuit and then for Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court.
For Associate AG: Tom Perrelli. His background: longtime private practitioner, mostly representing the entertainment industry. Under Clinton Admin., was Deputy AG, and counselor to the AG.
Hat tip to reader David Adams.
Webpage for recovering stolen guns
Very interesting idea. If a gun is stolen, the victim sends in the data. It is not posted online, and in the database is encrypted with 256-bit encryption. If someone wants to sell you a gun, you can run it. If there is a match, victim and finder are both notified. There's also a provision for posting a reward.
I know a few FFLs who have "connections" with the local police dep't and, off the record, have them run a gun if it is offered for sale. But you need a special connection, and the NCIC database is terribly unreliable. I'd expect a gun owner to be more precise with the serial number than would be a data entry clerk taking a telephone report.
Brady grades get an F again
The Brady Campaign ranks North Dakota 44th out of 50 States, with only 4 of 100 possible points.
Just in time for the North Dakota Attorney General to announce that in 2008 the State had ZERO gun homicides. And only two homicides at all, both stabbings.
Hat tip to reader Dan Mason....
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (10)
LEO in need of training
Glynn County, GA. Video here. Traffic stop, officer notices a legally-carried gun, draws, aims at driver's head (Using a wierd sideways gangsta hold, two handed) and threatens to kill him.
Discussion over at GeorgiaPacking.org. The Sheriff did send a letter of apology (well, sort of), listed on the thread.
My 14th Amendment paper is online
At SSRN, right here.
It deals with the original public understanding of the 14th Amendment, as distinct from its Congressional history. The question under this standard is -- what did the American people think they were being asked to ratify? Key to that in the legislative history of Sen. Howard's speech upon introducing it in the Senate, where he says one of the purposes is to force the States to obey the US Bill of Rights. The question then becomes did the American public know of this statement?
Pretty clearly. It was carried on the front page of the NY Times and the NY Herald (then the biggest newspaper in the country), in the Philadelphia Inquirer, and in quite a few smaller papers.
The thrust of the 14th was to strike down the "Black Codes," I found those were prominently discussed in newspapers as well. The primary focus was upon laws forbidding blacks to own land, or to enter certain occupations, and upon seizure of their firearms and those of other Unionists.
You can download the pdf by clicking on the button above the title. UPDATE: that takes you to a second page, again with the abstract, then you click on the "SSRN" button to download.
UPDATE: SSRN is undergoing database maintenance for about an hour (it's stated as 8-9 PM, I assume EST) right now.
Permalink · 14th Amendment · Comments (8)
FIRE on 1st *and* 2nd Amendment infractions
Article here:
"In the spring, the South Campus of Tarrant County College (TCC) declared that wearing empty gun holsters, even during an officially sanctioned protest in the school’s tiny free speech zone, was too much for its fragile students to bear in this scary, post–Virginia Tech massacre world. TCC student Brett Poulos had notified administrators that his group would be engaging in an “Empty Holster Protest,” collaborating with Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC), a national organization that “supports the legalization of concealed carry by licensed individuals on college campuses.” SCCC promoted a coordinated national protest for April 2008 in which students would peacefully attend class and perform other daily tasks while wearing empty holsters to signify opposition to state laws and school policies denying concealed handgun license holders the same rights on college campuses that they are granted in most other places.
In an April 10 response Juan Garcia, Vice President for Student Development, “granted” Poulos’ request to stage a protest on the South Campus, but he changed the fundamental nature of the protest by banning the protesters from wearing empty holsters anywhere on the South Campus, including in the designated free speech zone. The tiny free speech zone on the South Campus, according to Poulos, is an elevated, circular concrete platform about 12 feet across. Poulos met with Garcia on April 18 and was told that TCC would take adverse action if SCCC members wore empty holsters anywhere, strayed beyond the campus’s free speech zone during their holster-free “empty holster” protest, or even wore t-shirts advocating “violence” or displaying “offensive” material.
Later, in a May 29 radio interview with the National Rifle Association on NRA News, Garcia explained that after the Virginia Tech and Northeastern Illinois shootings, students were “on edge,” so “any kind of equipment for guns” was something that TCC would not accept because it was “threatening” and would “disrupt our learning environment.” Garcia admitted that no students had said they were afraid of empty holsters and also said (seeming to contradict himself) that the VT/NIU incidents had “nothing to do with Brett Poulos.” Nevertheless, Garcia said, corralling the student protesters in the free speech zone was appropriate because “we want students in an area where we can provide security for both sides” and TCC would not allow protests anywhere on campus without knowing about it because that would just create an “open field” for anyone to protest anywhere.
It bears mentioning that TCC was the only public college in the country that banned empty holsters from campus during the nationwide protest.
If you think that case is nuts, take a look at what happened this fall at Lone Star College–Tomball, which used an even crazier rationale for censoring a tongue-in-cheek “Top Ten Gun Safety Tips” flyer during a student activities fair. After college officials banned the Young Conservatives of Texas (YCT) from distributing the flyer, the general counsel for the entire Lone Star College System invoked the specter of the Virginia Tech shootings, suggesting that even a “mention of firearms and weapons” is inherently a “material interference” with the school’s operations. The new group’s status as a student organization was even threatened simply because of the flyer, although recently FIRE learned that the group would be allowed to exist after all. We await word from school administrators, however, about whether the flyers will remain censored."
2d Amendment year in review
Very comprehensive story in the Hawaii Reporter.
Reason on 14th Amendment P or I incorporation
Article here.