« January 2014 | Main | March 2014 »
February 2014
Illinois CCW permit issued!
Word is that Illinois is mailing the first of its CCW permits today; 5,000 have been approved, with something over 40,000 more in process.
Calif. AG moves to intervene in Peruta
Very strange. San Diego asked her to intervene at the trial court stage, and she did nothing. The trial court ruled, and she did nothing. The appeal was briefed and argued, and she did nothing. Now the appeals court rules against San Diego, the sheriff decides not to appeal and to issue permits on a "may issue" basis, and she moves to intervene in the case. It's a bit late.
Since the time to move for rehearing lapses, I think, today, and a motion must allow time for opposition and reply, I can only make two senses to it. (1) A publicity ploy (most likely) and/or (2) hope to be granted intervenor rights in time to file a petition for cert.. I think (1) is by far the most probable. Get turned down and say "I tried."
UPDATE: Here's the motion. California seeks to intervene in order to ask for en banc review. There might be another reason for the motion. Any judge of the Ninth can call for such review, and has another week in which to do so. This could be meant to alert the judges to the case and motivate them to ask for it. Although I'd assume this ruling was carried in all the mass media in San Francisco, so it's hardly likely the judges are uninformed here.
Quaere: since the Defendants have announced they will issue CCW permits to all law-abiding folks, is there even a "case or controversy" left, or is the case moot?
Permalink · Chicago aftermath · Comments (10)
ATF and reporting lost guns
"It is clear that agency rules were not followed in many of the incidents, which show at least 49 guns were lost or stolen nationwide between 2009 and 2013."
"The newly released ATF reports show that between 2009 and 2013, agents lost their guns or had them stolen in at least 45 incidents -- with a couple of the cases involving the loss of three firearms.
It is unclear if the records include "missing" guns, a separate category used by the agency.
Most of the lost weapons were handguns, but there also were at least two assault rifles stolen. Typically the reports do not indicate what happened to the unrecovered guns. However, in a November 2008 incident, the gun may have wound up in Mexico, according to the report."
"The report cited examples similar to those in the documents obtained by the Journal Sentinel, with agents leaving weapons in public bathrooms, atop their vehicles, on an airplane and one in a shopping cart."
Via Katie Pavlich
Nikki Goeser story online
Right here. She is a CCW holder whose husband was murdered because she (being law abiding) had to leave her gun in a car before going into a "gun free" zone.
ATF testimony on botched storefronts
For tomorrow's hearing. It's remarkable for saying almost nothing. And for being delivered by the Deputy Director rather than the Director.
NRO on self defense
""Stand your ground" is not a principle that endorses vigilantism, the quest to enforce the law unilaterally, but instead a principle that declares that public spaces do not belong to violent aggressors. This represents not the abrogation of law but rather the use of law to more justly determine the rights of aggressor and victim, granting greater rights to the victim and thus bringing the statutory law closer in line with natural law. When the state, by contrast, mandates that citizens retreat from aggression (a concept fraught with practical difficulties and dangers), then it does not limit violence, it instead empowers unlawful aggression.
. . . . . .
The Left has to change the subject to vigilantism because the case for self-defense is so manifestly obvious. Is the state respecting the fundamental rights of citizens -- including their right to life -- if it mandates passivity in the face of violent attack? Of course not. It does, however, respect the right to life when it empowers self-defense while also prosecuting those rare few who seek to mask murderous intent behind a self-defense pretext."
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (2)
I can't see how this could have happened
I don't care how thick the person's skull was, I don't see how this could have happned.
Supreme Ct denies cert in three 2A cases
Note here. The cases are Lane v. Holder, NRA v. ATF, and NRA v. McCraw.
No way to know the reason(s), of course. All we know is that no case got four votes to grant the writ. Perhaps they don't want to take on a "bear arms" case, or at least just now, perhaps they want away from the 2A for a time, perhaps their docket was full of higher-priority cases, or perhaps these just weren't the cases they wanted (or, most likely, it was a combination of these).
Statement of the Ukrainian Gun Owners Ass'n
Right here.
"As of today Ukrainian Gun Owners Association will start to work on the preparation of amendments to the Constitution, which will provide an unconditional right for Ukrainian citizens to bear arms.
People should have the right to bear arms, which will be put in written into the Constitution.
Authorities should not and will not be stronger than its people!"
Hat tip to Prof. Joe Olson.
The first NRA president to have his picture on a stamp...
Is Charleton Heston.
I still have some "My President is Charleton Heston" bumper stickers, issued during the Clinton presidency.
Nikki Goeser story to be televised
It's on Tuesday, Feb. 25, 9PM EST, on Investigation Discovery TV. She has a book out, Denied A Chance: How Gun Control Helped a Stalker Murder my Husband which tells her story. She had a CCW permit, but she and her husband dined in a restaurant that served alcohol, a "gun free zone" in their State. She left her gun in the car ... and her husband was murdered while they dined.
Permalink · arms law victims · Comments (3)
House Judiciary hearings into BATF storefront ops
Story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel -- which I won't link because of a particularly annoying and hard to get rid of pop-up ad -- says that House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations will hold hearings on Feb. 27. Justice's Office of Inspector General is also investigating. Targets are four storefront sting operations, one in Milwaukee. In that one BATF lured a mentally retarded young man in, then charged him, they trashed the premises they'd rented, and lost three guns, one a full auto, which have never been recovered.
Jerry Brown vetoes gun bill
Story here. Further proof that being pro-gun is not always the same as being conservative!
ATF agent likely to win one against ATF management
A Federal Court of Claims judge calls the government's conduct "disturbing" and "wrenching". There are other reports that the judge said it was the worst case he'd seen in all his years on the bench.
Agent Jay Dobyns spent years infiltrating the Hell's Angels, until his cover was blown and he started getting death threats from folks whose threats mean something. He'd fallen into disfavor, and BATF did nothing. An arson attack burned his home ... and the agency tried to frame him for it. The trial revealed an email where one supervisor emailed another about hiding information from higher level management, and assured the other that "I can hide the ball with the best of them."
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
Dave Kopel on expansion of "shall issue" CCW
It's posted at the Volokh Conspiracy, which is now one of the Washington Post blogs (a wonder in itself!)
Basically, in 1986:
Under 10% of the US population lived in "shall issue" States.
About 33% lived in States that had no CCW permit process at all.
The remaining 57% lived in "may issue" States.
Only residents of Vermont could carry concealed without a permit.
As of today:
66% of the population lives in "shall issue" States.
No States have no CCW permit system at all.
27% live in "may issue" States.
7% live in States where you can carry concealed without a permit.
(And if the effect of the Peruta ruling is to make "shall issue" the rule in California and Hawaii, the percent in "may issue" will fall to 14%, and "shall issue" will rise to 79%).
Permalink · CCW licensing · Comments (10)
ACLU on Heller & McDonald
Never mind the inconsistency with all its other positions, and despite two Supreme Court rulings to the contrary, ACLU still refuses to read the Second Amendment as reflecting an individual right.
It's drawn over 1,300 comments, mostly in opposition, and some amusing. ("How does an ACLU lawyer count to ten? 1, 3, 4, 5...")
Years back, Glenn Reynolds and Don Kates published a "thought experiment" on the Second Amendment. What if we assume the "collective right" approach is true, that the amendment was meant only to ensure that States could have militias to resist the Federal government? OK, so any State can create an organized militia free of Federal control. And arm it sufficiently to where it could resist the national military. Any person who joined such a militia has an unfettered right to full autos, artillery, military aircraft. Perhaps even nukes -- the Feds have them. I wonder how ACLU would regard the logical outcome of its position?
Thoughts on the 9th Circuit case -- where do we go from here?
The county has 14 calendar days from the date of the ruling to move for rehearing en banc. If the county fails to move, any judge of the court, of their own volition, move for such rehearing within 21 days of the ruling. This seems to fit the grounds for such a motion, in particular conflict with other circuits and an issue of pressing national importance. A majority of the court can vote to grant.
En banc: normally, ruling are handed down by 3-judge panels. En banc in all other circuits means that all of the judges of the court take part and vote, after rehearing the matter. The 9th is so large, however (27 active-duty judges) that it has adopted a special rule. Ten judges are chosen at random, plus the chief judge (Alex Kosinski, a supporter of the 2A). For whatever it's worth, the 27 active-duty judges divide into 18 Democratic appointments and 9 Republican ones.
To complicate things, the Circuit can also vote to have a true en banc, with all 27 judges participating.
Once the en banc panel is chosen, it votes on whether to have additional briefing or argument. They almost always for for additional argument, I don't know about briefing.
If the en banc court reverses the panel ruling here, it'd make a really nice case for the Supreme Court (and maybe even if it upholds it). Big circuit split -- 7th and 9th Circuits taking a broad view of the right to bear arms outside the house, several other circuits saying "not until the Supreme Court orders us to do so." The panel decision has a great exploration of the issue, and is 77 pages long; the dissent is 40 pages, as I recall, and clearly presents the argument to the contrary. An en banc ruling would further flesh things out, with input from 11 (or 28) judges.
UPDATE: thinking it over ... en banc upholds panel decision, the result is a clear circuit split, well hashed-out, good candidate for Supreme Court. BUT since the good guys won, they cannot ask the Supreme Court to review. En banc reverses panel, less of a circuit split (there's still the Seventh Circuit, which recognized that the 2A applies outside the house, good guys lost, so they can seek review. There may also be collateral effects, in that other cases seeking cert. now or in the near future can point to the (at least temporary) split between the 7th and the 9th and the other circuits that refuse to apply Heller/McDonald outside the home.
9th Circuit reverses Peruta v. San Diego, strikes down "may issue"
Opinion here!!!!
California's handgun carry permit system says a permit may issue for "good cause," with a definition that is essentially "some special and exceptional reason beyond the average person's carrying for self-defense." The Circuit panel holds that a constitutional right cannot be so arbitrarily restricted. It's the first time a Circuit has accepted that (to my mind, very strong) argument. The opinion also accepts that the right to arms extends outside the home.
Hurrah!
Hat tip to reader Gene Hoffman, of Calguns Foundation.
Update: two of the three judges signing the opinion are Clinton appointees! (Correction: one of them is). Another update: correct, the Clinton appointee dissented. I missed that -- don't think I've ever seen a case laid out as majority opinion-list of counsel-dissenting opinion.
Permalink · Chicago aftermath · Comments (16)
Ray Nagin goes down
Former New Orleans mayor, and member of Mayors Against Illegal Guns Ray Nagin has been convicted of 20 counts of conspiracy, accepting bribes, wire fraud, laundering money and filing false tax returns.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (3)
Disillusionment
McGruff the Crime Dog gets sentenced to 16 years for drug and arms offenses. What next -- Smokey the Bear starts a forest fire while smoking crack?
On talk show this afternoon
At 5:40 PM EST I'll be on the Teri O'Brien Show, discussing the Second Amendment and the decision of major gun makers to abandon the California market.
Activist who pushed for making gun possession on school grounds a felony, arrested on felony charges of doing just that
Story here. Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it. Via Instapundit.
Permalink · antigun groups ~ · arms law victims · Comments (4)
Gun control as a culture war
From The American Thinker: "Gun Control: a War, Not a Conversation". I've been writing an article on this theme.....
Aftermath of a predawn no-knock raid in Texas
Target of the raid kills a deputy as he breaks in, grand jury refuses to indict him for homicide. He was represented by Dick DeGuerin, one of the top, if not the top, criminal defense men in Texas.
South Carolina not the place for robbers
Three men try to rob two women. One of the women shoots two of the men; the third flees, breaks into a house, and the homeowner decks him with a shotgun.
The sheriff's reaction:
"You've got to pat this lady on the back. She got two out of three of them with a 9mm, and then reloaded and was wanting some more," said Wright. "I'm going to ask her if she wants a job, apparently she knows how to shoot real well."
Sounds like a non sequitur to me....
Hartford, CT: gun used to shoot up a bar traces to a shipment of guns from Smith and Wesson that was stolen by the delivery driver.
Mayor Bill Finch proclaims, "This incident is a perfect example of why we need stronger gun laws in the United States. Loopholes need to be tightened up."
Texas town arrests, seizes rifles of open carriers
Story here. Open carry of a long arm is legal there, so the basis for the arrests isn't clear. Equally troubling, after someone posted a physical threat to open carriers, the PD refused even to let a report be filed.
Irrationality of FFL revocations
David Codrea has a interesting post on BATF's capitiulation in an FFL revocation proceeding against Brink's security. Brinks' attorneys uncovered a lot of evidence that initiation of such proceedings was utterly arbitrary, and particularly so in its case. BATF compromised: if Brinks would not appeal its revocation, BATF would issue it four new FFL licenses.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (1)
Petition to have guns confiscated (and more)
Mark Dice, famed for soliciting (and getting) signatures on outrageous petitions, visits a California college campus and successfully gets signatures on a petition to confiscate all guns. He builds on that by adding steadily more outrageous descriptions of the petition -- repeal the Second Amendment, house to house searches by the military, lock gun owners up in concentration camps, and still they sign. He goes even farther -- we want to have gun owners executed, or just shot down, they are just peasants, peasants shouldn't have guns ... and still they sign.
To be fair, one guy did refuse to "repeat after me" the line about peasants, though.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
Progressives and gun control
From New Zealand comes this article, arguing that progressives should oppose rather than support gun control here.
"In January 2011 (following Representative Gifford's shooting and renewed calls for gun control), Dan Baum wrote in the Huffington Post that progressives have wasted a generation of progress on health care, women's rights, immigration reform, income fairness and climate change because "we keep messing with people's guns." "