« November 2007 | Main | January 2008 »
December 2007
California-safe "assault rifle"
Here. Not black and menacing, but cute and pink and with a pic of a kitten, and meeting all California standards for "not an assault rifle.""
Hat tip to reader Spiker...
British teachers told boys playing with imaginary weapons is good
Story here.
"Playing with toy weapons helps the development of young boys, according to new Government advice to nurseries and playgroups.
Staff have been told they must resist their "natural instinct" to stop boys using pretend weapons such as guns or light sabres in games with other toddlers.
Fantasy play involving weapons and superheroes allows healthy and safe risk-taking and can also make learning more appealing, says the guidance.
It conflicts with years of "political correctness" in nurseries and playgroups which has led to the banning of toy guns, action hero games and children pretending to fire "guns" using their fingers or Lego bricks.
But teachers' leaders insisted last night that guns "symbolise aggression" and said many nurseries and playgroups would ignore the change."
Hat tip to Dan Gifford....
"Charlie Wilson' War"
From a review of the movie and its bigger-than-life subject, Texas Congressman Charlie Wilson come two great quotes.
1) While he was being investigated for having done cocaine in a hot tub with two naked Vegas showgirls, "I won't blame booze and I won't suddenly find Jesus."
2) On why his conservative constituents kept re-electing him, "You have to bring home the bacon, convince 'em you don't want to take no [bleep] off them Russkies, and you can't think of anything more obscene than gun control."
Recollection...
With all the news of Pakistan, I was reminded of what my late father in law, and best friend, told me he witnessed in Indian during WWII.
A shopkeeper had big trays of fruits and vegetables out front of his shop. A sacred cow sees this and wanders over for a snack. One of the shopkeeper's employees appears with a large stick, smacks the cow over the head, and drives it off.
In some wonderment, Bill asks the shopkeeper -- I thought Hindus weren't supposed to lay a hand on a sacred cow, but let it do whatever it wanted?
Shopkeeper grins and jerks a thumb at the employee with the stick. "He's moslem. That's why I hired him."
Robbers beware....
That Domino's Pizza delivery guy you're thinking about robbing might just have a CCW permit.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (4)
If a criminal pulls a gun on a victim, the victim will just take it away and use it on him
From Gun Watch comes this Florida story. Perps stage a nightime home invasion robbery, but the homeowner disarms one and shoots him and they flee.
I think this is a third story I've encountered where the victim disarmed the criminal and used the gun on him. I have yet to see one where the criminal disarmed the victim. This may reflect that fact that the criminal is much more likely to be under the influence of opiates, crack, and/or ETOH than the victim. Or perhaps that victims are smarter, or know more about gun handling.
Oh, and the newpaper headline? "Tallassee home invasion turns deadly."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
A rather unpleasant Christmas
We may all complain about the shopping rush and traffic and all that, but remember that at least we didn't have to spend Christmas Eve dangling by our heels in a septic tank.
Talk about a crappy holiday...
Column on McCain
I'm rooting for Fred Thompson, and dislike McCain's pushing "campaign finance reform," a/k/a "Congress shall make some laws ... abridging freedom of speech." But for all that I have to say this column on McCain does ring true.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Senators request Interior to allow carrying in Parks
47 Senators have requested that Interior Department modify its regulations to allow carrying in National Parks. Since National Parks are often large, thinly populated with LEOs, and frequently contain wildlife that may think that humans taste very good, it seems like a plan to me.
Old Fish and Wildlife Service joke: a fellow asks what is the best handgun to carry in grizzly country. Reply: get a .22 revolver with a short barrel, and grind off the front sight. Why would that be best? "Because that way it hurts less when the grizzly takes it away from you and shoves it up your ***."
I'm told, by an attorney for the company, that Ruger does have a letter of praise from a guy who saved himself from a grizzly charge with one of their little Bearcat .22 revolvers. He shot, and by one in a million luck caught it right in the eyesocket.
John Hosford dies
Reget to report that I just received an email from Second Amendment Foundation that John Hosford died in his sleep at age 62. John worked with NRA, then LEAA, and finally served as Exec. Director of Citizens' Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. He was also a director the Washingon Arms Collectors.
BATF director-nominee catches flak from judge
Story here. Basically, the federal sentencing guidelines provide for stiffer sentences as illegal conduct, well, gets bigger. If a guy defrauds the government out of a million, penalties are a lot worse than if he only takes ten thousand. The judge, in sentencing a contractor for fraud in relation to the flawed "Big Dig" tunnel, notes that Sullivan's US Atty office failed to investigate just how much the guy had swindled from the government, even tho it had two people who had turned state's evidence, and the defendant had boasted of ripping off the government fo 18 years. As it was, there was only evidence of an $80,000 fraud, and the judge had to sentence him to 15 months. The judge added that there was evidence the total frauds in the Big Dig went from $3 to 15 billion, yet there had been few prosecutions.
Via Red's Trading Post.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
"The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms"
Just received a copy of David E. Young's new book by that title. I've only had time to skim, but it is GREAT!!!! And just in time for Parker.
260+ pages, but it compresses data very nicely -- he's a clear and concise writer. It goes into more detail than any other book I can recollect. It discusses, for instance, British anti-arms measures leading up to 1775 (banning of gunpower imports to the colonies, seizures of colonial powder supplies, attempted militia arsenal raids -- Concord/Lexington wasn't the first). He turns up records that have long gathered dust -- how PA, due to its Quaker population, had a voluntary militia system, how VA created the same to evade royal control (and they used "well-regulated militia" in the document, showing that well-regulated did not mean government controlled). How PA issued some arms to its militia, and decided to call them in for cleaning in 1787, and that was sufficient to create a controversy in the newspapers.
Not to mention... the state ratifications, which lay out the Second Amendment with zero, one, two, and three commas...
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas from almost all of us, to all of you!
(Almost all, because son Mark wasn't available for the pic).
Permalink · Personal · Comments (8)
More trouble for Romney
His speech a while back mentioned watching his father march with Martin Luther King, in Grosse Point, MI. Then it was shown he wasn't there, and he explained he didn't mean "saw" literally.
Then the issue arose whether his father had marched with Dr. King at all.
His campaign came up with two witnesses that said they'd seen the two marching there, back 40+ years ago. OK, that was impressive, and the story seemed at an end.
But the Boston Phoenix, which broke the original story, has investigated and reports that on that day Dr. King wasn't in Michigan, he was speaking to the AFL-CIO in Brunswick, NJ.
Via the Carpetbagger Report.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (3)
Pennsylvania and Arkansas CCW reciprocity
Word is that they have reached a reciprocity agreement.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (0)
Podcast of Sanford Levinson on Heller
Sebastian has a link to an NPR podcast on the issue.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (3)
Violence Policy Center starts losing it on NICS bill
Josh Sugarman, head of VPC, posts under the title of Trojan Horse Gun Control: The NRA Wins on the NICS Bill:
"Much has been made of the bill's bi-partisan, triangulating support: Democrats! Republicans! The National Rifle Association! The Brady Campaign! Beyond this cheery bon temps, little public attention has been paid to what the bill actually does beyond its title. And that's because if you start looking at the details of the bill--especially after NRA-backed changes made by Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn--it becomes clear that the measure is nothing less than a pro-gun Trojan Horse. That's why my organization, the Violence Policy Center, and other national gun control groups, have voiced their strong concerns about the version of the bill that was passed by Congress."
"So why's the NRA so in thrall with an alleged gun control bill? Here are some of the reasons why.
"The bill would resuscitate a failed government program that spent millions of dollars annually to allow persons prohibited from buying guns to regain the ability to legally acquire firearms. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would be required to establish a "relief from disability" program to allow persons now prohibited from possessing a firearm because they have "been adjudicated as a mental defective" or "committed to a mental institution" to apply to have their bar on firearms possession removed. As a result of the bill, more than 116,000 individuals would be eligible to apply. States would also be required to establish such "relief" programs to restore the gun privileges of those with mental health disabilities in order to be eligible for potential grant money to upgrade records submitted to the NICS."
"Once a solution, the bill--hijacked by the gun lobby--is now part of the problem. Intended as Congress' response to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech by focusing on improving the current laws prohibiting people with certain mental health disabilities from buying guns, the bill is now nothing more than a gun lobby wish list. It will waste millions of taxpayer dollars restoring the gun privileges of persons previously determined to present a danger to themselves or others."
And of course, the obligatory hit at those who... shudder... have served their country:
"The concerns over these aspects of the bill are not abstract. According to research published earlier this year, male U.S. veterans are twice as likely to commit suicide as men with no military service and are more likely to kill themselves with a gun than others who commit suicide. .... Veterans with mental health problems may present special risks for gun violence. In 2000, the New York Times examined 100 rampage shootings and found that the majority (52 percent) of such killers had been in the military."
Hmm... Cho, the Columbine killers, others ... I can't recall a vet among them. Discipline and duty are not things that a violent narcissist seeks out.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (8)
Mitt Romney endorses AW bans, again
Right here. He dances around on the issue, says he signed the MA state ban (but dances on just why: in his version it was because it made owner licensing less stringent, too) and in the end allows "We also should keep weapons of unusual lethality from being on the street."
Permalink · Politics · Comments (15)
NICS Improvements Act passes both houses
Sen. Colburn's hold enabled him to get some improvements, too:
"Just before midnight Tuesday, Coburn and the Democratic supporters of the bill struck a deal: The government would pay for the cost of appeals by gun owners and prospective buyers who argue successfully in court that they were wrongly deemed unqualified for mental health reasons.
The compromise would require that incorrect records _ such as expunged mental health rulings that once disqualified a prospective gun buyer but no longer do _ be removed from system within 30 days.
The original bill would require any agency, such as the Veterans Administration or the Defense Department, to notify a person flagged as mentally ill and disqualified from buying or possessing a gun. The new version now also would require the notification when someone has been cleared of that restriction."
UPDATE: it's getting rather strange of late. Here's what Carolyn McCarthy said: "Together, we have crafted a bill that will prevent gun violence, but maintain the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens" to bear arms."
Uh ... Second Amendment rights of individuals? Law abiding citizens? I didn't antigunners were allowed to use terms like that.
ANOTHER UPDATE: You can find extensive discussion from SayUncle and Snowflakes in Hell, as well as the National Shooting Sports Foundation. All say it's an improvement in the law, and I would agree.
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (1)
Antigun group attacks NICS bill
the Joyce Foundation bankrolled Violence Policy Center's press release of today. The high points:
"The "NICS Improvement Act" passed today by the Senate would:
-- Resuscitate a failed government program that spent millions of dollars annually to allow persons prohibited from buying guns to regain the ability to legally acquire firearms. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would be required to establish a "relief from disability" program to allow persons now prohibited from possessing a firearm because they have "been adjudicated as a mental defective" or "committed to a mental institution" to apply to have their bar on firearms possession removed. As a result of the bill, more than 116,000 individuals would be eligible to apply.... Under the bill, states would also be required to establish such "relief" programs to restore the gun privileges of those with mental health disabilities in order to be eligible for potential grant money to upgrade records submitted to the NICS.
-- Set an arbitrary time limit for the VA to act on applications for "relief." If the agency fails to act within 365 days, applicants could file a lawsuit asking a court to restore their gun privileges, even if Congress fails to provide the VA with the appropriate resources to process these investigations. Some prevailing applicants would be entitled to attorneys' fees. ...
-- Significantly narrow the category of records of people with mental disabilities that would be submitted to the NICS by the federal government. The current permanent bar on persons with certain health disabilities would be replaced with temporary restrictions.
Kristen Rand, legislative director of the Violence Policy Center, states, "This bill was intended to be Congress' response to the mass shooting at Virginia Tech that left 32 people murdered. But rather than focusing on improving the current laws prohibiting people with certain mental health disabilities from buying guns, the bill is now nothing more than a gun lobby wish list. It will waste millions of taxpayer dollars restoring the gun privileges of persons previously determined to present a danger to themselves or others. Once a solution, the bill is now part of the problem."
Josh Horwitz, executive director of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, adds, "It is ironic that the gun lobby has coerced the Senate into providing resources to rearm mentally disabled veterans during a time when the VA is struggling to provide adequate mental health care to those in need."
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (2)
News of the day
Virginia's Attorney General will join the Attorneys General amicus supporting the individual rights position.
The Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus is celebrating some pro-hunting wins in the budget bill (details in extended remarks below).
UPDATE: The Supreme Court often asks the opinion of the Solicitor General, on a constutional question of some weight, if the Federal government is not a party. In that event, he's expected to file a brief, and sometimes to participate in oral argument (with sometimes a squabble about whether his time should or should not be deducted from the side he tends to favor -- when you only have 30 minutes per side, having 10 or so minutes removed can become a major issue!).
Continue reading "News of the day"
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (3)
VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: How many more will die in 'gun-free' zones?
Editorial here.
Move to allow carry in parks & refuges
Montana US Senators Baccus and Tester have sent the Interior Secretary a letter, asking him to allow transportation and carry of firearms in federal parks and wildlife refuges, in accord with State law.
Poll: NRA endorsement of candidates carries most weight
Story here, from a Chinese source. For some strange reason, other media seem to be ignoring it.
The poll asked whether likely voters would be swayed by various endorsements. The conclusion:
By NRA: 27%
By Bill Clinton: 25%
By G. W. Bush: 23%
By AFL-CIO: 16%
By Oprah: 9%
By Barbra Streisand: 4%
Permalink · NRA · Comments (9)
Another hold on ATF director's nomination
LA Senator David Vitter has joined Idaho's senators in putting a hold on Michael Sullivan's nomination for head of BATFE.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
You CAN fight city hall....
If you're DC's 911 service. CIty councilman hears woman screaming outside his house, calls 911, and gets jacked around.
"Roughly 1,000 calls a week to D.C.'s call center are being monitored for quality, Quintana told the public safety panel, chaired by Councilman Phil Mendelson. But council members said they hear the same complaints over and over - of police who don't show up, of call takers who are rude and ask too many questions, and of phones that are never answered."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (5)
Proposed gun law for Cook County, ILL
Text here. A quick skim indicates it's a conglomeration of every second amendment violation yet dreamed up, with some that have been hitherto undiscovered. Bans on carrying long arms, on laser sights, on "assault weapons," on handguns that don't have a myriad of safety features, even a ban on future registration of long arms. Oh, and vision tests before permits are issued, and a separate permit to own each firearm. And no private firearm sales, ownership of ammo other than for a registered gun outlawed, and any gunowner whose gun is used in a crime without his knowledge or intent (i.e., who has a firearm stolen and used in crime) must pay a $1000 fine.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (18)
4th grader arrested
A 10 year old has been arrested on felony weapons charges in Orlando -- for eating lunch with a knife.
One more proof that no tolerance = no brains.
Hat tip to reader Bill Bailey....
Permalink · arms law victims · Comments (9)
An interesting blog
"A Shining City on a Hill", devoted to American exceptionalism -- the principle that the US is something exceptional in the world and in history. Which it certainly is.
Good variation of Christmas carol...
Over at the Real Gun Guys. (The Real Gun Guys is the pro-gun website: the Gun Guys is actually an antigun site).
Bill of Rights Day
Is today. The Cato Institute is understandably a bit glum over the modern status of that document.
Media and copycat mass killings
Loren Coleman, who has studied copycat killings and runs a blog on the subject, cites an Op-Ed by Dave Kopel:
"Last April, The Denver Post published on its front page five "glamour shots" that the Virginia Tech murderer had taken of himself, and sent to NBC. On Wednesday, the Post ran a front-page picture of the young man who killed two at a youth missionary center in Arvada and two others at a church in Colorado Springs, along with very large-type excerpts from the killer's rantings. In the first sentence, the killer compared himself to the Virginia Tech killer.
The Post might has well have a run a sidebar: "Are you a hate-filled sociopath? Are you upset because you have an intense feeling of superiority to other people, even though you have accomplished little or nothing? Your hateful screeds will not meet our standards for publication as a letter to the editor. However, if you perpetrate a mass murder, we will put your picture on our front page, publish your writings there, too, and do our part to ensure that your name is remembered forever."
......
Loren Coleman's book The Copycat Effect convincingly proves that sensational media coverage of murders and suicides leads to additional murders and suicides. Coleman's weblog, copycateffect.blogspot.com, suggests that the Colorado attacks may have been triggered by media coverage of a similar attack on an Omaha, Neb., shopping mall a few days before."
From the Volokh Conspiracy
Continue reading "Media and copycat mass killings"
I love this "debate" footage
Fred Thompson giving the "debate moderate" guff.
These %$^# "debates, anyway. Where is the "debate" between candidates when some "moderator" in a dull monotone reads a &%%^#& question and asks everyone to raise hands yes-or-no, or to give a sound-bite on an issue (which, as they are trained to do, they ignore?). How about "tonight is foreign policy, you get 30 minutes each and a ten minute rebuttal on it, and the moderator holds the stop watch and keeps quiet."? Let alone the Lincoln-Douglas debates, where each guy got three hours.
From Instapundit...
PA carry permit revoked for ... 100% legal conduct
Snowflakes in Hell is reporting the case of a PA man who carried openly into a polling place (which, he pointed out when challenged, is completely legal), and is told his carry permit is being revoked. The grounds are a clause that denies permits to a person “whose character and reputation is such that the individual would be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety.” The sheriff contends that his open carry "violates the spirit of the law," even though it is completely legal.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (8)
There are worse things than being robbed at gunpoint
"Polk County Man Sets Two Women On Fire". The two women he splashed with gasoline during the robbery took burns over 90% of their bodies.
Thanks to reader Fred Rawlings for the story....
Update: whether and why the law should punish attempt less seriously than a completed crime has LONG been debated. The traditional view was that justice requires retribution for crime, and an attempt did less harm than a completely offense. Then that seemed a little to ... judgmental? ... and the theory arose that the object was incapacitation, lock the guy up or snuff him and he can't do it again, or alternately, deterrence. Under either of those approaches it's hard to explain punishing attempt less strictly -- a perp who tries to kill is just as a much of a risk as one who succeeds, and deterrence of attempts is just as valuable as deterrence of the crime. Of course, here the guy is gonna get the max for, oh, three counts of agg. assault while armed, three of attempted murder, one of burglary (entering a structure with intent to commit theft, and anything else they can fit in. (In AZ, if the perp says "stand over there," they add in kidnapping). In some states, but not AZ, the judge can "stack" sentences at will, so the guy might wind up with about four twenty year sentences, consecutive.
Permalink · non-gun weapons · Comments (4)
Good Op-Ed
In the Portland (ME) Press Herald:
"Has anyone ever wondered why people with guns who have kissed sanity good-bye never take out their uncontrollable rage on the nearest police station?
Nor do they drive off to the nearest Army base, shooting range or hunting club to vent their murderous frustration.
It should only take a moment's thought to understand why: Those places have people who have relatively easy access to weapons themselves.
It's one thing to be homicidal and suicidal, but it's quite another to consider that one's murderous intent could be brought to an untimely halt through the immediate application of superior firepower.
However, there are places that draw these people like magnets, and they, too, are easy to locate: They are the places where the possession of firearms is forbidden, and that fact is widely advertised.
Some of these places even go so far as to publicly display their vulnerability to mass murder through the posting of signs that say "No Guns Permitted" or "Gun-Free Zone.""
Clayton Cramer & SF Chronicle on inner cities and crime
Right here. The point is made by one officer: you have entire areas where everyone, but everyone, is growing a psychopath. How do you deal with that?
Via Instapundit...
Permalink · Crime and statistics · Comments (4)
Counterattack on Idaho hold on Sullivan confirmation
As I mentioned earlier, the Idaho senators put a "hold" on confirming Michael Sullivan as head of ATFE. Now, John Kerry is asking them to release the hold. And a New York Times editorial takes the same stance.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (3)
Hilarious -- until YouTube starts yanking them
Bitter put me on to Red State Update, a collection of hilarious videos. But I just noticed that they're hosted on YouTube, and about a quarter of them have been taken down in the last hour or two.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (0)
Even the "living constitution" movement is in retreat
Prof. Cass Sunstein, in the Huffington Post:
On the one hand,
"Some people, above all Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman, have urged that the American constitutional tradition includes not merely formal amendments but also "constitutional moments," in which We the People make large-scale changes in our understandings. These changes ultimately have consequences for the meaning of the Constitution."
On the other,
"Predictions are hazardous, but here is a prediction. In the near future, the Supreme Court will conclude that the Second Amendment confers an individual right to own guns. When it does so, its conclusion will be greatly affected by a social setting in which that judgment already has acquired broad public support. And in fact, there now seems to be a general public understanding that the Second Amendment does protect at least some kind of individual right; and that understanding greatly affects American politics. If the Supreme Court finds an individual right to bear arms, it will not really be speaking for the Constitution as it was written by those long dead; it will be reacting to judgments that are now widespread among those now living."
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (6)
To thank a soldier...
Just go right here.
Interesting statute
SayUncle notes an interesting TN statute that requires an LEO to sign off on an NFA transfer application, if the recipient is legit.
Background: the ATF form for acquiring a National Firearm Act firearm (full auto, suppressor, etc.) must be signed by a chief LEO or prosecutor for your area. But absent a law like this, there is no duty to sign, no matter how good your character might be, and many won't.
Via Instapundit....
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (5)
Editorial in Colo. Springs paper
Right here. The high point:
"We don’t pretend to have the answer to prevent this kind of tragedy, but it can be instructional to look at what shootings of this nature have in common: they took place in places where shooters expect to find unarmed victims. At New Life, that expectation turned out to be a fatal mistake for the gunman; he was stopped by an armed member of the congregation. That’s the lesson that should be taken from this event.
A quick study of mass shootings in the United States reveals the same common element: Schools, malls, offices and churches are usually gun-free zones. Many people are comforted by that knowledge. Bad actors bent on killing a large number of innocent people see those areas as killing fields where there is little danger to themselves. ...."
Senators put "hold" on new ATF director confirmation
Red's Trading Post reports that the Idaho senators have put a hold on confirmation of Michael Sullivan as ATF head.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Interesting views from the left
A columnist at the Huffington Post proclaims he is sufficiently in tune with Buddhism to where he would not even shoot to save his own life ... but apparently finds no contradiction with pushing for strict gun laws, i.e., feeling perfectly all right about imprisoning his fellow citizens.
But I find the comments interesting:
"In view of the last seven years, I don't just want a gun, I want a effing arsenal!"
"So now I must get a gun. A big gun that hold lots of bullets. Strangely enough not to protect me and my family from criminals,no, to protect me an my family from roving gangs of 'security contractors' that will be patrolling the streets of the USA after Bush declares martial law just ahead of the 08 elections. I have come the the conclusion that Bush intends not to remake Iraq in the image of America, but to remake America in the image of Iraq. For that, I will need a gun. AAMF, I will need lots of guns. Good thing I live in Texas."
"Well Pete, the government is armed to the teeth, and many of us are not sure the government has the best intentions towards it's citizens and their right to dissent. We are headed towards a police state funded by homeland security money."
To paraphrase what Instapundit says about those who speak of global warming: I will take seriously the claim that Bush is a Hitler, when those who say he is one, act like he is one.
The world turned upside down...
Hillary is attacking Obama as unelectable, because he favored outlawing handguns.
Two candidates with an "F" rating on an issue, fighting out which of them is more un-electable on it.
Update: Obama's campaign is now disavowing the questionaire, and stating that he supports “common-sense limits, but not banning” handguns.
If I was Brady Campaign, and had any hair, I'd be pulling it out just now.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (9)
Church gunman killed himself, after heroine scored multiple hits
AP is reporting that the Colorado church gunman killed himself with a shotgun after volunteer security guard Jeanne Assam scored multiple hits on him. As I said, she kept her head, a very sound and heroic performance.
It also reports she was fired 10 years ago by the Minneapolis PD for having given false statements in connection with whether she cussed someone during a confrontation. Given the nature of the charge, I suspect it was more like she ticked off the Chief over something, and he found a way to fire her.
Here's a video interview of the lady. For some reason in my player the video freezes but the audio goes on. She definitely handled it like a pro.
One mystery to me: the gunman was reported to be carrying an AK clone and two pistols. If he had a shotgun, too, that would have been around twenty pounds of gunmetal. And reports are that he had a thousand rounds of ammo. A thousand rounds of 7.62x39 weighs in at about 45 pounds, a thousand of 9mm about 35-40. So he's carrying about sixty pounds of guns and ammo?
Gun free zone liability act
Alan Korwin reports that bills have been introduced in AZ and GA to make entities that declare "gun free zones" liable for any harm caused by impairment of self-defense.
Update: I'm informed the GA bill is from 2003; there is no such bill pending there now.
Via Instapundit, who has in the past suggested you could get the same result under common law. It might be clearer now -- I mean, every mass killing I can remember occurred either in a gun free zone, or a place where the killer would expect no one to be armed (an Amish schoolhouse, a church -- the killer in the Colorado cases may have *thought* churches were gun-free in that state). And every mass killing that was stopped short was stopped by armed civilians, not by LE.
Also via Instapundit, SayUncle has an impressive list of armed civilians vs. mass killers.
Permalink · Self defense ~ · State legislation · Comments (12)
California bans .22 rimfire use in condor areas
From the Ventura County Star:
"California hunting regulators Friday broadened a prohibition on lead bullets scheduled to take effect July 1, adding .22-caliber ammunition to the ban.
The new rules will apply only in those areas where the endangered California condor roams — generally, the coastal mountains from Monterey south to Ventura County and in the southern Sierra.
The action by the Fish and Game Commission follows enactment of a landmark law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this fall that bans the use of lead ammunition by deer hunters in the affected areas."
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (15)
Former DC police chief recants on handgun ban
Former DC police chief Charles Ramsay has backed off from his support for its handgun ban.
"Ramsey's comments Monday to WTOP radio are a shift away from his defense of the D.C. gun ban during his time in Washington. In congressional hearings on the gun ban in 2004 and 2005, Ramsey told lawmakers nothing good would come from overturning the law."
Update: I corrected his name.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (1)
More on the lady who stopped the New Hope Church killer
Story here. Yep, she was a church member with a CCW who volunteered to help with security.
More in the Denver Post. The witness says there were at least two other armed male church-goers who drew, but froze up. She didn't. A good shot and a cool head. And much better to look at than most of us gunnies.
Canada registers stolen guns to new owners
Here's a webpage noting that the daughter of a Canadian pro-gunner is making YouTube videos. If you watch the video, well, it's something made by a young teen, but she recites some data that is pretty astonishing. Her father made a public records request: has the Canadian gun registry system gotten reports of stolen guns, and later allowed them to be registered to someone else?
Answer: only about 4,500 times, by their count. Plus another 500 lost ones re-registered.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (0)
"Use" of a firearm in a drug transaction
The Supreme Court ruled today in Watson v. US. Watson concerned a defendant who got a lengthy sentence for a use of a firearm in drug offense, where he bartered drugs in exchange for getting a gun.
The Court, per Justice Souter, holds that *receiving* the gun in such a trade is not "using" it. The majority distinguishes earlier case law holding that *giving* the gun in such a deal can be using it. Justice Ginsburg concurs with a note that she'd overrule the earlier case relating to giving, as well: the likely Congressional intent was to punish "use" in the sense of using a gun as a tool, not just as property for barter.
Shooting at New Life Church
A coment on a previous thread noted that the person whose shots stopped the mass killer at New Life Church was actually a church member with a CCW permit, not a hired guard, and that the media is spinning the story so as to make it appear she was the latter. I did a bit of checking, and that appears to be the case.
This story from CNS news reports:
"Many people are expressing relief that a volunteer security guard used her own gun to stop a man on a shooting spree Sunday. "She probably saved over 100 lives," the Brady Boyd, the pastor of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, said on Monday. The female guard, a church member dressed in plain clothes, killed the gunman after he opened fire at the mega-church."
UPDATE: Ahab has confirmed the lady who brought down the killer was not a church employee, and was carrying her personal gun. And here's my followup. She's a lady with some LE experience, and a CCW permit, who volunteered to provide security -- not a church employee, nor a hired security guard.
But the AP coverage describes her as "a member of the church's armed security staff" and "the security guard." Since it quotes the pastor much the same way as the CNS story does, it sounds like a report on the same interview or conference. And the Rocky Mtn News describes her as "a church security officer."
Letter to the ed. from retired police inspector
In the Philadelphia Daily News:
"POLITICIANS, government officials and editorial boards have no business using the recent spate of shootings of police officers as grounds for their anti-gun position. They have no right to call for tougher gun laws "for the sake of those officers." Not unless they talk to them first and find out how they feel about the issue.
Police chiefs should also spend more time with their own troops before they join the chorus. Of course, that might mean going against the media who've decided they know more about fighting crime than the cops do."
Colorado church shooting halted by armed female
Michelle Malkin reports that one of the Colorado church shootings was halted by an armed female security staffer, who killed the perp.
"Police arrived to find the gunman had been killed by a member of the church’s armed security staff, Myers said.
“There was a courageous staff member who probably saved many lives here today,” Myers said."
Via Instapundit, who notes "People don't stop killers. People with guns do."
Castle doctrine hearing in PA
PA's House Judiciary Committee will be holding hearings on a castle doctrine bill Tuesday. Further info and contact data here.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (0)
VA panel recommends keeping list of CCW holders private
Story here.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (0)
NFA weapons registry and studies of its flaws
The NFA Owners Assn has put up small pdf of studies of the NFA database, and how many errors were found. It's pretty impressive...
Permalink · National Firearms Act · Comments (0)
speaking of vigilantees....
An article on the situation in a small Arizona town. There are some areas here where it basically is as it was on the frontier -- nearest law enforcement officer 60 miles away, and that's if you're lucky.
As one commenter on the previous thread noted, most of the western vigilanteeism represented a response to chaos. When a person or gang was too powerful to be taken care of by legal process, they were given a warning and unless they were fools, they got out of town, because it was notice that the citizenry were prepared for organized if illegal action against them. The custom was, I recall, 24 hours' written notice. Thus the Earps received notice in Tombstone, and left.
An interesting question springs into mind. Juries are required to be drawn from the vicinage, vicinity, of the offense. This is required, I'd assume, so that jurors know local conditions. Arizona counties are generally huge -- some are larger than Eastern states. In this case, this town is about 80 miles from Phoenix. Its conditions compared to Phoenix (an urban area with about 3 million population and a large police force) are as night and day. But Phoenix is the county seat, and in a trial held there the jury will almost certainly be 100% urban dwellers. Should someone in this town act in self-defense, might there be a case for arguing that the vicinage from which jurors should be taken should be the town, and not Phoenix nor the entire county?
My own county, Pima, has done something like that for misdemeanors. The county seat is Tucson in the east, but there is a JP court and judge out in Ajo, way to the west. It didn't make sense to require people to drive 100+ miles to contest a speeding ticket or misdemeanor or try a small claims case. So in a misdemeanor jury trial there, the jury would be drawn from Ajo, rather than Tucson.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (2)
Looks like it's working
Several States have adopted programs to recruit young hunters -- Michigan DNR, for example, lowered the age limits by two years and established an "apprentice hunter program. And the latest surveys indicate that while hunting fell off among the older set, it increased among kids under 16.
New blog focuses on self-defense cases
It's Gun Watch. Curiously enough, run by an Austrailian, but mostly reporting US cases. The lead one involves a fellow who was robbed by two thugs, who stuck a gun into his ribs and said they'd shoot him. He waited for the right moment, drew his own revolver, and shot the gun wielder.
"Northampton County District Attorney John Morganelli said the good guy won in a botched armed robbery. But at a news conference Wednesday, he also cautioned against a return to the vigilante days of the Wild West." I never can understand why any government official, in describing a clearly valid case of self-defense, has to reference vigilantes. I could better understand him cautioning armed robbers that they should not engage in their trade, but why does he feel compelled to utter this sort of warning to their victims?
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (13)
Europe: complaint about released criminal equals incitement to violence
The Brussels Journal reports on a case where a rape victim fought back, a blogger asked why the rapist (convicted of a prior rape) had not been removed from society, and otherwise citizens themselves might have to do so -- and was forced to delete his post lest it incite violence:
"It is taboo in Europe to say that if the state fails to protect the citizens, the citizens should do so themselves. There is no Second Amendment in Europe. Even European politicians from the so-called "right," like Mr. Sarkozy, are horrified at the suggestion that citizens should be allowed to protect themselves against criminals. Last year, Mr. Sarkozy told French radio: "Security is the responsibility of the state. I am against the private ownership of firearms. If you are assaulted by an armed burglar, he will use his weapon more effectively than you anyway, so you are risking your life.""
UPDATE: actually, this is not Hobbesian. Hobbes maintained that the ONE right you could not give up was the right of self-defense. It was to him the only "inalienable" right. After all, you had given up rights (including the "right" to kill in vengence or just for the heck of it) in order that the sovereign would protect you against others exercising those rights. So you couldn't agree to give that up, too, or you would be giving the sovereign the only thing he had promised to provide you.
This is something far beyond Hobbes. More like you give levithan everything, and hope for the best.
Continue reading "Europe: complaint about released criminal equals incitement to violence"
Permalink · non-US · Comments (31)
Instpundit on Omaha shootings
Right here.
"it's worth noting -- since apparently most of the media reports haven't -- that this was another mass shooting in a "gun-free" zone. It seems to me that we've reached the point at which a facility that bans firearms, making its patrons unable to defend themselves, should be subject to lawsuit for its failure to protect them. The pattern of mass shootings in "gun free" zones is well-established at this point....
Perhaps we need legislation. If it saves just one life, it's worth it."
Supreme Court ruling on restoration of rights
Right here. I flew back east for some Parker matters, and am too tired to say a lot more. Basically, both GCA and a federal sentencing enhancement law say that "felony" includes violations that states expressly classify as "misdemeanors," but which are punishable by more than two years imprisonment, and that "felony" does not include a conviction that has been set aside or for which civil rights have been restored.
Defendant here got caught as a felon in possession, had several of those 3 year "misdemeanors," and got maxed out. He argued that since you don't lose civil rights for a "misdemeanor," that shouldn't count as a prior. Interesting argument, but it lost 9-0.
On the side, the Court agrees that, as to what restoration of civil rights means, "courts have held, and petitioner agrees, that the civil rights relevant under the above-quoted provision are the rights to vote, hold office, and serve on a jury. "
Permalink · Gun Control Act of 68 · Comments (8)
Robert VerBruggen takes on Harvard Crimson
At American Spectator, the Wash. Time's Robert VerBruggen chews up the Harvard Crimson.
Permalink · media · Comments (2)
NY Times on Parker/Heller
Story here. And for the NYT, strangely unbiased.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (6)
Situation in France
Story here.
Yep, it was a mistake to leave his pistol at home; I'd have suggested bringing a 12 gauge with buckshot, too, if the officer was actually allowed to own one.
Around here, tho, if rioters had beaten a responding officer with clubs, and fired on others with shotguns, I suspect some lead would have been flying, and it it would have been bigger than birdshot. And if Pima Count Sheriff's Office were somehow outnumbered, they could have called upon the good citizenry, who (1) were probably even more heavily armed and (2) aren't really conversant with the details of deadly force policy and tend to think the test is a little more like "did he need killing?"
Fact: about 30 years ago, the city police department went on strike. Burglary rates fell. Burglars knew that with law enforcement functioning, many victims would call 911. Response would give time for escape, and officers responding would be bound by standard policies restricting use of deadly force.
Without it in operation, the citizenry would figure they had to deal with it on their own, and would answer to grand juries composed of citizens who knew they'd had to do the same thing.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (8)
Reader commentary on why arms were singled out
Reader Chris Caserta has some thoughts on why "arms," an item of property, were singled out for protection in the Bill of Rights. (I suppose we could say presses were, too, except that "freedom of the press" is really more like "freedom to publish"). I've put his thoughts in extended remarks, below.
Continue reading "Reader commentary on why arms were singled out"
Brady Campaign in fallback position
Their president, Paul Helmke, writes in today's Huffington Post:
"Thus, the Parker court concludes, "the right in question is individual.
The court, however, simply obscured the real issue. There is no question that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to "the people" -- that much is clear from the text. The issue is: What right does the Second Amendment grant to the people? Is it the right to possess and use guns for private purposes like hunting or self-defense, as asserted by the Parker majority, or rather the right to be armed for purposes related only to service in a government-organized militia?"
They've gone from collective rights ("it's a right of the State") to the fallback of sophisticated collective rights.
How big a retreat is this? Well, their 2003 amicus brief at the District Court (pdf file) argued, for example, "By this action, Plaintiffs seek to contest long-settle precedent that construes the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as protecting only the ability of the States to maintain a "well-regulated Militia." (p. 2), "The vast majority of courts have interpeted Miller as a rejection of any individual right to bear arms under the U.S. Constitution," (p. 7) and "The Framers of the Constitution did not intend to create an individual right to bear arms." (p. 12)/ They cited pure collective rights cases (pp. 8-10).
Yep, it's a big retreat.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (12)
Detroit Free Press reprinted my letter to the editor
Haven't had much time to blog this weekend!
Op-Ed piece on 2nd Amendment
A few days ago, Prof. (soon to be Dean) Edwin Chemerinsky published this this Op-Ed in the Contra Coasta Times, claiming that the Second Amendment is oriented toward States' rights, that Miller was a collective right decision, and that gun rights are property rights and thus easily regulated.
I raced out a refuting Op-Ed, and the Time was nice enough to print it today.
UPDATE: thanks to a comment, I fixed the link so it gets around their registration page.
The perils of trolling...
Via Instapundit:
A commenter on a blog posts something attacking teachers, esp. unionized ones, as overpaid goof-offs, and ends by saying the Columbine killers knew how to deal with them.
Police are called (and I'd agree the post was not a properly criminal manner) ... and wind up arresting the poster, who turns out to be the president of the teachers' union. Ooops.
USAToday poll
Rather ineptly worded: "Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?"
With 18,000 votes in, it's running 98% yes, 1% no.
Rather reinforces a point Gene Volokh makes in my documentary. He notes he doesn't believe in this "living constitution" approach, but if he did.... The right to arms has become more and more individual and broad in the eyes of Congress (which 4-5 has passed bill invoking it), in the eyes of the States (which have adopted increasingly individual and broad constitutional guarantees of it, with no State going the other way) and the people (as reflected in surveys). So if the Constitution can change as opinion does, then the right to arms has become stronger, not weaker. Unless you assess this change only through the eyes of, say, judges, or the editorial board of the NY Times -- which, Prof. Volokh notes, is surely an impermissible form of "living Constitution."