« May 2012 | Main | July 2012 »
June 2012
Now, this is a shocker
Justice Department announces it won't prosecute the Attorney General.
I wonder at the wisdom of announcing it, though. As I recall the next step in a criminal contempt citation is for Issa to ask for himself or others to be appointed to prosecute, in the name of the House. Normally he'd have to give Justice a reasonable time in which to act, but now there is no such need.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (5)
If the House REALLY wants to press the contempt issue...
There is the "inherent contempt" power, where the House orders the arrest of the defendant, and can try him then and there, and pass sentence. It hasn't been used since 1934, when the Senate sentenced a fellow who destroyed evidence to ten days in jail. It was upheld by the Supreme Court in Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 (1935). ("Here, we are concerned, not with an extension of congressional privilege, but with vindication of the established and essential privilege of requiring the production of evidence. For this purpose, the power to punish for a past contempt is an appropriate means.") The House sends out its Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest the defendant, he is tried on the spot, and the House decides whether to convict.
All the more ironic, in that not too many years ago the Demos were suggesting its use against a Republican administration. One pointed out that the the Capitol has an unused jail cell for just that occasion.
Hat tip to Jim Norell, a husband of the late Nancy Norell and a former Senate staffer who reminded me of the Capitol "dungeon."
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (7)
Eric Holder vote coming down
Pelosi just announced the Demos will walk out on the vote.
Rep. Chaffetz is kicking ass and taking numbers.
The Demos repeatedly invoke a constitutional duty of the branches of government to cooperate and work with each other. I wonder where that provision is found?
Issa says that the wiretap applications (he cannot give details due to their being under seal) show that high-ups in DoJ (they have to be approved by an Ass't AG, as I recall) show that any reader of them would know that guns were being walked. And this before Brian Terry was killed.
Time for debate has expired. Rep. Dingell moves to remand to committee for additional hearings, largely on Operation Wide Receiver. He chews into ATF leadership pretty well! He says that he's defended the Second Amendment more than any other member of the House (which is a fair claim).
Dingell motion goes to a recorded vote.
It loses.
Now the vote on whether to cite. It passes, supported by 17 Demos. About 100 did walk out.
A second motion to empower the committee to bring a declaratory action in the District Court. The majority wants to move on two fronts, recognizing that the DoJ isn't likely to move fast on charging the AG.
Issa shuts Cummings up, firmly. Good. The guy's tough.
Second resolution is up ... Cummings calls for a recorded vote. (??? why? I was wondering if Pelosi was clever to stage a walk out. NRA was going to score the vote, and probably other groups would do the same. So maybe with a walk-out Demos could say they hadn't voted against it. But now they've returned, and Cummings make a motion that puts their votes on the record, when he could have just let it pass on the voice vote).
Second resolution passes, 255-93, 4 presents and 89 not voting. (I may be a bit off, I missed the last few seconds of the vote). The last number is quite impressive.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (3)
Last minute meetings won't stop contempt vote
Story here.
I wouldn't score showing 14 documents, the night before the vote, as a showing of good faith.
Fast and Furious: American Thinker asks some good questions
Right here. I especially like:
1. Could the possibility that this plan was concocted at the very top of the administration, putting it on par with Watergate, explain Eric Holder's entrenched refusal to release the tens of thousands of documents being sought by congressional investigators?
. . . . .
4. Does anyone really think an ambitious politician like Holder would risk career-ending contempt of Congress charges to protect some incredibly stupid subordinates who supposedly, all by themselves, planned and implemented such a boondoggle?
5. In an administration known for its quickness in throwing friends and associates under the bus in matters of self-preservation, is it not remarkable that rather than being so dispatched by Holder, many of the key players in F&F have been promoted despite denials by their bureau?
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Fast and Furious: Issa stands his ground
He sends a letter to the White House, telling the President that:
"“Either you or your most senior advisers were involved in managing Operation Fast and Furious and the fallout from it, including the false Feb. 4, 2011 letter provided by the attorney general to the committee, Or, you are asserting a presidential power that you know to be unjustified solely for the purpose of further obstructing a congressional investigation.”
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Border Patrol union protests idiotic brainwashing
Apparently they're being taught that if they come across an 'active shooter,' mass murderer, they should run and hide or, if cornered, throw things.
"These types of mandatory brainwashing courses and the idiocy that accompanies them are simply stunning when they are force-fed to law enforcement officers. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that any three of the above shootings would have been stopped cold by an off-duty law enforcement officer or a law abiding citizen with a gun. The Fort Hood shooting would have been stopped cold by someone with a gun as well. The shooters in these situations depend on unarmed and scared victims."
Gotta love BP....
Contempt vote for Eric Holder
Word is that it's set for Thursday.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Political impact of executive privilege claim
Dick Morris believes that opines that Obama's invoking executive privilege was a damaging mistake. He notes that presidents don't invoke executive privilege four months before election day over matters of principle; they do it to conceal a scandal. But by invoking it, Obama makes the coverup focus on himself, rather than on Holder or his subordinates.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (2)
Excellent shooting from a 14 year old
A Phoenix teen is babysitting his siblings when a person breaks in and points a gun. Score Teen 1, Perp 0.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
NY Post on Fast and Furious
"Pssst — heard the one about the lethal scandal that reaches to the upper levels of the Obama administration and may turn out to be bigger than Watergate? A crime in which two American agents have been killed, and which the Justice Department has been furiously trying to cover up for more than 18 months?
If you answered “no,” you’re not alone. The mainstream media have largely ignored the lethal — and most likely deliberate — “gunwalking” operation known as Fast and Furious. The plan, as ridiculous as it sounds, was to knowingly sell weapons to Mexican drug cartels, in hopes of tracing the guns. Of course, our government lost track of them."
And
"Wishing to “prove” the lie that 90% of the guns used in Mexican drug violence originate in America (the real figure is closer to 17%), Justice used the failed Operation Wide Receiver as the model for a larger operation deliberately designed to fail.
That way, they could point in feigned horror at the recovered American weapons and crack down on legitimate gun dealers — the very dealers they had forced to sell weapons to the cartels via “straw purchasers” in the first place."
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (6)
Procedures for bringing contempt of Congress charges
I've added this as an update below, but it merits posting here as well. Ken Klukowski has written a law review article on the procedure for bringing a contempt of Congress charge; while I can't find it online, I can find his article on it at Breitbart. In brief, the House must vote to cite, then...
1. The charges are referred to the US Atty for D.C., who of course works for Eric Holder, and is rather unlikely to charge him.
2. The House then votes again, to authorize one of its members to bring suit for the documents. (I'm not clear from the article how the contempt power links to this. In civil contempt, the person is ordered to produce or be punished, and there is no right to a separate trial, jury trial, etc.. But if he produces, there is no punishment. In criminal contempt, the failure to produce is treated as a "done deal." There was a lawful order, and it was violated. He can be punished even if he later produces. In turn, since it is a criminal charge, there is a right to a separate trial, usually trial by jury, etc.).
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
"Why Can't We Be Like France?"
It's the title of Steve Halbrook's latest article. From the abstract: "This article counsels “be careful what you wish for,” using the experiences of France as the paradigm."
Permalink · non-US · Comments (2)
Unusual move in George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin
Story here. His attorneys have released to the media, and , posted to the internet, his videotaped re-enactment, written statement, and audio interviews.
I agree with my friend Don Kates: a defense attorney's impulse is to silence his client, because he's generally guilty (of at least something) and speaking out just gives the prosecution more ammo against him. If the defense is passing out the defendant's statements here, it means they are sure that he is clearly innocent and there are no flaws in his story, and if it goes to trial the result will be a prosecutorial debacle.
SOCTUS on juries and criminal fines
Southern Union v. U.S., handed down today. After a jury trial, Southern Union was convicted of violating the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the punishment for which includes a fine of up to $50,000 per day of violation. The trial court found that it had been in violation for 762 days, making the max $38 million, and it imposed fines of $18 million. Southern Union argued that any fine over the one-day max was unconstitutional, since the jury had not been asked to find how many days of violation were involved. The Supreme Court agreed, 6-3. It's an unusual split: the majority includes Sotomayor, Scalia and Ginsburg, while the dissent is Breyer, Kennedy, and Alito.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (2)
Article on executive privilege
A short piece in the Washington TImes. I handled FOIA requests when I was with the government. At least at my level (career staffers rather than the POTUS) the rules were essentially that you could withhold deliberative materials, where staffers advised on or debated what to do, thus ensuring they could evaluate things without being chilled (no agency will, of course, agree that that applies to private citizens). But it could not withhold factual portions, parts that described happenings.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Lively day for Fast and Furious
First, Obama (not Holder) invokes executive privilege over the Fast and Furious papers. Then, Issa's Committee holds Holder in contempt of Congress. The next step is a vote by the House (it doesn't have to go to the Senate). After that the charge is referred to DoJ. If it (surprise!) refuses to press charges, I believe the House appoints one of its members to press charges in its name.
UPDATE: Ken Klukowski has written a law review article on the procedure for bringing a contempt of Congress charge; while I can't find it online, I can find his article on it at Breitbart.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (7)
NRA will score the committee vote on Holder
Report here. "Scoring" means a vote is sufficiently important to firearm rights to where it will be considered in determining a legislator's ranking and whether he/she gets endorsed.
contempt vote nears on Holder
Story here. Issa is holding firm, it seems. I'm in DC right now, but have to fly out before the action begins.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
Fast and Furious: down to who blinks first
The contempt vote is tomorrow... and Eric Holder is asking to negotiate.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (5)
Interesting discussion of the proposed small arms treaty
Right here.
1875 marksmanship manual
"How To Become an Expert Shot." The author counsels that as your bore becomes fouled, velocities will drop and shots come in lower. No idea if that effect was significant enough to require compensating for it.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (0)
1875 marksmanship manual
"How To Become an Expert Shot." The author counsels that as your bore becomes fouled, velocities will drop and shots come in lower. No idea if that effect was significant enough to require compensating for it.
Permalink · shooting · Comments (0)
Just what is needed....
Teen commits suicide with black powder muzzle loader, father lobbies to regulate them."
A loss like that one is always staggering -- I've seen death in the eye from my own standpoint and that of a child (google "alpha one antitrypsin") and, believe me, the first is far easier than the second -- but regulating behavior whose consequences are so rare as to be a "black swan event" is not really the best way of working off the pain.
No good deed goes unpunished....
Oregon man tries to rescue rodent from a cat he befriended, gets bitten, and winds up with bubonic plague. Never heard of septicemia plague before, but septicemic anything is extremely dangerous.
Fast and Furious crisis peaking....
Sipsey Street Irregulars posts that congressional investigators have found a 2010 Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo reporting 50 "walked" guns were traced to Mexican crime scenes ... authored by Agent Jaimie Zapata, who would later be ambushed and killed by men using more "walked" guns. ICE is part of DHS, which has so far been treating Fast and Furious as a Justice/BATF matter of which they had little knowledge.... this memo is bad news for Ms. Napolitano.
David Codrea reports that Mike V adds "“We are at a critical juncture here, ... You need to let your readers know that, and ask them to once again call their congressmen, especially if they’re on the [House Oversight and Government Reform] Committee, to beat them up and make them aware there will be a political price for not voting for contempt.”
I think it goes even farther than that. We're talking two Cabinet departments that have been in deep coverup mode....
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (0)
Journalism
The AP had an article today on the increased popularity of four cylinder auto engines, noting that designers are boosting their power and efficiency in three ways. First, direct injection (which is hardly new), and which the author explained "mixes air and gas in the chamber that surrounds the piston." Like the cylinder, I suppose. He got turbocharging roughly correct. Then, "some vehicles shut off their engines automatically at stoplights. They can run pumps and other devices off the battery rather than a belt that sucks power from the engine."
I think it was Glenn Reynolds who remarked that after you keep spotting errors and misunderstandings in areas where you have some knowledge, you start to wonder if journalists are as ignorant in all other areas, it's just that you lack the background to spot their errors there.
Which brings us to "no retreat laws," the story-writing fad of the day.
The Daytona Beach News Journal lists local cases where "no retreat" applied.
1. A fellow jumped by a knife-armed attacker, who tried to start his car to flee and fired when it wouldn't start. "No retreat" hardly governs there -- he tried to retreat.
2. A person who shot a burglar who had threatened to kill him. Even in the minority of States that require retreat, most if not all make an exception inside your own house.
3. Another response to a burglary.
4. A case where the defendant shot another person in an argument, and his attorney can't say whether "no retreat" applies.
The Chicago Sun-Times editorializes that "For centuries, the law has said you can’t kill someone if there’s a way to avoid it. That should still be the standard." Fact: the vast majority of American States (I'm told forty) have never had a retreat requirement. (My own State's Supreme Court rejected it in the 19th century). Even those that have a retreat requirement recognize that it doesn't apply if retreat would be dangerous (which is usually the case if you're being attacked).
On other fronts, the Muskegon Chronicle editorializes regarding "assault rifles," that "The real danger here is the risk of one of these assault weapons hitting a fellow hunter. Consider what might have happened if former Vice President Dick Cheney had been toting a semiautomatic when he nearly bagged a lawyer deep in the heart of Texas."
Permalink · media · Comments (7)
Fast and Furious reaching crisis stage
Sipsey Street Irregulars is reporting that one or two high-level Justice officials are requesting whistleblower status and have been feeding internal documents to Issa's committee.
The Washington Post, in a front page article, heaves Eric Holder under the bus. When a Demo is in the White House, WaPo is the White House's PR agency, so I read this as indicating the White House has decided that he's a lost cause.
UODATE: NBC did the same, that night.
Meanwhile, the Assistant AG who told Sen. Grassley that there was no gun-walking decides to go into academia.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (2)
Murder and violence rates drop
FBI data here. IKn 2011, murder rates fell 1.9%, and other violent crimes fell 4%, despite record firearm sales. Of course that wouldn't answer a claim of "they might have dropped even farther if fewer guns had been sold," but it certainly answers "more guns means a bloodbath."
House schedules contempt vote for Eric Holder
CBS reports a committee contempt vote is set for June 20.
What the media chose not to know about Trayvon Martin
A compelling article at American Thinker.
Nancy Norell passes on
Nancy Norell was firearms law staffer to Sen. Jim McClure, while he was pushing the Firearm Owners' Protection Act; she was married to Jim Norell, who was head of communications in NRA-ILA, and more recently writes for America's First Freedom. This is an understatement of her role in the gun movement--on gun issues, she was the point staffer for the point Senator on the gun issue, at an extremely pivotal time. It begins with the creation of the gun rights movement, the founding of NRA-ILA, SAF, and Gun Owners in the mid and late 1970s, the first big battles (blocking the planned ATF regulations under the Carter Administration, ATF abuse investigations and hearings, the six year fight for FOPA, etc..
Here's her obit, written by Jim, for the local paper:
Nancy B. Norell of Three Springs, writer, editor and former legislative assistant to U.S. Sen. James A. McClure, died Wednesday at JC Blair Hospital, succumbing to stage 4 pancreatic cancer.
Mrs. Norell was the wife of James O.E. Norell who was also her business partner in a long-time writing enterprise. The Norells recently celebrated their 47th wedding anniversary. They have lived at their
small farm near property Three Springs for 32 years.
A native of Idaho, Mrs. Norell began working in the U.S. Senate in 1975 and began her freelance writing-editing career when Sen. McClure retired in 1990. She wrote for SAF’s Women and Guns as legislative correspondent, and for the NRA’s Women’s Outlook, covering political and legislative issues as well as features.
On Capitol Hill, she was affectionately known as the “gun lady,” having passionately worked to defend Second Amendment Rights for decades. She was instrumental in garnering support for enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 – a landmark firearms rights law that reformed and removed many onerous provisions of Federal law that had been used to vindictively pursue lawful firearms ownership and commerce. Enactment of the reforms protecting gun owners was a seven year effort. Mrs. Norell, as a legislative advocate, worked closely during those years with staff in both houses and on both sides of the political isle. She also dealt with the media on firearms rights.
Her legislative duties also covered Native American issues and foreign affairs. In the latter capacity, she traveled to Taiwan and China.
The Norells became permanent residents of Clay Township after she left her Senate duties.
Mrs. Norell is an Endowment Member of the National Rifle Association.
She is also a member of Three Springs-Saltillo chapter of the Beta Sigma Phi Sorority having at one time been elected its President.
She has also served in various elected capacities on the Board of Election Supervisors in Clay Township and has been a familiar face on election day.
Mrs. Norell grew up on a family dairy in the Palouse near Genesee, Idaho. With her parents and little sisters, they farmed 360 acres and milked 60 cows.
She was especially known for her wit. Growing up, Nancy chased and washed Holsteins before and after school. When her husband once suggested at the Belleville auction that they buy a “little Jersey cow,”
she told him, “I hope you will be very happy living in Three Springs, Pa. – with your little Jersey cow.”
Mrs. Norell is survived by her husband, Jim; her daughter, Kjersti Sivitilli and her son-in-law Rob Sivitilli, who reside in Singapore; by her godson, Hans Schneider of Austin, Texas; by her sister, Jan Gill of
Anchorage, Alaska; and by her brother-in-law, Michael Norell, also of Three Springs.
She attended the University of Idaho and earned her B.A. in English from American University in Washington D.C. in 1965. She taught eighth grade English for four years.
Nancy was an avid reader, book collector and cross-stitcher. She loved to garden and was known for her small family of house cats – some of whom she taught parlor tricks.
The Norells were recently confirmed in the Roman Catholic faith.
Permalink · Personal · Comments (3)
Wiretap applications in Fast and Furious
Eric Holder testifies that, while the applications were approved by the Ass't AG and the Deputy AAG, , they didn't really read them before approving.
An extraordinary claim. There's a reason why those have to be approved up to the Ass't AG level. There's probably a provision in the Departmental Manual that states what an approval certifies. (The Interior Dept manual had a provision specifying what a staff attorney's approval signified). I don't think Justice was as strict as Interior was on the details -- I once had an important memo bounced back to me by my boss' boss because on page two there was one space between the period of one sentence and the first letter of the next, and the gov't style manual required two -- but it's likely that everyone who approved that application in fact read every word in it.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
Zombies
Some useful tips on surviving face-eating zombie attacks. It incorporates knowledge recently gained, such as zombies appear to prefer faces to brains now, and zombies can be arrested.
This tells me something about George Zimmerman's prosecutor
Harvard Law Prof. Alan Dershowitz has been critical of Angela Corey's handling of the Zimmerman prosecution, and of her filing an affidavit that omitted important facts favorable to the defense.
So Ms. Corey responds.... calling the dean of the law school, ranting that she's going to sue the school, or maybe file criminal defamation charges against Dershowitz, or sue him.
Sounds like someone needs their prescription increased...
Pro gun academics get favorable coverage
The Fordham Lawyer publishes Gun Rights and Civil Rights, on its law prof. Nick Johnson.
Bob Cottrol, professor of law and of history at George Washington U, gets coverage in an article in the American Historical Association's AHA Today.
hat tip to Alice Beard....
Fast and Furious--wiretap authorizations
My friend Bob Sanders -- who retired from ATF HQ many years back -- predicted that the Fast and Furious wiretap authorization requests would be critical. ATF virtually never uses wiretaps, he pointed out, and so the persons seeking authorization would be unable to claim lack of memory, it was likely the only one they'd ever done, and would try to inform as many people as possible to guard against error and to CYA if one was made. Rep. Issa got his hands on those requests and, as predicted, found a treasure trove. From what his letter of yesterday relates, they show that officials up to an Assistant Attorney General were fully informed that guns were being allowed to go to the Mexican drug cartels.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
Newspaper "study" of Florida's no-retreat law
The Tampa Bay Times publishes "Race Plays Complex Role in Florida 'stand your ground' Law." Good grief! They start with 200 cases, with no controlling for variables (e.g., did the defender have a record, were they a good witness, etc., etc.) and try to draw conclusions, such as "people who killed a black person walked free 73 percent of the time, while those who killed a white person went free 59 percent of the time," suggesting an unconscious racial bias.
But wait a minute... self-defensive homicides, like homicides in general, usually involve two people of the same ethnicity. So if people who killed a black person were acquitted more often, that means ... black self-defenders were acquitted more often. The article goes on to note that when the statute was invoked, whites and blacks were charged at the same rate and convicted at the same rate. And ...
"In mixed-race cases involving fatalities, the outcomes were similar. Four of the five blacks who killed a white went free; five of the six whites who killed a black went free."
and
"Overall, black defendants went free 66 percent of the time in fatal cases compared to 61 percent for white defendants..."
But even the higher acquittal rate for blacks must prove racial bias, because it is "a difference explained, in part, by the fact blacks were more likely to kill another black." Yet the article began by claiming a higher conviction rate for blacks, and suggesting that proved racial bias. (The article does not explain why it gives two different sets of figures). So, indeed, whether the conviction rate for blacks is higher, or lower, either proves racial bias!
To former Brady head: wake up and smell the coffee...
Richard Aborn, former Brady Center president, has an op=ed in my local paper, and likely elsewhere.
Hmmm.... pro-gun groups outspent antigun ones by 11 to 1 (not sure where he gets those figures--the pro gun one is way too low). NRA has succeeded in arguing that any gun control is a step toward prohibition, and rallying members in a way the antigun movement has not. The antigun movement must forge links with gun owners by arguing that "the movement behind gun control does not seek to limit a law-abiding person's ability to get a gun."
Richard, there is one small difficulty with that plan.
Nobody believes you. To be more precise, nobody has any reason to believe you. For starters, in DC v, Heller, your group filed an amicus brief in support of DC's position -- that complete prohibition of handgun ownership was justifiable -- and that argued "I. THE SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEES NO RIGHT TO POSSESS FIREARMS UNLESS IN CONNECTION WITH SERVICE IN A STATE-REGULATED MILITIA." In McDonald v. Chicago, it filed an amicus that argued
"gun possession poses grave risks to the gun’s possessor, his or her family, and the public. A handgun kept in the home for self-defense is all too often used by a child to shoot himself or another child unintentionally, turned against a partner in a domestic dispute, used to end the life of a depressed teenager or adult with (often fleeting) suicidal thoughts, or obtained by criminals."
In other words, Brady was arguing that guns are a public menace even in the hands of the law abiding, since they might commit suicide, have an accident, or have their gun stolen by a criminal.
And then there's Brady's support for lawsuits aimed at bankrupting gun manufacturers, its name change from "Handgun Control, Inc." after it discovered a new issue of "assault rifles," etc.. The purpose was there from the beginning. Back in the 1970s, Pete Shields (for all practical purposes, the founder of the organization) told the New Yorker that he would not be content until all guns were prohibited, even for law enforcement use, but in the meantime he'd have to take half a loaf rather than none.
Aborn's statement hints at a world where, if a company wants to get people to believe their detergent or auto or insurance is better than others, they just spend on advertising in the confidence people can be convinced of that non-fact. He doesn't realize he's dealing with a far more serious subject -- and with far more experienced people.
UPDATE: reader Jim D. emails:
Richard Aborn, in the Huffington Post while running for Manhattan DA penned a blog entry titled "An Anti-Endorsement I'm Thrilled to Have":
"Our campaign for Manhattan DA has received many endorsements -- like Congressman Jerry Nadler, the Association of Legal Aid Attorneys, Former NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton, to name a few -- but today it's an anti-endorsement I'm particularly proud to receive. Specifically, the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, the official NRA-affiliated State Association in New York, urged its members yesterday to vote against me in the race for DA. And I couldn't be prouder."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-aborn/an-anti-endorsement-im-th_b_280774.html
It's going to take a lot more sucking up than he can get through propaganda to change people's minds after "proudly" accepting rejections like this.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (3)
Finally, a ruling in Nordyke v. King
9th Circuit en banc opinion here. After thirteen years of litigation.... the County re-interprets its regulation banning gun shows to allow gun shows, under an exception that allows possession of firearms as part of an "event," provided they are secured when not in actual possession of the person participating, and the Ninth Circuit buys it. The majority argues that the minimal restriction employed (gun must generally be secured during gun shows on county property) would pass any level of scrutiny, The concurrences suggest that, after this many years of litigation, the court should at least state a level of scrutiny.
Permalink · Nordyke v. King · Comments (7)
News from Ruger
Not too long ago, some antigun group (Violence Policy Center, most likely) was protesting that reports of record firearm sales couldn't be taken at face value, despite rather obvious indicators (record levels of background checks, record levels of Pittman-Robertson excise tax collections, etc). I just received a Ruger report: In 2011, they launched the Million Gun Challenge, seeking to become the first company to sell and ship a million guns in a year. They hit 1.25 million. The first quarter of 2012 saw earnings rise over 2011 by about 40%.