« April 2008 | Main | June 2008 »
May 2008
Instapundit at conference
We all are familiar with the bloggers' embarassment. The fact that Instapundit blends puppies into the energy drink Puppie Smoothies.. But few of us expected him to be so bold as to do it during a conference. At long last, is there no shame left?
Now, THIS is restraint above and beyond!
Story here.
Customer has argument with grocery store manager, pulls gun. In response, this being Florida, the manager and assistant manager draw, too. Customer backs up and then opens fire.
The manager reasons "When I saw the first bullet hit high, right away I knew I was dealing with someone that was not a good shooter." He and the assistant hold fire, eventually talk the guy into putting down his gun, assuring him they really won't beat him up if he surrenders.
I like to think I'm a cool head but I couldn't have done it. It Somebody lets loose at me, and I rather doubt I'd be observing his group size and figuring he's firing high. illustrates what Glenn Reynolds said, that in a disaster movie everyone screams and panics, because that makes for an exciting movie, but the reality is that in a tight spot Americans tend to keep calm, organize, and respond rationally.
Via the always amusing This Is True. A really great site for news of the unusual, including pro-gun news of the unusual.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (6)
Akins Accelerator folks file second suit
Complaint here, in pdf. I tend to agree with their legal theory, but wouldn't give high odds of winning.
[UPDATE: Bill Akins sends a comment, blocked for some reason by the spam filter, but added in extended remarks below. Context is comment about wanting a .22 gatling gun:
Continue reading "Akins Accelerator folks file second suit"
Permalink · National Firearms Act
Philadelphia, guns, and crime
Howard Nemerov has this to say.
With regards the previous post -- desert dwellers eradicate rattlers. Other reptiles are welcome (they tend to control the packrats, for one thing). Had to swerve to dodge a Gila Monster the other day (only the second one I've ever seen). Last week I killed a rattler -- INSIDE the house.
UPDATE: the room he got into was a studio, where the door is often open, so he probably just slithered on in. No pics, since he was way behind some stuff, with only a bit of tail visible. I couldn't whack him, nor open fire without destroying stuff I wanted, and probably leaving birdshot ricocheting all over. Force to improvise, I sprayed insecticide in and, when he stuck his head up, gave him a good shot.
I then left because there is a limit to my indiscretion. Next day, no sign, figured he departed. Two days later noticed an unpleasant smell, and my nose led to me to the body. Uh... not a sight worth of photos.
A serious research project
Permalink · shooting · Comments (5)
Another CCW holder stops a mass slaying
Via Instpundit and SayUncle comes this report of a Nevada CCW holder who killed the murderer.
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (0)
Ohio House passes castle doctrine and much else
A comment on a prior post noted this, and I figured it merits its own post. The Buckeye Firearms Association has the story here. It had already passed the Senate, albeit in a different form, so a conference between the houses will be necessary to get the final bill.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (2)
How you (and the Court) reads a sharply divided decision
An interesting discussion by Prof. Orin Kerr at The Volokh Conspiracy. The question is basically when the Court divides, say,
4 Justices voting for reversal on one ground;
1 concurring in reversal, on a different basis;
1 concurring, on still another basis;
and three voting to affirm...
For what does the ruling stand?
I personally don't think Heller will fragment like this, but the risk is non-zero.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (1)
Taking down an editorial praising AHSA
SayUncle does the job nicely.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (3)
Arizona governor casts veto
Newspapers report that the governor vetoed a couple of bills, one to make the CCW license a lifetime one, another to make it clear that a person could display a firearm (but not use it) in response to verbal threats.
UPDATE: I recall several cases where you had one guy going along side or tailgating the other, shouting threats, the recipient of the threat showed him that he was armed, and the one making the threats departed, called 911, and got the sorta-defender arrested. It was probably under Ariz. Rev. Statutes 13-2904, covering disorderly conduct:
"A. A person commits disorderly conduct if, with intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of doing so, such person
.....
6. Recklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.
B. Disorderly conduct under subsection A, paragraph 6 is a class 6 felony. Disorderly conduct under subsection A, paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 is a class 1 misdemeanor."
ANOTHER UPDATE: Prof. Joe Olson's remarks are in extended remarks, below.
Continue reading "Arizona governor casts veto"
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (12)
A predictable split in Ohio
Story here. A bill is up that would shift the burden of proof in self defense cases so that the state has the burden. The governor supports it, and the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association opposes.
Don't know if the bill draws a distinction between two types of burdens. (1) Burden of proof: one party must, at the end of trial, have proven something to whatever standard is required. That'd mean that if self defense is raised, the State must disprove it or lose (depending on how it is arranged, this might require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, or proof by a preponderence of the evidence). There's every reason to put that burden on the State. (2) Burden of going forward. One party or the other must bring in some evidence before the issue is in play. I can see opposing putting this burden on the State, and requiring the defendant to present some evidence to make it an issue. Otherwise -- two people in a room, one kills the other, and doesn't talk about it. The prosecution will likely fail (whether it really was self-defense or not) since the State has nothing to disprove self-defense, and bears the burden of doing that.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (9)
Proposal for Canadian gun laws
Letter here. Interesting, since if the letter is correct, present Canadian law (1) does not require marking of a gun with its importer (US law since 1968, I believe) and (2) its definition of firearm only includes a complete and operable gun, not any one part such as the receiver (which has been US law since 1938, I think).
Permalink · non-US · Comments (1)
Memorial Day
Here's an early webpage I did on Civil War research, including tracking down a friend's fallen great-great-grandfather. He was MIA since June 4, 1864, but I showed pretty clearly that he was one of Arlington's unknowns, and they got his name added to the Bay City MI memorial to its Civil War dead.
Serious weapons fun
Over at Popular Mechanics,
A 60 lb 25mm chain gun, and a 5 lb. guided missile.
Targets a lot more fun than clay pigeons.
And some fun stuff for subs, too!
Supreme Court nominations
Some thoughts about the type of Justices a President Obama would nominate.
How many home FFLs?
Back in the 90s, Congress passed legislation meant to kill "home FFLs," guys who didn't have a storefront, etc.. The main hit was a requirement that an FFL comply with zoning and other local non-gun regulations: more home FFLs were of course in areas zoned for residental and not for business.
But I know at least a few survive (I assume because their zoning allowed it). What's the general experience with this in your area?
Permalink · Gun Control Act of 68 · Comments (26)
Word of shakeups in ATF command
Word is circulating that a number of ATF supervisors, from field up to high HQ levels, Assistant Directors and such, are being effectively suspended (effectively, but without using that term) while higher powers look into their competence and allegations of abuse and/or fraud. The Inspector General is said to be taking a role, and some of those involved in matters like Red's Trading Post are under the microscope.
About time; I just hope it goes far enough. There's a lot of good agents out there, who're perfectly reasonable toward firearm owners and honest in their work. The problem is for decades the agency has overlooked the ones who weren't and too often promoted them. (It was esp. bad in the late 70s, when the driving force was producing arrests and seizures, so that the abusive guys were "getting results" and the reasonable ones were not -- and for bureaucratic reasons, including the fact that US Attorneys wouldn't prosecute, felon-in-possession case were useless).
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (12)
Walter Williams on the Philadelphia cop-killers
Article here.
The local pols are basing calls for gun control on the murder of police Sgt. Stephen Liczbinski by three criminals. But...
"According to former Philly cop Michael P. Tremoglie's article "Who freed the cop-killers?" for the Philadelphia Daily News on May 8, all three homicide suspects had extensive criminal records. Levon Warner was sentenced in 1997 to up to 15 years for robbery, one to five for possessing an instrument of crime and five to 10 for criminal conspiracy. Howard Cain was convicted in 1996 on four counts of robbery and sentenced to five to 10 years on each count. Eric Floyd was sentenced to five to 10 years in 1995 for robbery, rearrested in 1999 for parole violation and later convicted in 2001 for two robberies."
Hmm... convicted of robbery, sentenced to 5-10 years in 1995, out on probation in 1999, violated it, convicted of two more robberies in 2001, and out on the street by 2008?
Over at Snowflakes in Hell, Sebastian has a great post, linking to the triggerman's criminal record. He had a 15 page rap sheet, including thirteen charges for illegally carrying a gun. plus eleven other gun charges ... all with charges dismissed. He was convicted on three-gun related charges. Basically, he'd be charged with about a dozen offenses -- theft, kidnapping, robbery, etc., etc., plead to one or two, get sentenced, get out, and repeat. In July 1993, he got 1-2 years (plea to receiving stolen property, a dozen other charges dropped). On March 1995, he got 26 charges dropped. In August 97 he got 2 years for escape and assault. about thirty other charges dismissed. In November 1997, he got 5-10 years for robbery (five separate counts, I assume concurrent sentences), about 50 other charges dropped. I haven't counted how many felony charges were filed against this guy, but it must run one to two hundred. Basically, he's a guy who, so long as he is free, will engage in robbery, assault, and theft, generally while packing a gun. What's he doing on the streets of Phillie?
Another of the murderous group had three felon in possession charges and six other gun-related charges.
Tentative settlement in Red's Trading Post
Story here. Not much detail, and it sounds as if ATF is still running it up the chain of command for full approval.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (2)
John Lott on Philadelphia and AW Bans
John Lott has an good article on the subject, in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Hat tip to reader Jack Anderson...
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (1)
Suit by schoolteacher over preemption
The Oregon Firearms Federation has a report here. Basically, a teacher would like to CCW, and school policy prevents that, so she's invoking the State preemption law, which forbids local units of government to regulate firearms possess and transportation. I 'd not give it high odds, but it is imaginative.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (3)
A clever self-defender meet a dumb crook
Story here. Tampa store owner Agustin De Jesus is sleeping in his shop when he sees that a guy has broken in, is rifling his cash register, and has left his truck idling outside.
So he jumps into the guy's truck and races away, depriving him of a getaway vehicle. He calls police. So does the burglar, to complain that someone stole his truck. And upon de Jesus returning to the scene, the burglar denounces him as the one who stole his truck, and is of course immediately arrested.
Hat tip to This Is True, a really fun mailing list. I got onto it when the operator was being given grief for having reported some pro-gun stories.
IowaHawk on Hillary's assassination mention
As usual, one very funny post.
Via Instapundit...
Permalink · humor · Comments (2)
NYC lawsuit--very strange event
Judge Jack Weinstein forbids New York to call Mayor Bloomberg as a witness.
If the witness is willing to testify, a party wants to call him, and his testimony is relevant, it's pretty peculiar for a judge to bar it. I could see an argument that the subject of the testimony is irrelevant, but Weinstein says the city should call someone else to testify to it, so he can't see it as irrelevant. Maybe the Mayor didn't really want to testify, so Weinstein has been tipped to that. Or maybe it's just the judge running plaintiffs' case for them, as he has in the past. I heard from an attorney who'd defended on a gun lawsuit in this court, and at the end of plaintiff's case he moved for judgment as a matter of law, since they hadn't proven their claim. Weinstein said he agreed they hadn't proven it, but they could prove it if they were establish this, and that, and the other thing, and he would allow them to reopen their case to prove what he had just ruled would be sufficient!
Hat tip to reader Jack Anderson...
Permalink · Gun manufacturer liability · Comments (5)
I suppose this settles one question
I.e., Would Hillary REALLY kill someone to get into the White House?. Or at least try to give someone else the idea?
I know the Clinton ambition and ruthlessness were powerful, but I didn't think they were totally unlimited.
I guess this settles the question of whether Obama might pick her as a running mate. The joke about the Vice President having nothing to do but read the obit column in the Washington Post might be a little too true. Sorta hard to team up with someone who be slapping their legs in glee if the heard you had been killed.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (5)
Car Dealership offering guns
Michelle Malkin has the story. A Butler, MO car dealership is offering a free gun with each car purchased. “Down here we all believe in God, guts and guns,” the dealer says.
Techno-bleg
I've got a webpage for selling my 2A documentary. It shows up OK on every browser I use. But I'm getting reports that when accessed by some (I think IE 7, with fonts set at a certain size) the type overlaps. If you could take a look at it and tell me what it looks like in your browser, it'd be appreciated. So would ideas on how to make it work properly.
Bloomberg lawsuit heading for trial
Story here.
Hat tip to reader William Taggart...
Permalink · Gun manufacturer liability · Comments (1)
Pro-gun control forces not optimistic
Story in The Hill.
"“It’s a pro-gun House, a pro-gun Senate and [Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) or Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.)] won’t want to deal with it,” McCarthy said.
McCarthy stressed that she is not giving up on reauthorizing the weapons ban that sunsetted in 2004, but also made clear she is not holding her breath."
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
Utah weighs restricting CCWs for nonresidents
The Deseret News has the story. The problem is that a majority of their applicants are from out of State, and this year they'll issue 40,000 of them.
Limiting it to residents might bump up against the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution (i.e, the original one, not the 14th Amendment). That's a complex subject; a challenge to the NY requirement that a person either live or have an office in-State in order to get a firearms permit there was upheld a while back on the tenuous ground that the State wasn't discriminating unfairly, it just found it easier to keep track of people who lived or officed there.
Hat tip to Joe Olson....
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (5)
Possible limits on ATF "letter rulings"
Background: agencies are supposed to follow detailed rules when issuing a "regulation": publish a proposal in the Federal Register, receive public comment, then publish a final rule with preamble answering the major comments. Plus comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act, Regulatory Reform Act, etc..
They also issue informal rulings in specific cases, sometimes by letter. ATF technical issues rulings all the time -- this device is or is not a firearm or machinegun, etc.. In practice since these have internal precedent, they can be cited in future letter rulings. (Or as more than one person has found out, they can be completely changed, perhaps on a personal or arbitrary basis). They aren't opened for public comment, usually aren't cleared by any high official, and don't have to comply with the various reg. statutes.
The White House and OMB have started cracking down on these. Here's Exec Office of the President's guidance. Here's an Executive Order. And here's OMB instructions. (all are pdf) As I read them, they include letter rulings within some requirements of an earlier EO, and require that significant rulings (rather narrowly defined) be posted on the web with opportunity for comment.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (5)
At last I get recognition!
From the VPC Blog (parody blog, that is):
"Runaway Jury is perhaps the preeminent movie of our times. It is so realistic and so truthful that the Brady Campaign holds a yearly showing during one of their fund-raisers.
.....
Gene Hackman’s Gun Lobby Attorney character is based on noted lawyer Dave Hardy. It is a well-known fact that Dave Hardy has access to a supercomputer and a team of fifty people. He steals evidence and cracks open encrypted data all the time. This is, in part, why the Gun Blobby was able to overturn New York’s Reasonable Lawsuit against gun manufacturers."
The Miller behind US v. Miller
Story here.
Permalink · US v. Miller · Comments (2)
Pro-gun bills moving in AZ
An email from AZ CDL is in extended remarks, below. The bills would allow carrying a firearm concealed in a motor vehicle without a permit (you can presently carry in the glove compartment or trunk that way, if holstered), bring the requirements for a CCW permit into line with the requirements for gun ownership, and clarify when a firearm may be displayed in self defense.
Continue reading "Pro-gun bills moving in AZ"
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (0)
Five years ago today
May 21, 2003. My ex, Frances, had managed to gesture and gasp out that it was time for the hospice, and was sliding into a coma. Here's her webpage, with more detail.
Permalink · Personal · Comments (3)
DC snafus
Pretty amazing, even by DC standards. The city winds up reinstating over a dozen officers fired for misconduct ... because it keeps missing a self-imposed deadline for making the decision. Apparently admin. judges have been ruling, for twenty years, that the deadline is binding, but the administrators keep ignoring it. Even for DC's staggeringly incompetent government, this is impressive!
Via Instapundit...
Olofson case
Snowflakes in Hell has a detailed post on US v. Olofson, complete with links to major documents in the case. It appears a good deal more complicated than had seemed. Apparently the fellow to whom Olofson had loaned the AR-15 was told not to put the selector switch in a third position. I was wondering how the prosecution had met the requirement that the defendant be shown to have known a full auto was full auto . I suspect this was it.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (13)
Thoughts on the Polar Bear listing
Interior just announced that it has ruled that the Polar Bear is a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. The basis is that global warming is causing its habitat to contact. I did ESA work for nearly ten years at Interior, and have a few thoughts.
1. From the news reports, the ruling also bans bringing PB parts into the US, which will basically end trophy hunting. Now, you can allow hunting of a threatened species (which isn't as much at risk as an endangered one). I can't see why not here. The threat is loss of habitat, not shrinking of the population. It postulates that there are now about 25,000 bears, and in decades there won't be habitat but for a fraction of that. If the limit is habitat, hunting isn't going to change the population any.
2. The Secretary's speech sounds like he's trying to evade the inevitable, which is that any action even arguably affecting global warming will require extensive review by Fish and Wildlife Service. Here are the rules in a nutshell:
Any federal action that has any possibility of affecting a species requires a may affect/will not affect initial finding. Note the "may" versus the "will not." Any action that simply "may" affect a species require further analysis.
That takes the form of a biological opinion, done by FWS staff. A biologist/botanist, or a team of them, draws up a detailed study of the species and the effect the action will have on it. The conclusion must find whether the action will jeopardize the species with extiction (note that the term is jeopardize, not a certainty it will do so) or not. They must also map out reasonable alternatives to the action that would have less risk, and lay out modifications to the action that will reduce its impact. This generally requires a lot of study and writing: the biologists must get up to speed on the technical aspects of the action, which lay outside their training. If a jeopardy finding is made, the action is generally blocked. And in any event, the result is subject to challenge by lawsuit. And courts love to grant preliminary injunctions to stop it, since if the result is wrong it can lead to extinction.
Now, put into that mix a formal finding that global warming menaces a listed species. Any federal agency conduct that "may" affect global warming is going to require a biological opinion at the very least, and become a subject of a lawsuit. Oil imports, ethanol, building refineries, mileage ratings of autos, land with growing plants, etc.. The only real exemptions would be for legislation (which is not agency action) and where an agency has absolutely no discretion (down to inability to impose terms and conditions).
And that's just sec. 7(a)(2) of the ESA. There's also the ambiguous 7(a)(1) which requires agencies to use their powers to "conserve" (i.e., affirmatively try to bring back from endangerment) listed species, and sec. 10 which makes it illegal for anyone (not just a federal agency) to "take" a listed species. I forget now what the regulations say about how much habitat modification is required in order to "take" (kill) members of a species.
Essentially, welcome to years of global warming litigation! I doubt Interior has a tenth of the biologists it's going to need to do the biological opinions, or tenth of the attorneys it will need for the litigation.
UPDATE: My prediction was right on. It didn't take long. And that's just a suit against Interior (which would seem to run afoul of Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, except to the extent it challenges only listing as threatened rather than as endangered). Lujan held that you have to sue the agency taking the action, rather than sue Fish and Wildlife Service for not having stopped them.
David Young and I at NRA convention
Here we are, in booth 1551. Left to right myself and David Young. (Typo corrected: original said Arlene Young in the middle; I was thinking of a different photo). David was selling his books and I was selling my Second Amendent documentary.
Continue reading "David Young and I at NRA convention"
Permalink · documentary film · Comments (5)
Sen. McCain's speech at NRA meeting
Transcript here.
Afterwards, Grover Norquist made an insightful comment. It would have been much better had McCain just dropped the last two paragraphs, relating to the war in Iraq. Odds are most of his listeners know his position there already. But their insertion made it likely that the media would seize upon them and make that the story, rather than his talk about firearms and gun laws.
Alderman lets gun registration expire
From SayUncle comes this amusing and appalling story.
Essentially, Chicago imposed handgun registration, a requirement to re-register annually, and a ban on all new registrations. Over the years, a number of people have forgotten to renew their registration, and been informed that they cannot reinstate it due to the handgun registration ban, and thus lost their guns.
Now, a Chicago Alderman who voted for those rules let HIS OWN handgun registration expire. So he's quietly introduced a proposal to create a 30 day amnesty during which handguns can be registered, but only if (1) they were previously registered and (2) the registration expired during a certain time period, which strangely spans when his registration expired.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (7)
DC police to get "assault weapons"
Story here.
Strange part is that the firearms sound like M-16s and M-4s converted over to semiauto. (1) surplus may be cheap, but unless they replace the receiver it's legally a full auto no matter what you do to convert it; (2) military M-4 cost around $1500, whereas AR-15 clones can be had for half that (and probably still less if you're buying in this sort of quantity); (3) has the government stopped buying M-4s at that price, since it apparently is selling off a surplus of them?
A Canadian take on the NRA Convention
In the Toronto Star.
Just got back, and am totally exhausted. Wayne said attendance was estimated at 60-70,000; they didn't have firm figures yet. There were somewhere around 3,000 booths. Got to meet a bunch of fellow gun bloggers -- Bitter and Sebastian, whom I'd met many times, Sharp as a Marble, SayUncle, The Smallest Minority, Joe Huffman and some others that now slip my tired mind.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (6)
Sandy Froman on the election and future Supreme Courts
Here's Sandy's latest Townhall column, on that subject. She makes some excellent points.
Update: typo corrected, thanks.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (9)
Exhibiting at NRA Convention
David E. Young and I will be at booth 1551 at the NRA Convention. I'll be promoting my documentary film, In Search of the Second Amendment, and he'll be promoting his books on the history of the right to arms. Drop on by if you're in the area!
Solicitor General resigns
Paul Clement has resigned as SG. The Washington Times suggests that White House opposition to his position in Parker/Heller was a factor, although I'm unsure how much weight to give the suggestion.
Hat tip to reader Jack Anderson...
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (10)
GA broadens rt to carry
Story here. The legislation allows CCW holders to carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, on mass transit, etc..
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (2)
Light blogging
Out of town on business yesterday afternoon and today--will have little to no chance to update anything...
NYC losing suppression mtns in fed. court
Story here. Gist is that NYC, in order to get the longer prison sentences that come under federal law, has arranged for felons in possession to be charged in federal court. But they've been losing cases right and left because the judges find the testimony as to why the person was searched incredible (in the bad sense of that term).
"But a closer look at those prosecutions reveals something that has not been trumpeted: more than 20 cases in which judges found police officers’ testimony to be unreliable, inconsistent, twisting the truth, or just plain false. The judges’ language was often withering: “patently incredible,” “riddled with exaggerations,” “unworthy of belief.”"
What's almost as interesting is that NY is helping to initiate federal cases because, presumably, NY law gives a lower (probably significantly lower, given the trouble involved) sentence for felons caught carrying. I thought NY had such a crime problem that they wanted the other 49 states to act in conformity with their desires? Certainly doesn't sound like it.
Hat tip to reader Jack Anderson....
Walmart and sportsmen
An interesting article. I didn't have time a while back to blog about Warmart's deal with Bloomberg to do things like videotape firearm sales. It was interesting, since (outside of Alaska) Walmart only sells hunting rifles and shotguns. I guess Bloomberg has bigger targets than urban handguns... oh, and the linked page has a link to where you can give Walmart some feedback.
David Codrea interview of David E. Young
Over at The War on Guns. David Young's written two crucial books on the 2nd Amendment (one of which was quoted I forget how many times in Emerson v. US, and both of which were quoted in Heller amicus brief). He and I will be exhibiting at booth 1551 at the NRA Annual Meeting.
Opinion on Eagle Act, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and Indians
Here, in pdf. Altho it construes a statute, it applies a number of constitutional standards. When I was at Interior, I worked with some of these issues. The Eagle Protection Act generally outlaws intentionally killing eagles or using their parts. Certain Indian tribes consider them essential to various religious services. To try to deal with that, Interior puts dead eagles (road kill, mostly) into a repository and rations out feathers, etc.
Problem here was that this tribe maintained that the eagle being offered to the Almighty must be pure, i.e., not road kill. In fact, the stricter adherents maintained the eagle must be captured live by a person. Having seen their claws and beaks, I think I'd contract that job out.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (5)
Meet the gun lobby....
69 year old lady carrying for two grandkids, but with 450,000 Florida members behind her. Story here.
Permalink · NRA · Comments (2)
It depends on whose ox is being gored...
Cash-strapped Massacchusetts (wonder why?) comes up with a plan. Fund social services, etc. by imposing a 2.5% tax on college foundations, to the extent their assets exceed a billion dollars. Yes, billion with a "b." Oh, the indignation!
Via Instapundit...
ATF & FBI in turf fights
Story here. That's not unpredictable: "merging" two agencies by having them both report to one Cabinet official doesn't change anything. Where they overlap, it has a downside -- merging all intelligence functions means those above only get one "position" rather than 2-3 that might give better insight.
FBI's had turf wars with CIA over foreign intelligence gathering, and I seem to recall with DEA over drug cases. I'm sure ATF sees FBI as wanting to grab all the best explosives cases and leave them with the uninteresting or less fruitful ones, and the FBI sees itself as the older brother with certain perks.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
ATF & FBI in turf fights
Story here. That's not unpredictable: "merging" two agencies by having them both report to one Cabinet official doesn't change anything. Where they overlap, it has a downside -- merging all intelligence functions means those above only get one "position" rather than 2-3 that might give better insight.
FBI's had turf wars with CIA over foreign intelligence gathering, and I seem to recall with DEA over drug cases. I'm sure ATF sees FBI as wanting to grab all the best explosives cases and leave them with the uninteresting or less fruitful ones, and the FBI sees itself as the older brother with certain perks.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
What would a narrow, pro-individual right finding in Heller mean?
A question raised by a comment a few days back, too busy just now to find it. Suppose, as I'd expect, the Supremes come down, perhaps narrowly, for an individual right, that there are some limits, but here we only need rule that a total federal ban on handguns is not a permissible limitation.
What does the near-term future world look like, in terms of (1) future litigation and (2) politics and (3) gun control promoting organizations? On the last, would it be a great blow to morale, or just confirm their modern tactics of asking for rather small things (instead of national registration and permit systems, take that bayonet lug off that nasty-looking gun!) I have little idea.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (16)
"We're all gun nuts now"
It's the title of an election-related article in the Weekly Standard.
"With both contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination evading the gun control issue as if it were sniper fire, you couldn't blame gun control advocates for feeling bitter. Yet Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence--the pro-gun control counterweight to the National Rifle Association--says Obama and Clinton are "coming fairly close to delivering the message that we'd like." On licensing and registering guns, Helmke says, they are "being realistic" in recognizing "there's no support for pushing that forward at this stage." His thoughts on the candidates' ducking questions on the D.C. gun ban? "They're politicians, and most politicians on tough calls do not answer."
Where to comment on allowing CCW holders to carry in national parks
Here's the comment website. I'd cut and paste the Docket ID, FWS-R9-NSR-2008-0062, into the message just to make sure it gets to the right place. You can read the proposed rule as a pdf off the comment page, too.
The admin rules are essentially: if the agency wants to change a rule, they must publish a proposed rule with explanation. The public must be given a reasonable time (30-60 days is customary) to comment on it. Then the agency publishes the final rule, together with a response to significant comments. So it's not just a letter to the editor: although numbers don't hurt, logical reasons affect the process better than simple statements of support. I'd suggest emphasizing how law-abiding CCW licenesees are (preferrably with links to sites with hard numbers), and responding to claims it'd lead to risk of poaching.
UPDATE: reader Carl in Chicago provides his comment, pasted into extended remarks, below.
Continue reading "Where to comment on allowing CCW holders to carry in national parks"
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (3)
Defense of others in Dallas
Video here. I see an officer carrying an AR-15 variant, not clear if that's what was used, or if it was the officer's gear.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (6)
GA court strikes down Atlanta ordinance on guns in parks
Story here. Congrats to the plaintiff, GeorgiaCarry.org.
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (3)
Comcast continuing...
I told the person yesterday, when the tech people are coming out, call my office number, here it is. Do not call the cell number, the one on the account.
They were supposed to be here between 10 and 12: nobody showed up.
So I call back in... and am told the tech called me. I ask, did he call the office number? Yes, that's the number we gave him. I responded -- I have caller ID, that shows two calls today, and I answered both. Uh... no explanation, we'll tell him to put you on the list when he's available.
Checked home phone. Yep, he called there. Called back and was told someone will be here "today."
Someone was angered enough to create Comcast Must Die.
UPDATE: 6 PM local, it was fixed. First repair guy again called the wrong number, but that was handy since I wasn't here, but was available via the wrong number. He showed up, traced the problem to the box at the edge of the property (which contains the amplifier), but that was something a separate team had to fix. They showed up, left (I suspect to get a replacement?) returned, and high speed is operational again.
Mayor Bloomberg has problems with 1st as well as the 2nd amendment
According to the New York Sun, Mayor Bloomberg has moved, in the suit against a GA gun dealer, to forbid the defense from mentioning the Second Amendment. As the paper notes, "While trials are often tightly choreographed, with lawyers routinely instructed to not tell certain facts to a jury, a gag order on a section of the Constitution would be an oddity."
I suppose we'll see if Hon. Jack Weinstein has problems with both amendments as well.
UPDATE: it's called "long arm jurisdiction." A very technical end of the law (took a case to the state Supreme Court on it once). Basically, you can sue a person or company where they reside, and also sue a company where it "does business," so to speak. If you go beyond that, it's a denial of due process. The question of how much contact the company has to have with a State is confused and confusing, even at the US Supreme Court level. But local courts of course want to assert jurisdiction (having locals sue out of Staters sounds like a great idea). In my case, it was product liability, a single action being dropped and firing. The mfr was in Italy. At the time the gun was sold, the mfr had no advertising in the US, no local company. Its sole contact had been to make one lot of arms, which an American importer based in Connecticut picked up in Italy and sold in the US. Twenty years later, one of them was dropped in AZ and fired, killing a local. How it got from CN to AZ was not determined; someone could have bought it back east and moved here.
AS Supremes held that the AZ courts had jurisdiction over the Italian manufacturer, and the US Supremes denied cert..
Purposeful availment--I forget how they dealt with that. Claimed to go with the Asahi plurality, using that standard, but then construed it to mean ... memory is faint, but it was something like: this was shipped to the US, a single-action is a Western looking gun and would be likely appeal to a person in a Western state such as AZ, aha, that's purposeful availment of AZ markets! The state Supremes were very pro-plaintiff then, which I didn't mind since I mostly do plaintiffs' work. The case was A. Uberti v. Leonardo, 181 Ariz. 565, 892 P.2d 1354 (1995).
Permalink · Gun manufacturer liability · Comments (8)
NYC police gunfights
A summary of studies.
Two figures -- only 13% of shots fired hit, and only 34% of the time was the person being fired on hit at all -- aren't too astonishing. One of the revolutions in training came years back, when they realized that people were being trained in shooting from a good position at a well-lit target in a fixed location, when in fact gunfights usually occurred under conditions too dark to see the sights, while you were trying to take cover, the other guy was doing anything but standing still facing you, and your blood was full of adrenalin, often with bullets whizzing past.
Hat tip to Joe Olson...
Typos fixed...
Atty interested in talking to private investigators in Chicago
Just got a relayed email from an attorney who has represented several private investigators and security folks in that city. Even though state law says they're exempt from many gun regulations, the city police have been busting them or confiscating their guns.
If any of you know anyone in that situation, they should contact attorney Joel Ostrander, voice 1-708-383-2112, fax 1-708-383-2237. I don't have an email for him.
Video of Len Savage on CNN re:BATF
Right here. At least I think so. On dialup I can't do very much to watch video.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (6)
Comcast ... grrrr...
Some Comcast workers are out front, installing a new distribution box or whatever it's called. High speed internet goes down (it did so temporarily yesterday while they worked). OK, it's called working on the system.
I look out and notice everyone's gone. And the high-speed still doesn't function.
Call their number. Reach a human, who asks that I test everything here. I do. Then he puts me on hold for another department ... and the call is cut off.
Call back, run thru the entire matter. Am told, around 2:30 PM, that the earliest they can have a repair guy out here is between 10 AM and noon tommorrow. He'll call first, and it's mandatory that someone answer. If no one picks up, he will not try again, just cancel the appointment.
Fortunately, I have dialup backups on this computer, but the rest of the family has none on theirs.
Brady Campaign campaigning
Against the Ill. Firearm Owner ID card. They want background checks in addition to the firearm permit, because the permit spans ten years. (I think there is a requirement, for a gun permit system to exempt the holder from background checks, that the permits not go beyond a certain time, or have a way to revoke if the holder is convicted of something disabling).
UPDATE: see comments. Carl in Chicago, who oughta know, says the ID cards are updated if convictions occur, and background checks are run for each sale atop them. If that's so, then Brady is campaigning only because they don't understand the law.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (6)
CCW and NRA meeting
Snowflakes in Hell is reporting that CCW permit holders can carry in the convention center, anyway. Maybe I'm old and overly cautious, but I'm not going shod. I wouldn't count much on a newspaper article (Sebastian already notes one correction to the story; this may or may not be true as to the celebration of Amer. values), wouldn't know the local laws (is the center only open to concealed carry?) and any misunderstanding will be on the evening news (esp. if there is more than one misunderstanding).
S&W integral trigger lock failures
They're being discussed at the Smith & Wesson Forum. Quite a few reported -- trigger lock engaging under recoil, if dropped, etc..
Link via Xavier's Thoughts, reporting his own gun lockup.
Hat tip to reader John M. Maraldo, who adds: "puts me in mind of the differing attitudes gunnies and gunphobes have as to safety. Ask a gunny what safety is and they'll relate the rules of safe handling and safe shooting. Ask them what safe design is and they'll tell you it is a design that makes the gun shoot when the trigger is pulled, but not when the trigger is not pulled. Ask gunphobes what safe design is and they'll tell you it is a design which makes the gun unlikely or difficult."
Permalink · shooting · Comments (5)
Burglar fights with police, shoots self by accident
Story here.
Pro-gun media pieces
1. Just got tipped that Lou Dobbs, CCN at 7 PM, will be doing a pro-gun piece. Could be tonight or tommorrow night, or perhaps later.
2. Howard Nemerov will be on NRANews.com tonight, at 11:40 PM EDT. Apparently the topic will be Brady and VPC's system of ranking states.
Steve Halbrook's new book out!
"The Founders' Second Amendment." You can order it here, from Independent Institute. 20% discount, so $23.16. Which for a 448 page hardcover, is very, very modest.
Antigun fundraising
Snowflakes in Hell has an interesting post regarding the pro and antigun PACs this election cycle. Brady Campaign's PAC has under $50,000, and has so far raised... $73. NRA's PAC has over six million, and has raised eight million, of which about 3/4 came from donors of under $200.
His guess that perhaps Brady has been forced to cross off PAC fundraising in an effort to keep its regular operations bankrolled does seem a likely explanation. But $73?
Hat tip to Instapundit, whose referrals are keeping Snowflakes in Hell swamped for the moment...
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
McCain announces Justice Advisory Committee
Story here. I have no knowledge of what such a critter does, but the story says it would advise him on judicial appointments. What stands out to me is that it includes:
Sandy Froman, the Tucson attorney who is former NRA President.
Prof. Eugene Volokh, a quite pro-2nd Amendment academic and operator of the Volokh Conspiracy;
Prof. Orin Kerr, a member of the Volokh Conspiracy.
Charles Cooper, whom I recall filing some pro-2A amici, tho the memory is faint.
Former Sen. Phil Graham, with whom I've gone shooting.
Sen. John Kyl, quite pro gun.
Former Sen. Fred Thompson.
UPDATE to comments: Nope, a different Frank Keating! Former Gov. of Oklahoma, not former convictee in AZ. I actually have a bit info regarding the other. McCain was junior Senator, and the senior one, Dennis DeConcini, talked him to going along for a meeting with the agency that was investigating Keating's savings and loan. Supposedly, it was just a meeting to encourage the regulator to act quickly and not delay a ruling any farther. At the meeting, however, DeConcini bluntly pressured the regulator to act favorably to Keating. Who, it turned out, had been ripping off the S&L blind, or equivalent conduct (I forget now).
I was told by officials at the U of Arizona that the outcome made the football games a bit difficult. Both Senators had seating in the, I forget the term, the fancy box seats up on top. McCain was so angry at DeConcini that, to avoid a conflict, they had to work things out so neither Senator entered or left at the same time, and neither passed the other during the game.
Hat tip to Joe Olson....
Permalink · Politics · Comments (12)
Gunfight and police siege ... in London
Story here.
Permalink · non-US · Comments (3)
NRA celebration to be loaded with former candidates
The Kentucky political blog PolWatchers reports that the NRA's Celebration of American Values in Louisville will be attended by John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Karl Rove, several senatorial candidates, Those backing Ron Paul won't be left out, as he's having his own rally on the 17th.
Permalink · Politics · Comments (6)
Form 4473 under Paperwork Reduction Act review
Here's the Federal Register notice, in pdf.
Basically, under the Paperwork Reduction Act, every agency is required to file, with the Office of Management and Budget, any form it has that requests info from the public, together with its estimate of how many hours are spent filling in the form (for 4473, ATFE estimates 4.3 million hours annually; they estimate 10 million are filled out at 25 minutes each.
Then every so many years it comes up for OMB review, and the public can send comments suggesting how the time burden can be reduced. (One that comes to my mind: how about eliminating the requirement for detailed info, in the vast majority of cases where the buyer is presenting state-issued ID that already has all that recorded?)
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (4)
Ooops...
Police chief shoots self in foot while clearing a jam.
Ev Nappen on VPC state rankings
Ev Nappen has a column in the Union Leader on the subject.
"The VPC dares not look at the bottom seven states instead of the arbitrary five. That is because, lo and behold, New Hampshire ranks seventh from the bottom in per capita gun deaths. New Hampshire is undeniably a strong pro-gun state that greatly respects the individual right to keep and bear arms.
New Hampshire is beaten only by sixth-place Connecticut, the home of "Gun Valley," a major area of gun making in the United States. For that matter, all of New England is in the bottom 12....
he VPC also has to purposely limit its selectively picked data to states rather than cities. This is because the one jurisdiction with the strictest gun control in the entire nation is the District of Columbia. In D.C., all handguns are banned, long arms must be stored disassembled, locked and unloaded, and law-abiding citizens have no right to carry guns. According to the same 2005 CDC data relied upon by the VPC, D.C. has the highest rate of shooting deaths of any place in the United States! The district has well over double the national average."
UPDATE: Reader Denton Bramwell has this pdf examining the similar Brady Campaign rankings. Essentially, if you chart States' Brady rankings and their homicide rates, you find no relationship at all. States with As and States with Fs are equally as likely to have a high or low homicide rate, suggesting that Brady's agenda doesn't do anything to reduce violence.
Hat tip to reader Jack Anderson...
Claim for attorney's fees
The Goldwater Institute in Phoenix challenged a city gift, essentially, to a developer and shopping center. The trial court ruled against them, and now the developer is seeking $600K in attorneys' fees for their having had the temerity to suggest the gift violated the state constitutional ban on subsidizing individuals.
Another 911 case
In Madison, WI. Brittany Sue Zimmermann calls 911 from cell phone (nobody's talking about what she said). At one point she stops talking, and the 911 operator just hangs up. No word as to whether the operator bothered notifying officers.
The next day her fiance finds her murdered in her apartment.
Note all this is coming out a month after the event.
Here's another story, reporting that 911 did not dispatch police.
Josh Horwitz on Heller
At the Huffington Post. Horwitz is leader of one of the antigun groups (they change names so frequently I can't recall what it's named now) created by some mega-billionaire.
His theme is rejection of an "insurrectionist" purpose behind the 2A (i.e., that it was meant to provide a safeguard against tyranny). He doesn't deny the history, just doesn't like the idea because it precludes the government having a "monopoly on force." (Madison's insight was deeper than Weber's: he saw the US as composed of people, states, and the federal government. By this standard, none of the three has a true "monopoly."
What I find interesting about all repudiations of "insurrectionist purposes" is that they are left empty when it comes down to: so what WAS the Second Amendment about? It had to have purposes, right? If not enabling resistance to tyranny, aren't you left with self-defense as a purpose? But for some strange reason they don't like that idea, either.
Permalink · Parker v. DC · Comments (10)
Civil War collector killed by140 year old shell
Story here.
When I lived back there, I'd see lots of civil war cannon projectiles for sale. Collectors would roam the old battlefields (only tiny portions of which were parks) with metal detectors. I read about one who had invented a remote controlled drill press, with water cooling of the bit and a closed circuit TV, so that he could drill into and deactivate them while staying a safe distance away. And gad, this was a 75-pounder.
UPDATE More on the issue, this time from the experts, including a picture and CAD images of the naval fuses. Some news stories suggest that he was grinding rust off the outside of the shell, but I can't see anyone trying that without deactivating it first; he must have known how spark-sensitive black powder is. Just from the size of it he would have known it was a naval shell (for land use, 6-12 pounders were standard, and a 32 pounder was heavy siege artillery), and I'd assume knew about naval fuses.
Hat tip to reader Bill Bailey....
Permalink · shooting · Comments (6)
Man arrested for pointing finger
Story here.
"The former mayor is under indictment, the Village Board is hamstrung by infighting and a defiant landowner has vowed to put a pig farm on his property to stop the town from building a water tower.
But the news on everyone's lips in far north suburban Island Lake is about Greg Kachka and his T-shirt."
He was arrested for disorderly conduct, on the claim that while wearing a "Don't run, you'll only die tired" T-shirt during a heated village council meeting, he pointed a finger at one member while she was rolling her eyes at her constituents, and the claim he also extended his thumb, making it a gun-like symbol.
It's interesting that the council members say it was only brought to their attention after the meeting. Whatever disorderly conduct may be (usually including disturbing the peace), it doesn't include things that have to be "brought to your attention" after the fact.
Hat tip to Dan Gifford...
Tortonto Star on Chi handgun ban
Quite an interesting article.
"Bans? "That's what people do when they don't understand the problem."" says a former gang leader.
Hat tip to Dan Gifford...
Permalink · State legislation · Comments (4)
Arming teachers
Some thoughts, from reader Steven Wright.
Supreme Court case on Lautenburg Amendment
An attorney in US v. Hayes has a website on pleadings in the appeal. Hayes won in the 4th Circuit, the government sought cert., and it was granted; briefings have not yet begun.
The issue is one of statutory interpretation. Lautenberg forbids a person to possess a firearm if they have been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor. That in turn is defined as a misdemeanor that "has, as an element, the use or attempted use of physical force, ... committed by a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim..."
The defendant had been convicted of ordinary battery, not of an offense against a specific domestic violence statute. The battery was against a spouse, but that was not an element of the offense. That is, while the offense involved a spouse, the State could have gotten a conviction whether that was true or not. It had no duty to prove it.
So the question is whether the words of the statute mean "an element of which is force against a spouse" or mean "an element of which is force, and which happens to be committed against a spouse." That is, does "an element" refer only to use of force, or to use of force against a spouse. This is course the sort of fine point that we attorneys love -- but in this case it determines whether Hayes is to be a federal felon for having a firearm ten years after a misdemeanor plea.
Permalink · Gun Control Act of 68 · Comments (10)
Index of firearms groups
Alan Korwin has posted an interactive map of pro-gun State organizations. He asks that if you know of some he hasn't got listed, you email him with their web pages.
Monica Conyers gets chewed up by school kids
In a meeting of the Detroit City Council, Mrs. John Conyers, a councilwoman, starts screaming and calls the Council president (who is bald) "Shreck."
The episode is followed by her meeting with a group of primary school students, who get by far the better of the exchange. A 6th grader says "that's what a 2nd grader would do." And to her protests that, well, you kids have done stuff like that in your life, comes the rejoinder, "but you're an adult. We're supposed to look up to you."
Hat tip to reader cmitchz...