« September 2006 | Main | November 2006 »
October 2006
3.5 years for gun possession in NY
Mayor Bloomberg is celebrating an amendment to NY gun laws that rules out probation, and imposes a 3.5 year sentence, for possession of a loaded firearm without a permit.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (3)
Carnival of Cordite
The latest Carnival of Cordite is online, as is the Carnival of Homeschooling.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Thoughts on DV cases
Federal law prohibits firearms possession by persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. It defines DV as an offense that has, among others, "has, as an the element, the use or attempted use of physical force," against a cohabitant (or, curiously enough, a former spouse, regardless of whether they are cohabiting).
Current immigration law allows removal of an alien who commits an act of "domestic violence," defined as "any crime of violence" as defined in 18 USC sec. 16) against an intimate partner. 18 USC §16 in turn defines crime of violence to include “(a) an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another." Pretty close to the GCA definition.
The Ninth Circuit recently ruled in Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales (No. 03-74533 (Oct. 26, 2006) that Arizona's DV statute did not qualify as grounds for deporation under the federal standard. The reasoning seems to be that under the Arizona statute, a conviction can be had for reckless, nonintentional, use of force, and that a reckless use of force (even tho literally within the coverage of the statute's term "use of force") is not covered by the statute.
The Circuit notes that its earlier cases had suggested that recklessness was enough, but now it relies on the Supreme Court ruling in Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004). Since the relevant element of the Arizona statute is not limited to intentional use of force, an Arizona DV conviction is not a crime of DV under the federal immigration law.
Of course, when in the Ninth Circus, we have to bear in mind that the same statutory language may have radically different meanings when a gun owner and gun law is involved.
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (0)
More on Utah judge
Bitter has a great posting on more dirt that's coming to light about the Utah judge who, well, went berserk and ordered a guy taken into custody because he dared to respond when she started arguing with him about the evils of hunting. It's pretty serious -- making an ex parte (private, without the other side being notified or involved) contact with a defense attorney, promising to reduce his client's sentence, and telling him not to let the prosecution know about the call. We're talking some grossly unethical judicial conduct here.
UPDATE: sorry, been so busy I thought I'd blogged the story before. Bitter at TheBitchGirls has been following it from the beginning. Here's what the judge did in the courtroom. Basically, starts a lecture on how sweet deer are and how terrible it is to hunt them, then when a spectator walks out, orders him brought back, starts to debate him, and when he answers politely has him seized and held in custody.
Here's her followup story, and here's another.
Self defense in Seattle
Clayton Cramer has a post on a case in Seattle. Basically, a guy classed as a mentally ill criminal offender (he'd tried to burn down a day care), and was self-medicating with crack cocaine (generally not considered therapeutic for mental disease) attacked a fellow and was shot.
The attacker's uncle has written an article, basically blaming the person on the receiving end for carrying a firearm and not running away or fighting with fists (as Clayton points out, he'd been knocked to the ground in the first assault). "There is no doubt that Danny acted erratically that day, but he did have a diagnosed mental illness. I am certain he would admit that what he did was wrong, if he were alive, but he was taken from us by a misguided man with a gun."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (2)
"Why all the lies?"
A blog asks a very good question.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (2)
If a criminal carries a gun, the victim will just take it away
I've mentioned before that the belief that "if a person uses a gun in self-defense, the criminal will just take it away and use it on him" seems to be pure urban legend. I have yet to encounter a case where that happened. On the other hand, victims from time to time do disarm gun-using criminals. I've noted cases of that here and here and here.
Now from Memphis comes another case: "Frayser woman takes intruder's gun, kills him."
My guess as to why defenders are so successful, and attackers not: defenders actually have a motive to try that dangerous tactic (here, she was a mother with two kids whose apartment had been invaded), and offenders are often impaired by alcohol or drugs, and also distracted. The defender is thinking only of defense or escape, the attacker is concerned with controlling them, looting the scene, and keeping an eye out for police.
[Hat tip to Don Kates].
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (1)
"Students Say No to Guns"
That's how station WALB (Alabany, GA) carries the story, adding "Some Albany youth pledge to stay away from guns. "
Actually, the story says they swore "to stay away from gun violence."
More "security theater." One of the sponsors, the US Attorney's Office, commented that they "think that we need a response to violent crimes that are taking over here in our community..." So the solution is to make a bunch of people promise they won't commit violent crime. For Pete's sake, they didn't include the "stick a thousand needles in my eye" part, without which no gradeschool promise is binding!
Permalink · media · Comments (0)
Dead folks voting
The Poughkeepsie Journal is reporting a study indicating that 2,600 New Yorkers managed to cast ballots after they were dead. These political zombies were for some reason very partisan; Democrats outnumbered Republicans by 4:1.
[Via The Volokh Conspiracy].
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
A Different View of the Founding Fathers
Just found online Ben Franklin's great work, Advice to a Young Man, on Choice of a Mistress.
Second Amendment documentary
Just some more thoughts on "In Search of the Second Amendment," the documentary film I'm wrapping up. Thanks for the input. (BTW, I have an old, emphasis old, website devoted to it here. Note it's so old that it doesn't have the current title, In Seach of the Second Amendment. The script there involved educated guesses as to who would be filmed and what they would say. Today, of course, everything is on ice. When In Search of the Second Amendment is ready to distribute, I'll switch the website over to that). Anyway--
1. Editing is pretty good and keeps the story moving. My one concern is with the English right. It's very hard to pep up 17th century legal evolutions! I chopped it to the minimum, maybe 12 minutes, and tried to keep it going. Could always have added pikemen and musketeers but that would have cost several thousand and, as I had zero assistance and zero budget at that stage, it couldn't be done. I got some nice images and used those in place of moving footage. I figure 12 minutes of slow moving isn't going to hurt. I couldn't cut it, because I wanted to illustrate that the American right did not just spring out of nowhere, or just out of conflicts with redcoats after 1768.
The rest of the film is pretty lively. It had to keep moving! There's so much ground to cover in short time. When your history spans from Charles I to the civil rights movement, you have your work cut out for you!
When I get time I'm going to transcribe the latter. I got a couple of former civil rights workers (Don Kates and Joe Olson) to carry that end, talking about how they packed guns, how almost every civil rights worker they knew did so, and how they used them to ward off the Klan (Joe said protocol was this: on a lonely road, a truck pulls up right to your back bumper, high beams on. You know what that means. You take your handgun, put it in your left hand, and lean it out the window, pointed up, wave it slowly back and forth. The vehicle behind you suddenly slows, falls back, and turns around. This was not the civil rights worker they wanted to tangle with. Then I go into Robert Williams' book on his experience, where his chapter of NAACP got itself chartered as an NRA club, and started ordering in rifles, and wound up shooting up a Klan attack. From there to re-enactment of a case where the Lumbee Indians, with their weapons, broke up a Klan cross-burning and ruined the Klan in their area (local officials charged the Klan leader with inciting them to riot and sent him to prison. Amusingly, the judge noted that perhaps the Lumbees were not without fault, but none could be identified. It's amusing because reporters had photographed them at close range and the pictures were in local and national media! I suspect the judge and spectators were chuckling as he spoke).
2. A reader was concerned the first run would be 5000 DVDs... might that be suddenly wiped out, and will there be arrangements for pre-ordering?
I'm one of those fellows who is VERY loathe to make a promise until he is certain he can fulfil it. I figure to set up pre-ordering maybe a week or ten days before the DVDs arrive. By then I should know everything has tested out, the reproduction is mostly complete, and have a very good idea of when things will arrive. I think my distribution system should insure against wiping out the inventory.
a. Starting in mid or late November with 5000, slowly begin promotion. Note it here, of course, maybe hope for some internet chatter. Follow with articles in quick-turnabout gun journals such as Shotgun News. If this moves 500-1000 or so (the first number probably more realistic), invest that in another order for 5000 or even 10,000, which should arrive in 1-2 weeks.
b. In mid-December, run the first ad in a major gun magazine. (These have to be scheduled 2 months in advance, so take out a loan for it). At that point, 3-4 weeks after first availability, I hope for the first big demand.
c. IF that turns out big, order more and follow with advertising in multiple gun magazines in, say, March-April. (The two month requirement makes the gap in time necessary).
UPDATE: Thanks for the ideas. I'm writing up flyers, etc. in my spare time. And text for an internet store page. I'm in contact with a fellow here who designs and runs internet stores. I suspect that, what with having to fit this around other work which has to take higher priority, this will take about ten days. That should put everything in place maybe a week before the DVDs are done.
Permalink · documentary film · Comments (5)
Associated Press writer on basketball stars with guns
An AP writer, dealing with professional basketball types who have guns, lets his feelings/bias flow.
""It's a pretty, I think, widely accepted statistic that if you carry a gun, your chances of being shot by one increase dramatically," Stern said earlier this week during his preseason conference call," runs one quote.
I would note in response that many studies have shown more than 94.5% of statistics are made up on the spot.
I have to admit that, while respecting the *right* in each case, I have a different visceral reaction to "NBA players carry guns on trips" and "NRA members carry guns on trips." I tend to associate the latter with firearms being carried by people who know how to use them, wouldn't use them outside of sport unless someone was advancing on them with a knife or attacking another decent citizen, and whose idea of getting wild is having a few drinks and telling war stories, rather than getting a snoot full of cocaine and figuring they're a deity and can break the law.
I guess we could solve the reporter's problems by making NBA players "prohibited persons" under the Gun Control Act (subject to provisions for restoring their rights after they retire). But maybe the sport and the reporter ought to look at a source of the problem, as his article notes:
"The NBA made it through the post-Jordan era in part by marketing itself to the hip-hop generation. It was edgy cool -- Allen Iverson with his checkered past and rebellious present, and high schoolers who thumbed their noses at tradition to become instant millionaires.But then things started getting a little seamy. Kobe Bryant was accused of rape. The Americans looked more like spoiled brats than a Dream Team at the Athens Olympics. The Brawl at The Palace in the Detroit made fans wonder if they should fear for their safety at a game.
Edgy had gotten out of control, and the NBA has been working overtime to clean up its image."
Guess what? If you start marketing your sport (which is what was done, for the bucks), maybe the players will believe the marketing?
I love the closing quote: "After all, this is the NBA, not the NRA." Coming right after a description of a case where a team was out partying until 3 AM on the training night, and one faces a felony rap for firing five shots in the ceiling of a bar, I'm glad for that.
[Inside joke, refering "soccer hooligans" who riot -- "Camp Perry officials condemned "National Match hooligans" who muttered "Semper Fi" after a Marine competitor finished shooting. The officials stated that the muttering distracted other competitors and blasted it as "displaying a lack of the personal discipline we expect."
Permalink · shooting · Comments (0)
Pretty tired
I've got the documentary movie file to the DVD making firm. Should have the final proofs of the jacket within a few days. They're encoding it for the DVD right now, I just approved the layout for the chapter headings, looks real nice. Turnaround is 2-3 weeks from approval, so it looks like mid-November or a bit later. Also sent in an ad for the DVD to a gun magazine, and they want some tinkering with it (no word back yet on details).
In between all this, doing legal work to keep the wolf from the door.
Pretty tired, but it is coming together. After nearly four years of work (filming started in January 2003), it's about time.
The finished product is an hour and 51 minutes. It'll have twelve or thirteen professors of law, plus Dave Kopel, Steve Halbrook, Don Kates and Clayton Cramer. It covers the how the 2nd amendment was rediscovered by academia, history of the English right, the revolution and framing period, early commentators, the black experience and the 14th Amendment, and present relevance of the right (self-defense, genocide, political, etc.).
I've had some folks say 1:51 is too long, and some say no problem. Too late to change it, but what do you readers think on that?
Permalink · documentary film · Comments (7)
On this date...
On this date (some sources day tommorrow) in 1919 Congress enacted the Volstead Act, or as it is now known, Prohibition.
The "Great Experiment" in keeping Americans from getting what they want, as a way of improving their lot, was repealed in 1933, but not before it had fueled massive lawbreaking, corrupted countless governments and law enforcement agencies, encouraged disrespect for the law, killed far more than it saved, and created modern Organized Crime.
Maybe someday people will learn from experience.
[update in light of comment: I think Don Kates has some writings on how the press hailed the Sullivan Law as disarming disliked minorities -- in that case Italian and eastern European immigrants. And Bob Cottrol and Nick Diamond have written on the racist origins of other gun laws around that time. There a state court opinion on a CCW law where one judge comes right out and says it was aimed at blacks in lumber camps, and was never understood to apply to the white population.
BUT -- courts are reluctant to strike statutes on bases like those. The fact that a statute, neutral on its face -- unlike segregation laws, etc. -- was enacted from a racist or related motive is hard to prove. The legislators' hearts might have been pure, whatever the NY Times or this judge thought. So the courts are pretty reluctant to rule on the basis of indirect evidence of a bad motive.
Digression: Kates has also remarked to me that he thinks Prohibition cooled the ardor for gun laws like the Sullivan Law. In 1913 or whenever, very strict gun laws sounded like a good idea. After 1919, the idea that strict legal controls means domestic peace went down the tubes. The state gun laws that were enacted in the Northeast were much milder than the Sullivan Law, and outside the mideast and midwest even these rarely were passed. It wasn't until this experience had been largely forgotten, a generation or two later, that we see the urge for stricter gun laws gaining way.]
Brady grades and crime rates
Here's a paper by Denton Bramwell, studying the relationship between the Brady Campaign's grading of state gun laws, and the homicide rates and total violent crime rates, of those states. (pdf file, but small).
If Brady's report cards made any sense (that is, if the legal measures it wants enacted, the type of thing that earns an A grade), then there should be some correlation between grades and violent crime and murder rates. The paper concludes that there is no such correlation at all. At each grade level, states' homicide/violence rates range from low to high, and there is no evidence of any correlation between grades and homicide rates at all. A regression analysis indicated that the relation between Brady grade and crime rate was no better than you would get by running random pairs of data, plucking grades and crime rates out of the air.
Logical conclusion: Enactment or failure to enact Brady's legislative priorities had no correlation to murder rates. If a state were to go from F to A, from virtually no gun control to everything on Brady's agenda, the only result would be a joyful press release from Brady.
It is quite interesting to see an advocacy group impeached by its own grading system.
[Welcome Instanpundit readers! Take a look at the blog in general, or check out my documentary film on the 2nd Amendment, released last week and starring Prof. Reynolds, Gene Volokh, Dave Kopel, and quite a few others.
Alas, poor Utah
A Utah antigun group sponors a day of rememberance. "in 2005 Utah received a grade of D- for its laws shielding families from gun violence, from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Utah has no child access prevention laws, no gun safety lock or safety design standard laws, no limitation on assault weapons and magazines or “junk” handguns, no requirement for a license to purchase a gun, no requirement to maintain gun sales records or to register the ownership of a gun, no requirement for background checks on “private” gun sales, and no required safety training for handgun buyers."
Hmm, so let's look at the crime picture in this D- state. Uh -- in that year it had a homicide rate of 2.3, the 42nd lowest in the country (the absolute lowest rate was Vermont, which allows concealed carry without a permit, and the highest rate, 35, was the District of Columbia). In total violence crime it was 47th -- only Vermont, New Hampshire and South Dakota had less violence.
Mayor Bloomburg & boys gearing up for post-election
USAToday has an article about a Bloomberg mayors' meeting beginning today. As I've earlier noted, Joyce Foundation has kicked $175,000 over to underwrite the group.
""A large majority of Americans want some form of common-sense gun legislation," Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said..."
Interesting tactics they plan. Apparently they consider the Fourth Amendment, like the Second, to be an annoyance:
"The city officials meeting today will discuss strategies to get guns off the street:....
•In Trenton, police set up checkpoints to search cars for illegal guns....•New York City sued 15 gun dealers in Georgia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Virginia in May for allowing straw purchases. Private investigators hired by the city posed as gun buyers and wore hidden cameras.
SayUncle has a take on the Knoxville mayor joining in: "But, remember, Mr. Haslam just wants to deal with illegal guns. Apparently, the wants to do that by making more guns illegal: Mayors say they struggle to stem the flow of guns from states with lax gun laws. Mr. Haslam, that'd be Tennessee they're talking about there."
Gary, IN city lawsuit allowed to proceed
A state trial court has allowed the Gary, Indiana suit against six FFLs to proceed, over a motion to dismiss based on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act. It's hard to make much assessment, based on a news article, which is itself largely a Brady Campaign release, but it sounds as if the key was that the suit is against six specific dealers who were accused of straw man sales, rather than one of those against dealers, mfrs, etc., based on general claims that they're suable because criminals used guns they handled.
Permalink · Gun manufacturer liability
Self defense, proportionality & gap between law and popular views
Earlier this month, I posted an entry on Prof. Renee Lettow Lerner's presentation at the George Mason Univ. conference. One of her themes had been that there is a considerable gap between legal standards (created by the legal elite portion of society) and popular feelings on self defense. The legal standard keys on proportionality: generally, one may use deadly force only to defend against deadly force, not to defend against non-deadly attack, property crimes, burglary, etc. as such. The popular view is more like -- shooting burglars is a public good, and if someone advances on you, unarmed, but with violent intent, despite warning that you are armed, well, he's going down and you're in the right. There's no moral equivalance between his life and yours (the core assumption of proportionality) if you're a defender and he's an intruder, burglar, or serious aggressor.
Just had a couple of illustrations of this. Earlier today I posted on the Massachusetts gubernatorial debates, where the candidates were rivalling each other in support for a Castle Doctrine law, presumably because ALL candidates knew the voters wanted it -- in *Massachusetts*, no less.
Now comes this story from Cincinnatti. In one case a thief physically attacks a convenience store owner, who shoots him as he flees. In the other, a man shoots a car thief. Neither would come close to meeting a proportionality test -- no reason to fear serious bodily harm at the time the shot was fired. But a former prosecutor tells the reporter:
"If either one of these two individuals is charged, I think the state may have a difficult time possibly getting a conviction because I think people in this community are fed up with crime and I think there would be some sympathy for the defendants in these cases. It might be a difficult case to get a conviction on."
MA gubernatorial debates turn to castle doctrine & gun laws
The transcript is here.
Interesting that the castle doctrine (or as Brady calls it, the "shoot first law") plays that well even in Boston.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (2)
Article on arming teachers
Interesting article at the Mises Institute. "So there we have it: the government that is supposed to protect people ends up only recommending a gauzy "environment" in which everyone is supposed to feel special and listened to. Instead of protection, we get therapy."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (1)
Canadian gun organization
I like its title: The Canadian Unregistered Firearms Owners Ass'n.
[Link found here].
School ends "attack the attacker" training
Aubrey Turner reports that the instructor who was teaching kids to attack and resist a school shooter has been reassigned, and the school has notified all parents that they do not endorse his approach. "I should have known that a school district with the spine to teach children to resist an attack was too good to be true."
Via The Bitchgirls.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (1)
Florida Atty General race
Just got an email from United Sportsmen of Florida:
Whether Walter "Skip" Campbell, Democrat Candidate for Florida Attorney General, is flip-flopping, playing chameleon or plain out lying, one thing is clear -- that's not the kind of man you want for Attorney General (or any other elected office).
Campbell told the NRA and Unified Sportsmen of Florida that he supported legislation to protect the right of law-abiding citizens to have lawfully owned firearms locked in their private vehicles when their vehicles are parked in business parking lots.
Campbell then changed his position when appearing before the Florida Chamber of Commerce, which represents anti-gun businesses that want to ban guns from private vehicles if they are parked in parking lots while customers shop.
The Palm Beach Post reported (10/25/06) that Campbell said Florida businesses should be able to restrict the rights of employees and visitors because "the rights of the property owners are "sacrosanct" because they pay property taxes and insurance."
We find it egregious that Campbell, a man seeking the office of Attorney General, would put the desires of anti-gun, big brother business owners and managers above the well established constitutional and statutory rights of law-abiding citizens.
On the other hand Bill McCollum, Republican candidate for Attorney General, kept his word and stood up for law-abiding gun owners saying, "If my wife or one of our children are working late at night in a law office or any other facility and they go out to the car, I want them to have the ability to have a gun."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (1)
Washngton snipers
Instapundit recalls that the Washington snipers were busted four years ago. An excellent example of the unorganized militia at work. As I recall, the police had gotten their IDs (not very hard, after they asked for cash to be wired to an account one owned) and license plate.
The police wanted to keep it quiet, but mistakenly broadcast it on an unencrypted radio channel. Reporters got ahold of it and reported it. A truckdriver, keeping his eyes open, spotted their car and called police.
Going by memory here, but the citizenry did a much more credible job than law enforcement. Local police had set up a hot line for sniper reports. When the real sniper called in with his demands, they repeatedly hung up on him. When he called the police directly, they told him all such calls must go to the hotline. He finally called a clergyman and got HIM to call, figuring they might at least listen to a minister, which they finally did. Then the FBI profilers had their say: the sniper was a young caucasian loner, who'd recently experienced some traumatic event. Wrong on everything.
Permalink · Personal · Comments (1)
Modest victory in Texas
Alphecca reports that the Harris County Attorney has advised the county that it cannot forbid CCW licensees to carry in parks. (Via Instapundit).
Candidate says he hangs out at Playboy parties
Senate candidate Harold Ford has stated he attended a Playboy party, according to HotAir.
Considering Congress, it's probably just a last minute character-building pitch to the voters, and an atempt to distance himself from Washington. A guy who hangs out at Playboy events is probably not gonna send sexual emails to teenage boys, right?
[Update: yup, Harold Ford, not Harrison Ford. Corrected.]
Permalink · Politics · Comments (2)
Canadian media hatchet job
From the Montreal Gazette comes this piece, about a group of licensed competitive shooters (obviously a suspicious if not bloodthirsty lot!):
"The shooting rampage at Dawson College last month refocused the gun-control debate."....
"You'd never know it to look at them. In regular life, the Sunday shooters are just normal people with normal jobs....." [Zombies. They're all around you, but you can't tell it]
"Though professing a message of vigilance and safety, they collect gun paraphernalia, troll the Internet looking for gun websites and wear T-shirts logo'd with the provocative names of gun manufacturers and organizations. One of them is called Canadian GunNutz, and its emblem is a beaver holding an assault rifle."
"....they feel part of a misunderstood fraternity." (No ____?)
"The targets themselves are of two types: special octagonal cardboard targets about the size of a human torso, and thick steel targets called poppers, shaped in the rough size of a child..."
"But to an outsider, the match does seem to mimic something all too real: the modus operandi of a madman on a murder spree."
After all, weren't gunmen like Kimveer Gill just as brazen and agile as these shooters aim to be in competition? Didn't Gill fire his semi-automatics while out in the open and on the move? And didn't he aim to hit his targets?"
Permalink · media · Comments (4)
Australian study: gun law did nothing
A ten-year study published in the British Journal of Criminology concludes that the Australian confiscation (termed a "buy back" only because a half-billion in compensation was paid out) had no effect on crime rates.
"Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buyback and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia," the study says.
In his first year in office, the Prime Minister, John Howard, forced through some of the world's toughest gun laws, including the national buyback scheme, after Martin Bryant used semi-automatic rifles to shoot dead 35 people at Port Arthur.
Although furious licensed gun-owners said the laws would have no impact because criminals would not hand in their guns, Mr Howard and others predicted the removal of so many guns from the community, and new laws making it harder to buy and keep guns, would lead to a reduction in all types of gun-related deaths.
.......
The director of the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics, Dr Don Weatherburn, said he was not surprised by the study. He said it showed "politicians would be well advised to claim success of their policies after they were evaluated, not before"."
Update: ABC News -- the AUSTRALIAN Broadcasting Co., that is, carried the story, and fairly. At the end they quote Prof. Simon Chapman, describing him as an "anti-gun advocate" (when was the last time you heard that term used by the US press?) as "He says the gun laws on hand guns still need some tightening up. "There's been a proliferation of hand guns in recent years, but I think generally speaking that the gun law situation in Australia remains one of the toughest in the world and that's to the great disappointment of the gun lobby in Australia and internationally.""
Permalink · non-US · Comments (5)
Upcoming Supreme Court arguments
They've got some fairly interesting issues scheduled for argument early in the Term:
11/8: Whether the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 is invalid because it lacks a health exception or is otherwise unconstitutional on its face.
11/7: Whether attempted burglary is a crime of violence within the meaning of the Armed Career Criminal Act (which provides a 15 year mandatory minimum if there are three prior for violent crimes or serious drug offenses). Defendant was convicted of felon in possession of a gun, and had two drug priors and an attempted burglary. I'd bet against it being violent; government argument is that burglary of a dwelling can lead to violence, but I think that's a stretch).
11/6: Guy sues under 42 USC 1983, after he was convicted of murder, appealed, and court rules charges against him based on unlawful arrest and unlawful interogation. Question is when the statute of limitations begins to run. -- whether it begins with the arrest, or with dismissal of the case.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (1)
Wierd laws
Here's a webpage on strange local laws. [Link courtesy of Budd Schroeder]
I could make a few nominations.
18 US Code § 711a. “Woodsy Owl” character, name, or slogan
Whoever, except as authorized under rules and regulations issued by the Secretary, knowingly and for profit manufactures, reproduces, or uses the character “Woodsy Owl”, the name “Woodsy Owl”, or the associated slogan, “Give a Hoot, Don’t Pollute” shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
And for those game businesses that make you buy tokens, there is
18 US Code § 336. Issuance of circulating obligations of less than $1
Whoever makes, issues, circulates, or pays out any note, check, memorandum, token, or other obligation for a less sum than $1, intended to circulate as money or to be received or used in lieu of lawful money of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
And just in case you wanted to give your pocket change as security on a loan (or perhaps use a coin collection for the same--
18 US Code § 337. Coins as security for loans
Whoever lends or borrows money or credit upon the security of such coins of the United States as the Secretary of the Treasury may from time to time designate by proclamation published in the Federal Register, during any period designated in such a proclamation, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Hmm, and beware, you militaria collectors:
18 US Code § 704. Military medals or decorations
(a) In General.— Whoever knowingly wears, manufactures, or sells any decoration or medal authorized by Congress for the armed forces of the United States, or any of the service medals or badges awarded to the members of such forces, or the ribbon, button, or rosette of any such badge, decoration or medal, or any colorable imitation thereof, except when authorized under regulations made pursuant to law, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
And the Swiss get special protections not given other nation's symbols:
18 US Code § 708. Swiss Confederation coat of arms
Whoever, whether a corporation, partnership, unincorporated company, association, or person within the United States, willfully uses as a trade mark, commercial label, or portion thereof, or as an advertisement or insignia for any business or organization or for any trade or commercial purpose, the coat of arms of the Swiss Confederation, consisting of an upright white cross with equal arms and lines on a red ground, or any simulation thereof, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.
And note that if you figure that Jane Fonda or someone else is a traitor, you have a LEGAL duty to tell the White House, or some federal judge about it:
18 US Code § 2382. Misprision of treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.
[Note--this dates from the days when the United States was a plural -- "against them," not "against it." Also note that a compliance with this law is liable to get you on various agency watch lists, at the very least the "crackpot watch lists."]
Shot detecting technology in Washington DC
DC has put some gunshot detecting technology to work. The system detects the sound of a gunshot and computes its location.
You'd think it would have little work in an area that bans handguns and tightly restricts everything else, but apparently it is getting quite a workout. "Scott D'Angelo, who lives half a block away, said he heard the gunshots that morning but did not call police. He said that the sound is frequent in his Anacostia community and that he does not call 911 every time he hears the familiar pop. "Many times a week, you hear gunshots," D'Angelo said. "
Podcast with Dave Kopel
Instapundit reports and links to a podcat with Dave Kopel, on gun issues.
Another dumb crook
A gang member goes on a burglary run, with his mother driving the car. He breaks in and rushes the lady homeowner, who puts three rounds of .38 into him (excellent shooting -- 3 out of 4 hit). Driving away, and trying to find the way to a hospital, his mother flags down a passing car. To be precise, the sheriff's squadcar responding to the homeowner's 911 call.
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (3)
Jeff Cooper/Carnival of Cordite
Carnival of Cordite is up, with a collection of tributes to Col. Jeff Cooper.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Edward Welles, early Brady director, dies
Edward Welles, a former OSS/CIA officer who became first Executive Director of what is now the Brady Campaign, has died at age 85.
Brady started out as ... if I remember correctly, the National Council to Control Handguns. It was a very small group until Welles landed Pete Shields, a DuPont vice president, as his replacement. Shields knew organization and PR and put it on the map. In the process, its name changed to Handgun Control Incorporated (because its previous name, and acronym, was too easily confused with National Coalition to Ban Handguns, the other large antigun group). Later Shields recruited the Bradys, after his retirement they named it after themselves.
One of my beefs, BTW, is that the Brady Campaign's website and literature barely acknowledges that Shields existed -- before Brady, there was nothing -- when actually he was the creator of the group as it is today. His counterpart would be Harlon Carter, who largely created the NRA as it is today, and NRA has no trouble remembering him -- he's an honorary life member, the HQ building is named for him, his bronze bust in the its hall, his memory is invoked at every annual meeting. I have trouble understanding why Brady doesn't honor the fellow who put it on the map.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (1)
Latest Gallup poll
It's online here.
Reminds me of a poll done back in the 70s, where they actually probed the question -- if you think gun laws should be made more strict, just what would you want to see? The most frequent answers were things should be outlawed that were already illegal (most frequent answer was that there should be laws forbidding convicted felons to own guns).
French gun owners badly off
Here's a translation of statements by one French presidential candidate ... and he's the more conservative one! He's speaking to a burglary victim who wants to be able to defend himself.
"Private gun ownership is dangerous. I do perfectly understand that you may be exasperated, to have been stole [burglarized] twice and I do understand the fear of your wife and your daughter, but the answer is in the efficacy of the judiciary answer. It's not in private gun ownership."
[Update, via Instapundit: Here's how good the "judicial answer" is. The police can't protect themselves, let alone anyone else.]
Permalink · non-US · Comments (3)
They're tough in Hugo, OK
Station KXII reports that a fellow tried to rob a liquor store with a .45, and the result:
"The clerk pulled out a .38 revolver and shot the suspect one time in the upper torso. When that did not encourage the suspect to put down his gun, the clerk grabbed a shotgun and shot the suspect one time. The man, identified as 50-year-old Guy Wade Buck, walked outside the store where two Hugo police officers were standing."
[Hat tip to Dan Gifford. Don Kates, responded, BTW, that self-defense stories are usually carried by the local media, and ignored by all others.]
Page on Rebecca Peters of UN
Bruce Mills tipped me to an interesting webpage on Rebecca Peters, the person pushing gun control at the UN.
Among other interest data is the fact that she's been bankrolled by George Soros.
Permalink · UN · Comments (5)
One heck of a shot
An Iraqi terrorist sniper bites the dust at upwards of 3/4 mile. Though why the article never mentions the distance in yards is beyond me. I assume the reporter wasn't a gunny.
Review of Bloomberg lawsuits
The New York Sun has an article about the lawsuits, and about the firm defending the dealers.
New term: "Security Theater"
Wikipedia has it. It's security measures designed as theater, to convince people something is being done, rather than to actually render something more secure.
[via Lew Rockwell.com.
So much for the government protecting you...
Mayor Bloomberg's car got carjacked from an employee. Story here.
Intereting findings re: violence
Here's a summary of an interesting study of prisoners, which found that when they were fed the right nutrients in-prison violence declined by 37%. Apart from suggesting a rather strong link between nutrition and violence, it would also suggest that jails might be a bit more placid if they actually fed people (a baloney sandwich and a small bag of chips is customary lunch in most of them).
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (5)
VERY interesting paper on mass killings
Here's a very interesting short paper (small pdf) on mass slayings, with emphasis on the shootings at Port Arthur.
The gist of it is that, before that massacre, a national TV program had laid out a "how to do it" segment, with features that would predictably have appealed to a potential mass murderer, and ended with "We are going to have a massacre in Tasmania like those elsewhere."
He concludes what is needed for such a killer is rewards and guidance, and the media gives both. It rewards them with publicity, turning a bitter loser into a national figure. It gives guidance on how to do it, and once the first case occurs, lays out just how the killer went about his crimes.
I might add that what's needed for murder-suicide mass slayings is a person with a serious case of narcissistic personality disorder. That involves, not just a big ego, but a mass of inner self-hatred, from which the person is shielded by the enormous ego. Thus the murders satisfy the ego -- they feel godlike, able to strike down people on a whim. The suicide satisfies the self-hatred. The prospect of publicity is very appealing to such killers; it stokes the ego. "Celebrity" defines their idea of heaven -- not to be a hero, that requires heroism, but to be a celebrity, celebrated. In an instant, they can be on every new channel, the cover of Time, be talked of overseas, an experience that would otherwise take a lifetime of hard work and luck. Why, Nobel Prize winners don't become celebrities like that, despite decades of hard work and genius!
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (3)
Website on New Orleans confiscations
Here's a new NRA website on the New Orleans gun confiscations.
Minor error when boresighting
This slide show serves as a reminder... when boresighting, remember to remove the boresighter before firing.
(I'm amazed the barrel split that far back, from an obstruction in the last few inches).
Permalink · shooting · Comments (4)
More on ex ATFE Director's extravagance with tax monies
The Federal Times has the story.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Carnival of Cordite
The latest Carnival of Cordite is online, including memories of Jeff Cooper.
I've been light on blogging today, since I'm working on the documentary. Think I have final edition done. I'll test it tonight, ship it to replication firm tommorrow. They take 2-3 weeks, so I should be in distribution sometime in mid-November.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
Coxe, Madison and "healing strictures"
One of the more significant indications of original intent on the Second Amendment is the newpaper article by Tenche Coxe, circulated while the First Congress was debating the Bill of Rights, and referring to the Second Amendment as protecting Americans' possession of "their private arms."
Madison wrote Coxe a thank-you note, saying, among other things, that the Constitution was already indebted to the "healing strictures of your pen."
I just happened to do a search for the contemporary meaning of "stricture" in that context, and found some uses:
In modern medical terminology, it usually means the narrowing of a passage, but this medical dictionary notes an earlier use: "A stricture is also anything that closely restrains or limits. Shakespeare used "stricture" in the sense of strictness, as in "A man of stricture and firm abstinence.""
Here's another use: "An adverse remark or criticism; censure."
It looks as if Madison's remark meant "healing criticism (presumably of the Constitution's detractors) or argument."
Permalink · Second Amendment wording · Comments (0)
High speed photography
Here's some high speed video of projectiles (they look to be handgun bullets) going through anything the videomaker could find.
Here's a page with theory and images.
here they amuse themselves photographing .22s as they slice cards edgewise.
And here's some more stills.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (0)
Not exactly surprising news
President Bush has signed the legislation forbidding firearms confiscations during national emergencies (or at least confiscations by any federal agencies or anyone receiving federal funds, which is about every police agency).
Unarmed security guard murdered
A university posts unarmed security guards, and one of them winds up murdered. Story here.
"Wally's family thinks he might still be alive if he had a gun.
"My brother-in-law is supposed to be protecting campus and everything," said Lori Swan. "How can he if he can't protect himself?" "
Unarmed security guard sounds a little like a contradiction ... at best a deterrence to the more stupid or minor criminals (don't steal that bike -- there's a guy in uniform), at worst, a man put in an impossible situation, charged with protecting others, but having nothing but a radio to call for help, and maybe his fists.
CCW instructor offers free training to teachers
A Utah CCW instructor is giving free courses to teachers.
"The concealed-weapons instructor's offer was met with opposition from some teachers and union representatives at the Utah Education Association's conference in Salt Lake City.
"We've always resisted the idea of arming school employees," said Susan Kuziak, executive director of the 18,000-member teachers union. "Though the intentions may be good, ultimately, the potential for harm is too great.""
Well, I suppose they knew their members better than I do. Although I might be a bit reluctant to have my kids taught by someone I can't trust not to start shooting at them.
(I was taught by the Old Nuns. 5 foot high women who'd taught 4th grade boys for decades. They didn't need guns. If anyone had tried to attack their classroom, they'd just have torn off his arm, beaten him to death with it, and then asked Mary to make sure St. Peter repeated the thrashing when the battered miscreant arrived. They made Marine DOs look like Kumbaya-singing wussies. No way you could stop one with a conventional weapon).
Interior Dept blocking blog access
The Federal Times is reporting that Interior Department is blocking access to blogs.
Gad--they just had their internet access restored, after years offline. (Background: Indians sued Interior about a decade ago, alleging that over the years several billion dollars in their trust funds had been diverted or otherwise vanished. The suit is still ongoing. There is good reason to suspect that whoever diverted the funds -- if they're still alive, and this involves many, many years -- would have reason to delete any evidence. Years ago, the judge was informed that the relevant accounts could easily be hacked via internet, and ordered Interior off the net until it was fixed. Justice figured to stonewall, insist that the cutoff was hurting the department, etc.. Didn't work, and it took them offline for, oh, five years or so).
Anyway ... I'm surprised they even know about blogs. In my day (1982-1992) there was no department-wide IT dept, at least that I knew of. Our own office had a tech branch that knew nothing of computers. As in -- one of the persons sent to advise us did not know the difference between memory on hard drive and RAM. They thought fifty megs was an enormous amount of memory for a network, since "that was as much as a hundred computers have," and I couldn't explain the different concepts of "memory" to them. THey also didn't know what a hard drive was -- they only knew that data went into a big metal box (the server) and was somehow stored there.
Our office system was something called an Aquarius, which was totally incompatible with anything. Its only virtue had been that the salesman was buddies with a then-deputy head of the office. It could not format a floppy, specifically so that you had to buy pre-formatted 5.25 floppies at ten dollars each. No kidding.
One day they actually bought one of the computers that could run DOS as well as Aquarius. I tried to use it and reported ... it had no OS. The answer was that they didn't buy the operating system, but if I had DOS on a floppy at home I could bring it in and run the office unit on that.
Old memories -- the bean counters decided to make themselves look productive, while shifting the work to everyone else, by compiling a briefing book for high officials on all our court cases. It must of course be on a precise format -- one page to a case, no matter how complex. They thought we had some few hundred cases, and told the field offices to send theirs in via modem.
It turned out we had over 20,000, and the resulting transmissions at 300 or 1200 baud tied up the system for 48 hours. From then on, the field offices were to send them in on those $10 floppies, sent overnight mail. HQ (guys like me) were then detailed to look at each one and ensure it was perfect, not a single typo permitted. But since the original files on the field office computers were unchanged by our edits, that meant next month's reports would have the same typos in them.
Ah, the memories! At the bottom of each page was, for example "for further information contact John Smith at 208-6012." In bureaucratese, that does not mean contact him, it just means he's the fellow handling it. But Secretary Lujan actually read his briefing book (which had by now become six big ring binders holding 20,000 pages). He found some interesting, and called the attorney direct, just like it said to.
Management went ballistic. The Secretary himself was getting direct information from someone who knew! He's supposed to go thru the chain of command, and a week later get a document that gives the "position" of the office, carefully examined and massaged to omit anything he shouldn't know (i.e., something that might give him "ideas). We, grunts, finally got written orders that if the Secretary called us, we were to refuse to answer any questions and tell him to go thru the chain of command. (The orders could be enforced because our head, the Solicitor, had been personal atty to the President in private life, had been put there by the White House, and thus didn't really have to worry about what the Secretary thought).
At about the same time, another cabinet Secretary got a story in the WashPo about what had happened when they just decided to leave their office, go wandering the halls of HQ, and drop in on their employees and chat some. After HQ staff discovered they were missing and wandering around, they sent out search parties thru the building to find them and urge them to "come home." They were not supposed to be talking to people in their building -- who knows what they might find out!
Dumb crooks, episode 36.842
In Mesa, AZ, two crooks try to steal an ATM, using a backhoe and a trailer. They didn't count on the weight of the concrete-encased ATM, and it crushed their trailer. Needless to say, all this made a lot of noise, and a police officer came over to investigate the racket.
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (1)
Training to fight school attackers
Dr. Helen has an interesting post on a plan to train students to attack a killer, rather than just hide under a desk and wait to be shot. And gives a body blow to one criticism of it.
Life is full of lousy choices, especially if the good choice (arm at least some teachers) is ruled out.
Via Instanpundit, which has links to other interesting posts on the plan.
Dove hunting in Michigan
The controversy over allowing dove hunting (which has always been legal in Arizona) in Michigan is heating up.
It's strange to my eyes. From my days at Interior, I recall that it was no issue at all. Doves rely on mass reproduction to survive. They build rickety nests that are constantly falling down, are a favorite of predators, etc.. They have a life expectancy of about zero, and get around it by mass-producing young. They're one bird on which adding some hunting take has no possible impact.
More on former ATFE chief
Forbes has the story.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Ruling: 911 cannot be sued for failure to protect
A Camden, NJ court has ruled (as all or almost all courts have) that the 911 service cannot be sued for failure to respond to a call. The family of a kidnap/murder victim sued, over failure of 911 and police to respond to a call from a witness of the kidnapping.
Here's some detail:
"According to investigators, the caller telephoned police from his car in the PATCO lot to say that he saw a woman struggling with two men. The caller, whom police would not identify, said a woman was screaming as she was being dragged into a car. The man followed the abductors' car through the parking lot and then lost sight of it, investigators said. All the while he was on the phone with police dispatch, they said.
The dispatcher dismissed the incident as a domestic dispute and never relayed the information to patrol officers, according to investigators."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
David Zucker campaign commercial
The always-enjoyable Instapunk has a post on YouTube's semi-censorship of the hilarious David Zucker campaign commercial (see link below). The page requiring that you subscribe to YouTube has apparently been removed.
As far as proposals to boycott YouTube over that and deletion of Michelle Malkin, etc., Instapunk remarks:
"I also have no problem at all with maintaining my purely symbolic boycotts of products I don't like or find helpful in any way. Boycotting the New York Times is a particular pleasure. Ditto with Detroit's giant gas-guzzling SUVs, lilke the Cadillac Escargot and the Lincoln Nasticator. I haven't decided about the Hummer yet. I mean, I know it's a fuel hog and all, but if I get the assault rifle I asked Santa for this Christmas, it would look super cool mounted on the dash of one of those leviathan Hummer truck things."
For a sample of why I say Instapunk is always enjoyable, try this post on the Foley page scandal, which begins: "Leave it to the Republicans to come up with the ultimate oxymoron, a boring sex scandal."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Justice IG rules on former ATFE money waste
The Justice Inspector General has issued the report (pdf) on fiscal misconduct by former ATFE director Carl Truscott.
It's a long document, but juicy. They find that he spent massive sums of money to line his office with wood paneling and to improve the HQ gym, at a time when the agency was so short of cash that agents were using outdated bullet-resistant vests. A team was assigned to pick just the right wood and design. He wanted built-in bookcases, custom milling, and even wanted his pantry wood paneled, and a wood floor to match that of a vice presidential office. The millwork alone would have cost a quarter million, and his floor $62,000. He planned another $100,000 for gym improvements.
And that he hired on agents knowing he would have no budget to pay them.
When they renovated the firearms licensing center, he directed that it have a gym, too.
When his nephew wanted to do a high school video on the ATFE, he directed that various offices assist with research, and provide tours, and he himself delivered the nephew's freedom of info act requests to the office handling that (hint, hint). Substantial agency time was spent ensuring that the nephew got a good grade.
He also created an agency Executive Protection Branch, so that he could have bodyguards. For a time they even stayed with him when he worked out in the gym, until he realized there were several of them working out at the same time as he did, anyway. They escorted him on trips, including his commute to HQ. The new office had a chief and four bodyguard agents, plus three assigned autos. The bodyguards served as his drivers during his trips to the office and back, He went out of his way to keep them inconspicuous when he visited the Hill. They drafted a formal protocol for his visits to field offices. When he did so, an advance agent went to the location a day ahead of him to make sure everything was proper for his reception. Two more agents went with him to the airport. One handled the car and the other went inside to get his boarding pass and make sure he got special treatment in boarding the plane, since he hated waiting. A bodyguard said escorting him thru crowds was like the parting of the seas, and people asked who this important official might be. Sometimes on arrival 3-4 cars escorted him, because they were needed to "secure lanes" for his car (apparently they used emergency lights to ensure he got thru traffic quickly). He was also assigned a medic on trips as an escort, just in case he had a medical problem. The medic carried a defib unit, several decontamination suits, etc.
When he went overseas, a squad of 3-4 accompanied him, and stayed at $300-400 a night hotels.
When he had lunch with friends, two female agents were instructed to function as waitresses. At the 2005 International Assn of Chiefs of Police meeting, he had two agency photographers assigned to tail him constantly and take photos.
He hired cronies, and kicked up their job evaluations over what their supervisors had given them.
Conclusion is that since he has resigned, there is nothing to be done.
Note the resignation -- that of course means IG was free to go to town on him. However much might be done by his successors, well, we may never know. But this guy apparently wanted to live like a king, or at least a duke, to have an office and an escort worthy of a president or VP, etc. Your tax dollars at work.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (2)
Barney the Dinosaur snuff film
From my earlier days, here is a movie ofmyself and my son Mark snuffing Barney the Dinosaur. He's got the AR-15, I had the full auto Thompson.
[Not to say this is a bit old, but it was done on 8mm digital, as a quicktime .mov file, since MPEG either wasn't around or was too expensive].
Permalink · Personal · Comments (2)
Pistol packing CN mayor
It turns out that the Mayor of Miron, CN, a Marine, has a CCW permit and carries concealed. This newspaper report illustrates the culture divide, or dare we say, culture-war, over so simple a thing, with some responding "so what?" and others horrified at the idea.
Clash over gun laws in PA
PA's gubernatorial candidates are slugging it out on gun control. the Philie Inquirer has the story, with spin.
Email of ATFE employee's complaint
I've rec'd an email of a complaint made to Justice Inspector General regarding ATFE headquarters conduct and waste of tax money, and attach it below. I've previously noted that the agency's previous director resigned in the wake of similar fiscal scandals, after spending $300,000 to pretty up his office suite at the same time the agency budget didn't have enough for bullet-resistant vests.
SEPTEMBER 22, 2006
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
950 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW
WASHINGTON, DC 20530
DEAR INSPECTOR GENERAL,
EMPLOYEES AT THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES HAVE LONG BEEN DISTURBED WITH THE ACTIONS OF SOME OF OUR EXECUTIVES. THE TIME HAS COME TO SHARE THESE CONCERNS WITH YOU FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION. FOR THE GOOD OF OUR BUREAU, WE IMPLORE YOU TO SEEK ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS SURROUNDING WASTE, MISMANAGEMENT, AND ABUSE OF POWER BY TOP GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS:
>ARE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR BOUCHARD AND ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CHASE VIOLATING DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RULES BY USING GOVERNMENT-OWNED VEHICLES TO COMMUTE FROM HOME TO WORK IN DEFIANCE OF A POLICY THAT PROHIBITS THE USE OF TAXPAYER FUNDED VEHICLES FOR SUCH PERSONAL USE?
>IS IT A GROSS WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR THESE ASSISTANT DIRECTORS TO DRIVE LUXURIOUS NEW GOVERNMENT VEHICLES FOR PERSONAL USE WHILE AGENTS DRIVE MUCH OLDER AND HIGH MILEAGE CARS TO GET THE JOB DONE?
>IS IT AN EXTRAVAGANT EXPENDITURE OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR BOUCHARD TO ARRANGE WEEK-LONG CONFERENCES FOR OVER 30 OF HIS EMPLOYEES AT PLACES SUCH AS LAS VEGAS HARD ROCK CASINO AND SEA ISLAND GOLF AND TENNIS RESORT WHILE FIELD AGENTS LACK ESSENTIAL EQUIPMENT? DID THESE CONFERENCES COST TAXPAYERS $30,000? $50,000?
>IS IT AN EXTRAVAGANT EXPENDITURE OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR RADEN TO ARRANGE A TRIP OF ALMOST TWO WEEKS FOR NEARLY A DOZEN OF HIS EMPLOYEES TO ATTEND A CONFERENCE IN GERMANY THAT DID NOT DEMAND SUCH EXTENSIVE GOVERNMENT RESOURCES? DID THIS TRIP COST TAXPAYERS $20,000? $40,000?
>IS IT A MISUSE OF AUTHORITY AND RESOURCES FOR DEPUTY DIRECTOR DOMENECH TO WASTE TAXPAYER MONEY BY ORDERING THE DIRECTOR’S SECURITY PERSONNEL TO PROVIDE HIM CHAUFFERED LIMOUSINE SERVICE FROM WORK TO HOME, ALTHOUGH SECURITY APPARENTLY WAS NOT NEEDED FROM HOME TO WORK, AS ACTING DIRECTOR?
>HAS ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CHASE WASTED TAXPAYER MONEY BY TRAVELING, WITH HIS SPOUSE, ALL THE WAY ACROSS COUNTRY TO LOS ANGELES FOR A ATF RETIREMENT SEMINAR THAT IS OFFERED WITHIN HIS DUTY STATION OF WASHINGTON, D.C.?
>IS DEPUTY DIRECTOR DOMENECH VIOLATING ANTI-NEPOTISM LAWS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS (5 USC 3110) BY ARRANGING FOR HIS WIFE TO BE PROMOTED FROM A SECRETARIAL POSITION TO A SENIOR PROGRAM ANALYST? BY ARRANGING FOR HIS SISTER IN LAW TO BE PROMOTED FROM A FIELD AGENT IN NEW YORK TO THE AGENT IN CHARGE OF THE PORTLAND, OREGON OFFICE AND HAVING TAXPAYERS PAY THE EXPENSES FOR THIS MOVE BACK HOME? BY ARRANGING FOR HIS NIECE TO BE HIRED AS AN INSPECTOR IN FLORIDA, THEN NORTH CAROLINA?
>DOES DEPUTY DIRECTOR DOMENECH VIOLATE MERIT SYSTEM PRINCIPLES BY REGULARLY PRACTICING FAVORITISM IN MAKING PERSONNEL SELECTIONS BASED ON FRIENDSHIP AND FACTORS OTHER THAN MERIT? DOES HE CREATE AN INTIMIDATING, HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT BY RETALIATING AGAINST THOSE HE PERSONALLY DISLIKES THROUGH UNDESIRABLE, FORCED REASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS?
>IS IT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR RADEN TO SPEND A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TIME IN FLORIDA AND CANADA BEING ENTERTAINED BY A TECHNOLOGY VENDOR WHILE APPROVING TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS WITH THEM?
>IS IT AN ABUSE OF AUTHORITY AND WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR BOUCHARD TO ARRANGE WITH OTHER ASSISTANT DIRECTORS A CHANGE IN POLICY THAT ALLOWED HIS SON TO BE HIRED AS A PAID SUMMER INTERN ON GOVERNMENT SALARY WHILE OTHER ATF PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS GO UNFILLED DUE TO BUDGET CONSTRAINTS?
>IS IT AN EXTRAVAGANT EXPENDITURE FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR CHASE TO USE TAXPAYER MONEY TO PURCHASE A WORLD GLOBE FOR SEVERAL HUNDRED DOLLARS WITH GOVERNMENT RESOURCES SIMPLY TO DECORATE HIS OFFICE? WAS THIS GLOBE USED TO PINPOINT WHERE HE WOULD TAKE NEEDLESS TRIPS TO CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS AROUND THE WORLD TO PLACES LIKE FRANCE, HUNGARY, AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL LOCATIONS?
>IS IT UNETHICAL CONDUCT FOR ASSISTANT DIRECTOR RADEN TO REPRESENT ATF AT FUNCTIONS AND EVENTS WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL?
THESE ARE BUT A SAMPLE OF KEY EXECUTIVES ABUSING THEIR POSITIONS AND TAXPAYER MONEY THAT WE HAVE WITNESSED OVER THE LAST 3 YEARS. AS YOU INVESTIGATE THESE EXAMPLES, YOU WILL FIND MANY MORE LIKE THEM. FOR THE GOOD OF OUR BUREAU AND ITS FUTURE, PLEASE STOP THIS IMPROPER BEHAVIOR AND MISMANAGEMENT BEFORE IT FURTHER ERODES MORALE HERE AND THREATENS THE FUTURE OF ATF.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
ATFers United against Mismanagement and Misconduct (ATFUMM)
Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
David Zucker's campaign commercial
It's available on YouTube, and just hilarious. Word is that Zucker, producer of "Airplane" and "The Naked Gun," presented to the GOP, and after they stopped gasping they turned it down. Too bad. It might have been the one campaign ad everyone would have been happy watching.
I remember Glenn Reynold's prediction, during the last election, that future elections would see privately-produced campaign ads that would be more timely, more searing, and far more funny than anything a political party could put out. Looks like that call was right on.
Dave Kopel on school shootings
At National Review Online, Dave Kopel has an excellent article on school shootings.
(Via Instapundit).
Carnivals up
The Carnival of Cordite is up, and so is the Carnival of Homeschooling.
Permalink · Festivals · Comments (0)
England's gun crisis
Surprise -- British police have found they have gun crime crisis.
Continue reading "England's gun crisis"
Permalink · non-US · Comments (0)
Joyce Foundation underwriting Bloomberg, too?
Georgiapacking has an interesting page tying together all the links between antigun groups and their financing. From them I got an interesting tip. Joyce Foundation's latest report on their funding of antigun efforts includes a grant of $175,000 to the Mayor's Fund to Advance New York City, "To organize a coalition of mayors from around the country to promote national, state, and local policies, litigation, and law enforcement strategies aimed at reducing the flow of illegal guns into cities."
The Mayor's Fund webpage describes it as the "umbrella not-for-profit corporation of the City of New York," and a 501(c)(3). So now Joyce is not only buying law reviews, and creating "astroturf" grassroots groups, but also funding public officials in their projects.
UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers! Take a look at the main blog, where I've blogged the recent George Mason Univ. symposium on the second amendment, and put up a trailer for an upcoming documentary film on the right to arms.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
Trailer film for 2nd amendment documentary
UPDATE, I have the film done and am distributing ... : you can order, and see the trailer on Youtube by going to the link below.
I've got a webpage for it here.
Permalink · documentary film · Comments (3)
GMU Symposium, part one
The George Mason Univ. symposium on the second amendment opened with three illustrious panelists (grin).
First up was Prof. Nelson Lund of GMU law school. He spoke on the structure of the amendment and its purposes. His conclusion was that the amendment was meant to ensure that Congress could not, under its power to provide for the armament of the militia, employ that power (plus the necessary and proper clause) to disarm the people, from whom the militia must be drawn.
Next was Prof. Robert Cottrol, of George Washington Univ. He's done extensive work on Brown v. Board of Education (the school desegregation decision). He pointed out that underlying Brown was not only legal writings but also publications in sociology that argued that segregation was harmful. Eventually the change in opinion was such that Brown became inevitable.... in a relatively few years, a system that had been accepted for a century, and blessed by the Supreme Court sixty years before, became seen as completely stupid. He suggested the Second Amendment was reaching a similar stage presently. Decades of scholarship have so undermined the collective rights view that it has become intellectually untenable.
Finally, I spoke. I opened by showing a "trailer" film of my documentary (I'll upload it here when I have time) and then suggested that the Amendment has two clauses precisely because it had two purposes. Americans of the period were in some cases Classical Republicans (who emphasized the militia as an institution) and in others proto-Jeffersonians (who emphasized individual rights, including the right to arms). Madison and the First Congress had to satisfy both bodies. That's why the amendment survived the First Congress' tight editing (which chopped all of Madison's other prefatory clauses), with two intact provisions. They aren't paraphrases of each other, but rather separate ideas, and each has to be given force.
UPDATE: some tangentially related matters added to extended comment, below.
Continue reading "GMU Symposium, part one"
GMU conference, part two
Par two led off with Larry Keane, general counsel to National Shooting Sports Foundation. His focus was on firearms liability litigation after enactment of the Lawful Commerce in Firearms act. Basically, most of the city suits against gun manufacturers were dismissed, and arguments that the statute was unconstitutional were rejected. The one exception was, surprise, assigned to Judge Weinstein of EDNY. The Act has an exception for a dealer who violates laws specifically applicable to gun dealers and makers. It was plainly aimed at GCA 68 and state gun laws. Weinstein found instead that the NY statutes on "nuisance" came within the exception and so his suit could go ahead.
He was followed by Richard Gardiner, a Fairfax VA attorney who pretty much specializes in defending against ATFE revocations. The standard pattern in these is ... well, between bound book and 4473, there are about 40 items to fill in or check off per gun. So even if you get the human error rate down to 1%, there would be one error per 2.5 guns sold. ATF audits the books, finds lots of errors, gives warning. It comes back in a year or two later, finds lots of errors, and files to revoke the license.
He noted that sometimes the errors claimed are things not required by regulation. One dealer got cited for a person who filled in the 4473 question "have you ever been convicted" etc. with "never," ATF claimed the proper answer was yes or no. He pointed out the regulations say the question must be answered, and the gun cannot be transferred if it is yes. But nothing in the regs say the answer must be "no" and not "never."
George Mason Univ. Symposium, pt. 3
The third panel was on international matters. The first speaker was Joyce Lee Malcolm, formerly prof. of history at Bentley College, and presently prof. of law at George Mason. She gave a presentation on how the British right to self-defense, let alone to arms, has decayed. Two examples stand out in memory. First, a British official has instructed the public that if it comes to their attention that they are being burglarized, the family should retreat into a room, preferrably the bathroom, barricade the door as best they can, and wait until it is safe to come out. The other was the case of a woman who had been terrorized by some juvenile thugs for some time, and .... swore at them. She was charged with some manner of criminal act, fined 80 pounds, and the fine was increased to 120 pounds upon appeal. Police explained that by swearing at the thugs she "took the law into her own hands."
Joyce also talked about how gun laws had been stiffened in several countries, Australia, Canada, and Great Britain, I believe, in the wake of mass shootings, and how violent crime in each had skyrocketed.
Dave Kopel then spoke on international law, illustrating how the fathers of the field had, in the 17th century, all recognized self-defense as a core right, both for nations and for individuals. They had treated it not merely as an individual right, but as something that lay at the core of any well-ordered society: dealing with a thug is not just exercise of a private right, but doing the work of the public and conferring a benefit upon other honest citizens. He pointed out how the modern UN is departing from the very core of international law in this regard.
[update to comment--I know the proceedings were videotaped. I don't know about plans to make them available, but did suggest it.]
GMU conference, Part 4
I'm back from the GMU conference on the second amendment, trying to catch up, but will blog it as time permits. I'd like to start with the last two speakers, as I found their presentations the most interesting.
Prof. Renee Lettow Lerner, of Geo. Washington Univ. law school, gave an interesting presentation on recent expansions of self defense rights via statute -- the castle doctrine laws (no retreat) and the presumption of right to use deadly force when a home is forcefully and illegally invaded. She pointed out that this field of law traditionally had a major gap between opinions of the ordinary citizenry, and law, which reflected opinions of the elite.
The legal view had for decades increasingly focused upon proportionality. Deadly force can only be used to meet deadly force. You can't shoot a burglar to prevent the burglary as such, or to prevent him from leaving with your property, or to keep a thief from taking your car. But among the general populace, there is wide support for doing just that. Proportionality is rejected, in part because the burglar or thief is seen as invading your autonomy, the area where you ought to be let alone (and where even police have to obtain a search warrant before entering to do their job).
She also pointed out that some European countries, pushed by feelings of the public, have expanded the right to self defense, and had a VERY interesting survey of European law on the subject, showing how it differed. One curious fact was that many countries have a special category for use of excessive force caused by panic, anger, or any excited mental state caused by crime. In some this is an absolute defense, in others it reduces the offense from, say, murder, down to manslaughter. The idea appears to be that if the criminal's actions cause a mental state in the victim, this is either a complete defense or a matter of extenuation for the victim.
Then came Brian Patrick, a prof. of communication at the Univ. of Toledo, and author of the book The National Rifle Ass'n and the Media: The Motivating Force of Negative Coverage. He began by asking how the gun movement had survived in the first place. Communication has for a century or so been taking a vertical mode. No voter can possibly know, personally, all the facts necessary to taking action. He's not been to Iraq, has no time to study its politics, is not in the Capitol watching debates about gun laws, etc. In the vertical form of communication, the government and mass media serve as interpreters of reality. They have the info (or at least are believed to have it), digest it and give a short summary to the masses, whose understanding is limited to that summary.
But for decades these interpreters have carried the message that guns are bad, gun owners are dimwits, NRA is evil, all gun laws are enlightened reforms. How did the gun movement survive?
He said that the gun movement created horizontal patterns of communication. Small and large groups which communicate within. Gun owner can't keep up with how each congressman voted... but they can check NRA and GoA ratings and know in seconds. The gun groups, large and small, serve as interpreters of reality, and are trusted above the mass media. In his book, he demonstrated how negative coverage of NRA was directly related to increases in its membership, because small groups cohere when attacked. The other thing to note is that vertical communication can change minds, but horizontal communication changes minds AND motivates to take action. This could explain why polls from time to time indicate that a majority wants more gun laws, yet they are not enacted. The majority is passively receiving the basis of its opinions from the vertical pattern, forming opinions but not acting upon them (i.e., voting upon them), while gun owners receive theirs horizontally, and do vote and volunteer and organize based upon them.
He added that he found McCain Feingold most disturbing in this respect, since it hinders private groups, horizontal groups, from expressing their views, while leaving the vertical communication of the media untouched. The Framers, when they wrote of freedom of speech and assembly, had in mind these small, horizontal groups, not something like the mass media. Newspapers of their time were largely scandal sheets, or rabidly partisan pieces of no reliability. Reporters were somewhat disreputable, and often expelled from society weddings and suchlike. Modern reporting really began with the Civil War correspondents, and only became an institution, an interpreter of reality for the masses, a century after the Framers.
He also remarked that European countries are quite lacking in horizontal groups, whereas Americans love them. Europeans tend to consider this an American quirk, quite beyond explanation. (At dinner later, the example of American universities came up. In the US, even public universities are semi-autonomous. In Europe, if a fellow wants to teach law, he takes certain tests, and if he passes, the ministry of education assigns him to a law school.
Blogging light
Blogging will be light for a few days, as I'm in the DC area for the George Mason Univ. conference on Saturday, and preliminary meetings for that.
Gene Volokh, common sense, and school shootings
Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Prof. Volokh has good common sense:
"My sense is that the only thing that could have stopped this murderer is someone else who's armed -- whether an armed security guard (something that even many non-trusting, non-insular schools don't have), an armed teacher, or someone else who had the requisite firepower (and willpower). Better yet would have been someone else who's armed but who's not in uniform, since even an armed but uniformed school guard could easily be surprised by the killer, who could murder him and then go inside with impunity."
New Action sport
I predict this will quickly replace skeet. (Streaming video file).
Gunnies in Marin County
Marin County CA may be liberal and wealthy, but it's got a significant population of gunnies.
PA rejects gun laws
The PA legislature has voted down most of the proposals for gun laws brought before it. One-gun-a-month remains up for a vote. Most of the margins were overwhelming.
Hat tip to Dan Gifford...
PA rejects gun laws
The PA legislature has voted down most of the proposals for gun laws brought before it. One-gun-a-month remains up for a vote. Most of the margins were overwhelming.
Hat tip to Dan Gifford...
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (0)
Proposed Calif laws
California -- let's see. The Legislature turned down microstamping, I'm told, then passed two bills stopped by the governor's veto. Here's a webpage on what's still pending.
Glad I live elsewhere.
Discussion of law forbidding confiscation in emergencies
Dave Kopel at the Volokh Conspiracy has an detailed discussion of the new law.
Gov. Schwarzenegger drops a veto on two antigun bills
Via a Calif. Rifle & Pistol Assn email:
AB2714 (TORRICO) INTERNET/MAIL ORDER AMMUNITION SALES ID REQUIREMENT
This bill would provide that no ammunition or reloaded ammunition could be delivered via the INTERNET/Mail order pursuant to a retail transaction unless the purchaser personally presents clear evidence of his or her identity and age to the seller of the ammunition. This bill also repeals a provision of current state preemption law that restricts local governments from regulating the sale of ammunition.
To the Members of the California State Assembly:
I am returning Assembly Bill 2714 without my signature. It is important to ensure that minors do not use mail-order or internet sales to obtain access to items prohibited under current law that could be dangerous if used improperly. However, current law already requires sellers to verify the age of a purchaser who wishes to buy ammunition at the time of sale. By adding a new requirement that retailers ensure third party verification of the identity of the purchaser at time of delivery, this bill could inadvertently subject legitimate retailers to criminal penalties for actions that they have no control over. As a result, this bill could be counter productive by providing a negligible benefit to public safety while concurrently discouraging legitimate business. In addition, this bill would allow local governments to enact their own measures governing the sale of ammunition if they are stricter than state law. Statewide uniformity of the laws regulating firearms is critical to public safety. By allowing local governments to proliferate local measures regarding the sale of ammunition that significantly differ from state law, this bill could result in inconsistent regulation, interpretation, and enforcement of firearms laws by businesses, law enforcement, and the public. For these reasons, I am returning this bill without my signature.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger
SB 59 (LOWENTHAL) HANDGUN LOSS OR THEFT REPORTING
This bill would make it an infraction for any person whose handgun is stolen or irretrievably lost to fail, within 5 working days after his or her discovery or knowledge of, or within 5 working days after the date he or she should reasonably have known of, the theft of loss, to report the theft or loss to a local law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction in which the theft or loss occurred or in which the person resides. This bill also repeals a provision of current state preemption law that restricts local governments from creating a patchwork of laws regarding reporting lost or stolen firearms.
To the Members of the California State Senate:
I am returning Senate Bill 59 without my signature. While I share the Legislature's concern about the criminal use of lost or stolen weapons, the ambiguous manner in which this bill was written would make compliance with the law confusing for legitimate gun-owners and could result in cases where law-abiding citizens face criminal penalties simply because they were the victim of a crime, which is particularly troubling given the unproven results of other jurisdictions in California that have passed similar measures. In addition, this bill may have undesirable legal consequences as it allows local governments to pass ordinances that differ from State law, thereby leaving law-abiding citizens with the task of navigating through a maze of different or conflicting local laws depending upon the jurisdiction they are in. A patchwork of inconsistent local ordinances creates compliance and enforcement problems that erode the States ability to effectively regulate handguns statewide. For these reasons, I am returning this bill without my signature.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Police shootout
MSNBC has word of a shootout in Florida where the suspect, accused of murdering a deputy, was shot 68 times.
They fired 110 shots total, giving a hit rate of about 60%. Not great marksmanship, but better than usually seen.
Self defense cases
Clayton Cramer assesses a case where self defense was argued, but lost. Interesting perspectives from each side.
As far as the outcome ... well, as trial attorneys will tell you, *anything* can happen in a court of law. I've lost cases I knew should have won, and won cases that should have been lost (did that last week, in fact), for no reason I could ever figure out.
UN and genocide
The London Times has the story:
"The bodies were still warm when Lieutenant Ron Rutten found them: nine corpses in civilian clothes lying crumpled by a stream, each shot in the back at close range. It was July 12, 1995, and the UN-declared “safe area” of Srebrenica had fallen the previous day. The lush pastures of eastern Bosnia were about to become Europe’s bloodiest killing fields since 1945.
Refugees poured into the UN compound. But the Dutch peacekeepers (Dutchbat) were overwhelmed and the Serbs confiscated their weapons. “From the moment I found those bodies, it was obvious to me that the Bosnian Serbs planned to kill all the men,” Rutten said. He watched horrified as Dutch troops guided the men and boys onto the Serb buses."
The article goes on the detail how, warned of a planned massacre in Rwanda, Kofi Annan forbade UN commanders stopping it. His cable told them of a "need to avoid entering into a course of action that might lead to the use of force and unanticipated repercussions. "
(via Instapundit)
Request regarding Joe Olson quotation
Prof. Joe Olson has a request--if anyone comes across a "quotation" from him regarding a Scottish 18th century writer, please inform those you can that it's bogus:
Friends,
The bogus e-mail (from 2000) erroneously attributed to me is going around the internet again. It has now morphed into at least 4 versions (each with a different political twist) with people now freely adding fabricated "quotes" from me.
I've had two friends show me copies in the past two weeks and I've received numerous e-mails seeking (luckily) to verify the alleged quotes. I've replied to all telling them it is bogus.
My Hamline web page has the following disclaimer on it. That appears to have a positive effect because several correspondents have mentioned it to me and have said they are forwarding it to their e-mail lists.
"DISCLAIMER: There is an e-mail floating around the internet dealing with the 2000 Bush/Gore election, remarks of a Scotish philosopher named Alexander Tyler, etc. Part of it is attributed to me. It is entirely BOGUS as to my authorship. I've been trying to kill it for 3 years. For more details see: http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp."
If you run across this bogus e-mail, please help me kill it by notifying whoever sent it to you that it is an internet hoax.
Clever shopping bags
Actually on topic, look at the first one, here.
(Hat tip to Dan Gifford)
Prohibition on gun confiscation during emergencies
NRA reports passage of HR 5013, the “Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act,” which prohibits gun confiscation during emergencies. I don't have the text of the bill yet, but here's a link to earlier versions of it.
If the bill as passed tracks the earlier language, then it makes another (the fifth?) time that Congress in a preamble to a bill finds the Second Amendment to be an individual right. It bars confiscation, and also registration (beyond that permitted by state law), by any federal officer, or anyone receiving federal funds or under control of a federal agency. Any person affected has a right to sue for damages, and recovery of legal fees is mandatory if they win.