« August 2014 | Main | October 2014 »
September 2014
Police officers charged in alleged straw man sales
Story here. The trial starts Monday, and the defendants are two Sacramento County deputies, an FFL, and a private purchaser.
As I read the story, it arises out of California's discriminatory gun laws. To be sold new in CA, a handgun must pass "safety tests," which are expensive (they must be done by State-licensed labs, and involve a lot more than safety). Lots of ordinary handguns -- such as the Ruger .380 said to be at issue) don't have the certification.
BUT (despite this being a supposed safety standard) police officers (and as I recall the law, employees of a prosecutor's office) can buy unlisted guns from a dealer. I'd guess that the charges involve officers buying unlisted guns and reselling them to private persons who wanted an unlisted firearm. Since California requires all sales to go through an FFL, and also as I recall requires handgun sales to be reported to the State, there can't be an argument that these were true "straw sales," intended to hide the identity of the ultimate owner.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (15)
BATF loses suit to undercover agent
A judge of the Federal Court of Claims has awarded former agent Jay Doybyns over half a million in damages for agency misconduct. "Misconduct" that amounted to betraying and backstabbing an agent who had spent years infiltrating the hell's angels.
His book outlines his work. It's likely the most dangerous undercover work of which I've ever heard: he was infiltrating a large gang to whom murder was a casual matter, and he got full membership by faking the murder of a rival gang member. Then his agency abandoned him, let his new false ID become known, and when his house was destroyed (and wife and kids nearly killed) in an arson fire, backstabbed him with suggestions that he might have done it himself.
Permalink · BATFE · Comments (2)
Update on Oklahoma beheading & defense
An article in the Christian Science Monitor asks "Oklahoma City beheading: Will jihad-style attack boost 'bring gun to work' laws?"
I can remember when CSM made the Washington Post look like Guns and Ammo; if the other side is losing CSM (phrased otherwise, if it's become open to arguments on the issue) they are indeed in deep trouble. The article says that the defender used a handgun (earlier reports stated it was some manner of rifle). It says the sheriff's department confirms he was not acting in any capacity as their deputy at the time. The only even vaguely antigun point is the very last sentence (which I suspect was stuck in by an editor who was gritting his teeth) to the effect that since the defender had special training (which may or may not be true, depending on the office) maybe this doesn't prove that allowing guns at work is always good.
Making a self-defense story fit the desired narrative
Moore, Oklahoma. Business fires violent nut case, he rams vehicle into headquarters, charges inside with knife, decapitates one woman, begins stabbing another...
An employee ends the assault (and almost certainly intended mass killing) with three fast shots from a rifle... given the setting, certainly a semi auto, and likely a dreaded "assault rifle." Employee is a reserve deputy (depending upon the jurisdiction, anything from a friend of the sheriff to a member of the "unorganized militia," an armed civilian who is available for public service if called upon).
So intended mass murderer uses a knife, defender stops it with gun and likely a terrible "assault weapon." How to make this fit the desired narrative?
CNN refers to the defender as a "coworker" who is "also an Oklahoma County reserve deputy." No mention of the firearm used.
A television station that runs the CNN story says "a sheriff's deputy shot Nolen."
Even Fox refers to the defender as an "off duty officer," while noting that he used a rifle.
I have yet to find a media account that describes the rifle (to be fair, that info may not yet be available, but I rather doubt we'll hear it later, either).
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (7)
Kickstarter promo of "The Filmography of Guns"
It's a promotion project for a new book on guns featured in movies.
Only government actors are safe with arms
'Nuff said. At least they did bring criminal charges against the shooter; only his poor marksmanship kept this from becoming a homicide charge.
2A "as applied" challenge victory
Binderup v. Holder, Eastern Dist. of PA, No. 13-cv-06750. (I won't attach it because it's an 86 page pdf).
By way of background: a constitutional challenge can be a facial one, aimed at the face of the statute (any and all applications of the statute are unconstitutional) or "as applied" (regardless of whether the statute itself is unconstitutional, its application to this person in this context would violate a constitutional command). This was an as applied challenge, brought by Alan Gura.
Plaintiff was convicted, long ago, under a State law punishing corruption of a minor (in this case, a 17 year old girl with whom he had an affair). The statute expressly terms this a misdemeanor, but allows a punishment of up to five years' imprisonment, making it a bar under Federal law (which bars firearms possession by anyone convicted of an offense punishable by more than one year, except for offenses expressly termed misdemeanors and punishable by no more than two years).
The court decides that, in light of the nonviolent nature of the offense, its antiquity, and the fact that plaintiff has kept a clean record before and since, using it to bar him from possession would violate the 2A.
Nice reasoning, and as we see more of these (and more payments of legal fees by the government) Congress might have an incentive to limit the disqualification to offenses that actually suggest a person is too risky to be allowed a firearm. That was raised back in 1968, and again when the GCA was rewritten in the 1980s, but encountered opposition that essentially went searching for statutes that would no longer be disqualifies but would suggest a person was a risk. (The final fall back was always "but they only got Al Capone for a tax violation.").
Permalink · prohibitted persons · Comments (2)
Shaneen Allen: good news
She's going to be admitted to pretrial diversion, which in practice means going to a bit of effort in exchange for having charges dismissed. Kudos to attorney Ev Nappen!
Here's the Attorney General's memo, dated today, finding that (absent aggravating factors) a prosecutor can offer diversion to avoid imprisonment under the NJ statute imposing a 3.5 year mandatory minimum sentence.
Court refuses DC request for a stay
After striking Washington DC's complete ban on firearms carrying, district judge Frederick Scullin granted the city a stay until Oct. 22 to give it time to pass new regulations. DC then requested an indefinite stay until it had appealed the ruling, and the judge has denied the request. This keeps the pressure on for DC to actually do something, rather than figuring that it might have to do something a year or two down the road. DC has filed a motion to reconsider, which will be argued October 17 (and is rarely granted) and the time to file a notice of appeal won't start until after that ruling.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post is editorializing that the City should appeal even if it passes new regulations.
Brady Campaign stretches things in fundraiser
Story here. Brady tries to claim credit for Cabela's involvement in anti-straw man training, when in fact the program was created long ago by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, and Cabela's enrolled in it before Brady opened their latest anti-FFL campaign.
Of course, it will only be a fundraising "scandal" if the media cares about it, so this will never achieve scandal status...
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (0)
Rest in peace, Gordon Russell
Story here. He was a heck of a nice guy, and died in harness, as Shakespeare said. I am told he was doing his job at the September NRA Board meeting when he suddenly collapsed, I assume a massive coronary or stroke. They gave him CPR but he didn't make it. Gad, he was only 55, and slender. My brother in law nearly died of a massive coronary at age 52, coming off a tennis court, but fast CPR (and a cardiologist and a defib unit nearby) pulled him through.
11th Circuit slaps down SWAT-type regulatory raid
A good summary at Reason.com. I've heard of similar things happening in California. Regulatory "inspections" are traditionally given only loose Fourth Amendment protections by the courts, because they usually are no big deal. But some locals send the "inspectors" in with real law enforcement, supposedly to protect them. The team with them then uses the opportunity as a chance for a warrantless search (at least as to anything in "plain view.")
Here, a barbershop inspector, entitled to make sure the barbers were licensed and presumably to see that they were following regulations (combs dipped in disinfectant, etc.) made a completely unnecessary inspection, accompanied by a SWAT-style team, for purposes of looking for drugs and recruiting informants (i.e., catching someone with them). The Eleventh Circuit upholds the resulting lawsuit and denies the officials "qualified immunity" (a court-created defense for actions that a reasonable actor would not have known were unconstitutional).
It's strange to reflect that the Supreme Court only got around to putting the teeth in "unreasonable search" five or ten years ago. Until then, all the case law was over whether they had probable cause, whether they had a warrant or fell within an exception for a warrant, etc.. Whether the search was, overall, an unreasonable one was largely ignored. Perhaps that was before SWAT tactics became almost the default, searches tended to be reasonable in their approach. When serving a search warrant meant sending out a few squad cars to knock, show the warrant, and search the place, "unreasonable search" was rarely a major issue.
Permalink · General con law · Comments (1)
New York Times and assault weapons bans
NY Times editorial, "Myths About Gun Regulation," January 31, 2013:
"As busy as the gun lobby is in promoting macho myths about self-defense -- stand your ground and outshoot the bad guys -- it is no less dedicated to spinning myths for lawmakers to use as excuses to avoid enacting laws to deal with the shooting sprees that regularly afflict the nation. This was clear at the opening Senate hearing on gun controls this week, where Judiciary Committee members seemed to have largely swallowed gun lobby propaganda that the evidence shows the original 10-year ban on assault weapons was ineffective.... The false statistics comfort members of Congress who fear the gun lobby or their more conservative constituents, or both, and are blocking a new and stronger ban on assault weapons proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein."
NY Times Editorial, "The Moment for Action on Gun Control, January 15, 2013:
"Some lawmakers are already talking about focusing on the background checks and bowing to gun lobby's opposition to an assault weapons ban. That shouldn't stop the administration and its allies from demanding that all these provisions be passed immediately. With the deaths of Newtown's children still so fresh, the public will be repulsed by lawmakers who stand aside and do nothing."
NY Times editorial, "The Assault Weapons Myth," September 14, 2014:
"But in the 10 years since the previous ban lapsed, even gun control advocates acknowledge a larger truth: The law that barred the sale of assault weapons from 1994 to 2004 made little difference.
It turns out that big, scary military rifles don't kill the vast majority of the 11,000 Americans murdered with guns each year. Little handguns do.
In 2012, only 322 people were murdered with any kind of rifle, F.B.I. data shows.
......
Most Americans do not know that gun homicides have decreased by 49 percent since 1993 as violent crime also fell, though rates of gun homicide in the United States are still much higher than those in other developed nations. A Pew survey conducted after the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., found that 56 percent of Americans believed wrongly that the rate of gun crime was higher than it was 20 years ago."
Permalink · AW bans ~ · media · Comments (8)
Brady Campaign sues ammo dealer, etc.
Story here. Brady will sue on behalf of the parents of a child killed in the Aurora CO shooting, against the dealer who sold the ammunition and some unnamed others.
I cannot figure this one out. First, the tort law is pretty clear that (with very narrow exceptions) a person does not have a duty to prevent someone else from committing a crime that harms someone else. Second, how can an ammunition dealer, of all people, be expected to know that a buyer whom he has never met plans on using the ammo in a crime? In other words, even if there was a legal duty, where is the negligence? Third, unless the killer bought all his ammo from that one dealer, how can the dealer be shown to have any involvement?
And to top it off... the murders were committed on July 20, 2012. From what I can see, Colorado has a two-year statute of limitations for personal injury. So the statute ran nearly two months ago. Oops. Now, Brady could contend that it's suing for a minor, and the statute of limitations doesn't begin to run until a minor's 18th birthday. BUT the minor died, and the article says the suit is actually brought on behalf of her parents (wrongful death statutes differ somewhat in this respect, in some the suit is brought on behalf of the decedent's estate, in some it's brought by the survivors in their own right).
It does sound like a civil action that is a sure loser, brought in hopes of gaining publicity. That of course runs a big risk of getting hit with sanctions.
Permalink · Gun manufacturer liability · Comments (3)
Protestors seem to be getting deperate
Protestors picket national police championships, as if learning to shoot accurately had much to do with questions about whether a shooting was justified. Of course, it's being consistent to some degree. Most just assume that firearm skills = being an accessory to crime applies only to the general citizenry.
Moms Demand Action for.... something other than common sense
From one of their spokeswomen: "Green said women and girls should be aware that lax gun laws lead to gun violence which can beget domestic violence."
Some 19th century wag wrote something like: "If a man engages in casual murders, next he will descend to excessive drink and pilfering, and thence sink to profane oaths and sabbath-breaking, and so become utterly lost."
An interesting debate
From Glenn Reynolds, "The Second Amendment as Ordinary Constitutional Law," arguing that the 2A has become a normal part of Con law, legal doomsday did not come, and courts might as well accept that. Then, from David Wolitz, comes "Second Amendment Realism," suggesting that that just means the courts will screw it up like they have all the rest of the field. He phrases it a little more tactfully.
Armed defenders put a dent in Milwaukee robbery rate
First story here. An armed gang tries to rob tavern workers after closing time, one victim opens fire and kills one of the robbers, with police later arresting the remainder. The robbery gang was responsible for dozens of armed robberies over the past three days. The shootee also had a string of arrests for robbery, auto theft, fleeing and whatnot, and had been injured in a gang shooting a few weeks ago.
And last month, a Milwaukee nurse, a victim of an attempted carjacking, shot one carjacker. The day before, the shootee had shot a person during an attempted carjacking; when his accomplice was rounded up, police arrested ten more suspects believed to be involved in dozens of robberies and carjackings.
Hat tip to Tamara Keel.
Permalink · Self defense · Comments (3)
In a search for continued relevance...
Brady Campaign, in a desperate quest for continued relevance, announces it will protest "bad apple" licensed dealers. "Bad apples" are to be measured by the raw number of BATF traces tracing guns back to them.
Now...
1. Licensed dealers can sell only after the buyer passes a background check (and their first target is in Illinois, where the buyer must pass another check and get a Firearms Owner ID Card as well). So it stands to reason that the targeted FFLs are not selling to criminals. More likely, to legit buyers who had their guns stolen by criminals (the trace still goes back to the dealer who made the sale, not to the thief).
2. Traces are not the same as guns used in crime. BATF encourages police to trace every gun that comes into their possession, including, for example, guns recovered from a gun burglar.
3. Brady is using only raw numbers, not percentages of sales. If traces are randomly distributed among dealers, the largest dealers in the area will have the most traces. Just as, in my city, if cars used in drive-by shootings were traces, the biggest numbers would come from the 2-3-4 biggest auto dealers in town, and very few from the more numerous dealers with 20-30 used cars on their lot. (The city has likewise 2-3 major gun dealers, about 5 medium ones, and probably dozens of small ones, Back when getting a license was simple, it probably had hundreds.).
But why worry, so long as it generates some media coverage and maybe adds a few members to a a foundering organization.
Permalink · antigun groups · Comments (5)
Gun Rights Policy Conference this month
SAF is holding it at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, Chicago O'Hare Airport, on September 26, 27 and 28, 2014. Drat, I won't be able to make it, but for any who can, the event is very useful, and free (so are the extensive materials distributed with it. You can make hotel reservations by calling 888-421-1442 -- mention you are attending the conference, and the rate will be $112/night.
UPDATE: the logistics and economics of such a gathering can differ. A Gun Rights Policy Conference brings together a few hundred activists. It's no measurable economic boost to the locality, and SAF can afford to make its location a defiant gesture. An NRA convention, in contrast, brings together 50,000 or so gunnies and hunters (in addition to the activists) and is a major economic boost, hence NRA won't hold conventions in an antigun city. The two events have utterly different economic impacts and, in a policy sense, face entirely different considerations.
Ammo shortage may taper off
At least if this article is correct.