« March 2006 | Main | May 2006 »
April 2006
New book by Steve Halbrook
Steve Halbrook has just released "The Swiss and the Nazis: How the Alpine Republic Survived in the Shadow of the Third Reich." It sounds like a very detailed treatment of how the Swiss dealt with Nazi threats and infiltration, remaining a democracy while the rest of Europe fell into a modern Dark Age.
You can find a summary and ordering info here.
Funny pro-gun T-shirts
Here are some nicely understated ones.
Judiciary Committee hearings
The House Judiciary Committee's Subcomm. on Crime, Terrorism & Homeland Security will be holding hearings Wednesday on HR 1384, the Firearms Commerce Modernization Act, and HR 1415, the NICS Improvement Act.
HR 1384 basically would allow sale of all firearms (not just the present rifles and shotguns) by a dealer to a nonresident if the transaction conformed to the laws of both states.
HR 1415 is fairly complicated, but a quick read suggests it is meant to pressure states into putting more NICS data (particularly mental hospitalizations and misdemeanor DV convictions) into the NICS system.
UPDATE: My own thoughts on this are straightforward: felony convictions are public records, and ought to be in some manner of system. Prior to all this, many if not most police depts kept records only of arrests, figuring conviction was a court's business, not theirs. I suppose misdemeanor DV is the same (altho I disagree with making that a disqualifier, esp. for people who before Lautenberg may have pled guilty just because the fine was less than a legal fee. The rest of the stuff -- well, I don't like big government databases. The liberal-left which is showing concerns that the Patriot Act lets the government look at who checked books out of a library should awaken to the fact that the biggest database of them all was created with their generally enthusiastic support, on the claim it was aiding a gun law.
Democrats and gun control
Larry Pratt has an interesting article on Democrats and gun control.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Self-defender charged with gun violation
Here's an article on a homeowner who used a handgun to stop a burglar, and wound up charged with gun law violations. The article isn't the clearest, but seems to indicate an Ill. representative has introduced a bill to prevent gun law prosecutions arising out of self-defense use.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
Police protection in Britain
From Britain, another case of police failure to protect. A pregnant woman was seriously assaulted, but an arrest could not be made because police were dealing with a dog in a locked car. A week later the assailant cut her throat.
(Hat tip to reader H. Clay).
Permalink · non-US · Comments (0)
Closer look at AZ "Castle Doctrine" bill
A conversation with friend and reader Bill Bailey prompted a closer look at Arizona's SB 1145, as passed by the House and signed recently by the Governor. It has five major thrusts:
(1) Previously, "justification" defenses, including self-defense, were affirmative defenses. The defendant (or self-defender) had to prove them by a preponderence of the evidence (i.e., proof of "more likely true than not). Under SB 1145, if the defense presents "evidence" (quantum undefined) of justification, the prosecution must disprove justification to a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. This change is not limited to defense of home or car, but applies anywhere.
(2) No duty to retreat before using force to prevent certain serious offenses, including aggravated assault. Again, this applies anywhere, any place a person has a right to be, in the language of the law.
(3) A person is presumed to be justified in using force or deadly force if he/she reasonably believes they are another are in imminent peril and the attacker has entered or is trying to enter a residence or occupied auto. Again, no duty to retreat. (I don't think this changes the law any, since if a person reasonably believes themselves in imminent peril they are justified in using deadly force whether in a house or anywhere else).
(4) A person is generally presumed to be justified in use of force if the attacker has unlawfully forced his way into residence or car or is trying to do so (with certain exceptions, such as if the person forcing in had a legal right to be in there). I wonder how this interacts with (1) above... if the prosecution is always required to disprove justification anyway, what is the additional effect of saying that in certain cases justification is presumed? I can think of two possibilities: (1) under the first, the defense must put up some "evidence" before the burden shifts to the prosecution, so perhaps this presumption substitutes for the evidence. If the defender proves a home invasion, the prosecution immediately assumes the burden of disproving justification. If home invasion is shown by the prosecution's own case, it had better disprove need for use of force before it rests, or it may lose on a directed verdict before defendant has to put on his/her case. (2) It's always nice to have two favorable jury instructions rather than one. Oh, perhaps (3) the shifting of the burden only functions at trial, so perhaps this presumption would function to prevent a finding of probable cause, and thus arrest, in a home invasion absent evidence that use of force was not justified.
(5) If the aggressor is foolish enough to sue, and the defender wins, the defender recovers attorney fees and lost income (presumably, lost while at the courthouse). This not limited to the home invasion situation. Good idea, but I think the legislature slipped up. It applies to any justification "under this chapter." This chapter is ch. 4 of TItle 13, ARS. That includes all justifications, including necessity (no way to obey law without greating greater social or individual harm, not applicable to causing serious injury or death) and duress (being forced into it, with the same limit). The good news for LEOs is that Chapter 4 also covers use of force in law enforcement.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
Heads up on more scam spams
I've got my email on several webpages, so I tend to receive scam emails early in the process. The ones that say your account is being terminated, suspended, or needs info refreshed, look utterly genuine down to the images, and have a link to click on (which actually doesn't take you to that link at all), where they wlll grab your account data, credit card data, you name it.
I get several fake Paypals a week, at least one fake Ebay, have gotten so many for Chase Bank (where I've never banked) that I put it on spam blocker, and still some get through. Got one for Wells Fargo the other day.
Today came a first -- a scam spam for Amazon.com.
There are indications the scammers are getting fancy, hiding folders on other people's webpages. I assume the folder either stores the data for their retrieval, or redirects the data.
UPDATE: yep, you can hover the mouse over the link, or check the source code. But sometimes they get fancy and you have to look close. The link may be to something like "paypal.uk" or "pavpal.com" or "login_paypal.com"
Article on self-defense and CCW laws
An interesting article on those laws, noting that six states have passed "Castle Doctrine" bills, two more passed modified versions of them, similar measures are pending in 16 more, and 48 now allow CCW (note that does not mean have liberalized CCW measures, just that they don't follow the old Western rule of forbidding it entirely. By the measure used here, for example, NY and MA "allow" CCW since you can in theory get a permit).
It's interesting from a historical perspective. Ten or fifteen years ago the Brady Campaign was on the march, and pro-gun forces on the defensive.
Australian antigunners seek still more controls
ABC News reports that the Australian PM wants stricter gun laws. There is a telling interview with a spokesman for their National Coalition for Gun Control.
He begins by saying that ten years ago ""I think the perception was that there was reasonable regulation over handguns," but they needed a ban on semi-auto rifles and shotguns.
Today, that's not enough. He wants a ban on semi-auto handguns, which apparently can still be owned by licensed targetW-shooting club members. "We really need the Commonwealth to explain why target shooters with handguns in clubs are better armed than our police. We really need an explanation as to that and they haven't provided one."
[UPDATE: the Daily Telegraph has word on gun law changes in New South Wales. They've eliminated a monopoly one company had on giving tests for rifle and shotgun licenses -- a monopoly that made it millions -- but made the tests more difficult. The PM says "I think there's always more that can be done at a state level," and "we really must resolve as a nation never to go down the American path." In the meantime, The Australian disputes whether all the antigun measures have done anything worth doing.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (6)
Contact point for letters to the editor
NRA grassroots has established a nifty letters to the editor generator. Punch in your zipcode, and it gives you your local papers' and stations' email addresses and a box for the message.
Permalink · NRA · Comments (1)
Nelson Lund article
Just finished Nelson Lund's "Putting the Second Amendment to Sleep," 8 Green Bag 101. It's a deservatively negative review of two books which were intended as critiques of the individual rights view. Details in extended entry below.
Continue reading "Nelson Lund article"
Permalink · collective right · Comments (1)
Supreme Court case on vindictive prosecution
The Supreme Court just handed down Hartman v. Moore. A quick read indicates that plaintiff engaged in a powerful lobbying campaign to get Postal Service to adopt a new technology, and was then indicted on kickback allegations. At trial, charges were dismissed for lack of evidence. Plaintiff sued, alleging that the prosecution was a "payback" for its lobbying, which was First Amendment protected.
The Supremes ruling: (1) the prosecutor is absolutely immune and cannot be sued, period (pretty much standard law); (2) where the government retaliation is something other than a criminal prosecution, it is enough to show that the government action would not have occurred except for the constitutionally protected act ("but for" causation); (3) but where the retaliation is a criminal prosecution, plaintiff must show that PLUS lack of probable cause ("strong suspicion" that an illegal act occurred). Since lack of probable cause = ground for suit for false arrest anyway, this makes a retaliation suit in a prosecution context a bit more complicated than false arrest, rather than simpler.
I suppose I can see both sides of the question, but it does illustrate that suing the government, even when it is punishing a first amendment exercise, is rarely a simple thing.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (1)
Mayor's Summit
The Boston Globe reports on the Mayors' summit. It can be summed up as "more of the same."
UPDATE: Bloomberg's press release is in the extended entry below. It's interesting in that just about every discussion of "this is what some city has done, and it worked" comes under the heading of enforcing an existing law -- crackdowns on felons, illegal traffickers, intense patroling of high-crime areas, etc.
Continue reading "Mayor's Summit"
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (0)
David I. Caplan
Just received word that David I. Caplan, formerly of New York & New Jersey, then retired to Florida, died this last week.
Dr. Caplan (he held a PhD plus his law degree, and thus had the "Dr." legit) was author of what I count as the first "modern" law review article on the Second Amendment, dating back to 1974, and was a member of the NRA Board for a great many years (30+ as I recall).
A mutual friend reminded me that his greatest service probably came in the days leading up to the "Cincinatti Revolt," 1977, when his skill, and that of his wife Susan, in New York nonprofit law was so valuable, NRA being a New York nonprofit. For those too young to recall that battle, it was the defining moment of the modern NRA. One side (until then, dominant) wanted to withdraw from politics, move HQ to the big spread of land near Raton Pass, and ensure NRA remained a sporting organization with little or no politics. The other, the "Federation," wanted to ensure a major political presense. At a major battle at the annual meeting in Cincinatti, the Federation overturned the powers that be, and the result was formation of ILA and the NRA as we know it nearly forty years later.
Permalink · NRA · Comments (4)
NSSF asks to be included in Bloomberg summit
Mayor Bloomberg of NYC has convened a "summit" on (how big cities can impose their failed) gun control (on the rest of us in hopes that what failed will work if just made bigger).
National Shooting Sports Foundation has offered to participate, to educate the mayors. They're not holding their breath.
Governor signs AZ castle doctrine bill
Just rec'd word that Governor Napolitano signed SB 1145 into law.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (0)
'Interstate commerce" and the Gun Control Act
There are a number of court decisions that basically extend GCA 68 to the outermost constitutional limits of the commerce power, to the point where you begin to wonder whether the Court regards Congressional action as irrelevant to the statute. E.g., the Supreme Court held in one case that the ban on felons possessing "in" commerce or receiving a gun that had ever travelled in commerce extended to a defendant who had *received* before he became a felon (thus no violation) and thereafter possessed, but not in commerce (no violation). It simply said that Congress had meant to extend its powers to the limit of the Commerce Clause... presumably since Congress COULD have written it possessed a gun that has ever travelled in commerce, that conduct was illegal, even though Congress didn't write the statute that way.
I've had two thoughts on this.
1. Congress did *not* try to write to the outer edges of the commerce power. Not only are there the limited uses of the power above, there's also a definition of interstate commerce in GCA itself. 18 USC 921(a)(2) provides that commerce "includes commerce between any place in a State and any place outside of that State, or within any possession of the United States (not including the Canal Zone) or the District of Columbia, but such term does not include commerce between places within the same State but through any place outside of that State." The exclusion of commerce that only coincidentally passes through another state is not found in the general definition of commerce for most Title 18, i.e., 18 USC 10. And it's hardly required by caselaw.
2. Since the commerce nexus is an element of the crime, it must be decided by the jury. If you give jury instructions based directly on the statute, a person in the situation of Dr. Emerson (not a prohibited person when gun was received, became one later while in possession) wins if the jury follows the statute. So what does a court do? Add a jury instruction that amounts to "OK, you've heard the statute. You are instructed that the Supreme Court has said the statute doesn't mean that, but rather means ... " whatever. That would not only be rather awkward, but comes rather close to a directed verdict for the prosecution.
Permalink · Commerce Clause · Comments (4)
Australia in the wake of its gun law stiffening
From The Australian:
"Don Weatherburn, the chief of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics, said the pattern of firearms had made a "horrendous change" for the worse with handguns now responsible for between 50 and 60 per cent of annual gun deaths."
"Ms McPhedran said policies on gun control should be based on evidence and that homicide rates overall had remained relatively static since the Port Arthur massacre despite the gun buyback, while suicide rates have actually gone up."
Permalink · non-US · Comments (1)
Guns in DC taxis
TownHall has the story. DC Taxi Commissioner Sandra Seegers (plaintiff in the Seegers case challenging the DC handgun ban) proposed to let taxi drivers arm themselves against robbery. The author points out her own experience--since she lives in a (relatively) risky area, taxis simply won't come to it, nor take her safely home.
UPDATE: here's a WashPo article on a serious run of carjackings in DC and Maryland. Pro-gun Progressive points out that it's interesting they avoid Virginia, where liberal CCW is the rule.
Robert Racansky sent in a comment, which for some reason was blocked by the spam filter, He notes:
Sounds like there may be places in Iraq where it's safer to be a taxi driver than in our nation's capital.
As part of the Cabbie Exchange Program, American cab drivers are being sent to the Middle East (credit: The Critic)
But seriously, cab drivers have (or had) a higher rate of on-the-job homicides than police officers. See Volokh.com
May 1, 2002 . The data from the 1996 OSHA report goes up to 1992, so I don't know if this is still true or not.
Continue reading "Guns in DC taxis"
More on Lott's lawsuit
Empirical Legal Studies notes a problem Dr. Lott may face in the defamation suit he's filed.
Lott's complaint argues that his critic Levitt said that other statisticians had been unable to replicate Lott's results, and that this is false because (1) in the social sciences, "replicate" means to re-run an analysis, using the same methods and data and (2) every statistician who has done this with Lott's work has replicated his results. Further, the Levitt claim was defamatory because, with this definition of "replicate," failure to replicate means the original study involved "cooking the books."
ELS argues that different social scientists use "replicate" in different and broader ways than this, and in fact the term appears to have no fixed meaning, or at least no one fixed meaning. (In many fields of science, it means to run the original method on a different data body, a different set of lab rats, so a failure to replicate may mean that the original study's conclusions were honestly reported but a product of chance or of its limitations).
That's the big risk with libel suits -- you lose on some narrow point, but the loss is interpreted as proof that the defamatory statement was proven as true.
Violent crime soaring in Venezuela
AP has the story. 9400 homicides last year, in a population of about 25 million, for a rate of about 37 per 100,000, or about 500% of the US rate, I remember correctly.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (1)
Paper on legal academic blogging
Gail Heriot, of U Cal San Diego School of Law, has a paper up, entitled "Are Modern Bloggers Following in the Footsteps of Publius?" (Via Instapundit)
AP picks up on New Orleans' return of guns
Here's the story.
BTW, as far as finding a gun was considered evidence in a crime, I had an experience a couple of years ago with an FFL whose inventory was seized by ATF -- for something that turned out not to be a violation of GCA at all.
ATF withheld seven guns because the NCIC check showed they were stolen. We asked for the NCIC reports. It turned out that five of the guns were reported as stolen, mostly at the other end of the country, months AFTER ATF had seized them and popped them in storage. The sixth was an NFA firearm which had been registered to the FFL twenty years before. What'd obviously happened was errors in recording the serial numbers of guns which were stolen. (We let them keep the seventh gun. He'd owned it for years, the report of theft was 20+ years old and the person reporting it was dead. Probably another error, but the gun was cheap and not worth arguing over). Six errors on an inventory of 300 guns would indicate a false positive rate of 2%. Probably the real rate is much higher since most of the inventory was new -- less time for a gun with a closely-related serial number to have been stolen and reported. I suspect the false positives on his inventory of used guns might have been around 10% or more.
Permalink · contemporary issues · Comments (0)
At least the burglar was not the excitable type...
After an 85 year old man shot an intruder, "Deputies went to Clark's home on Mack Pete Road and found him asleep with two gunshot wounds to his back...."
I'm rather stoic myself, but if I'd been shot twice I'd probably have trouble getting to sleep. On the other hand, there is just a tiny chance that ethanol/morphiates/etc. played a role.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (0)
Thoughts on "an evolving constitution"
I tend toward originalism, and tend to see the idea of "an evolving constitution" or "a living constitution" as a conscious or unconscious exercise in scholarly/judicial will to power (the scholarly and judicial classes expressing a drive toward power that is lacking if the Framers' or the Americans' will is what matters). But in the extended remarks below I'll note a couple of thoughts on how the idea of an evolving constitution is in fact consistent with a vigorous view of an individual right to arms.
Continue reading "Thoughts on "an evolving constitution""
Obscure history
While trying to research a reference in the 14th Amendment's leg history (the same Congress passed a bill to disband the southern militia structure, a Senator asked what power Congress had to do that, and another Senator said that Jeff Davis had before the war said that the militia was part of they army), I found reference to an interesting historical event.
It seems that in 1833, toward the end of the Black Hawk War, Lt. Jefferson Davis was sent to muster into service some Illinois volunteers, and he gave their leader the oath of allegience.
Thus it came about that Jefferson Davis gave Abraham Lincoln his first oath of office...
Interaction of 2d, 9th, and 14th Amendments
The 9th Amendment provides that the enumeration of rights in the first eight amendments shall not be read to disparage or rule out other rights reserved by the people. It was designed to overcome the objection that enumation of a list of rights would be construed to rule out any other rights (which is of course what has happened).
The 14th Amendment forbids the States to deprive anyone of the "privileges and immunities" of national citizenship. As I read the legislative history, that meant the federal Bill of Rights protections (and some others).
The Supreme Court, in the Slaughterhouse Cases and US v. Cruikshank, differed. The reasoning (after the Court's initial proclamation that doing this, and giving federal courts power to enforce it, would be so shocking a violation of federalism as to require the clearest of proof that this was intended -- the "we can't believe they meant to do this" maxim of constitutional interpretation) was roughly: (1) privileges and immunities of US citizenship must be something other than P&I of state citizenship, those rights that would have existed before there was a federal constitution and thus federal citizenship; (2) the rights at issue in those cases (freedom to assemble, to bear arms, etc.) were rights that always existed in any free society, and thus antedated the US Constitution, hence (3) they could not be privileges and immunities of US citizenship.
Now, with the caveat that I've always figured that if you couldn't win on the 2nd Amendment, you sure weren't going to win on the 9th,--
Doesn't the Slaughterhouse/Cruikshank reasoning lead inevitably to the conclusion that the individual right to arms is protected, against federal action, by the 9th Amendment? The Court says the reason it isn't protected against State action by the 14th Amendment, is that it is a right that has always existed, in any free society, existed whether written out or not, and hence pre-existed the Constitution. Doesn't that fall squarely within the 9th Amendment as a right reserved by the people?
It seems to me that there is a dilemma here: a right held inapplicable to the States under the P&I clause must logically be one that binds the U.S. under the 9th Amendment.
April 19
Today's the 13th anniversary of the Waco tragedy. I thought I'd add a link to my own webpage on it, based on 3-4 years of Freedom of Info suits. I haven't had time to update the page in a year or more, so some of the links (esp. to Real Media audio files) are broken. But you may find the images and video of interest.
Here's an article by Anthony Gregory on the matter, entitled Waco and the Bipartisan Police State.
DId a quick run of Google News and found no mentions, except in the ancient history ("on this day in 1993...) category. Here's one bit of local coverage. About 80+ articles on Oklahoma City.
And the folks lost along the way, since 1993: Carlos Ghigliotti, infrared expert, dead of a heart attack. Fred Zegel, infrared expert, died of unreported causes. One of the ATF agents committed suicide, saying he'd been blamed for the failure (he'd posed as a UPS deliveryman to gain info, and was a bit clumsy at it, not that that played any role in anything, but agencies look for scapegoats). One of the TV cameramen who filmed the first raid died at an early age, reportedly of drinking too much. At least one of the FBI higher-ups was drinking too much, it was said. Robert Rodriguez, ATF agent who tried to stop and raid (and whom David Koresh rather liked), forced out of the agency (and successfully sued them over leaking personal info to harm him ... as usual in a bureaucracy, the one guy who does things right is persecuted for making everyone else look bad).
More "the government will protect you" reports
In Michigan, suit is filed over a 911 operator's treating a child's report as a prank, and the article mentions another suit where a woman, seriously injured by a gunshot, had the dispatcher treat her as a nut case. In the first case, a woman had collapsed of an apparent heart attack, and the dispatcher told her son "Now put her on the phone before I send the police out there to knock on the door and you gonna be in trouble."
In Chatanooga, US Today reports thousands of 911 calls a month go unanswered.
Another suit in Canada cites a woman who bled to death during a 31 minute delay in response to a stabbing.
And a girl discovers to her dismay that not all cell phone services support 911 calls.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (2)
An arrest has been made...
The Danville PA newpaper is reporting that an arrest has been made in the case of a fake easter bunny who flashed a firearm at several teens.
I'm relieved that they report it was a fake Easter Bunny. I'd hate to think the real one would be this reckless.
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (0)
Carnival of Cordite
The Carnival of Cordite is up. So is the Carnival of Homeschooling.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Boomer Bible quarter century
Instapunk announces that the Boomer Bible has celebrated its quarter century mark.
I'd like to describe the book -- a huge one, BTW -- and have quite given up. The boomer part is of course the self-absorbed baby boomers. It's written in the style of the bible, complete to concordances in the margin. Its equivalent of the old testament consists of histories of prior civilizations, up to our own, written in verse and hiliarious. The book of the Greeks, the Book of the Romans (Otherwise Known As the Second Book of the Greeks), etc. right up to the Book of the Yanks. Then come the Boomers, led by Harry, and try to take over and turn everything into a whining, self-centered, cocaine-driven pseudo religion (in which coke is the sacrament of consolation). At length a band of Phillie punks strikes back to restore civilization (after settling each issue, including what type of literature they will create, in the only way they know -- by fighting).
Beyond that' it's impossible to describe. It's Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West, set to verse, with humor and hope and action. I think Neitzsche, who did have a sense of humor, would have been rolling on the ground, while Spengler himself was sitting there trying to figure out what was going on. The first time I skimmed it I thought it nonsense. But the person who had recommended it was highly intelligent, so I read it again and found it absolutely great. I've kept a copy for twenty years now, and re-read it from time to time.
Continue reading "Boomer Bible quarter century"
Arizona veto time
Word is that Gov. Napolitano signed into law the bill removing the requirement of retraining for a CCW permit renewal, but vetoed the bill forbidding disarmament in the event of an emergency, ala New Orleans, on the ground it'd never happened here.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (1)
Prof. Kleck
An interesting column on Prof. Kleck and others, whose statistical work is affecting legislation.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (0)
Strange debate in Jamaica
As I read this story, a member of Jamaica's senate has called for complete repeal of its gun laws, a former police commissioner has endorsed arming the citizenry, but the Jamaica Rifle Association is protesting because "Guns are not the solution to Jamaica's crime problem."
I guess I have enough trouble figuring out our own politics....
Self-defense arrest in NYC
A pair of shop-owners who used a 9mm to ward off armed robbers have been charged with possession of an unlicensed gun.
Dr. Timothy Emerson update
Just got an email update on Dr. Timothy Emerson, defendant in Emerson v. US. Rather depressing Easter news.
Emerson had discovered his wife was having an affair, and they separated. The wife claimed he'd threatened her significant other (emphasis on other) and maybe herself, and got a restraining order. Depending upon the jurisdiction, those may require a bit of judicial inquiry, or may be issued out of hand (the judge feeling "what's the harm to forbidding someone to cause harm?"). She later barged into his office and claimed he'd threatened her with a pistol. (He was acquitted of that). But the Feds charged him with possession of a firearm while subject to a DV restraining order, under the Lautenberg Amendment, a federal felony. He challenged it, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the Second Amendment is an individual right, but also that the statute survived (altho it said barely survived) the challenge, as a reasonable regulation, etc., etc.
The email informs that Dr. Emerson served two and half years in Federal incarceration and is now on supervised release (parole under another name). Shortly after his release his father died and his mother had to go into a nursing home.
His ex-wife got exclusive custory of their daughter. He's seen his daughter for about an hour over the last five years. His ex is suing him for $71,000 in child support, which he wasn't able to pay since he was earning a few cents an hour in prison. As a result of the unpaid support (deadbeat dad laws) he's lost his license to practice medicine and his driver's license, which means zero chance of paying the support, or regaining his licenses, in this lifetime. He tried for disability but ... is not disabled, just unable to practice or drive to other work.
CRPA's new program
California Rifle and Pistol Ass'n has a new program, designed to maximize shooter input on Forest Service decisions. It fits in nicely with Glenn Harlan Reynold's theme of the internet creating an "Army of Davids," since it is decentralized even from the State level. A cadre of volunteers will monitor each Forest's Schedule of Proposed Actions.
New Orleans gun returns
After months of delay, and even claims that they didn't have any seized guns, New Orleans has announced the gun returns will begin tommorow.
Continue reading "New Orleans gun returns"
Permalink · contemporary issues
Right to arms documentary
I'll be on NRANews.com with Cam Edwards in about half an hour (around 5:40 PM EDT), probably discussing a project I've been working on since 2002, and hope to finish by summer -- our first Second Amendment documentary film. As the rough draft now stands, it's just a bit under two hours in length, featuring Profs Joyce Malcolm, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, Randy Barnett, Gene Volokh, Brannon Denning, Nick Johnson, plus Don Kates, Steve Halbrook, and David Kopel.
I've posted a short clip (if you can call a 19 meg MPEG file short). Remember, this is a very rough first draft. I chose this just to show how much untold history will go into the film.
[Update: the audio goes up and down from clip to clip because "normalizing" it so that it all is at the same volume is done only after a film is in final form. At this stage, each clip has its own native volume -- some people speak loud, others soft, and the mike isn't at the same position for each filming. Also the narration is lackluster, because I'm just sitting at the computer doing it into a mike. Final narration will be scripted, practiced, and done in a recording studio.]
Memoirs of a bureaucrat
In a prior life (1982-92) I was a bureaucrat, a GS-14 at Interior Dept HQ in DC. Good pay, good benefits, cast-iron job security. I thought I'd let you (we) taxpayers know what the bureaucracy is like.
To a bureaucrat there is right, wrong, and "our position." The last trumps anything, including reality. It really does resemble mental illness at certain levels. I once reported to the client agency what had happened in court ... we argued this, they argued that, the judge made this ruling. My boss's boss became terrified ... I'd told them what had happened, without making sure that was "our position." I asked how one can have a "position" about hard facts and he gave me a blank stare, then went back to worrying.
At one point the administrative types, bean counters, hit upon a bureaucrat's dream -- make yourselves look good, while someone else does the work. Their plan was to have a case briefing book, where every litigation matter, no matter how complex, was to be distilled to one page, with 5-6 mandatory segments. No one knew how many cases interior had going -- they guessed several hundred. It turned out to be over 7,000. The briefing book became a set of big 3 ring binders, maybe 3 feet of paper, renewed once a month. When the field offices sent theirs in (via 300 baud modem, the only type then available) it tied up the system for two days. So they ordered field offices to send them in via 5.25" floppy disks and overnight mail. Then we in HQ had to edit them and make sure they were perfect. But the field offices never got our changes, so everything had to be re-edited next month. Then they decided that this didn't highlight changes in all that paperwork. So each month's changed parts were to be in bold.
Down at the bottom of each page was "For further information contact (name of atty handling, and phone). Secretary Lujan actually read his copy, and sometimes found something interesting and... called the staff atty handling it to chat. The mid level bureaucrats became terrified. He was getting the real scoop from the attorney, not "the office position.: He wouldn't stop it. So we got written orders, no kidding that if we were called by the Secretary we were to refuse to discuss a case and tell him to go through channels. (We were under the Solicitor, who'd been personal attorney to Geo. Bush I, and so the Secretary couldn't fire him).
When people wrote in to the Secretary, he never saw it. The mail room skimmed everything off and sent it to the office they thought handled it. The office (i.e., if you were complaining, the people you complained about) then wrote a letter for the Secretary and it went up the chain of command. In every case I can recall, he signed it -- being quite busy, and knowing only that everyone below him, who knew more of it than he did, said this was what happened.
You were in little risk of getting dinged for giving stupid advice, but were always dinged if there was a typo. If you had typos in more than 10% of documents, it cost you at evaluation. The typists were making typos constantly, but you were held accountable. You'd make corrections, and they'd make new typos. Many attorneys read their documents with a ruler on them, carefully going down one line at a time and concentrating on each word. Try that with a 20-30 litigation report... one typo and you'll be dinged. It took 2-3 days to get a one page document together on average (only late in my time did individual attys have their own computers and word processors. I once had an emergency matter bounced back because on page two I had said "indian tribe" when protocol was "indian tribe." Another document get bounced back because it had one space between the period ending one sentence and the first letter of the next and the Govt Style Manual said use two spaces. Then when you were done the document was set up in a package (including seven copies for various files. If you were smart you made one for yourself, since nobody could ever find documents in those files. If anyone above you made a change or caught a typo, start the process again, make seven more copies....
We worked as hard as anyone else, no laziness there. But the bureaucracy was such that we were lucky to get done in a week what one energetic person could do in a day.
Amusing tale: one day an electrical socket burst into flame in the office of the Deputy Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. He ran outside to the newly installed, multi-million dollar fire alarm and threw it. Nothing happened. He grabbed a fire extinquisher. Nothing happened. (He was lucky -- they were pressuried water, not the thing you want to use against an electrical fire). They finally got it out, and had to take crowbars to the window to get it open -- all windows were long ago painted shut, and by intent (if you left one open at night, pigeons flew in and roosted). About two months later we got memos from the administrators telling us to be aware this was National Fire Prevention month ... and ending with a note that they hoped to have the fire alarm system repaired soon. I suspect any private office that knowingly had a nonfunctioning fire alarm system for two months would have been shut down.
Mass hammer slaying in PA
Six dead in hammer attack. Here's more.
It's a bad day for hammer casualties. Rep. Patrick Kennedy was injured in a hammer accident, too.
Permalink · non-gun weapons · Comments (3)
Supreme Court to end unpublished opinions by Circuits
According to Law.com, the Supreme Court has voted to end the practice of unpublished opinions. For those not initiated in legal arcanery, an unpublished decision is one the court says shouldn't be printed in the traditional hardcopy West reports, and should not be cited as precedent. In practice, many such decisions are picked up by legal computer databases. The Supreme Court itself doesn't have unpublished cases.
There's been a big debate over this practice. On the pro side, (1) it lets the Circuits screen out a lot of caselaw that is mundane, of no value ("my sentence was longer than is fair") or on very narrow grounds; (2) the Circuits, if presented with a poorly-briefed case, can acknowledge that they might be on thin ice rather than binding themselves; and (3) since they don't have to worry about crafting these carefully, just reaching a correct result on the facts presented, it saves a lot of time. On the con side, (1) it means courts can reach inconsistent results and thus flies in the face of the core of stare decisis (all cases on identical facts will have identical results); (2) maybe cases involving things like citizens getting locked up ought to have a bit of thought put into them; and (3) it tends to encourage an approach along the lines of "de-publish unless it's really important".
Permalink · General con law · Comments (1)
ATFE: Making the World Safe from Ninjas
The headline says it all: "ATFE Rids University of Ninja Threat".
A Univ. of GA student was attending a pirates vs. ninjas event (I assume a fundraiser), wearing black clothes and with a bandanna over his face. Some ATFE agents, on campus for another event, decided he was suspicion, told him to freeze, and when he ran, tackled him, handcuffed him, and held him for university police ... who of course released him.
Click on the pictures to zoom in. Note how the one agent has the handcuffed student on the ground, with one of the agent's knees on his neck, and what looks like his full body weight on the kid's neck, twisting his head over. I guess they figured that when ninjas are concerned, there is no such thing as excessive force.
Continue reading "ATFE: Making the World Safe from Ninjas"
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (8)
John Lott files lawsuit
John Lott, economist and author of the book "More Guns, Less Crime," has filed suit against Steven Levitt, co-author of the best-seller "Freakonomics," which said that other economists could not replicate Lott's findings that increased issuance of CCW permits coincided with drops in violent crime.
While I wouldn't bet the farm on the lawsuit (defamation cases being hard to win, and extremely hard in the case of public figures and issues of public concern), it is interesting that the battle is over "does liberalized CCW reduce violent crime, or fail to affect it," as opposed to "does liberalized CCW increase violent crime," let alone "does liberalized CCW result in a bloodbath and the fall of the Republic."
(Hat tip to Don Kates on this one)
UPDATE: Levitt cites the suit on his own blog, and the partisans of plaintiff and defendant really get into it in the comments. Tim Lambert, Lott's critic (an understatement), has a roundup here. The reason I say defamation is incredibly hard to win is -- I had a defamation case a few years ago, and it was murderously difficult. American law greatly restricts the plaintiff. If it's an issue of public importance, the defamation must relate to hard facts, not opinions ("He is a convicted felon" can be sued over, "he is a crook" cannot be). If the plaintiff is a public figure (broadly defined) he must prove not only the defendant made a false statement about him, but that defendant knew it was false at the time (or knew it was probably false, and deliberately failed to make inquiries). Then there's the matter of proving damages -- how much economic damage did the defamation cause? If non-economic harm to reputation, how do you prove it? Your enemies will say they believed you were scum before they heard it, and your friends will say they figured it must be false anyway. In the case I handled, the jury spent four solid days of deliberation before they returned a verdict for a whopping $2500. Frankly, the biggest danger in such a suit is that you lose on one of these grounds -- it was an opinion, or there was no provable damage, or the speaker didn't really know it was false -- and then everyone assumes the court found that the defamation was true.
Trial court judge in US v. Miller
I just came across some old email in which I'd contacted the grandson of the district court judge in the Miller case, Hon. Heartsill Ragon, who issued the short ruling striking the NFA, from which the government appealed. The grandson could add little to the ruling -- he never heard his grandfather speak of it, but does add a little human background.
The judge had served on the House Ways and Means Committee, was a conservative Democrat. He served six terms in the US House before coming to the bench. He and the defense attorney, Paul Guttensohn, later became law partners for a time. He was later appointed to the 8th circuit, but the grandson says this was almost contemporaneous with his death.
Here's an online bio.
Permalink · US v. Miller · Comments (0)
Marion Barry takes the dive again
Gun Week also reports that former DC mayor Marion Barry has taken a second felony dive (the first being for cocaine in the 1990s). This time he plead out to income tax evasion .... he failed to file returns for five years during which his income was estimated at over half a million, and the amount he stiffed IRS was estimated at around $195,000.
Being well connected politically must be nice. Even tho he had a prior, he was allowed to plead to misdemeanor, and he got probation, no jail, and no fine.
Here's a WashPo article on it, noting that his salary as a city councilman is being garnished to pay a judgment awarded to a woman who said he assaulted and exposed himself to her.
Washington DC: too small for a state, too big for an asylum.
Gateway Pundit has a post on it -- "And Barry Makes Six." Actually, Florida state Senator Gary Siplin, NRA F-rated, makes seven. Hmm.. and Robert C. Janiszewski, the NJ state chairman for Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, makes eight.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (0)
Ithaca shotgun co. reviving
Today's Gun Week reports that Craig Marshall of Sandusky, Ohio, has purchased Ithaca Guns and has moved the firm to Ohio. They have a website here.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (9)
Self-Defense legislation -- a proposal
I have a proposal for self-defense and "castle" legislation. The usual standard for self-defense is reasonably belief that the other person is going to do something (use deadly force, etc.). The key is the defender's belief and whether that was reasonable.
As a result, you generally can't introduce evidence that the use of force really WAS reasonable, unless the defender knew of that information when he/she acted. Say they shot a knife-wielder outside arm's reach. The defender cannot introduce evidence as to how fast a knife attack can be launched, unless they knew of the evidence at the time. Or in cases where there is much proof the attacker is dangerous -- he had convictions for violence, had seriously maimed others in the past, etc. -- again, not relevant unless the defender had learned of this prior to the defense.
Why not modify statutes so that the defense can be proven either by proof that use of force was justified OR that it was reasonably believed to be so? Self-defense is, after all, justified because no honest citizen should have to die at the hands of a thug -- why now allow proof that that was exactly the case? The reasonable belief standard was meant to give the defender leeway where they have to act quickly. Keep that, but also allow proof that the person snuffed genuinely was a social menace.
I suspect such a bill would have the backing of law enforcement, since LEOs also wind up using force and having to prove justification under the same statutory standards. The local prosecutor might gripe, but the cops would be all for it.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (4)
"Castle doctrine" bill in AZ
The Arizona Senate unanimously passed SB 1145, which has two main effects: (1) "no retreat" if defending house or auto (although AZ doesn't have a retreat requirement anyway) and (2) use of deadly force is presumed to be justified if the other person forcefully and unlawfully entered a home or vehicle. The latter is a change in the law which, as I recall, requires a defendant to prove the defense of justification, and by a preponderance of the evidence. Word is that in the House there may be an attempt to remove the latter section. If you want to give the legislature your feelings, you can find your legislators here.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (2)
DEA agent sues US over accidental shooting tape
In 2004, before this blog began, a DEA agent was filmed giving a presentation to a class. Shortly after he announced that only he was professional enough to carry a handgun, he managed to shoot himself in the foot. The videotape of course made the rounds of the internet.
The Smoking Gun announces that now he's suing the government over allowing dissemination of the tape.
Reading the complaint, he might just have, dare we say, a shot at it. He alleges the person who videotaped the event turned over the only copy of the tape to DEA, and DEA returned it with the event erased (which says something about how the government functions -- simply destroy privately owned evidence if it embarasses the agency). If this is true, the only copy was in DEA hands, and protected by the Privacy Act. Now, you could probably get it thru the Freedom of Information Act, but his allegation is that copies were just passed around by DEA and eventually got onto the web. If so, he might just have a Privacy Act case.
Thanks to Alan Gura for the tip...
Great deposition
Off topic, but here's streaming video of a great deposition. The various counsel start cussing each other out, the witness offers to punch the questioning attorney on his ass, and finally two attorneys "step outside" to continue the legal discussions.
More Media bias
Not specific to guns, but...
Irish Pennants notes how the NY Time spins a story. Our troops' Interceptor body armor will stop an AK-47 at 10 feet. Last year the Army predicted that ammo could be improved and this hypothetical future ammo might penetrate it, so they engineered even better plates, some thousands of which are already in the field. NY Times carries the story as -- a year after the need was seen, the Army is still struggling to get body armor to the troops. (Via Carnival of the Insanities, which also has a psychiatrist's discussion of Bush Derangement Syndrome.
And here's an interesting case where Time online distorted Condi Rice's photo. (The Times page has now changed it back to normal). (Via Instapundit). Michelle Malkin had an earlier case where USA Today distorted one of her photos to give her eyes a demented glare.
Oh, here's a truly hiliarious piece. Vote Sadaam in 2008 -- he's a uniter, not a divider!
Permalink · media · Comments (0)
More on Britain
I've posted below on how the British government (1) makes it all but impossible for its subjects to defend themselves and (2) declines to defend them, having recently adopted a policy of issuing warnings for burglary, assault, etc..
Don Kates alerted me to this reprint of a Times article, discussing how their police react to criminal gun assaults. Apparently the standard procedure is to stay away from the scene for hours, because after all an armed criminal might be dangerous. The first case cited involved police staying away from a shooting scene for an hour despite telephone calls from it saying the gunman had left. In the meantime, two women bled to death. The culture has become one of extreme caution, driven by events such as a workplace health and safety citation of a Police Commissioner ... after a constable suffered a fatal fall while pursuing a criminal across a rooftop.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (1)
Memories of handloading
Just came across the first reloading manual I ever used, back when I was 16-17 and loading with a Lyman tong tool (don't think they make them anymore, but I still have mine). It's P O Ackley's Pocket Manual for Shooters and Reloaders, 1964 edition.
Quite a look back, to the days when the .22-250 and .25-06 were wildcats, and the .223 so new that he doesn't have a table for it, just a note that Remington's chief designer say 22 graints of 4198 is close to max with 50-53 gr. bullets.
Tons of older wildcats that you'll probably not see today, most developed in the 1920s and 1930s when small bore centerfires had few factory cartridges. .22 K Hornet, .218 Bee, Mashburn Bee, .219 Zipper and Zipper Improved.
For you young'uns, the Improved cartridges stem from the 19th century practice of designing cartridges with lots of body taper, long shoulders, and long necks. You improved them by designing a chamber with little body taper, a steeper shoulder and shorter neck. When you fired a factory cartridge it expanded to fill the chamber (with some losses when the brass couldn't take it). Since the newformed cartridge had more internal capacity, you could then handload it to greater power. It worked a lot better with rimmed cartridges, since the rim held them in place. With rimless it could get dicey, since there was only modest contact between shoulder of the factory cartridge and shoulder of the chamber.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (1)
Article on women and guns
The Charlotte Observer has an article on women and guns.
Permalink · women & guns · Comments (0)
Carnival of Cordite
The Carnival of Cordite is up. The lead post is interesting--the Army is bringing out a cannister round for the 120mm gun on the M-1. It spits out 1100 tungsten balls, each 10mm in diameter, and should be quite useful in urban fighting. They'd probably have no trouble penetrating most walls, and would clear a street in a hurry.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Disabilities act applied to gun licenses
From the New Jersey Star-Ledger: a shooter who is partially disabled by head injuries was denied an NJ gun permit on the grounds that his disabilities might make him a hazard to self or others (altho he was in good enough shape to be camping and fishing). But a court has overturned the permit denial, as violating the state's laws against discriminating against the disabled.
Angel Shemaya
Hammer of Truth reports that Angel Shamaya's problems have been resolved. Angel is founder of rtba.com. I guess he moved to Michigan and ran afoul of a law that says all handguns must be presented for a "safety inspection," as a form of registration. They worked out a deal where he pleads to misdemeanors and gets unsupervised probation. Gary Marbut of Montana Shooting Sports Association reports that Angel will be moving to Montana (we don't need no steenking safety inspections!) and become the Association's recruiter.
Here's a link to Gary Marbut's page on the case, where you can make donations to Angel's defense fund.
Now, THIS is domestic violence!
According to this Reuters article, a domestic spat in Mexico escalated through fighting, knife-throwing, and pistol use, and ended when one blew up the house with a homebrew gasoline bomb.
The government will protect you
In Detroit, a 6 yr old calls 911 to report his mother is unconscious. The dispatcher refuses to send anyone unless he puts an adult on line, and there is no adult. He calls again, and the dispatcher threatens him with trouble for a prank call. When police do arrive, 3 hours later, his mother is dead.
"Officials said the 911 operator will be disciplined, but because of her years of service she will not be fired." Nothing like civil service. Story here.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (2)
CBS blog
At the CBS blog, Jim Geraghty reflects on CBS's reaction to the blogosphere heat regarding Dan Rather's speech to a Brady Campaign fundraiser.
Permalink · media · Comments (1)
GoA webpage on New Orleans confiscations
Gun Owners of American has a webpage with great video of the New Orleans gun confiscations.
Permalink · contemporary issues · Comments (1)
pro gun laws booming at state level
Castle doctrine bill passes in Idaho.
Another passes the Missouri House.
Nebraska liberalizes concealed carry.
Via NRAnews.com.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (0)
Deacons for Defense
Just got Prof. Lance Hill's book, "The Deacons for Defense" (U. N. Carolina press, 2004). I'd expected the usual sort of book, which I can read in a day or less -- I cover ground pretty quickly. Instead it took me half a day to get to p. 77, which leaves about 300 more to go. This is a VERY serious piece of historical scholarship, combining news storys and interviews of members and witnesses, and putting everything in a detailed context.
Prof. Hill's thesis (to the extent I can see from the first 77 pages) is that the Deacons and related groups played a role at least as important, and perhaps more important, than the non-violence protestors (which in the context of the difference, means "no violence even if attacked" protestors). He adds, BTW, that even those civil rights workers understood that it was "no violence if attacked while on duty" -- many had guns in their homes and understood that if attacked at home they were free to fire back,
The armed groups such as the Deacons served several purpose. First, they made it safer for the non-violent workers, by making it harder for the Klan to stage large attacks. In many towns, Klan attacks stopped the first time they picked on a Deacon and he fired back. As one Deacon put it, Klansmen were willing to kill but not willing to be killed. Second, their defensive tactics often forced law enforcement to protect the nonviolent demonstrators. Law enforcement would sit back so long as Klan v. civil rights consisted of attacks by the Klan. When it became a two-sided conflict, that was something that had to be prevented. Third, in an honor-based society, they earned respect that would not be accorded someone who allowed himself to be beaten or attacked.
The quotes are wonderful. "We were tired of singing 'We Shall Overcome.'" Klansmen "didn't mind killing, they just didn't want to die." And the history -- the group started as some WWII vets who formed a sort of police auxilliary, and were given pistols, badges and a squadcar by the local police chief. He'd hoped they'd become a sort of overseer, and he could use them to control local blacks. It didn't work out that way, but when they made it clear they would not enforce segregation laws they apparently earned enough respect to where they kept their status.
Here's an intriquing note from the Martin Luther King papers: at one point the good doctor was applying for a gun permit, and another civil rights worker was shocked to see "an arsenal" in his house.
Permalink · civil rights struggle · Comments (0)
Journal on Firearms and Public Policy
Dave Kopel, as editor of Journal on Firearms and Public Policy is looking for submissions. It's not limited to legal topics, but covers history, social science, philosophy -- all but reloading, I guess.
Britain: issuing warnings for burglaries
The Daily Mail (UK) reports the new British policy: issuing warnings to burglars. The same for arson, threats to kill, auto theft, and assault with infliction of bodily harm.
So (1) you may not protect yourself but (2) the government won't protect you, or even punish the offender afterwards, either. Essentially, the society has just been handed over to the sociopaths.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (4)
Carnival of homeschooling
For anyone who's homeschooling, the Carnival of homeschooling is up.
AZ law limiting emergency powers
The Arizona legislature is on the verge of passing a a bill taking away power to seize guns in an emergency, ala New Orleans.
Not a big deal in itself -- any Arizona governor who tried to do it would be flung from the Captiol roof-- but I find the opposition interesting. "Tuesday's action was criticized by Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Phoenix. "It sounds a little bit like advocating or supporting those militia organizations that are interested in stockpiling weapons and taking up arms against the government," she said."
[hat tip to Bernie Oliver]
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (3)
Juvenile conviction in Colorado
Publicola and SaysUncle report a Colorado juvenile case that I find disturbing. Maybe the press reports are off or inadequate (naw, never happens) but it seems to be:
1. Colorado law says an underage person cannot possess a handgun, with exception for possessing it with parental permission on land controlled by the parent.
2. The juvenile defendant posted pics of himself with guns on myspace.com. The exact nature of the pics is not described, but it sounds as if they were meant to alarm adults. This is a teenage male, after all.
3. But the pics were made on the parents' property, and the father testified he had his permission to possess.
If that's all accurate, the case should be over. I don't care how distressed a person might get over the pictures, they've been proven innocent of the offense. But he was convicted. The defense attorney says this is a difficult case in his argument. Reading between the lines, with 30 years of experience, that suggests to me either (a) the defense attorney doesn't know his art -- when you've got a slam dunk, go for it, don't apologize or (b) he knows his art and his judge, and knows that the judge might convict despite the law.
The prosecutor is said to have argued the juvenile didn't have permission to do everything with firearms, which sounds like a real stretch -- a general permission isn't permission if you implicitly have outer limits on it. That's like prosecuting a person for trespass when I gave them permission to come on my land, because I implicitly didn't allow them to come on it to bugger my dog and call al Qaeda. Of course the press account is probably inadequate. But it is suggestive that this is a media-driven case... once word of the pictures got out, the prosecutor felt driven to prosecute, whether the law merited it or not. And the judge may have felt driven to convict for the same reason. Cripes, according to the news reports the juvenile has been held since February, will be sentenced June 1 and won't be released until a "safety plan" is formulated. At least around here, that's 2-3 times the detention he would have gotten for a repeat offense burglary of an occupied dwelling (which does hurt someone and is likely to get someone shot).
Thoughts on IEDs
Off-topic, but always hoping somebody in DARPA or suchlike would pick up an idea I've had.
From what I hear, most IEDs are detonated by cell phones or walkie-talkies. Thus if you had a detector for these, you would have a passable IED detector.
Radio receivers actually radiate a bit. Processing the signal requires moving it up and down in frequency (some functions are best handled at high frequency, some at low). You have crystals generating a radio signal and mix it with the incoming signal. This means that the receiver also transmits. I seem to remember that shortwaves gave off 455 h or maybe khz. This is, btw, why they make you turn off cells at takeoff. A cellphone should thus give off a characteristic frequency, as would a walkie-talkie (dunno if they'd be the same). I also believe a cell gives off some signal so that the stations can keep track of just where you are in case there's an incoming call. That signal would be fairly powerful. There are also very broad spectrum receivers that search for ANY radio emissions nearby at any frequency. They're used to search for bugs and are cheap (since they have no tuning section).
Simplest proposal: detector on a pole, like a long metal detector. Use it to probe suspicious packages. If the guy detonates it, at least you're 10-20 ft away rather than opening it.
More elaborate: a directional Yagi antenna can focus reception and improve range by a factor of ten to twenty. At high frequencies like this, it'd be quite small. You might be able to spot a cell phone from a good distance, and know its direction (just sweep back and forth, listening for the strongest signal). Might even have enough range to spot the phone of the guy waiting to set it off. A continuous sweep could spot anything in the road ahead. Might be able to get ranges of hundreds of yards, if cell phones emit signals to tell the system where you are. Cost of antenna is under a hundred bucks, mfrg cost probably five bucks.
Or mount the detector on a toy remote controlled car, and run it up to the package.It'd be close enough to spot radiation from a walkie-talkie in that event.
UPDATE in light of comment: you could probably reduce false positives. The local detector on a pole or remote control toy car could be set to only alert if a cell is within five or ten feet. Sensitivity of one connected to an antenna could be set to alert only if a cell is in the direction the antenna points and within, say, fifty yards. If the antenna is pointed at a person when it alerts, it probably is a false positive. If it's pointed at empty road or a trash bag by the side of it... bingo. The rig could be built for a lot cheaper than a cell phone jammer. (I note the Warlock systems jammers look like they cost $15,000 each. This could be made for around a hundred. And wouldn't just jam the system while a convoy is near it, but would alert you to its location).
Further nasty thought: for the cell to tell its tower where it is, the signal it sends must identify itself. If you could intercept that signal, with help from the wireless phone co. you could determine its number. Post someone to watch it. When someone comes to retrieve it for relocation, dial the number.
FURTHER update: I found a British company that sells a cellphone detector for about $200. Says its good to 40 ft., and you could extend that greatly with the right directional antenna. Here's another, said to have a range up to 30 meters. With regard walkie-talkies ... I think they have a limited number of frequencies. Rig a transmitter that will sweep across these, link to a directional antenna, and you might be able to detonate the bombs ahead of you. At least until they start putting in countermeasures, requiring that the detonating signal convey some information, etc.
While I'm at it, a tip from Vietnam days. Chain link fence does great against RPGs, but they ought to invent something to defeat them. All it takes is a small dent in the nose cone. RPGs detonate when a piezoelectric crystal in the nose is crushed on impact and sends out an electrical signal. The signal passes via the outer casing to the detonator, then back via the inner shell. Dent the outer shell a bit and it shorts out. Stop it without anything hitting the nose and it doesn't function. I've wondered if an armored vehicle couldn't be protected by narrow metal slats pointing outward, maybe a couple of inches apart. If the RPG hits a slat square, it'll still detonate, but if it hits between them it might short. I've tried to figure out how to send a radio/magnetic pulse that would detonate one (now wouldn't that be fun--set off any RPG round in the launcher) but don't have the expertise to figure a way around the fact that it's basically two coaxial conductors, which is pretty resistant to a pulse.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (7)
Brady Campaign survey
Pretty funny... go to the Brady Campaign's latest online survey, and click in whatever answers you want.
On the next page, click on the hypertext for see how other viewers answered the questions. On the next page, note that 77% gave "other" for what is of most concern to them, then click on the link for "view all responses," and go down to, oh, late March.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (6)
One more "this is pitiful" moment
This one from Canada:
Anti-gun activist's son arrested
Police find two guns hidden in man's pants
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (1)
Supreme Court Gun Cases online
A summary of "Supreme Court Gun Cases," by Steve Halbrook, Dave Kopel and Alan Korwin, is online.
Permalink · Supreme Court caselaw · Comments (0)
WashPo on officer mistaken shooting of an arrestee
It's here. Apparently the SWAT team was called out to arrest a bookie, he made no resistance, but a member wound up killing him by mistake. (Memo to SWAT team: keep finger out of triggerguard unless you're ready to fire).
Alan Gura sends the following comment (which was blocked by the spam filter because it included "bet" -- due to a massive onslaught by online gambling comment spam, I've had to block bet, wager, poker, etc):
Dr. Culosi was not a bookie. He was an optometrist. His crime was that he liked to bet on football with some of his friends at a local bar. An undercover cop befriended him and started betting with him. The cops knew he was a non violent doctor who owned no weapons, had zero criminal record, and was arguably entrapped. They blew him away outside of his house for no apparent reason.
Typically in cases like this, the killer gets prosecuted. Intent can be inferred from one's actions, as the prosecutor would tell you in any case but one involving a police officer. Police officers are simply not prosecuted for any misconduct in Fairfax. Apparently it hasn't happened in 30 years. Must be an extremely clean department. Right now, the law is that if the police murder someone in Fairfax County, but claim it is an "accident," then that's the end of the matter.
End of comment. Alan also cites to this website established by the victim's parents. They in turn link to a Fairfax PD press release announcing a crackdown on illegal gambling. I wonder if the use of the SWAT team against a rather harmless suspect was meant to "send a message?" It's also rather ironic that the press release talks about how gambling can ruin lives -- when Virginia promotes its state lottery.
Now, these are serious ballistics!
The 120mm gun on the M-1 shoots a depleted uranium fin-stablized round. Nice pics here. Weight of projectile is about 10 kg (22 lb) and muzzle velocity upwards of 5,400 fps. I read somewhere that, due to its incredible ballistic form, it's still going upwards of 5,000 fps at a mile range.
Here are some tales of its use ... one shot going thru two Iraqi tanks and destroying both, a shot right thru the cover (a sand dune) to nail a tank on the other side (its exhaust was seen by the heat imager).
Permalink · shooting · Comments (1)
Don Kates on Afro-American homicide rates
Don Kates sent the following -- he ran a book review on History News Network, got a reader query, and composed the following:
MURDER IN AMERICA: A HISTORY (Ohio State U. Press) by the Haverford College social scientist/historian Roger Lane:
Lane's MURDER IN AMERICA emphasizes industrialization as a violence-reductive factor in the Western World: the Industrial Revolution required and produced disciplined, orderly work forces.1 Current American murder rates are driven by the very disproportionate murder rates among some Afro-Americans.2 These disproportionate rates may be attributed to the virtual exclusion of Afro-Americans from major sectors of employment during the post-Civil War period which continued through the mid-20th Century. ]
AFRO-AMERICAN HOMICIDE RATES
As indicated in my article DO GUNS CAUSE CRIME?, murder rates seem to have diminished across Europe from the period before guns existed. The decline was particularly marked in Europe from the 18th Century on.
The major exception to this has been rates of homicide by blacks which are six to eight times higher than white murder rates in both the US and England. Reader Mark Clark (presumably not the general, who is long deceased) queries the reasons.
It should be noted that some studies have suggested that rates of black homicide and other violence are no greater than those of similarly situated (i.e., economically deprived) whites. See, Brandon S. Centerwall, "Race, Socioeconomic Status and Domestic Homicide, Atlanta, 1971-72," 74 AM. J. PUB. HLTH. 813, 815 (1984) (reporting results of research and discussing prior studies). See also Darnell F. Hawkins, "Inequality, Culture, and Interpersonal Violence," 12 HEALTH AFFAIRS 80 (1993). For a discussion assailing racist theories of the prevalence of violence see Jerome A.Neapolitan, "Cross-National Variation in Homicide; Is Race A Factor?" 36 CRIMINOLOGY 139 (1998).
The only time I have treated this matter at any length was in a never-finished article written a few years ago. Though large parts of it have been published elsewhere, the portion on black homicide has not, nor have I revised it here. In fact it is not my own research, but rather relies almost exclusively on the seminal work of historian Roger Lane (see below).
He emphasizes industrialization as a violence-reductive factor in the Western World: the Industrial Revolution required and produced disciplined, orderly work forces. Current American murder rates are driven by the very disproportionate murder rates among some Afro-Americans. Thus John DiIulio argues that "America does not have a crime problem; inner city America has a crime problem." John J. DiIulio, "The Question of Black Crime," 117 THE PUBLIC INTEREST 3 (1994) also quoting 1969 National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence to the same effect; id. at 5.
We have added emphasis to DiIulio's words to focus attention on the geographic limitation which refutes any notion that race per se is the factor underlying the Afro-American homicide rate. It is not Afro-American homicide per se that makes the American homicide rate so enormous, but rather "inner-city" homicide grossly distorts both American and Afro-American homicide rates. As we shall see, urban blacks actually have far less gun ownership than either whites in general or rural blacks. Yet the gun murder rate among young black urban males is 9.3 times higher than among young black rural males. Lois A. Fingerhut, et al., "Firearm and Non-Firearm Homicide Among Persons 15 Through 19 Years of Age: Differences by Level of Urbanization, U.S. 1979-89," 267 Journal of the American Medical Ass'n. 3048, 3049, Table 1 (1992). Obviously, neither guns nor race can account for the fact of homicide being so much less among the well-armed rural Afro-American population than among their relatively poorly armed urban compeers. The obvious lesson is that, whatever their race, the small fraction of (highly aberrant) people who want to murder find guns regardless of how prevalent guns may be in their general community.
Historically, disproprotionate black homicide rates may be attributed to the virtual exclusion of Afro-Americans from major sectors of employment during the post-Civil War period which continued through the mid-20th Century. Lane's seminal research has documented the role of racism in both promoting murder by Afro-Americans and excluding them from the violence-reductive effects of industrial employment: In the post- Civil War period though black murder rates were high, they were far lower than today ... and lower than those of their immigrant Irish competitors while Italian murder rates [when Italians began immigrating] soared well above those of blacks.
[ A]fter the [Civil W]ar both unions and employers, all over the country, combined to drive [blacks out of high paying trades]... [ F]actory work, all across the country was considered too good for black workers.
[ Black homicide is] another social-psychological [deprivation that] resulted from black exclusion from the regimenting effects of industrial and bureaucratic work. These effects are shown in the relatively rapid decline in homicide rates among Irish and Italian immigrants, two other ethnic groups with high levels of preindustrial violence, as their integration into the industrial work force demanded unprecedented levels of sober, disciplined, orderly behavior, which carried over into their private lives.
[ Later when they were] no longer shut out of the urban-industrial revolution, blacks were instead let in too late. During the 1940s and 1950s blacks in effect were piped aboard a sinking ship, welcomed into the urban industrial age just as that age was dying, with industrial cities losing population and jobs.
[ In late 19th Century Philadelphia] blacks consistently outscored their competitors on written tests of all kinds... [] Even the white press generally agreed that black civil servants (and, a historian would add, blacks as a group) were overqualified for the [low level jobs to which they were confined] in this era, as a result of a general refusal to promote them to positions where they might have authority of any kind over white workers.
[ Blacks were acutely aware of the need for education and struggled heroically to attain it. B]lack literacy in the city soared from roughly 20 percent to 80 percent over the final thirty years of the [19th C]entury ...
[Philadelphia blacks included doctors, lawyers and other professionals -- graduates of Harvard, Yale and the University of Pennsylvania. But] that was no guarantee that they could make a living. As whites would not hire them and blacks could not afford them, licensed black physicians were found working as bellhops.... In the early 20th Century not one of Philadelphia' black attorneys could make a living through his law practice alone.
The lesson blacks learned from this was that for them education had no economic value.
(NOTE: the quotes just given are taken from Lane's MURDER IN AMERICA, pp. 181-85, 298-300 and 327, as well as Roger Lane, "Black Philadelphia, Then and Now" 108 THE PUBLIC INTEREST 35, 42 (Fall, Summer, 1992) and Roger Lane, ROOTS OF VIOLENCE IN BLACK PHILADELPHIA: 1860-1900 (Cambridge, Harvard U.Press, 1986).
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (6)
Joyce Foundation analogy
I've posted before on the Joyce Foundation, which was started by a timber company family, originally to provide benefits to lumberjacks, and now is pumping millions into antigun causes.
How did it get that way? Here's an article on the Ford Foundation, which started out as a family foundation directed at Detroit-area charitable causes, such as a hospital. Today it has billions in assets, hands out half a billion a year, and virtually none of that goes to Detroit causes. The last family member resigned from the board decades ago in disgust, and it's now run out of headquarters in New York City by what can be described as professional foundation administrators.
[Via Instapundit]
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (0)
Larry Wilson
Some sad, bad news about Larry Wilson, the expert on rare 19th century Colts and the author of the beautiful books on them and other rare pieces. The article reports he was sentenced to a year in jail for defrauding a client, and word of some shakey appraisals is sending shockwaves thru the collector community. (The very high end collector community, where a gun's price may be in 6 digits).
Carnival of Cordite
The April 1 Carnival of Cordite is up. And, yes, the date is significant.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Kopel's latest
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Dave Kopel has a post on George Mason and the right to arms. Also an ironic post about the Bradys abandoning their past agenda.