« March 2007 | Main | May 2007 »
April 2007
Kansas City mall shootings were in gun-free area
John Lott has confirmed the Kansas City shootings occurred in a "gun free zone."
Sam Donaldson of ABC News to host Brady fundraiser
Newsbusters has the story. The 2007 Brady Center fundraising dinner will feature Sam Donaldson as Master of Ceremonies. (Mike Wallace was a speaker at their 2005 event honoring Art Buchwald).
Media bias? Nawwwww....
[Second hand hat tip: Newsbusters says they got the news from Cam Edwards.
Permalink · media · Comments (0)
Supremes rule on car pursuit
Scott v. Harris, handed down this morning. A high speed chase that ended with the fleeing person rolling the car and being paralyzed, after a police car bumped it from behind to end the chase. Supreme Court sustains summary judgment for the officer.
This was the case that had bench comments during oral argument: plaintiff's version was that he endangered nobody, but the police cruiser had a video running, and it showed an extremely dangerous flight thru the center of town. Some justices essentially asked -- are you saying that for summary judgment we have to accept plaintiff's version, even when we can see on the video that it's bunkum?
Scalia writes the opinion, and as might be expected, it's a little saucy:
"Indeed, reading the lower court’s opinion, one gets the impression that respondent, rather than fleeing from police, was attempting to pass his driving test..."
"Justice Stevens hypothesizes that these cars “had already pulled to the side of the road or were driving along the shoulder because they heard the police sirens or saw the flashing lights,” so that “[a] jury could certainly conclude that those motorists were exposed to no greater risk than persons who take the same action in response to a speeding ambulance.” Post, at 3. It is not our experience that ambulances and fire engines careen down two-lane roads at 85-plus miles per hour, with an unmarked scout car out in front of them."
Oh, and in a first, the Court puts the videotape exhibit online for all to see, as it notes in Fn. 5:
"Justice Stevens suggests that our reaction to the videotape is somehow idiosyncratic, and seems to believe we are misrepresenting its contents. See post, at 4 (dissenting opinion) (“In sum, the factual statements by the Court of Appeals quoted by the Court … were entirely accurate”). We are happy to allow the videotape to speak for itself. See Record 36, Exh. A, available at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/video/scott_v_harris.rmvb and in Clerk of Court’s case file."
Permalink · General con law · Comments (2)
Novel of-duty police work in Brazil
Off duty police, and retired police, are hiring out as "militia" in Rio. The slums there have long been ruled by drug gangs, and are virtually war zones. (Current issue of Soldier of Fortune has an article on it -- basically, in large areas the gangs rule the place, and anyone who objects will be tortured and killed). The official police function there is essentially to protect the rich and powerful, and neglect the poor.
So the off-duty work consists of forming a group (which the article calls a militia, in the way the term is now used to mean any non-governmental armed group), and hiring out to the slum residents. Pay them so much per household, and they'll do what the government will not ... hang out with their guns and drive the druglords away.
The governor of the state opposes them, saying the government should provide security, but the mayor of Rio defends them, saying anything is better than rule by drug gangs. The locals seem to love them.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (3)
Did "Dateline NBC" push Cho over the edge?
An interesting article in the NY Post. Understand, we're dealing with a psychotic here, so his "reasoning" will not match ours.
1. The night before his murders, Dateline NBC ran a special on a psychotic mass killer, whose history closely tracked that of Cho. Cho was a late night TV fan.
2. In between his earlier and late killings, Cho mailed a package to NBC. No other network was on his mailing list.
3. The package included a note "You pushed me into a corner," that has been interpreted as "everyone pushed me into a corner." Might it instead mean that in his delusional world, NBC had pushed him over the edge.
Utah and guns on campus
Utah remains happy with its statute allowing arms on campus.
Courthouse Forum
Here. Seems to just be starting up, but they have pages where you can make notes on judges. Which, I'm sure, will require some moderating! On the other hand, notes on such are always useful.
Chuckle--I was at counsel's table when Steve Halbrook argued Printz, and the clerk warned everyone in advance: CJ Rehnquist is experiencing bad back pains, can't sit for an entire argument. Don't be concerned if he suddenly gets up.
It was good to know, because otherwise you'd be most disconcerted when the CJ gets up, as he did, with a grim look (he was hurting pretty bad) and begins pacing back and forth behind the other Justices while the argument is ongoing. It looked uncannily as if you had to hacked off the CJ that he was too angry to speak, and was pacing while he brought himself under control before ordering security to grab you and throw you down the steps.
Gun charges dropped against Jim Webb aide
Story here.
What's interesting is that (as I understand the law, anyway) Congress has exempted the Capitol from DC law. So provided that he wasn't questioned, or clammed up, they might indeed have had a problem proving a case against him. After all, if he had just taken the gun out of one office, left the Capitol, wandered around the lawn, and come back in, he would have broken no law. That wasn't what happened, but disproving it beyond a reasonable doubt might have been a problem. (Not that that stopped them, years ago, from giving quite a bit of flak to Ted Kennedy's bodyguard. But then that bodyguard showed up with a lot more than one pistol!)
Proposal to bar gun sales to those on terrorism watch list
Sen. Lautenberg and the Justice Dept are both backing a bill to forbid gun sales to people on the terrorism watch list.
The good news: somebody finally found a way to disarm Ted Kennedy.
I suppose it would be better to take his driver's license....
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (7)
Problem with missing guns
29 guns have gone missing from Houston PD's evidence locker, and two have been found in hands of arrestees.
Arizonans more worried about drivers on cell phones than drivers with guns
Story in extended remarks, below.
[Hat tip to Landis Aden]
Continue reading "Arizonans more worried about drivers on cell phones than drivers with guns"
Kansas house passes override on pre-emption
The Kansas House voted 98-26 to override Gov. Sebelius' veto of a pre-emption bill. The Senate vote is expected today.
[Link fixed... thanks]
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (4)
9/11 and Va Tech: a failure of doctrine
Marc Danzinger has an article on the subject.
[Hat tip to Instapundit]
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (0)
Anybody looking for a bit of work?
I've been told of a small pro-gun group that is looking for someone to write their email alerts to members, focusing on events of the day. Sounds rather like blogging. If anyone is interested, just drop me an email.
Instapunk on school shootings
He's going to town on the issues surrounding this....
First, a a defense of the decision to air the killer's video. As might be expected, about ten times as intelligent as anything the MSM could come up with in their own defense.
"Almost all of what Americans know about psychopathic, paranoid, and schizophrenic personalities, they've learned from the movies. But guess what? Not all stone killers do Katherine Hepburn impressions, smack their lips in the presence of potential victims, or exude the charisma of Robert de Niro in Taxi Driver. Very few of them are genius misanthropes who have read every book ever written and know more about escape science than Houdini. Most of them are, in fact, as dreary, uninteresting, forgettable, and tediously monomaniacal as Dylan Klebold, Lee Harvey Oswald, Ted Kaszinski, and Cho Seung-Hui. The degree of danger tracks with their degree of nonentity. How are we supposed to recognize madness in the vacuous and boring? There's only one way. By looking at it. Up close. In detail. Again and again. Until we truly appreciate and internalize the appalling contradiction of Adolf Eichmann -- that deep evil is frequently grey, dull, undifferentiated, faceless, and downright mundane until it takes monstrous action against unsuspecting innocents."
And here, from his multimedia novel (Long before most of us heard the term multimedia)
"DANIEL:... The society of Ameria exists in a state of universal abortion—which is to say that the Baby Boomers will not produce a generation of adults. Their offspring will grow to physical maturity and eventually to senility as superannuated children, locked forever in the absolute selfishness of the infant mind which has never been created as a self in the first place. ...
PATRICK. We are still waiting for the beauty.
DANIEL. The beauty? Oh, yes. The beauty. I would say that the whole presents three distinct faces of beauty. The first is the beauty of poetic justice. The second is the beauty of perfect irony. The third is the beauty of a new birth, the emergence of a new form of being.
PATRICK: Now that you mention it, I do believe I see the irony. Here is a generation of parents who have been so consumed with their own desires and appetites throughout their lives that they embarked on a secret experiment—the attempt to sire a new generation without accepting the responsibility for raising them. Let the teachers teach them, let the television babysit them, let the mall and the mass media introduce them to the culture they would inherit. Meanwhile, the parents were free to do as they wanted. Free to be self-serving film producers, network executives, teachers, advertising copywriters, attorneys, politicians, journalists, and businessmen. Free to add their own little molehill of ugliness to the mountain of bad influence their children would have to surmount in order to raise themselves. Because this was a generation of parents who had also developed their own definition of freedom, meaning that freedom consisted of their right to act in their own self-interest even as they sought to limit the freedom of anyone who got in their way. Such a novel definition of freedom had to be accompanied by an equally novel definition of virtue—that whatever they did in their own self-interest was virtuous because they were the ones doing it, and whatever anyone else did in their own self-interest was something that needed to be regulated by the government.
ROGER: There was, to be fair, some guilt involved.
PATRICK: But a guilt denied. That’s why the irony is, as Daniel has suggested, so perfect. For the wave of denial has been the size of a tsunami. Parents who could not hold a hundred-word conversation with their own children professed a love and commitment to their kidz which was nauseating in its saccharine, self-serving hypocrisy. Citizens of the richest nation in recorded history, they lamented the declining standard of living that required both parents to hold full-time jobs, lest they be reduced to the penurious state of living without that second VCR, that third television, that fourth movie channel, that fifth trip this month to the restaurant. In penance—and in proof of their love for the kidz—they bought the little bastards off, with hundred-and-forty dollar sneakers, TVs, computers, cell phones, and all the baggy designer togs a kid might need to hide out in. And when anything went wrong with their little darlings, they were savage in their denunciation of the violence in the movies, the sex on MTV, the incompetence in the classroom, the easy availability of drugs, the danger of guns, and the dearth of fit role models for the sullen, resentful slugs they had spawned."
Bob Levy response to a NY Times editorial
NY Times spouts about the VA Tech murders and the need for more gun control, and Bob Levy responds in the American Spectator.
Kates & Mauser article
"Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International Evidence."
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (1)
Now this is an interesting aspect of con law!
"Digitus Impudicus: The Middle Finger and the Law."
"This Article argues that, although most convictions are ultimately overturned on appeal, the pursuit of criminal sanctions for use of the middle finger infringes on First Amendment rights, violates fundamental principles of criminal justice, wastes valuable judicial resources, and defies good sense."
Permalink · General con law · Comments (0)
USC students swarm gunman
Story here. Drug dealing teen shows up for college party, makes threats, pulls gun, and is promptly taken down by the students there.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (6)
Political cartoon
A good one, appearing in the San Antonio papers.
[Hat tip to reader JT, whose blog is here.
VA Tech shooter's writings ... and those of one of his profs
Interesting article, in light of the "why couldn't they see this guy was murderous from his classroom writings?" It's interesting when the writings of a killer's professor make his own homicidal fantasies seem rather tepid.
[Hat tip to Dan Gifford]
More on Southwest Airlines getting hammered with verdict
I posed earlier about a $9 million verdict against SW Airlines in the case of two bail bond enforcement agents who were arrested for carrying a gun on a plane, after a SW employee told them they were cleared to do so. I suspect from the size of the judgment, and the punitive damages (very hard to get under AZ law) that there was a lot beyond those simple facts.
The winning attorney's homepage sets out what that might have been, and which was lacking from the bar journal story. When they asked SW to give the FBI the information that would have cleared them, SW refused to do so unless they gave it a release from liability. I'd assume this was what resulted in their spending three days in jail.
Incarceration, committment and homicide rates
Two recent papers by Prof. Harcourt finds an inverse relationship between homicide and total incarceration rate (i.e., in prison and in mental institutions).
"First, at the national level, using the new, expanded data on mental institutions (including all institutions for those deemed mentally ill), the contrast between the midcentury and 2001 is even more pronounced: during the 1940s and 50s, the United States consistently institutionalized in mental hospitals and prisons at rates above 700 persons per 100,000 adults, reaching peaks of 778 in 1939 and 786 in 1955. The relationship between the expanded aggregated institutionalization and homicide rates over the period 1934 to 2000 is statistically significant at the national level, holding constant three leading correlates of homicide.
Second, the very same relationship exists at the state level. Using state-level panel data regressions spanning the entire period from 1934 to 2001, including all 50 states, and controlling for economic, demographic, and criminal justice variables, I find a large, robust, and statistically significant relationship between aggregated institutionalization and homicide rates. The predicted relationship is not linear, but involves some slight elasticity. The findings are not sensitive to weighting by population and hold under a number of permutations, including when I aggregate jail populations as well. "
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (4)
A bit ghoulish....
"Hopes That Massacre Will Spark Treaty"
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (6)
Arizona legislative moves
The morning paper reports that the House voted out SB 1166, which makes retroactive changes to self-defense legislation (basically shifting the burden to the prosecution once the defense puts on some credible evidence of self-defense).
It also passed a bill establishing a volunteer militia that can be called up by the governor in times when the Nat'l Guard is called into federal service.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (4)
The will of the uninformed
It's an Op-Ed in the LA Times. A few gems:
"HUGE NUMBERS of Americans don't know jack about their government or politics. According to a Pew Research Center survey released last week, 31% of Americans don't know who the vice president is, fewer than half are aware that Nancy Pelosi is the speaker of the House, a mere 29% can identify "Scooter" Libby as the convicted former chief of staff of the vice president, and only 15% can name Harry Reid when asked who is the Senate majority leader.
Also last week, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that two-thirds of Americans believe that Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales' firing of eight U.S. attorneys was "politically motivated."
So, we are supposed to believe that two-thirds of Americans have studied the details of the U.S. attorney firings and come to an informed conclusion that they were politically motivated ...?. Are these the same people who couldn't pick Pelosi out of a lineup? Or the 85% who couldn't name the Senate majority leader? Are we to imagine that the 31% of the electorate who still — after seven years of headlines and demonization — can't identify the vice president of the United States nonetheless have a studied opinion on the firing of New Mexico U.S. Atty. David Iglesias?
......
Though examples are depressingly unnecessary, here are two of my favorites over the years. In 1987, 45% of adult respondents to one survey answered that the phrase "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was in the Constitution (in fact, it's a quote from Karl Marx). Then, in 1991, an American Bar Assn. study reported that a third of Americans did not know what the Bill of Rights was."
[Hat tip to Dan Gifford]
The winner!
A letter to the editor in the N.M. Daily Lobo:
"Imagine that we can all carry weapons to campus. If an unbalanced individual walks into a class, pulls a weapon and opens fire, absolute chaos will ensue. The 20 students in the class will overreact as the adrenaline pumps through their bodies and open fire not only at the shooter, but at their classmates, as well. Other students who come into class brandishing their weapons, not knowing who initiated the violence, will start firing at everyone with a gun."
[Link fixed--thanks...]
Permalink · media · Comments (2)
Scottish knife homicides up 38%
Story here. They apparently had a "knife amnesty" program last year, by the way.
An interesting story below, about a fellow who stabbed someone to death the afternoon of the day he was released from prison. This time he got a whole 15 years. "After he was sentenced, Reilly taunted his victim's family from the dock with the words: "Fifteen years ... no bother.""
VA Tech shooter's psych ruling
A commenter brought this up in the past posting, and it surely deserves prominence. Cho's evaluation for committment is online: here's the critical page (You can go back and forward from that page to see the others).
The Special Justice (a bit of research indicates those are, in VA, attorneys appointed by the court to do judge-type work on a part-time basis, while often keeping their legal practice going on the side) finds that he presents an imminent danger to himself. But he doesn't check the box for committment, and instead enters "Court ordered O-P [outpatient] -- to follow all recommended treatments."
I've got to say that the forms illustrate how lightly these are taken. Most of the findings are by checking boxes, just like a small claims court order. Here, it was entered by a special justice whose only job requirement is that he be licensed to practice law.
Arms of the Khyber Pass
An interesting video. I gather that folks in the area like guns, and have never heard of little things like safety rules.
Southwest Airlines gets stung in civil case
My Arizona bar journal just arrived, with a story about the largest verdicts of 2006. The fourth largest was $9 million against Southwest Air. Apparently a pair of bail bonds recovery agents wanted to board a plane while carrying, and were approved to do so. They identified themselves as working for H&D Enterprises, but the Southwest Air people read that as the government department HUD when they okayed it.
The article isn't clear as to what happened next: it says before landing the pilot radioed that they did not have clearance (I wonder if it means that they radioed the pilot). After landing, they were arrested (although it should have been obvious by then that they weren't up to anything improper) and jailed for three days. I guess the jury didn't like what happened. I suspect there's a lot more to the story -- three days in jail doesn't normally equal a million in actuals and four million in punitives (on the latter, AZ law requires proof of "an evil mind.") If I were to guess, the airline probably tried to cover up, which may have led to their being jailed and/or held for three days instead of being quickly released. Something like that might have gotten the jury hacked, and met the legal standard.
Michael Moore's new docu to bring in antidepressants and shootings
He won't have to go far for information. To make "Bowling for Columbine" he convinced one Columbine victim to go onscreen by telling him and his parents that he would explore the link between those killers' medication and their actions, which the victim and parents thought was the key issue. Of course, he didn't, once he had the footage in hand.
I'm told the essence of the issue is that *most* of the time antidepressants work as intended. But in a minority of cases they don't. They can push a bipolar from depression into manic states, etc. They can also take a person who is so deeply depressed that he doesn't commit suicide -- that requires decisionmaking, and implies there is hope -- and raise him/her enough to where they can commit suicide without getting them to where they don't want to. It's a matter of the doctor keeping a close eye on things as treatment begins.
Also it's a matter of choice of drug. The newest and more expensive ones are more reliable and have fewer side-effects. But for patients on federally-subsidized medical care, the government bean counters often require that the older ones be used, to save money. (So much for Moore's probable thesis that if the government took over medicine, all would be cheerful). The bean-counters who pay for the medicine are probably different than the bean-counters who pay for committments, so if the patient has problems and winds up committed it doesn't come out of the first set of bean-counters' budgets, and paying for it is someone else's problem.
Prof. fired for advocating self defense against school killers
An adjunct faculty at Emmanuel College in Boston has been fired, and barred from campus, for a classroom demonstration of how armed students could have stopped the Va Tech murderer
Here's the prof defending himself on Youtube. Be sure to watch the four clips in the right order. Via John Lott.
Some of the MSM get it
Such as Mark Steyn, in the Chicago Sun-Times. Except:
"Virginia Tech, remember, was a "gun-free zone," formally and proudly designated as such by the college administration. Yet the killer kept his guns and ammo on the campus. It was a "gun-free zone" except for those belonging to the guy who wanted to kill everybody. Had the Second Amendment not been in effect repealed by VT, someone might have been able to do as two students did five years ago at the Appalachian Law School: When a would-be mass murderer showed up, they rushed for their vehicles, grabbed their guns and pinned him down until the cops arrived.
But you can't do that at Virginia Tech. Instead, the administration has created a "Gun-Free School Zone." Or, to be more accurate, they've created a sign that says "Gun-Free School Zone." And, like a loopy medieval sultan, they thought that simply declaring it to be so would make it so. The "gun-free zone" turned out to be a fraud -- not just because there were at least two guns on the campus last Monday, but in the more important sense that the college was promoting to its students a profoundly deluded view of the world."
Permalink · media · Comments (1)
Details on Cho's mental state and legal status
Here's the article, in the Washington Examiner.
It may be a bit more complicated than that ... remember the Gun Control Act definitions were drawn up nearly forty years ago, and the mental provisions were a minor issue. [Heck, until we cleaned it up in '86, the statute had two different definitions of felon, one for whether a felon could purchase and one for whether a felon could possess).
The federal definition of prohibited person (18 USC 922(d)(4) is "has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution." "Mental defective" isn't used in state law, nor I suspect in psychiatry, these days. So the best you can say is that a finding that someone is a danger to self or others *probably* falls within it, just on the basis "that sound defective to me." In practice, reliance is usually put on the other clause, committed to a mental institution, since at least that gives you something firm and clear to go on.
What's a bit of a mystery to me is why a judge would find that a person was an imminent danger to self or others and then assign him to outpatient treatment. What if he doesn't go? What if he finally flips before he gets an appointment? He either is a danger or he's not, and if he is, should be committed then and there.
[UPDATE: the stories imply that he was either (a) temporarily committed for observation, or (b) voluntarily checked in for observation. I'd guess the former (why hold a judicial committment hearing if the guy is there voluntarily?) I checked with a friend who has practiced psychiatry for 30+ years, and testified at more such hearings than you can count. They told me that findings of dangerousness, but refusal to commit, is not totally unknown, but very, very, very rare. If a person is insane to the point of being a danger to life, you don't release them and say "now, do be sure to get some treatment." They need to be off the streets and treated, right now. Such a ruling can only be explained by the fact that a judge can do anything he wants without consequence.
Quotes from Freud
Here. Of relevance is "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." But I also chuckle at a letter to his fiance: "Woe to you, my Princess, when I come... you shall see who is the stronger, a gentle girl who doesn't eat enough or a big wild man who has cocaine in his body."
[Update: Wikiquote, way down at the bottom, says the fear of weapons is a misquote, apparently a paraphrase of a paraphrase by Don Kates. Here's further discussion.]
"The voice of the intellect is a soft one, but it does not rest until it has gained a hearing. Ultimately, after endlessly repeated rebuffs, it succeeds. This is one of the few points in which it may be optimistic about the future of mankind, but in itself it signifies not a little."
"One feels inclined to say that the intention that man should be “happy” is not included in the plan of “Creation.”"
Of romantic love: "Admittedly an unusual state, but not one that can be stigmatized as pathological."
"The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is "What does a woman want?""
Attributed to him, possibly in error:
"Every normal person, in fact, is only normal on the average. His ego approximates to that of the psychotic in some part or other and to a greater or lesser extent."
When asked whether his cigar was a phallic symbol: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
[Link borrowed from Instapundit]
Media leader speaks frankly
Every now and then, one retires, and then speaks his mind. Tom Plate was formerly editorial page editor of the LA Times; now he teaching at UCLA and free to tell us what he thinks:
"In the nineties, the Los Angeles Times courageously endorsed an all-but-complete ban on privately owned guns, in an effort to greatly reduce their availability."
"The correct target of our concern needs to be guns. America has more than it can possibly handle. How many can our society handle? My opinion is: as close to zero as possible."
Permalink · media · Comments (1)
Wall St. Journal on gun laws and Parker
Editorial here.
Interesting idea
Butler County, Ohio, sheriff Richard Jones has proposed commissioning people as peace officers and stationing them in schools.
I'm not convinced it would be that expensive. You could get five people for each school, with one day's service per week. Choose retirees who have time. My gun club alone could probably cover my city.
Of course a simpler solution would be to allow teachers, and in colleges, students, who have CCW licenses, to carry, for free. But the sheriff's proposal would at least deal with those who have no problem with allowing sworn law enforcement officers to carry, yet tremble at the thought of anyone else doing so. I knew a fellow at Interior who transferred from legal to law enforcement, got his badge, and defused a dangerous situation where law enforcement was frankly getting out of control (a vehicle chase with gunshots gets the adrenalin flowing, and the perp who crashed the car was a bank robber). He was the type of guy who kept his head in a nasty situation (as in pointing out that it's a bad idea to be shouting about killing the SOB in front of witnesses, no matter how bad he is or how worked up you are). But then he was the same before he got the badge.
Another dumb crook story
Story here. Officer gives his cell phone number to a youngster, who gives it to his mother, apparently with the explanation that if she has any problems with drugs this is the fellow to call. She misunderstands ... or thought that included problems with running out of drugs, and winds up calling the officer to order cocaine.
How times have changed...
Gene Volokh notes how times have changed.
Fred Thompson -- now there is a candidate I could vote for!
Just read his article in Nat'l Review Online. A few excerpts:
"The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so."
"In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Fred Thompson
A caricature, and a great quote. I'd happily vote for anyone who can come up with “After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood.”
[via Instapundit]
When they were filming "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" in DC, the cameraman remarked to me that, what with working Hollywood, he was accustomed to dealing with gigantic egos. But, he added, the egos of Washington astounded him.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Ted Nugent's take
As usual, he comes out swinging, on CNN.
Podcast on the documentary
Here's a podcast I did the other day--I'm in the second half hour.
Kennesaw GA v. Morton Grove IL
An interesting article in World Net Daily. It begins with the note that Kennesaw passed its ordinance requiring all residents to be armed in 1982 -- and hasn't had a gun fatality in the 25 years since.
James Q. Wilson on gun control
In the LA Times. Wilson is one of the biggest names -- maybe the biggest name -- in criminology.
Of Octopuses and NRA
The Associated Press launched a story that, because an NRA cartoon had shown Bloomberg as an octopus trying to take over, and there were Nazi cartoons depicting Jews as octopuses, NRA must be antisemitic. The media picked it up, quite uncritically. "The eight-armed sea animal has been used as the Nazi representation of Jewish conspiracy and control, and was referenced by Adolf Hitler in "Mein Kampf,"" says AP.
A few minutes of research would have shown that the "octopus taking over" cartoon theme has been used by everybody to depict everybody (especially corporate and business interests), and in WWII was more often used by the Allies, with the fascists cast as the octopus.
Here, for example is a British cartoon depicting the fascist Japanese government as an octopus.
Here's an American leaflet (aimed at Japanese soldiers, and hence written in their language) that shows the Japanese hold on Taiwan as an octopus caught between FDR and Chiang Kai-Shek (translated, the message is that the alliance of China and the US will doom Japan).
And here's a wartime image showing the American eagle attacking the fascist octopus.
After the war, the octopus was used to depict the Soviets, and Stalin in particular and more recently, World Trade Organization. Here's a French cartoon that puts Bill Gate's head on a world-hugging octopus.
And in 19th century newspapers, the octopus was used to depict the liquor industry and the Southern Pacific Railroad's monopolistic plans, And in a 1904 Russian cartoon, it is used to depict British capitalists taking over Europe.
In fact, there's a website devoted to octopus propaganda, from which I got several of these images. It begins:
"Cephalopods are major figures in one of man's least noble popular enterprises: propaganda.
Despite their generally shy, retiring habits, octopus have long been used to connote villainy and dark intent. As such, they have also long been staples of propaganda illustrations....
Typically, the Enemy Octopus stands in for a nation or distinct community, and not as an individual. The octopus has been cast as Nazi, fascist, Jewish conspiracist and English imperialist. They've stood in for Antwerp, of all places. Stretch out the arms and they span the distance from 1904 Japan to 2003 internet, anti-Russian sentiment to anarchist website."
[UPDATE: I'd initially attributed this story to Violence Policy Center, based on the first report I had of it. While it sounded like VPC at the time -- they are opponents worthy of the steel, being fast and creative -- I can't find any confirmation that they were behind it, and it's quite possible that AP, while neither fast nor creative, actually came up with it on its own. I've amended the post accordingly.]
[UPDATE: chuckle. I purposely avoided the plural of octopus, because it is indeed octopods or octopodes, the work being Greek and not Latin. Not that I'm fluent in Greek, but I read it in George McDonald Fraser's hilarious novel "Pyrates," where two pirates get into an argument over the correct plural. It's one of the funnier books I have ever read, with most of the competition for that title coming from the same author.]
Permalink · NRA · Comments (25)
Clayton Cramer on mental disabilities
Clayton Cramer has a post on the issue.
The ultimate question comes under "damned if you do and damned if you don't." Before 1970s or so (i.e., just before I went to law school) the committment laws allowed committment of just about anyone with any significant mental quirk. Arizona Law Review had an issue on that, and they tracked down the person who'd had the longest time in the state mental hospital ... a woman committed something like 50 years before because the doc said "she always felt like dancing."
The legal reforms that went in after that basically deinstitutionalized all but a handful of the mentally ill. As a general rule, unless a person could be proven an immediate danger to self or others (which is hard to determine unless maybe they were paranoid schitz and specifically said they were going to kill someone else) or so completely disabled as to be unable to function, they could not be held. A large part of those released, or not held, wound up on the streets, of course. Of course in the old days there was no real treatment for serious disorders. At best, you warehoused them, usually for their lives. Today you have enormous advances in psychiatric medications, but if the person won't take them, you're out of luck. And some take quite a while to kick in, weeks sometimes, so you can't just make the guy pop a pill and reach a state where he realizes he really is better off on the medication.
The bottom line was that there was no good solution -- at best, you can look for the "least bad" one.
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (0)
TN panel gets it right
The Knox News-Sentintel reports:
"In a surprise move, a House panel voted today to repeal a state law that forbids the carrying of handguns on property and buildings owned by state, county and city governments — including parks and playgrounds.
"I think the recent Virginia disaster — or catastrophe or nightmare or whatever you want to call it — has woken up a lot of people to the need for having guns available to law-abiding citizens," said Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains. "I hope that is what this vote reflects.""
[Hat tip to Glenn Reynolds]
Rep. McCarthy caught on assault weapon legislation
UPDATE: Michelle Malkin has the video.
From Dan Gifford:
The TV is on in the background and every once in awhile something catches my attention. In this case it was an interview on MSNBC of New York Democratic Party Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy by Tucker Carlson.
`McCarthy has introduced a proposal for federal legislation banning firearms with certain features, one of them being a "barrel shroud." Carlson asked McCarthy what a barrel shroud was and she changed the subject. He asked again and she changed the subject again. On the third try, McCarthy finally responded that she did not know what a barrel shroud was. I'm not sure what surprised me more, that McCarthy didn't know what something she wanted banned was or that Tucker Carlson, of all talking TV heads, actually kept after her and forced the admission.
Like McCarthy, I have heard that California Democrat Diane Feinstein has no clue what she put in legislation banning so called "assault weapons years ago, either. One story I've heard many times is that she and her aides simply listed the guns to be banned from photos of ones they didn't like the looks of in a book.
UPDATE: Dave Kopel responded:
Feinstein may be clueless about the content of her ban. However, the picture book story isn't about her. It's about the drafting of the California state AW ban, after the Stockton murders.
The drafters did indeed look at a picture book (Gun Digest, I think) and just pick out guns based on appearance.
That's why California (and copycat jurisdictions like Denver) banned the "Encom CM-55," which doesn't exist. The CM-55 was made by another company, but the words "Encom" and "CM-55" appeared on the same page, and so the stupid drafters thought they referred to a single gun.
It's also how they banned the non-existent "H-93" rifle -- because Gun Digest had a typo "H" instead of "HK" which the California legislature blindly copied.
Don Kates' take on the tragedy
It's in extended remarks below. Insightful, as usual.
Continue reading "Don Kates' take on the tragedy"
Scalito?
The joke during Alito's confirmation hearings was that he was "Scalito," a Scalia clone. Yet it's been noted that he frequently splits with his supposed alter-ego.
Today came yet another split, in JAMES v. UNITED STATES (No. 05-9264). At issue was a 15 year sentence under 18 USC 924(e), which imposes mandatory terms on felons in possess who have three priors for "a violent felony or a serious drug offense." The term violent felony is further defined to include burglary, and a catchall provision for any offenses for any crimes that involve a serious risk of violence. The question was whether attempted burglary under Florida law qualifies as a violent felony.
Alito's majority opinion says yes. The common aspects of the listed crimes are not their completion but their potential for violence. Attempted burglary poses nearly the same risk of a violent confrontation as does completed burglary.
Scalia dissents, joined by Stevens and Ginsburg (again illustrating that simple "conservative wing/liberal wing" breakdowns of the Court often don't work). The catch-all clause is ambiguous. How much similarity is required? Burglary itself is the least risky of the crimes enumerated (others include arson and extortion). Attempted burglary presumably is less risky than the least risky crime listed.
Permalink · Supreme Court caselaw · Comments (0)
Another "Ooops" moment
Two Secret Service agents down in accidental discharge at the White House.
Instapunk on Va Tech's administration
Instapunk is merciless, as usual.
Column by V. Tech student
"Please realize that I am licensed to carry a concealed handgun in the commonwealth of Virginia, and do so on a regular basis. However, because I am a Virginia Tech student, I am prohibited from carrying at school because of Virginia Tech's student policy, which makes possession of a handgun an expellable offense, but not a prosecutable crime.
I had entrusted my safety, and the safety of others to the police. In light of this, there are a few things I wish to point out.
First, I never want to have my safety fully in the hands of anyone else, including the police.
Second, I considered bringing my gun with me to campus, but did not due to the obvious risk of losing my graduate career, which is ridiculous because had I been shot and killed, there would have been no graduate career for me anyway.
Third, and most important, I am trained and able to carry a concealed handgun almost anywhere in Virginia and other states that have reciprocity with Virginia, but cannot carry where I spend more time than anywhere else because, somehow, I become a threat to others when I cross from the town of Blacksburg onto Virginia Tech's campus.
Of all of the emotions and thoughts that were running through my head that morning, the most overwhelming one was of helplessness."
J. Neil Schulman book, free download
"Stopping Power," in pdf format, is here.
VCDL on Va Tech shooting
An email:
As most of you know VCDL has been pushing hard to change Virginia law
to allow college and university students with concealed handgun
permits to be able to carry a gun on campus for self-defense.
Last year Delegate Todd Gilbert put in such a bill for us and so did
Delegate Mark Cole this year.
We could not get the bills out of subcommittee.
We warned the General Assembly that violent crime can, and does,
happen on campuses across the Commonwealth.
But the university and college lobbyists swore that crime was not an
issue and that the schools did not want students and visitors to be
able to defend themselves with a gun or other weapon. They argued
that the schools had little boxes with lights that had a button
someone could press if they needed the police.
The General Assembly turned a deaf ear to allowing college and
university students to be able to protect themselves and here we are
today.
While it is NOT illegal for a college or university student with a
CHP to carry in Virginia, they could get expelled (or fired if a
teacher). And that is a severe enough financial penalty that students
don't want to take the chance. Who can blame them?
As I noted in the previous post, "Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was
defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."
Gunman kills 21 at Virginia Tech
Here's the story.
UPDATES:
Joe Olson emails:
"A terrible tragedy. I know, I teach on college campus.
Once he starts to act, the only thing that can stop a single, psychotic killer who is willing to die is the rapid delivery of counter fire by whoever is near. Cop, civilian, it doesn't matter who or their job status. The more people who are nearby and capable of delivering return fire, the fewer and less serious the injuries (there's criminological data on this).
Virginia Tech. is a "gun free" zone guaranteeing that the psychotic killer had the only gun. He came prepared. He waited until there were no police in sight and then commenced his murderous acts certain that he would encounter no effective resistance. And , he didn't.
Twenty-one innocent dead because there was no one capable of fighting back. All they could do was cower or run."
Clayton Cramer emails:
"Here's the section of the VTU policy on this:
http://www.policies.vt.edu/5616.pdf
2.2 Prohibition of Weapons
The university’s employees, students, and volunteers, or any visitor or
other third party attending a sporting, entertainment, or educational
event, or visiting an academic or administrative office building or
residence hall, are further prohibited from carrying, maintaining, or
storing a firearm or weapon on any university facility, even if the
owner has a valid permit, when it is not required by the individual’s
job, or in accordance with the relevant University Student Life Policies.
Any such individual who is reported or discovered to possess a firearm
or weapon on university property will be asked to remove it immediately.
Failure to comply may result in a student judicial referral and/or
arrest, or an employee disciplinary action and/or arrest."
Instapundit notes:
"reader John Lucas, who works with a Virginia law firm, emails that Va. Tech is a "gun-free zone." Well, for those who follow the law. There was an effort to change that but it failed: "A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly." That's unfortunate."
Interesting quote from the story linked by Instapundit: "Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.""
West Virginians may get wider reciprocity with CCW
Story here.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (1)
Gunnies looking for presidential candidates
A story that pretty well sums it up.
The Jurist on Parker
Alan Gura has an article on the Parker case over at The Jurist.
Ohio court upholds pre-emption
Just got word that the Ohio Court of Appeals reversed the trial court in Ohioans for Concealed Carry v. City of Clyde. Ohio enacted a form of pre-emption in 2007, but the City promulgated a "no guns in parks ordinance." The court had upheld a Toledo parks ordinance a few years before, based on state law considerations, but it held that the 2007 rewrite of the law resolved the problems, and thus the no guns in parks ordinance was invalid under it.
NRA convention & board elections
They announced the results--top five vote getters were, in order Ollie North, Sandy Froman, Ted Nugent, Bob Barr, and Marion Hammer. Vote is still being collected for the 76th director, but it looks like Bob Viden will get it -- he was the only one really campaigning.
The crowds are huge. I heard a 60,000 attendance estimate and would believe it. The line just to get into the exhibit hall was about two hundred feet long, literally, and stayed that way for a couple of hours.
And this is despite absolutely beastly weather. I saw a sign saying it was 39 degrees. With a very stiff wind and rain.
Permalink · NRA · Comments (1)
Russia arms judges
Sounds like a good idea.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (1)
MA now most violent state in New England
Report here. The solutions proposed focus, of course, on more gun laws.
Sandy Froman to write column for WorldNetDaily
Here's the announcement.
Legal matters
Attended the Legal Affairs Committee meeting at the NRA Convention, and heard the following:
The General in Alaska who forbade his men to own arms at home has been transferred out.
NRA v. San Francisco lawsuit: the city has appealed.
New Orleans suit is ongoing. City and mayor are fighting, with very weak arguments, probably out of sheer desperation. Bottom line is they can't give back many seized guns, because no records were kept of who owned what, and many others were stolen by NOPD officers. Others may have vanished when NOPD sorta "issued them" to FEMA and other emergency responders, and told them that when they left the area they could just give them to the first police car they saw.
Palo Alto police -- rewards
This posting reports that Palo Alto CA police are posting reward signs offering $1000 for information on people with guns.
I'd be happy to call up and volunteer the information that I have guns, if someone would send me $1000. That's be enough to buy still more guns!
Carol Moore's book on Waco
Carol Moore's book on Waco is still in print and can be ordered here. She was the earliest serious researcher on the event, and produced an excellent examination of it.
PA puts warrants in the computer
Story here. The state found there were 1.4 million unserved arrest warrants, incluing thousands for violent offenses.
It's amazing just how many criminal records such as this have never been entered into any usable database. I helped on a case here where the mess came to light. Felony arrest warrants took days or weeks, misdemeanor ones weeks or months, to get into the system. The court computer system didn't "talk" to the law enforcement one, so each warrant had to be hand-entered. A warrant for violation of probation was a state issue, so county and city authorities didn't enforce it, nor even tell state authorities when they knew where a violator was.
Penn & Teller: "gun control is b___ sh___"
Petition for rehearing in Parker v. DC
It's been filed -- here it is, in pdf format.
Pregnant mother shoots robber
Here's the story. (Via Instapundit).
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (0)
Ready to head for St. Louis
I'll be heading to NRA convention in St. Louis, and looking up some ancestral sites. One group of great-great-great uncles included the Barton brothers. David Baron was Missouri's first US Senator, and Joshua Barton was the first US Attorney. Joshua was killed in a duel on Bloody Island which now (the channel having silted in) is part of East St. Louis. Another branch of the family, the Phillips, had a gunsmith in St. Louis in 1850.
It wasn't Joshua Barton's first trip to Bloody Island. He earlier served as second to Sen. Thomas Hart Bention in a duel there.
Parker case in WaPo
The Parker case has managed the impossible: getting a thoroughly favorable article in the Washington Post.
Antigunners object to memorial statute
Antigunners in the most literal sense. Michelle Malkin has the story. Navy SEAL Danny P. Dietz won a posthumous Navy Cross for a gun battle against the Taliban. The city of Littleton proposed a statue in his memory -- and people objected because it showed him holding ... a rifle.
"They should be putting up a peace dove instead."
Hat tip to The Bitchgirls.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (3)
NRA 76th director campaign
I see NY State Rifle & Pistol Club isendorsing Bob Viden for 76th NRA director. The flyer on him is here (pdf).
The flyer outlines his qualifications in terms of shooting and promoting shooting, but for some reason omits the fact that he's chair of the NRA Board's Range Development Committee, handling all issues related to creation of more shooting ranges. I've attended Board meetings for ten years or more, and he's never failed to show up and carry his load. If you're going to St. Louis, stop by the voting booth during the meeting and cast one for Bob.
[For those who aren't familiar with the 76th director concept: 75 directors are elected by mail in ballot. The 76th is elected at the annual meeting. I think any life member or 5 yr member who attends can cast a ballot.]
My take on Parker v. DC
The Parker case, and anticipated cert. petition, has attracted a lot of attention lately, and I thought to give my take on it.
Forward: it's long been my observation that litigators are bold about such a case, and scholars reluctant. I suppose it goes with the turf. A litigator has to be convinced he can fight his way out of a difficult situation, and as a matter of course goes into cases where he has no idea of the feelings of the court, let alone of a jury. It's how you earn a living, and you have to develop the attitude that you can do it or else find another job.
I was on a panel that explored the idea of a test case, perhaps ten years ago, and at the end it was a straight party-line vote. All academics were reluctant, all litigators were gung-ho. I'm a litigator and occasional semi-academic, so take my feelings with that caveat as to outlook and bias.
Case itself: VERY well done. It was brought in one of the very few circuits with no caselaw on the issue, against a near-absolute ban, and with plaintiffs who are thoroughly upstanding types, and whose situations were structured so as to survive an attack on their standing to sue (not easy to do, by the way). Oh, and since it's DC there's no federal 14th amendment incorporation question. An excellent example of how to structure a test case for maximum chances of winning.
Vote count: I'd be sure of Scalia and Thomas, fairly sure of Roberts and Alito. That leaves us with four probable votes and five unknowns. The litigator in me says those are pretty good odds... you have to lose all five unknowns to lose. Against that, you have to figure Breyer is probably a lost cause (the second amendment just isn't Euro enough for his taste) and a friend who is a court watcher said that Souter displays negative body language when firearms come up. Perhaps, I dunno. Still, unless you lose five out of five, you win. With most appeals, you go in without the vaguest idea of the vote count.
Benefit of waiting: I'd say minimal. At most you have the thought that Stevens (age 77 at last check) might retire. Since he's on the "liberal wing," he might be a vote against (again, a guess: he might just be a Don Kates/Mark Benenson/Wm van Alstyne type of liberal who is right now worrying that while field-stripping his 1911 he got WD-40 all over his ACLU membership renewal).
But to change things any, (1) Stevens would have to retire quickly, which is very unlikely, or the Repubs win the 2008 election, which is unknown; (2) Bush would have to appoint a pro-second amendment type, which is pure coincidence (likely priorities in nomination would be favoring executive power and opposition to Roe v. Wade -- where the nominee stands on the right to arms might not even be asked) and (3) the nominee would have to get Senate approval, which was difficult enough when the Demos were the minority. So I have to say today is as auspicious as anytime.
Concern: it might yield a ruling that the right exists, but is subject to extensive regulation. In recent years we've learned that "Congress shall make no law" abriding freedom of the press means Congress can make it illegal to mention candidates within so many months of an election, etc.. Roberts seems to have a tendency toward narrow decisions, which might reduce this risk some -- the ruling could be as narow as "a complete ban on a large category of guns violates this guarantee -- we can worry about what else might later." And even this would be an advance on the current situation, where outside of the 5th and DC Circuits, there is no right at all.
In toto, I can see the risks, and have been doing this too long to believe that "we're in the right, therefore we must win." I've been reamed, steamed, and drycleaned too often in cases where the law, as a matter of logic and intellect, was utterly clear, but the appeal failed the test of "the judge can't believe this is a good idea." On the other hand, the case is carefully chosen, it won a stunning victory already, the vote count seems good if not totally certain, and the situation is as good as we're likely to see in our lifetimes. I'd say it's a go.
I wouldn't have said this a few decades ago, mind you. It was entirely rational to wait. I have "inside information," which I won't detail, that indicates quite strongly that if the Court had reached the issue in the early 1980s we would have been flattened. But 25 years of research has changed things.
Illinois state police advice on resisting rape
And a hilarious read it is.
"Use of a firearm to protect yourself or property is not recommended."
So what do you do?
"Since many attacks on women are not sexually motivated, and are designed to degrade and humiliate, talking your way out of it may be easier."
"There is documentation of assailants that left a would-be-victim alone after she told him that she was pregnant and it would kill her baby. "
"Telling an attacker that you have VD or AIDS can discourage him."
"It may sound disgusting, but putting your fingers into you (sic) throat and making yourself vomit usually gets results." (I swear I am not making this up).
And if you do go for a weapon, by all means don't make it a 1911! Instead:
"nail file
rat tail comb
teasing brush
pens and pencils
keys"
I can see it: "Stay away, I have this comb and am prepared to use it." "Freeze or I'll let you have it with this pencil."
[Update: I have no idea where the article's claim that half the women using a gun in defense will shoot the wrong person comes from. The surveys indicate that well under half of self-defenders who shoot (a tiny minority of self-defense uses) hit the target, simply because confrontations occur with both people jittery and often at night when aiming is difficult. Additionally, criminal confrontations rarely occur in front of witnesses. Between the two, hitting the wrong person 50% of the time, or even 5% of the time, is statistically impossible. I think I've heard of a defender hitting the wrong target -- zero times in my life].
A "duh" moment
The mayor of Albany issued a call for more gun laws... but is now reconsidering since someone told him New York already has registration and permit requirements.
Carrying gun in "public place" -- his own porch
A recent ruling by the Oregon Court of Appeals. State law apparently bans carrying a loaded firearm "in a public place," and the court holds that include your own porch, since it was "a place where any [member] of the public could walk up to, if they wanted to knock on the door."
[Link fixed, thanks]
20/20 looking for self defense cases
ABC 20/20 is looking for self defense cases. Via Volokh Conspiracy, which notes that there is no guarantee what type of program will result -- they may be looing for bona fide cases, or hoping to get inarticulate people whose use was questionable, who knows?
Bible stops bullet, 21st century version
As in IPod slows bullet before it hits body armor.
(Via Instapundit).
Boston crime wave
Boston's homicides are up 60%. So much for one of the few states that gets an A from Brady Campaign.
Passing note: the mayor proposes to spend millions on summer jobs to lower the rate. Uh... sure. Apart from the obvious, I've always had a question. Where do you get the money for the jobs? By taxing it away from people who might otherwise hire someone for a summer job. Tax and spent can move money around, but can't create it. Of course it also means that the persons with the jobs will thank the mayor instead of some other employer.
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (1)
More on Romney and hunting
AP story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Idea on promoting the 2nd amendment documentary
The surge from the documentary's favorable reviews in The American Rifleman, America's First Freedom, and Gun Week seems to be wearing off. I'm open to ideas on how to further promote the DVD, if anybody has some. Just in case someone wonders "what documentary?" here's its webpage.
Permalink · documentary film · Comments (15)
ACLU of Texas & NRA in alliance
The NY Times has picked up story. It should be noted that the Texas ACLU has proven itself quite pro-gun in the past, even if the national body is far from such.
Mitt Romney--"lifelong hunter."
Well, it might be true in a very narrow sense. He went hunting once at age 15, and a second time last year. Story here.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Six children killed -- no media outcry, prob. since no gun was used
WTOP has the rather casual story.
Permalink · media · Comments (5)
NY ruling on 5th amendment and DV charge
An interesting ruling from NY. A fellow had an unregistered handgun, a domestic court ruling ordered him to turn in all guns to the police. Altho the story doesn't say so, he apparently did so and was prosecuted. The court apparently ruled that the prosecution violated his right against self incrimination.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (2)
Instapundit on Parker & DC gun ban repeal bill
Prof. Glenn Reynolds, at Instapundit, has a discussion of the subject and of Bob Levy's article (posted below).
Bob Levy on Parker case
Bob Levy has an article on it in the Washington Examiner.
Knew I liked Utah folks
The immediate results of the shopping mall shooting there have been a doubling in CCW permit applications.
" "The Trolley Square shootings was a horrific, historic, violent act," McConkie says. "People reacted in different ways. Many people wanted a concealed carry permit and people who had let their permits go dormant reapplied."
Firearms instructor Clark Aposhian says his classes, usually with fewer than 10 students, have swelled to 20 or 30. "Since the 13th of February, I'm teaching easily 150 a week."
Aposhian says he has been asked to train 45 employees from one company and even a large Salt Lake church group. He declined to identify them."
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (4)
CNN program on Roanoke Times revealing CCW permit lists
CNN has a VERY good program on the Roanoke Times having "outed" CCW permittees.
The reporter who outed them claimed to have been receiving threats after that, and then that a suspicious package (which turned out to be just what it was labelled, a bunch of DHL shipping lables in a box) had arrived on his doorstep.
Just for more amusement, VCDL got an audio of the reporter's 911 call and the police radio calls thereafter. After searching for the threat reports, they mention that the only reports of his name are as an offender. Here's the audio.
Permalink · media · Comments (3)
Legal Times on Parker, DC Voting bill, NRA, etc.
Short version: Demos proposed a (to my mind, GROSSLY unconstitutional) bill to give DC a vote in the House, and by way of compensation to Republicans, give Utah an extra House seat, too. Republicans countered by proposing an amendment that would wipe out the DC handgun ban, and the bill died. Legal Times (subscription) has a story on the ensuring fingerpointing. Excerpts in extended remarks below.
Continue reading "Legal Times on Parker, DC Voting bill, NRA, etc."
FFL facing revocation sets up website
It's Red's Trading Post, the oldest gun store in Idaho.
Clayton Cramer has a good summary of the case.
Continue reading "FFL facing revocation sets up website"
Story about Kennedy bodyguard arrest in 1986
Story here. I was in DC when it happened. The fellow walked into a Senate building with two subguns, a pistol, and sufficient ammo. Oops!
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (3)
Women and guns in CA
A favorable article in the San Mateo Times.
Hat tip to Budd Schroeder.
Permalink · women & guns · Comments (3)
CA man pleads to possession of assault rifle
A California gun collector has entered a plea to felony possession of an assault rifle. Story here. The guns came to light when his house caught fire.
(And I don't recommend having 185 cans of gunpowder around, if only because it can make a house fire much more interesting).
Video satire
We're the Government, and You're Not."
Hat tip to Dan Gifford..