Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Here's what I'd been working on... | Main | Time magazine on "gun control" »

Not Bloomberg's best day

Posted by David Hardy · 8 August 2012 05:42 PM

First, in the midst of an antigun event, a reporter asks why NYPD just sold 28,000 pounds of spent cartridge to an ammo reloader, and he rather loses it, and tells the reporter if she keeps at it she'll have to stand in the back of the room at all future press conferences. (That, BTW, illustrates why the press often hesitates to criticize government officials, or at least Democratic ones. The official has what the reporters want, access -- you can have interviews, invitations to press conferences, "unnamed officials" who leak things to you, or you can be cut off while your competitors get all that).

Then, word that San Francisco has declined to adopt the NYC policy of vigorous stop and frisk, because more than 80% of those stopped and frisked are black or hispanic, and 90% of frisks found nothing.

(Instead, SF will rely upon "a zero-tolerance approach for violations of probation, parole or the city's gang injunction." I guess actually enforcing those is a new idea to the city).

· antigun groups

5 Comments | Leave a comment

JohnS | August 8, 2012 10:02 PM | Reply

Every year or so the Chron comes out with an equivalent article, quoting police and politicians, describing a useful, effective policy: let's concentrate on the criminals!

And then, for the rest of the year, they go back to ignoring the advice of the professionals on what works.

That's SO California.

Brian | August 9, 2012 12:40 PM | Reply

"he rather loses it, and tells the reporter if she keeps at it she'll have to stand in the back of the room at all future press conferences."

What a pathetic little tyrant.

Sarah | August 10, 2012 4:52 AM | Reply

Nothing like a little good, old-fashioned, American freedom of speech. The right to question one’s authority and all.

Critic | August 10, 2012 5:12 PM | Reply

It seems like the destruction of guns and shell casings is an unconstitutional waste of taxpayer money. It doesn't even appear that it could pass a rational basis test, because its only purpose is to make arms more expensive, and a law who's only purpose is to make the exercise of a constitutional right more expensive, seems to me unconstitutional. The big problem I see is standing. I thought I read that the precedent is that taxpayers can't sue for government waste unless it directly effects them personally. Maybe there is some way standing can be overcome to get this waste corrected. Maybe a pro-gun state can sue the feds if they do any of this destruction.

Critic | August 10, 2012 5:45 PM | Reply

It looks like a taxpayer doesn't have standing to sue a state or the feds but can sue a municipal entity for tax waste.

Leave a comment